meetings of the boards of directors - valley metro · valley metro • 101 n 1st ave • ste 1300...

VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 85003 • 602-262-7433

MEETINGS OF THE

Boards of Directors

Valley Metro RPTA

Joint Meeting of Valley Metro RTPA

and Valley Metro RailValley Metro Rail

MEETING DATE

Thursday, April 21, 2016

MEETING DATE

Thursday, April 21, 2016

MEETING DATE Thursday,

April 21, 2016

TIME

12:15 p.m. TIME

12:30 p.m. TIME

12:45 p.m.

LOCATION

Valley Metro RPTA Lake Powell Conference Room

101 N. 1st Avenue, 10th Floor Phoenix


April 14, 2016

Board of Directors Thursday, April 21, 2016

Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1st Avenue, 10th Floor

12:15 p.m.

Action

Recommended

1. Public Comment A 15-minute opportunity will be provided to members of the public at the beginning of the meeting to address the Board on all agenda items. The Chair may recognize members of the public during the meeting at his/her discretion. Up to three minutes will be provided per speaker or a total of 15 minutes total for all speakers.

1. For information

2. Minutes Minutes from the March 17, 2016 Board meeting are presented for approval.

2. For action

CONSENT AGENDA

3A. Video Surveillance System Contract Award

Staff recommends that the Board of Directors authorize the Interim Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute a contract with EAR Professional Audio Video to upgrade the security video surveillance system at the Valley Metro Mesa Bus Operations and Maintenance Facility (MBOM) for an amount not to exceed $100,200 and to establish a 10% contract change contingency of $10,020 that is included in the overall budget established for the project.

3A. For action

3B. Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) on Regional Community Network (RCN) Staff recommends that the Board of Directors authorize the Interim CEO to execute an IGA with MAG for RCN.

3B. For action

2

REGULAR AGENDA

4. Valley Metro Fiscal Year 2017 (FY17) Preliminary Operating and Capital Budget and Five-Year Operating Forecast and Capital Program (FY17 thru FY21)

Scott Smith, Interim CEO, will introduce John McCormack, Chief Financial Officer, who will provide information regarding the FY17 Budget and Five-Year Preliminary Operating Forecast and Capital Program (FY17 thru FY21).

4. For information

5. Proposed October 2016 Transit Service Changes Scott Smith, Interim CEO, will introduce Wulf Grote, Director, Planning and Accessible Transit, who will provide an update on the proposed October 2016 transit service changes and community outreach plan.

5. For information

6. Implementation of Regional Dial-a-Ride Service Scott Smith, Interim CEO, will introduce Ron Brooks, Accessible Transit Services Manager, who will provide information regarding the implementation plan for Regional Dial-a-Ride service starting in July 2016.

6. For information

7. Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events Chair McDonald will request future agenda items from members, and members may provide a report on current events.

7. For information and discussion

8. Next Meeting The next meeting of the Board is scheduled for Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 12:15 p.m.

8. For information

Qualified sign language interpreters are available with 72 hours notice. Materials in alternative formats (large print, audiocassette, or computer diskette) are available upon request. For further information, please call Valley Metro at 602-262-7433 or TTY at 602-251-2039. To attend this meeting via teleconference, contact the receptionist at 602-262-7433 for the dial-in-information. The supporting information for this agenda can be found on our web site at www.valleymetro.org.


DATE AGENDA ITEM 1 April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Public Comment PURPOSE A 15-minute opportunity will be provided to members of the public at the beginning of the meeting to address the Board on all agenda items. The Chair may recognize members of the public during the meeting at his/her discretion. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Scott Smith Interim Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None


DATE AGENDA ITEM 2 April 14, 2016

Minutes of the Valley Metro RPTA

Board of Directors Thursday, February 18, 2016

12:15 p.m. Meeting Participants Councilmember Jim McDonald, City of Avondale, Chair Councilmember Thelda Williams, City of Phoenix, Vice Chair Councilmember Suzanne Klapp, City of Scottsdale, Treasurer Vice Mayor Eric Orsborn, City of Buckeye Councilmember Kevin Hartke, City of Chandler Councilmember Lynn Selby, City of El Mirage Councilmember Jenn Daniels, Town of Gilbert (via phone) Councilmember Lauren Tolmachoff, City of Glendale Councilmember Sharolyn Hohman, City of Goodyear Supervisor Steve Gallardo, Maricopa County Vice Mayor Dennis Kavanaugh, City of Mesa Vice Mayor Jon Edwards, City of Peoria Councilmember Skip Hall, City of Surprise Mayor Mark Mitchell, City of Tempe (via phone) Councilmember Kathie Farr, City of Tolleson Councilmember Everett Sickles, Town of Wickenburg Chair McDonald called the meeting to order at 12:17 p.m. and the pledge of allegiance was recited. 1. Public Comment Chair McDonald said our first item today is public comment. That's a general public comment, since there is no consent agenda today. I will give opportunity to speak at the general as public comment. And then I'll give another opportunity, if someone would like to speak on any of the items, there will be one opportunity to speak on any actual items today. I do have a public -- general public comment card from Blue Crowley. Mr. Crowley said I had a great deal of fun at the manager's meeting, because what I did is I went and found a bicycle map, which is more detailed for all of your communities than the bus map. And what I did is I went and took and outline of the communities where the bus runs. And it amazes me that over here I put it at 75th, it only goes to 67th. And I looked at 67th, and I went, gee, what communities are west of 67th Avenue with absolutely no north-south bus service. Would that be surprise, El Mirage, the two Sun City's, Peoria, all of Peoria in fact, Avondale, Tolleson, Goodyear, Buckeye.

2

So when I see you sitting there, and it has been ten years since you took and what I and others had wrote back in the eighties with the advice and counsel of your own communities, that I'd figure that, gee, what is there over there on this bike map. And Goodyear, oh, it's the airport. I wonder why Buckeye stops at where it does. And I look at Avondale and, I go, when are you gonna get a bus or is that socialism. Because when I look at the bike maps and that, I note with all the bike routes that that wouldn't be done in the middle of open fields and bunny rabbits and cactus and such. That would have to be within a metro area. And since part of the reason we put the plan together was for air quality, when are your communities, Litchfield, Avondale, Tolleson, Goodyear, El Mirage, Youngtown, the Sun City's, Surprise, and Peoria gonna do any commitment to getting the job done. Just a thought since you are the electeds. Chair McDonald said okay. I don't have any other cards for general comment. So for the meeting itself, I actually have two cards, so one for agenda Item 3 and one for four. The one for agenda Item 3 is not signed. I'm assuming, Mr. Crowley, that's you? Mr. Crowley said yes. Chair McDonald said if you'd like you have three minutes to discuss items three and four. Mr. Crowley said well, if you guys would get the job done and 24-hour service and service the region, I would not say anything for three months other than thank you for getting the job done. But, you want to start my time again, please. I was just reacting to the -- thank you. I did -- if the Executive Director would note that I walked away with time on the clock, not that that would have made a difference. I'm looking for your agenda and I don't have it here. Okay. Lost thirty seconds on that. All right. With the intergovernmental agreement with the Department of Transportation, as I have pointed out, I've got 2 percent of Aguila that has said where is the rural bus for us, since it's one of the things that you've stated that market demand. I went to the Taco Tuesday to get it, so I figured I was doing it the market and in demand. But that's not what you're doing. You're just financing the other one. I don't see any of the rural routes as they were also intended to go -- oh, yeah, west through -- it now goes through some of your communities, but where's the one going to Tonopah and such. And with the last minute and a half, with the bonds that you've done, I talk to the man, and he said, oh, those moneys we bonded park-and-ride lots, part of which was paid for

3

by the rail. Thelda, when did that ever happen? Every one of those park-and-rides along Camelback is paid for by who. That was the bus. And since every single park-and-ride space is the equivalent of a bus stop, I really wish that when you're telling me good things that the bus is -- or that you're doing with the moneys, could you get all the bus stops covered. Today when you get out of this meeting the UV index will be such that all you white folks will burn within seven minutes of standing out there in the sun. Now I know that none of you are using the bus to get back and forth so you don't have to be at a stop, especially one of the two-thirds that doesn't have a shelter. So when I ask about the bonding and that, I'm going, where are the bus routes. I requested now for the third month in a row the document that I saw with Marie Lopez Rogers that showed Avondale that showed Buckeye that showed Tolleson all having buses going through, because the improvements were continuous and through every year. And at that time I said why don't we have more on the west side? And she said, well, the powers on the east side and they get theirs first. I'd sure like to see some of the bus routes on the east side that you still haven't got done. Thank you. Sorry for overrunning. 2. Minutes Chair McDonald said our next item on the agenda is the minutes. Does anybody have any concerns with the minutes or anything that needs to be addressed? IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILLIAMS, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORSBORN AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 18, 2016 BOARD MEETING MINUTES. 3. Intergovernmental Agreement with the Arizona Department of Transportation Chair McDonald said the next Item No. 3 is the Intergovernmental Agreement with the Arizona Department of Transportation. Mr. Smith Mr. Smith said Mr. Chair, thank you very much. I'd like to introduce Wulf Grote, who will give a brief presentation on a rural route that we do have that is funded through ADOT by federal moneys. Mr. Grote said Mr. Chair, members of the board, this is an item we go through every year and for our Rural Route 685 that goes -- serves out in the West Valley to Buckeye and to Gila Bend. We have to apply for the funds through ADOT every year. Actually this year they're

4

doing it for two years. And so we're requesting to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with ADOT, and this has to be done ahead of their grant process, so we're looking for your approval to, once again, to extend this grant with ADOT for these services. Chair McDonald said are there any questions? Seeing none, could I get a motion to authorize the intergovernmental agreement? Hearing none can I get a motion? IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER HARTKE, SECONDED BY VICE MAYOR KAVANAUGH AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE IGA WITH ADOT. 4. Refunding Bond Issuance Authorization – Third Supplemental Resolution Chair McDonald said item No. 4 is the Refunding Bond Issuance Authorization. Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith said Mr. Chairman and members of the Board, thank you very much. We are always looking for ways to find additional funds. As we know, certainly our services have been greatly impacted by the effects of the great recession, which we still have not recovered, so we look for every little nook and cranny we can. And one of the areas that we do look at constantly is the status of our financings and see if the financial markets allow for us to seek opportunities through primarily refinancing to refinance at lower rates, lower yields, which allows us to save the money on those finances. So Paul Hodgins, who is the Manager of Revenue Generation and Financial Planning, will discuss and ask for your approval of one plan that we have. Paul. Mr. Hodgins said thank you, Mr. Smith. Mr. Chair, members of the Board, we do have an opportunity with continued low yields out there to refinance some of our outstanding debt. Just to highlight the debt that we do have outstanding, we have two issuances one in 2009, which is split between the tax exempt and taxable Build America bonds. Those bonds were primarily -- well, it's about 50/50 between the bus program used for fleet replacement and some bus facilities. And then the rail program used some of those proceeds for primarily the regional facilities along the original 20 miles, so fleet, bridges, the maintenance facility, and such. And then the 2014, which is all tax exempt, and that was all used for the rail program for primarily the central Mesa and Northwest extensions. So we've issued approximately $215 million in debt and about $182 million outstanding. We'll be dealing mostly with the 2009 issuance for the refunding. We're proposing this primarily the -- because of the cost to issue the debt. The 2009 cost was just under 4 percent true interest cost. And we are looking right now with the 2016 series at under 2 percent. That's largely

5

because it's a much shorter average maturity. These bonds have to be paid off by 2025. But, again, the yields are pretty low. The 2014, they're not callable until 2024, but they're also issued at a fairly low cost, so it doesn't make sense to look at those for refunding at this time. What we're looking at or proposing to refund are just the 2009 A, the tax-exempt debt. The debt that we're proposing to retire, the debt service, is about $30.5 million dollars. The new debt service on the 2016 is about $29.2 million currently estimated, which gives us an estimated savings about $1.3 million out of issuance cost. As noted, the proceeds were split between bus and rail, so the debt service for the old and the new and then also the savings will also be shared between the bus and the rail programs at the same percentage, so the savings will go back into the transit lifestyle program to be reprogrammed for other purposes, other projects This does come with a cost. The cost of issuances we have underwriters, financial advisor, bond council, some other administrative costs, including getting ratings, we're estimating conservatively right now at about $370,000 for those. But we hope it comes in under that amount. So, again, net estimated savings after the issuance cost of $1.3 million currently. And with that, staff would recommend that the Board approve the third supplemental resolution authorizing the refunding. I'd be happy to answer any questions, Mr. Chair. Chair McDonald said are there any questions? Mr. Smith said Mr. Chair, if I might, just to clarify it for anyone in the audience. There was a lot talked about rail and bus. And understand -- just so everyone understands that this agency, because it is created by the State and therefore can issue tax- exempt financing is the issuing agency for rail projects and bus projects as the issuing agency. All bond, though, any debt that goes for a rail project is paid through an inter-agency agreement, us and Valley Metro Rail, by the rail side. The bus side does not pay for any debt that is incurred for rail projects. Rail pays its way. It just uses or utilizes RPTA because it is an authority, and therefore, can issue tax-exempt financing. So when we hear rail and bus, I want to make it perfectly clear to everyone that, yes, the debt does show up, but it is accepted and paid for, when it relates to train or any improvements that are used for the train, that it is paid by Valley Metro rail. There are some projects where there are joint beneficiaries. For example, on park- and- rides, things like that, we really have a separation. Our park-and-rides are primarily for express buses. Park-and-rides out in the distance that are purely bus and

6

those are the responsibility of RPTA. Anything that is train related is paid for by Valley Metro Rail. I just wanted to make sure that we were clear on that, because it can be a little confusing when you hear both bus and RPTA and rail mentioned in the same sentence. Chair McDonald said thank you for that clarification. We do that also when there's recommendations made where the rail recommends to the RPTA and makes that vote. So thank you for that clarification of -- we operate, hopefully as one group, but there are still two different entities. Chair McDonald said do we have any questions on the refunding bonds? Okay. I don't see any. Do you have a question? Councilmember Williams said I don't have a question. I was going to make a comment. That this was reviewed by the budget committee and they have thoroughly reviewed it, recommend approval. Chair McDonald said thank you. Seeing no questions, could I get a motion? IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER HARTKE, SECONDED BY VICE MAYOR KAVANAUGH AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO ADOPT THE THIRD SUPPLEMENTAL RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF TAX-EXEMPT, SENIOR LIEN BONDS IN FY 2016 IN AN AMOUNT SUFFICIENT TO REFUND CERTAIN MATURITIES OF THE SERIES 2009A BONDS AND TO PAY COSTS OF ISSUING THE BONDS. 5. Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events Chair McDonald said item No. 5 is Future Agenda Items and Requests. So on the RPTA side are there any future agenda items you would like to bring forth? Okay. Our next board meeting will be April 21st at 12:15 p.m. The Valley Metro Board meeting is adjourned. With no further discussion the meeting adjourned at 12:34 p.m.


DATE AGENDA ITEM 3A April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Video Surveillance System Contract Award PURPOSE To request authorization for the Interim Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute a contract with EAR Professional Audio Video to upgrade the video surveillance system at the Valley Metro Mesa Bus Operations and Maintenance Facility (MBOM) for an amount not to exceed $100,200 and to establish a 10% contract change contingency of $10,020 that is included in the overall budget established for the project. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION The MBOM, located at 3320 N Greenfield Road, is used to store and maintain public transit buses that serve the residents of Maricopa County. The facility does have on site security personnel to provide security services 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. However, due to the size of this facility security video surveillance equipment is used to monitor, deter and detect vandalism, accidents, theft, and other unlawful activities. The facility is currently equipped with exterior analog cameras and recording equipment. The video surveillance system utilizes outdated technology that has proven to be unreliable in the past. In addition, this system does not provide the amount of coverage needed to monitor the entire facility. Lastly, the system does not have adequate storage capacity or memory to maintain archived video footage or allow real time playback that meets the current needs of the agency. Valley Metro will procure the necessary equipment and services needed for this project by utilizing a cooperative agreement through the State of Arizona – State Procurement Office. Valley Metro staff sent a written request for quote and provided a Scope of Work and background information to the 12 vendors listed on the State Contract with an invitation to attend a site visit of the MBOM facility in order to provide an accurate quote. Each firm contacted was asked to provide a quote to upgrade the current video surveillance system to provide full perimeter camera coverage and increase storage/image recall time at a minimum of 30 days. In addition, firms were allowed to repurpose or move any of the existing 24 cameras, provided that an increase in facial recognition and perimeter coverage would be obtained. Three of the 12 vendors attended the site visit with all three submitting a quote based on the parameters and pricing of the contract they hold with the State of Arizona. The list of vendors that provided quotes on this project was as follows:

EAR Professional Audio Visual

2

Logicalis CCS Presentation Systems

Valley Metro staff met with each of the vendors listed to gain a better understanding of their proposal, and their approach to upgrading the video surveillance system. At the conclusion of the evaluation process, Valley Metro staff recommends awarding a contract to EAR Professional Audio Video. This vendor’s offer and proposed solution was the “best value” for the video surveillance system upgrade and the price is deemed fair and reasonable when compared to an independent cost estimate prepared by staff. COST AND BUDGET The proposed contract award for the video surveillance system for the MBOM is $100,200. A 10% contract contingency of $10,020 is established that is included within the overall budget for the project for unanticipated changes. The cost for this project is included in the RPTA Adopted FY16 Operating and Capital Budget. Funding is provided by a combination of fare revenue, PTF, and Member City Contributions. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item relates to the following goals and strategies in the Five-Year Strategic Plan, FY 2016 – 2020:

Goal 2: Advance performance based operation o Tactic A: Operate an effective, reliable, high performing transit system

COMMITTEE ACTION RTAG: March 16, 2016 for information TMC: April 6, 2016 approved Board of Directors: April 21, 2016 for action RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Directors authorize the Interim CEO to execute a contract with EAR Professional Audio Video to upgrade the security video surveillance system at the Valley Metro Mesa Bus Operations and Maintenance Facility (MBOM) for an amount not to exceed $100,200 and to establish a 10% contract change contingency of $10,020 that is included in the overall budget established for the project. CONTACT Ray Abraham Chief Operations Officer 602-652-5054 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None


DATE AGENDA ITEM 3B April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) on Regional Community Network (RCN) PURPOSE To request authorization for the Interim Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to enter into an IGA with MAG for participation in the RCN. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION Valley Metro is pursuing the opportunity to participate the RCN led by MAG in conjunction with ADOT. RCN is a regional Intelligent Transportation Systems network for Maricopa County. RCN serves the followings purposes:

Increase the bandwidth capacity of public sector telecommunications links; Increase the reliability of public sector telecommunications links; Increase information sharing capabilities across jurisdictional boundaries; Enhance the level of service that public sector agencies provide to the

communities they serve. Valley Metro’s participation in the RCN will allow information to be shared with the RCN participating agencies from ADOT, MCDOT, MAG, Phoenix, Tempe, Mesa, Chandler, Gilbert, Glendale, Peoria and Surprise. COST AND BUDGET None STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item addresses the following goals and strategies in the Board-adopted FY16-20 Strategic Plan: Goal One: Increase Customer Focus

Tactic C: Enhance customer service to member cities Goal Two: Advance Performance Based Operation

Tactic A: Operate an effective, reliable, high performing transit system Goal Five: Advance the Value of Transit

Tactic B: Collaborate with member agencies to advance the value of transit COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: March 16, 2016 for information TMC: April 6, 2016 approved Board of Directors: April 21, 2016 for action

2

RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Directors authorize the Interim CEO to enter into an IGA with MAG for participation in the RCN. CONTACT William Tsuei Chief Technology Officer 602-495-8253 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None


DATE AGENDA ITEM 4 April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Valley Metro Fiscal Year 2017 (FY17) Preliminary Operating and Capital Budget and Five-Year Operating Forecast and Capital Program (FY17 thru FY21) PURPOSE To provide information regarding the FY17 Budget and Five-Year Preliminary Operating Forecast and Capital Program (FY17 thru FY21). BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION The Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority (RPTA) FY17 combined operating and capital budget (the budget) is $344.2 million (M) and includes $141.2M in projects funded with Proposition 400 Public Transportation Fund (PTF) revenues. Of the $141.2M PTF revenues, $80.2M is for bus operating and bus capital and $61.0M is for light rail/high capacity transit capital. The preliminary FY17 operating and capital budget has been prepared with the goal of delivering a fiscally prudent, balanced budget using carry forwards, reserves and bond proceeds. The budget was developed in compliance with Board of Directors’ adopted budget, financial and Transit Life Cycle Program (TLCP) policies. The annual budget is prepared on an accrual basis and adopted by the Board of Directors each fiscal year. The legal level of budgetary control is the total annual appropriated budget. With respect to Capital Budgets, project contingency accounting is used to control expenditures within available project funding limits. With respect to Operating Budgets, encumbrance accounting is not used and all appropriations lapse at the end of the year. Prior to final adoption, a proposed budget is presented to the Board of Directors for review and public comment is received. Final adoption of the budget must be on or before June 30 of each year. The total operating budget of $166.4M represents a $5.6M (3%) increase from the previous year’s operating budget of $160.9M. The total capital budget of $177.8M represents a $51.8M (41%) increase from the previous year’s capital budget of $126.0M. Details and explanations of the major budget changes are discussed in the attached Budget Analysis and Overview document. With the agency integration, the RPTA and Valley Metro Rail (VMR) budgets are developed with a unified staff plan, with department managers planning the level of effort required to meet the bus and rail activities. Salary and overhead charges to bus and rail projects are based on actual time worked on each project. For FY17 there are 310 employees budgeted in the integrated agency, with 131 FTE’s budgeted to RPTA activities and 179 budgeted to VMR activities. Compensation budget based on 2.5%

2

increase. For staff salary changes, merit increases are evaluated based on employee performance; division level control to manage total costs within budget. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item relates to the following goals and strategies in the Five-Year Strategic Plan, FY 2016 – 2020: Goal 2: Advance performance based operation

o Tactic E: Maintain strong fiscal controls to support Valley Metro’s long-term sustainability.

