tahoe transportation district (ttd)...tahoe transportation district budget finance committee meeting...

TAHOE TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT

BUDGET FINANCE COMMITTEE

Meeting Agenda Tahoe Regional Planning Agency February 13, 2015 128 Market Street 9:00 a.m. Stateline, NV 89449 All items on this agenda are action items unless otherwise noted. Items on the agenda may be taken out of order. The Board may combine two or more items for consideration. The Board may remove an item from the agenda or delay discussion relating to an item on the agenda at any time.

I. PUBLIC INTEREST COMMENTS All comments are to be limited to no more than five minutes per person. Comments made cannot be acted upon or discussed at this meeting, but may be placed on a future agenda for consideration.

II. RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 23, 2015

III. DISCUSSION ITEMS

Item Action Requested Page A. Review and Acceptance of the District’s Financial

Statement of Operations for July 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014 (Item V.A.)

Recommend Acceptance

1

B. Authorize the Renewal of the District’s Line of Credit with Nevada State Bank at a Minimum Amount of $500,000 for Purposes of Cash Flow Management for District Operations (Item V.B.)

Recommend Approval 11

C. Authorize Execution of Contract with Solutions for Transit’s Customized Software Reporting System (Item V.D.)

Recommend Approval 16

IV. ADJOURNMENT

TAHOE TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT (TTD) BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Meeting Agenda

Tahoe Regional Planning Agency February 13, 2015 128 Market Street 9:30 a.m. Stateline, NV 89449

All items on this agenda are action items unless otherwise noted. Items on the agenda may be taken out of order. The Board may combine two or more items for consideration. The Board may remove an item from the agenda or delay discussion relating to an item on the agenda at any time. I. CALL TO ORDER AND GENERAL MATTERS

A. Roll Call and Determination of Quorum of TTD B. Approval of Agenda for February 13, 2015 C. Approval of Minutes of January 23, 2015

II. PUBLIC INTEREST COMMENTS

At this time, members of the public shall have the opportunity to directly address the Board. All comments are to be limited to no more than five minutes per person. The Board is prohibited by law from taking immediate action on or discussing issues raised by the public that are not listed on this agenda. In addition, members of the public shall have the opportunity to directly address the Board after each item on which action may be taken is discussed by the public body, but before the public body takes action on the item.

III. BUDGET FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT IV. TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION

APPOINTEE REPORT V. TAHOE TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT (TTD) CONSENT ITEMS

Items for Possible Action Action Requested Page A. Review and Acceptance of the District’s Financial

Statement of Operations for July 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014

Acceptance 1

B. Authorize the Renewal of the District’s Line of Credit with Nevada State Bank at a Minimum Amount of $500,000 for Purposes of Cash Flow Management for District Operations

Approval 11

C. Review and Acceptance of South Shore and Commuter December 2014 Transit Contractor Report and Transit and Mobility Managers’ Updates for January 2015

Acceptance 13

D. Authorize Execution of Contract with Solutions for Transit’s for a Customized Software Reporting System

Approval 16

VI. TAHOE TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT (TTD) BUSINESS ITEMS Items for Possible Action Action Requested Page

A. Formal Recognition of Norma Santiago and Angela Swanson for their Service as Board Members of the Tahoe Transportation District

Recognition 18

B. Appoint Board Director to Replace Norma Santiago on Finance Committee

Appoint 19

C. Informational Update Regarding the Draft Trans-Sierra Transportation Plan and Coalition Progress

Informational Only 20

D. Update, Discussion, and Possible Direction Regarding Implementation Planning for Lake Tahoe’s Highway Corridors and An Inter-Regional Long-Range Transit Plan, Including the Update to the Bike and Pedestrian Plan

Discussion and Possible Direction

55

E. Update and Discussion on Local, California, Nevada, and Federal Transportation Legislative Initiatives In Relation to Tahoe Transportation District's Transportation Program

Informational Only 61

VII. DISTRICT MANAGER REPORT VIII. LEGAL COUNSEL REPORT IX. BOARD, COMMISSION MEMBER AND STAFF COMMENTS X. ADJOURNMENT

COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS This notice and agenda has been posted at the TTD office and at the Stateline, Nevada post office. The notice and agenda has also been posted at the North Tahoe Conference Center in Kings Beach, the Incline Village GID office and the North Tahoe Chamber of Commerce and on the TTD website: www.tahoetransportation.org. For those individuals with a disability who require a modification or accommodation in order to participate in the public meeting, please contact Judi White at (775) 589-5502 or [email protected]. Nevada Open Meeting Law Compliance Written notice of this meeting has been given at least three working days before the meeting by posting a copy of this agenda at the principal office of the Board and at three other separate, prominent places within the jurisdiction of the Board not later than 9 a.m. of the third working day before the meeting. Written notice of this meeting has been given by providing a copy of this agenda to any person who has requested notice of the meetings of the Board. Such notice was delivered to the postal service used by the Board not later than 9 a.m. of the third working day before the meeting for transmittal to the requester by regular mail, or if feasible for the Board and the requester has agreed to receive the public notice by electronic mail, transmitted to the requester by electronic mail sent not later than 9 a.m. of the third working day before the meeting. Supporting materials were provided to any person requesting such materials and were made available to the requester at the time the material was provided to the members of the Board or, if provided to the members of the Board at the meeting, were made available to the requester at the meeting and are available on the TTD website: www.tahoetransportation.org. Please send requests for copies of supporting materials to Judi White at (775) 589-5502 or [email protected].

http://www.tahoetransportation.org/

Tahoe Transportation Board Special Meeting Minutes - January 23, 2015

TAHOE TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT BUDGET FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES

January 23, 2015

Committee Members in Attendance: Will Garner, Placer County, Chair Steve Teshara, SS-TMA Ron Treabess, TNT-TMA

Committee Members Absent: Vacancy

Others in Attendance:

Carl Hasty, Tahoe Transportation District Alfred Knotts, Tahoe Transportation District Joanie Schmitt, Tahoe Transportation District Aaron Langmayer, Tahoe Transportation District Judi White, Tahoe Transportation District Adam Spear, Esq., Legal Counsel

I. PUBLIC INTEREST COMMENTS No public interest comments were made.

II. RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF December 12,

2014 Mr. Teshara made the motion to recommend approval of the minutes of December 12, 2014. Mr. Treabess seconded the motion. The motion passed.

III. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Review Request for Proposals to Provide Financial Auditing Services and

the Process for Selection of a Qualified Firm Ms. Schmitt reviewed this item. The committee reviewed the Request for Proposals and gave staff minor changes, suggestions and direction to move forward with the RFP and selection process. Action Requested: Discussion and Direction

B. Review and Acceptance of the District’s Financial Statement of Operations for July 1, 2014 through November 30, 2014 Ms. Schmitt reviewed this item. Action Requested: Recommend Acceptance Mr. Teshara made the motion to recommend acceptance of the Financial Statement of Operations for July 1, 2014 through November 30, 2014. Mr. Treabess seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

Tahoe Transportation Board Special Meeting Minutes – January 23, 2015 2

C. Ratify the Scrapping of Two Bluebird Buses Received During the Settlement Between TTD and MV Transportation, Inc. and Approve the Sale of the Tacoma Pick-up Truck Without Public Sale Procedures Mr. Hasty reviewed this item. Action Requested: Recommend Ratification Mr. Treabess made the motion to recommend ratifying the scrapping of two Bluebird buses received during the settlement between TTD and MV Transportation, Inc. and approve the sale of the Tacoma pick-up truck without waiving the District’s public sale procedures. Mr. Teshara seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

D. Ratify Advertising Purchase Order Under the Approved Agreement for

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Funding for Spare the Air Free Ride Days Mr. Langmayer reviewed this item. Action Requested: Recommend Ratification Mr. Teshara made the motion to recommend ratifying the advertising purchase order under the approved agreement for Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality funding for Spare the Air Free Ride Days. Mr. Treabess seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

IV. ADJOURNMENT


TAHOE TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT / COMMISSION SPECIAL BOARD MEETING MINUTES

January 23, 2015

TTD/C Board Members in Attendance: Steve Teshara, SS-TMA, Chair Will Garner, Placer County Ron Treabess, TNT-TMA Mark Kimbrough, Carson City Travis Lee, Douglas County

TTD/C Board Members Absent: Marsha Berkbigler, Washoe County, Vice Chair Austin Sass, City of South Lake Tahoe Andrew Strain, Member at Large Sue Novasel, El Dorado County Sondra Rosenberg, NDOT Gary Arnold, Caltrans Mike Gabor, U.S. Forest Service Darrel Kizer, Washoe Tribe

Others in Attendance:

Carl Hasty, Tahoe Transportation District Alfred Knotts, Tahoe Transportation District Joanie Schmitt, Tahoe Transportation District George Fink, Tahoe Transportation District Nick Haven, Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Judi White, Tahoe Transportation District Adam Spear, Esq., Legal Counsel

I. TAHOE TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL

A. Roll Call and Determination of Quorum

The meeting of the Tahoe Transportation District was called to order by Chairman Teshara at 9:30 a.m., at the Granlibakken Resort and Conference Center. Roll call was taken and it was determined a quorum was in attendance for the TTD.

B. Approval of TTD Agenda of January 23, 2015

Motion/second by Mr. Treabess/Mr. Kimbrough to approve the TTD agenda for today’s meeting. The motion passed unanimously.

C. Approval of TTD/TTC Meeting Minutes for December 12, 2014

Motion/Second by Mr. Treabess/Mr. Kimbrough to approve the TTD and TTC minutes. The motion passed unanimously.


II. PUBLIC INTEREST COMMENTS

Phil Marley, About Time Limousine, explained the licensing issues the Lake Tahoe Basin private ground transportation services are having in crossing between the state lines of California and Nevada and asked for the District’s assistance.

III. BUDGET FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT

Mr. Garner reported the committee met and gave staff direction to solicit proposals for auditing services. The committee also reviewed and recommended the requested actions of the consent items.

IV. TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY ADVISORY PLANNING

COMMISSION APPOINTEE REPORT Mr. Teshara reported the APC had a presentation and public hearing on the Fanny Bridge EIR/EIS/EA.

V. TAHOE TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT (TTD) CONSENT ITEMS

A. Review and Acceptance of the District’s Financial Statement of

Operations for July 1, 2014 through November 30, 2014 B. Ratify the Scrapping of Two Bluebird Buses Received During the

Settlement Between TTD and MV Transportation, Inc. and Approve the Sale of the Tacoma Pick-up Truck Without Public Sale Procedures

C. Ratify Advertising Purchase Order Under the Approved Agreement for Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Funding for Spare the Air Free Ride Days

D. Review and Acceptance of South Shore and Commuter November 2014 Transit Contractor Report and Transit and Mobility Managers’ Updates for December 2014 Mr. Garner motioned to approve the consent calendar, without waiving of the public sale procedures for the sale of the Tacoma pick-up truck under Item V.B. Mr. Lee seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

VI. PUBLIC HEARING

A. Public Hearing on State Route 89/Fanny Bridge Community Revitalization Project Public Draft Joint Environmental Document Mr. Knotts and Marianne Lowenthal, Ascent Environmental, gave a presentation. Public Comment: Jim Sadjak requested the number of lanes and alignment of those lanes be reviewed to develop a workable revision to Alternative 6A to avoid the Bridgetender Restaurant. He believes Alternative 6A provides the least impact to the environment, prevents the potential risk of lost revenue for the struggling business community, alleviates congestion at the current


