View
2
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Regional Transportation District 1600 Blake Street
Denver, CO 80202-1399
303-299-2306
Board of Directors
Chair – Larry Hoy, District J
First Vice Chair - Tina Francone, District N
Second Vice Chair – Barbara Deadwyler, District B
Secretary – Jeff Walker, District D
Treasurer – Natalie Menten, District M
Lorraine Anderson, District L Ken Mihalik, District G
Ernest Archuleta, District C Chuck Sisk, District O
Bob Broom, District F Paul Daniel Solano, District K
Dr. Claudia Folska, District E Doug Tisdale, District H
Judy Lubow, District I Kate Williams, District A
M I NUTES Operations & Customer Service Committee
Tuesday, September 12, 2017
Rooms R, T, & D
5:30 PM
Conference Dial-in # 303-299-2663
Conference ID: 15120
Operations and Customer Service Committee
Chaired by Committee Vice Chair Williams
A. Call to Order
Committee Vice Chair Williams called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Lorraine Anderson Committee Chair Remote
Ernest Archuleta Director, District C Present 5:24 PM
Bob Broom Director, District F Present 5:10 PM
Barbara Deadwyler Director, District B Present 4:54 PM
Claudia Folska Director, District E Present 5:12 PM
Tina Francone Director, District N Present 5:26 PM
Larry Hoy Director, District J Present 5:28 PM
Judy Lubow Director, District I Present 5:14 PM
Ken Mihalik Director, District G Present 5:27 PM
Natalie Menten Director, District M Present 5:21 PM
Chuck Sisk Director, District O Present 5:23 PM
Paul Solano Director, District K Present 5:34 PM
Doug Tisdale Director, District H Present 5:25 PM
Jeff Walker Director, District D Present 5:19 PM
Kate Williams Committee Vice-Chair Present 5:08 PM
Director Anderson participated via phone.
Staff Present: Bruce Abel, Susan Altes, Ivonne Aranda, Rolf Asphaug, Mike Barnes,
Martha Bembry, Larry Buter, Gina Callahan, Jessie Carter, Susan
Cohen, Carolyn Conover, Chuck Culig, Nate Currey, Joey Davidson,
Jeet Desai, Kevin Diviness, Terry Emmons, Ron Enserro, Eric
Farrington, Bret Feddersen, David Genova, Bob Grado, Dawn Greco,
Svetlana Grechka, Kim Heldman, Ali Imansepahi, Jeff Kay, Mitch
Kuharski, Russ Larson, Samantha Loucks, Doug MacLeod, Brian
Matthews, John McKay, Heather McKillop, Mike Meader, Michael
Millage, Allen Miller, Tai-Shrae Parish, Walter Pierce, Scott Reed,
Jenifer Ross-Amato, Jannette Scarpino, Greg Smith, Lindsey Smith,
Kevin Steele, Henry Stopplecamp, Mark Tieman, Jeri Torsak,
Tanzania Trout, Lisa Trujillo, Bill Van Meter, Ashland Vaughn, Jyotsna
Vishwakarma
Others Present: Doug Brockwell, William Gross, Tom Peterson, Dave Sachs, R. Paul
Williamson, Gary Van Dorn, 9News
B. Recommended Actions
Committee Vice Chair Williams stated that there were no recommended actions.
C. Updates
• North Metro - N Line Operation 9 12 17
Henry Stopplecamp, Assistant General Manager of Capital Programs,
introduced the team that has been working on North Line (North Metro)
operations. He stated that the agency is in the process of the construction
of the North Metro Rail line from Denver Union Station out to 124th Avenue
and then beyond. He said that back in 2015, the agency went to the Board
to discuss how they wanted to operate North Metro and decided would
handle operations: RTD, Denver Transit Partners (DTP), or a third party. DTP
already had operations in their contract on the Eagle P3 project as an option
and that, if the agency wanted to exercise the option, the agency would
have to negotiate the price. He further stated that the agency would need
DTP to continue to do vehicle maintenance and dispatching to Denver Union
Station, where all the corridoes tie in, and that BNSF and Amtrak should be
handled by one dispatcher.
He said that the Board previously authorized additional funds to cover
expansion of the facility and the fleet that the agency was putting into the
North Metro. He further stated that, based on the agency’s financing
strategy, all the agency could do based on the IRS ranks is a ten year. He
said the agency finished those estimates, then finalized the scope of the
project and the scope of the vehicle operations, then went forward, and in
2017 the formal direction was to develop an option B. He said the agency
was seeing stuff from Denver Transporters and the option B basically was
what would happen if RTD would go forward with it. He stated that the
agency received estimates from DTP and performed an Internal Cost
Estimate (ICE) to compare RTD numbers. He stated that the agency looked
at the outside industry to get a trend around the United States. Then the
agency went through a very detailed cost comparison between what RTD
does, what DTP would do, and how the agency would go forward.
