Agenda - Monterey-Salinas Transit

Board of Directors Regular Meeting 

Monday, March 19, 2012 

MST Conference Room 

One Ryan Ranch Road, Monterey 

10:00 a.m. 

TRANSPORTATION: Ride Line 8 Ryan Ranch-Edgewater to MST Office 

1. CALL TO ORDER 

1-1. Roll call. 

1-2. Pledge of Allegiance. 

2. CONSENT AGENDA 

2-1. Review highlights of Agenda. (Carl Sedoryk) 

These items will be approved by a single motion. Anyone may request 

that an item be discussed and considered separately. 

2-2. Adopt Resolution 2012-17 recognizing Rosemary Bayles, Human 

Resources Generalist, as Employee of the Month for February, 2012. 

(Kelly Halcon) (pg. 1) 

2-3. Adopt Resolution 2012-19 recognizing Richard Meza, Coach Operator, as 

Employee of the Month for March, 2012. (Robert Weber) (pg. 3) 

2-4. Disposal of property left aboard buses. (Sonia Bannister) (pg. 5) 

2-5. Minutes of the regular meeting of February 13, 2012. (Deanna Smith) 

(pg. 7) 

2-6. Financial Report – January, 2012. (Kathy Williams) (pg. 15) 

2-7. Minutes from Public Hearing, Salinas, February 4, 2012. (Deanna Smith) 

(pg. 23)

2-8. Minutes from Public Hearing, Carmel, February 6, 2012. (Deanna Smith) 

(pg. 27) 

2-9. Minutes from Public Hearing, Seaside, February 8, 2012. (Deanna Smith) 

(pg. 31) 

2-10. Minutes from Public Hearing, Prunedale, February 9, 2012. 

(Deanna Smith) (pg. 35) 

2-11. 2011 Community Stakeholder Survey. (Zoe Shoats) (pg. 37) 

2-12. Purchase One Replacement Engine. (Michael Hernandez) (pg. 43) 

End of Consent Agenda 

3. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 

3-1. February Employee of the Month – Rosemary Bayles, Human Resources 

Generalist. (Kelly Halcon) 

3-2. March Employee of the Month – Richard Meza, Coach Operator. (Robert 

Weber) 

3-3. Donation of Vehicle from Gil’s Basketball Academy. (Carl Sedoryk) 

3-4. Presentation by Majic Consulting: “Onboard Passenger Survey and Attitude 

and Awareness (Non-Rider Telephone) Survey” (Zoe Shoats) (pg. 45) 

4. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA 

Members of the public may address the Board on any matter related to the 

jurisdiction of MST but not on the agenda. There is a time limit of not more 

than three minutes for each speaker. The Board will not take action or 

respond immediately to any public comments presented, but may choose 

to follow-up at a later time, either individually, through staff, or on a 

subsequent agenda. 

5. COMMITTEE REPORTS 

No action required unless specifically noted. 

5-1 Finance Committee Minutes from February 13, 2012. (Deanna Smith) 

(pg. 49) 

6. BIDS/PROPOSALS 

7. PUBLIC HEARINGS

8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 

8-1 Adopt Accessible Taxicab Distribution Policy. (Tom Hicks) (pg. 53) 

8-2 Adopt MST Bylaw changes re: election of officers, Article VI (b). 

(Carl Sedoryk) (pg. 59) 

9. NEW BUSINESS 

9-1 Authorize adding discounts for residential complexes serving the elderly 

and disabled to the Group Discount Program. (Zoe Shoats) (pg. 67) 

10. REPORTS & INFORMATION ITEMS 

The Board will receive and file these reports, which do not require any 

action by the Board. 

10-1. General Manager/CEO Report – January, 2012. (pg. 69) 

10-2. TAMC Highlights – February, 2012. (pg. 119) 

10-3. Washington D. C. Lobbyist report – February, 2012. (pg. 123) 

10-4. State Lobbyist report – February, 2012. (pg. 125) 

10-5. Staff trip reports. (pg. 127) 

10-6. Correspondence. (pg. 129) 

11. COMMENTS BY BOARD MEMBERS 

11-1. Reports on meetings attended by Board members at MST expense 

(AB1234). 