Wye to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and reduce project costs to both the highway administration, local agencies, and taxpayers. Ellie Waller, Tahoe Vista resident, noted that Placer County is not a party to the environmental documentation but may be responsible for road segments and asked what the difference is between implementing the project and non-party status involvement. She hopes the PDT team is working with Placer County regarding the Tahoe City area plan to ensure the town center goals are met and modifications to the Caltrans maintenance yard are consistent. She stated the environmental documentation must address the community noise proponent levels (policy N-2.1), water quality (3.3), and transportation policy (T-1.2). Larry Boehm, resident of Kimberly Drive in Tahoe City, reiterated his email of January 19. He agrees that improvements of air quality and traffic controls are needed, but strongly objects to several of the proposals. Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 4 are intrusive and an expensive way to address the existing problem and would cause the new bridge to be built just below the residences on Kimberly Drive, increasing traffic noise and intrusive overhead lighting, blighting what is now a beautiful natural setting, bifurcating the land, and drastically reducing the property values of all the residences on that drive. He asked if the homeowners be compensated for the noise, lighting and loss of the beautiful pristine setting. He believes Alternative 6A is best to accomplish the goals of the project, be far less intrusive, and save the taxpayers an enormous amount of money. He also suggested building a tunnel under SR 89 to accommodate pedestrians and bikers to eliminate the pedestrian crossing. Kathy Hemmen, Tahoe City Shell, stated she really cares about community and the proposed bypass transfers 25 to 60% of people coming into Tahoe City to the West shore, which will devastate the businesses. She also stated that Fanny Bridge isn’t falling down and alternative 6A is the only alternative to keep businesses viable. She stated that travelers coming to the area will take the bypass to the Lake, ignoring Tahoe City and because of that, is strongly against the bypass. Paul Patton handed out a copy of correspondence between him and Mr. Knotts. He referenced item 3.1.3 in the EIR as he is concerned that there will be no access if it is abandoned. He stated he feels his concerns were not addressed in the EIR and asked if the promises made to him and his family at the October 2012 meeting would be kept. Mike Schwartz, chief North Tahoe Fire, noted the North Tahoe Fire Protection District has submitted comments and stated Alternative 1 is preferable for improving public safety. Matt Homolka, Assistant GM of Tahoe City PUD, expressed great appreciation for being involved in the project as it has direct impacts on


the water, sewer and bike trails systems. He stated his Board supports Alternative 1, in that it provides the best emergency access to the west shore, improves circulation, and enhances trail and pedestrian safety. John Betts, artist of the fish sculpture at the Wye, is concerned that there is no mention of potential impacts to the various alternatives to his sculpture, and is anxiously looking forward to that issue being discussed and addressed in any future planning documents. Kathy Betts, stated the fish sculpture was built in 1977 to enhance the entrance to Tahoe City and is a very important icon to the town. She asked if the public will have another chance to comment once an alternative is chosen and if estimates were available for each alternative’s cost. She also stated a survey was conducted in November when there was snow on the ground and any evidence of archeological artifacts would be under snow. Janet Gregor commented that things have changed since the project was started. One is the de-icer product used on the roads and hopes that is addressed. She also stated the pedestrian crossing that was installed on the eastern side of Tahoe City is a significant impact to traffic. She stated she favors Alternative 6A and the project should not bisect 64 acres. Jaime Wright, Executive Director TNT-TMA, recommended all alternatives. She stated Alternative 1 meets the necessary criteria and appreciates TTD’s appreciation for community input. She also stated the chosen alternative should allow State Route 89 to remain open at the current alignment, thereby allowing for two access points to the west shore. She noted that improving all forms of mobility in that corridor is vital for the project and that signage and community gateways will be vital to the economic vitality of Tahoe City. Shannon Eckmayer, League to Save Lake Tahoe, stated she hopes to see a much stronger analysis on the impacts of the environmental thresholds and stronger mitigation measures. John Ravitza asked where the fill will be used to building the new highway. Mr. Knotts replied the fill will be on the approach of the new bridge structure. Mr. Ravitza asked for consideration of working through the winter to speed up project and if there will be any consideration to local contractors or sub-contractors. He stated he favors Alternative 1, option 2. Roger Kahn, property owner at the Wye, stated he was on Citizens Advisory Group and he favors Alternative 1. He is also in favor of keeping the free right lanes to allow access to his property. He stated if the project is done properly, the amount of asphalt currently in Tahoe City will be reduced. He also stated the town should start at roundabouts with additional signage showing access to Tahoe City and Kings Beach.


Peter Kraatz, assistant director of Placer County Public Works Department, commented on behalf of the county and department and as a CEQA responsible agency to this project. Placer County has long been a partner on the project and has made a sizeable monetary commitment to the project. He stated the County is very serious with what happens with project and is looking forward to a finished project with the public’s support. Logan Carnell, Tahoe City resident, asked for clarification of the process of choosing the preferred alternative. Mr. Knotts explained the bid process and contractor selection will be dictated by federal acquisition regulations. He also explained the lead agencies each have to certify the environ doc as technically adequate once all comments have been responded to and then a preferred alternative will be chosen, with an opportunity to comment before an action is taken to approve the preferred alternative. Action Requested: Conduct Public Hearing

VII. DISTRICT MANAGER REPORT Mr. Hasty noted the February Board meeting will be held as normal on February 13 at the South Shore. He also reported that our new Board member for the City of South Lake Tahoe will be Austin Sass and Sue Novasel for El Dorado County.

VIII. LEGAL COUNSEL REPORT

Mr. Spear had nothing to report.

IX. BOARD, COMMISSION MEMBER AND STAFF COMMENTS Mr. Treabess commented that at next month’s the resort associations TOT budget meeting will determine what transportation services will be funded by TOT.

X. ADJOURNMENT

The meeting adjourned at 11:22 a.m. Respectfully Submitted: Judi White Executive Assistant Clerk to the Board Tahoe Transportation District

(The above meeting was recorded in its entirety, anyone wishing to listen to the aforementioned tapes, please contact Judi White, Clerk to the Board, (775) 589-5502.)

JS/jw AGENDA ITEM: V.A.

MEMORANDUM

Date: February 9, 2015 To: Tahoe Transportation District (TTD) Board of Directors From: TTD Staff Subject: Review and Acceptance of the District’s Financial Statement of Operations for

July 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014 Action Requested: It is requested the Board accept the Financial Statement of Operations for the first six months of fiscal year 2015, ending December 31, 2014. Fiscal Analysis: The District is currently in good financial standing. Background: Staff has completed analyzing financial information for the first six months of fiscal year 2015 (FY15). The presentation of the financial information will highlight FY15 December activity and continues to detail the District’s funds: General, Capital Improvement Program (CIP), and Transit Operations. Discussion: General Fund – Overall, the District ended with a decrease of $19,610 for December activity. The decrease can be summarized as follows: District Operations ($8,357) Ruffalo (includes Nov & Dec) $8,000 CNG Fueling Facility ($3,482) Trillium O&M Fees $8,940 Rental Car Mitigation Fees (RCMF) ($7,771) TNT/TMA Annual Fee $20,000 The net result decreased General Fund’s overall fund balance for the year to $222,485, which is $28,525 less than at the start of the fiscal year. General Fund Forecast – The Ridge contribution of $35,159 will be recognized in January 2015, with an additional $35,159 originally budgeted in Transit Operations shifting to the General Fund in April 2015 which will help offset the CNG Fueling Facility expenses. FY15 RCMF’s have increased $9,786 from $35,053 in FY14 to $44,839 in FY15 for July through December activity.

TTD Board Meeting Packet - February 13, 2015 - Page 1 -


In February, the 2004 Tacoma Pickup, received from the STATA settlement, was sold for $7,400. CIP Fund – December activity resulted in an increase of $8 (Interest). Below is a brief recap of the December activity for the CIP fund. Funding Source Expenditures Grant Balance FLH Half Percent Round 5 $197,520 $3,003,358 Public Lands Highways Discretionary Fund Bikeway 1C $0 $56,892 US 50 $40,718 $566,853 Federal Transit Administration NDOT 5303 $4,196 $490,548 5308 TTD Bus Purchases $102,459 $772,541 Placer County Bus Purchases $0 $125,000 Prop 1B PTMISEA – Electronic Fareboxes $95,022 $519 PTMISEA – Vehicles $0 $17,290 PTMISEA – Vehicles (FTA 5308) $25,615 $318,568 PTMISEA – Transit System Modernization $0 $1,000,000 TSSSDRA – Yard Security $51,378 $27,158 Question 1 Bikeway 1B & 1D $6,784 $293,359

Total Expenditures $523,692

The District transferred $272,732 in Equipment to the Transit Fund. The net result increased CIP’s overall fund balance for the year to $357, which is $43 more than at the start of the fiscal year. Transit Fund- Overall, the District ended with an increase of $175,413 for December activity. The increase can be summarized as follows: South Shore Operations – Increase $175,413 Total costs for Transit Operations incurred during December totaled $548,849. NDOT was invoiced $151,136. Contributions recognized totaled $142,068 (Vail $70,833, The Ridge $4,481, Douglas County $3,942, STPUD Mitigation $58,312, and CSLT for SnowGlobe $4,500). TDA funding recognized totaled $96,761 (LTF $67,161, STA $29,600). Farebox collections totaled $56,171 and Pass Sales totaled $5,343. Interest earned was $52. Depreciation totaled $68,735. Transit Ops transferred 46 security cameras, 35 motherboards, and 15 electronic fareboxes, along with other electronic farebox equipment from the CIP Fund, totaling $272,732.



CMAQ – Even Total costs incurred for December’s “Spare the Air” Campaign totaled $20,097. Caltrans was invoiced $17,792, with The Ridge providing the match requirement of $2,305. SR 28 – East Shore Express - Even East Shore Express incurred $239 in expenditures during December. NDOT was invoiced $191 and Lake Tahoe License Plate Fund $48. Farebox revenue totaled $0. Mobility Management – Even Total costs for the program incurred for December totaled $12,269. NDOT was invoiced $4,258, with Douglas County providing the Nevada match of $224. Caltrans was invoiced $3,646, with the Ridge contributing $2,005. Area 4 Agency on Aging was invoiced $1,353 and the Tahoe Truckee Community Foundation Grant contributed $725. Farebox totaled $58. The net result decreased Transit’s overall fund balance for the year to $5,128,151, which is $38,285 more than at the start of the fiscal year. Transit Forecast The District is anticipating an insurance reimbursement for building repairs at the transit yard due to one of the buses hitting the exterior wall. The expenses totaled $27,361 and were recorded as part of the South Shore November ($25,468) and January ($1,893) operational costs. Balance Sheet The detailed balance sheet as of December 31, 2014 is attached (Attachment A). The fixed asset balances, net of depreciation, include $3,231,285 in transit funds and $462,083 in the general fund of federalized obligations. Should the District choose to liquidate a federalized asset, permission from the governmental agency is required and their obligation takes priority. Additional Information: If you have any questions or comments regarding this item, please contact Joanie Schmitt at (775) 589-5507 or [email protected]. Attachment:

A. December Financials


Tahoe Transportation DistrictBalance Sheet

As of December 31, 2014

TOTAL General CIP Transit GFAASSETSCash & Equivalents 1,145,433 218,504 -131,603 1,058,531Accounts Receivable 2,116,733 37,714 665,373 1,413,645Prepaids 36,585 17,820 18,765*Capital Assets, Net Depreciation 3,964,931 3,964,931 572,269TOTAL ASSETS 7,263,682 274,038 533,771 6,455,873 572,269

LIABILITIESAccounts Payable 899,355 51,554 468,067 379,735Deferred Revenues 815,987 65,347 750,639Nevada State Bank - LOCEE Compensated Absences 21,934 21,934 56,427TOTAL LIABILITIES 1,737,277 51,554 533,414 1,152,309 56,427

NET POSITIONInvested in Capital Assets 4,140,945 4,140,945 643,592Unrestricted 1,155,244 206,010 314 948,921 -50,944Contingency FundCommitted Encumbrances 45,000 45,000SUB TOTAL NET POSITION 5,341,189 251,010 314 5,089,865 592,648

FY 15 Increase/(Decrease) to Net Position 185,217 -28,525 43 213,699 -76,806

TOTAL NET POSITION 5,526,405 222,485 357 5,303,564 515,842

TOTAL LIABILITIES & NET POSITION 7,263,682 274,038 533,771 6,455,873 572,269

* The fixed asset balances, net of depreciation, include $3,231,285 in transit funds and $462,083 in the governmental-wide fund account of federalized obligations. Should the District choose to liquidate a federalized asset, permission from the governmental agency is required and their obligation takes priority.