Terry Emmons, Assistant General Manager of Rail Operations, spoke about
the assumptions that the agency used in the analysis. He said that one of
the items the agency reviewed was dispatching. He stated that the agency
wanted one area to control the movement of all trains and that under the
RTD option the agency would have to negotiate that option with DTP, but
under DTP option, DTP was already responsible for moving the trains. He
said that for vehicle maintenance DTP is currently responsible for the
agency’s North Metro Rail Line vehicles and that there are already contracts
through 2044. He stated that RTD could mobilize in 24 months, whereas
DTP could mobilize in 18 months because they would already have the
facility, the training department, and some of the vehicles placed to help put
the agency in action.
Mr. Emmons stated that, the agency would procure a rescue train in the
RTD option because the Skyway bridge is one of the longest bridges in the
state, and that the agency would need be proactive to be able to rescue a
train from the bridge. He stated that, under the RTD option, RTD would have
to acquire and renovate a facility where the agency could keep spare parts,
the agency’s maintenance of way employees, and large equipment. He
added that, DTP option would already have the Commuter Rail Maintenance
Facility (CRMF).
Mr. Emmons said that, for the 711 building, the agency would need a
location where the agency can house staff and would also need to have a
location for the agency’s operators. He said that the 711 building, located
by Coors Field, has a bay 711 for the operators to be housed between the
Commuter Rail Maintenance Facility (CRMF) and Denver Union Station.
Mr. Stopplecamp said that the Board would be given cost estimates at a
future committee meeting and that the costs associated with the North
Metro operation would be rolled into the Strategic Budget Plan (SBP) and the
Annual Program Evaluation (APE).
Mr. Emmons stated that the RTD rollout would take 24 months because
there are many elements the agency is going to have to prepare, such as the
system testing training of operators and training of the employees involved
with the North Metro. He said the agency would have to be prepared and
conduct inspections during the systems integration. He stated that the
agency would have to hire a total of 121 full time employees and prepare
and have in place a new starts matrix, which is a Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA) requirement.
He also said the agency would have to work on the run board and make sure
the agency would have the integration to work interlaced vehicles between
existing systems. He added that the agency would have to purchase or
prepare facilities spare parts, and support vehicles and would also need to
coordinate between DTO and DTP. He said that the 24 months is broken
down into four quarters. He said the first quarter would be used to put
together a transition team and refine the mission’s critical items. He said
that in the second, third, and fourth quarters, RTD would incrementally hire
additional staff to operate the line. He noted the talented pool of existing
RTD employees who could provide expertise. He also noted some of the
challenges with respect to interagency coordination.
Mr. Stopplecamp stated that these challenges would be the same if the
agency brought in a third party. He added that a lot of the value that RTD
would bring to the table would also be challenges for a third party. He said
that a third party would not have the institutional knowledge. He stated that
when the agency looked at a third party and DTP, it became pretty apparent
that a third party would have a lot more challenges than RTD for establishing
a commuter rail operation. He said that the agency basically narrowed the
choice down to DTP or RTD. He noted that as of right now the staff is
strongly considering a recommendation for RTD to operate the line but noted
can change as the agency finalizes the evaluations. He said that he would
like to hear the Board’s pros and cons on October 3, 2017. He said that the
agency is looking at a 10-year contract for the DTP option or a 20-25 year
forecast for the RTD option. He stated that the staff would come back to
the Board for approval for the SBP and APE, which then would cover
authorization to go forward on option A or B. He noted that RTD staff would
continue to present to the Board regardless of which operator is selected.
Director Folska thanked staff for the overview. She asked Rolf Asphaug,
General Counsel, if the agency has resolved the challenges with DTP.
Mr. Asphaug, General Counsel, stated that the dispute resolution process
with DTP is still ongoing.
Director Folska asked if RTD would be taking over North Metro operation in
29 years.
Mr. Stopplecamp remarked that that is correct, RTD’s contract with DTP
expires in 29 years. He said that the agency may re-extend it, may bring
somebody else in, or may take it over.
Director Folska asked if the agency could build its knowledge base now with
the agency’s own people.
Mr. Stopplecamp stated that that is correct.
Director Folska noted that that would be her preference.
Director Broom inquired about the rescue train. He asked if staff could
describe it in a little more detail. He asked if it would be a 2 or 3-unit train, if
it would be diesel so that it can operate when there is no electricity, and if it
would sit without being used.
Mr. Stopplecamp responded that it would be diesel and the agency would
use it to maintain the track on a regular basis. He stated that the agency
would need a piece of equipment strong enough to pull other vehicles. He
said the agency’s goal would be to use it for rescue and for maintenance.
Director Archuleta stated that RTD would need 121 more employees to staff
the R line. He asked how the agency would go about getting these new
employees especially considering the ongoing operator shortage.
Mr. Stopplecamp stated that it would be a challenge but whichever entity is
selected to operate the line would also need 121 operators and maintainers.