12. ATTACHMENTS 

12-1 Disbursement Journal for January, 2012. (pg. 135) 

13. ANNOUNCEMENTS 

14. CLOSED SESSION 

As permitted by Government Code §64956 et seq. of the State of California, the Board 

of Directors may adjourn to Closed Session to consider specific matters dealing with 

personnel and/or pending possible litigation and/or conferring with the Board's Meyers- 

Milias-Brown Act representative. 

14-1 Conference with property negotiators, Gov. Code § 54956.8. (Parcel # 

APN 032-171-005, L.2.3, L.2.4.1, L.2.4.2, APN 031-011-056-000). Agency

negotiator, Carl Sedoryk. Negotiating party, Monterey County 

Redevelopment Agency. (No enclosure) (Carl Sedoryk) 

14-2 Conference with Legal Counsel-Litigation, Existing Litigation, Gov. Code § 

54956.9(a). Landwatch v. County of Monterey. (Monterey Superior Court 

Case No. M113552). (No enclosure) (Carl Sedoryk) 

14-3. Conference with Legal Counsel-Litigation, Existing Litigation, Gov. 

Code § 54956.9(a). ArrivalStar S.A. and Melvino Technologies 

Limited, Plaintiffs, v. Monterey-Salinas Transit Corporation, 

Defendant (CV 12 0990), an action filed in U.S. District Court for 

the Northern District of California (San Francisco). (No enclosure) 

(Carl Sedoryk) 

14-4 General Manager Performance Evaluation, Gov. Code § 54957 (b) - (No 

enclosure) (K. Halcon) 

15. RETURN TO OPEN SESSION 

15-1. Report on Closed Session and possible action. 

16. ADJOURN 

NEXT MEETING DATE: April 9, 2012 in MST Conference Room. 

NEXT AGENDA DEADLINE: March 27, 2012 

Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Board after distribution of 

the agenda packet are available for public inspection at the Monterey-Salinas Transit 

Administration office at 1 Ryan Ranch Road, Monterey, CA during normal business 

hours. 

Upon request, MST will provide written agenda materials in appropriate alternative 

formats, or disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or 

services, to enable individuals with disabilities to participate in public meetings. Please 

send a written request, including your name, mailing address, phone number and brief 

description of the requested materials and preferred alternative format or auxiliary aid or 

service at least 5 days before the meeting. Requests should be sent to Deanna Smith, 

MST, One Ryan Ranch Road, Monterey, CA 93940 or dsmith@mst.org.

Monterey-Salinas Transit Corporation 

Board of Directors Regular Meeting 

March 19, 2012 

MST Conference Room 


Immediately following regular meeting of MST Board of Directors. 

TRANSPORTATION: Ride Line 8 Ryan Ranch-Edgewater to MST Office 


1-1. Roll call. 


Members of the public may address the Board on any matter related to the jurisdiction of 

MST but not on the agenda. There is a time limit of not more than three minutes for each 

speaker. The Board will not take action or respond immediately to any public comments 

presented, but may choose to follow-up at a later time, either individually, through staff, 

or on a subsequent agenda. 


As permitted by Government Code §64956 et seq. of the State of California, the 

Board of Directors may adjourn to Closed Session to consider specific matters 

dealing with personnel and/or pending possible litigation and/or conferring with 

the Board's Meyers-Milias-Brown Act representative. 


54956.9(a). ArrivalStar S.A. and Melvino Technologies Limited, Plaintiffs, 

v. Monterey-Salinas Transit Corporation, Defendant (CV 12 0990), an 

action filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (San 

Francisco). (No enclosure) (Carl Sedoryk) 


4-1 Report on Closed Session and possible action.

5. ADJOURN 

Upon request, MST will provide written agenda materials in appropriate 

alternative formats, or disability-related modification or accommodation, 

including auxiliary aids or services, to enable individuals with disabilities to 

participate in public meetings. Please send a written request, including 

your name, mailing address, phone number and brief description of the 

requested materials and preferred alternative format or auxiliary aid or 

service at least 5 days before the meeting. Requests should be sent to 

Deanna Smith, MST, One Ryan Ranch Road, Monterey, CA 93940 or 

dsmith@mst.org

1 

Agenda # 2-2 

March 19, 2012 Meeting 

ROSEMARY BAYLES 

FEBRUARY 2012 

EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH 

WHEREAS, each month Monterey-Salinas Transit recognizes an outstanding employee 

as Employee of the Month; and 

WHEREAS, the Employee of the Month is recognized for their positive contribution to 

