Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Works March 14 2006WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Public Works and Safety Committee March 14, 2006 Committee Chair Barbara Brenner called the meeting to order at 1 :35 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Present: Absent: L. Ward Nelson None Sam Crawford Also Present: Carl Weimer Dan McShane COMMITTEE DISCUSSION ONLY 1. CONTINUATION OF THE DISCUSSION PERTAINING TO THE LUMMI ISLAND FERRY USER RATE INCREASE PROPOSAL (A132006 -101A) Jeff Monsen, Public Works Director, submitted a power point presentation (on file) and stated he is asking for information from the committee to communicate to the Island community. Brenner stated the rate comparison was eye- opening. She asked which comparison Whatcom County is most like. Monsen stated the Port Townsend ferry is about 90 minute round trip. The Anderson Island is about one hour. The Guemes Island ferry is almost identical to Whatcom County's service. The new rates for the Guemes Island ferry are included in the packet information. They charge less than Whatcom County charges. Skagit County had not established a recovery rate policy. Skagit County made the change because it started to dip more and more into the fund balance of their road fund. The comparisons aren't meant to suggest that Whatcom County is the same. Brenner asked the percentage they recouped. Ken Richardson, Accounting Supervisor, stated Skagit County's cost per passenger is about 2.3 times Whatcom County's cost. The Guemes Island ferry carries fewer people and has more cost to the system. Skagit County collected about 30 percent from the fare box, but is trying to push that up that percentage. Monsen stated Skagit County's ticketing procedure required a fourth crew member to collect tickets. Whatcom County is still running three crew members. That is a big cost difference. Brenner asked about the idea of eliminating the senior discount and basing all discounts on need. Basing something on age offends her. Monsen stated Whatcom County is unusual in how it deals with senior discounts. Whatcom County does not give senior discounts. It only gives discounts based on need. Another problematic recommendation is about those need -based products. The need -based products, and a few other products, require a lot of administrative time to Public Works and Safety Committee, 3/14/2006, Page 1 manage. Eliminate as many products as possible to simplify the administrative process. Rather than having a discounted fare based on need, see if they can establish a program to provide a financial system to purchase those tickets. He is looking for feedback from the committee on this information to present to the community next week. The majority of the information in the Council packet is a summary and update of the County's status on rate - setting. Ridership consistency is difficult to predict. With the new boat, he predicts a rise in demand. However, the rate increase will drive down ridership. They must predict or respond to what happens in reality. Crawford asked why the number of motorcycles, bikes, and riders has gone down so much. Monsen stated that in 2002, during the last rate increase, the County eliminated a price for bicycles and also stopped counting bicycles. Bikes are charged the pedestrian fare. The information on system costs includes significant increases. Presumably, they will implement the strategy on Council packet page 157. In 2006, there will be a shortfall when recovering the 55 percent. It is the difference between current revenue and predicted need. Recently, he spent some time with consultants and designers. The predicted costs for the new boat and the backup vessel has gone down. Also, they don't expect the six percent annual cost growth to continue. Brenner stated the costs of the backup boat are significant. Monsen stated the backup boat has a significant cost. The use of a backup vessel will eliminate the need for security during dry dock. Nelson asked if anyone else has backup boats. Monsen stated the State Department of Transportation has backup vessels, but there may be a reduced level of service during maintenance periods. Pierce County has a backup vessel. Nelson asked the policies and procedures for their backup vessels. Monsen stated they will always run only one boat, alternating the use of the two boats. Skagit County does not have a backup vessel. They currently operate just like Whatcom County. Brenner stated Whatcom County doesn't need a backup vessel. Crawford asked if the Whatcom Chief, if it becomes a backup vessel, be used by Guemes Island ferry as their backup vessel also. Monsen stated it could be. Skagit County is interested in that option. They are beginning to look at the relationships between fare types. Pierce County and the State have peak seasons. Brenner asked if any of the other jurisdictions charge peak and non -peak fares. Monsen stated the State and Pierce County peaks are seasonal, not time -of -day. Richardson stated the multi -ride ticket is the same all year long. The Guemes Island ferry used to have a peak season fare, but eliminated it because of the cost for administration. For the small ferry systems, it seems best to have a large discount from cash to multi -ride. Therefore, the seasonal user would pay cash and the resident would pay for the multi -ride pass. Public Works and Safety Committee, 3/14/2006, Page 2 1 Monsen stated Pierce County and the State have a full -time ticketing operation that 2 is separate from the boating operation. 3 4 Crawford asked if Whatcom County could have time -of -day peak fares. It may 5 encourage folks to take the ferry at other times. Richardson stated some ferry systems 6 have used time -of -day peak fares. They sell another product for the commuter. They get 7 a discount to not ride during peak hours. For Whatcom County, the administrative cost will 8 rise if they begin to offer more products. The more complex the ticket, the more likely it 9 will have to be sold by the administration instead of ferry crew. 10 11 Brenner asked if they could just sell peak hour cash fares at the boat. Richardson 12 stated a long -term goal is to get cash off the boat entirely. To handle cash on the new 13 boat, they would have to add crew, which is even more expensive. 