He said it is a challenge to find the right people and that is why it did not go
as pro or con because the agency feels like it would be an issue for anyone,
but knowing about it ahead of time, recruiting efforts can start early. He
added that one of the positions the agency wants to bring in upfront is the
track Overhead Catenary System(OCS) signal supervisors. He said they can
come on board to learn the system as the agency goes through on the
construction and then they would be responsible for recruiting others.
Director Archuleta inquired about recruiting. He asked how the agency is
doing with the union and if the agency is going to be raising the wages. He
asked if the agency would suspend checks for marijuana use.
Bruce Abel, Chief Operating Officer and Assistant General Manager of Bus
Operations, stated that the agency’s drug and alcohol program gets sent to
the agency, compliments of the Federal Transit Administration (FRA) and the
US Department of Transportation. He further stated that it is not anything
that is under the agency’s control and, while he does not have a crystal ball,
he would not anticipate that the agency should expect any modification from
the federal level and the drug and alcohol arena in the transportation
business. He added that in the last two years the agency has implemented
split run bonuses of $2 an hour, provided bonuses for individuals to take on
work in addition to their mid-work for $2 an hour more, and raised bus and
rail operators’ wages by $1 an hour. He added that as the Board knows, the
agency will be going into labor negotiations with the union for a contract
that expires February 28, 2018 and the agency will see what the outcome
of those negotiations will be as it relates to any additional adjustments in the
compensation package.
Mr. Abel remarked that, if the Board were to relax its drug testing policy the
Federal Transit Administration bank account would go to zero.
Director Lubow inquired about the startup time. She states that the agency’s
start up time is estimated at 24 months, whereas the contractor would be
18 months. She asked whether that meant that, if the agency operated the
line, the agency would be six months later starting up than the contractor.
Mr. Emmons stated that the agency put together a schedule and is looking
at the requirements to get this operation up and going. He said that currently
the best estimate is 24 months for on the schedule that the agency has with
the different items such as the building a matrix, training and getting the
facilities ready.
Director Lubow asked if that meant if the Board chose this option people
would be angry at the agency for six more months.
Mr. Abel stated that, under the DTP/DTO option, DTP/DTO would need to
mobilize 18 months prior to anticipate it opening, though the agency would
need to mobilize 24 months prior to anticipate it opening. He said that that
the opening would not be delayed by 6 months.
Director Lubow asked whether an outside contractor would need a rescue
train.
Mr. Emmons stated that it would be their option.
Director Lubow asked if the agency would expect them to have one for the
same reasons the agency would want one.
General Manager Genova, stated that the agency can put the rescue train in
the scope of work though it would drive up the cost.
Director Lubow stated that she feels the train would be needed. She asked
about the level of challenge of interfacing with DTP.
Mr. Emmons stated that there would be some challenges but that he thinks
the agency can work through all of those.
Director Sisk asked whether there would be additional cost over and above
that which is budgeted.
Mr. Stopplecamp stated that for the security for the system, the agency
provides the second operator right now on the University of Colorado A line
and the B line and the agency will be doing the G line. He further stated that
those are paid for out of RTD and the agency would be doing the same thing
on North Metro. He added that that number comes out because it is going to
be the same cost whether DTP or RTD runs the system.
Director Sisk asked if those monies would come from FasTracks or the Base
System.
Mr. Stopplecamp remarked that Heather McKillop, Chief Financial Officer
and Assistant General Manager of Finance and Administration, will go into
more detail as the agency goes forward but the money is programmed under
Company 3 and the APE, and, if there is a short fall, the money comes from
the Base System.
He said the agency’s goal would be not to bring money from the Base
System but does require $ 32.7 million from the Base System.
Director Sisk asked if that $32.7 million is the same $30 million that was
going to go into the SH119 BRT project.
Mr. Stopplecamp stated that it is the same value.
Director Sisk stated that he has real concern about the SH119 project.
Ms. McKillop stated that the agency has put an estimate in the APE that
would cover either scenario at this time. She said that this would not add
additional dollars to the APE any additional transfer from the Base System
above the $32.7 million dollars.
Director Solano asked, within this timeframe, when would Regional Rail
Partners (RRP) hand over to DTP in this process.
Mr. Stopplecamp remarked that RRP will hand over to whoever the agency
decides will operate the system during the integrated testing, which is the
last phrase of the construction.
Director Solano asked if the agency has rectified the issue on the
engineering design conflict between RTD and RRP.
Mr. Stopplecamp said no, not at that time.
Director Solano asked if the conflict would be handled.
Mr. Stopplecamp said that at this time the agency has estimates and has
been working with RRP to refine their numbers but is still working on that at
this time.
Director Solano asked if DTP is primarily nonunion.
Mr. Stopplecamp remarked that they do fall under SMART, so their
operators are represented by the union.
Director Solano asked if the contractors are under the union.
Mr. Stopplecamp said that the contract operators fall under the union.
Director Francone stated that it seems to her that one of the beauties of the
University of Colorado A line contract with DTP was the fact that it was a
third party and it reduced the risk to this agency as well as to the taxpayers.
