REPORT TO SHASTA COUNTY RTPA
|
SUBJECT |
|
MEETING DATE |
ITEM NUMBER |
|
Consider 2003/04 Transit
Needs Assessment and Conduct 2003/04 Unmet Transit Needs Hearing |
02/25/03 |
8 |
|
RECOMMENDATION
It is
recommended that the Agency:
1) Consider the 2003/04 Transit Needs Assessment that generally
discusses transit needs within Shasta County;
2) Hold a public hearing and take testimony on unmet transit needs
in Shasta County;
3) Direct staff to present the information generated from today=s hearing to the Social
Services Transportation Advisory Committee (SSTAC) and claimant agencies for
formulation of their recommendation; and
4) Direct staff to prepare recommendations, written responses to
comments, and draft findings in anticipation of final Agency action at the
April 22, 2003 RTPA meeting.
SUMMARY
Annually,
the RTPA is required to address the issue of unmet transit needs. This is a prerequisite to making annual
Transportation Development Act (TDA) allocations in each jurisdiction. Generally, the unmet transit needs process
involves a three-part review as follows:
1) A general assessment of transit needs within Shasta County
jurisdictions in accordance with '99401.5(B) of the TDA and as provided in the 2003/04
Transit Needs Assessment;
2) A public hearing to consider specific unmet transit needs; and
3) Participation by the SSTAC, including a recommendation to the
RTPA regarding unmet needs that are reasonable to meet. The SSTAC meeting is scheduled for March 19,
2003.
DISCUSSION
2003/04
Transit Needs Assessment
The
attached 2003/04 Transit Needs Assessment meets the requirements for part one
of the unmet needs process outlined above.
The report concludes that the system=s ridership is growing and met the required farebox
ratio approved by the RTPA. The 2001/02
RABA farebox ratio calculation is 19.8%.
The 2003/04 Transit Needs Assessment is intended to provide background
information when reviewing more specific transit needs identified at the public
hearing and when considering the SSTAC recommendation. Final action by the Board on the 2003/04
transit needs and proposed TDA allocations to claimant agencies is scheduled
for Tuesday, April 22, 2003.
The
2003/04 Transit Needs Assessment concludes that, generally, public and private
transit operators serve the primary areas of high transit demand as well as
many other specialized transit needs throughout the county. TDA-funded transportation services are currently
operating consistent with established performance standards, including those
found in the Aunmet needs@ and Areasonable to meet@ definition.
Where
funding is available, new or expanded services can be required under the
Transportation Development Act where an Aunmet transit need@ is found Areasonable to meet@ by the RTPA. Where services do not meet the TDA criteria, the service may
still be provided with TDA funds under one of the following conditions:
1.
The service is approved by the RTPA as a
Consolidated Transportation Service Agency (CTSA) service which meets the
criteria for services; or
2.
The service is funded at the discretion of the
individual cities or the county.
Again, it should be noted that this general
assessment is intended to provide background information when reviewing more
specific transit needs during today’s public hearing and when considering the
SSTAC recommendation.
TDA Fund Claims
One of the duties of the RTPA is to distribute TDA
funds, including those deposited in the Local Transportation Fund (LTF). These funds are derived from ¼ of 1 percent
of the 7-1/4-cent retail sales tax raised within the County and are returned by
the State to the RTPA for apportionment to eligible claimants on the basis of
population.
Attachment A, page 32 shows last year’s TDA budget
adopted for FY 2002/03, the proposed disbursements off the top, and the
remainder of the individual claimant apportionments available to the local
jurisdictions based on population.
TDA Funding Priorities
The first priority for claiming funds from a
claimant’s apportionments is for public transit under Article 4. The amount that is available for each
claimant is limited to the amount representing that claimant's population-based
apportionment. (See PUC '99230-99231.2;
Title 21 California Code of Regulations Sections 6649 and 6655.) In Shasta County, an 80% service hours/20%
population-based cost sharing formula was agreed to and adopted as the most
equitable assessment for transit costs among claimants.
After the allocations for Article 4 (Transit) are
made, disbursements may be made under Article 8, which can be used for
miscellaneous claims such as pedestrian or bicycle facilities, or for streets
and roads claims of the cities and county.
Attachment A, page 34 is a summary of LTF allocations, purposes and
priorities from the Caltrans TDA Manual.
To approve a claim for streets, roads or other
purposes under Article 8, the RTPA must make a finding for each claimant
jurisdiction that 1) there are no unmet transit needs, or 2) there
are no unmet transit needs that are reasonable to meet. The cities and the County have full
discretion over how Article 8 funds are used and may choose to fund additional
transit services that do not meet the RTPA standards as discussed below.
Definition of "Unmet Transit Needs" and
"Reasonable to Meet"
The definitions of "unmet transit needs"
and "reasonable to meet" (Transit Needs Assessment, page 3) are
established by RTPA Resolution 00-21.
Accordingly, a jurisdiction's "unmet need"
must be for both of the following: 1) for a defined population group;
and 2) necessary for maintenance of life, health, or physical and mental
well-being, which excludes primary and secondary school transportation
needs.
In order for a transit need to be found "reasonable
to meet," it must be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Agency that: 1)
the service subsidy required to meet the need will not exceed 80% of operating
cost in the claiming jurisdictions urban area and 90% in its non-urban area
(the subsidy maximums may be determined on an individual route or service area
basis); 2) the service proposed to be funded will not be in direct
competition with existing private service; and 3) where transit service
is to be jointly funded by two or more of the local claimants, that the
resulting inter-agency cost sharing is equitable. Also, proposed expenditures must be in conformity with the
Regional Transportation Plan.
Public Hearing
This public hearing was advertised beginning January
10, 2003 and the written comment period will extend to February 25, 2003. Comments received to date are summarized in
Attachment B.
Recommendation
In proceeding, the Board should conduct a public
hearing to take testimony from the public and interested agencies. Staff would then prepare responses to all
comments. At the April 22, 2003
meeting, the RTPA will review responses to comments and determine for each
claimant jurisdiction what unmet needs are reasonable to meet and adopt formal
findings as the basis for the 2003/04 claims.
OTHER AGENCY INVOLVEMENT
The 2003/04 Transit Needs Assessment has been
reviewed by the Redding Area Bus Authority, CTSA, Caltrans, the Cities of
Anderson, Shasta Lake and Redding, and Shasta County, and the Social Services Transportation
Advisory Committee.
FINANCING
The Agency review and final approval of findings in
April will provide the basis for Agency evaluation of the annual claims of the
various jurisdictions for TDA funding.
________________________________________
Daniel J. Kovacich, Executive Officer
SLC/jac