tv [untitled] August 8, 2010 7:30am-8:00am PST
director heinicke: let me ask it three ways. how much did it cost on salaries and maintenance to restore 5% of our service or addback half of the service we -- add back half of the service we cut? how much service did we gain thanks to the other unions and how much are we paying total for this $5.75% increase? >> so let's start off with the savings we got from the other labor unions first. that was somewhere in the $9 million. director heinicke: $9 million for the -- >> local 21. >> the labor increases for the t.w. added up to about $11.2 million in salary line item and another $2.5 million in the trust fund payment. so about $14 million total. director heinicke: $14 million in salary and benefits to restore half of our service cuts? >> no, for the t.w. increase.
director heinicke: it cost us $14 million. >> right. director heinicke: how much did it cost us in salaries and benefits to restore the percentage? >> so $4.3 million to add back the service component. director heinicke: thanks in part to $9 million from the other uniyors we were able to restore -- unions we were able to restore half of the money. we have to implement a $14 million raise this year because we received no concessions from the t.w.? >> $11 million -- a little over $11 million is salary and benefits. and then $2.5 million for the trust fund payment which isn't a salary and benefit line item. it's that additional money that we have to set aside for benefit increases for the health care component.
director heinicke: we have $9 million in givebacks. we used some of this money to restore salaries and benefits associated with the service restoration. that's $4 million. but the reason we still have to add $10 million is because we have an overall $14 million increase to t.w.u. and we have gestimated it would be a 3% increase when in fact it's a 4.75% because of the charter? >> yes. director beach: one other question. in your presentation on page 3 you talked about a prop k one-time award. is that the money from the transportation authority? >> it is. director beach: ok. one concern i have -- i'm glad to see that -- hopefully that's all lined up because i think i made the motion to make that service change contingent on that. are all of the i's dotted and t's crossed here? my concern is that we spend too much money to get money, i.e.,
special needs or requirements from the t.w. money that will net that $7 million down to a lower number. >> director beach, you bring up an interesting point. the way this money will be allocated is through a drawdown as we do on other grants and there has been additional requirements that the t.a. has imposed on this money as it relates to our receiving it. the actual impact in terms of our staffing costs in terms of additional reporting we haven't totally quantified. but there will be a net impact in terms of staff time to go capture this money and draw it down as we implement that targeted rehabilitation program. >> ok. my concern is -- director beach: my concern is that it doesn't return to the minimum payment on the credit card each month? >> yes. director beach: thank you very much. we appreciate your outstanding
leadership at every respect in this. chairman nolan: mr. ford, as you reported, i'd like to take a moment to recognize members of the board, cheryl brinkman, she is the nominee for the board. she's appearing before the rules committee tomorrow. i am not -- we wish you well and we look forward to working with you. thanks for being here this afternoon. >> ok. mr. chairman, members of the board, the next item we need to present to you is related to our capital assets inventory and our state of good repair program. since the last capital improvement program update in june of 2008, the m.t.a. in conjunction with our regional and federal partners have undergone some significant financial challenges. and this has placed us in a position to put a greater focus on our limited capital resources as it relates to our safety, strategic expansion of the system.
so over the last year we have developed an expensive asset inventory of all of the assets belonging to the san francisco m.t.a., particularly focusing on their condition of those assets and their useful life. in addition, we developed a set of criteria that meets the he's -- the agency's multimodal process. we are currently in the process of prioritizing the future capital needs which consists of over 00 projects of various sizes, covering all of our modes of transportation over the next 20 years. director ford: we used a tool called decision lens, it's a software tool that helps use standardize the capital pry ortyization -- prioritization process. it is currently to be valued over $11 billion. the total assets of the san francisco m.t.a. infrastructure, parks, equipment, tools, facilities, totals over $11 billion.