COMMITTEE PROCESS Preliminary Budget Review: Financial Working Group: February 26, 2016 for information RTAG: March 16, 2016 for information TMC: April 6, 2016 for information Audit and Finance Subcommittee: April 14, 2016 for information Board of Directors: April 21, 2016 for information Proposed Budget Adoption: TMC: May 4, 2016 for action Budget and Finance Subcommittee: May 12, 2016 for action Board of Directors: May 19, 2016 for action RECOMMENDATION This item is being presented for information only. CONTACT John P. McCormack Chief Financial Officer 602-495-8239 [email protected] ATTACHMENT Valley Metro Fiscal Year 2017 (FY17) Preliminary Operating and Capital Budget and Five-Year Operating Forecast and Capital Program (FY17 thru FY21) Executive Summary

4/14/2016

1

2

Valley Metro RPTAFY17

Budget Overview

April 2016

4/14/2016

2

FY17 Baseline Operations

3

Passengers Revenue miles Operating Costs Fare RevenuesFixed Route BusFY16 17,263,000 11,403,000 $72,604,000 $13,265,000FY17 17,902,000 12,002,000 $75,561,000 $13,580,000Change 4% 5% 4% 2%

Baseline Trips Trips - Contingency Operating Costs Fare RevenuesParatransitFY16 487,000 $14,103,000 $1,727,000FY17 522,000 10,440 $15,580,000 $1,784,000Change 7% 2% 10% 3%

Passengers Revenue miles Operating Costs Fare RevenuesVanPoolFY16 1,136,000 6,108,000 $1,045,000 $1,148,000FY17 1,192,000 6,414,000 $967,000 $1,069,000Change 5% 5% -7% -7%

FY17 Strategic Plan Initiatives

4

Improve Customer Satisfaction• Development of Fare Smart Card and Smart Phone mobile ticketing $0.4M• Renovation of Website and mobile phone travel aid applications $0.2M

Enhance services & facilities for seniors & people with disabilities• Implement seamless Regional Dial-a-Ride Service $2.5M

Maintain strong fiscal controls • Establishment of Internal Audit Department with direct reporting to Board Audit and

Finance Subcommittee $0.1M

Communicate availability, attractiveness and safety of transit service• Discretionary ridership advertising campaigns to continue to attract riders $0.1M

4/14/2016

3

Valley Metro RPTA FY17 Sources of Revenues: $344.2M

5

Valley Metro RPTA Revenues

6

Sources of Funds $millions

Funding Sources FY17 FY16 Change $ Change %

Public Transportation Funds $141.2 $133.9 $7.3 5%

Transit Service Agreements $30.8 $30.2 $0.7 2%

Federal Grants $39.8 $33.6 $6.1 18%

METRO Rail Reimbursement $17.1 $16.9 $0.2 1%

Fixed Route Fare Revenues $15.7 $16.3 -$0.6 -4%

AZ Lottery Proceeds $11.3 $11.3 $0.0 0%

Regional Area Road Funds $4.9 $4.8 $0.1 2%

Other Revenues $3.3 $2.0 $1.3 64%

Bond Proceeds $61.3 $0.0 $61.3

Carry forwards and Reserves $18.9 $38.0 -$19.1 -50%

Total $344.2 $286.9 $57.4 20%

4/14/2016

4

Valley Metro RPTA FY17 Expenses: $344.2M

7

Carry Forward & Reserves

5%

Lead Agency Disbursements

21%

Transit Service Contracts & Fuel

28%

Personnel8%

Capital Expenditures11%

Bond Disbursements

13%

Bond P & I7%

AZ Lottery3% Other

3%Contracts

1%

Valley Metro RPTA Expenses

8

Uses of Funds $millions

Uses of Funds FY17 FY16 Change $ Change %

PTF Pass-thru Disbursements $72.3 $69.5 $2.8 4%

Transit service contracts & fuel 94.6 89.1 5.5 6%

Capital 36.9 25.9 11.0 42%

RPTA & METRO Personnel Costs 27.2 26.3 0.8 3%

Bond Principal & Interest 25.4 24.2 1.2 5%

Contractual Agreements 3.8 4.0 -0.2 -6%

AZ Lottery Disbursements 11.2 11.2 0.0 0%

PTF Bond Pass-thru Disbursements 43.1 25.0 18.1 72%

Other Costs 11.0 11.2 -0.2 -2%

Carry forwards to Reserves 18.7 0.4 18.5

Total $344.2 $286.9 $57.4 20%

4/14/2016

5

Integrated Agency Budget Assumptions: Staffing Costs

9

Staffing cost analysis

FY 17 FY 16 change pct change$ million

Salaries 19.6 18.8 0.8 4%

Fringe Benefits 7.6 7.5 0.1 2%

Total Salary and Fringe Benefits 27.2 26.3 0.9 3%

Analysis of changes Salary Fringe Total

Base Compensation FY16 18.8 7.5 26.3 Base increase 0.5 - 0.5 Position Changes 0.3 0.1 0.4

New Base Compensation FY17 19.6 7.6 27.2

Change FY17 Preliminary Budget vs. FY16 Adopted Budget 0.9 $ million

10

Integrated Agency – FY17 Position Changes

Title Division Scope of Work

Manager, Internal Audit Chief Executive Office Agency Internal Controls with primary reporting to Board

Internal Audit Specialist Chief Executive Office Internal Control testing and compliance

Program Representative Planning & Accessible Transit Support East Valley, West Valley, and regional paratransit

Scheduler Operations and Maintenance ‐ RPTA Fixed Route Bus schedule analysis and managementProgram Coordinator Operations and Maintenance ‐ RPTA Fixed Route Bus contractor performance management

4/14/2016

6

FIVE YEAR PLAN OVERVIEWFY 2017 THROUGH FY 2021

Valley Metro RPTA

11

5-Year Operating Assumptions• Public Transportation Fund (PTF) - up approximately 5.4% annually

• Federal PM Revenues down from $8.9M to $7.6M in FY18, $7.0M FY21

• TLCP planned route service miles funded by PTF increase 588,000

• Transit service costs up 3% annually plus contingencies

• Fixed route fares up 5% in FY18

• VM operated paratransit ridershipFY17 up 7%FY18 – FY 20 + 5.3% per year overall Regional trips up 9.6%

• Administrative costs up 2% annually

12

4/14/2016

7

Five Year Operating Forecast -Revenues

14

(thousands)

5-Year

Total

Revenues

Public Transportation Fund (ADOT) 793,606$

Less: AZDOR Assessment (4,973)

PTF Bond Proceeds 61,257

Less: Debt Service Bus & Rail (157,971)

Less: Rail Capital Funding (current) (268,669)

Net PTF for Operations 423,250$

Other Regional Funds 24,725$

Federal Funds 41,973

Transit service reimbursements 182,658

Fare Revenues 92,018

Alternative Fuel Tax Credit 1,228

Interest and other revenue 160

Total revenues 766,012$

Five Year Operating Forecast -Expenditures

15

(thousands)

5-Year

Expenditures Total

Operations

Fixed Route 458,136$

Paratransit - EVDAR 47,350

Paratransit - NWDAR 10,515

Paratransit - Regional Trips 14,549

Paratransit - RideChoice 4,703

Vanpool Service 5,138

ADA 108,312

Total operations expenditures 648,704$

Transportation Demand Management 5,912$

Planning & Administration 24,668

Regional Services 42,018

Safety & Security 1,974

Operations Contingency 18,993

Total expenditures 742,269$

4/14/2016

8

5-Year Capital Program Assumptions• Bus Fleet - $211 Million

– 475 replacement units; 93 expansion units

– 85% Federal /15% PTF

• Vanpool Fleet - $18 Million

– 301 replacement units; 100 expansion units 100% Federal STP

• Facilities and Equipment - $31.6 Million

– Peoria PNR and Transit Center - 80% Federal / 20% PTF

– North Glendale and Laveen Park and Rides - Local match PTF

– Regional Communications System - 80% Federal / 20% PTF

– Fare Collection/Paratransit Software Improvements - 100% PTF

– Mid-Life Bus Rebuilds (194 units) - 80% Federal / 20% PTF

16

Five Year Capital Program- Revenues

17

(thousands)

5-YearTotal

RevenuesPublic transportation funds 46,696$ FTA - Section 5307 161,448 FTA - Section 5311 456 FTA - Section 5337 1,046 FTA - Section 5339 8,245 FHWA - STP 17,159 Member local match 100 Vehicle/parts proceeds 1,929 Capital assets reserve applied 1,740 Vanpool reserve applied 741 Undesig. Fund Balance Applied (PTF) 20,891

Total Revenues 260,451$

4/14/2016

9

Five Year Capital Program- Expenditures

18

(thousands)

5-YearTotal

Expenditures by ProjectIT Infrastructure 2,747$ Standard Bus - Replacement 154,339 Standard Bus - Expansion 50,308 Express/BRT - Expansion 3,168 Rural Fleet - Replacement 1,173 Paratransit Fleet - Replacement 1,915 Vanpool Fleet - Replacement 13,462 Vanpool Fleet - Expansion 4,438 Fleet - Other 1,957 Transit Centers (4-Bay) 2,376 Bus Stop Passenger Amenities 535 Park & Rides 9,233 Vehicle Management/Communications Systems 6,546 Fare Collection Systems 505 State of Good Repair - Fleet Rebuild 7,749

Total Expenditures 260,451$

19

Forecasted Reserve RequirementsProposed FY17-21 Five-Year Operating and Capital Forecast $ in Millions

RESERVE FUND FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21General Fund Operating Reserve $23.4 $23.7 $24.4 $25.2 $26.0Capital Reserve Fund $3.6 $3.0 $1.6 $2.5 $1.5Working Capital Reserve Fund $14.2 $5.9 $7.8 $5.8 $10.5Vanpool Reserve Fund $3.4 $3.5 $3.7 $3.9 $4.1Emergency Reserve Fund $1.0 $1.0 $1.0 $1.0 $1.0Total Reserves (July 1) $45.5 $37.1 $38.5 $38.4 $43.1

Forecasted Fund Balance Bus Fund Balance $86.0 $66.3 $51.8 $48.3 $41.4Rail Fund Balance $39.4 $57.8 $59.3 $53.4 $63.0Total Forecasted Fund Balance (July 1) $125.4 $124.1 $111.1 $101.7 $104.4

4/14/2016

10

Budget Schedule FY17

20

Nov 19 FY17 Agency Budget Initiatives presented to Boards for information

Feb 18 Board approves service changes effective April 2016

Feb 26 Preliminary FY17 Budget presented to Fin. Working Group

Mar 1 Executive Summary & 5 year Plan posted to website

Apr 6 Draft Budget delivered to TMC/RMC/AFS

Apr 14 Member City Comments due

Apr 14 Budget presented for information to AFS

Apr 21 Budget presented to Board of Directors for information

May 19 Board Meeting for Budget Adoption

VALLEY METRO • 101 N 1ST AVE • STE 1300 • PHOENIX AZ • 602-262-7433

DATE AGENDA ITEM 5 April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Proposed October 2016 Transit Service Changes PURPOSE To provide an update on the proposed October 2016 transit service changes and community outreach plan. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION Transit service changes are scheduled twice each year in April and October. In preparation for these service change dates, Valley Metro staff works closely with the Service Planning Working Group, comprised of representatives from Valley Metro member organizations, to determine what changes are needed and to coordinate across jurisdictions. This working group meets monthly. The changes have also been coordinated with the five-year Short Range Transit Program (SRTP). The Service Planning Working Group has been meeting since February to prepare for the October 24, 2016 transit service change. Several changes have been proposed and continue to be discussed with the working group. Valley Metro staff is analyzing the proposed route changes in terms of the Board adopted Transit Standards and Performance Measures, Title VI impacts, defining possible fleet needs and all costs involved. Following is a preliminary list of all changes currently being analyzed for possible modification. More detailed information about each potential route change will be provided on the Valley Metro website throughout the public outreach process. Proposed Route and Schedule Changes: Arizona Avenue/Country Club Drive LINK – In Mesa, Chandler and Gilbert, eliminate

route and consolidate with Route 112 Country Club /Arizona Avenue.

Main Street LINK – In Mesa, eliminate route and consolidate LINK with Route 40 Apache/Main.

In Phoenix Proposition 104 Improvement – Phase I:

o increase span of service to operate from 4AM to midnight Monday – Friday and 5AM to 10PM Saturday and Sunday within the City of Phoenix; and

o improve weekday and weekend frequency to 30 minute minimum within the City of Phoenix on the following routes:

2

Phoenix Operated Local Bus Routes

Route Name

Increase Span of Service

Weekday Frequency Increased to 30 Minutes

Weekend Frequency Increased to 30 Minutes

0 Central Ave √ √

1 Washington/Jefferson √ √

3 Van Buren √

7 7th St √

8 7th Ave √

10 Roosevelt √

12 12th St √ √ √

13 Buckeye √ √ √

15 15th St √ √

16 16th St √ √

17 McDowell √

19 19th Ave √ √

27 27th Ave √

28 Lower Buckeye √ √

29 Thomas √ √

32 32nd St √

35 35th Ave √

39 40th St √ √

41 Indian School √

43 43rd Ave √ √

44 44th St/Tatum √ √

50 Camelback √

51 51st Ave √ √ √

52 Roser Rd √ √

59 59th Ave √ √

60 Bethany Home √

67 67th Ave √ √

70 Glendale Ave/24th St √

75 75th Ave √ √

80 Northern √

83 83rd Ave √ √

90 Dunlap √

106 Peoria √ √

122 Cactus √ √ √

138 Thunderbird Rd √ √

154 Greenway √ √

170 Bell Rd √

186 Union Hills √ √

3

Valley Metro Operated Local Bus Routes (in Phoenix)

30 University √ √

45 Broadway √

56 Priest √

61 Southern √

77 Baseline √ √

108 Elliot/48th St √

Route 40 Apache/Main – Consolidate route with Main Street LINK.

Route 72 Scottsdale/Rural – In Scottsdale and Tempe, provide weekday morning and evening peak trips from Scottsdale Fashion Square to the Scottsdale Park-and-Ride at Scottsdale and Thunderbird roads.

Route 112 Country Club/Arizona – Consolidate route with Arizona Avenue/Country Club Drive LINK.

Route 170 Bell* – In Scottsdale modify routing along Hayden Road and Frank Lloyd Wright Boulevard.

Mesa BUZZ Circulator – Retain service to Mesa Riverview along Rio Salado Parkway and Dobson Road.

Scottsdale Miller Road Trolley – Improve weekend frequency.

Scottsdale Camelback Trolley – Reduce weekend frequency.

Route 50 Camelback Road – In Scottsdale modify routing along Scottsdale and Drinkwater, match Phoenix span of service weekdays 5AM to Midnight and weekends 5AM to 10PM

Route 81Hayden – In Scottsdale, improve weekend service from 60 to 30 minute frequency

* denotes Phoenix operated route. Public Outreach Valley Metro is conducting community outreach beginning in April through May to notify the public and solicit input on the proposed service changes. Comments will be accepted through May 20. Customers can provide feedback through the following channels:

Public hearing (May 18) Information sessions region-wide

o Various sites determined by service change impacts Webinar (May 12) Social media Via email at [email protected]

4

Valley Metro communicates these input opportunities through newspaper advertising (30 days in advance – English and Spanish publications), news release(s), website, email, social media, city publications and targeted outreach at key locations. COST AND BUDGET The estimated costs of the proposed service changes and adjustments are still under evaluation. Once the list of service changes is finalized, staff will define the impact on bus service operating contracts and member agency Intergovernmental Agreements. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item addresses three goals in the Board-adopted FY16-20 Strategic Plan:

Goal 1: Increase customer focus o Tactic A: Improve customer satisfaction

Goal 2: Advance performance based operations o Tactic A: Operate an effective, reliable, high-performing transit system

Goal 3: Grow transit ridership o Tactic A: Expand and improve transit services to reach new markets o Tactic B: Improve connectivity of transit services for greater effectiveness

COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: March 16, 2016 for information TMC: April 6, 2016 for information Board of Directors: April 21, 2016 for information RECOMMENDATION This item is for information only. Following the public review process and final review by the Service Planning Working Group, proposed service changes operated and/or funded by Valley Metro will be brought before the Board for action. This will include any actions necessary to adjust affected transit service operating contracts and Intergovernmental Agreements with member agencies. CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Planning and Development 602-322-4420 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None

4/14/2016

1

1

Proposed October 2016 Transit Service Changes

April 2016

Overview• Coordinated through:

– Service Planning Working Group

– Individual member agencies

– Short Range Transit Program

• Board action anticipated in August 2016– Service contract changes

– IGA amendments2

4/14/2016

2

3

Proposed Changes

Phoenix T2050 Improvements

• T2050 bus service improvements – Expand service hours: 44 routes

• Better align with light rail service hours

– Increase frequency: 30 routes • 30-minute minimum frequency

• Other cities (to match Phoenix)– Route 50 (Scottsdale)

– Route 51 (Glendale) 4

4/14/2016

3

Proposed LINK Service Changes

• Eliminate LINK – Country Club/Arizona Ave (Mesa, Gilbert, Chandler)

– Main St (Mesa)

• Add trips/improve frequency on local routes– Route 40 – Apache/Main St

– Route 112 – Country Club/Arizona Ave

• Improved service at similar cost5

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

Avg

. W

eekd

ay B

oar

din

gs

Average Weekday Boardings in Southeast ValleyApril 2015

Ridership – Before Central Mesa Ext.

Light Rail Local LINK16,844

4/14/2016

4

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

Avg

. W

eekd

ay B

oar

din

gs

Average Weekday Boardings in Southeast ValleyOctober 2015

Ridership – After Central Mesa Ext.

Light Rail Local LINK19,726

Other Trip/Frequency Changes• Add weekday peak trips

– Route 72 – Scottsdale/Rural• Scottsdale Park-and-Ride to Scottsdale Fashion Square

• Improve weekend frequency – Scottsdale Miller Road Trolley – Route 81– Hayden/McClintock

• Reduce weekend frequency– Scottsdale Camelback Trolley

8

4/14/2016

5

Minor Route Modifications

• End-of-line adjustments– Route 170 – Bell

– Route 50 – Camelback

• Retain pilot service– Mesa Downtown BUZZ

– Requires Title VI analysis

9

Next Steps

• Continued analysis & agency coordination

• Public comment period – April through May – Webinar (May 12)– Public hearing (May 18)– Open houses & targeted outreach– Online: website, email & social media

• Board action – August 2016

10

4/14/2016

6


DATE AGENDA ITEM 6 April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Implementation of Regional Dial-a-Ride Service PURPOSE To provide information regarding the implementation plan for Regional Dial-a-Ride service starting in July 2016. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION In February, 2016, the RPTA Board of Directors approved recommendations set forth in the recently completed Regional ADA Paratransit and Dial-a-Ride Service Plan. One of these recommendations was for Valley Metro to implement direct shared-ride Regional Dial-a-Ride service beginning in July 2016 for all ADA certified customers making ADA eligible trips which would otherwise require transfers between two or more local Dial-a-Ride systems. Staff recognizes that the smooth and timely implementation of regional Dial-a-Ride service is important to our customers. Implementation will require Valley Metro, its member agencies and the region’s five local Dial-a-Ride providers to take a number of coordinated actions. The Technical Working Group (TWG), established as part of the Regional ADA Paratransit Plan, has continued to meet as a forum for collaboration toward the completion of this start-up. The TWG provides an opportunity for representation from all Valley Metro member agencies. In addition, Valley Metro has created an internal start-up team which includes staff from Accessible Transit Services, Marketing, Community Relations and staff from other Valley Metro departments as needed. The following tasks will be addressed as Valley Metro moves toward a July 2016 implementation.

2

TASKS DATE Administrative

Finalize budgets for each member agency February – April Execute Change Order with VM service provider June Amend IGAs June

Operational Finalize operational procedures with member agencies March – April Create written procedures for use by staff and DAR

providers April – May

Conduct staff and provider training May – June Rider and Community Information

Present new paratransit policies to appropriate community events

Now – Ongoing

Send letter to current riders announcing policy changes April Develop new Regional Dial-a-Ride Guide April – May Distribute Ride Guide to new customers at outreach

events and upon request June

Post updated information on-line June Regional Dial-a-Ride Start Date July 2016

COST AND BUDGET None STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item relates to the following goals and strategies in the Five-Year Strategic Plan, FY 2016 – 2020.

Goal 1: Increase customer focus o Tactic A: Improve customer satisfaction o Tactic B: Evaluate and enhance passenger safety and security o Tactic E: Enhance services and facilities for seniors and people with

disabilities. Goal 2: Advance performance-based operations

o Tactic A: Operate an effective, reliable, high-performing transit system Goal 3: Grow Transit Ridership

o Tactic B: Improve connectivity of transit services for greater effectiveness COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: March 16, 2016 for information TMC: April 6 for information Board of Directors: April 21, 2016 for information

3

RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Planning and Accessible Transit 602-322-4420 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None

4/14/2016

1

Regional ADA Paratransit and Dial-A-Ride Service Implementation Plan

April 2016

Implementation Approach• VM Start-Up Team

– Accessible Transit Services

– Marketing and Community Relations

– Other staff as needed

• Paratransit Technical Working Group– Meeting in March and thereafter as needed

– Finalizing all operational procedures

– Coordinating community information

• Implement regional service on July 1, 20162

4/14/2016

2

Start-Up ScheduleTASKS DATE

Administrative

• Finalize budgets for each member agency February – April

• Execute Change Order with VM service provider June

• Amend IGAs June

Operational

• Finalize operational procedures with member agencies March – April

• Create written procedures for use by staff and DAR providers April – May

• Conduct staff and provider training. May – June

Start-Up ScheduleTASKS DATE

Rider and Community Information

• Present new paratransit policies to appropriate community events Now – Ongoing

• Send letter to current riders announcing policy changes April

• Develop new Regional Dial-a-Ride Guide April – May

• Distribute new Ride Guide to customers at outreach events and upon request.