She asked if that a consideration when the agency is considering whether or
not RTD will assume the build design and operation of this as opposed to
DTP.
Mr. Stopplecamp stated that on this project the agency will not go forward
on the design build, that has already been done by RRP. He added the
agency will give a formal recommendation to the Board on October 3rd.
Director Francone asked about the benefits and the downsides of having one
operator over the other.
Mr. Stopplecamp stated that one of the benefits to having operations all
under DTP is the agency has one operator, and one contractor for Denver
Union Station and the commuter rail maintenance facility.
Director Tisdale said his understanding is that the agency should have a
completed decision matrix on or before October 3rd.
Mr. Abel stated that staff was presenting the frame work for the analysis
and will present the proposal in greater detail on October 3rd.
Director Tisdale asked if the agency will have further discussion on the
October 17 on the annual program evaluation process and then have a final
vote on October 24th.
Mr. Abel said that that is correct. He said, as Ms. McKillop indicated from a
financial prospective, there has been an assumption made, the agency
believes that that assumption will accommodate an alternative, but the final
runs will be done in October.
Director Tisdale asked whether the agency will have an opportunity to have
a more fulsome answer to the concerns that were expressed by Director
Sisk on the impact to BRT on SH119.
Mr. Abel said that he suggests that the agency will have an opportunity to
have a better discussion on the financial impact to SH119.
Director Menten asked whether the 12 vehicles that are currently operated
by the agency are the only ones needed in the near term.
Mr. Stopplecamp said yes, those are the only 12 vehicles needed for the
North Metro corridor.
Director Menten asked about the 711 building. She asked if the agency has
the figures on the rehab or any of the requirements.
Mr. Stopplecamp said that the agency has looked at the 711 building and it
is a three-bay building. He stated that the agency is currently putting TIC in
one bay and the treasury in the second bay. He further stated that the
agency has done some estimates which will be numbers in October.
Director Menten asked whether the new start requirements would fall on
RTD, regardless or on the contractor.
Mr. Stopplecamp said the task would fall on whoever is operating the line.
He said if it falls to DTP, they would update their documents, and RTD
would also have and generate those documents.
Director Menten asked for breakdown of time, labor, and money required.
Lindsey Smith, FasTracks Public Information Specialist, stated that it is
projected to be 10,000 riders a day.
Director Menten stated she did not see much after that initial discussion
about third parties. She stated that she wonders about a third party because
the agency has challenges with DTP and, if the agency looked at a third
party, perhaps there might be some alternatives.
Mr. Stopplecamp said that the agency did look at a DTP option, a third party
option, and an RTD option, and the pros and cons associated. He said if the
agency goes with the DTP option, the agency can always go out on the
street. He stated that he challenges for a third party would be even greater
than our own challenges. He further added that the agency has a great staff
infrastructure they only need to bring in the operating side.
Director Menten stated that her initial thought is that she has more faith in
the private sector in having a little more flexibility and opportunities.
Mr. Stopplecamp asked if she could define what she means by flexibility.
Director Menten said the private sector has a variety of different options in
advertising, and partnering.
Mr. Stopplecamp said the selectee would be handling operations and should
not be financing anything, but the agency will follow up on that.
Director Anderson stated that her concerns are for duplications of service
and she added that but seems to her the agency would be duplicating the
mechanical equipment that the agency needs to take care of the trains and
keep them in a state of good repair. She said she is also concerned over the
priorities for tracking, how that would work, and how that would be
negotiated.
Mr. Stopplecamp remarked that when talking about bay one, duplication of
maintenance and equipment, the agency is referencing a building that RTD
owns and that is going to be housing the operator and administrative staff.
He stated that it is not a bay to maintain the equipment. He further stated
that currently the agency is under contract with DTP to maintain the fleet of
12 vehicles for the next 29 years. He added that the operator that is
selected will have to buy additional high rail equipment, because RTD cannot
operate with what has. He said is true for the Southeast Rail Extension. He
said Mr. Emmons and the team are picking up new maintainers and more
pieces of high rail equipment. He said the agency would add miles to track
and would still need to add equipment, and whether RTD operates it or DTP,
it is still needed. He said that it is important to get the same dispatcher
working the throat that takes care of the Eagle project, North Metro, BNSF,
and Amtrak. He added that those dispatchers now work that whole throat to
be sure that everybody gets a fair shake coming into the station.
Director Anderson stated that she appreciates the matrix the agency went
through on making the decision and she thinks that it is certainly well
thought out and helps the Board get to a decision. She added that she is
strongly in favor of a zero tolerance drug use policy.
Director Folska stated that she wanted to echo Director Anderson’s
comments on the drug use policy. She said that, to Director Sisk’s point, she
does not really care about SH119, because she thinks it is a great idea, but
it feels more to her like a bait and switch for the Northwest Line. She added
that she thinks that was what the NAMS study was all about. She said that
she is concerned about is finishing FasTracks sooner rather than later and
the Board should be making sure that voters get what they voted for first.