MST and to the entire community; and 

WHEREAS, Rosemary Bayles began her career with MST as a Human Resources 

Generalist in August of 2010. In her first year, Rose has helped in creating new efficient, stream 

lined processes within the Human Resources Department; and 

WHEREAS, Rosemary Bayles re-vamped the Leaves of Absences processes by auditing 

files and developing a database to track the leaves. She established a protocol of keeping in touch 

with employees and obtaining timely status updates. These new processes bridged the gap 

between employees, payroll and the department supervisors; and 

WHEREAS, Rosemary Bayles assisted and led the recruitment efforts in filling over 30 

vacant or newly created positions in 2011. She was instrumental in creating a new assessment for 

mechanic applicants and developing new recruitment guidelines when working with hiring 

managers. These tactics have led to finding the right applicant for the positions; and 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of Monterey-Salinas 

Transit recognizes Rosemary Bayles as Employee of the Month for February 2012; and 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Rosemary Bayles is to be congratulated for her 

excellent work at Monterey-Salinas Transit. 

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF MONTEREY-SALINAS TRANSIT 

PASSED AND ADOPTED RESOLUTION 2012-17 this 19 th day of March 2012. 

_______________________ _____________________ 

Fernando Armenta Carl G. Sedoryk 

Chairman Secretary

This page left intentionally blank. 

2

3 



Richard meza 

march 2012 

EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH 

WHEREAS, each month Monterey-Salinas Transit recognizes an outstanding employee 

as Employee of the Month; and 

WHEREAS, the Employee of the Month is recognized for their positive contribution to 

MST and to the entire community; and 

WHEREAS, Richard Meza began his career as a Coach Operator with Monterey-Salinas 

Transit in June of 2009; and 

WHEREAS, Richard Meza was recently recognized for two years of consecutive safe 

driving. He is safe, on-time, and continues to provide a high level of customer service; and 

WHEREAS, Richard Meza recently finished working six months within the Operations 

Department as a Temporary Operations Supervisor providing added support in Operations when 

needed most. Many employees have been very positive in their comments with respect to his 

level of cooperation and professionalism while he served in that role; and 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of Monterey-Salinas 

Transit recognizes Richard Meza as Employee of the Month for March 2012; and 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Richard Meza is to be congratulated for his 

excellent work at Monterey-Salinas Transit. 

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF MONTEREY-SALINAS TRANSIT 

PASSED AND ADOPTED RESOLUTION 2012-19 this 19 th day of March 2012. 

_______________________ _______________________ 

Fernando Armenta Carl G. Sedoryk 

Chairman Secretary


4

To: Board of Directors 

From: Sonia Bannister, Office Administrator 

Subject: Disposal of unclaimed property left on bus 

St. Vincent de Paul (Seaside) 

5 



2 water bottles 1 apron 1 make up bag 

2 sunglasses 1 head phone 1 scarf 

2 caps 1 lunch box 

1 book 2 backpacks 

1 jacket 3 cell phones 

To be disposed 

2 backpacks 2 credit cards 

1 lunch bag 1 hat 

1 water bottle 2 notebooks 

2 keys 

MST makes an attempt to contact the owners of Lost and Found items. If the items are 

unclaimed after 30 days, they are added to the above list.


6

7 



BOARD OF DIRECTORS 

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING 

MONTEREY-SALINAS TRANSIT 

February 13, 2012 


Chair Armenta called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m. in the MST Conference Room 

and Director Clark led the Pledge of Allegiance. 