here to present the details of our capital asset inventory and state of good repair program is our manager of capital planning. >> good afternoon. thank you, mr. ford. chairman nolan, members of the board. i have a short presentation today to talk about our capital asset inventory, share with you some of the initial findings from our efforts today and to talk about how this goes about our state of good repair program. we formally started this effort back in 2006. at that time we only had a quantitative inventory of our vehicle assets at that point. and we're trying to expand that to cover all of the agency's
assets. we update the information, we'd like to add some condition information so we can better understand how effectively and efficiently our capital assets are functioning. one of the more immediate goals is to produce an initial state of good repair report to submit to f.d.a. this august. this is the first time that we really quantified all of the agency's assets and this includes all of the vehicles, both revenue and nonrevenue, all of our infrastructure, track, overhead signals, the various systems that we manage, communication systems, collection systems, our facilities which include both the passenger facilities and our operating facilities and
all of the equipment our i.t. systems that help to make the system run. we've been participating it he regional level. what we're doing here in san francisco all the other transit agencies are trying to do as well in the bay area. we're reaching the second phase of this effort where m.t.c. will be reviewing each of the comparblete. are we -- compareability. we need to look at the funding allocations they make as well as the regional, state and federal level on our behalf. they'll also be looking at establishing an update process so this information just doesn't sit in a book but becomes a regularly updated set of data that we can use.
and finally, they're going to look at different measures of effectiveness. how do you measure a state of good repair? what are the metrics that would be used? this is a question that f.t.a. has been asking. they are trying to take an active stance in trying to see what will be useful metrics to measure the ability in order to maintain a state of good repair. now that we have the inventory in place, we're reviewing the assumptions to make sure that within our own data set that they're consistent and reasonable. we're also going through an effort to convert this inventory of 3,000-plus individual items into capital project that we can rate and evaluate through our capital investment plan. we're linking the project prioritization process for the agency's goals and objectives so that the agency's values are what will be driving the
priority of our needs. and we've been utilizing input from stakeholders throughout all of the divisions and functions within the agency to help us with this process. this graphic shows kind of the overall framework for managing our capital assets over the long term. and it starts at the top box with establishing the agency's goals and objectives. we had recently revised those to really focus on what the agency's values are nerms of its capital investments. we're using those to do an initial rating of all of the individual projects that as mr. ford mentioned we have about 200 projects that we have to evaluate and prioritize. this will feed into the box called tradeoff analysis where we'll be looking at how those priorities best fit the
agency's overall goals and tie that to what we anticipate receiving in funding. it feeds back into our two-year budget and also to our short and long-range transportation plans which you adopt on a periodic basis. and then the last few boxes reflect a continuous monitoring and feedback process of, again, we're learning as we go along in improving any of the aspects of our prioritization and analysis as we move forward. so the thrift of the presentation will focus on some preliminary findings, and each of these bullets that are shown on this slide have a little bit more detail on a subsequent slide. so the first one is the current value of all the agency's
assets are about $11 million. so that to re-create the transportation network that we have today from scratch would require about $11 million investment. some good news is that currently most of our assets are within their useful life. so they're not dufort replacement or rehad a bill digs -- not due for replacement or rehabilitation. a little bit of the bad news is that we're nearly $200 -- $2 billion deferred investment, things that should have been replaced or rehabilitated by this point that certainly haven't been. if we look forward over the next 20 years, about a third of the program would be dedicated to the overhaul and replacement of vehicles. and this includes both the revenue vehicles and any support vehicles. and looking forward over again a 20-year period our average state of good repair need would
total $455 million on an annual basis. now, that's that $2 billion backlog as well as to continue to maintain a state of good repair going forward each year. we look at how our assets are divided into different classes. the $11 billion. the largest component overall is the overhead system, and this includes not just the support to the trolly coach but also the l.r.v. system as well. the visible parts that you see, the overhead wires but also the traction power systems in the substation which are quite high value assets that we're actually in the process of overhauling at this moment. the second category would be the facilities. again, these include the
passenger facilities like the stations as well as all of our operating and maintenance facility. and third are all the vehicles, the transit vehicles and all of the support vehicles, 20% of the total assets. when we look at how well we are maintaining a state of good repair, this shows the assets that are within their useful life. this is dollar weighted so, you know, something that's a higher value would influence whether it's achieving the state of good repair more than something of a lower value. so in the top line, the utilities line, because it's showing that it's 100% on this graph, that means that all of the assets in that category are within their useful life. if you go down to the third line, traction power, only about a third are within their useful life. and, again, we have a capital
project that's developing to address some of those needs in the near future. so this gives you a sense of where some of that backlog is and by how much in the various different types of assets that we have. this is another way of looking at that backlog based on the total value. and looking at it today, the top area is in facilities and it's primarily due to the age of the metro stations. these were built in the 1970's and a lot of the components in them are coming dufort their -- due for their rehabilitation cycles. this is the parking facilities, mainly the parking structures, and then, third, is the overhead system that i already mentioned before.