14 15 Monsen stated he recommends that they deal with off -boat ticketing with one full - 16 time equivalent (FTE) employee. That employee will focus on selling multi -ride products. 17 The machine will sell single -ride tickets. The employee will not be there for all hours of 18 ferry operation. 19 20 Brenner stated that when the FTE leaves, the employee would do a cash out before 21 leaving. It's like any cashier. Richardson stated the peak time of day is between 5:30 22 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. and between 3:30 p.m. and 5:30 or 6:00 p.m., five days per week. 23 One FTE employee can't cover the job that way. They would need three employees to 24 cover the times they operate the ferry. 25 26 Brenner stated that peak hours would only be from 6:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and from 27 4:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. Richardson stated that, in his experience, the peak hours are 28 longer. 29 30 Nelson stated he agrees there are too many products. 31 32 Brenner stated it won't be difficult to program the machine for charging peak hour 33 cash fares instead of non -peak hour cash fares. Monsen stated he's not trying to argue 34 against peak hour fares. He is trying to emphasize that those special rates are meant to 35 influence the demand on the system. They are not a revenue issue. It's not meant to 36 generate money. 37 38 Brenner stated her idea is meant to dissuade peak -hour use. 39 40 Crawford stated there could be a mechanical fare system that handles many 41 different rate structures without any human interaction, using a machine generated 42 magnetic card, similar to systems used in subways. Such a system will probably cost a lot 43 of money. He asked if there is a system available by which the community can have such a 44 system. Residents can load up and use the cards as much as they want. Richardson 45 stated scale has to do with it. A ferry system is unique because it is two kinds of 46 transportation. It's like a subway and a toll bridge both. A machine can't tell the 47 difference between a car and a person. Then it would have to count how many people are 48 inside that car. The most sophisticated systems still use someone to count people. 49 50 Crawford stated toll roads requiring more than two people per car use the honor 51 system. A police officer can catch violators. Richardson stated a system that seems totally 52 unmanned usually has someone keeping an eye on things. He went after this idea, but it Public Works and Safety Committee, 3/14/2006, Page 3 is a combination of people and machines, and forcing people to sell multi -ride products. The humans sell the multi -ride products and the machine sells the single -ride tickets. Monsen stated encourage purchase of the multi -ride products, which would simplify the administration. The system isn't set up that way now. Now, two - thirds of the transactions are cash fares. It isn't a matter of the multi -ride not being low enough, it's that the cash fare isn't high enough. That may deal with the seasonal peak issues. When comparing both those fares, the average user is paying $.97. The average car driver is paying $3.82. If there is a 40 percent increase to those numbers, and they get the vast majority of people to purchase multi -ride products, the cost would be $5.35 as a multi -fare and a $7 cash fare for a car and driver. Get the number of cash fares purchased to drop to ten percent of the users. Brenner stated there will be a lot of cash users by tourists in the summer. Monsen stated it isn't enough to make a difference in the long -term. Crawford asked if multi -rides are transferable between vehicles. Monsen stated that when they sell multi -rides in the future, it would be like buying coupons that anyone can use. Monsen stated he recommends looking at the difference between a vehicle and a person and how they manage discounts. Begin to focus on multi -ride passes. Brenner asked about a needy person getting the multi -ride pass. It could be a hardship to put out enough money for a large multi -ride ticket. Monsen stated establish the needs criteria first. Sell some form of pass instead of a ride -by -ride transaction. Once they decide the ticket prices, then determine the special products. Brenner asked if they are going to base driver pass, and then they are going to raise the people from purchasing single fares. They need money. the basic fee on the multi -ride car and cash fare above that amount to dissuade to calculate some way to get some extra Crawford stated Mr. Monsen is talking about basing the entire structure on passenger - vehicle cash fare, and then increasing the purchase of multi -ride products through substantial discounts from the cash fare. Councilmember Brenner described it the other way around. Monsen stated the way councilmember Brenner described it is correct. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) 40 41 Crawford asked if any of this will be in next Tuesday's meeting. Monsen stated this 42 will be explained, as well as the discount issues. 43 44 Brenner stated age should not be a reason for an automatic discount. It should be 45 need - driven. Monsen stated that if the County uses federal money on any part of the boat, 46 the County is obligated to have a senior discount. 47 48 Richardson stated the reason the Guemes Island ferry has an age discount is 49 because federal funds for improving the transit system connections require the discount. 50 51 Brenner stated she wants to see that in writing. 