Chair Hoy stated the agency is laying out a path forward to a decision point.
He said that he thinks that the operator selected will probably be invisible to
the passenger. He said as the agency goes forward his thoughts are going to
be focused on cost.
• DUS Request for Information (RFI) 9 12 17
Mr. Abel stated the agency received a proposal from Greyhound on the
potential use of Denver Union Station as a stopping point for their services
in Denver Metro area. He further stated that, subsequent to that, the agency
also received an inquiry from Ramblin Express. He said that the agency does
not have a policy at this time for utilization of Denver Union Station. He said
that Request for Interest (RFI) has been prepared that the agency will be
sending out to the transportation community. The RFI is the agency’s
attempt to gage the level of interest as well as ask some basic questions of
the industry He added that the process that the agency has laid out is to
send an RFI out into the industry.
Mr. Abel stated that based on the response the agency will make a
determination on what the next steps would be, potentially the preparation
of a Request for Proposals, broader public input from the affected areas as
to the potential for use of Union Station by more than the existing carries,
and the determination of how to proceed for actually making Union Station
available for the carriers use.
Director Folska said she has been so excited for the agency to take the
highest and best use of the agency’s assets, especially the land. She stated
the agency is struggling financially. She asked about the lease terms for the
Denver Union station.
Mr. Asphaug said he would take a look at that.
Director Folska said that she thinks the RFI is very exciting. She asked if the
Bustang gives the agency any.
Mr. Abel stated that at this point in time there are no funds generated from
Bustang’s use of Union Station.
Director Folska said that she could see how Bustang could be an exception
because it is operated by the government rather than a private entity. She
added that she loves Greyhound but they would have to pay.
Director Lubow stated that she was intrigued that at present third parties do
not pay the agency to use Union Station. She asked the thinking behind that
decision.
Mr. Abel said that the third parties that use Union Station are public
partners, but agency can look at the demand for use of the facility and
determine how the agency can best achieve a multimodal transportation
hub.
Director Lubow inquired how private operators might access the bathroom
facilities.
Mr. Abel said that Greyhound would have to explain how they would
accommodate that function knowing they cannot do it at Union Station. He
added that those are the kinds of questions that the agency will ask as part
of RFI.
Director Broom asked if there are synergies for the traveling public for
combining the bus station as opposed to having a second Greyhound bus
station. He asked what happens if the agency has to have TSA deal with
intercity buses or what would happen to old Greyhound station if they were
to lease one or two gates in Union Station.
Mr. Abel said that many parties in the city believe that the western
expansion of the Central Business District (CBD) is in many cases blocked by
the existing Greyhound terminal. He said there are many parties in the
community that would like to see the terminal redeveloped to a higher use
from a land-use perspective as opposed to a transportation perspective. He
added that there are very real pros from a synergy prospective, to expanding
our multimodal footprint to enable people to transfer from intercity buses to
local buses to light rail to commuter rail to the airport. He said the agency
would have to balance those issues and evaluate pros and cons.
Director Francone inquired if there some synergies with respect package
handling.
Mr. Abel said it is certainly something worth looking at. He added that the
agency does have that legal authority and used to have a very active
package delivery service.
Director Anderson said that she thinks that this is a great idea because it
offers an opportunity for many people. She stated that it offers opportunity
during bad weather, during emergencies, even during crowded periods. She
added that if a constituent cannot get one form of transportation, they can
always get another.
Director Tisdale said could use the RFI to determine whether to monetize the
use of Union Station.
• ADA Expert Second Annual Report
Mr. Abel stated that serval years ago the agency entered a consent decree
with the disability community regarding the use of the securement area on
board fixed route buses. He further added that, as part of that agreement,
the agency agreed to bring on an ADA expert who would come in
periodically to assess whether the agency has been complying with the
consent decree and other factors. He said that the agency received good
grade from the ADA expert. And noted the report emphasized the agency’s
willingness to modify the design of its 40 foot buses.
Carolyn Conover, Senior Manager of Contracted Services, stated that the
agency did see improvement from 2015 to 2016. She said that there was a
24 % decrease in the number of pass ups and that shows that the drivers
are doing what they are supposed to do. She added that the drivers are
doing everything they can do to try to accommodate people with mobility
devices.
Committee Chair Williams stated that the agency did take one of the buses
out the other day with a number of members of the Transit and Accessibility
Task Force and said it was a nice ride. She added that three people in wheel
chairs and a person with a walker were all accommodated.
Director Folska asked who the expert was.
Mr. Abel remarked the expert is Elizabeth “Buffy” Ellis, an employee of KFH
Group Inc.
Director Menten said complaints increased from 2015. She added that in all
it does not sound like the agency receives a lot of complaints compared to
the.
Ms. Conover said that many complaints came from the agency’s policy of
allowing persons with mobility devices to board first.
Director Menten said that she does hear from constituents who are
frustrated with the other patrons blocking the aisle and doing things that
would seem to just be inconsiderate.