June

• Post updated information on-line June

Regional Dial-a-Ride Start Date July 2016

4/14/2016

3


DATE AGENDA ITEM 7 April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events PURPOSE Chair McDonald will request future agenda items from members, and members may provide a report on current events. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Scott Smith Interim Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT Pending Items Request

2

Pending Items Request

Item Requested Date Requested Planned Follow-up Date


April 14, 2016 Joint Meeting Agenda

Valley Metro RPTA

and Valley Metro Rail

Thursday, April 21, 2016 Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1st Avenue, 10th Floor

12:30 p.m.

Action Recommended

1. Chief Executive Officer’s (CEO) Report Scott Smith, Interim CEO, will brief the Boards on current issues.

1. For information

2. Minutes Minutes from the March 17, 2016 Joint Boards meeting are presented for approval.

2. For action

3. Ad Hoc Committee Scott Smith, Interim CEO, will request approval of the Ad Hoc Committee members.

3. For action

4. Chief Executive Officer Recruitment Scott Smith, Interim CEO, will provide an update on the CEO recruitment process.

4. For information and possible action

5. Fare Technology Improvements Scott Smith, Interim CEO, will introduce Maria Hyatt, City of Phoenix Public Transit Director, and John McCormack, Chief Financial Officer, who will provide an update on Fare Technology Improvements.

5. For information

2

6. Management Policies and Procedures Update Scott Smith, Interim CEO, will provide an informational update including progress made on Board directed policy and procedure changes in progress, as well as anticipated next steps for each area.

6. For information

7. Travel and Expenditures

The monthly travel and expenditures for Valley Metro RPTA and Valley Metro Rail are presented for information.

7. For information

8. Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events

Chairs McDonald and Williams will request future agenda items from members, and members may provide a report on current events.

8. For information

Qualified sign language interpreters are available with 72 hours notice. Materials in alternative formats (large print, audiocassette, or computer diskette) are available upon request. For further information, please call Valley Metro at 602-262-7433 or TTY at 602-251-2039. To attend this meeting via teleconference, contact the receptionist at 602-262-7433 for the dial-in-information. The supporting information for this agenda can be found on our web site at www.valleymetro.org.


DATE AGENDA ITEM 1 April 15, 2016 SUBJECT Interim Chief Executive Officer’s Report PURPOSE Scott Smith, Interim Chief Executive Officer, will brief the Boards on current issues. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Scott Smith Interim Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None



Minutes of a Joint Meeting of Valley Metro RPTA

and Valley Metro Rail

Boards of Directors Thursday, March 17, 2016

12:30 p.m.

Valley Metro RPTA Meeting Participants Councilmember Jim McDonald, City of Avondale, Chair Councilmember Thelda Williams, City of Phoenix, Vice Chair Councilmember Suzanne Klapp, City of Scottsdale, Treasurer Vice Mayor Eric Orsborn, City of Buckeye Councilmember Kevin Hartke, City of Chandler Councilmember Lynn Selby, City of El Mirage Councilmember Jenn Daniels, Town of Gilbert (via phone) Councilmember Lauren Tolmachoff, City of Glendale Councilmember Sharolyn Hohman, City of Goodyear Supervisor Steve Gallardo, Maricopa County Vice Mayor Dennis Kavanaugh, City of Mesa Councilmember Skip Hall, City of Surprise Mayor Mark Mitchell, City of Tempe (via phone) Councilmember Kathie Farr, City of Tolleson Councilmember Everett Sickles, Town of Wickenburg Members not present Vice Mayor Jon Edwards, City of Peoria Valley Metro Rail Meeting Participants Councilmember Thelda Williams, City of Phoenix, Chair Mayor Mark Mitchell, City of Tempe, Vice Chair (via phone) Councilmember Kevin Hartke, for Councilmember Rick Heumann, City of Chandler Councilmember Lauren Tolmachoff, City of Glendale Vice Mayor Dennis Kavanaugh, City of Mesa Chairs McDonald and Williams called the joint meeting of Valley Metro RPTA and Valley Metro Rail to order at 1:44 p.m. 1. Public Comment

Mr. Crowley said how y'all doing again? Well, now I'm gonna to try to point some things out to you. This is the East Valley bus map. And you can barely see there's occasionally a line going east and west past Gilbert Road and nothing past Power. But

2

when I, like I said, look at the bicycle map I highlighted those streets that have that. In your joint meeting you're going to do the boarding and destination survey. There's a couple things in that, being it was done as information that the managers, it says in there people will walk a quarter of a mile to make the bus. Then past that it decreases immensely. Well, we all know that. So when I look at this area here, and if you notice all those little squiggly lines, those are all bike routes which means that's all infill not infill, that's all community already -- that a quarter of a mile on the other side of four streets in a, what, 200 square mile area. That is what you have for the bus. It also said in there that less people are using the bus book. You guys are the ones that cut back its distribution and use, so when you say, hey, there are not that many being used, I just have a problem with that kind of thing. So I would like you to understand that people walk approximately a quarter mile to the bus and this is the area you're basically servicing. Could we get some more buses out there on all the grid? I don't understand how the job hasn't been done in the last ten years to increase and do. But then I have a problem when I look at Lincoln, Glendale, McDonald where the city of Paradise Valley says, we don't want buses in our area. Well, if we're having a bus system that is connected, wouldn't you think that Lincoln going from Scottsdale Road all the way to Luke Air Force Base would be a bus route, but no, it stops at 24th Street. That's efficient. That's effective. That's b s. 2. Minutes Chair McDonald said the second item on the agenda is the minutes. Is there any item from the minutes that anyone would like to comment on or question? Seeing none, I'd entertain a motion to accept. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORSBORN, SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR GALLADRO AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 18, 2016 JOINT BOARD MEETING MINUTES.

3. Chief Executive Officer’s Report Chair McDonald said Item No. 3 on this agenda is the Chief Executive Officer's Report. Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith said thank you, Mr. Chair, Madam Chair, and members of the Boards. It's been a busy last little while, and it's gonna get busier, as we move along, and I, once again, thank you for the opportunity I have to participate in this. We are in this region, I think, doing some amazing things with limited resources,

3

obviously would love to be able to do more and hope to at some point in time be able to accomplish that. But I can tell you that the cities, the County, and the Valley Metro staff are working together to make good things happen. We're going to celebrate one of those good things this Saturday on the rail side where we have the Northwest extension opening celebration. That will be 9:00 a.m. to noon with the program at 9:00 a.m. Mayor Stanton, Councilmember Valenzuela, and others will all be there. And you are all, obviously, invited to help celebrate, which is really a community achievement. It will be 9:00 to noon right at 19th Avenue and the Dunlap park-and-ride. Beautiful place with an art space and a plaza. I think you will enjoy it. And there will be a community fair also that goes along with that. As we build up to this opening, we've had several special tours for members of the community. One that we had was the ADA tour last Friday, which was meant to provide travel training to those members of our ADA community. It was conducted by our accessible transit staff and also attended were Councilmember Winters from Surprise. Thank you very much for being there. And he learned a lot about how we plan and everything from platforms to accessibility and everything going to our planning. Last Monday, most recently, we had a media tour, got some very, very good media coverage. Thanks to our staff for working to arrange that and the City of Phoenix staff. We introduced the project to TV, radio, print media, and others because this is an exciting achievement. Mayor Stanton was there. Councilmember Valenzuela was there. And we also had many members of the community, the local community, who took their first ride down that three plus mile segment of new rail. Anytime we open up new rail, what we found, we've down it now twice, both in Mesa and on the Northwest side, it's exciting. Now to put it into perspective, between Mesa and Northwest, we've now added six miles, which represents almost a 30 percent increase in our original mileage. We're now up to 27 miles. Within the next few years we will be up to 40 miles. And within the next ten years we will basically double our system on light rail. And with the passage of 104 in Phoenix, we'll have great improvements in both system, at least in the City of Phoenix, system coverage on the bus side and system frequency, which is important, both of those. I was able to attend the American Public Transit Association legislative conference this last week, got back last night. We were able to meet with Senator McCain, Congressman Gallego, Congresswoman Sinema, and Representatives Schweikert and Kirkpatrick, and they actually stuck their heads in and got a brief update on what's been

4

going on and we also briefed staff from Senator Flake and Congressman Grijalva and Franks. Now the reason we go back to this is, number one, because what we do, both on the bus and the rail side, really almost invariably involve some level of federal participation, if not financial participation then certainly oversight planning participation. It's important for us to maintain those contacts, those face to face contacts. The other thing is we want to meet with our members of our delegation and their staff. We can meet with the members of our delegation here in town, but many times the communications in Washington are conducted by the staff, the senior staff of our members of Congress. Right now we had a specific ask and that is related to the Tempe streetcar. Mayor Mitchell flew back and met with our members of delegation, because while it is included in the President's budget, it now needs to go through the appropriations process. Hopefully, based on what the FAST Act has and the budget scenario there, the items in the President's budget will flow through the congressional process, but there are no guarantees to that. So one of the things we were talking about was to ensure that the, certainly, the Tempe streetcar and our other projects move forward. Maria Hyatt from the City of Phoenix was with us, talked about the South Central extension, and make them aware of what we are doing. Because many of these are being fast tracked because of the Prop 104 in Phoenix, and so we're outside the normal lines, and, therefore, we need our delegation and, especially their staff, and FTA staff to understand the scenario we're working with. So these are important. So I would like to thank those who helped arrange that, those visits, and they were very productive. The other one is the Women's Transportation Seminar. We had several on March 12th, we had the local organization, WTS Metro Phoenix, awarded organizations and individuals who made significant contributions to the transportation industry. We had several of our team and your teams that were at this event. The business system team at Valley Metro and the cities of Phoenix and Mesa were recognized for their innovating transportation solution award for the community outreach and business outreach specifically on the central Mesa extension and on the Northwest extension. Phoenix Vice Mayor Kate Gallego was the woman of the year for her leadership of Transportation 2050. She was the co-chair of that committee and did a great job of helping the citizens of Phoenix understand the importance of transit and leading that to a great victory. More than $14,000 in scholarships were awarded. Karen Nassar, a Valley Metro intern, received one of those Arizona Transit Association scholarships. And she's going to be working on her masters in urban and transit in urban and environmental planning at

5

ASU. And we congratulate Karen. In February, we had the Friends of Transit annual conference, which is always a great gathering, and yes, there are many friends that we have in this Valley and in this state of transit, those who are committed to building the best transit system possible. The highlight of the program were student presentations. We love to get our students involved. The main reason is students have no bounds. There's no barriers. They are dreamers and they're not afraid to tell you what they believe. And we need that. We need that input. We have to deal in reality. We would love to do everything that we can, of course, all of a sudden reality slaps you in the face, whether it be financial, political, whatever it is. And so we involve these students in these programs. Mayor Stanton addressed and Vice Mayor Gallego addressed the conference, and it was a good day for us. One other thing we'd like to recognize is another member of our Board, who is dressed so festively in green today, Vice Mayor Dennis Kavanaugh of Mesa was selected as Mesa's 2015 citizen of the year. Congratulations to Vice Mayor Kavanaugh, who has not only done yeoman work on these Boards, but also has been a real friend of transit and an amazing contributor to many different aspects of, not only the Mesa community, but the Valley community. He was recognized a few years ago by the governor and the Statewide Arts Organization as their person of the year. So congratulations, Vice Mayor Kavanaugh, for that. We are proud to participate in that We have some service changes coming up in October. We're working on extensive service changes that we'll be presenting to you in the next few months. Public outreach will start in April about a month from now. The reason I wanted to make you aware of this is that these service changes are driven they're part of the periodic review we have, but these are more extensive than normal, because of the passage of Prop 104. And so there's a lot of Phoenix changes, both with route, the schedule, the frequency, and also the reach of many routes within the City of Phoenix. So I just want to make you aware. And those do impact our regional routes. They connect to our regional routes. They connect to our light rail routes. And so this coordination is taking place, so there's going to be a lot of changes that come up. I wanted to make you aware of that As far as our February data, in February, there is an interesting phenomenon that's going around the country and that is that while our rail ridership increased significantly, partially because of the new line into Mesa, up over 8 percent in total boardings and over 5 percent in average weekday boardings. Our bus ridership is down for a variety of reasons. And one of the things we were talking about in the APTA conference in Washington is everyone thinks they're unique, but we're finding this is nationwide on bus we're seeing decreases in ridership. There were a lot of things that were talked about, as gas prices go down people tend to

6

stay in their cars, or I should say as gas prices go up, they leave their cars at home, however you want to look at it. Actually an improving economy actually works to counter bus ridership in many cases. But this is not something that's unique to the metro Phoenix area. It is a nationwide phenomenon. We have groups that are looking at things that are happening in the economy and in demographics and everything to see if we can identify those changes. But it's really hard, because there's so many different things that impact transit ridership. But the train continues to improve, and we're looking for another bump as we open the Northwest extension. It continues to be not only accepted and supported, but embraced by this community. And I think the only thing we've seen is that what APTA's statement, which is "Where transit goes community grows," is true. We're seeing new investment along both especially along our train routes, but also along our fixed bus routes. We're seeing people adapt and change their lifestyle to be more transit oriented. And so good things are happening. Mr. and Madam Chair, that's my report. Chair McDonald said thank you, Mr. Smith. Are there any comments from the Board? Councilmember Orsborn said can I ask just a question related to the City of Phoenix Prop 104 and the timing for those improvements. I know we're talking about changes to service. When will we actually begin to see the design and construction of what was voted on? Mr. Smith said Councilmember Orsborn, Mr. and Madam Chairs, I'll be efficient on that, okay. One thing the main thing that's happened is that we've reprioritized, specifically in light rail. There are some bus improvements that will start pretty soon. But the main thing you'll see will not happen physically and not visibly but is happening behind the scenes. The biggest change is the fact that projects that might have been done are now, for example, west Phoenix and those, now will be done. But the biggest one is the South Central Extension, which is the extension of light rail from Central Avenue down from Washington down to Baseline has actually been accelerated by eleven years. It was originally planned for 2034 completion. It will now be hopefully open in 2023. And that may sound like a long way away, but if you remember our Valley Metro Rail has been open over seven years. So in less the time that our rail has been opened, we will have an extension going to south Phoenix. We also have a couple other projects that we built fairly quickly. 50th Street stop platform is now going to be built, a new stop at 16th Street is being studied. Those things will be advanced.

7

So you'll see some physical indication of what's going on, but really what's happening is that the planning now is being fast tracked so that within a couple three years you'll see some physical evidence that there's gonna be a lot of construction going on and most of that is related to the passage of 104. Councilmember Orsborn said thank you. Can we maybe get some kind of summary that details those long range type projects so that when we're asked by our constituents what's happening related to that? Mr. Smith said absolutely. As a matter of fact, we'll get you stuff. Wulf will get you, we have maps, dates, and a specific schedule that shows you the pre 104, post 104, what exactly 104 does for projects. And we'll get that to you. We'll get all the Board that to you. Because there's no doubt that while the vast majority of our 73 million per year transit customers ride our buses, the most visible to many of our constituents is the rail. And construction, especially, is certainly visible in both good ways and other ways. And so it's important that all of you know, because each one of you, you know, Phoenix is the center. Downtown Phoenix, hopefully, is a gathering place for all of our citizens. And so these projects do impact everybody. And everyone is interested in it. When I'm home in Mesa people ask me what's next, what's next. So we'll get that to you. Councilmember Hall said Scott, was there any talk about correlation between getting off a bus and getting in a train? As far as bus ridership doing gown and rail going up. Mr. Smith said Councilmember Hall, I have not seen a study that correlates those two. You'll find out in the study we just completed, and as a matter of fact, you're going to get a presentation, on the origin and destination study. We find the vast majority of our riders do not transfer. There are some that if they do transfer, it's a one transfer. I'm looking at you, Wulf, to make sure that I state this correctly. But the vast majority of our rail passengers do not transfer. So we do not see a correlation between the decrease in bus ridership and an increase in the train. We think what's happening because the other thing it will show is that most the majority of our train riders actually live within a mile of the trains. We think people are leaving their cars and they're coming. And these new routes just open up new areas. That's really one of the main reasons why train has gone up is for that. And, like I said, this is a phenomena that is happening around the country. Now, one thing I will say to add on to some of the service changes that you'll see in October, is that as we extend hours for example, as the City of Phoenix extends hours, one of the things they're trying to do is to make bus service more connected with the train schedule. Right now those are not in sync. Our bus service ends before our train service ends, especially on weekends. And so you could literally ride a bus the train out and not find a bus to get to your ultimate destination.

8

One of the things Prop 104 will do is it'll add frequency so that there will be more of a direct correlation between getting off the train and getting on the bus and vice versa, especially on those late-night, early-morning routes, where right now we do not have any service consistency. Councilmember Orsborn said Chair, just another question, I probably should just be quiet and we can go on with the meeting. But just kind of thinking out loud the light rail, just like you said, goes right along those areas where people can walk, probably easily ditching their cars and jumping on the rail. And it's exciting. It's new. And it seems to be the trend and, kind of, a trendy, sort of, a hip thing to do right now, not that it's gonna not that that's gonna waiver.

We hear a mass of excitement about the extension of service for light rail, but we don't hear that same massive excitement about the extension of bus services. And I think that maybe part of that is just that it's the new thing and that's the way we're going to move people around, at least in those corridors and at least a majority of the folks that are excited about that. But it seems like the trend is, sort of, away from bus and toward rail, I guess, ridership-wise and that's sort of what that maybe is showing. Mr. Smith said Councilmember Orsborn, once again, we don't have data that shows that people are choosing rail over bus. We believe most of our rail are new passengers and that's sort of what it shows. They haven't ridden transit. They now ride transit more frequently than they probably would with a bus. It's easy to talk more about rail. It's a big project. It's noticeable. Bus is widespread. It's more in its visual, it's more diluted, you might to say. It connects more points, it carries a lot more people, but it doesn't do it in one line like rail does. So I think rail is just more visible. And when you open up a new line it has a tendency of changing areas much like it did in downtown Mesa. It will now, I think, at 19th Avenue and Dunlap more so than a bus does. That's just the reality. The construction of a rail line attracts private investment more than the establishment of a single bus line. That's just the facts. It is a magnet, whereas buses are not. It's not that buses are any certainly any less important. If we only had a rail line we would not have a transit system. And as I've said, last year we carried about fourteen and a half million riders on our rail system. We're scheduled to do about almost fifteen million this year. And we have over 56 million on the buses. So there's certainly a lot more people that take advantage of the bus. And I think that the reason why there's excitement is just you don't have light rail extension very often. I think you'll see a lot of excitement come October when we add all these routes in Phoenix and we will certainly make sure that along with the City of Phoenix that the public knows about it, they're aware about it, they're aware about the new possibilities, and so you'll see a lot of awareness. But there's no doubt what the nature of the service is different and, therefore, I think, attracts a different type of notice.

9

Councilmember Orsborn said I agree. And in the end it's a complete multimodal system that gets people around both rail and bus, and every other way we can move people around efficiently, so. Mr. Smith said and that's exactly when people choose to invest in our Valley, they ask about the system. And whether it's bus or rail, that's secondary as long as there's a transit system and a roadway system that can provide access and an easier flow of goods and of people. That's what they look at. So it truly is a system. Chair McDonald said are there any other comments? All right. This was for information only. 4. Valley Metro RPTA Budget and Finance Subcommittee Name Change, Scope

Expansion, and Inclusion of Valley Metro Rail (VMR) Representation Chair McDonald said the next item on the agenda, Item No. 4. Valley Metro RPTA and Valley Metro Rail Budget and Finance Subcommittee Structure Modification. Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith said Mr. Chair, Madam Chair, we have been looking for ways obviously, in the last few months, to expand the financial oversight of the both the RPTA and the Valley Metro Rail organizations. We've been looking for ways to include communication wise and oversight wise the Boards of both organizations in that oversight. And one of the items that was presented early was to take what was established primarily originally for the RPTA and that is our Budget and Finance Subcommittee and to expand its oversight to include rail. In many ways it has been doing that for a while. When we present to the subcommittee, we talk about rail and bus and both of those we make them aware of it. This would formalize that and would also formalize that in its membership too. The proposal is to take the existing five members that we have, but just to ensure that there are at least two members that are from the Valley Metro Rail Board with the other three members being from the RPTA Board. The City of Phoenix would have a seat always on the Board. It would be represented by their RPTA Board member would be on this committee. And then the others, other Valley Metro Rail we can only have one other Valley Metro Rail member; otherwise, we get into quorum problems. So there would be another one and obviously that would be a member of the Valley Metro Rail Board member which means it would be either from Mesa, Tempe, Chandler, Glendale did I miss anybody? That's it in addition to Phoenix. The other thing is to maintain the geographical equity. So what we would anticipate there would be two members from the West Valley, two members from the East Valley, and Phoenix. It just so happens that in this time it works.