52 Public Works and Safety Committee, 3/14/2006, Page 4 Monsen stated that if there is a senior discount, the product should be based on age, separate from the need -based products. At this point, there is no federal money that would require them to base fares on age. Brenner asked how they sell a pass to someone based on need, even if it is discounted. Monsen stated the County has that challenge now. According to the citizens who testified at the last public hearing on rates, the County needs to have quarterly passes because of a financial need of some residents. The quarterly pass is the most expensive product they sell. They sell almost no quarterly passes. If the quarterly pass is the right product, they have to deal with the financial side of it. Cash sales are so high because there is no reason for people to purchase other products. Crawford stated he disagrees. He would not be opposed to eliminating the entire need discount system. The ferry is the most expensive road system in the county. The County is going to maintain a policy to recover 55 percent of that expensive component through the fare box. Therefore, the cost part of the cost of living on Lummi Island. He questions the County's rationale for saying they need to respect the population who lives there and who has this financial need. He doesn't understand why the residents live in an environment that requires this incredibly expensive system. He is not excited about the need -based program. He likes the age -based program. Monsen stated the biggest issue is trying to get people to understand rate - setting, which is dominated by the idea that the majority of use is from full -time residents. The County should focus rate - setting on that core group. Nelson asked if the multi -rate structure would be closer to, but still under, Skagit County in terms of the fare for single and multi - passengers. Monsen stated it would be. COMPREHENSIVE 1. RESOLUTION INITIATING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING AMENDMENTS FOR 2006 (AB2006 -082) Docket # 2006 -DD: Add a new Chapter 12 and goal regarding LOS Troy Holbrook, Assistant Director, stated staff offered to change the language at the last meeting. The applicant agrees with the new language. He read the language change. Part of the reason for the language change was due to the concurrency resolution that does not docket anything. Brenner handed out information on the recently - passed Bellingham Transportation Concurrency Ordinance, which is based on level of service. It looks good. The County can use it. Brenner moved to recommend that the Council docket this item. Nelson stated he liked the concurrency issue being addressed. He asked if it won't be necessary to do emergencies if the Council does this. Holbrook stated that is correct. scope. Nelson stated it was limited to level of service alone. It should have been broader in Public Works and Safety Committee, 3/14/2006, Page 5 Crawford stated his concern was that they were broadening a specific proposal on a specific item, without telling the public. If everyone is comfortable with it, he can go along with it. He hopes this is what the Executive envisioned with his concurrency resolution. This gives the resolution some teeth. Motion carried unanimously. Brenner stated she would like to look at this as an interim transportation concurrency ordinance for the Birch Bay area. Birch Bay is in terrible shape. Peter Roberts, Whatcom County Association of Realtors, stated he looked at the Washington Administrative code (WAC) and the definition of level of service (LOS). He submitted and read from his example of what can happen (on file). The LOS changes based on population changes. This is a poorly drafted law. The current Comprehensive Plan currently addresses LOS services. There can be a change in LOS with no new people in Whatcom County. They don't need to draft a lot of new stuff. They are dealing with the concerns appropriately with the language change. Holbrook re -read the language change, "Establish levels of service for governmental services that adopt policies to implement a concurrency program." Crawford stated his objection two weeks ago was that they've moved so far away from what was originally proposed. He wants to support the administration to move the concurrency issue forward. Roberts stated the realtors agree that if they establish an appropriate level of service, they should not fall below it. Brenner stated that the County usually talks about average family size, but doesn't talk about single families or other units. Roberts stated his point is there could be a loss of level of service without new development or new residents. McShane stated the example given by Mr. Roberts is what has happened in his neighborhood. The response from urban neighborhoods is that the government starts putting in restrictions about the number of unrelated people who live in the house. There is a loss of level of service. Parking suddenly becomes an issue in the neighborhood. Those issues do happen. Brenner asked about the constitutionality of prohibiting a house from filling with as many unrelated people as they want. Roberts stated the City has addressed it through it's zoning, but the federal government feels they can't restrict who lives where. Nelson stated he's glad for the language change. They always assume the negative, but it can work for the positive as well. A development could occur not for family housing, but for senior housing with fewer impacts. Be careful they don't generalize their concurrency policies. Roberts stated the current law doesn't necessarily say they have to have the actual concurrency happening. They have to have funding for concurrency. He's not sure the wording is exactly in line with the current law on the books. Brenner stated the Council is looking at how soon implementation has to happen. Roberts stated implementation doesn't mean the County has to spend money. They could supply another bus stop to decrease the amount of traffic. Public Works and Safety Committee, 3/14/2006, Page 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Brenner stated the Council will also look at bringing down the timeframe in the concurrency. For example, the County could require that the service shall be existing at the time of occupancy. Holbrook stated some jurisdictions are more restrictive than six years. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 2:47 p.m. Jill N`kp�,' mute 9'Twwrpnscription .A%HATC go. C� WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Da fBrown'Dvi!4, C ci erk Barbara Brenner, Committee Chair Public Works and Safety Committee, 3/14/2006, Page 7