1. 1 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REVIEW Balancing Transit Service with Travel Demand and Available Resources

2. 2 Identify Transit Services Reductions that will:  Decrease Transit Expenses in an amount called for in the District’s Financial Plan; and  Minimize negative impacts on:  transit customers  fare revenue  non-District subsidies. What is the Objective of the Transit Performance Review?

3. 3 How is Transit Service Performance Determined?  By using Measures of service performance: –Service efficiency - Passengers per trip –Service productivity - Passengers per hour –Service financial effectiveness - Subsidy per passenger –Fare equity - Fare recovery –Financial equity - Subsidy per passenger mile Focus on Financial Measures to Achieve Financial Objective of Reducing Transit Expenses.

4. 4 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REVIEW PERFORMANCE MEASURES BUS TRANSIT

5. 5 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REVIEW Measure: Patrons Per Trip 20 Patrons Per Trip Standard COMMUTE BASIC LOCAL FEEDER If applied, then cancel … Basic Routes: 10, 30, 40, 90, 63, 65 Commute Routes: 71, 78 Ferry Feeder Routes: ALL Local Routes: 17, 21, 23, 27, 33, 39, 45,  31 routes affected with low patronage but uncertain expense savings

6. 6 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REVIEW DISTRIBUTION OF SERVICE HOURS Commute + Basic account for 84% of service hours

7. 7 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REVIEW APPLICATION OF FAREBOX RECOVERY CRITERIA (Basic and Commute Service) Accumulated Savings Affected Patrons 33% Farebox Recovery $23.4 M Savings Significant savings, but big impact on customers 3.5 M Patrons

8. 8 Factors to Consider in Reducing Service How bus route contributes to System Productivity (ferry shuttle/LFT parking for example) Incremental cost of route (likely lower than the formula cost) External (non-District) funding of route Route connectivity to system (transfers between routes) Geographic coverage (availability of alternative services) Special circumstances (impact on transit dependent for example) Patronage trends including shifts from auto to transit resulting from a GGB toll increase (Option G could increase transbay transit patronage by over 10%).

9. 9 Golden Gate Transit Service Funding $23 million in passenger fares provides 30% cost recovery. $2 million in advertising, fees and other operating revenues. $2.2 million in direct STA subsidy for transit operations District receives $17 million of external subsidy to support specific transit services: –$11 million Marin TDA, $600,000 STA and $70,000 from schools for GGT local and regional bus, paratransit and ferry routes serving Marin County. –$4.5 million Sonoma TDA and $20,000 STA for GGT regional bus and paratransit routes serving Sonoma County –$800,000 regional STA from MTC and Eastbay agencies for GGT Route 40 Richmond Bridge service –$70,000 FTA rural transit grants support weekend west marin bus routes. District toll revenue provides the remaining $33 million to support transit services

10. 10 Transit Operating Expense  GGT Bus Operating Cost  About $230,000 per bus per year  Over $100 per hour of service  GG Ferry Operating Cost  About $1,000 per ferry crossing  Over $1,000 per hour of service  A significant portion of this expense may not be saved as a result of a service reduction

11. 11 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REVIEW SUMMARY OF BUS PERFORMANCE MEASURES TOP 10 POORLY PERFORMING ROUTES* * Out of 32 total basic and commute bus routes

12. 12 Candidate Bus Routes for Reduction

13. 13 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REVIEW PERFORMANCE MEASURES FERRY SERVICE (a different approach than bus)

14. 14 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REVIEW FERRY SERVICE  Two Routes  Sausalito-Heavy Tourist influence and seasonality  Larkspur - Predominantly commuter service.  Financial Performance. Available at System Level: 93 patrons per trip, 123 patrons per hour, $5.04 subsidy per patron, 34% fare recovery.  Measures. P atrons by month, time period and by ferry trip.

15. 15 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REVIEW SAUSALITO FERRY SEASONALITY (a definite seasonal pattern) Data: Avg for FY97 - FY01

16. 16 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REVIEW LARKSPUR FERRY SEASONALITY (not seasonal) Data: Avg for 9/98 - FY01; not include SF Giants

17. 17 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REVIEW LARKSPUR FERRY WEEKDAY TRENDS (commute use dominates) Average AM and PM Commute Patrons Per Day Average Mid Day Patrons Per Day Average Reverse Peak Patrons Per Day

18. 18 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REVIEW SUMMARY OF FERRY PERFORMANCE REVIEW POORLY PERFORMING SERVICES Based on patterns of low patronage per ferry trip, the following ferry services could be reduced: Sausalito Midday and Weekend Ferry Service During the Winter Season, Larkspur Midday Weekday Ferry Service Throughout the Year; however the affect on the nearly $11 million annual ferry service operating subsidy has not yet been determined.