10

Councilmember Jenn Daniels from Gilbert, her term is up on the finance committee. She will be replaced by another East Valley city, and in this case, it would be either be someone from Mesa, Tempe, Chandler, who would be a Valley Metro Rail, so we would have that two members and then the two members on the West Valley and so they would go forward maintaining that balance. The other thing is that this committee will expand its oversight. And as part of that, we are recommending that the name change -- be changed from the Budget and Finance Committee to the Audit and Finance Committee, because as we take more seriously our audit functions, this committee will be the committee that will both define audit scopes and will be the first area of report and the direct report for the new internal audit department, which we have included in our budget proposal for 2017, a two person internal audit. The internal audit department was something that was actually proposed several years ago in org charts, and for whatever reason, was actually never implemented in our organization. We are proposing that it be formally implemented now. Two people to begin with. The primary purpose of this internal audit is to audit areas of interest and high profile such as, travel, entertainment, those kind of expenditures, but also to audit the areas of truly high financial risk and exposure and that is the tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars of contracts that flow through the joint organizations every year. This committee would, once again, be directed and report directly to the Audit and Finance Committee. Their annual audit scopes would be approved by the Audit and Finance Committee. The audit reports would go do the Audit and Finance Committee who would then report back to the joint Boards as to their findings and any recommendations they would have. So our request is that you approve the recommendation, both on the name change and on the expansion of duties of this committee and the member makeup of the committee as presented. Councilmember Williams said Scott, included in this does not preclude us as a Board from having an outside auditor? Mr. Smith said Madam Chair, absolutely not. As a matter of fact, the outside auditor, which we have to have by law and by design, we have to have both to satisfy our own financial reporting and state and federal requirements. That outside auditor would report primarily to this committee. This committee could also if there were special audits or things that they would like to undertake, they could also present or propose to the Board that another independent auditor do any types of audits that the internal audit perhaps could not do or maybe is too busy to do.

11

They can establish the scope of any audits, which means audit being outside. They would also be the place where the outside auditors would report primarily their first report would be to this committee, and then they report to the entire Board. So no, it would not change that at all. Councilmember Williams said and the Board would still have to have the approval for the expenditure for any outside audit. Mr. Smith said Madam Chair, absolutely. This is a subcommittee, which means it cannot act upon its own. It can only advise and present things to the combined Boards for action, so anything that they do, especially as it relates to hiring any other auditors or any other professional services would have to come before the Boards for their approval Councilmember Williams said okay. Thank you. I know I had a couple of questions about that, so I wanted to make sure it was clear. Do we have any other questions? All right. I'm going to call on the members of the METRO Board for a motion. (VMR Motion) IT WAS MOVED BY VICE MAYOR KAVANAUGH, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TOLMACHOFF AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION DEFINING THE ROLE AND MEMBERSHIP OF THE AFS. (RPTA Motion) IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER FARR, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HARTKE AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION DEFINING THE ROLE AND MEMBERSHIP OF THE AFS. 5. Ad Hoc Committee Chair McDonald said the next item on the agenda is No. 5. Ad Hoc Committee. Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith said thank you, Mr. and Madam Chair. The ad hoc committee is a request that basically arose out of the conduct of the ongoing audits that are being performed in relation to the events that we have had to deal with. Basically, we want to make sure that while we have this City of Phoenix audit going on we have audits by the Auditor General and others going on, any reports that these agencies have, we want to make sure that the public has confidence that, first of all, we recognize the importance of the process that's going on. We recognize that the severity of the issues that have been raised, and, therefore, the proposal was made to establish an ad hoc committee that would serve primarily to review the results of these audits, the recommendations of these audits from the various agencies, and to report to the Board on any suggestions they would have in relation to

12

these specific audit reports. The committee will be made up of anywhere from five to seven citizens, hopefully prominent citizens that are well known and well regarded in the community. We propose that the appointment to the ad hoc committee, which, once again, would last only until they issue this report on these audits and then would disband, that the two chairs make appointments subject to the confirmation of the combined Boards. Right now we anticipate receiving these audits sometime in April, so we will if approved, the two chairs will present to the Boards at the April meeting their recommendation for this committee. We've already talked to several members of the community have asked you for recommendations, suggestions, nominations for these committees, and so we're asking today for your approval of empowering the two chairs to make those appointments with your confirmation in April and empowering this committee to receive those reports and conduct their review and issue a report back to the Boards when they have finished. Chair Williams said if I could make a comment, when the newspaper articles first hit and we learned about the situation that we were in, I had great concerns and talked to the city manager of Phoenix and I was concerned how Washington D.C. was going to respond, because there are no secrets in this world. And I knew they probably had read it the next morning the same as I had. And I called and met with city manager and to assure them that every step would be taken to make sure that everything was on target, everything was identified, there was not anything missing, and if by chance something happened, City of Phoenix would be prepared to stand up and take the responsibility and fulfill this. And I said what would give you confidence. And actually they're the ones suggested this type of committee to review this audit. They said this is something you're not the first, you'll never be the only one that this has happened to, and we have used this procedure in other areas. And they said, you know, this worked well for us in the past, gives us every confidence that everything has been done and all corrections have been made and you can move forward. So interesting. I'm the one that actually originally, I think, proposed this to all of you, so that's why I'm very supportive of this making sure we go ahead and, you know, I'm not saying it needs to be political in any way. In fact, I think it's important that we have people who are well respected in this community that have stood the test of time and have some financial experience or federal experience that they can read an audit and everyone be assured that there word is worthy of accepting.

Mr. Smith said Madam Chair, if this does go through obviously the two chairs would be open to any suggestions you might have. We're looking for, once again, as we always do, we need broad coverage, so west side, east side, Phoenix. We want stellar citizenry in the name of transparency.

13

There's still a lot of healing that needs to go on and it's tough to heal when you don't even know what the total hurt is. And, you know, there's gonna be a rough spot when these audits come in, because even if it says nothing that we don't already know, it will, of course, renew put it in the news again. And, you know, we use the word "transparency," which I don't really love that word, but I get it. The fact of the matter is, to have somebody outside who is not specifically connected, citizens whose reputation is beyond reproach and who has been through this before and is widely respected look at our dirty laundry, you know, is, I think, part of the healing process. It's something we need to go through as we work to regain the confidence of the citizens of our Valley and our region. And so I would agree that this is an important process and I think it will serve us well if we go through this. Chair Williams said does anyone on the METRO Board have any questions, comments? Or may I have a motion? (VMR Motion) IT WAS MOVED BY VICE MAYOR KAVANAUGH, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TOLMACHOFF AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO AUTHORIZE THE VALLEY METRO RPTA AND VALLEY METRO RAIL BOARD CHAIRS TO APPOINT MEMBERS TO THE AD HOC COMMITTEE. Chair McDonald said for the RPTA side, are there any questions? Supervisor Gallardo said Mr. Chairman, thank you. I'd be very supportive of having such an ad hoc committee. I really believe this is an opportunity for us to really get behind some of the negative stuff to be able to look at all our policies and see what changes can possibly be made. And I think everyone is prepared for the report that's not going to be so great. And I think this is an opportunity for us to shed some light on some things that need to be changed and how we can put the other protocols in front to make sure that this doesn't happen again. Again, it's an opportunity to regain the trust of the public and be able to establish that this Board is serious when it comes to how we operate. So I'm very supportive. I'm glad this is coming before us. And I look forward to seeing this ad hoc take place. Mr. Smith said thank you. Chair McDonald said are there any other comments from RPTA? All right. I just wanted to add on to this also that this is important. When this came about this Board obviously immediately took actions to take care of the short issues, the issues that were known. You mentioned the healing process, part of this healing process involves outside activities. It's the outside groups that are gonna have a higher level of trust right up front. And if we can have the outside group, a group of people that are trusted in the

14

community to do this, I think that's going to go far. So, again, I'd like to remind everybody, if you know somebody of stature in the community, someone that there's a lot of people that look up to that would be interested in serving on this committee, please bring their names either to Mr. Smith or Thelda or I and we'll bring them forth as well. So on that, can I get a motion to accept from the RPTA Board? (RPTA Motion) IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER FARR, SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR GALLARDO AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO AUTHORIZE THE VALLEY METRO RPTA AND VALLEY METRO RAIL BOARD CHAIRS TO APPOINT MEMBERS TO THE AD HOC COMMITTEE. 6. Chief Executive Officer Recruitment: Summary of Future CEO/Executive

Director Survey Chair McDonald said the next item on the agenda, Item No. 6. Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith said thank you. Mr. Chair, Madam Chair, we have been talking for the last couple of months about steps to provide permanent leadership for these organizations, these combined organizations. We have solicited from you, your staff, and from other stakeholders sort of a wish list or a definition of what they would look for in the new CEO, understanding that having come through the experience we're coming through, there may be a different point of view, there may be a different vision for what people see this organization going forward, and obviously the leader is the one that's gonna set the stage for that vision. We've received your feedback. There are certain themes that arise in this that I think would not come out if we were just starting from scratch in a sterile environment, you might say. And I think that as we use these to define a job description, it will be very apparent the type of leader that we're looking for going forward. So what we would like now that we have this input, we then need to move to the next step which is to start a formal process. We reported before on some of the options that were available. And I think what staff would be looking for is specific direction and authority to move forward with finding an agency or an organization to actually conduct a search to take the input that we have received and to then define or to craft a job description, and then to set up the actual procedure that is used to begin the search. One of the things we have to look at is the timing of this as we come with these audit reports and everything, so part of what we'll do is as we get with this organization, whether it be, and to repeat, to recap what we have talked about before, either Maricopa County who has offered, but we have not had specific, “we” meaning this staff has not had specific discussions with them as to how it would work or having them do it all, having them do the administrative part and hiring an independent headhunter to coordinate the recruitment or going with an outside firm to do that.

15

Those, I think, are the three options that we have discussed that have not formally been decided by these Boards, and I don't know if you're in a position to decide that today or to come back and have us talk to the different organizations, come up with some specifics as to how that would work and come back to you next month. The other thing is to define how the Boards would like to function. Obviously this is going to be a somewhat of a detail oriented activity, one at which at a certain level, the Board needs to get involved. You have an existing joint subcommittee. We could use that. We could have the Boards appoint a special subcommittee between the two Boards to process this, either one of those, I think, would work, or have no subcommittee. I would personally suggest that you have a smaller group that can work with whoever is conducting the search and the calling to at least give some Board direction at a small scale and at a filtered level, and then you can take the results, whatever they are, to the full Board. So those are the kind of directions that I think we're looking for now. If you'd like Valley Metro staff even though we will not be involved in the actual search or the actual recruitment process, I think if we are the ones that probably will help coordinate and if the people who will be conducting this on the Board present the options to you so we can then take formal action, enter into contracts, agreements, whatever we need to do to make sure that we can then get a job description, start advertising and start the process of recruiting a new CEO. So that's the report. And also the request for direction today, Mr. and Madam Chair. Chair McDonald said okay. On that we said we'd like to hear what people's opinions are on what method they would like to go with and suggestions. Supervisor Gallardo said thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have had conversations with Tom Manos. Tom is in Maricopa County and is willing to do whatever is needed in order to assist in this program, our County Manager fully aware and they're willing to do everything that they could do to help in this effort. We have a whole Human Resource Department that's relatively large. It's able to go forward with that. I would suggest and possibly maybe staff can help us with a possible timeline, I think we understand we need at least start thinking about this, but it would be helpful to have some type of timeline on where we're at and what needs to fall in place. I wouldn't necessarily jump to hiring a headhunter quite yet. I think we're able within that whatever the timeline is to be able to look. I mean, you got a lot of organizations out there. National League of Cities and Towns, you have a lot of organizations out there that you can reach out to help promote, but if it comes down into the process that looks like, you know, you have to reach out to get a consulting firm or a headhunter or however you want to refer, then I'm open to it. I'm not close minded to it.

16

I'm open to reaching out to outside help. But I would like to see just what the organizations that are out there currently that we utilize that and see what the response is. I mean, obviously if during this search it looks like we don't have perhaps maybe someone that kind of fits the criteria that we're looking at, then make that decision of possibly going outside. But I think just helping with some type of a timeline would be helpful. Mr. Smith said well, if I could respond to that a little bit, Mr. and Madam Chair and Supervisor Gallardo, there's two things just to be blunt. One is, you know, we could start at any time. I guess the question something I've discussed with many of you in private is how do we coordinate the search for CEO with what we just talked about, the release of audits, and whether that will have an impact, not have an impact, whether it's wise to do before and whether to go through with the process while that's happening, whether to wait for that to happen so we know what we're dealing with and then start it, you know, we could go either way. What our HR department and others I have talked with is that we would begin as soon as we can get our ducks in a row. We'd be ready to begin. So I was guessing the next 30 days we would have things in place. We'd have a job description. We'd be ready to go. It's however long you want to keep the item open. And that depends upon the quality and quantity of the candidates you get. We've heard a minimum of 60 days which is what it would really take. I know some of your cities it's taken much longer than that because in the first wave you don't get that quality. But I think you're looking at that's sort of the time frame. You bring up one thing that I'd like to address just real quick is one of the overriding themes that came in the suggestion for CEO is that they have local knowledge. In other words, someone who understands both the geography, the history, and the politics of metro Phoenix, because we are unique. And these organizations are unlike anything in the country. And I think there's no doubt that it would be very difficult, and what I've heard, to just pluck someone who may be a transit professional out of somewhere in the country and put them in here and expect them to understand the unique set up that this is. It truly is it's different than any place else.

That doesn't necessarily mean that the person has to be living here. We have a lot of people who have worked for your cities, who have worked for even Valley Metro who have gone on and are working for other places around the country, so this is by nature gonna be a national search. I mean, the second you put it in a national transit magazine, it's a national search. And I think that that's one of the things, for example, that will be highlighted in our job description is that if you don't have an understanding or experience in living, working in metro Phoenix and the government for metro Phoenix, it's gonna be tough, because I would guess that the overriding consensus, really, is that we want someone who gets us. We want someone who understands us, because we don't have the luxury of someone trying to have the learning curve and figure that out, and that's gonna be a big plus. You don't know when you're gonna find that person.

17

There's been a lot of names thrown around. I don't know yea or nay whether -- I'm learning stuff on this -- I will tell you in the weeks I've been on this job, I've learned an awful lot. And even with six years as a mayor, six years working closely in MAG, this is a different animal. This truly is a unique situation, because I get to work for all of you and all of your staffs and we work with each other every day on very important things and millions of dollars in projects that are important that are high stress, this is a unique animal. And I've changed my view as to really what it takes to run this in a positive way. I'm excited about the future. But I want as you do, want somebody who truly can understand how to get us to work together and to truly understand that we are here to serve you that we are here and we have our cities and our county and others as our customers and that's unique. That's unique for a regional transit authority to do. So the timing, I pointed out probably a minimum of 90 to 120 days and that's just Penny, are you shaking your head over there -- that's if we started tomorrow, she believes that's what it's going to take. And then you get into the choosing and selecting and all of that. And a lot of it depends on when we start the process, will be dependent on the Board's feeling about how to coordinate with getting over these milestones such as the audits. Chair Williams said from my perspective, I think that you have enough information based on the survey to draft a job description. And I would like us to use the committee that was set up that reviewed Banta's contract, at least that committee is a joint committee and has the knowledge of what was good and what wasn't, and can look at that job description and, I think, could make a recommendation for approval. I don't know if it needs to come back to this Board. If we're all in agreement on what we see in this memo today, I don't know as it does need to come back that we could proceed. I really believe that, and I don't mean this against any employee of this organization. It needs to be an outside agency that handles this recruitment that maintains the confidence in the community that we are going forward in a very open and thorough way. I don't know as we need a headhunter. I don't know what the cost is, whether that's more expensive that we could have a headhunter who then gives the information to the county who could then do the background and narrow it down so that then we could have a committee that did the interviews. Are you recommending something like that? Mr. Smith said Madam Chair, just so you know, we are not -- and in one of the options that's not on the table is for Valley Metro to conduct this search. We have -- I would not we threw that out as on option simply because it's always an option, but we recognize that that's not going to happen. And I wouldn't want to do that. Without having that knowledge, and for example, we don't know how much it would cost. And one of the things I'm asking for direction is would you like us either to the

18

subcommittee or to the Board as a whole, to go out and talk to someone to get an idea of what that would cost, and then maybe perhaps reporting it to the subcommittee or to the Board. Obviously, Maricopa County is a no cost, because they've offered, from what I understand, to do it without charging Valley Metro. Chair Williams said which is so attractive.

Mr. Smith said yes it is. But remember, we're making one of the most important decisions that these Boards will make. And while I'm always about doing things the best way and the most cost efficient way, I want to be effective. And so the other thing is to come back and say we've reached out to a few firms, here's what we believe the ballpark is for the cost. And then you can at least make the decision knowing what those costs will be. That's one of the options that we could do. And we could find that out for you and come back to you and present that. Chair Williams said April 21st is the next Board meeting. So could you bring back a written job description, some costs, some options on those costs, and give us some timeline dates that we could set fairly firm on when the recruitment starts, how long it lasts, how long it takes to process certain people, so we could set up interviews, because I'm hoping that we can be conducting interviews by mid-June. Mr. Smith said okay. Chair Williams said that's pretty tight time schedule, at least by the first of July. I think we only have you until the end of July. Mr. Smith said well, no, you have me for -- I've committed here to six months to a year. Chair Williams said okay. But I just want to make sure that we're moving forward and that we keep on schedule. Mr. Smith said I will do whatever this Board wants. I think within the time frame we're talking, we'll obviously be able to complete this process. Chair Williams said I'm just thinking we need to get organized and get going down this path. I don't know how the rest of the committee feels. Councilmember Hartke said I'm grateful that you've committed up to a year, but between six months and a year this process is going to go on, and I also encourage us to -- there's going to be bad news or indifferent news, it's in the paper anyway, so whoever's gonna look at this position is gonna see that there's been some turmoil and that should not stop us to wait for that to end to start the process. That's just we're just pushing back on something. And I think a year could be swallowed up quickly if we don't stay earnest with this process. So I would also encourage us to move expeditiously on this and as efficiently as we can certainly. But I just think six months is gonna disappear like that and we'll be

19

well closer to a year depending on who we get when are they even available to spring free to come here. So I would hope that we would by next meeting that we would have a plan in place, perhaps, if we hire someone that we would know, however we get to that process, but that we would be able to start that process going and that will kick open that window of a search and everything that goes into that rather than kick this down the road a couple months before we make that decision. Mr. Smith said and thank you, and, Mr., and Madam Chair and Councilmember Hartke, I think if we follow what Councilmember Williams has said and we come back with those specific things, we can take action on that April 21st. And the process can begin immediately, because regardless of which way we decide to go, either Maricopa County or the firm or however you decide we'll be ready to go, they'll have a job description and they can -- and my guess is they'll probably already have an ad ready to go, and we can start immediately that last part of April and that will be when the formal process would begin. And by the way, the audits will probably be out by then. So that will probably be a non-issue. Councilmember Tolmachoff said thank you. These processes seem to always take longer than we think they're going to. And Supervisor Gallardo's point of if we’re going to want to hit the ground running in April, I think the fastest way, at least to the starting line, is through Maricopa County. And then if we decide we need a firm, we can still pursue that, but we can have somebody managing the recruitment process as soon as we're ready to deliver it rather than starting the search. And do our piece or whatever we need to do, so I would be in favor of keeping that option on the table, but going forward with the county right out of the gate when we're ready with the job description. Mr. Smith said how about we do this in creating this job description, we meet with Maricopa County and involve them in that process and start getting things ready. And that will take us, you know, a couple three weeks, and before we know it we'll be on the April meeting again. And we can come back so that we're ready to literally once we get the final go ahead from these Boards, we can move right ahead. We won't be starting we won't be waiting to start actions. We'll get together with Maricopa County and use their HR and their expertise. And that way you also get an outside, a third party view. I'm sure that combined with our experience and they can take our -- the comments that came back and get a little bit different view on it and probably come up with a better description than we could have if we were doing it on our own. Vice Mayor Kavanaugh said thank you. I think that Supervisor Gallardo's offer and Maricopa County's offer to assist with this is a great example of regional cooperation in interest. It's something that I've really appreciated ever since we heard the initial proposal to us. I do think several of us are veterans of the joint committee process that we've used for a

20

variety of issues over the last several years. And I think that's worked pretty well in looking at detailed issues and it being faithful in reporting back to the Boards for recommendations for action. So my suggestion, rather than creating a new committee, let's use the format that does work. And I think that would help, again, expedite the process rather than casting around looking to create a new committee and things like that, so that would be my two cents' worth. Chair McDonald said a couple of comments. I got a little bit of a concern and, Mike, I'd like to get your input on this. I don't have a problem with Maricopa County doing this. Do we run into an issue of the Supervisor not being able to vote, having to recuse himself on a vote if his organization is the one who puts together the search? Mr. Minnaugh said Mr. Chair, I think, I think this certainly may require some additional, maybe some supplemental research to be sure, but I'm not aware of any potential future conflict that would arise in the event we go forward with that path. My thinking is that we can create enough separation between any involvement of Supervisor Gallardo that would create enough barriers and walls to relieve any potential conflict or any idea of impropriety. But certainly, I think, it requires some additional research. Chair McDonald said as much as the attractive of free could be, I'd hate to have him be excluded from this process because of something like that. So if you could also make sure that that's not going to be an issue for us moving forward. Another thing I wanted to bring up, I've had two people send me their resumes asking for this job already. I haven't responded to either of them. And I'd like to ask everyone here if you get a resume forward it on. Don't respond to them. It's inappropriate for someone contact you directly, so please forward those on. One other thing I wanted to make -- and I don't disagree with the comment that whomever the candidates are they should have a working knowledge of the area or the politics and things like that. I do see a lot of value in that. But one item I'd like to give some consideration to, somebody who comes -- if we bring somebody from another transit organization, a very highly successful transit organization, I think that might be useful in helping us build a road map to making this a regional organization. We have a lot of issues with the way that we're structured, the fact that we're two different organizations, the way that money flows into the organization, the way we make plans and determine where bus routes go, it has a level of dysfunctionality that I think we need to be working hard towards getting away from. So I don't want to discount somebody who isn't local from this process. I think if the skill set is there, if the experience is there with an organization that has both bus and rail, I know this is a monumental task to suggest we're going to do a restructure into

21

something regional, but I think that could be very valuable in starting that process. So I just don't want to discount anybody who's not from the area just because of that reason. Mr. Smith said Mr. Chair, I'm glad to hear you say that. At the end of the day, our objective is very simple. We want to hire the best person. We want to have the perfect person. Now who that person is and will they fit everything that we want to do, hiring the best person and I don't know what that package is. We won't know until we go through this process. And, you know, there have been others that I don't want -- we got some strong comments. We don't want to hire another person from another transit organization. I think we're severely limiting ourselves if we put those kind of restrictions on. I just mentioned that as an example of something which was a consensus that maybe somebody who doesn't know us, but they've shown a capability through what they've done in their career to easily grasp the situation they're in. That doesn't mean that they have to be from here. But it means they have to be able to understand us and recognize the unique challenges. That may be someone who's never stepped in Phoenix, Arizona. And so I would never foreclose that because I want -- I'm with you. I want to hire the very best person. And I think this process will go through and we'll identify that person. I'm also very much aware that usually and in my searches, and, Dennis, you can correct me, I'm not sure that the City of Mesa for example, in our services, ever hired anyone who actually applied for the job. Most every time we actually went out and found that person, because sometimes your best candidates are very happy where they are. And so I don't want to foreclose that either. And that's why I keep coming back. And whoever does that, it doesn't matter to me. But I think we need to understand that we may end up finding that the best person is somebody who doesn't know right now that they want this job. And that may not be because we don't get a high quality of applicants. We may get the perfect person in the process. We may find that person. But on the other hand, I think that everything should be open. And I think the direction we've given and Maricopa County for example, will have all of the comments that were made. They'll have a pretty good idea of what the sense of the Board is. And that will help in their evaluation as the candidates come in Chair McDonald said just some additional comments. I agree with what Dennis had said about the Board. It was a very functional Board. But I want to make sure that as this Board meets and there's a challenge for us, there's a challenge for us timing-wise. But when the subcommittee does it, I'd hate to see it come back as subcommittee recommendation of a candidate. I'd like to see subcommittee recommendations for review and then after that, recommendations for candidate approval, rather.