next slide shows the -- over the next 20 years we need to invest about $9.1 billion. as i mentioned before, about a third of the programs for vehicles followed by the overhead system and then the facilities. this bar graph shows the different need by asset class. so this is showing how much is needed each year for all the different asset classes. in the early years you can see the blue bar at the bottom is the facilities where we have a significant backlog. and those bars rise and fall over the years depending on the needs. but the dash line in the middle is that $455 million average over the 20 years. we're showing the backlog here as, you know, spread over the first few years but that's
really going to be dependent on the level of funding that we're able to achieve. that backlog just may be pushed out in time. hopefully be reduced over time but it probably -- we wouldn't realize the resources actually address it on the time frame that's shown here. the last chart i'd share with you. looking at that same information but this time looking at the different modes of operation. if we look at the various modes, about 40% of the need is for the rail services. so that would include the l.r.v.'s, the track stations and the operating facilities to support them. so this inventory is feeding into a larger effort to update our overall capital plan. so in june we had finished the asset inventory, and at this
point we're in the process of developing what our capital project list is and beginning to raise each of those projects. in august and into september we'll be analyzing results of the prioritization, applying our funding projection, seeing where we have efficiencies or how well we're able to address our capital needs. as i mentioned before, we'll be submitting our first state of good repair report in august. and submitting our inventory of assets to m.t.c., also, next month. in september, as part of the new starts reporting process, we'll be submitting the agency's 20-year financial plan and then we'll have the draft of the capital investment plan to bring back to you in october of this year. >> thank you very much for a very comprehensive look at where we're at. chairman nolan: where would the
b.r.t.'s fit into this? >> it would be an expansion. chairman nolan: over and above? >> central subway. this is what we currently have under our watch in terms of assets and the status of those assets. >> so future needs is just based on what we currently have, right? >> right. chairman nolan: thank you. members of the boards, question? >> one question, mr. chairman. on page 80 of your presentation the current conditions, most of your graph shows a pretty severe need for capital expenditures in our overhead system. and yet looking on page 8 here, traction power is down at 32% within design life. and yet substations and overhead, 81%. what comprises the huge chunk of that number? >> i don't have the exact figures here. but i believe that, you know,
that 2/3 of the traction power system is driving that to a large degree. the substations and the overhead itself while being relatively low percentage-wise has a fairly high dollar value in terms of the arse etc. and those assets would need to be repaired -- replaced at this time. director beach: ok. i understand the value of overhead and substations. i just find it hard to believe that they are that much higher than a vehicle fleet, although in design life, is not far from being outside that number? >> yeah. one of the things that we'll be looking to refine in subsequent reports is breaking down these graphs to show, you know, which assets are coming up to their useful life so it's not just a black and white, you're within your useful life or not, but
we'll show some progression of how much our assets is less than half, 3/4, coming to the end of the useful life. that will help shed more life on those types of questions. director beach: and i understand what you're effectively being asked to do is a three dimensional graph here which is not easy to do. thank you. chairman nolan: director heinicke. director heinicke: this is a suggestion or request for next time, if possible. these are obviously huge numbers on large-scale projects which are difficult for me and presumably the public to translate to actual service. and one thing that i'm always interested in is, what is -- what effect is our state of good repair in capital system or asset system having on service today? and so if in the future discussions of our state of good repair we could have some presentation as to the current effect on service, you know, so many runs are being missed or whatever because of state of
good reparish use, and here's what we anticipate if we don't do what's suggested here. i think that's a good way to make this understandable to us and so folks understands this isn't just money for building shiny monuments. this is money to keep the system running on time. director beach: exactly. excellent point. chairman nolan: thank you very much. >> next item is the joint powers authority has been hosting several public events leading to an official groundbreaking event on august 11. i believe all of you have been invited to that event. we hope to see you there. as part of that array of special events, the joint powers authority will close the terminal at midnight and relocate all operations to the new temporary terminal on august 6, 2010. we've been working very closely with the tjpa and the m.t.a.