Ms. Conover said that one of the things the agency is doing with the
refresher training this year with the operators is giving them tips and
pointers on how they can address the passengers when they pull up to a
stop, especially when they pull up to a busy stop and everybody tries to
rush the door.
Director Menten stated that she is stressed about how much of a delay it
creates for everybody. She said of the report it talks about the replacement
of the 3900 series buses. She asked, based on the agency’s current
financial situation and the limits on borrowing, whether the replacement can
take place in 2020.
Mr. Abel stated that the agency’s fleet replacement plan has been extended
from that which was in place when this study was done.
Director Menten said that she had one possible change to the agency’s code
of conduct regrading impeding access onto the bus by persons with mobility
devices.
Director Solano said that he is just curious if there is information in this
document that addresses service animals.
Ms. Conover said that information on service animals is one of the things the
agency is going to include in the refresher training this year.
Director Solano asked if service animals were an element of the consent
decree.
Ms. Conover remarked that no, it was not.
• Contracted Fixed-Route Quarterly Report – 2nd Quarter 2017
Mr. Abel gave an overview of the report and asked the Directors if they have
any comments.
• Access-a-Ride/Cab 2nd Quarter Update - 2017
Mr. Abel said he was pleased to report that the number of trips impacted
due to returned manifest in the first quarter was 2,000 in the month of
January, 2,000 in the month of February, 1,400 in the month of March, and
in the second quarter those numbers dropped to 800 in April, 250 in May,
and 150 in June. He said that allowing the contractors to rebid improved
their wages to improve their ability to hire drivers and on time performance.
• Special Services Report 2nd Qtr 2017
• 2017 2nd Quarter Drug & Alcohol Compliance Monitoring
• 2017 2nd Quarter Customer Complaint Analysis
Mr. Abel gave an overview of these reports and asked the Directors if they
have any comments.
• Second Quarter - April 1 through June 30, 2017
Bob Grado, Transit Police Chief, stated that the fare enforcement report was
presented in a new format.
Director Folska said that 1,122 is an interesting number. She asked what is
the percentage on fare evasion.
Mr. Grado said it 0.14 % for commuter rail and added that the rate actually
went down in the second quarter.
Director Folska said that when she was first elected the rate was estimated
to be about 3.
General Manager Genova said that was the agency’s light rail fare evasion
rates but that number that Chief Grado gave is the commuter rail fare
evasion rate. He added that the agency breaks light rail and commuter rail
down separately because the agency has a different amount of security
resources on the different lines. He said the agency is able to do a lot more
inspection on the commuter rail line.
Director Folska asked to be reminded of the procedures when officers find
people who are evading a fare.
Chief Grado said that the first infraction results in a warning, and the
second, third, and fourth time they are fined. He added that the fine in
Denver county is $86.50 and $106.50 in other counties. He further added
that the fine structure stays the same throughout that process, but once a
person hits that fourth mark, the agency will suspend them from service.
Director Folska inquired on how long they would be suspended for.
Mr. Grado said 30, 90 or 120 depending on how many offenses they have.
Director Francone asked for an explanation of the distinction between the
fare task force and the commuter rail enforcement numbers.
Chief Grado stated the task force is a group of 10 officers who work
primarily during day time and swing shift hours. He added that the agency
does not pull them off for any other calls for service and the officers have a
lot more visibility. He further added that the agency is doing a more
aggressive fare enforcement program on one of the other lines where the
agency has seen some issues recently. He said that this task force can move
around if necessary.
Director Francone stated that she is delighted to see transit police present on
the platforms and on the train and it makes her feel safer. She asked if the
agency reports out crime statistics or the number of incidents of violence
reported at some point during the year. She added that she is seeing more
incidents happening at the stations.
Mr. Grado said the agency does that every month. He stated that the
agency has recently contracted with the city of Denver police department
crime analysis to helps the agency on a part time basis and help compel
these stats to make sure the agency is getting good numbers. He said that
the early results have been very encouraging. He stated that the agency
doing fare enforcement tends to drive a lot of the other quality of life issues
off the system.
Director Menten asked for clarification on the numbers for the patrons
without fares and asked if the agency is paying Denver to help with security.
Chief Grado said the agency does pay and it is part of the off-duty program.
Mr. Meader, Chief Safety Officer and Assistant General Manager of Safety,
Security, and Asset Management, stated that, based on data, the agency
has is able to assign officers to those lines or those platforms at specific
times of the day to mitigate some of these things that are happening. He
added that there are no additional funds being spent.
Director Menten ask if the agency is paying Denver for their analysis.
Chief Grado stated that the agency pays for the analysis using budgeted
dollars.
Director Solana stated that he is looking at total complaints in the 2016 and
noted 2017 is catching up. He states he received two calls the previous
evening regrading that a bus did not show because of the Bronco game.
Committee Chair Williams stated that she does not know if Director Solano’s
question falls under safety and security. She added that that was a valid
question and asked if he could hold on to that.