Tahoe Transportation DistrictStatement of Operations

July 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014

TOTAL General CIP Transit GFARevenuesFederal Grants 2,306,031 1,342,023 964,008State Funding 881,537 249,708 631,828Contributions 572,652 6,000 566,652General Revenues 91,617 91,617Charges for Services 469,502 115,814 353,688Special Items 4,801 2,651 43 2,107TOTAL REVENUES 4,326,140 216,082 1,591,774 2,518,283

ExpensesPersonnel 484,297 39,471 266,712 178,113Personnel - Compensated Absences 9,809 9,809 5,484Admin Support 91,517 57,234 34,283Contracts 2,208,924 907,854 1,301,070Fuel 245,286 -748 246,034Depreciation 406,573 406,573 71,322Other Operating 596,126 199,283 42,453 354,391Capital Outlay 98,025 6,237 692 91,096Interest 365 365Other Funding Sources 316,786 -316,786TOTAL EXPENSES 4,140,923 244,607 1,591,731 2,304,585 76,806

Increase / (Decrease) to Net Position 185,217 -28,525 43 213,699 -76,806


Tahoe Transportation DistrictGeneral Fund

Statement of OperationsJuly 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014

1st Qtr Oct Nov Dec 2nd QtrYEAR TO

DATE

Board Approved

Budget Var %District

Ops RCMF CNGProgram

TotalsRevenuesGeneral Revenues Admin Support 36,839 18,965 16,804 18,910 54,678 91,517 212,599 43.05% 91,517 91,517 Miscellaneous 100 100 500 20.00% 100 100 Contributions 6,000 6,000 6,000 135,159 4.44% 6,000 6,000Total General Revenues 36,939 18,965 22,804 18,910 60,678 97,617 348,258 28.03% 97,617 0 0 97,617

Charges for Services Rental Car Mitigation Fees 30,146 2,464 12,229 14,693 44,839 75,000 59.78% 44,839 44,839 CNG Station Revenues 31,078 14,357 9,158 16,383 39,897 70,975 180,909 39.23% 70,975 70,975Total Charges for Services 61,224 14,357 11,622 28,612 54,590 115,814 255,909 45.26% 0 44,839 70,975 115,814

Special Items Sale of Fixed Assets 2,559 2,559 2,559 -100.00% 2,559 2,559 Interest Revenue 45 23 8 18 48 93 240 38.61% 93 93Total Special Revenues 45 2,582 8 18 2,607 2,651 240 1104.76% 2,651 0 0 2,651

TOTAL REVENUES 98,207 35,903 34,433 47,539 117,875 216,082 604,407 35.75% 100,268 44,839 70,975 216,082

ExpensesOperating Personnel 14,685 9,993 7,807 6,986 24,786 39,471 78,645 50.19% 38,028 1,443 39,471 Fuel -535 -97 38 -154 -214 -748 3,600 -20.79% -748 -748 Repairs & Maintenance -554 -554 -554 400 -138.60% -554 -554 Insurance 936 312 312 312 936 1,872 3,744 50.00% 1,872 1,872 Facility Rent 5,837 2,214 1,954 2,090 6,258 12,094 25,547 47.34% 10,850 1,245 12,094 Facility Utilities 14,845 7,078 5,178 10,143 22,398 37,244 95,573 38.97% 2,435 34,809 37,244 Supplies 4,150 1,371 1,371 1,391 4,134 8,284 16,452 50.35% 8,284 8,284 Advertising & Public Relations 600 0.00% Reproduction & Printing 282 282 1,200 23.53% 282 282 Postage 300 0.00% Dues, Subscriptions & Publication 2,700 163 2,598 2,762 5,461 4,665 117.07% 5,461 5,461 License & Permits 2,100 0.00% Professional Services 46,662 15,090 11,317 21,207 47,614 94,276 212,160 44.44% 54,222 40,054 94,276 Legal Services 1,200 0.00% Auditing Services 10,685 3,500 1,700 5,200 15,885 23,650 67.17% 15,885 15,885 Bank Fee / CC Fees 210 50 39 51 141 351 2,000 17.56% 351 351 Transit Management - No Shore 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 100.00% 20,000 20,000 Training 1,000 0.00% Travel 1,476 54 168 203 424 1,900 8,950 21.23% 1,900 1,900 Taxes 907 51 55 1,176 1,283 2,190 3,500 62.57% 1,777 413 2,190 Miscellaneous Expenses -1 0 0 0 -1 -2 5,220 -0.04% -2 -2Total Operating 102,839 36,116 31,902 67,149 135,167 238,005 510,506 46.62% 137,818 20,000 80,188 238,005

Capital Outlay Office & Equipment over $5000 6,000 6,000 6,000 -100.00% 6,000 6,000 Office & Equipment under $5000 237 237 237 -100.00% 237 237 CIP over $5000 Reimbursed Capital ExpensesTotal Capital Outlay 0 0 6,237 0 6,237 6,237 0 -100.00% 6,237 0 0 6,237

Interest Interest Expense 282 84 365 365 6,000 6.09% 365 365Total Interest Expense 0 282 84 365 365 6,000 6.09% 365 0 0 365

Other Financing Sources Preventive Maint (In) Capital Outlay (In) Out Transfer (In) OutTotal Other Financing Sources 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0

TOTAL EXPENSES 102,839 36,397 38,222 67,149 141,769 244,607 516,506 47.36% 144,420 20,000 80,188 244,607

Increase/(Decrease) to Net Positio -4,632 -494 -3,789 -19,610 -23,893 -28,525 87,901 -32.45% -44,151 24,839 -9,212 -28,525

Actual vs Budget Program YTDGeneral Fund Activity


Tahoe Transportation DistrictCIP Fund



DATE

Board Approved

Budget Var %FLH

Rds 4 - 5 PLHD FTA FLAP / TAP Prop 1B Question 1Program

TotalRevenuesCapital Grant & Contributions FTA 5308 102,459 102,459 102,459 1,000,000 10.25% 102,459 102,459 FTA 5303 1,483 260 3,513 4,196 7,969 9,452 500,000 1.89% 9,452 9,452 FLH 1/2 Percent Funding 431,828 185,257 221,534 197,520 604,311 1,036,139 2,375,644 43.62% 1,036,139 1,036,139 Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) 1,506,637 0.00% Public Lands Highways Discretionary (PL 118,897 5,461 28,897 40,718 75,076 193,973 1,307,619 14.83% 193,973 193,973 Transportation Alternatives Pgm (TAP) 66,500 0.00% Prop 1B 22,760 15,092 21,144 172,015 208,252 231,012 709,683 32.55% 231,012 231,012 Question 1 11,802 110 6,784 6,894 18,697 18,488 101.13% 18,697 18,697 Contributions 34,750 0.00%Total Capital Grants & Contributions 586,771 206,179 275,088 523,693 1,004,961 1,591,731 7,519,321 21.17% 1,036,139 193,973 111,911 231,012 18,697 1,591,731

Special Items Interest Revenue 22 10 3 8 21 43 -100.00% 43 43Total Special Items 22 10 3 8 21 43 -100.00% 0 0 0 0 0 43 43

TOTAL REVENUES 586,793 206,189 275,092 523,701 1,004,982 1,591,774 7,519,321 21.17% 1,036,139 193,973 111,911 0 231,012 18,740 1,591,774

Expenses Personnel 117,912 61,064 43,580 44,157 148,801 266,712 562,937 47.38% 243,434 15,566 7,712 266,712 Contract Services 405,159 112,475 197,291 192,930 502,695 907,854 4,949,029 18.34% 723,833 174,885 9,137 907,854 Reproduction & Printing 200 200 200 17,550 1.14% 200 200 Rent Meeting Room 602 500 550 1,050 1,652 18,485 8.94% 1,652 1,652 Supplies 2,450 0.00% Advertising / Outreach 1,475 1,475 1,475 40,750 3.62% 1,475 1,475 Admin Support 22,863 13,866 9,806 10,699 34,371 57,234 125,932 45.45% 52,005 3,522 1,707 57,234 Postage 10,825 0.00% Subscriptions, Dues, & Publications 367 135 502 502 3,300 15.21% 502 502 License & Permits 12,480 610 610 13,090 100 13090.05% 3,530 9,560 13,090 Professional Services 15,965 525 1,874 2,399 18,364 120,500 15.24% 1,813 16,551 18,364 Legal Services

Actual vs Budget Program YTDCIP Activity


Tahoe Transportation DistrictCIP Fund



DATE

Board Approved

Budget Var %FLH

Rds 4 - 5 PLHD FTA FLAP / TAP Prop 1B Question 1Program

Total

Actual vs Budget Program YTDCIP Activity

Expenses Continued Training 284 495 779 779 10,000 7.79% 779 779 Travel - Per Diem 1,935 426 426 2,361 4,750 49.70% 2,227 134 2,361 Travel - Commercial Air 1,703 913 44 957 2,660 2,250 118.21% 2,660 2,660 Travel - Auto 945 173 131 121 426 1,370 5,030 27.24% 1,338 33 1,370Total Operating 579,564 190,476 253,252 250,961 694,689 1,274,254 5,873,888 21.69% 1,035,447 193,973 9,452 16,685 18,697 1,274,254

Capital Outlay Equipment over $5000 14,092 18,850 204,108 237,050 237,050 1,617,433 14.66% 97,724 139,326 237,050 Equipment under $5000 7,817 1,000 2,986 68,624 72,610 80,428 28,000 287.24% 692 4,735 75,001 80,428 CIP over $5000 0.00% Reimb Capital Expenses -7,817 -15,092 -21,144 -272,732 -308,968 -316,786 -1,645,433 19.25% -102,459 -214,326 -316,786Total Capital Outlay 0 0 692 0 692 692 0 -100.00% 692 0 0 0 0 0 692

Interest Interest 0.00%Total Interest 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other Financing Sources Preventive Maint (In) 0.00% Capital Outlay (In) Out 7,817 15,092 21,144 272,732 308,968 316,786 1,645,433 19.25% 102,459 214,326 316,786 Transfer (In) Out 0.00%Total Other Financing Sources 7,817 15,092 21,144 272,732 308,968 316,786 1,645,433 19.25% 0 0 102,459 0 214,326 0 316,786

TOTAL EXPENSES 587,381 205,568 275,088 523,693 1,004,350 1,591,731 7,519,321 21.17% 1,036,139 193,973 111,911 231,012 18,697 1,591,731

Increase / (Decrease) to Fund Balance -589 621 3 8 632 43 0 -100.00% 0 0 0 0 0 43 43


Tahoe Transportation DistrictTransit Fund



DATE

Board Approved

Budget Var %S. Shore

Ops ESEMob

Mgmt CMAQProgram

TotalRevenuesGrants & Contributions

FTA 5311 - NDOT 385,004 112,384 110,488 155,585 378,457 763,461 1,925,000 39.66% 640,944 92,821 29,696 763,461

FTA 5311 - Cal Trans 69,064 32,905 30,531 63,436 132,500 132,500 100.00% 132,500 132,500

FTA 5317 - Cal Trans 1,198 1,552 2,534 3,646 7,732 8,931 45,008 19.84% 8,931 8,931

Older Americans Act - Area 4 5,993 1,377 1,509 1,353 4,239 10,232 50,000 20.46% 10,232 10,232

CMAQ - Cal Trans 3,949 17,792 17,792 21,740 -100.00% 21,740 21,740

USFS - SNPLMA 27,144 27,144 32,080 84.61% 27,144 27,144

RTAP - Cal Trans/NDOT 3,500 0.00%

LT License PLate Fund 49,846 1,162 211 48 1,421 51,267 68,781 74.54% 51,267 51,267

TDA - LTF 201,482 67,161 67,161 67,161 201,482 402,965 814,116 49.50% 402,965 402,965

TDA - STA 88,799 29,600 29,600 29,600 88,799 177,597 355,194 50.00% 177,597 177,597

Contributions 251,369 83,790 83,790 147,327 314,906 566,275 1,122,030 50.47% 556,973 6,997 2,305 566,275

In-Kind Contributions 377 377 6,120 6.16% 377 377

Total Grants & Contributions 1,084,224 329,931 325,823 422,510 1,078,264 2,162,489 4,554,329 47.48% 1,938,123 144,088 56,233 24,045 2,162,489

Charges for Services

FareBox Revenue 151,856 39,555 34,452 56,229 130,237 282,093 539,864 52.25% 267,015 14,877 201 282,093

Pass Sales 37,980 13,547 14,725 5,343 33,615 71,595 120,000 59.66% 71,595 71,595

Advertising Revenue 8,000 0.00%

Total Charges for Services 189,836 53,102 49,177 61,572 163,852 353,688 667,864 52.96% 338,610 14,877 201 0 353,688

Special Items

Sale of Fixed Assets 1,825 1,825 1,825 -100.00% 1,825 1,825

Interest Revenue 173 26 30 52 108 282 570 49.42% 282 282

Total Special Items 173 1,851 30 52 1,933 2,107 570 369.60% 2,107 0 0 0 2,107

TOTAL REVENUES 1,274,234 384,884 375,030 484,135 1,244,050 2,518,283 5,222,763 48.22% 2,278,839 158,965 56,434 24,045 2,518,283