has played a significant role in relocating all transit operations and services. transit services that will be relocated to the temporary terminal include our muney operation, greyhound, golden gate transit. director ford: as it relates to our automatic fair collection program, our pilot program for the clifford is on schedule and moving along quite well. the contractor has delivered the pilot fair collection equipment and recently began installing a new fare at the civic station center. this will be accompanied with three new ticket vending machines and one control terminal at the east end of the civic center station complete installation will take about a week and shortly thereafter staff will begin testing equipment. the pilot equipment at civic center will be in service on tuesday, august 18. as it relates to our federal transit administration and our funding, we recently received some good news. we received some national
recognition. of the $71 million of the m.t.a. received in our funding we have logged nearly $800,000 total job hours under that fund -- 800,000 total job hours under that funding. this ranks sixth among all the transit agencies that received our funding. so out of the largest systems in the country we were ranked number six. and beyond that the m.t.a. ranked number fourth for jobs created or retained in the first quarter of 2010 using these federal funds. the transit capital assistance program, a grant of $85 million, is funding 14 of our transit-related capital projects. and as a result of these funds, 568 jobs were created and/or sustained including laborors, coordinators, electricians, engineers and expectors, quality control specialists as well as machinists and installers. so we remain committed to working with the federal government to retain and create more jobs and continue our efforts in seeking additional
federal funding to support improving the m.t. arment. -- m.t.a. at some point we will be bringing back to the board a status update of the funded projects that we have under way so you'll have an update in terms of what's occurring with that funding at a more practical -- more direct level. you've read and heard a great deal of information of our september 4 service restoration at the st. francis circle project comes to an end, we're simultaneously preparing to restore service to the -- to our pre-- to our service modifications that we reduced 10%. we were planning on restoring. we were planning to restore approximately 6%. and based on some of the planning of our staff, we are going to be restoring a bit more than that. we've modified our service planning strategies to restore approximately 61% of the 10%
service that was reduced. and while we have not fully restored the entire 10%, we are going to continue that work and our planning to try and reach a january 1 timeline in conjuncture with the board of supervisors and the mayor's office and the task force that will be created to strive for that target. with that i'd ask john to come before you at this time and present and overview of the service restoration plans. john. >> thank you, mr. ford. mr. chairman, board members, i appreciate the opportunity to come before you to talk to you about our proposed service restoration plan. before we introduce you to the specifics of it, i just wanted to point out that what we've done in putting the restoration plan together is try to follow the policy guidelines and views
you provided us with -- you know, through your leadership over the last several months as we've gone through the budget and service discussions. number one, that as we put back or look to restore service, so in a strategic fashion. we look at the roots, ridership and benefits along those lines. throughout the last several months there have been numerous discussions on audits and our approach to schedule making. of course schedules and the levels of service being the biggest driver. we are following in this particular case and are looking at our plan to restore service, doing everything we can to write and develop more efficient schedules, particularly as we have heard loud and clear that the discussions that have taken place over the last several months to minimize the amount
of stand by time. so that is the second principle . the third principle that we wanted to follow in restoring the service was to make sure that whatever we put back, we have the ability to mana are aw last several months we have gone threw ups and downs in terms of our staffing and manpower. you heard an overview of our entire capital assets and also about our vehicles. so, part of what we are doing here is looking at the service that we can restore and effectively manage at the same time. so, those are the three underlying principles that we followed as we looked at what service to restore. the highlights of what we are restoring, first of all, we talked about as we went through
the difficult decision to curtail service in the first place and where the impact would be. restoring the later hours and the earlier start-ups, particularly on weekends on the community routes. over the last several months monitoring the crowding and bunching on key lines where we spread like the california where we open up the headways a little bit. we looked at following all of those principles. in addition we looked at the way we scheduled the up line, which continues to remain extremely popular and heavyly traveled. the last thing we did is restore l.r.b. with your apov