Present: Fernando Armenta County of Monterey 

Kristin Clark City of Del Rey Oaks 

Alan Cohen City of Pacific Grove 

Libby Downey City of Monterey 

Alvin Edwards City of Seaside 

John Huerta, Jr. City of Greenfield 

Susan Kleber City of King 

Frank O’Connell City of Marina 

David Pendergrass City of Sand City 

Sergio Sanchez City of Salinas 

Karen Sharp City of Carmel-by-the-Sea 

Patricia Stephens City of Soledad 

Absent: Maria Orozco City of Gonzales 

Staff: Carl Sedoryk General Manager/CEO 

Angela Dawson Accountant 

Mark Eccles Director of IT 

Mike Gallant Planning Manager 

Kelly Halcon Director of Human Resources & Risk Management 

Hunter Harvath Asst. General Manager/Finance & Administration 

Michael Hernandez Asst. General Manager/COO 

Tom Hicks Mobility Manager 

Michelle Overmeyer Grants & Compliance Analyst 

Deanna Smith Executive Assistant to the GM/CEO 

Robert Weber Director of Transportation Services 

Kathy Williams General Budget & Accounting Manager 

Carl Wulf Facilities Manager 

Ben Newman Risk & Security Manager 

Sonia Bannister Office Administrator

Others: Dave Laredo General Counsel/De Lay & Laredo 

Heidi Quinn De Lay & Laredo 

Margaret Davis Friends of the Fort Ord Warhorse 

Bryan Sperber CSUMB Student 

Therese Potter CSUMB Student 

Bill Weigle Retired 

L. Telase Retired 

David Ford Retired 

Kay Cline Retired 

Diane Cotton Retired 

Lynn Hamilton Retired 

Greg Furey Retired 

Jean Donnelly Retired 

David Donnelly Retired 

Steve Ecklund Retired 

Steven Judd MST 

Fred Watson CSUMB/Marina 

Lisa Deas Backcountry Horsemen of CA 

Jason Campbell Seaside Resident 

Susan Campbell Seaside Resident 

Eric Petersen Citizen 

Lance Atencio MV Transportation 

Jim Fink Citizen, MST Customer 

Susan Pruea Teacher 

Sharon Hack Transit Rider 

Apology is made for any misspelling of a name. 


2-1 Conference with property negotiators, Gov. Code § 54956.8. (Parcel # 

APN 032-171-005, L.2.3, L.2.4.1, L.2.4.2, APN 031-011-056-000) Agency 

negotiator, Carl Sedoryk. Negotiating party, Monterey County 

Redevelopment Agency. (No enclosure) (Carl Sedoryk) 


54956.9(a). Landwatch v. County of Monterey. (Monterey Superior Court 

Case No. M113552) (No enclosure) (Carl Sedoryk) 

2-3. General Manager Performance Evaluation, Gov. Code § 54957 (b) - (No 

enclosure) (K. Halcon) 

Public Comment 

Margaret Davis stated that the Board should represent the public. Ordinary 

people need access to public land for recreation, and the public was promised a 

continuous trail from beach to BLM land. She opposes the Whispering Oaks project. 

8

Susan Pruea read two limericks and a devotional excerpt on sin. She opposes 

the Whispering Oaks project. 

John Hutchison stated he was petitioner number 18,000 opposing Whispering 

Oaks development. He “called out” Mr. Sedoryk and challenged him to a hiking debate 

with members of the media acting as mediators. 

An unnamed student of CSUMB can’t believe the selfishness of MST and does 

not support the development. 

Brian Sperber disputed the accuracy of site alternative evaluations and opposes 

the development. 

Fred Watson believes Whispering Oaks is a valuable habitat for numerous 

species. Other sites are preferable and available. 

Jason Campbell believes the development is the wrong course for MST and the 

public. He believes alternative site evaluations are flawed. 

Paul Wolf stated that he speaks for numerous people and the more he told 

people about the project, the more they opposed it. 

Director Huerta arrived at 10:15 a.m. 

Lynn Hamilton does not want the trail to go by a bus yard. She believes the 

Marina Airport is preferable. 

Steve Ecklund can’t understand why MST would want to build at Whispering 

Oaks because it is not easy to get there. 

Bill Weigle addressed Mr. Sedoryk and requested his resignation. He believes 

Mr. Sedoryk wasted $4 million dollars prematurely, is disingenuous regarding alternative 

sites, and is ignoring the public. 

Diane Cotton stated that the FORA plan’s intent was to build on blighted areas, 

and Whispering Oaks is not blighted. She stated she will chain herself to an oak tree if 

the project continues. 

Eric Petersen opposes Whispering Oaks. He asked for MST to start over and 

look for a new site. 

Sharon Hack is surprised that MST is fighting the public. 

Kay Cline questioned whether a consolidated facility is even necessary. She 

thinks that three sites might be a good idea, and read a poem by an eighth grade 

student. 

9

Lisa Daes represents 3,000 equestrians and hates to see the Cavalry Trail 

severed. 

Jim Fink stated that he researched this issue last July and believes the public 

who opposes the project are misinformed. He believes LandWatch has acted 

fraudulently. He supports the Whispering Oaks project. 

Close Public Comment 


3-1. Report on Closed Session and possible action. 