Expenses

Operating

Personnel 74,759 38,367 31,101 33,886 103,354 178,113 387,415 45.97% 138,008 3,211 36,894 178,113 Personnel - Compensated Absenc 2,523 2,664 2,045 2,578 7,287 9,809 6,000 163.49% 9,809 9,809 Contract Services 640,800 184,097 188,227 287,946 660,270 1,301,070 3,159,415 41.18% 1,216,948 79,010 5,112 1,301,070 Vehicle Fuel 129,598 36,252 33,913 46,271 116,436 246,034 771,529 31.89% 231,775 12,739 1,521 246,034 Sales Tax on Fuel 310 611 611 921 12,000 7.68% 921 921 Repair and Maintenance 5,373 2,536 34,300 1,091 37,927 43,300 160,774 26.93% 43,300 43,300 Insurance 44,422 14,880 14,807 14,807 44,494 88,916 185,727 47.87% 86,699 2,218 88,916 Reproduction & Printing 3,874 563 946 69 1,578 5,452 16,300 33.45% 3,910 1,542 5,452 Facility Rent 39,921 9,747 9,747 9,747 29,240 69,161 148,785 46.48% 58,880 10,252 29 69,161 Facility Utilities 12,335 3,393 4,279 8,793 16,465 28,800 65,141 44.21% 27,361 1,438 28,800 Telephone 3,638 1,781 1,327 1,420 4,528 8,165 18,038 45.27% 8,165 8,165 Supplies 6,100 0.00% Advertising & Public Relations 25,478 95 421 516 25,995 70,609 36.81% 1,925 22,590 390 1,090 25,995 Admin & Overhead Expense 13,976 5,099 6,998 8,211 20,307 34,283 86,667 39.56% 26,136 626 7,520 34,283 License & Permits 28 55 83 83 2,625 3.14% 83 83 Dues, Subscriptions and Publications 854 854 854 12,500 6.83% 854 854 Professional Services 35,278 9,785 3,532 4,846 18,163 53,442 88,786 60.19% 23,927 26,881 2,634 53,442 In Kind Prof Services 377 377 -100.00% 377 377 Legal Services 275 87 87 362 2,200 16.46% 362 362 Audit Fees 500 500 500 500 100.00% 500 500 Bank Fees 874 275 276 269 820 1,694 3,600 47.06% 1,694 1,694 Training 1,995 1,995 1,995 8,750 22.80% 1,995 1,995

Actual vs Budget Program YTDTO Fund Activity


Tahoe Transportation DistrictTransit Fund



DATE

Board Approved

Budget Var %S. Shore

Ops ESEMob

Mgmt CMAQProgram

Total

Actual vs Budget Program YTDTO Fund Activity

Expenses Continued Travel 312 105 12 429 545 857 8,900 9.63% 441 416 857 Reimbursed Travel 182 294 294 476 -100.00% 476 476 Miscellaneous Expenses 0 86 86 86 200 43.05% 86 86 FareBox Replacement 3,159 19,797 19,797 22,955 -100.00% 22,955 22,955 Depreciation Expense 202,342 68,238 67,258 68,735 204,232 406,573 904,140 44.97% 406,573 406,573Total Operating 1,239,804 378,757 398,884 512,830 1,290,470 2,530,274 6,126,701 41.30% 2,290,830 158,965 56,435 24,045 2,530,274

Capital Outlay Equipment under $5000 8,797 1,000 6,184 68,624 75,808 84,606 28,000 302.16% 84,606 84,606 Disposal of Fixed Assets 6,490 6,490 6,490 -100.00% 6,490 6,490 Reimbursed Capital ExpensesTotal Capital Outlay 8,797 7,490 6,184 68,624 82,299 91,096 28,000 325.34% 91,096 0 0 0 91,096

Other Financing Sources Preventive Maint (In) Capital Outlay (In) Out -7,817 -15,092 -21,144 -272,732 -308,968 -316,786 -1,459,183 21.71% -316,786 -316,786 Transfer (In) OutTotal Other Financing Sources -7,817 -15,092 -21,144 -272,732 -308,968 -316,786 -1,459,183 21.71% -316,786 0 0 0 -316,786

TOTAL EXPENSES 1,240,784 371,155 383,924 308,722 1,063,800 2,304,585 4,695,518 49.08% 2,065,140 158,965 56,435 24,045 2,304,585

Increase / Decrease) to Fund Balan 33,449 13,730 -8,894 175,413 180,249 213,699 527,245 40.53% 213,700 -1 213,699


JS/jw AGENDA ITEM: V.B.

MEMORANDUM

Date: February 9, 2015 To: Tahoe Transportation District (TTD) Board of Directors From: TTD Staff Subject: Authorize the Renewal of the District’s Line of Credit with Nevada State Bank at

a Minimum Amount of $500,000 for Purposes of Cash Flow Management for District Operations

Action Requested: Staff is requesting the Board approve and authorize the District Manager to execute the extension/renewal of the Line of Credit (LOC) agreement with Nevada State Bank (NSB). The LOC is currently established at $500,000. Fiscal Analysis: The District is in good financial standing and the LOC serves as a mechanism to support cash flow while waiting for grant reimbursements. The renewal fees and interest incurred from the LOC is included in the general fund budget. Background: Upon District Board approval on January 13, 2012, the District entered into a Loan Agreement with NSB to establish a $500,000 line of credit. The initial loan matured on January 25, 2013 and has been renewed annually for the past two years. Staff is requesting another one-year renewal, which will run from March 7, 2015 through March 7, 2016. Currently, there is a zero balance on the LOC, however, Staff projects that the District will be relying more heavily on the LOC as FY15 progresses, as CIP projects continue to move forward towards construction. Discussion: The District has not received renewal documentation from NSB at this time, but has met with a NSB representative and provided the requested financial information. The current agreement requires no guarantees or collateral and is contingent upon a loan sweep of accounts arrangement, which is a form of automatic repayment. The annual loan fees are estimated to be close to last year’s amount of $1,650. The interest rate has increased from Wall Street Journal (WSJ) Prime +2.5%, with a floor of 6%, to WSJ Prime +3%, with a floor of 6%. The WSJ Prime for the past year has been 3.25%, therefore the District’s interest rate will increase from the 6% (floor) to 6.25%. The main factor causing this increase is due to rates for unsecured lending increasing about a full percentage point over the last year. This particular increase has nothing to do with the


JS/jw AGENDA ITEM: V.B.

District’s financial conditions, other than the fact that it is an unsecured line and not secured by any assets. There is a future possibility of a request to increase the LOC up to $1,000,000, as the District is anticipating the need of cash flow assistance in future construction projects. The LOC has been utilized more frequently during the fall of 2014 and will continue to be utilized as needed. Additional Information: If you have any questions or comments regarding this item, please contact Joanie Schmitt at (775) 589-5227 or [email protected].


AL/jw AGENDA ITEM: V.C.

MEMORANDUM

Date: February 9, 2015 To: Tahoe Transportation District (TTD) Board of Directors From: TTD Staff Subject: Review and Acceptance of South Shore and Commuter December 2014 Transit

Contractor Report and Transit and Mobility Managers’ Updates for January 2015 Action Requested: It is requested the Board review and accept the monthly transit contractor report for December 2014 and the Transit and Mobility Managers’ updates for January. Background: To inform the Board of the performance of the transit system, Staff will submit a monthly summary of key operational information. Transit Contractor Report: The December’s ridership numbers totaled 88,554. The increase in passengers for the month was due in part to the New Year’s Eve and SnowGlobe Festival events. The “Spare the Air” (free rides) campaign started December 20 and continued through January 4. All three factors resulted in a 154% increase from November to December in total ridership. Anita Smith was nominated for the December Customer Service Award. Anita has driven for BlueGo since 2004, providing excellent safety and service to our passengers. Dan Trader was nominated for December Customer Service Award for consistent and professional attitude and service. While ridership numbers were up month over month, they were down 9% from December 2013 See Attachment A for the monthly ridership report. There were no accidents for the month of December. Mobility Manager Report: Staff submitted two applications to the Tahoe Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Caltrans 5310 Enhanced Mobility for Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities Program. One application proposes the continuation of the Mobility Management program and the second application would support operations associated with the South Shore demand response service and the proposed South Lake Tahoe specialized transportation service. It is anticipated awards will be announced late summer or early fall.


AL/jw AGENDA ITEM: V.C.

The North Tahoe Truckee Transport (NTTT) program’s two grant objectives are unduplicated passengers (first time users) and one-way passenger trips. As of December 31, 2014, there were:

• Unduplicated passengers: o Nevada County 15 out of 35 o Placer County 4 out of 20

• One-way passenger trips:

o Nevada County 52 out of 100 o Placer County 25 out of 80

Grant objectives must be met by June 30, 2015. Promotional efforts have been focused in the North Lake Tahoe region and the following efforts have been made to increase awareness about the program:

• Program fliers have been posted in all North Lake Tahoe and Truckee bus shelters • The service has been explained and promoted to local caregivers, including the Del Oro

Caregiver Resource Center • Special trips to community events have been added for seniors • Radio advertising has been initiated

The program has been going well. However, the operator, Gold Country Telecare, has informed the Town of Truckee that they are unable to fulfill the contract and their last day of service will be March 15, 2015. Staff is working with Truckee staff to find a solution. Truckee is pursuing an emergency procurement and there are currently three prospective contractors. Additional Information: If you have any questions or comments regarding this item, please contact Aaron Langmayer at (775) 589-5505 or [email protected]. Attachment:

A. Transit statistical data for December 2014


RIDERSHIP REPORTDECEMBER 2014

Dec 2014 Dec 2013 Nov 2014 Dec 2014 Dec 2013 Nov 2014Fixed Routes

19X 503 441 62 14% 523 -20 -4% 1,797$ 801$ 996$ 124% $1,039 (96) -9%20X 1,643 1,524 119 8% 1,221 422 35% 2,763$ 995$ 1,768$ 178% $1,149 301 26%21X 2,236 2,035 201 10% 1,919 317 17% 6,885$ 3,203$ 3,682$ 115% $2,896 717 25%23 10,001 9,923 78 1% 5,254 4,747 90% 4,852$ 2,875$ 1,977$ 69% $1,554 992 64%50 16,103 20,279 -4,176 -21% 11,096 5,007 45% 19,532$ 21,328$ (1,796)$ -8% $13,580 (3,330) -25%53 15,951 17,011 -1,060 -6% 10,932 5,019 46% 17,878$ 20,928$ (3,050)$ -15% $13,181 (3,799) -29%

Total Fixed 46,437 51,213 (4,776) -9% 31,138 15,299 49% 53,707$ 50,130$ 3,577$ 7% 33,679$ 20,028 59%

Pass Sales 5,343$ 14,755$ (9,412)$ -64% $14,725 (9,382) -64%Winter Routes

10 2,477 2,144 333 16% 98 2,379 2428%11 29,245 31,122 (1,877) -6% 3,552 25,693 723%12 1,882 2,059 (177) -9% 29 1,853 6390%13 661 964 (303) -31% - 661 #DIV/0!14 1,314 3,332 (2,018) -61% - 1,314 #DIV/0!15 5,263 5,326 (63) -1% - 5,263 #DIV/0!

Total Winter 40,842 44,947 (4,105) -9% 3,679 37,163 1010%

On-Call 1,275 1,329 (54) -4% 1,187 88 7% 2,523$ 1,243$ 1,280$ 103% $1,054 270 26%

TOTAL 88,554 97,489 (8,935) -9% 36,004 52,550 146% 61,573$ 66,128$ (4,555)$ -7% $49,458 12,115 24%


19X 240 229 11 5% 0 240 #DIV/0! 53 49 5 10% 49 5 10%20X 316 316 0 0% 218 98 45% 79 77 3 3% 77 3 3%21X 367 362 6 2% 306 62 20% 89 85 4 5% 85 4 5%23 551 554 (3) -1% 349 202 58% 19 17 2 11% 17 2 11%50 573.2 567 7 1% 540 33 6% 4 3 0 13% 3 1 17%53 606.33 558 48 9% 540 66 12% 10 3 7 236% 3 7 0%

Total Fixed 2,654 2,585 69 3% 1,973 681 34% 254 234 21 9% 234 21 9%

Winter Routes10 244 266 (21) -8% 43 202 475% 41 22 19 85% 7 34 483%11 937 1,068 (131) -12% 213 724 340% 130 142 -12 -9% 34 96 279%12 266 238 29 12% 47 220 470% 37 23 14 61% 6 31 511%13 105 111 (5) -5% - 105 #DIV/0! 17 11 7 63% - 17 #DIV/0!14 95 283 (188) -66% - 95 #DIV/0! 16 37 (22) -59% - 16 #DIV/0!15 172 533 (361) -68% - 172 #DIV/0! 19 51 (32) -63% - 19 #DIV/0!