Director Tisdale asked if RTD receives the revenue whenever a citation is
issued or if the city where the citation was issued receives that fine.
Chief Grado stated that the city receives the fine.
Director Solano stated that, when people have to wait for a bus that does
not show, it is a safety issue.
Mr. Abel stated that the agency has very real operator shortages and that an
operator called off. He said due to the requirements of all of the additional
services the agency did not have any extra operators for the last evenings
Broncos game. He said an apology would be issued to this constituent.
Director Folska stated that incidents when people cannot get to work or
pickup their children because the agency is taking people to a Broncos game
are not okay.
Director Anderson stated she was very impressed with the numbers. She
added it appears that fare evasion rates are going down on commuter rail as
people learn to ride. She said she knows that commuter rail is checked and
she knows that people respond when there is enforcement there.
• Lost Service Hours Update 9 12 17
Mr. Abel stated that in August of 2017, the agency dropped 7,074 hours of
service between either delayed pull outs or missed trips, compared to 80
hours of service dropped in August of 2016. He says the agency will
continue to experience various challenges with its operator head count. He
said the agency asks for volunteers amongst the operators to work on one
of their days off and, absent the ability to secure enough volunteers, the
agency begins at the bottom of the seniority list and communicates to those
employees who will be required to work on one of their days off.
Mr. Abel states that the chart indicates the degree to which the operators
have been mandated since the agency has been formally tracking this back
in 2015. He said the number of mandates in 2016 is higher than 2015, and
2017 is higher than 2016. He added that the agency has been mandating far
more than it would like amongst existing employees. He said the agency
hires charter buses to the extent possible. He stated that staff continues to
work with HR to increase the number of operators into training. He said that
as the agency mandates more people to work on their days off, people find
the to be a less appealing in the current job market. He said the agency will
try to make working conditions better in an attempt to improve retention.
Director Solano asked why the agency is putting priority on sporting events
and not on the constituents.
Mr. Abel stated the agency’s sporting event riders are constituents as well,
but they are a different market segment than the agency’s commuters. He
further added that the agency makes commitments in both areas to our
customers.
Director Solano asked if it is true that the people going to the games ride for
free.
Mr. Abel remarked that it is not true as long as the agency’s bus operators
and fare enforcement employees are doing their jobs.
Director Solano stated that he has been on a lot of the buses and nobody is
checking fares. He added that the trains are jammed full and that on the
light rail he has never seen anybody checking fare.
Mr. Abel stated that the agency has ticket sellers or street supervisors at the
Park-n-Rides and they will sell a round trip fare then the customer will board
the bus. He said that the operator does not check fares because there is a
ticket seller and the return trip is assumed. He added that on light rail the
agency has fare checks at Mile High Station and Decatur/Federal. He said at
Mile High Station the turnstiles are used for Broncos games and other
sporting events and no one can get in or out of the station without fare.
Director Solano said he think it is a double standard.
Chair Hoy stated that as he got on the Broncos Ride with thousands of other
people at the Wagon Road Park-n-Ride, the buses were crammed and
everyone paid full fare. He added that when the agency hires those buses
from out of state, those buses comes with a driver.
Director Tisdale said he took a light rail to the first preseason Broncos game
and was very impressed by the system. He added that in the one time where
he knew everybody by had paid to ride.
Director Broom asked if agency has explored hiring head hunter firms to find
drivers.
Mr. Abel stated that he does not know that agency has looked at using a
head hunter firm but said the agency certainly put that on the table.
Director Anderson stated that her community is full of hard-working people
that use RTD to go to work and there are probably even more people in her
community who look at RTD to go to ball games. She says she does not
think the agency should discriminate against the constituents, and all of
agency’s constituents are important. She said that she thinks that agency
has to do everything in its power to find a way to increase the number of
operators. She added that she knows the agency’s operators are working
many long hours. She further added that she appreciates what staff has
done to minimize the effects of split shifts.
Committee Chair Williams stated that she also rode the light rail from the
Broncos game with two young men who were developmentally disabled. She
said that they were absolutely thrilled about being able to take the train and
told her all about it even though she did not tell them she had anything to do
with RTD. She added that there are pros and cons to every situation.
D. Other Matters
General Manager Genova stated that he wanted to provide the Board with
an update on the Federal Road Administration (FRA) and Public Utilities
Commission (CPUC) update on the University of Colorado A Line, the B Line,
and the G Line. He said that the agency. He stated the agency recently
applied for a permanent waiver for the University of Colorado A line and for
the B line. He said that one of the reasons they are suggesting this
permanent type of a waiver is because of the method of technology that the
agency is using on the grade crossing is different and there is more of an
extended buffer time than with the agency’s wireless activation system in
combination with the positive train control system. He said that the FRA has
advised seeking a permanent waiver for these lines. He said it is very
common for the FRA to issue five-year waivers and more indefinite waivers
on different types of things. He added that a permanent type of waiver has
nothing to do with safety and the agency will still operate a very safe
system. He added that the waiver provides a certain regulatory relief from
certain requirements and will allow the agency to seek quiet zone approvals.