Item 2-3 was postponed until March 19, 2012. No reportable action was taken 

on any item. 

4. CONSENT AGENDA 

4-1. Review highlights of Agenda. (Carl Sedoryk) 

Mr. Sedoryk read the highlights of the agenda. 

4-2 Adopt Resolution 2012-17 recognizing Rosemary Bayles, Human 

Resources Generalist, as Employee of the Month for February, 2012. 

(Kelly Halcon) 

4-3 Disposal of property left aboard buses. (Sonia Bannister) 

4-4 Minutes of the regular meeting of January 9, 2012. (Deanna Smith) 

4-5 Financial Report – November and December, 2011. (Kathy Williams) 

4-6 Claim Rejection – Cruz, Sebolino, King, and Herrera. (Ben Newman) 

4-7 Approve Resolution 2012-18 (Attachment 1) authorizing the filing of a 

grant application with the Monterey Peninsula Foundation. (Michelle 

Overmeyer) 

4-8 Minutes from Public Hearing - January 23, 2012. (Deanna Smith) 

4-9 Minutes from Public Hearing – January 24, 2012. (Deanna Smith) 

4-10 Fremont-Lighthouse BRT Modification to Contract. (Hunter Harvath) 

Public Comment – None 

Due to time constraints, item 4-2 was pulled from the agenda. Director Huerta 

made a motion to approve the consent agenda excepting item 4-2 and was 

seconded by Director Stephens. The motion carried unanimously. 

10

5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 

5-1 February Employee of the Month – Rosemary Bayles, Human Resources 

Generalist. (Kelly Halcon) 

5-2 Donation of Vehicle from Gil’s Basketball Academy. (Carl Sedoryk) 

All presentations were postponed until the March 19 Board meeting. 

6. COMMITTEE REPORTS 

6-1 Planning & Operations Minutes from January 9, 2012. (Deanna Smith) 

7. BIDS/PROPOSALS 

None. 

8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 

8-1 Conduct Public Hearing for FY 2012 Program of Projects. Adopt FY 2012 

Program of Projects and authorize the filing of appropriate grant 

applications with the Federal Transit Administration and Caltrans. (Hunter 

Harvath) 

Mr. Harvath directed the Board to page 49 of the agenda and stated that the 

hearing was noticed according to MST policy and federal requirements. He stated that 

funds received will be used for operations and planning. 

Public Comment – None 

Director Clark made a motion to adopt the FY 2012 Program of Projects and 

authorize the filing of appropriate grant applications with the Federal Transit 

Administration and Caltrans and was seconded by Director Stephens. The 

motion carried unanimously. 

8-2 Conduct Public Hearing for Proposed spring 2012 service reductions. 

(Hunter Harvath) 

Mr. Harvath stated that today’s public hearing is the seventh in a series of public 

hearings conducted throughout the MST service area. In November, MST received 

information on an unexpected reduction in state funding levels of approximately 

$600,000. Next year, the shortfall could be as much as $1.3 million dollars. 

Mr. Harvath highlighted the proposed elimination of weekend and holiday 

discount fares for all riders except those who are under 18, over 65, active military, 

those will disabilities, and Medicare card holders. He provided a PowerPoint 

presentation detailing all proposed service reductions and ridership data. He stressed 

that reductions were spread across all service areas. Implementation of the reductions 

is scheduled for late April 2012. 

11

Director Clark asked how much money will be saved by eliminating the discount 

fares. Mr. Harvath stated that savings are expected to be approximately $200,000 

during FY 2013. Savings will be less for the remainder of FY 2012. 

Director Huerta asked if the service reductions will result in MST driver layoffs. 

Mr. Harvath stated that MST does not plan to reduce its driver force. The regular 

attrition of drivers will balance out labor expenses. 

Director Edwards asked if staff had looked over all public comments including 

those placed on the dais. Mr. Harvath stated that staff had read and considered all 

comments, and that exceptions have been made for several requests. He emphasized 

that some public requests were for additional service, but that the nature of service 

reductions mandate that cuts must be made. Reductions are primarily to service areas 

and routes with low ridership, and a fair distribution of service area reductions was 

attempted. Director Edwards stated that most public comments are received after 

changes are made. Mr. Harvath stated that numerous attempts to inform the public and 

encourage participation in public hearings were made, including requests for phone or 

written comments from those who could not attend. Mr. Sedoryk stated that the most 

effective method of informing riders of proposed changes and meeting times comes 

from the car cards placed in MST buses. 