22

So even though the whole group will be vetting everybody, the subcommittee will vet it down to a group of people and allow the whole committee to look at this, review it and refine, and retool this, let them go back and make further, and then come back with their recommendation. I just don't want the Board to just have one bite at this apple. I want us to have more opportunities. Now having said that, I understand the timeline. Thelda, you said it very well. We need to have something solid at our next meeting, and I'd like to ask the Board if they would be open to if information comes up, we put it out there and host a telephone meeting, so we don't all have to come downtown, if there's some important information or something that's needed that we all make ourselves available at four o'clock in the afternoon on a particular day, call in and get the information and be able to take action on an item. So that was a lot. Mr. Smith said Mr. Chair, you know, while the final process has not been decided in the subcommittee and you, I would anticipate that exactly -- well, I would strongly suggest that there not be just one bite at the apple. I would hope that there be a group of people that are recommended and that many people get a bight at the apple. Stakeholders remember, this CEO interacts not only with the Board but with all of your staff. Much more with your staff than I think even you realize on a daily basis. We interact with other people in the community. And I think that, I would expect that the process will include some sort of step that allows stakeholders to also interact with the candidates. I found in government that has always resulted in a better result when you get by in before you come with the last one in. Usually, it's a pretty -- it's a nice culling experience. And often it comes down to you either have somebody who just rises to the top or you have the horrible situation that you have two people that you say, wow, we can't -- either one of those would be good. Chair McDonald said we have to go back and get more. Mr. Smith said or we have to go back. And, believe me, I have been involved in two searches where we went through the whole process, and my city manager, and I will forever thank him, walked in and said, we don't have our person. I'm sorry. And he was all embarrassed. And I thought that was the most wonderful thing I'd ever heard, because he was -- he wanted to get the right person. And we went through the process. And we went back out. And one of those people we hired was Frank Milstead, who happens now to be head of DPS. So I'm glad I had a city manager who said we've gone through this six month process and we don't have it. And I thought that took a lot of, you know, a lot of fortitude to do, because the pressure would have been let's hire, but he just didn't feel comfortable. I don't know if we'll hit that or not. I hope we find the person. And if we do we'll move. But the idea is that we'll get the best person possible for this job. There's too much on

23

the line. Chair Williams said thank you. And I think it brings up a good point because I wouldn't feel comfortable if when we handle a candidate if Phoenix management team didn't review those, too. They have the expertise like certainly I don't, you know, of this Board. It helps that policy, but they know the operations and the technical information that I wouldn't ever think to ask. They have to be part of this process too. Chair McDonald said I don't think there's a problem with the other group organizing, I just would hate to have any individual group refuse a candidate without going through our organization. Definitely vet them absolutely. I have no problem with more eyes the better. Chair Williams said that's what I feel. But I agree with you, I think it needs -- this committee has the ultimate responsibility. The joint committee has the responsibility to hire this person. And the more of us that are involved in the process, I believe, it's more positive. But I also know we'll -- we'll have time to sit on every meeting. And I think it's important to follow through with the committee. We have experience. Do we need to make a motion on this today? Mr. Smith said no, I think I have the direction. I will repeat the direction that as I understand it. Chair McDonald said well, before we go on, I do want to see if there's anyone else that wanted to add anything new to this? Kathie. Councilmember Farr I think from the sound of this whole Board, you get a direction that we want it done, we want it done now, we want it done right, we want the right guy. Mr. Smith said so as I understand it, I'm going to reach out to Tom Manos, Mr. Supervisor, if you would let him know that we'll be contacting him, we'll get Penny, and we'll go meet with Tom and with the Maricopa County and your HR leaders. We will share our information and we'll begin the process of defining a job description that will come up. Staff will also reach out and get different cost options, just to make sure that you've had -- looked at all options for outside help. By the time we meet again, we will have either communicated with the subcommittee our findings, or we'll come back to these Boards and say here's where we are. You give us the formal approval to go ahead and we will be ready, literally the next day to post an ad to start the process. We'll have it in place -- well, at least within a few days -- we'll be able to go, so this process will begin by no later than the third or fourth week of April. Did I hear that correctly? Chair McDonald said that's how I understood it. If there's no other comments, we'll go ahead and go on to Item No. 7.

24

7. 2015 Origins and Designations Study Mr. Smith said Wulf do you want to give a very quick presentation of origins and destination study. This is information that really defines who our riders are, where they're coming from and where they're going. So Wulf. Mr. Grote said Madam Chair, Mr. Chair, members of the Boards, I don't know how quick this is going to be, there's a fair amount of information here, but I'll try to move things quickly. First of all, this is an information item to report on our origin and destination study that we've been conducting. This is done every four to five years. The last one that we did was in 2011. And previous to that, we also did one in 2007 shortly before the light rail system opened up. We also, in addition to the presentation, we have a report that we've been sharing with staff and the various members for the service planning working group. And this report should be on our Web page by next month, so we'll have all the information there. And there's also a lot of data, tons and tons of data, so if you have questions, we can certainly try to draw some of that data out per the questions that we get. So the reasons that we do this study, there's actually several reasons. One is that we really want to understand our riders and who they are and do better planning for the future. Secondly, we also have obligations to the federal government that we have to fulfill. And then finally, the information that comes out of this survey goes to MAG as part of their transportation planning process for their travel forecasting model. And they need this data updated on a regular basis. So we anticipate that we'll be doing this again in probably about four years from now This started back in November of 2014. And we just finished last month. Really there's two main things that -- and we've done this part of this -- first, we do an on to off survey. And then the next the we do is an intercept survey, which is a full survey asking people questions on board the transit vehicles, both bus and rail. We received 22,000 of those on-board surveys back. It was about a 93 percent response rate. So we did pretty good there. The first survey that we did, though, was the on to off survey. And what we did was on buses and on the rail vehicle we handed, as the people got on, mainly on the bus system, we handed them a card. When they got off, we took the card back. We recorded where they got on and where they got off. It will give us a good indication of where they were coming from, going to. This data is also used, once we get it, to expand the on-board survey data to represent a population rather than just representing the numbers that we received, so this is also

25

important to us. So go right to the findings, I know some of this is a little bit difficult to see, but from this first map, this shows you where the boardings and alightings -- and if you don't know what alightings mean, that means where people get off, so boardings where they get on, alightings where they get off -- is defined by geographic area or zone. These are also zones that are defined in the MAG transportation planning process. And what you'll see is that the red or the orange on here is where the highest activity is. And we're seeing that that really is mostly along the light rail line where we see a lot of that that high level of activity. But maybe to help a little bit more, we also identified for you the top 100 boarding and alighting locations in the Valley. And this, the areas here in red, and there are several of them, identify where a lot of the activity is occurring. So it's not only occurring on the light rail line. You can see a lot of activity in downtown Tempe. You see a lot of activity central to north Phoenix. A lot of it actually in the West Valley, and west Phoenix, and to Glendale, a lot of activity in that area. And also you'll see in the very outlying areas, you see the red boxes way in the outlying areas, the reason for that is that's where the park and rides are for the express service. So that's why you see those nodes of activity. Looking at trip characteristics, I'll try to point out the main things here for you. There's only two areas that we're trying to have you look at here. One is the orange, which is the work trips, and the other one is the red, which is the bottom here, which is the college trips. And those are kind of highlighted here because we see some trends happening here. And you'll see on this chart there's, and several of the others that will come after this, we have 2007, 2011, and 2015 surveys. The 2007 questions were a little bit different, so you won't see exact duplication from one level to the other, but we wanted to at least show you the information there. Bottom line here is that we're seeing that that actually there's a lot of similarities between 2007 and 2015. And that 2011 was really different than that. So we've seen between 2011 and 2015 an increase in the amount of work trips. This is home based, people starting from home going to work. And we've also seen a significant decline in college trips going from home to college. And that's what we see from this. It's not just some percentages. It's also in numbers as well and real numbers. Looking now with the same information by trip purpose, we'll see similar characteristics, really, here, similar trends. This is bus only. And we have 41 percent are going to work now as compared to the 32 percent in 2011. And we see overall that the bus went from 13 percent to 8 percent college student.

26

This is a little bit more pronounced when we go to rail. On the right side of the rail columns, between 2011 and 2015. We don't have 2007 because we didn't have rail in 2007. So what you see here, again, we were 30 percent in 2011 for college students going down to 13 percent for college students on rail in 2015. And I'll explain some of that here in a moment. Chair Williams said I was going to say, did you get numbers from ASU on their ridership on their new shuttles? Mr. Grote said we don't have ridership figures, but that's part of the reasoning, and I'll explain some of that to you here in a moment. The other thing we also looked at was number of vehicles in the household. What we're seeing is that about 54 percent of our riders overall do not have a car available in their household. And 26 percent have one car. And then the others are more. The age of the rider, what we're seeing is that the 24 and under represents about 37 percent of our riders. And the age of our riders is actually increasing. So our ridership base is getting older is what we're seeing over the last four years. Employment, again, you can see the trends. We're back to where we were in 2007. In 2015, the blue area represents the employed full time. So 54 percent of our riders are full time. Actually, if you add the red bar and the green, it's part-time as well as people looking for work, so 80 percent are either full time, part-time, or looking for work Student status, the blue on the bottom of this is not a student. So 73 percent on the 2015 survey, 73 percent are not students. In 2011 that was only 60 percent. So here again, you're seeing that trend with the students and decline in the number of students that we're carrying, particularly, this is college students that are the decline, that went from 26 to 14 percent. So this comes back, Madam Chair, this comes back to the question that you were asking before, what's been happening, why are we seeing some of these trends. We looked at trends at particular Arizona State University, it's not just Arizona State, but it's other things, too, but we had statistics for Arizona State. When we opened up our light rail system in 2008 the Arizona State had a policy that would allow free student passes for the year for their students. And now it's $200. It's kind of gone up over time, but $200. During that same time period, the parking fees for the University stayed pretty much constant. In fact, I think the year before we opened up light rail, they did an increase that year that was the last increase that I know of that they did.

27

The other thing that they also did before we opened up light rail was they actually decreased their parking supply by four or 5,000 parking spaces. At that time there was a good reason for a bump up in ridership for our transit system. We also have seen on the right side of this chart, the purple line shows what's happened with our student pass sales, the University passes. And they went from 18,000 in 2010 to just about 8,000 now. So we've lost 10,000 of those students that were getting University passes for the year In addition to that -- and, by the way, I should mention, overall if you looked at the numbers, we've lost about 15,000 students a day or 15,000 trips by students a day on a daily basis, bus and rail. Some of those may be multiple. The other reasons that we're seeing here for potential reason for change is that for ASU there's more housing, particularly here in the downtown Phoenix campus. That didn't exist when we started. So a lot of people are not making that trip between the schools. Madam Chair, as you pointed out, too, the free shuttles. Not only do they have those shuttles, they've expanded the service on them, you know, they're very comfortable shuttles, they have Wi Fi on them, they have high backseats and recline, you know, now they have double-deckers that they've recently put on with a new contract that they have. So there's a lot of incentive, I think, for the students there as well. We also recognize online classes. Just in the last year went from 5,000 to 20,000 students that were taking online classes. So that also is a factor. And then just in general, the inter campus travel is just reducing. And then not shown on here, of course, was mentioned earlier, the gas prices are probably also playing a factor in this as well. So just to give you a few more tidbits here. This one is on how people get schedule information. The blue at the bottom shows the Transit Book. Back in 2007, 61 percent of the riders were getting their information from the Transit Book. Now in 2015, only 21 percent are getting their information from the Transit Book, and we see that about 57 percent, if you combine some of these different things on here, are getting their information electronically or online. So there's a big trend in that direction. We see that happening pretty quickly. The walk distance to and from transit, we've seen an upward trend towards people walking less than a quarter mile. 83 percent in 2015 are just walking a quarter mile or less. You'll see the rest of them in the top parts of this are walking further. So maybe that's because people are moving closer to transit. We'd like to think that anyway. We also looked at the transfers between bus and rail. And I think there was a little bit of discussion about that early in the meeting -- or the previous meeting -- that what we see on light rail is that about 76 percent of the people that use light rail do not transfer

28

from a bus. They just may take a car and park or they may ride a bike or they walk, but 76 percent will not transfer. 24 percent do transfer from another bus, so but roughly a quarter of our riders do transfer from bus to rail. Looking at the 76 percent that don't transfer, the vast majority of those folks walk, 75 percent. And then there's a few percentages that are for driving alone or driving getting dropped off. Actually, I was surprised to see the 10 percent use bikes to access the rail. So what we've done here is we have a just a summary graphic, which I believe you have you have at your place there. I won't go into a lot of detail with it. Maybe just a couple notes that I'll point out is that 39 percent of our riders are people who are riding the system to go to work. Thirty-eight percent have access to a car for that trip. Sixty-six percent do not transfer at all. The average trip is of a transit user is 5 to 6 miles, a little bit longer for rail closer to 6 miles and for bus it's closer to 5. But overall it's in that range of 5 to 6 miles. So again, you have that information. If you have other questions, I can point that out later. And then finally just a few notes here about now that we have all this information, you know, what do we do with it besides passing along the information we need to to MAG and to some of our federal studies. We also recognize that this survey has a wealth of information. We need to continue to analyze the information and address opportunities to improve our ridership by looking at the information. We recognize that we need to expand our partnership with schools. We have to spend more time, not just with ASU, but with other schools in the Valley in trying to bring more students back to the system. We need to track more discretionary riders. That means people who have a choice that can be or are taking a car that we're trying to get onto the transit system. And also work trips, we're trying -- although we've seen improvement in work trips, I think what we're seeing also is looking at our statistics against the nation and other cities. We have less work trips than most other cities do that are our peers. So we want to continue to work in that area to bump up that number. And also, finally, we want to leverage technology. You saw what was happening with our online passenger information and we need to continue to do that into the future. So that really is a quick summary of what I have. I also have Joe Gregory, who is one of our ace planners over here. He's the one that's put together a lot of the information, so if you have questions, he's there as my backup. So that's it Chair McDonald said are there any questions from the Board?

29

Supervisor Gallardo said thank you, Mr. Chairman. Is this information, the rider profile, is that broken down by regions as well? I mean, because I would be interested to know, I mean, in terms of I'm assuming, only because I know these areas and I represent them, I represent these communities on the county Board and in the legislature, but I'm assuming the southwest portions of Phoenix, the percentages of Hispanics and African Americans are going to be much higher, I would assume, that these areas are going to have less access to a vehicle. I'd be interested to see how many of the riders have come out of Tolleson are students or those, you know, riding to work, that sort of stuff. Mr. Grote said yes I think we can do that. You know, when we start to break this down into subregions, we don't get quite as much information, the validity is a little bit questionable, but I think we certainly can try to break that down further. We also have one we didn't show you today. We have one for bus and we have one for rail as well. But we haven't broken it down by subregion. Councilmember Sickles said we had one of our objective was that we were gonna use direct transportation. Has that been initiated? And is that in your data or is that coming up? With no transfers. We were going to initiate that in the near future. Has that been implemented, and does these figures reflect that? Mr. Grote said you're talking about the dial-a-ride program. We will be implementing that in the beginning of July where we're going to eliminate transfers between Dial A Ride systems. So we're working very actively. In fact, next month we're coming back to the Board to explain our implementation plan and where we're going so that we can have that in place by the first of July. Councilmember Orsborn said this is great work. And the information is great, because then we can go straight to target the audience that we need to increase ridership. In fact, coming in this morning for another Board meeting that I had, driving in the fantastic I-10 traffic, just as you're about at the breaking point, there's a billboard that flashed a Valley Metro ad. And I thought that was perfect. And it talked about how much but basically it's a picture of somebody who's driving in and getting stuff done on her commute in. So I love that we have the information. I know we can go specifically target, and just like you said, maybe try and work something out with the universities to where we can provide their transit and makes us more efficient and makes it perhaps cheaper for them. Thank you. Chair McDonald said anyone else? Okay. This item was for information only. 8. Travel and Expenditures Chair McDonald said the Item No. 8 Travel and Expenditures. Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith said Mr. Chair and Madam Chair, thank you very much. You have a list of the travel expenditures. If you have any questions -- in your packet -- we'd be happy to

30

answer those. The one thing, though, I did want to bring up is that we have been busy and working diligently in the formal review of our travel policies and procedures. We will have for presentation to the new Audit and Finance Subcommittee in their April meeting specific proposals and an update as to our procedures and things that we have changed including significant changes to the travel policies and our outlook for this next year. And I'd like to commend our staff for really recognizing where we are and working diligently to be much more effective and efficient in what they do and also for looking honestly and openly at, you know, where we have our gaps and where we could do better with some of our policies and procedures. So I just wanted to give you an update that that's where we are. And you should expect the Audit and Finance Subcommittee will have it next month, which means some may come to the Board for their enactment approval or just for information in the next month. Councilmember Hall said Scott what is -- what is the steering committee for RailVolution, what are they steering? Mr. Smith said that's a great question. RailVolution is a national organization of primarily authorities and organizations who provide transit rail services. And also members of the industry, stakeholders and that. It's specifically related to rail. We are an active member in that and that has several committees including steering committees, which plan the activities of the organization, plan education activities that the organization provides to its members including us. They provide specific classes and specific gatherings to advance rail transit. Howard Steere, one of Hillary's direct reports is on a steering committee. We participate in this national organization because we believe it makes us a better organization here. Councilmember Hall said its mission is communication to the public. Mr. Smith said communications. In that particular committee, yes, communications and marketing. And so the billboards and things like that that we're talking about and especially other communications as it relates. RailVolution has the whole delivery of services, the design of systems and delivery of services, so anything related to that will be -- is covered by organizations such as RailVolution. Councilmember Hall said I see. And they share ideas as to what works in markets et cetera. Mr. Smith said yes. It would be best practices. It's a best practices gathering place. It's really a place where best practices are shared. Councilmember Hall said okay. On the second page, First Group, is that fixed bus route, is that a certain part of Maricopa County? The top one. The $4,391,000, is that a

31

portion of Maricopa County? Do they have all the fixed bus routes or how does that work? Mr. Smith said John, which one specifically does First Group America? Would that be our express routes? Mr. McCormack said that's First Transit, which provides East Valley bus, so it's the entire East Valley bus and local commuter express routes in the East Valley. Mr. Smith said and that First Group is the parent company of First Transit. Councilmember Hall said okay those were the main things. I wasn't sure about what this Sundt Stacey Witbeck joint venture, is that the rail construction? Mr. Smith said what you'll see is you have Sundt Stacy Witbeck, but you'll also Stacy-Witbeck Sundt. They're actually doing two separate rail projects. One is the Gilbert Road extension. And the other one is on the Northwest. It's same partnership. They just go by different names. Chair McDonald said all right. Do we have anyone else? Mr. Smith said Mr. Chair, I do have one thing, if I could add. I know it's been long. I failed to mention, and since the Supervisor Gallardo is here, in my report, I just skipped right over it. Supervisor Gallardo also representing the Maricopa County Department of Transportation did accept an award from the WTS for employer of the year. So we congratulate Maricopa County for being a great place for certainly women in transportation services to work. So congratulations. Chair McDonald said on that, this was for information only. The last item on the agenda is the future Board agenda items. Is there anything anyone would like to add to the joint meeting for our April 21st meeting? No.

With no further discussion the meeting adjourned at 2:10 p.m.


DATE AGENDA ITEM 3 April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Ad Hoc Committee Member PURPOSE To request approval of the Ad Hoc Committee members BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION At the December 17, 2015 Joint Boards of Directors meeting, it was suggested that an Ad Hoc Committee be established to provide insight and direction to the Boards on financial matters. Following is a summary of the proposed committees: Mission The mission of the committee would be to improve the public confidence and credibility in Valley Metro by providing the following:

oversight into the development of internal and external audits report to the boards on audit review and findings develop recommendations for policy and/or procedural amendments with regard

to audit findings review and provide recommendations to the following policies and procedures:

travel credit card procurement ethics

review the annual budget process and make recommendations to improve fiscal soundness

act as a sounding board for staff recommendations to improve transparency and confidence.