Total Winter 1,820 2,498 (679) -27% 302 1,518 502% 260 287 (27) -9% 47 213 449%

On-Call 546 598 -53 -9% 504 41 8% 98 139 -41 -29% 84 13 16%

TOTAL 5,019 5,682 (663) -12% 2,780 2,239 81% 613 659 (47) -7% 366 247 67%


19X 4,972 4,746 226 5% 4,520 452 10% 1,430 1,365 65 5% 1,300 130 10%20X 7,440 7,440 - 0% 7,200 240 3% 1,456 1,444 12 1% 1,364 92 7%21X 10,324 10,208 116 1% 9,860 464 5% 1,398 1,422 (24) -2% 1,380 18 1%23 7,392 7,436 (44) -1% 7,050 342 5% 374 394 (21) -5% 360 14 4%50 6,542 6,420 122 2% 6,120 422 7% 66 66 - 0% 60 6 10%53 7,549 7,254 295 4% 7,020 529 8% 136 62 74 119% 60 76 127%

Total Fixed 44,219 43,504 715 2% 42,254 1,965 5% 4,860 4,753 107 2% 4,532 328 7%ESE 0 0 - #DIV/0! 0 - #DIV/0! 0 0 - #DIV/0! 0 - #DIV/0!

Winter Routes10 2,230 2,187 43 2% 344 1,886 548% 328 313 15 5% 56 272 482%11 8,217 11,382 -3,166 -28% 2,214 6,002 271% 619 872 -253 -29% 194 425 219%12 1,908 1,927 -19 -1% 378 1,530 405% 220 151 69 46% 30 189 627%13 1,038 1,045 -7 -1% - 1,038 #DIV/0! 69 64 5 8% - 14 730 2,190 -1,460 -67% - 730 #DIV/0! 75 300 -225 -75% - 15 1,789 6,572 -4,783 -73% - 1,789 #DIV/0! 136 542 -406 -75% -

Total Winter 15,912 25,303 -9,391 -37% 0 15,912 #DIV/0! 1,447 2,242 -795 -35% 281 1,166 415%

On-Call 6,673 7,064 -391 -6% 6,263 410 7% 513 422 91 22% 399 114 29%

TOTAL 66,804 75,871 (9,067) -12% 48,517 18,287 38% 6,820 7,417 (598) -8% 5,212 1,608 31%

Riders FareboxYOY Change MOM Change YOY Change MOM Change

Vehicle Service Hours Non-Service HoursYOY Change MOM Change YOY Change MOM Change

Vehicle Service Miles Non-Service MilesYOY Change MOM Change YOY Change MOM Change

ATTACHMENT A

AL/jw AGENDA ITEM: V.C.TTD Board Meeting Packet - February 13, 2015 - Page 15 -

GF/jw AGENDA ITEM: V.D.

MEMORANDUM

Date: February 9, 2015 To: Tahoe Transportation District (TTD) Board of Directors From: TTD Staff Subject: Authorize Execution of Contract with Solutions for Transit’s for a Customized Software

Reporting System Action Requested: Staff requests the Board to authorize the District Manager to negotiate and enter into a contract with Solutions for Transit in an amount not to exceed $50,000 for the remainder of this fiscal year (FY15) and fiscal year 2016 (FY16). Fiscal Analysis: FY15 expenditures associated with this item are accounted for in the approved FY15 budget and FY16 expenditures are within current revenue expectations for next fiscal year. Work Program Analysis: All work associated with this effort is captured under respective elements of the approved FY 2015 Work Program and corresponding allotted staff time. Background: In December 2014, Staff completed the installation of Genfare’s Odyssey validating farebox system (GFI) which integrates passenger fare payment and fare media. Solutions for Transit (Solutions) was selected as the Project Management team to assist Staff in the migration from manual fareboxes to GFI. Solutions has managed many migrations to GFI technology and are the only Project Management firm recommended by Genfare to facilitate GFI integration. Solutions has extensive and unique experience in transit operations and maintenance. Work performed by Solutions on past projects for TTD, as well as other transit clients, has exceeded expectations. Solutions has particular expertise in utilization of cost effective technology to increase the effectiveness and desirability of transit systems across California. TTD staff has been impressed with Solutions’ technical competence, creativity, cost effectiveness, responsiveness, and insight into the specific challenges faced by TTD's operations staff, maintenance staff, and transit contractor. Discussion: In addition to collecting fares, the GFI system assembles a rich variety of data that can be extracted and processed for further analysis. Staff is recommending exploiting the full potential of this data through the use of Solutions’ “The Reporting Solution” suite of services and reports. The Reporting Solution is customized for each agency, providing information about how their system is running and what operator inefficacies are affecting it. At a minimum, The Reporting Solution provides the following services:


GF/jw AGENDA ITEM: V.D.

• IT support on-site and remotely o Installation of a customized server at the transit yard to collect the GFI data o Provide a customized website to collect information on TTD’s service o Back-up GFI data offsite automatically

• Develop the following databases in order to merge the GFI data and contractor data for full system analytics

o Transportation o Maintenance o Pass sales/inventory o Planning o National Transit Database (NTD) required reporting

• Customization of various modules, including: o Daily service logs o Ridership numbers by trips, routes, and runs o Buses used o Total miles and hours for commuter, fixed, paratransit, and shuttle routes

This information will allow Staff to:

• Identify and correct occurrences where the contracted service invoices do not match the service performed

• Identify which operators are correctly classifying the revenue to help prevent any loss of revenues and insure accurate data is collected

• Save time by eliminating the need to recreate reports from GFI information and the contractor’s reporting

• Receive data from the contractor that is corrected by Solutions each month prior to invoicing so decisions are based on accurate information, leading to better service and increased ridership

Solutions specialized expertise and familiarity with TTD’s transit system allows TTD to operate more effectively with a small staff and the expert support accelerates the development of contract employees. Using the robust data gathered, staff can focus on evaluating system efficiencies and meeting other mandates from the various regulatory oversight agencies to the normal day-to-day operations and reporting. TTD is systematically upgrading the equipment and technology that supports operation of transit in the basin to improve efficiency. While there are opportunities to create an independent patchwork of separate contracts and new processes, Staff believes that a complete and fully integrated user-friendly suite of services will be most beneficial to TTD. With our goal of expanding the transit system to serve a “basin & beyond” focus, The Reporting Solution will provide the data necessary to make strategic decisions, while maximizing our limited resources. TTD’s purchasing policy requires purchases over $25,000 to be by a formal bid. With Solutions’ expertise and knowledge of the transit system, Staff is requesting to dispense with the bidding procedures and recommends the Board approve the District Manager to negotiate and enter into a contract with Solutions for Transit through FY16 in an amount not to exceed $50,000. Additional Information: If you have any questions or comments regarding this item, please contact George Fink at (775) 589-5325 or [email protected].


CH/jw AGENDA ITEM: VI.A.

MEMORANDUM

Date: February 9, 2015 To: Tahoe Transportation District (TTD) Board of Directors From: TTD Staff Subject: Formal Recognition of Norma Santiago and Angela Swanson for their Service as

Board Members of the Tahoe Transportation District Action Requested: It is requested the Board recognize Ms. Santiago and Ms. Swanson for their service as board members of the Tahoe Transportation District. Background: Ms. Santiago, as El Dorado County Supervisor, was appointed to the Tahoe Transportation District Board of Directors in 2005. Ms. Swanson, as City of South Lake Tahoe Council member, was appointed to the Tahoe Transportation District Board of Directors in 2011. Discussion: Staff would like to formally recognize Ms. Santiago and Ms. Swanson for their service on the District’s Board.

Fiscal Analysis: Not applicable. Work Program Analysis: Not applicable. Additional Information: If you have any questions or comments regarding this item, please contact Carl Hasty at [email protected] or (775) 589-5501.


mailto:[email protected]

CH/jw AGENDA ITEM: VI.B.

MEMORANDUM

Date: February 9, 2015 To: Tahoe Transportation District (TTD) Board of Directors From: TTD Staff Subject: Appoint Board Director to Replace Norma Santiago on Finance Committee Action Requested: It is requested the Board appoint a Board Director to replace Ms. Norma Santiago on the District’s Finance Committee. Background: In June 2009, the Board approved the re-establishment of the District Finance Committee and appointed three members of the Board to be on the committee. In November 2010, the Board approved adding Mr. Teshara as the alternate committee member in order to ensure a quorum of two. In February 2012, Mr. Teshara was appointed to replace Mr. Ron McIntyre and Mr. Treabess was appointed as the alternate. Discussion: Ms. Santiago, El Dorado County Supervisor, was termed out as El Dorado County Supervisor and has left the TTD Board of Directors. As the finance committee consists of chosen board members, a new board member is needed for the committee. The options are to appoint Mr. Treabess as the third member with no alternate; appoint a third member and retain Mr. Treabess as alternate; or appoint Mr. Treabess as the third member and appoint a fourth member as alternate.

Fiscal Analysis: Not applicable. Work Program Analysis: Not applicable. Additional Information: If you have any questions or comments regarding this item, please contact Carl Hasty at [email protected] or (775) 589-5501.



CH/jw AGENDA ITEM: VI.C.

MEMORANDUM

Date: February 9, 2015 To: Tahoe Transportation District (TTD) Board of Directors From: TTD Staff Subject: Informational Update Regarding the Draft Trans-Sierra Transportation Plan and

Coalition Progress Action Requested: It is requested the Board hear an informational update regarding the draft Trans-Sierra Transportation Plan and Coalition progress. Fiscal Analysis: All expenditures associated with this item are accounted for in the 2014/15 Work Program and associated budget. Work Program Analysis: This project is included in the work program and the TTD’s Capital Improvement Program. All work associated with this effort will be captured under respective elements of the existing Work Program and corresponding allotted staff time. Background: At the July 2013 Board meeting, the Board approved a contract and task order for CH2M Hill to develop a business case for the Trans-Sierra Transportation Plan. Such a business case was proposed as part of the District’s efforts to address the need of ensuring continued revenue in order to construct Tahoe’s transportation projects. The Board heard a brief preview of the draft plan at its November 2014 meeting. Discussion: Attached is the draft Trans-Sierra Transportation Plan. It is one of two documents that are near final completion; the second being a more technically detailed economic analysis. Staff and the consultant team of CH2MHill and Derek Morse and Associates have met with the majority of the Nevada and California transportation entities to review the documents and their significance. The Trans-Sierra Transportation Coalition members have been asked to provide their comments by February 17, in order to complete the final drafts, with the public release thereafter. TTD staff and the consultant team will update the Board on the draft Trans-Sierra Transportation Plan, the Coalition discussion, and next steps.


CH/jw AGENDA ITEM: VI.C.

Additional Information: If you have any questions or comments regarding this item, please contact Carl Hasty at [email protected] or (775) 589-5501. Attachment:

A. Draft Trans-Sierra Transportation Plan



Trans–Sierra Transportation Plan

prepared for

The Trans-Sierra Transportation Coalition


1


Transportation: It’s That Important!Transportation is essential to our quality of life in the

Trans-Sierra Region. It is the foundation of a vibrant economy and job creation. Safe commutes to work and access to the numerous attractions of our Region, while maintaining blue skies and clean water, depend on a well thought out, efficient transportation system. The economic activities that depend on our transportation system generate the revenue that funds our schools, police, fire protection, parks, and the many other amenities that make our communities great places to live and work.Good transportation systems don’t just happen; building, operating, maintaining, and renewing our transportation systems takes long-term commitment and dedication. As the transportation needs of

business, residents, and visitors evolve, so too must the transportation system. This requires thoughtful, on-going dialog, planning, and execution.


2


That’s what’s behind the Trans-Sierra Transportation Coalition, a group of 11 California and Nevada counties, federal and state agencies, stakeholders, and citizens from Northern California and Northern Nevada committed to ensuring that the Region’s

transportation continues to support our economic vitality and preserve our quality of life. This Coalition is dedicated to developing collaborative, innovative strategies to meet the unique transportation challenges and needs of the Trans-Sierra Region while sustaining and enhancing the quality of life for current and future generations.As part of this ongoing, collaborative effort, the Coalition has created this Trans-Sierra Transportation Plan. This Plan honors and draws upon the individual comprehensive

plans developed by the participating state and local transportation planning agencies for their respective communities. All of the projects and services included within these individual plans, including those that are not currently funded, are incorporated into this Trans-Sierra Transportation Plan by reference. This Plan is meant to inform, stimulate, and excite the readers about how planned investments in a strong, coordinated transportation system can make the communities of the Trans-Sierra Region even better places to live, do business, and visit.

