HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.06 Request LAVTA for Paratransit Service CITY OF DUBLIN
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:- November 24, 1986
SUBJECT Request to LAVTA to Submit a Proposal for Paratransit
Services
EXHIBITS ATTACHED Proposed Letter
RECOMMENDATION Direct Staff to request formal proposal from LAVTA
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: 1986/87 Budget: $12, 345 Transportation Development
Act Funds (4 . 5)
11, 773 City General Fund Subsidy
24, 118 Total Budget
DESCRIPTION The current fiscal year is the fourth year that the
City has participated in the Transportation Development Act Program. The
funds claimed by the City have been used to provide paratransit services to
elderly and handicapped residents .
During the past year, the Livermore Amaddr- Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA)
has initiated a fixed route transportation system. Consistent with
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) requirements, LAVTA has
initiated a short term transportation needs analysis for their service area.
TDA 4. 5 funds are distributed through MTC. In Alameda County, the formula
for the distribution of funds is based on population over age 65 and a small
percentage is granted based on specific performance criteria. -As noted
above, the amount provided to Dublin only covers 51% of the program cost.
The remaining 49% is paid for with a subsidy from the General Fund.
The current services are provided through a Joint Powers Authority (JPA)
consisting of the Cities of Danville, Dublin and San Ramon. The
administrative responsibilities are rotated among the members and the actual
services are provided through a contract with a non-profit organization. In
1985/86, it was estimated that Dublin residents comprised 31% of the
ridership. Due to a lower TDA funding level than Contra Costa County cities
were receiving, Dublin was providing 26.2% of the funding for the JPA. It
is anticipated that the members may be looking in future years for funding
levels to more closely reflect ridership percentages . Therefore, it is
important that the City of Dublin evaluate methods of funding this service.
LAVTA as a regional transportation provider may be a more appropriate agency
to leverage and obtain funding for this program. In addition, they may be
in a better position to market, administer and provide this service to
Dublin residents. This may become even more feasible once Livermore ' s RIDEO
system falls under the auspices of LAVTA. Through coordination of
paratransit services on a regional basis, it may be possible to supplement
TDA 4 . 5 funding with additional TDA funds claimed by LAVTA.
Due to MTC filing requirements and existing commitments by the City of
Dublin to the Cities of San Ramon and Danville, a decision to change
providers would need totbe made in early 1987 . The City must notify the
members of the JPA 90 days prior to the date of termination. Also, MTC
requires the elected board submitting a claim for funds to take action no
later than April 1st.
Therefore, Staff would request authorization to request that LAVTA review
and provide a proposal for the provision of this service beginning July 1,
1987 . In order to address the deadlines and allow adequate time for City
Council review, we would request a response no later than February 1, 1987 .
Copies of the request would also be circulated to LAVTA member agencies .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
COPIES T0:
ITEM No.. Al.
- K. ''4 �?J�j'4�.,y'7'yi�l1",;t�.+ti' J $`5'Cd�'�'° J��^•'C:! .. _ ...
November 25, 1986
Mr. Vic Sood, General Manager
Livermore-Amador Valley Transit Authority
6500 Dublin Boulevard, Suite 203
Dublin, CA 94568
Dear Mr. Sood:
The Dublin City Council has directed Staff to explore the possibility of
LAVTA providing Paratransit Services within the City of Dublin.
The City is currently serviced through a JPA consisting of the Cities of
Dublin, San Ramon and Danville, The City claims Transportation
Development Act 4.5 Funds. The allocation for 1986/87 totaled $12,345.
The City recognizes the need to seek additional methods of funding this
service. Given the small TDA allocation, the City is required to
subsidize this program with General Fund payments.
Given your experience with the provision of service and securing funding
for transportation projects, LAVTA may become the logical agency to
provide paratransit services. The City would request your review and the
submittal of a detailed proposal. The proposal should indicate funding
sources, costs, service area, a description of the service and proposed
fare structure.
Given the LAVTA service area, it may be advantageous for the Cities of
Dublin, Livermore and Pleasanton to consolidate paratransit services. In
1986/87 the total 4.5 funds claimed by the 3 cities was nearly $73,000.
It may continue to be necessary for the City to claim 4.5 funds and then
contract with LAVTA for services. We would request that your proposal
include a description of the City's involvement with the operation and
determination of service levels.
Due to filing deadlines and commitments to our current JPA, it is
necessary to receive your response by February 1, 1986. This will allow
adequate time for City Council review prior to the deadline for submitting
TDA 4.5 claims.
If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Richard C. Ambrose
RCA:kk City Manager
cc: James Walker, City of Pleasanton
Lee Horner, City of Livermore