Committee Composition The Committee should represent well respected community and/or civic leaders committed to sound governance. The committee would be 5 - 7 individuals appointed by the two boards that can commit to meeting annually to accomplish the mission of the committee. Following the first year, the committee could meet annually to review the budget and audit findings and report back to the Boards of Directors with their observations and recommendations.

2

Committee Appointment At the March 10, 2016 Valley Metro and VMR Joint Board meeting, the Boards authorized the Valley Metro RPTA and Valley Metro Rail Board chairs to select the Ad Hoc Committee members and return to the Joint Boards for final approval. Prior to the April 21, 2016 Joint Board meeting, staff will transmit under separate cover recommendations by the Board chairs for the Ad Hoc Committee members. COST AND BUDGET There are no costs associated with establishing an Ad Hoc Committee. COMMITTEE PROCESS Boards of Directors: April 21, 2016 for action RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Directors to approve the selection of members to the Ad Hoc Committee CONTACT Scott Smith Interim Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None


DATE AGENDA ITEM 4 April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Chief Executive Officer Recruitment Update PURPOSE To provide an informational update regarding the Chief Executive Officer recruitment process. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION At the March 2016 Valley Metro RPTA and Valley Metro Rail Joint Board meeting, the Boards directed staff to work with Maricopa County to begin the recruitment process for the selection of a permanent CEO. In addition, the Boards requested the Valley Metro RPTA and VMR Board Subcommittee to convene to discuss the initiation of the recruitment process. A Board Subcommittee meeting is scheduled for April 15, 2016 to review the recruitment process. Following the Board Subcommittee meeting and at the request of the Board Subcommittee, supplemental information may be forwarded to the Valley Metro RPTA and Metro Boards prior to the April 21, 2016 meeting. At the Valley Metro RPTA and Valley Metro Rail Joint Board meeting on April 21, 2016, Scott Smith, Interim CEO along with MaryEllen Sheppard, Assistant County Manager and Andy Mesquita, Deputy Director, Human Resources, with Maricopa County will provide an update on the recruitment process and any recommendations resulting from the VM RPTA and VMR Board Subcommittee Meeting. COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS TMC/RMC: April 6, 2016 for information VM RPTA and VMR Board Subcommittee: April 15, 2016 for information and possible action Boards of Directors: April 21, 2016 for information and possible action RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information and possible action.

2

CONTACT Scott Smith Interim Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None

4/14/2016

1

Valley Metro Chief Executive Officer (CEO)/Executive Director

Recruitment Overview

1

Proposed Recruitment Timeline

• Phase 1 - Defining Position Needs & Desired Candidate Attributes– April 6, 2016 thru April 21, 2016

• Phase 2 - Recruitment of Applicants– May 2, 2016 thru June 30, 2016

• Phase 3 - Assessment & Evaluation of Candidates– June 30, 2016 thru October 14, 2016

• Phase 4 - Selection of Desired Candidate– October 20, 2016 thru December 15, 2016

2

4/14/2016

2

Example Qualifications

• Education– Ex. Bachelor’s degree in Public or Business Administration, or related field desired.

• Experience– Ex. Ten or more years of executive level management experience in the public or

private sector for an organization with similar complexity as Valley Metro desired.

• Preferences– Ex. Master’s degree in Public or Business Administration is preferred.

– Ex. Prior executive management transit experience ideal.

3

Example Candidate Attributes

Knowledge of:• Budget and finance • Strategic planning• Dynamics that exist within

local jurisdictions• Diverse backgrounds and

needs of customers and stakeholders

• Organizational management and development

• Transportation industry and regulations

Skilled in:• Effective communication

(both written and verbal)• Advocating to achieve goals• Inclusion• Cultivating positive working

relationships• Exceptional customer-

service and focus• Consensus building• Facilitation and public

speaking

4

4/14/2016

3

Example Candidate Attributes, cont.

Ability to:

• Operate with a high degree of personal and professional ethics

• Develop and achieve performance driven results

• Achieve goals through leading and inspiring others

• Collaborate

• Identify and implement innovative solutions

• Hold staff accountable

• Remain apolitical while seeking to understand political differences

• Build successful working relationships; accessible; approachable

5

Example Critical Duties & Responsibilities of the CEO/Executive Director

Based upon tactics associated with Valley Metro’s 2016-2020 Strategic Plan:• Improve customer satisfaction • Evaluate and enhance passenger safety and security• Enhance customer service to member cities • Continue to provide high-level and timely assistance to communities and

businesses in construction areas• Enhance services and facilities for seniors and people with disabilities• Operate an effective, reliable, high performing transit system • Enhance Valley Metro’s role in sustainability and the environment

6

4/14/2016

4

Example Critical Duties & Responsibilities of the CEO/Executive Director, cont.

• Deliver projects and services on-time/on-budget • Maintain a culture to recruit and retain a qualified and diverse

workforce • Maintain strong fiscal controls to support Valley Metro’s long-term

sustainability• Expand and improve transit services to reach new markets • Improve connectivity of transit services for greater effectiveness• Communicate availability, attractiveness and safety of transit service

7


• Partner with the business community to provide transit services to support their economic growth and attract new businesses

• Secure dedicated, sustainable long-term funding to advance the total transit network

• Pursue all available funding opportunities for transit projects and services

• Seek opportunities to increase revenue generation

• Seek opportunities to attract capital investment to advance transit projects through public/private partnerships

8

4/14/2016

5


• Work with the local communities to leverage transit oriented development (TOD) to increase investment in transit

• Develop and implement a communications plan to inform and educate the public on the value of transit

• Collaborate with member agencies to advance the value of transit

• Maintain sound relationships with federal, state and regional agencies

9

Potential Advertising Sources

• Transit Talent – transittalent.com

• Mass Transit Magazine – masstransitmag.com

• Transit Job Finder – transitjobfinder.com

• American Public Transportation Association – apta.com

• Community Transportation Association – web1.ctaa.org

• Southwest Transit Association – swta.org

10

4/14/2016

6

Potential Advertising Sources, cont.

• National Association of City Transportation Officials – nacto.org

• Association for Commuter Transportation – actweb.org

• Arizona Transit Association – azta.org

• National Alliance of Public Transportation Advocates –publictransportation.org/napta

• Conference of Minority Transportation Officials – comto.org

11

Potential Advertising Sources, cont.

• ICMA (International City/County Management Association – icma.org

• National League of Cities – nlc.org

• National Association of Counties – naco.org

• National Association of Regional Councils – narc.org

12


DATE AGENDA ITEM 5 April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Fare Technology Improvements PURPOSE To provide an update of Fare Technology Improvements. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION In 2015, Valley Metro initiated a study to explore technical upgrades for the fare collection system. Valley Metro commissioned CH2M to lead a Fare Technology Improvement Team to analyze proposed upgrades, determine practical alternatives, and develop a high level register identifying key elements to consider for implementation. Valley Metro’s goals for the project were to maximize the current system while exploring additional ways to improve fare collection services. Through multiple site visits with Valley Metro, City of Phoenix staff, and the Fare Policy Working Group, it became clear that a public smartcard program and mobile ticketing were desirable enhancements to the current fare collection system. Ch2M issued a report describing the customer benefits and risks of these technology alternatives and help position the region for future success. In September 2015, staff presented an information update to the Board. Since that time a fare technology leadership team has commenced work, updating the goals and priorities for the technology improvements. Staff will provide an overview of progress, decisions pending and timeline for next steps. COST AND BUDGET For information only. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item relates to the following goals and strategies in the Five-Year Strategic Plan, FY 2016 – 2020: Goal 1: Increase customer focus

o Tactic A: Improve customer satisfaction Goal 2: Advance performance based operation

o Tactic A: Operate an effective, reliable, high-performing transit system. o Tactic E: Maintain strong fiscal controls to support Valley Metro’s long-term sustainability.

2

COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: March 16, 2016 for information TMC/RMC: April 6, 2016 for information Board of Directors: April 21, 2016 for information RECOMMENDATION This item is for information only. CONTACT John McCormack Chief Financial Officer 602-495-8239 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None

4/14/2016

1

Dallas Houston Salt Lake City DenverFull fare media options Cash

Paper passes

Reloadable Smartcard in

development

Mobile App (launched 2014)

Cash

Limited paper passes

Reloadable Smartcard

Mobile App (launched Feb

2016)

Cash

Paper passes

Reloadable Smartcard

Open Payments

(contactless credit

cards)

Tokens

Cash

Paper passes

Non‐Reloadable

Smartcard for

employers and

schools

Reduced fare media

options

Paper passes, Mobile App (Yes

Senior/Disabled, No Students

on mobile)

Paper passes, Smartcard Paper passes Paper passes

Sale options (retail, TVMs,

on vehicle)

TVMs, retail network, online,

limited on vehicle (phase out

eventually with smartcard)

TVMs, retail network,

online, onboard bus

(including reload pilot)

TVMs, retail networks Paper passes‐ TVMs,

retail network, online

Types of fare distribution All passes at TVMs

Limited Retail Network (all

pass types)

On board buy 2‐hour or day

paper pass

Multiple TVM types (pass

type varies)

Retail network (all passes)

On board all local buses (all

passes)

Online form (reloadable

card)

TVMs sell paper passes

Retail network (all

passes)

Online form

(reloadable card)

TVMs sell paper

passes

Smartcards are

available through

employers and

schools

4/14/2016

2

Phase 1• Valley Metro Exploratory Proposal Request• CH2M Hill Independent Review• Fare Policy Working Group• June 2015 Fare Technology Improvement Study• Sept 2015 VM Board

Phase 2• CH2M Hill Planning and Design• Leadership Committee (City of Phoenix, RPTA, and other cities) • Series of topic specific, regional meetings • Concept of operations • RFP development

Improve Fare Payment Options for Customers

Enhance Data Collection and Ridership/Revenue Reconciliation

Increase Controls over Media Distribution, Reduced Fare Programs, Enforcement

4/14/2016

3

Provide new fare media options

Develop smart card for general public

Can load at TVM, retail, or online with smartcard

Install validators on bus and rail stations

Provide path to mobile ticketing

Customers can purchase fare products on smartphone

Initially display visual tickets and barcode (proven technology; pilot)

Improve fare inspection techniques Ability to inspect with hand held verifier; upgrades

Integrate electronic citation equipment

Advance data collection and provide automated revenue management Develop strategic long-term transit planning of the network

Improve revenue management with one back-end system

4/14/2016

4

Control reduced fare and media distribution Introduce personalized reduced fare smart card

Implement smartcard distribution channels

Explore long term alternatives Maximize current investment

Explore phased approach Start with improvements that serve project goals

Transition away from mag stripe pass

Policy implications

Smartcard Expansion

Mobile

App

Reduced

Fare

Program

Distribution Plan

Customer

Focused

Plan

8

4/14/2016

5

Fare Media Choices

Stored Value Choices

Payment Options

Faster Boardings

Time Savings


DATE AGENDA ITEM 6 April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Management Policies & Procedures Update PURPOSE To provide an informational update including progress made on Board directed policy and procedure changes in progress, as well as anticipated next steps for each area. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION In December 2015, the Boards requested a thorough review of, and updates to five priority policy areas. Those included the Credit Card Program; Travel & Entertainment; Ethics; Conflict of Interest; and Procurement. Staff will provide the Board with an update on policy revisions, along with a summary of the attached Policy Development Process which summarizes the approach being used in the development and revision of existing and future policies and procedures. COST AND BUDGET There are no budget impacts at this time. COMMITTEE PROCESS TMC/RMC: April 6, 2016 for information Audit Finance Subcommittee: April 14, 2016 for information Boards of Directors: April 21, 2016 for information RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Scott Smith Interim-CEO 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT Policy Development Process

4/14/2016

1

April 2016

Policy Development Process

2

Phase 1 –Policy Development

4/14/2016

2

3

Phase 2 –Policy Review & Approval

4

Phase 3 –Communicate, Train, Update & Archive

4/14/2016

3


DATE AGENDA ITEM 7 April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Travel and Expenditures PURPOSE The monthly travel and expenditures are presented for information. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT John McCormack Chief Financial Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT Valley Metro Travel Reimbursement Report Valley Metro RPTA and Valley Metro Rail Monthly Accounts Payable over $25,000

Valley MetroTravel Reimbursement Report

For Travel Completion DatesFebruary 26, 2015 through March 25, 2016

Name Job Title Purpose of Travel Location Dates Traveled Total Travel Cost Airfare Other

Transport Lodging Meals Misc.*

William Tsuei Director IT DHS Cybersecurity Training Baton Rouge, LA

2/21/16 - 2/25/16 $1,439.51 $532.20 $163.21 $423.60 $265.50 $55.00

John Farry Government Relations Officer

APTA Legislative Conference and Arizona Delegation Visits

Washington, DC

3/12/16 - 3/16/16 $1,873.91 **$215.80 $75.25 $1,525.16 $263.50 $10.00

Scott Smith Interim CEO APTA Legislative Conference and Arizona Delegation Visits

Washington, DC

3/12/16 - 3/16/16 $2,510.86 $744.20 $0.00 $1,525.16 $241.50 $0.00

Mark Mitchell Mayor, City of Tempe

Hill visits during APTA Legislative Conference

Washington, DC

3/15/16 - 3/16/16 $975.28 $611.20 $40.62 $323.46 $0.00 $0.00

**Cost reflects use of $518.40 airline credit.* Misc. cost includes airport parking and FedEx charges for shipping information packets for Washington DC delegation.

Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Check Date Check Amount20160226W003 Sundt/Stacy & Witbeck Joint Venture NWX Jan 2016 NWX Phase I Rail Construction 2/26/2016 1,229,380.2620160311W010 HDR/SR Beard & Associates October 2015 HDR Planning and Support Services 3/11/2016 755,241.85VMR 20160311W002 Alternate Concepts Inc. Jan 2016 Transportation Services 3/11/2016 720,961.9020160226W HDR/SR Beard & Associates September 2015 HDR Planning and Support Services 2/26/2016 489,556.41VMR 20160311W004 Jacobs Engineering Jan 2016 GRE Design Services 3/11/2016 334,695.23026085 RWC International New Aerial Platform Truck for Operations 2/25/2016 328,673.39VMR 20160311W008 Allied Barton Security Services Jan 2016 Fare Inspection & Security Svcs 3/11/2016 272,458.64VMR 20160311W008 Allied Barton Security Services Feb 2016 Fare Inspection & Security Svcs 3/11/2016 263,183.71VMR 20160311W009 Stacy and Witbeck-Sundt JV GRE Dec 2015 GRE Phase I Preconstruction 3/11/2016 231,444.4420160304W004 PB-Wong Joint Venture Jan. 2016 TO 4 & TO 20 NWE 4012 Project Management 3/4/2016 226,042.1220160226W004 City of Phoenix- Public Transit Dec 2015 Project Funding, ROW, Signal Equipt, Staff Costs 2/26/2016 206,975.2920160318W002 DMS - Facility Services, Inc. Jan. 2016 Facilities and LRV Cleaning Services 3/18/2016 148,734.1820160222W005 USBC Real Estate LLC March 2016 101 Bldg Rent 2/22/2016 110,759.2320160318W005 USBC Real Estate LLC April 2016 101 Bldg Rent 3/18/2016 110,117.1520160304W004 PB-Wong Joint Venture Jan. 2016 TO 2 & TO 20 CME/4027 Project Mngt 3/4/2016 103,582.53026122 R.C.D. Cleaning Service, Inc. LSQ Funding Group L.C. November 2015 Operations Cleaning Services 3/3/2016 88,938.23026124 AT&T CME Prop 400 Utilities 3/3/2016 87,949.50026122 R.C.D. Cleaning Service, Inc. LSQ Funding Group L.C. Dec. 2015 Operations Cleaning Services 3/3/2016 84,098.5520160226W011 Stacy and Witbeck-Sundt JV GRE Nov 2015 GRE Light Rail Extension 2/26/2016 69,444.4420160222W004 Knorr Brake Corporation (KBC) Brake Equipment Overhaul 2/22/2016 57,341.06VMR 20160311W007 City of Mesa-Central Mesa Billings 4/1/15 thru 11/29/15 GRE Costs Request #7 3/11/2016 55,525.2120160304W004 PB-Wong Joint Venture Jan. 2016 TO19 GRE 4036 Project Management 3/4/2016 52,484.56VMR 20160311W003 URS Corp Jan 2016 Planning Conceptual Engineering 3/11/2016 51,301.2820160304W001 DMS - Facility Services, Inc. Jan. 2016 Facilities Maintenance Services 3/4/2016 49,861.42026177 SRP Miscellaneous Accts Receivable NWX Prop 400 Utilities 3/16/2016 48,162.7920160318W002 DMS - Facility Services, Inc. Feb. 2016 Facilities Maintenance Services 3/18/2016 45,420.3920160226W002 URS Corp Dec 2015 Planning, Conceptual Engineering 2/26/2016 42,274.2120160222W001 URS Corp July 2015 Phx West Planning, Conceptual Engineering 2/22/2016 34,856.00026115 City of Phoenix- Public Transit Feb. 2016 - Fare Handling Fee 3/3/2016 31,407.00026121 Penn Machine Company, LLC LRV Tire Kits 3/3/2016 31,200.00026191 United Right-of-Way Feb. 2016 Facilities Landskeeping Services 3/16/2016 30,756.1220160226W008 Enterprise Technology Services Jan 2016 IT Services 2/26/2016 28,472.43026146 United Right-of-Way Jan 2016 Facilities Landskeeping Services 3/9/2016 26,837.7220160226W002 URS Corp Nov 2015 Planning, Conceptual Engineering 2/26/2016 25,485.43

Report Total 6,473,622.67

Valley Metro Rail, Inc.Monthly AP Payments over $25,000February 21, 2016 - March 20, 2016

Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation AuthorityMonthly AP Payments over $25,000February 21, 2016 - March 20, 2016

Document Number Name Transaction Description Effective Date Transaction Amount20160226W004 FirstGroup America, Inc. Jan. 2016 Express, Circulator, Local, Link & Flash routes, Cox Cable 2/26/2016 4,263,503.8434967 City of Tempe EVBOM Fuel, Utilities and Lease Agreement July thru Dec. 2015 2/25/2016 3,248,778.0020160311W City Phoenix (Transit Dept) March 2016 Fixed Route Service, Dial-A-Ride, Monthly Regional Service 3/11/2016 2,290,439.0020160222W City Phoenix (Transit Dept) Feb 2016 Fixed Route Service, Dial-A-Ride, Monthly Regional Service 2/22/2016 2,290,439.0034979 Total Transit, Inc. Dec. 2015 East Valley ParaTransit Services 2/25/2016 689,139.4535051 Total Transit, Inc. Jan. 2016 East Valley Paratransit Services 3/17/2016 686,441.5920160304W001 ADP PPE 2/28/16 ADP Wages Payable 3/4/2016 440,942.4020160318W001 ADP PPE 3/13/16 ADP Wages Payable 3/18/2016 434,307.9520160222W006 ADP PPE 2/14/16 ADP Wages Payable 2/22/2016 422,750.9420160311W City Phoenix (Transit Dept) PTF Expenditure Reimb., Project #133045, Request #10 3/11/2016 391,963.1120160304W01 United Healthcare March 2016 Employee Dental & Vision Coverage 3/4/2016 273,810.9534996 Valutrans, Inc Jan 2016 West Valley Fixed Route Transit Service 3/3/2016 198,573.3820160304W001 ADP PPE 2/28/16 ADP Payroll Taxes, Garnishments 3/4/2016 193,750.5120160318W001 ADP PPE 3/13/16 ADP Payroll Taxes, Garnishments 3/18/2016 192,877.0735051 Total Transit, Inc. Jan. 2016 NW Valley Paratransit Services 3/17/2016 187,178.7920160222W006 ADP PPE 2/14/16 ADP Payroll Taxes, Garnishments 2/22/2016 185,126.2020160304W002 ASRS PPE 2/28/16 ASRS 3/4/2016 160,947.9320160222W007 ASRS PPE 2/14/16 ASRS 2/22/2016 156,409.3920160318W002 ASRS PPE 3/13/16 ASRS 3/18/2016 153,772.573152016 Wells Fargo Bank Feb. 2016 Wells Fargo Credit Card Purchases 3/15/2016 55,076.3220160222W002 Second Generation, Inc. dba Ajo Transportation Jan 2016 Rural Connector Route 2/22/2016 50,105.67

20160226W003 CopperPoint Mutual Insurance Company March 2016 Rent Mobility Center 2/26/2016 47,102.3420160304W06 City of Mesa Feb. 2016 CNG Fuel Expense 2/29/2016 44,226.4135024 C.A.R.E Evaluators, Inc. Jan 2016 Valley Metro In-Person Assessment Services 3/9/2016 30,324.4735014 City of Glendale PTF Expenditure Reimbursement Project AZ-95-X023, Request #2 3/9/2016 25,345.0035029 Pac-12 Sales LLC Valley Metro-ASU Sponsorship Nov. 2015 3/9/2016 25,000.00

Report Total 17,138,332.28


DATE AGENDA ITEM 8 April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events PURPOSE Chairs McDonald and Williams will request future agenda items from members, and members may provide a report on current events. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Scott Smith Interim Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT Pending Items Request

2




April 14, 2016

Board of Directors Thursday, April 21, 2016

Lake Powell Conference Room 101 N. 1st Avenue, 10th Floor

12:45 p.m.