Transportation: It’s that important!

“Good transportation systems don’t just happen; building,

operating, maintaining, and renewing our

transportation systems takes long-

term commitment and dedication.”

(Add county logos)


3


The Trans–Sierra Coalition’s Vision: “The Trans–Sierra Region will be served by an integrated multimodal transportation system that is built, operated, and maintained efficiently and sustainably. The Trans–Sierra transportation system will promote a strong economy by supporting approved land use plans and meeting the mobility needs of residents, visitors, and goods movement. This system will be safe and support environmental protection of our region’s outstanding natural assets by reducing congestion, vehicle emissions, and roadway surface pollution.”


4


The Trans–Sierra Region: A Place Like No Other

The Trans-Sierra Region of Northern California and Northern Nevada is unique in many ways. It is an enormous but lightly

inhabited area of great natural beauty and vast cultural and geographic diversity. It is an area of exceptional environmental sensitivity that must be respected in all of man’s endeavors. While the Trans-Sierra economy is diverse, the lure of our natural and man-made attractions has made tourism and recreation arguably our largest economic sector. The Region straddles the rapidly growing Northern California megapolitan that reaches from San Francisco through Sacramento to Reno and is home to more than 15 million people. These characteristics combine to create unique transportation needs that demand unique transportation solutions.

89

395

80

50

50

50

80

267

28

89

88

49

49

49

20

395

88

89

89

49

49

49

89

89

395

80

Tahoe City ●

Auburn ●

Roseville ●

●

Placerville

●

● Stateline

●

●

InclineVillage●

Reno

Truckee

Sacramento

CarsonCity

● Minden/Gardnerville

Nevada CityGrass Valley

Downieville Sierraville

●

SouthLakeTahoe

Jackson

●

●

●

●

●

Lake Tahoe

California Nevada

Tentative Trans-Sierra Region

PlacerCarson City

Nevada

Sierra

El Dorado

Douglas

Washoe

Amador

Alpine

Storey

Lyon

The Trans–Sierra Region provides wide open spaces with room for

recreation and the opportunity for solitude and tranquility that can

recharge the human spirit.

Geography and population: Covering 17,087 square miles, and encompassing six California counties (Alpine, Amador, El Dorado, Nevada, Placer, and Sierra) and five Nevada counties (Carson, Douglas, Lyon, Storey, and Washoe), the Trans-Sierra Region is home to only 1.2 million people. The relatively small population, dispersed across a large geographic area makes the Trans-Sierra Region a place of wide open spaces that provides room for recreation and opportunities for solitude and tranquility to recharge the human spirit.


5


Natural beauty and man-made attractions provide the setting for a lifetime of experiences.

Rising from the foothills on the west, through the rugged Sierra Nevada, and then transitioning to the ranges and basins of Nevada’s high desert, the natural beauty of the Trans-Sierra Region is stunning in its diversity. Transected by flowing rivers, the wooded slopes of the foothills are interspersed with flowered meadows, vineyards, and fields.

The Sierra Nevada Range offers dramatic vistas, towering peaks, and alpine lakes, including world renowned Lake Tahoe. Further to the east, Nevada’s mountain ranges and high desert basins allow visitors to see the very bones of the Earth and the big skies of the American West.

The Region teems with wildlife including deer, elk, antelope, big horn sheep, bears, mountain lions, foxes, and coyotes. The skies offer the soothing melodies of song birds and the dramatic flair of falcons, hawks, owls, and eagles including our national bird, the bald eagle. Lakes and streams support robust populations of game fish such as trout and mackinaw.

The Region is also host to a wealth of man-made attractions and recreational activities including ski resorts, gaming venues, theatres, arts, music, museums, historic and archaeological sites, and viticulture to name a few.


6


The Gold Country, in the California foothills of the Trans-Sierra Region has developed an extensive winery industry, as well as farms and gardens in the Apple Hill region that are very popular and host numerous arts and cultural festivals. The Trans-Sierra Region also has a number of communities with hotel/casinos that provide gaming and other entertainment and special events that draw many visitors.


7


Environmental Sensitivity and SustainabilityThe natural features and ecosystems of the Trans-Sierra, while bountiful, are also fragile. Extensive and extraordinary measures must be taken to safeguard the wonders of the landscape and the environment in the face of recreational and commercial activities. For the residents of the Trans-Sierra Region, this is a matter of deep personal interest that is further reinforced by the extensive public lands ownership within the Region. The U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California State Parks, Nevada State Parks, and other agencies administer the majority of the land (approximate 62%) within the Trans-Sierra Region. These and other federal, state, and local agencies must balance the needs of multiple user groups to ensure that the natural treasures of the Region are protected and sustained.

Federal land ownership within the Trans-Sierra Region


8


Economy and TourismThe Trans-Sierra Region is home to major facilities of some of the best known brands in America including: Tesla, Microsoft, Google, Barnes and Noble, Amazon, Walmart, FedEx, Intuit, United Parcel Service, and Hewlett Packard. The Region boasts the world’s largest business park, the 107,000-acre Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center, as well as major medical, educational, and research facilities. With

excellent highway and rail connections putting 18% percent of the U.S. population within a day’s travel of the Region, it has become a major logistics hub for the Western U.S.In addition to these commercial and industrial activities, our economy is also strongly driven by year-round tourism and recreation. While most of the visitors

to the Trans-Sierra Region come from California and the Western U.S., the spectacular landscapes and wide array of recreational and entertainment offerings of the Region draw visitors from all over the world. Tourism is a major industry in the Trans-Sierra Region. Numerous hotel-casinos, wineries, state and national parks, and special events attract more than 13.5 million visitors to the region annually and contribute over $4 billion to the local economy each year. Many of these visitors come from California (approximately 70% of total visits), the majority coming from the San Francisco Bay area (55%).

Approximately 60 million people live within 600 miles of the Trans-Sierra Region.

80

70

4040

25

25

1017

108

15

15

9090

90

84

80

5

5

580

395

395

SACRAMENTO

PORTLAND

SEATTLE

BOISE

LAS VEGAS

RENO

SALT LAKE CITY

ALBUQUERQUE

DENVER

PHOENIX

SAN FRANCISCO

LOS ANGELES

SAN DIEGO


9


The Trans-Sierra Region: Backyard playground for the Northern California megapolitan

The wide open spaces and attractions of the Trans-Sierra Region straddle what has been dubbed the Northern California

megapolitan, the fast growing urban area stretching from San Francisco, through Sacramento, to Reno. The Northern California

megapolitan is home to some 15 million people today, and this number is expected to increase by an estimated 25-30% by the year 2035. The natural beauty, year-round recreational opportunities, and solitude of the Trans-Sierra Region are a relatively short drive from these urban areas. This proximity makes the Region a key contributor to the overall quality of life for the millions that live and work in the Northern California megapolitan.The Northern California megapolitan at night

The majority of visitors to North Lake Tahoe make a three-hour (or less) drive on I-80, from the Sacramento and San

Francisco Bay areas. These account for 71% of winter visitors and 68% of

summertime visitors.

Tourism expenditures in El Dorado and Douglas Counties were estimated at

$1.2 billion in 2006, and an estimated $634.4 million in income was created by indirect effects. The direct impact of tourism on employment in the Lake Tahoe region was 16,897 jobs with an

additional 6,514 jobs generated by indirect effects.

Placer County’s estimated direct travel spending was $787 million in 2008.

Local and state sales tax receipts from tourism and recreation amounted to

$43.9 million.


10


Trans-Sierra Transportation: Unique Needs and Challenges

The unique nature of the Trans-Sierra Region creates unique transportation needs and challenges. First, the Region’s

transportation system must meet the typical local demands of residents and businesses. Residents need safe, convenient, and reliable access to work, school, shopping, services, and amenities. Businesses need a system to bring supplies, materials, products, employees, and customers to and from their establishments.In addition to the typical local

demands, the Trans-Sierra Region’s transportation system has substantial impacts from tourists, visitors, and recreationists. Roads, highways, parking lots, transit vehicles, bike trails, and pedestrian

ways that function well much of the time are overloaded during weekends, peak seasons, and special events. Meeting the transportation needs of the Trans-Sierra Region presents significant challenges. The rugged topography and extreme environmental sensitivity of much of the Region severely limits the potential for expanding existing roadways or creating new ones.

Where opportunities for expansion are feasible, the costs are often extraordinarily high due to environmental considerations and the need to keep existing facilities operating during construction due to the lack of alternate routes.

“Residents need safe, convenient, and reliable access

to work, school, shopping, services, and amenities.

Businesses need a system to bring supplies, materials, products, employees, and

customers to and from their establishments.”


11


Expanding transit services to provide alternatives to the automobile in large parts of the Trans-Sierra Region is also difficult. In many cases, Transit service for residents is hindered by the cost of effectively serving the relatively small resident populations in many of the Region’s communities. To be attractive to most riders, transit service must be convenient, affordable, dependable, and within reasonable

walking distance to the origin and destination of trips and must have well planned schedules and routes to effectively serve demand. Effective transit for visitors is even more problematic. With luggage, equipment, and small children in tow, our transit systems must achieve extraordinary levels of integration and service to deliver a convenient door-to-door journey to those we host.

Parking lots, bike trails, and pedestrian ways are often impacted by many of the same factors that afflict the road system and likewise, they do not provide enough capacity when huge numbers of visitors arrive.All of these challenges to

providing an effective and efficient transportation system that serves the needs of businesses, residents, and visitors in the Trans-Sierra Region will be exacerbated by a growing and changing population of our residents and our visitors.

“Parking lots, bike trails, and pedestrian ways are often impacted by many of the same factors that afflict the road system

and likewise, they do not provide enough capacity

when huge numbers of visitors arrive.”


12


The Trans-Sierra Region population is projected to grow 25 percent from 1.2 million to 1.5

million by 2035. Sustaining the quality of life for those who reside in the Region will depend

on a good transportation system.

Nationwide, and in the Trans-Sierra Region, the population is aging. By 2030, the population of residents aged 65 and older in many parts of the Region is expected to nearly double (or more) by 2030. Our transportation system will have to evolve to meet the changing needs of our residents and visitors.

With an estimated 25 to 30 percent increase in population in the Northern California

megapolitan by 2035, our Region can expect to see a similar increase in visits from that

megapolitan, in addition to increased visits from the rest of the Nation and the world.


13


Meeting the Needs of the Trans-Sierra: Transportation for Today and Tomorrow

The individual transportation plans of the entities in the Trans-Sierra Region speak to the goals and objectives of

each community and to the transportation projects and services necessary to achieving these goals. Collectively, these plans create a path for realizing the Coalition’s transportation vision. If these plans are fully resourced and implemented, they would create a regional transportation network that can be sustainably operated, maintained, renewed, and expanded to meet the needs of our businesses, residents, and visitors. This would be the fully integrated, multimodal transportation system desired by each community and articulated in the transportation vision for the Region. This system would include:

▪ Major corridors binding the Region together and connecting it to the rest of the Nation such as I-80, US-50, US-395, and I-580.

▪ Local streets and roads linking our neighborhoods and providing access to businesses, employment, education, services, and amenities.

▪ Bicycle and pedestrian facilities providing healthy alternative mobility options consistent with a closer connection to our beautiful surroundings.

▪ Integrated transit services offering residents and visitors real options for mobility both within and between communities and attractions.

▪ Projects and initiatives mitigating the impacts of our transportation system on our fragile ecosystems and environment thus ensuring that the quality of life for residents and the quality of experience for our visitors remains intact for generations to come.

The following pages provide a glimpse of some of the benefits of fully implementing the Coalition’s transportation vision and the individual transportations plans that support that vision.


14


Our interregional corridors link the communities within the Trans-Sierra Region and connect us to the Nation and the world. Making sure that these corridors can continue to move people and goods safely and efficiently will require multiple strategies including:

Major Interregional Corridors: Bringing Us Together

▪ Intelligent transportation systems that provide travelers with advanced information on road conditions, incidents, and construction so that they may plan their route of travel, times of departure, and layover

▪ Improved winter operations that ensure snow and ice are anticipated and removed rapidly

▪ Integrated management of the major corridor system with new lanes at critical chokepoints and interchanges, new or improved reliever routes, and alternative modes such as transit and rail for moving people and goods


15


I-580/US-395, the primary north-south route through the Trans-Sierra Region for people and goods, could take

on even greater regional and national importance if it becomes the proposed I-11, the most significant major

addition to the interstate system in 30 years.