He stated for that the G line, the agency has submitted a petition for
omission to allow final testing on the G line. He said the agency has
completed that testing that both the FRA and PUC authorized and that
testing went very well.
General Manager Genova stated that the agency has submitted a grade
crossing amendment application for three crossings per the PUC’s request.
He stated that the timing on the PUC process is unclear. He said that other
parties are noticed when the agency submits an amendment. He added that
extensive, the PUC may begin more of a hearing process if the comments
received are than a docket process. He said that the agency is working
closely with both the City of Aurora and the City County of Denver on these
issues to gain as much support as much as possible. He stated that and the
PUC is not involved. He said the agency has also filed amendments for all of
the G Line crossings to seek PUC’s permission to do the final testing and the
earliest those might get set for the docket would be the end of September or
early October since it is new, the agency is expecting that we will get some
questions around that.
Director Menten asked if the agency added in the extra safely step the
agency may get in the way with this permanent waiver.
General Manager Genova stated that the FRA does issue waivers on a long-
term basis for a variety of different reasons and operations. He added that
the waiver is FRA’s suggestion for how they think we can best approach it
based on our system design.
Director Menten asked what three crossings are being proposed for A Line
and to see how commission reacts.
General Manager Genova stated that the three crossings are Dahlia, Steel,
and Sable, which the agency submitted three crossings is because a volume
issue with the PUC. He stated that what happens with the amendments is
fairly typical in the PUC process. He further stated that it is very common
that the agency gets an amendment after the agency is fully billed to tie up
any minor changes.
Director Menten asked which the parties are noticed.
Mr. Genova stated that the city in the jurisdiction in which the crossing is
located, the adjacent railroads that are a part of the crossings, which
property owners that are adjacent to that particular crossing are all noticed.
He added that the speed of the process is determined by the number of
comments received.
Director Menten asked the if the G line was not in testing right now because
the agency has to wait for a second approval.
General Manager Genova stated that that is correct.
Director Menten asked whether the agency would refrain from issuing an
estimated opening date.
General Manager Genova stated that that is correct because of the timing of
the approvals from FRA and the PUC.
Director Francone asked if a permanent waiver would it satisfy the dispute
with DTP or DTO.
General Manager Genova stated that he does not think the claim from DTP
will go away. He said that the agency is continuing to work through that
process with them in terms on contract compliance. He added that he does
not see a permanent waiver as being as issue with contract compliance as
long as the agency gets through the grade crossing issues.
Director Walker asked if the FRA has confidence in the performance in the
operation even though it does not perform as intended.
General Manager Genova stated that it means that the FRA is confident that
the system is working as designed and working safely. He further stated
that the reason for the waiver would be because the agency’s system design
is not a typical, conventional design that their regulations are used to dealing
with.
Director Walker said that the system still performs safely, it still functions,
just a little differently from what the agency intended.
General Manager Genova said yes, the agency has submitted lots of
documentation and a lot of different variety of forms but one of the recent
pieces has been the grade crossing criteria document that the agency has
been talking about with the FRA now for a number of months. Once the
agency gets through that piece and they are satisfied that it is working as
the agency described it in the design then they should be willing to look
forward with that.
Director Walker stated that he gets to work with federal agencies and they
are sticklers about what they do. He added that he thinks it is a good sign
that they are willing to expand on their concept of what is acceptable. He
said his experience with notification is that it is not just the number of
comments that the agency risk but the diversity of those comments. He
further added that if they receive a bunch of comments about the same
issues, those often are addressed rather quickly, but if they receive
comments on a wide variety of issues that is what slows down the process.
Director Anderson stated that this sounds like good news to her. She said
that RTD’s system is different from any other system in the United States
and a permanent wavier would be good news.
Director Francone asked the agency have any update on the $29 million
refund from the federal government.
Ms. McKillop said the agency’s lobbyists have been working on that. She
further stated that a draft of the bill defined what a “cohort” was and that
the issue has been that a “cohort” is anybody that has ever applied for a
loan.
Director Francone stated the Colorado delegation is on board and most
anxious to help.
Ms. McKillop said right now, because of the continuing resolution, nothing is
moving forward. She added that as that language starts to move forward
the agency will keep the Board updated.
E. Next Meeting Date - October 17, 2017
F. Adjourn
Committee Chair Williams adjourned the meeting at 7:50 p.m.
The following communication assistance is available for public meetings:
Language Interpreters
Sign-language Interpreters
Assisted listening devices
Please notify RTD of the communication assistance you require at least 48 business hours in advance of a
RTD meeting you wish to attend by calling 303.299.2307
THE CHAIR REQUESTS THAT ALL PAGERS AND CELL PHONES BE SILENCED DURING THE BOARD OF
DIRECTORS MEETING FOR THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT.
Recommended