Action Recommended

1. Public Comment

A 15-minute opportunity will be provided to members of the public at the beginning of the meeting to address the Board on all agenda items. The Chair may recognize members of the public during the meeting at his/her discretion. Up to three minutes will be provided per speaker or a total of 15 minutes total for all speakers.

1. For information

2. Minutes

Minutes from the March 17, 2016 Board meeting are presented for approval.

2. For action

CONSENT AGENDA

3A. Renewal of Safety and Security Agreement with the City of Phoenix, Public Transit Department Staff recommends that the Board of Directors authorize the Interim CEO to renew the Safety and Security agreement with the City of Phoenix, Public Transit Department through 2019.

3A. For action

3B. Network Video Recorder Upgrade Staff recommends that the Board of Directors authorize the Interim CEO to purchase necessary equipment from World Wide Technology, Inc. for an amount of $229,140 to complete a Network Video Recorder (NVR) upgrade to the light rail closed circuit television (CCTV) security camera system and to establish a 10% contract change contingency of $22,914 that is included in the overall budget established for the project.

3B. For action

2

3C. Amendment for Planning, Conceptual Engineering and Environmental Studies Consultant for the I-10 West and Glendale High Capacity/Light Rail Transit Corridors, Contract No. LRT-07-077A-PCES Staff recommends that the Board of Directors authorize the Interim CEO to execute a contract amendment to the Planning, Conceptual Engineering and Environmental Studies Consultant for the I-10 West and Glendale High Capacity/Light Rail Transit Corridors Contract with AECOM to reallocate $400,000 from the Capitol/I-10 West corridor to complete additional Alternatives Analysis tasks for the West Phoenix/Central Glendale corridor.

3C. For action

3D. City of Tempe Streetcar Project Agreements Staff recommends that the Board of Directors authorize the Interim CEO to execute the following agreements for the Tempe Streetcar project:

A. The Funding, Design and Construction Agreement B. The Operations and Maintenance Agreement C. The Public Way Use Agreement

3D. For action

3E. 16th Street Light Rail Transit (LRT) Station Advanced Feasibility Study: Phoenix Funding Agreement Staff recommends that the Board of Directors authorize the Interim CEO to enter into a Funding Agreement with the City of Phoenix to pay up to $60,000 for Valley Metro to conduct the 16th Street LRT Station Advanced Feasibility Study.

3E. For action

3F. Valley Metro Operations and Maintenance Center Security Fence Staff recommends that the Board of Directors authorize the Interim Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute a contract award through the state procurement office to install a perimeter fence around the Operations and Maintenance Center (OMC). This contract is to be awarded to Western Fence Co. for the amount of $180,000 and a contract contingency within the overall budget of $12,000.

3F. For action

3

REGULAR AGENDA

4. Valley Metro Rail, Inc. Fiscal Year 2017 (FY17) Preliminary Operating and Capital Budget and Five-Year Operating Forecast and Capital Program (FY 2017 thru 2021)

Scott Smith, Interim CEO, will introduce John McCormack, Chief Financial Officer, who will provide information regarding the FY17 Budget and Five-Year Preliminary Operating Forecast and Capital Program (FY17 thru FY21).

4. For information

5. Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Chair Williams will request future agenda items from members and members may provide a report on current events.

5. For information

6. Next Meeting The next meeting of the Board is scheduled for Thursday, May 19 6, 2016 at 12:45 p.m.

6. For Information

Qualified sign language interpreters are available with 72 hours notice. Materials in alternative formats (large print, audiocassette, or computer diskette) are available upon request. For further information, please call Valley Metro at 602-262-7433 or TTY at 602-251-2039. To attend this meeting via teleconference, contact the receptionist at 602-262-7433 for the dial-in-information. The supporting information for this agenda can be found on our web site at www.valleymetro.org


DATE AGENDA ITEM 1 April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Public Comment PURPOSE A 15-minute opportunity will be provided to members of the public at the beginning of the meeting to address the Board on all agenda items. The Chair may recognize members of the public during the meeting at his/her discretion. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Scott Smith Interim Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None



Minutes of the

METRO Board of Directors

Thursday, March 17, 2016 12:45 p.m.

Meeting Participants Thelda Williams, City of Phoenix, Chair Mayor Mark Mitchell, City of Tempe, Vice Chair (via phone) Councilmember Rick Heumann, City of Chandler Councilmember Lauren Tolmachoff, City of Glendale Vice Mayor Dennis Kavanaugh, City of Mesa Chair Williams called the meeting to order at 2:11 p.m. 1. Public Comment Mr. May said good afternoon. I would like to congratulate the Board on several things that are coming online, in fact, in a couple days, the Northwest extension. I'm also happy about the 50th Street platform that's going in next to ABIL, now known as Ability 360. And you guys are putting in South Central. Your people that voted in Prop 400 are not gonna be happy that they lost money for I-10 and have to wait for I-10 to be built later than what it was expected. And, finally, we're having a problem with bicycles not following the rules on the trains. Some of them are going into the tunnels, some aren't doing what they're supposed to, some of them are being in front of the doors, blocking the doors, or in front of the ADA seating area. Thank you. Chair Williams said thank you. And I direct staff to look into the bicycle problem. Thank you. Blue. Mr. Crowley said how y'all doing today on this part. It's been a long one, hasn't it? What I'd like to point out is, in your legislative update one of the things that is mentioned in there is the CANAMEX. ADOT has been putting some outreach and they're saying along that corridor, which runs from Highway 85 up to Wickenburg, that that area is also platted, according to the County, to be a Community of Belmont with an estimated population over the next 50

2

years to be six million people. But in the plat that they had, one of the things that the developers made sure that the County said that they don't need to be doing is rail. And I look at one of the jobs that you have as the light rail and as the transportation set in this area, since that CANAMEX running from highway well, it runs from Nogales to Hoover Dam, that in its alignment that the rail, y'all are a part of what needs to be done, but I see it as not just the light rail needing to go in that transportation corridor, but a heavy rail connecting the Union Pacific with the SBNF, because on the west side coming from Glendale and Waddell hooking into that with the industry that we have in those corridors, it would be a faster and more efficient way of moving goods and services. So, as I said, ADOT is doing outreach for input. And, like I said, one of the things they're thinking is on that corridor is what about rail as a part of it. What are you people doing on this? Just a thought, since you are the rail for the region, and it is a transportation corridor, or as it is often with transit, and the public's part of this equation. Are you going to be so far behind that you make no input at all and that it's just one more thing that ADOT believes that if it's a road, it's what they do? And as I've tried to state over and over again, your job of transportation is not just building roads, it's getting buses, putting rail, both heavy and light. And also with your legislative update, why don't you show what this committee's lobbyist, both Washington and down at the legislature, what are they doing. What have you got them doing, since, to me, a legislative update is how you are inter-relating with those political bodies, not just, well, they're gonna be building a roadway. Thanks. Chair Williams said Blue, you also have a card in for Item 3, which is the consent agenda. Do you want to address that? Mr. Crowley said I'll start off with the purchase of the tires. Thelda, do you remember Mr. Belmont or Beaumont who was a proponent of, what, magnetic levitation as a way of powering our rail. And that $320,000 for tire and wheel replacement would be how much if we were using mag lev. It would be zero, wouldn't it, because there is no friction. It would also be a more efficient and more effective system. But then along with he and myself saying, every part of your rail system should also be collecting something. And what is that, solar energy, and you converting it to the electricity to help pay for itself. But until you guys get a little more forward thinking and think about upgrading your system to magnetic levitation along the whole route, what can I say. As to Washington Street I look at it and 16th Street, when you were building it, I more than once said, where are the abilities to put more stations in. And when did you start trying to figure that out, after the fact and said, gee, we didn't build this right.

3

As in the South Central extension, I keep on hearing that ad on the TV, hey, we're going to 19th. And then we're gonna go to Metrocenter. Are you going to the Metrocenter transit center? No. So when you're saying Metrocenter, like I said before, it's not just an idea. And when you're going to Metrocenter, wouldn't you want to be going to the transit center, as a multimodal working together, as in something that you guys have expressed you don't do and haven't done, but would like to get on board to. If you're being multimodal, transferring between a bus and a rail, as I have stated up here for the last two years, you don't have the logistics right, and the bus is the one that suffers. Transferring from a bus to the rail at Central Station, if you're on a bus and the rail comes in, you've stopped at a stoplight for 45 seconds. After the rail passes through, then you can go into the station. I need you to be more multimodal. I need that Northwest extension to go towards the not just towards Metrocenter but into Metrocenter to the Central Station thus being able to connect with the two universities out there -- or colleges meaning Glendale Community and ASU West. The spine that Phoenix would like to say is the freeway and the rail is b-s, because there is more north south. It's called the 101, the 303, and we need to get all of these parts done.

Chair Williams said thank you.

2. Minutes Chair Williams said the minutes from the February 18, 2016 Board meeting are being presented for approval. IT WAS MOVED BY VICE MAYOR KAVANAUGH, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TOLMACHOFF AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 18, 2016 BOARD MEETING. 3. Consent Agenda Chair Williams said that brings us to the consent agenda. Does anyone have any questions on the consent agenda? Hearing none, do I have a motion? IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER HARTKE, SECONDED BY VICE MAYOR KAVANAUGH AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.

4

4. Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events

Chair Williams said the Future Agenda Items. Since I heard that WiFi will be available this weekend, courtesy of Cox, could we find out how this organization is coming on putting Wi Fi on the trains and the buses? Mr. Smith said Madam Chair, we'll give you an update at the next meeting on WiFi and an all over update on our IT work. We're going to complete evaluation of obviously WiFi on the light rail is a top priority, so we'll give you an update on that. Chair Williams said thank you very much. Are there any other future items anybody would like to? Chair Williams said I want to remind everyone to come to the Grand Opening at 9:00 a.m. this Saturday at 19th Avenue and Dunlap. And with that, our next meeting is April 21st, 12:00 p.m. And we are adjourned. With no further discussion the meeting adjourned at 2:30 p.m.


DATE AGENDA ITEM 3A April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Renewal of Safety and Security Agreement with the City of Phoenix, Public Transit Department PURPOSE To request authorization for the Interim Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to renew the Safety and Security Agreement with the City of Phoenix, Public Transit Department through 2019. This agreement identifies the safety and security agreement of the light rail system operation in the City of Phoenix. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION On February 9, 2009, Valley Metro and the City of Phoenix entered into an agreement, Phoenix City Contract No. 125439, establishing the security and code enforcement for Valley Metro light rail within the City of Phoenix. The purpose of this memorandum is to request an extension to the Light Rail Security and Code Enforcement Agreement through September 30, 2019. COST AND BUDGET There are no additional costs to the extension of the agreement. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item relates to the following goals and strategies in the Five-Year Strategic Plan, FY 2016 – 2020:

Goal 1: Increase customer focus o Tactic A: Improve customer satisfaction

Goal 2: Grow transit ridership o Tactic C: Communicate availability, attractiveness and safety of transit

service COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: March 16, 2016 for information RMC: April 6, 2016 approved Board of Directors: April 21, 2016 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Directors authorize the Interim CEO to renew the Safety and Security agreement with the City of Phoenix, Public Transit Department through 2019.

2

CONTACT Adrian Ruiz Director, Safety and Security 602-523-6054 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None A copy of the agreement is available upon request.


DATE AGENDA ITEM 3B April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Network Video Recorder Upgrade PURPOSE To request authorization for the Interim Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to purchase necessary equipment from World Wide Technology, Inc. for an amount of $229,140 to complete a Network Video Recorder (NVR) upgrade to the light rail closed circuit television (CCTV) security camera system and to establish a 10% contract change contingency of $22,914 that is included in the overall budget established for the project. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION A CCTV security camera system currently exists along the light rail alignment and at the facilities at the Operations and Maintenance Center (OMC). NICE Vision is the video management system used for all of the security cameras. The NVR is the server where all the video is stored. NVR’s directly affect the video quality and amount of time video can be stored. The four existing NVR servers are eight years old and need to be replaced with servers with newer technology. The NVR server upgrade will increase storage space from the old configuration which will enable Valley Metro to increase camera resolution while maintaining our minimunm video retention requirments. The NVR upgrade will consist of replacing the original servers with the same compatible models selected for the Central Mesa Extension and the Northwest Extenstion. In this way spare parts, training and operation would be consistent with all the NVR hardware. Valley Metro will procure the necessary equipment from World Wide Technology, Inc. utilizing a cooperative agreement through the State of Arizona. Cooperative Agreements are contracts that are solicited and awarded by other public entities and whose cooperative language allows Valley Metro to utilize these contracts for goods and services it requires. The price is deemed fair and reasonable when compared to an independent cost estimate prepared by staff. COST AND BUDGET The cost to purchase necessary equipment from World Wide Technology, Inc. to complete a Network Video Recorder (NVR) upgrade is in the amount of $229,140. A 10% contract contingency of $22,914 is established that is included within the overall budget for the project for unanticipated changes. Costs for the Network Video Recorder (NVR) upgrade is fully funded within the METRO Adopted FY16 Operating and Capital Budget.

2

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item relates to the following goals and strategies in the Five-Year Strategic Plan, FY 2016 – 2020:

Goal 2: Advance performance based operation o Tactic A: Operate an effective, reliable, high performing transit system

COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: March 16, 2016 for information RMC: April 6, 2016 approved Board of Directors: April 28, 2016 for action RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Directors authoriz the Interim CEO to purchase necessary equipment from World Wide Technology, Inc. for an amount of $229,140 to complete a Network Video Recorder (NVR) upgrade to the light rail closed circuit television (CCTV) security camera system and to establish a 10% contract change contingency of $22,914 that is included in the overall budget established for the project.

CONTACT Ray Abraham Chief Operations Officer 602-652-5054 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None


DATE AGENDA ITEM 3C April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Amendment for Planning, Conceptual Engineering and Environmental Studies Consultant for the I-10 West and Glendale High Capacity/Light Rail Transit Corridors, Contract No. LRT-07-077A-PCES PURPOSE To request authorization for the Interim Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute a contract amendment to the Planning, Conceptual Engineering and Environmental Studies (PCES) contract with AECOM to reallocate $400,000 previously authorized by the Board for work on the Capitol/I-10 West corridor to the West Phoenix/Central Glendale corridor. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION In May 2007, the PCES contract was awarded to URS to conduct planning, engineering and environmental studies for the Capitol/I-10 West (formerly known as I-10 West) and West Phoenix/Central Glendale (formerly Glendale) High Capacity/Light Rail Transit corridors. In 2014, URS was acquired by AECOM, so the contract is now with them. The initial notice to proceed was only for the first phase of Capitol/I-10 West corridor planning. Since that time, funds have been authorized by the Board incrementally for various tasks for both corridors. In November 2010, the Board authorized the CEO to execute a contract amendment for an amount not-to-exceed $1,698,529 including an allowance for $800,000 for Capitol/I-10 West project definition activities. The current contract value is $10,395,148.84, with funding authorization for the Capitol/I-10 West corridor of $8,217,549.49 and the authorized amount for the West Phoenix/Central Glendale corridor is $2,177,599.35. The contract’s expiration date is December 31, 2016. The consultant team has completed planning studies on the Capitol/I-10 West corridor and is now working on a draft Environmental Assessment (EA) document and advanced conceptual engineering efforts. In addition, the consultant is conducting an Alternatives Analysis for the West Phoenix/Central Glendale corridor, which will define the preferred alignment and transit mode for the corridor. Board authorized funding for the West Phoenix/Central Glendale corridor is adequate to complete study efforts to generally define a preferred alignment and transit mode, but additional funds in the amount of $400,000 are needed to complete key tasks to further define the project and develop a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) by the end of 2016. This includes the following analysis:

Route options in the vicinity of I-17 and Camelback Road Route options in the vicinity of 51st Avenue to transition from Glendale Avenue to

Glenn Drive End-of-line options at the west end of downtown Glendale

2

Street configuration options for the entire corridor Refinement of station locations

The consultant’s work effort to continue environmental studies for the Capitol/I-10 West corridor through the end of 2016 will only require $400,000 of the remaining $800,000 authorized for this corridor. Therefore, staff proposes to reallocate the remaining $400,000 to the West Phoenix/Central Glendale corridor. As noted earlier, the PCES contract will expire at the end of 2016. Any additional work efforts needed to complete environmental studies and preliminary engineering for the two corridors beyond 2016 will become part of the Planning and Community Relations Support Services contract currently in the consultant procurement process. COST AND BUDGET No additional funds would be added to this contract. The PCES contract value is $10,395,148.84 and is funded through regional Public Transportation Funds (PTF) and federal funds. Board authorized and unused spending in the amount of $800,000 is still available for the Capitol/I-10 West corridor, but only $400,000 of this amount will be needed to continue work for this corridor through the contract’s completion date. Staff proposes to reallocate the remaining $400,000 to the West Phoenix/Central Glendale corridor as indicated in the table below:

Capitol/I-10 West West

Phoenix/Central Glendale

Contract Amendment Allowance

$800,000 $0

Proposed Allocation $400,000 $400,000 All current and proposed work efforts to be undertaken by the consultant are either in the current FY16 budget or are programmed in Valley Metro Rail’s proposed FY17 budget. COMMITTEE ACTION RTAG: March 16, 2016 for information RMC: April 6, 2016 approved Board of Directors: April 28, 2016 for action RELEVANCE TO STRATEGIC PLAN This item addresses two goals in the Board-adopted FY16-20 Strategic Plan:

Goal 2: Advance performance based operations o Tactic A: Deliver projects and services on-time/on-budget

Goal 3: Grow transit ridership o Tactic A: Expand and improve transit services to reach new markets

3

RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Directors authorize the Interim CEO to execute a contract amendment to the Planning, Conceptual Engineering and Environmental Studies Consultant for the I-10 West and Glendale High Capacity/Light Rail Transit Corridors Contract with AECOM to reallocate $400,000 from the Capitol/I-10 West corridor to complete additional Alternatives Analysis tasks for the West Phoenix/Central Glendale corridor. CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Planning and Accessible Transit 602-322-4420 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None


DATE AGENDA ITEM 3D April 14, 2016 SUBJECT City of Tempe Streetcar Project Agreements PURPOSE To request authorization for the Interim Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute three agreements with the City of Tempe regarding funding, design and construction, operations and maintenance and public way use for the Tempe Streetcar project. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION The current three-mile alignment for the Tempe Streetcar Project was approved by the Valley Metro Rail Board of Directors in February 2015. Since then, Valley Metro has completed an Environmental Assessment and received a Finding of No Significant Impact in October from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). In July, Valley Metro submitted materials to the FTA for rating of the project under the federal Small Starts discretionary grant program. In February 2016, the FTA included the Tempe Streetcar project for funding in its Annual Report on Funding Recommendations for their Capital Investment Grant Program with Medium-High overall rating. The project was subsequently included in the President’s budget for federal FY17. Work continues on preliminary engineering and Valley Metro intends to initiate procurement for the services of a final design consultant, a Construction Manager at Risk contractor, and artists in summer 2016. However, prior to initiating this next phase of the project, it is necessary for Valley Metro and Tempe to formalize three critical agreements, including:

1. Funding, Design and Construction Agreement – Defines the relationship between Tempe and Valley Metro regarding the management, administration, funding, design, and construction of the project. Specifically, Valley Metro and Tempe have determined roles, responsibilities, expectations and obligations pertaining to key project elements. This agreement will terminate upon the completion of the project.

2. Operations and Maintenance Agreement: Defines the relationship between Tempe and Valley Metro for the continued operation and maintenance of the project following the completion of construction. Specifically this agreement defines the roles and responsibilities of Valley Metro and City of Tempe related to service operation and maintenance of the trackway, stops, ancillary facilities, and public street network.

3. Public Way Use Agreement: Defines the partnership with Tempe that permits

Valley Metro to use public right-of-way to construct and operate the streetcar tracks, stops, traction power substations, and utility relocations on Rio Salado

2

Parkway, Ash Avenue, University Drive, Mill Avenue, and Apache Boulevard in Tempe.

The Tempe City Council is anticipated to take action on all three agreements in April 2016. Pending Tempe’s approval, the Valley Metro Board will also need to approve execution of these agreements. COST AND BUDGET The capital cost estimate for the Tempe Streetcar project is $182.9 million (which includes finance charges in year of expenditure) and an annual operating cost of approximately $4 million (in FY19 dollars). COMMITTEE ACTION RTAG: March 16, 2016 for information RMC: April 6, 2016 approved Board of Directors: April 21, 2016 for action RELEVANCE TO STRATEGIC PLAN This item addresses three goals in the Board-adopted FY16-20 Strategic Plan:

Goal 2: Advance performance based operation o Tactic C: Deliver projects and services on time/on budget


RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the Interim CEO to execute the following agreements for the Tempe Streetcar project:

A. The Funding, Design and Construction Agreement B. The Operations and Maintenance Agreement C. The Public Way Use Agreement

CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Planning and Accessible Transit [email protected] 602-322-4420 ATTACHMENT None Copies of the agreements are available upon request.