US-50 provides visitors with access to more than 100 wineries and farms, as well as year-round outdoor and

leisure activities.

During peak months, an average of 180,000 vehicles per day travel through the Trans-Sierra Region on I-80 to

destinations in the Region and beyond.

On average more than 6,000 trucks per day cross the Trans-Sierra Region on I-80, an essential artery to the

Nation’s economy.


16


The Trans-Sierra Region is dedicated to having communities that are great places to live and great places to visit. Powerful tools, proven successful in many other regions, are being put to good

use here as well. Many communities have adopted the “complete streets” concept, to create safe, pleasant transportation facilities that accommodate all modes of travel: pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and automobile. Development that is well integrated and takes advantage of transit routes and hubs, sometimes called “transit oriented development” or “TOD,” will play a role in the transportation future of the Region. Transit oriented development has been successful in spurring greater private sector investment, increasing

property values, and creating vibrant, attractive centers in the Region’s more urban areas. In addition, the reconstruction and, in some cases, realignment of busy arterials will allow a rebirth of

some of the Region’s downtown areas by creating incredible “places” appealing to residents and visitors alike for shopping, leisure, special events, and community activities.

“Transit oriented development has been successful in spurring greater private sector

investment, increasing property values, and

creating vibrant, attractive centers in the

Region’s more urban areas.”

Local Streets and Roads: Serving Our Communities


17


In Reno/Sparks, the Oddie Boulevard/Wells Avenue Corridor Study has identified multimodal transportation improvements (bike, pedestrian, transit, and auto) to facilitate a more livable, safer, and vibrant corridor for residents and visitors alike.

The I-80/SR 65 interchange improvements in Placer County will enhance safety, reduce traffic congestion, and improve local traffic and regional commutes by increasing capacity and relieving the existing traffic choke point at the interchange.

Existing condition

Post-project condition


18


The Kings Beach Commercial Core Improvement Project will convert the existing four-lane highway to a corridor friendly to all users and will include roundabouts for improved traffic flow. The project also includes improved water quality facilities to preserve Lake Tahoe’s clarity.

The US-50/Stateline Community Revitalization Project would realign US-50 around the Stateline casino corridor area, creating not only a safe route for motorists passing through Stateline but also an unparalleled opportunity to reinvent the downtown core by making it more friendly to local traffic, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit. Economic studies indicate that this project is likely to spur as much as $1 billion in private sector investments in restaurants, retail shops, lodging, and other attractions to create a destination that will attract residents and visitors for year-round activities.


19


The Fanny Bridge replacement at the intersection of SR 89 and SR 28 in Tahoe City addresses congestion and improves seismic resistance while offering a unique opportunity to remake the downtown. The community has selected a multimodal alternative that will relieve congestion, improve safety, and allow the transformation of downtown Tahoe City into an exciting “place” for residents and visitors.


20


Partnering with Douglas County and the U.S. Forest Service Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit, the Tahoe Transportation District managed construction of the one-mile Rabe Meadow Bike Path, the first phase of the 3.2-mile Stateline to Round Hill segment of “America’s Most Beautiful Bikeway.”

While existing bicycle/pedestrian paths are popular in the Tahoe Basin, the use of non-auto transportation has been limited by the lack of a complete path network. The need for broadening transportation choices and providing alternatives to private car use will become more crucial as the number of area residents and visitors continues to increase. “America’s Most Beautiful Bikeway” has been proposed to complete a premier separated bikeway circling Lake Tahoe that connects communities, enhances recreational opportunities, expands transportation choices, and promotes the enjoyment of the Tahoe Basin.

While automobiles are an indispensable part of our overall mobility, there are many trips where good old fashioned people-power serves just as well. Research indicates that in urban areas, two-thirds of trips are five miles or less, making them good candidates for cycling. Nationwide, it is estimated that one-quarter of all trips are one mile or less, making them potentially suitable for walking. Traveling by foot or bicycle is an enjoyable, healthy alternative for many trips if we have a safe, connected system of bike lanes, paths, and sidewalks on which to travel. Communities across the Trans-Sierra Region have made significant investments in bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and the plans for the future take this to a whole new level!

Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Every Trip Begins or Ends with a Walk


21


The Tahoe Transportation District’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan for the Tahoe Basin envisions a network of interconnected bicycle facilities providing neighborhood connections as well as contiguous access around the Basin.

The Nevada County Transportation Commission recently completed a Bicycle Master Plan for Nevada County that would create an extensive network of Class I, Class II, and Class III bicycle facilities. These would provide neighborhood connections, and enable bicycle travel across the county.


22


The Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County (RTC) constructs sidewalks or pedestrian paths and shoulders accommodating bicycle lanes on all new roads and many reconstruction projects, when feasible. For example, the Plumb Lane Reconstruction project presented an opportunity to make bicycle and pedestrian improvements on a busy stretch of rural roadway, replacing drainage ditches with curb and gutter and providing a wide sidewalk and striped shoulders to improve safety for all users.

El Dorado County residents enjoy a number of first class pedestrian and bike facilities such as the Northside School Bike Path and plan to invest in more.

Sierra County’s Bicycle Master Plan includes adding shoulders on SR 89 to accommodate bicycles, creating safe access to numerous trailheads.

BeforeAfter


23


Change is happening throughout the Trans-Sierra Region, the Nation, and our world in the makeup of our population and our travel preferences. Expanded transit investments will be a key to the Trans-Sierra Region’s ability to prosper with these changes and sustain our great quality of life. Transit, used where and when it

works, can help the Region accommodate our growing number of active seniors as well as the increasing number of folks who would rather use their travel time for something other than just driving. Using transit frees us to read, browse the web, reach out to friends via e-mail or text, or just think. In congested areas of the Trans-Sierra Region, good transit service can help relieve congestion and get more value out of our roadways. Given the physical and

environmental constraints of Lake Tahoe and the Region, increased investments in transit will be key for getting a growing number of visitors and workers to and from their destinations with less congestion and fewer environmental impacts. Improved bus service, light rail transit, bus rapid transit, water taxis and ferries, and services for our senior and disabled friends and neighbors are all part of the Trans-Sierra Transportation Plan!

Transit: Where and When It Works

Investment in a well thought-out, integrated, multimodal transit system will be a key component in providing effective, sustainable transportation solutions to serve an increasing number of residents and visitors while protecting the Region’s environmental resources and natural beauty.


24


Continued investment in Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-compliant buses and paratransit services will ensure that disabled and senior citizens continue to have access to safe, reliable, and affordable transportation options.

Investing in fuel efficient hybrid and alternative fuel vehicles and facilities will help reduce long-range operating costs while preserving air quality and protecting our region’s sensitive environmental assets.


25


▪ Year-round service on SR 267 between Truckee, Northstar, Kings Beach, and North Stateline

▪ Year-round extended hours of service in the SR 89/267/28 triangle

▪ Improved service frequency during peak seasons in the SR 89/267/28 triangle and the West Shore

▪ Expanded peak summer season ▪ Year-round consistent service in Truckee and between Truckee and Donner Summit

▪ Additional paratransit service in summer and winter daytime periods

▪ Automatic vehicle location, real-time traveler information and enhanced communications systems

▪ No passenger fares

Tahoe Transportation District’s North Tahoe/ Truckee Transit Vision Service Plan


26


Benefits of Good Transportation: What’s in It for You

If the level of transportation investment were increased by $15.9 billion through 2035, this would enable the vision of the Trans-

Sierra Transportation Plan to become a reality creating a stunning array of benefits for businesses, residents, and visitors. . This additional incremental investment would boost business activity through 2035 by:

▪ Creating and sustaining 10,000 new, well paying, middle class jobs across all sectors of the economy

▪ Increasing the economic competiveness, diversity, and stability of the Trans-Sierra Region ▪ Expanding economic activity to generate an

additional $29.9 billion in economic output, including $11.3 billion in labor income ▪ Improving our ability to recruit and retain

top-notch workers ▪ Sustaining and expanding visitation and tourism ▪ Making our region more attractive for special events (Olympics, X-Games, conventions, etc.)

For residents, these investments would not only support and improve our quality of life today, but would preserve it as a legacy for future generations by:

▪ Expanding economic prosperity, competitiveness, and opportunity with sustainable jobs for generations to come

▪ Giving us more time to spend with family, friends, and other activities by reducing travel and delay time valued at $6.4 billion ▪ Lowering the costs of personal travel and the

transport of goods and services ▪ Offering a wider range of travel options

including transit, walking, and bicycling ▪ Reducing vehicle operating costs saving an estimated $9.9 billion through 2035

▪ Enhancing public resources with an additional $** in revenues that could be used to build stronger communities through investments in schools, parks, police, parks, fire, and other community services


27


▪ Increasing safety by reducing fatal crashes and serious injuries saving an estimated $2.5 billion

▪ Making our neighborhoods, communities, and region safer, healthier, and more enjoyable places to live, work, and play

Fulfilling the Coalition’s transportation vision would benefit our visitors by:

▪ Providing improved access to even more recreational opportunities across the region

▪ Improving the quality of the visitation experience by reducing the stress of travel to, from and within the region

▪ Offering the opportunity to choose eco-friendly transportation and recreation

▪ Enhancing their quality-of-life with an even better playground whether they come from the Northern California megapolitan, the Nation, or the world


28


Roadblocks and Opportunities: Moving Forward

Funding is the primary challengeFunding is the primary challenge facing transportation agencies in the Trans-Sierra Region, individually and collectively. Existing revenue sources are insufficient for sustaining the current transportation system, much less implementing the needed improvements to meet current and future demands. The transportation investments identified in the Trans-Sierra Transportation Plan will require an estimated $35 billion (in 2014 dollars) through 2035. Unfortunately, the current collective estimate of available transportation funding through 2035 is approximately $19 billion (in 2014 dollars) leaving a $16 billion shortfall. Table 1 summarizes the needs, revenues, and shortfalls by county and cumulatively for the Trans-Sierra Region.The estimated levels of future funding by the various transportation agencies within the Region assume that future federal and state

funding will mirror historic levels. There is no guarantee that this will occur and the estimated shortfalls may increase dramatically if our state and federal partners cannot sustain current levels of investment into the future.One of the major causes of the transportation

funding shortfall, which is not unique to the Trans-Sierra Region, is the heavy reliance on fuel taxes. Fuel taxes have served as the primary transportation funding source for many decades at all levels of government. When applied as a fixed “cents-per-gallon”

TABLE 1Estimated region-wide 2015-2035 funding needs, revenue, and shortfalls by county (2014$)


29


tax, fuel taxes do not respond to the erosion in purchasing power that occurs with inflation in construction and operations costs. In addition, fuel tax revenues are declining due to the increasing vehicle fuel efficiency and the rising popularity of electric, hybrid,

and alternative fuel vehicles. While increased vehicle efficiency has significant positive impacts in terms of reducing pollution and greenhouse gases, lessening our dependence on foreign oil, and saving us money at the pump, it also means that less revenue is being collected per mile driven. The combined impacts of inflation and increasing fuel economy mean that in real dollar terms we are collecting from the federal gas tax about 75% less per

mile driven today than we were in 1993, the last time the federal gas tax rate was increased. Fuel tax indexing and sales taxes on gasoline sales can be powerful tools for recovering the lost purchasing power of our transportation revenues due to inflation, but additional measures are needed to address the long-term loss of revenue due to increased fuel efficiency and alternative fuel vehicles. While transportation funding has increased nationwide over the past two decades, the significant majority of this increase has been at the local level. Between 1999 and 2014, there were approximately 475 local and 48 statewide transportation funding questions on ballots across the nation, 72% of which were approved. California and Nevada have been leaders in this regard. In these states, local money accounts for more than 50% of all transportation funding. Much of the local activity in both states has been motivated by the growing realization that neither the federal nor the state government has the capacity to fully fund local transportation needs, and that any increases in federal and state levies to do this would largely be paid by the residents of our communities. By going to residents directly, local communities increase the level of control, accountability, and efficiency in the use of these funds, and can take on a decisive role in determining their own economic destinies.

“If there is no additional preservation funding through

FY 2025, the pavement backlog (in Nevada) will rise from the current level of $1.9 billion to

$3.3 billion in 2025” Nevada Department of Transportation State Highway Preservation Report, February 2013


30


Continued collaboration to leverage the power of our transportation investmentsAn opportunity to accelerate the realization of the Trans-Sierra transportation vision is continued and expanded integration and collaboration among system operators. Dramatic progress has been made in integrated and collaborative management of weather events and incidents on the I-80 corridor by the California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS) and Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT) including real-time road condition and weather data being gathered and disseminated to corridor users. Transit operators are teaming to coordinate schedules, stops, and services where their systems interface to improve efficiency and reduce door-to-door travel times for their customers. Many jurisdictions are jointly contracting to achieve economies of scale, sharing equipment, and pooling expertise to make every precious dollar go further. Additional opportunities for further improvements in these areas and expanded collaboration include providing regional services such as:

▪ Real-time traveler information on congestion at popular attractions with suggestions for alternate routes or destinations

▪ Unified regional wayfaring signage that will offer visitors more to do and make it easier for them to do it

▪ Regional trip planning services that match visitor interests to an itinerary of amenities, services, and destinations throughout the Region

The status quo moves us backwardTaking steps to halt the erosion of the Region’s current transportation funding streams is an important step, but we cannot stop there. The Trans-Sierra Region is in a national and world-wide competition to sustain a vibrant economy while maintaining our quality of life. As our competitors increase their levels of transportation investment, stagnant levels of transportation investment in the Trans-Sierra Region will feed an ever widening gap between what we offer our residents, our businesses, and our visitors and what is available in other communities. The message is clear: Good transportation is not an adjunct to great economies and great communities, it is fundamental.


31


Solutions are within our grasp and will be unique to each communityDriving on roads that are in poor condition currently costs Trans-Sierra drivers an estimated average of $660 per year in additional vehicle operating costs. This is real money that is being wasted and bringing our region no benefit. If we could capture this loss and invest it in transportation improvements, it would cover roughly 60% of the current projected shortfall. Covering the other half of the shortfall would cost the typical resident in the Trans-Sierra Region approximately $2.25 per week, about the price of a cup of coffee. Given the enormous benefits to our region’s prosperity and to our quality of life, investing this amount in our transportation systems would more than pay for itself.

The path for addressing the transportation funding shortfall will be a decision made by each community in the Trans-Sierra Region. Local preferences will determine the combination of measures and the implementation timing that will be “right” for each individual community. One option for Trans-Sierra communities in California is sales taxes dedicated to

transportation. Such taxes have already been approved by voters in about 20 California counties. Most recently in 2014, voters in Monterey County approved a 0.125% transportation sales tax and voters in Alameda County approved doubling the existing transportation sales tax from 0.5% to 1.0%. This is even more impressive when one considers that approval by a two-thirds majority was required for passage. Among the options available to several Nevada counties in the Trans-Sierra Region is indexing of fuel taxes to recover the purchasing power lost through inflation. Indexing in Nevada was pioneered by Washoe County in 2008 followed by Clark County in 2013. The Nevada legislature has mandated that an indexing question be placed on the 2016 ballot in all of Nevada’s remaining counties.As a practical matter, reaching the level of additional funding needed to fully realize the transportation system desired by the Trans-Sierra communities will likely be accomplished in several stages, and a reasonable part of this burden will be borne by visitors. Regardless of the path taken, the successes in each community should be lauded and celebrated by all since improvements anywhere in the Region benefit everyone in the Region.


32


The Call to Action: What You Can Do

Full realization of the Trans-Sierra Transportation Plan will deliver enormous and lasting benefits: greater prosperity, outstanding quality of life, a healthy environment, and vibrant communities. If this is the future you would like to see, here are four things you can do to make it happen:

▪ Get involved in building and maintaining consensus in your community around what you want your transportation system to achieve and the specific projects and services needed to make it happen.

▪ Support efforts to fund and sustainably implement these transportation projects and services politically, environmentally, and financially.

▪ Urge collaboration and cooperation with public and private sector partners throughout the Region to maximize the effectiveness and efficiency of our collective transportation investments.

▪ Recognize and applaud the successes of your community and of your neighbors since success anywhere in the Region benefits everyone in the Region.

The journey to the full realization of the Trans-Sierra Transportation plan will be neither quick nor easy, but with patience and commitment, we can get there. The efforts of our parents and grandparents bequeathed to us a region of unsurpassed beauty and an outstanding quality of life. We have the opportunity to pass these precious gifts on to our children and grandchildren by making sound decisions and wise investments that will bring the vision of the Trans-Sierra Transportation Plan to reality.

Transportation: It’s that important!


CH/jw AGENDA ITEM: VI.D.

MEMORANDUM

Date: February 9, 2015 To: Tahoe Transportation District (TTD) Board of Directors From: TTD Staff Subject: Update, Discussion, and Possible Direction Regarding Implementation Planning

for Lake Tahoe’s Highway Corridors and An Inter-Regional Long-Range Transit Plan, Including the Update to the Bike and Pedestrian Plan

Action Requested: It is requested the Board hear an update, discuss the approach, and provide possible direction regarding the District’s implementation planning for Lake Tahoe’s highway corridors and an inter-regional long-range transit plan; and how it relates and supports the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) update, the Bike and Pedestrian Plan (BPP) update, and others. Fiscal Analysis: All expenditures associated with this item are accounted for in the 2014/15 Work Program and associated budget. Work Program Analysis: This project work is included in this fiscal year’s work program. All work associated with developing this effort is captured under respective elements of the existing Work Program and corresponding allotted staff time. Background: At the March 2014 Board meeting, Staff presented a proposal for implementation planning for Lake Tahoe’s highway corridors and development of an Inter-Regional Long-Range Transit Plan (Attachment A) for discussion and input. With Board support and approval, Staff incorporated the proposed work into the current work program. A $500,000 Section 5303 Transit Planning grant from NDOT was secured for the project. A Request for Approach was issued to four of the District’s qualified consultants for proposals to develop the plan. Stantec Consulting Services was selected and a contract and scope of work was approved. At the end of last calendar year, TMPO staff updated the BPP maps and project lists to be used as the basis for an update of the BPP plan. When brought to the TTC for approval, a number of questions came up in regard to the maps and project lists and their relationship to the plan. The Board asked that TMPO staff return with an outreach strategy for the plan update. Discussion: The TMPO has started the update process for the RTP and BPP and TTD staff has been working closely with TMPO staff to align mutually beneficial planning efforts. The integration of


CH/jw AGENDA ITEM: VI.D.

these efforts by leveraging respective funding, economizing basin stakeholders time, and economizing respective staff time will achieve these multiple objectives and documents. TTD and TMPO staffs have addressed the question of the BPP Plan update process and will share with the Board the proposed integrated planning process, utilizing the corridor approach as the mechanism to optimize the time needed to gather the information and discussion needed to develop a number of planning pieces, including the BPP. The conceptual drawing in Attachment B illustrates the process. Staff will explain the process, products, and responsible parties involved in greater detail. Work has begun and an update to that work will also be shared. Additional Information: If you have any questions or comments regarding this item, please contact Carl Hasty at [email protected] or (775) 589-5501. Attachments:

A. Corridor Implementation Planning Concept and Corresponding Map B. Planning Process Conceptual Drawing



Proposed Implementation Planning Concept for Lake Tahoe’s Highway Corridors

There are vital improvements that need to be made to the multi-modal transportation system in the Tahoe Basin. As evidenced by its efforts with the SR 28 corridor, TTD has a proven ability to conduct implementation planning that can be used to secure funding and construct an entire program of transportation improvements. Based on its success with the SR 28 corridor, TTD is proposing to conduct implementation planning for all of the highway corridors in the Tahoe Basin. Approach Implementation planning goes beyond traditional planning because it focuses on project delivery and on-the-ground results. Implementation planning is a highly involved process involving substantial outreach to government agencies and the public. Implementation planning:

• Prioritizes needs • Identifies solutions to issues and needs • Builds the partnerships and relationships that are necessary to secure funding and

deliver projects • Facilitates implementation funding and approvals

Product The implementation plan will focus on:

• Key infrastructure projects • Transit services • Connectivity

The implementation plan will be an action tool that identifies needs, obstacles, solutions, benefits and opportunities, in order to accelerate these projects. As was the case with the SR 28 corridor, the implementation plan will be used by decision makers to accommodate the objectives of various interests and parties and foster the cooperation necessary to actually deliver improvements to the transportation system. It can also be used to update the Regional Transportation Plan. The implementation plan would organize the Tahoe Basin into a total of six corridors:

• SR 28 corridor in Nevada • US 50 Zephyr Cove to Spooner Summit • South shore US 50 Trout Creek to Zephyr Cove • Meyers/Y SR89 to Camp Rich and US 50 to Trout Creek • SR89 Camp Rich to Meeks Bay, and • SR 89 Meeks Bay to SR 28 Kings Beach in California


Addressing the entire Tahoe Basin in one implementation plan will employ economies of scale and breakdown jurisdictional and piece-meal approaches and provide benefits to the region as a whole. The District also plans to prepare a long range, inter-regional transit plan to compliment the implementation plan, reduce costs and optimize synergy on an inter-regional basis. Timing The implementation plan would be completed over a three-year period and would be broken into two phases. Each phase would prioritize the order of work and identify the staging of funding procurement. Phase 1 (summer 2014 – summer 2015) will be focused on the operational system structure and needed function for all the corridors. Phase 2 (fall 2015 – fall 2017) will be focused on agency and public participation to create understanding, fine-tune improvement needs and garner agreements. Cost TTD estimates that the cost of implementation planning for the entire Tahoe Basin would be $1.5 million. TTD will hire a qualified consultant team to work with staff to prepare the products. Rationale The timing is right to proceed with this implementation planning: TRPA’s regional plan is in place; some of the local area plans have been approved; there is intense interest in economic development; the District is moving forward with its capital project schedule; the District’s cross lake passenger ferry project is in the environmental document phase; and traditional funding sources for transportation improvements are no longer available. TTD is the only entity with implementation and operational authority for the bi-state region who can address the system as a whole. Attachment:

A. Corridor Map


SR89 Recreation Corridor

Meyers/Y Corridor

NV SR28 National Scenic Byway Corridor

US50 East Shore Corridor

US50 South Shore Corridor

Homewood

Sunnyside

Tahoma

Kings Beach Incline Village

431

580

PROPO

SED PASSENGER FERRY

AlpineMeadows

SquawValley

NorthstarDiamond

Peak

Heavenly

LakeTahoe

TahoeCity

CarsonCity

Gardnerville

CampRichardson

SouthLake Tahoe

Emerald Bay

Sand Harbor

ElkPoint

Spooner

Sugar Pine Point

Tahoe Transportation

ProposedCorridors

267

28

89

89

28

50

50

395

207

SR89/28 Corridor


Bike / Ped Highway / Road Transit

Corridor

RTP roll-up with policies system description

CIP Management: models, map, database, finance plan

Circulation & Mobility


CH/jw AGENDA ITEM: VI.E.

MEMORANDUM

Date: February 9, 2015 To: Tahoe Transportation District (TTD) Board of Directors From: TTD Staff Subject: Update and Discussion on Local, California, Nevada, and Federal Transportation

Legislative Initiatives In Relation to Tahoe Transportation District's Transportation Program

Action Requested: It is requested the Board receive an update on local, California, Nevada, and federal legislative initiatives and actions related to transportation and the District’s program. Background: Two years ago at the February and March 2013 Board meetings, the Board approved the Nevada and California Legislative Action Plans, respectively. These plans included the recognition of Tahoe as an Urbanized Area. By November of 2013, Staff reported to the Board that the urban designation appeared to be best pursued through a technical amendment at the federal level. Staff also discussed the need to pursue local options. An update of the current climate on these matters was presented to the Board for information and discussion at its February 2014 meeting. Discussion: The District Manager and William “Buzz” Harris of WBH Enterprises will present an update to the Board on the state of the District’s respective legislative interests and what lies ahead for 2015 and beyond.

Fiscal Analysis: The revenues for educational outreach and revenue development work are programmed over the current fiscal year. Work Program Analysis: This project is included in the Work Program. All work associated with this effort continue to be captured under respective elements of the existing Work Program and corresponding allotted staff time. Additional Information: If you have any questions or comments regarding this item, please contact Carl Hasty at [email protected] or (775) 589-5501.



tahoe transportation district (ttd)...tahoe transportation district budget finance committee meeting...

Documents