4/14/2016

1

City of Tempe StreetcarProject Agreements

April 2016

Tempe Streetcar Route (3 miles)

2

4/14/2016

2

Tempe Streetcar Status

• Environmental clearance• Letter-Of-No-Prejudice for vehicle

procurement prior to grant award• “Medium-high” rating in FTA’s

report to Congress • Included in FY17 President’s

Budget

3

Project Timeline

4

• Spring 2016– Begin vehicle procurement process– Complete preliminary engineering

• Summer 2016– Advertise for final design, artist and Construction Manager at Risk

contractors

• Fall 2016– Award contracts– Initiate final design

4/14/2016

3

City of Tempe Agreements

A. Funding, Design and Construction• Determines roles and responsibilities• Defines funding arrangements• Terminates when project is complete

B. Operations and Maintenance• Determines roles and responsibilities

C. Public Way Use• Permits Valley Metro to use Tempe ROW

5

RecommendationsStaff recommends that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the Interim CEO to execute the following agreements for the Tempe Streetcar project:

A. Funding, Design and ConstructionB. Operations and MaintenanceC. Public Way Use

6

4/14/2016

4

DATE AGENDA ITEM 3E April 14, 2016 SUBJECT 16th Street Light Rail Transit (LRT) Station Advanced Feasibility Study: Phoenix Funding Agreement PURPOSE To request authorization for the Interim Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to enter into a Funding Agreement with the City of Phoenix to conduct an Advanced Feasibility Study to assess the potential of adding a station near 16th Street and Washington/Jefferson to the existing LRT system. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION In 2011, Valley Metro Rail, Inc. (VMR) Board approved a staff policy regarding requests to add stations to the existing light rail transit line. Under the policy, for any new station request, there must be a study to determine whether it would meet basic criteria relative to producing additional boardings, density of population and employment within a half mile of the proposed station, proximity to an existing station, constructability, environmental/economic/social impacts to the community, along with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) concurrence. The policy states that the requesting entity must pay all study costs and, if the station meets the criteria, the entity is responsible for identifying funds to implement the new station. In February 2013, at the request of the City of Phoenix, Valley Metro initiated a study to evaluate two potential additional stations along the 20-mile Valley Metro light rail line. The approximate locations of the proposed stations were at 16th Street and Washington/ Jefferson Streets and 48th Street and Washington Street. The study analyzed whether these stations would comply with station addition evaluation criteria. For the 16th Street location, the new station criteria were not met and it was recommended that the station be deferred until more development occurs in the area. The City of Phoenix has requested that Valley Metro conduct a follow-up feasibility study to add an LRT station near 16th Street. Since the initial study was completed, additional development activities have occurred in the area. This may generate the LRT ridership required to comply with Valley Metro’s station addition policy. The study will include development of an LRT ridership forecast and assess future development potential in the area. The study will also further refine a site recommendation, prepare a concept level design of the preferred station location and prepare capital and operating cost estimates. A funding agreement between Valley Metro and the City of Phoenix is required to cover the cost of conducting the study.


COST AND BUDGET The City of Phoenix will fund all costs associated with the 16th Street LRT Station Advanced Feasibility Study. The total project cost will not exceed $60,000. This study will be included in the Fiscal Year 2017 budget. COMMITTEE PROCESS RTAG: March 16, 2016 for information RMC: April 6, 2016 approved Board of Directors: April 21, 2016 for action RELEVANCE TO STRATEGIC PLAN This item addresses the following goal in the Board-adopted FY16-20 Strategic Plan:


RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Directors authorize the Interim CEO to enter into a Funding Agreement with the City of Phoenix to pay up to $60,000 for Valley Metro to conduct the 16th Street LRT Station Advanced Feasibility Study. CONTACT Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Planning and Accessible Transit 602-322-4420 [email protected]

ATTACHMENT None A copy of the funding agreement is available upon request.

2


DATE AGENDA ITEM 3F April 5, 2016 SUBJECT Valley Metro Operations and Maintenance Center Perimeter Security Fence PURPOSE To request authorization for the Interim Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to execute a contract award through the state procurement office to install a perimeter fence around the Operations and Maintenance Center (OMC). This contract is to be awarded to Western Fence Co. for the amount of $180,000 and a contract contingency within the overall budget of $12,000. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION The OMC, located at 605 S. 48th St. Phoenix, AZ 85034, is used to store and maintain public transit light rail vehicles (LRVs). The facility has on site security personnel to provide security services 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. However, there are areas without perimeter fencing, resulting in several trespassing incidents onto the property and buildings. Some of these trespasses have resulted in vandalism to LRVs. The facility currently has fencing along some of the perimeter of the property and a badge access gate at the entrance of the property. However, there is a span over 4,300 feet that is currently not fenced. Staff is requesting a contract award to complete the security fencing. Valley Metro will procure the perimeter fence by utilizing a cooperative agreement through the State of Arizona – State Procurement Office. Valley Metro staff sent a written request for quote and provided a Scope of Work and background information to the two vendors listed on the state contract with an invitation to attend a site visit of the OMC facility in order to provide an accurate quote. Both vendors attended the site visit with both submitting a quote based on the parameters and pricing of the contract they hold with the State of Arizona. The specific project deliverables include the following:

- 4385 linear feet of wrought iron fencing o Posts to be 2 ½” x 2 ½” square o Pickets 1” x 1” square spear topped o Rails to be 1 ½” x 1 ½” square

- One 20’ slide gate V-Track - One 20’ swing gate - Two 20’ double drive gates - One 5’ walk gate - One 4’ walk gate - Card Reader and gate automation

2

The list of vendors that provided quotes on this project was as follows: Western Fence Co. State Contract # ADSPO13-046426 American Fence Co. State Contract # ADSPO13-046427

At the conclusion of the evaluation process, Valley Metro staff recommends awarding a contract to Western Fence Co. This vendor’s offer and proposed solution was the “best value” for the fencing system upgrade and the price is deemed fair and reasonable when compared to an independent cost estimate prepared by staff. COST AND BUDGET The proposed contract award for the fencing system for the OMC is $180,000. A contract contingency of $12,000 is included within the overall budget for the project for unanticipated costs. Costs incurred during FY16 are available in the Valley Metro Rail (VMR) FY16 Operating and Capital Budget and the remaining cost for this improvement is included in the FY17 Operating and Capital Budget pending Board approval. Funding is provided by a combination of fare revenue, Public Transportation Fund (PTF), and member city contributions. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item relates to the following goals and strategies in the Five-Year Strategic Plan, FY 2016 – 2020:

Goal 2: Advance performance based operation o Tactic A: Operate an effective, reliable, high performing transit system o Tactic B: Evaluate and enhance passenger safety and security

COMMITTEE ACTION Board of Directors: April 21, 2016 for action RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the RMC forward to the Board of Directors authorization for the Interim CEO to execute a contract with Western Fence Co. State Contract # ADSPO13-046426 to upgrade the fencing system at the Valley Metro OMC for an amount of $180,000 and to establish a contract change contingency of $12,000 that is included in the overall budget established for the project. CONTACT Adrian Ruiz Director Safety and Security 602-523-6054 [email protected] ATTACHMENT None


DATE AGENDA ITEM 4 April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Valley Metro Rail, Inc. Fiscal Year 2017 (FY17) Preliminary Operating and Capital Budget and Five-Year Operating Forecast and Capital Program (FY 2017 thru 2021) PURPOSE To provide information to the Board of Directors regarding the FY17 Budget and Five-Year Preliminary Operating Forecast and Capital Program (FY17 thru FY21). BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION The Valley Metro Rail, Inc. (VMR) FY17 combined operating and capital budget (the budget) is $197.0 million (M) and includes $83.6M in projects funded with Proposition 400 Public Transportation Fund (PTF) revenues for light rail/high capacity transit capital. The preliminary FY17 operating and capital budget has been prepared with the goal of delivering a fiscally prudent, balanced budget using carry forwards, reserves and bond proceeds. The budget was developed in compliance with Board of Directors’ adopted budget, financial and Transit Life Cycle Program (TLCP) policies. The annual budget is prepared on a modified accrual basis and adopted by the Board of Directors each fiscal year. The legal level of budgetary control is the total annual appropriated budget. With respect to Capital Budgets, project contingency accounting is used to control expenditures within available project funding limits. With respect to Operating Budgets, encumbrance accounting is not used and all appropriations lapse at the end of the year. Prior to final adoption, a proposed budget is presented to the Board of Directors for review and public comment is received. Final adoption of the budget must be on or before June 30 of each year. The total operating budget of $57.0M represents a $5.2 (10%) increase from the previous year’s operating budget of $51.9M. The total capital budget of $139.9M represents a $56.5M (68%) increase from the previous year’s capital budget of $83.5M. Details and explanations of the major budget changes are discussed in the attached Executive Summary document. With the agency integration, the RPTA and VMR budgets are developed with a unified staff plan, with department managers planning the level of effort required to meet the bus and rail activities. Salary and overhead charges to bus and rail projects are based on actual time worked on each project. For FY17 there are 310 employees budgeted in the integrated agency, with 131 FTE’s budgeted to RPTA activities and 179 budgeted to VMR activities. The compensation budget based on 2.5% increase. For staff salary changes, merit increases are evaluated based on employee performance; division level control to manage total costs within budget.

2

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT This item relates to the following goals and strategies in the Five-Year Strategic Plan, FY 2016 – 2020: Goal 2: Advance performance based operation

o Tactic E: Maintain strong fiscal controls to support Valley Metro’s long-term sustainability.

COMMITTEE PROCESS Preliminary Budget Review: Financial Working Group: February 26, 2016 for information RTAG: March 16, 2016 for information RMC: April 6, 2016 for information Board of Directors: April 21, 2016 for information Proposed Budget Adoption: RMC: May 4, 2016 for action Board of Directors: May 19, 2016 for action RECOMMENDATION This item is being presented for information only. CONTACT John P. McCormack Chief Financial Officer 602-495-8239 [email protected] ATTACHMENT Valley Metro Rail, Inc. Fiscal Year 2017 (FY17) Preliminary Operating and Capital Budget and Five-Year Operating Forecast and Capital Program (FY 2017 thru 2021) Executive Summary

4/14/2016

1

1

Valley Metro RailPreliminary FY17Budget Overview

April 2016

Baseline: Light Rail Operations

2

FY17 FY16 Change

Passenger Boardings 17,293,000 15,558,000 11%

Vehicle Revenue miles delivered 3,754,000 2,845,000 32%

Boardings per Revenue Mile 4.61 5.47 ‐16%

Operating cost per passenger $2.60 $2.53 3%

Operating Costs $44,944,000 $39,415,000 14%

Fare Revenues $15,910,000 $14,019,000 13%

Fare Recovery 35% 36%

Avg Fare $0.92 $0.90 2%

4/14/2016

2

Baseline: LRT Capital Project ScheduleCalendar Year View

3

Valley Metro Rail Expenses - Operating

4


Uses of Funds FY17 FY16 Change $ Revenue Operations $44.9 $39.4 $5.5 Future Project Development 11.0 11.5 (0.5) Agency Operating Budget 1.1 0.9 0.2 Operating Activity Uses $57.0 $51.9 $5.2

4/14/2016

3

Valley Metro Rail Revenues - Operating

5


Funding Sources FY17 FY16 Change $ Fare Revenue $15.9 $14.0 $1.9 Advertising Revenue 1.1 0.9 0.2 Federal 5307 PM 1.2 1.1 0.1 Federal CMAQ 0.0 1.5 (1.5) TIGER 0.2 1.5 (1.3) Member Cities 31.2 26.3 4.9 MAG / RPTA (RARF) 1.0 1.0 0.0 PTF Sales Tax Revenue 6.4 5.6 0.9 Operating Revenue Totals $57.0 $51.9 $5.2

Valley Metro Rail Expenses – Capital

6


Capital Uses of Funds FY17 FY16 Change $Northwest Extension $3.2 $49.2 ($46.0)Central Mesa Extension 4.7 15.5 (10.9)Gilbert Road Extension 58.0 11.5 46.5 Tempe Streetcar Extension 9.5 1.2 8.3 50th Street LRT Station 5.8 0.7 5.0 South Central Extension 39.4 0.0 39.4 Non-Prior Rights Utilities 3.2 1.5 1.7 CNPAs - Mesa Extension 0.0 0.3 (0.3)Systemwide Improvements 16.2 3.5 12.7

Capital Uses Totals $139.9 $83.5 $56.5

4/14/2016

4

Valley Metro Rail Revenues – Capital

7


Funding Sources FY17 FY16 Change $ Federal New Starts $0.0 $7.1 ($7.1) Federal CMAQ 73.2 14.5 58.7 Federal SOGR 0.3 0.3 0.0 Member Cities 49.2 1.7 47.6

Less Payment NW Advance (60.0) 0.0 (60.0) PTF Bond Revenue 43.1 0.0 43.1 PTF Sales Tax Revenue 34.0 59.9 (25.9)Capital Revenue Totals $140.0 $83.5 $56.5

Integrated Agency Budget Assumptions: Staffing Costs

8

Staffing cost analysis

FY 17 FY 16 change pct change$ million

Salaries 19.6 18.8 0.8 4%

Fringe Benefits 7.6 7.5 0.1 2%

Total Salary and Fringe Benefits 27.2 26.3 0.9 3%

Analysis of changes Salary Fringe Total

Base Compensation FY16 18.8 7.5 26.3 Base increase 0.5 - 0.5 Position Changes 0.3 0.1 0.4

New Base Compensation FY17 19.6 7.6 27.2

Change FY17 Preliminary Budget vs. FY16 Adopted Budget 0.9 $ million

4/14/2016

5

9

Integrated Agency – FY17 Position Changes

Title Division Scope of Work FTE

Manager, Internal Audit Chief Executive Office Agency Internal Controls with primary reporting to Board 1

Internal Audit Specialist Chief Executive Office Internal Control testing and compliance 1

Program Representative Planning & Accessible Transit Support East Valley, West Valley, and regional paratransit 1

Scheduler Operations and Maintenance ‐ RPTA Fixed Route Bus schedule analysis and management 1Program Coordinator Operations and Maintenance ‐ RPTA Fixed Route Bus contractor performance management 1

Total Additions 5

Cleaner Operations and Maintenance ‐ RPTA Light rail vehicle cleaning ‐7

5-Year Operating Assumptions:

• 1.9 mile Gilbert Rd opens revenue service in Nov 2018

• 3.0 mile Tempe Streetcar opens revenue service in Dec 2019– With new rail service ridership up 20%

• Transportation and Security to service new extensions• Maintenance increases per preventive maintenance schedule• Fare Revenue

– FY17 changes to fare discount structure and enforcement – average fare $.92– Base fare increase FY20 - average fare $1.06

• Federal PM revenue level per MAG forecast• Member contributions grow with CME, NWE, GRE and Tempe Streetcar

10

4/14/2016

6

LRT Project Development5 Year Project Expenditure Plan – Uses of Funds

11

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total

USES OF FUNDS

Capitol/I-10 West 475$ 2,050$ -$ -$ -$ 2,525$

Capitol/I-10 West Phase II - - 100 750 1,600 2,450

West Phoenix/Central Glendale 711 3,000 1,250 500 - 5,461

Northeast Phoenix 529 - - - - 529

South Central 2,078 - - - - 2,078

Fiesta/Downtown Chandler 239 - - - - 239

Northwest Phase II 840 750 200 - - 1,790

16th Street Advanced Feasibility Study 60 - - - - 60

West Glendale Feasibility Study 644 343 - - - 987

OMC Master Plan and Phasing Study (PTF) 175 - - - - 175 Systems Planning & Project Development 3,811 3,925 4,043 4,164 4,289 20,232

Capital Project Development Administration 1,426 1,469 1,513 1,558 1,605 7,572

Total Uses 10,990$ 11,537$ 7,106$ 6,973$ 7,494$ 44,100$

5-Year Operating Uses and Sources

12

Uses of Funds - Operating Budget ($,000)Operations & Maintenance 251,988$ Project Development Planning Support 44,100 Agency Operating Budget 5,773

Total Uses 301,861$

Sources of Funds - Operating Budget ($,000)Fare Revenues 95,079$ Advertising 5,841 Phoenix 91,002 Tempe 34,959 Mesa 26,381 Glendale 1,143 Chandler 394

Regional 40,207 Federal 6,854 Total Sources 301,861$

4/14/2016

7

5-Year Capital Projects Uses of Funds

13

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 FY 2017-21

USES OF FUNDS Northwest Extension Phase 1 3,203$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 3,203$ Central Mesa 4,673 3,926 - - - 8,599 Gilbert Rd 57,988 56,653 14,153 1,309 - 130,103 Tempe Streetcar 9,478 48,872 73,296 30,035 - 161,681 South Central 39,417 124,687 98,336 89,080 68,309 419,829 50th Street Station 5,782 8,634 4,022 - - 18,438 Northwest Extension Phase 2 - 3,055 29,032 66,415 69,180 167,682 Capitol I-10 West - 5,089 5,089 11,557 42,580 64,315 West Phoenix Central Glendale - - - - 102,186 102,186 Subtotal HCT Corridors 120,541 250,916 223,928 198,396 282,255 1,076,036

Non-Prior Rights Utilities Relocation 3,185 8,174 6,274 2,744 3,339 23,716 Systemwide Improvements 16,222 22,438 22,000 2,126 1,480 64,266 Total Capital Costs 139,948$ 281,528$ 252,202$ 203,266$ 287,074$ 1,164,018$

5-Year Capital Projects Source of Funds

14

SOURCES OF FUNDS 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 FY 2017-21 Phoenix 45,820$ 138,456$ 129,648$ 107,327$ 107,201$ 528,452$

Less Repayment Phoenix NW Advance (60,000) - - - - (60,000) Tempe - 6,500 6,500 - - 13,000 Mesa 3,423 164 - - - 3,587 Glendale - - - - 14,722 14,722 Subtotal (10,757) 145,120 136,148 107,327 121,923 499,761

PTF Sales Tax Revenue (Allocation 43.24%) 34,038 27,871 33,879 38,110 41,951 175,849 PTF (Reserve) / Bond Borrowing 43,027 (1,351) 5,998 (9,463) 14,567 52,778

PTF Regional Revenue - Demand 77,065 26,520 39,876 28,648 56,518 228,627

TPAN - 55,430 14,253 1,309 - 70,992

Federal Revenues: FTA 341 20,262 41,906 56,737 64,520 183,763 CMAQ 73,300 34,196 20,019 9,246 44,113 180,874 Subtotal Federal 73,641 54,458 61,925 65,983 108,633 364,637 Total Revenues 139,948$ 281,528$ 252,202$ 203,266$ 287,074$ 1,164,018$

4/14/2016

8

Budget Schedule FY17

15

Nov 19 FY17 Agency Budget Initiatives presented to Boards for information

Feb 18 Board approves service changes effective April 2016

Feb 26 Preliminary FY17 Budget presented to Fin. Working Group

Mar 1 Executive Summary & 5 year Plan posted to website

Apr 6 Draft Budget delivered to TMC/RMC/AFS

Apr 14 Member City Comments due

Apr 14 Budget presented for information to AFS

Apr 21 Budget presented to Board of Directors for information

May 19 Board Meeting for Budget Adoption

Valley Metro Rail Revenues -Operating

FY17 vs FY16

16

4/14/2016

9

Rail Operating ContingencyFY17 Risk Register

Operating Expenditures $ Millions

Transp contractor service rates 10.00 3% 0.25 Security Resources 4.75 11% 0.52 Price of Electric Power 2.80 3% 0.08

Impacts of damage to LRV's , equipment and facilities 1.00 15% 0.15

Maintenance Estimates 17.60 2% 0.26 RAIL OPERATIONS CONTINGENCY 1.27

FY17 Planned Investments

18

VMR Investment

Total Investment

Develop smart card fare program/mobile ticketing 430.0$ 860.0$

Renovate website & mobile site 100.0$ 300.0$

Evaluate and enhance passenger safety and security.Increasing rail fare inspection and security resources 425.0$ 425.0$

1. Increase Customer Focus: FY17 Initiatives

Valley Metro FY17 Investment$ Thousands

Improve Customer SatisfactionIntegration of greater, more effective technology, improving passenger information systems with real time data, such as the website, facility signage and a Ridekick mobile application, and implementation of an enhanced fare media solution, including smart cards and mobile ticketing.

4/14/2016

10


19

VMR Investment

Total Investment

Operate an effective, reliable, high performing transit system.

Develop an asset management plan for Valley Metro in conjunction with member agencies 75.0$ 100.0$

Deliver projects and services on-time/on-budget.

Advance projects and services in the current regional transportation plan and Transit Life Cycle program.

Expediting S Central Corridor: $2,109,000 Expediting Northwest Phase II: $907,000 Advancing Northeast Corridor feasibility study: $291,000

3,307.0$ 3,307.0$

Maintain strong fiscal controls to support Valley Metro’s long-term sustainability.

Establishing Internal Audit Department with dual reporting responsibility to the Board of Directors and VM Executive Office

94.5$ 189.0$

2. Advance Performance Based Operation:

FY17 Initiatives



20

VMR Investment

Total Investment

Improve connectivity of transit services for greater effectiveness.

Analyze the region’s transit system to optimize connectivity between transit services, including new LRT extensions- Fiesta Downtown Chandler Study: $250,000- West Glendale Feasibility Study: $657,000

907.0$ 907.0$

Communicate availability, attractiveness and safety of transit service

Conduct discretionary ridership campaigns to continue to attract riders 105.0$ 210.0$

3. Grow Transit Ridership: FY17 Initiatives


4/14/2016

11


21

4. Focus on Economic Development, Regional Competitiveness and Financial Resources:

FY17 InitiativesVMR Investment

Total Investment

Work with local communities to leverage transit oriented development (TOD) to increase investment in transit

Research and monitor and report regional trends regarding TOD implementation and successes- Support to TOD working group and PNR utilization study: $100,000

100.0$ 100.0$

5. Advance the Value of Transit: FY17 InitiativesVMR Investment

Total Investment

Develop and implement a communications plan to inform and educate the public on the value of transit

Continue media campaign to raise greater awareness of the value of transit 63.0$ 126.0$


DATE AGENDA ITEM 5 April 14, 2016 SUBJECT Future Agenda Items Request and Report on Current Events PURPOSE Chair Williams will request future agenda items from members, and members may provide a report on current events. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION None COST AND BUDGET None COMMITTEE PROCESS None RECOMMENDATION This item is presented for information only. CONTACT Scott Smith Interim Chief Executive Officer 602-262-7433 [email protected] ATTACHMENT Pending Items Request

2



meetings of the boards of directors - valley metro · valley metro • 101 n 1st ave • ste 1300...

Documents