Mr. Fink asked that the two questions he submitted in his email regarding 

changes to Line 13 and Line 16 be answered. He stated that if the Line 8 mid-day route 

is cut, there will be no way for transit riders to return home from attending MST Board 

meetings. 

Sharon Hack stated that Sacramento is increasing service and she does not 

understand why Monterey needs to reduce service. She thinks the overall changes are 

creative, but thinks the weekend changes will be confusing. She believes the fares are 

too low and should be tied to the cost of fuel. She suggested a “car free” website with 

information on how to successfully navigate the transit system. She believes that more 

marketing is effective in encouraging public transportation use among the public. 


Mr. Harvath stated that he appreciated Ms. Hack’s comments and would look into 

her suggestions. He stated that Sacramento has a local sales tax for transportation that 

provides additional funding; Monterey County does not and has failed in its last three 

attempts to pass a tax measure. He assured Mr. Fink that the Line 8 changes would 

still allow for transportation to and from MST Board meetings. Line 28 will run hourly 

after 7:00 p.m. Line 16 from CSUMB will run on Lightfighter Drive, and he assured that 

Line 29 to 55, from Prunedale to San Jose, will run effectively. 

Director Downey made a motion to approve the proposed fare and service 

changes for spring 2012 and was seconded by Director Huerta. The motion 

carried unanimously. 

Director Huerta stated that he supports the effort to pass a local sales tax to 

support public transportation. 

12

Director Edwards thanked MST for making the effort to hold a public hearing in 

Seaside. 

Director Armenta thought that holding the hearing at Northridge Mall on a 

Saturday was a good idea and asked staff to try to encourage those walking in and 

around the mall to attend next time. 

9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 

9-1 Authorize the purchase of Bus Rapid Transit Shelters. (Michael 

Hernandez) 

Mr. Hernandez stated that the purchase of shelters is fully funded by the Very 

Small Starts program and Proposition 1B. He displayed a photo of the shelter prototype 

and stated that the project has a fall 2012 completion goal. 

Director Sanchez asked for the cost per shelter and what would be done with the 

shelters that would be replaced. Mr. Hernandez stated that three shelters would be 

placed in Sand City and one in Seaside. All old shelters will be placed in areas without 

shelters. The eleven foot shelters cost $28,105 and the double sized shelters cost 

$59,800. 

Directors Kleber and Sharp were concerned that they would not properly protect 

from the elements and only had seating for two people. Mr. Hernandez stated that the 

shelters were not designed to be weather-proof, but they do provide shelter from rain. 

The eleven foot shelter seats two people and provides a covered area for one 

wheelchair. The double shelter has more seating. 


Mr. Fink asked if the shelters will be able to accommodate a Light Rail system. 

Ms. Hack encouraged bike hooks at shelters. 


Mr. Harvath stated that the proposed Light Rail system is slated to run along the 

Del Monte corridor in Monterey, not the Fremont corridor being used for BRT. He 

confirmed that all shelters have bike racks and MST buses can store bikes. 

Director Armenta encouraged MST staff to make sure that South County is 

considered for new projects, shelters, and other transit-related enhancements. 

10. NEW BUSINESS 

None. 

13

11. REPORTS & INFORMATION ITEMS 

11-1 General Manager/CEO Report. 

11-2 TAMC Highlights – December, 2011 and January, 2012. 

11-3 Washington D. C. Lobbyist report – December, 2011 and January, 2012. 

11-4 State Lobbyist report – December, 2011 and January, 2012. 

11-5 Staff trip reports. 

11-6 Correspondence. 


Mr. Fink thanked the MST driver who assisted him on New Year’s Eve when he 

fell while disboarding a bus. 

p.m. 

13. COMMENTS BY BOARD MEMBERS 

13-1 Reports on meetings attended by Board members at MST expense 

(AB1234). 

14. ATTACHMENTS 

14-1 Disbursement Journal for November and December, 2011. 

15. ANNOUNCEMENTS 

16. ADJOURN 

There being no further business, Chair Armenta adjourned the meeting at 12:22 

14


15 



From: Kathy Williams, General Accounting & Budget Manager 

Subject: Financial Reports – January 2012 

RECOMMENDATION: 

1. Accept report of January 2012 cash flow presented in Attachment #1 

2. Approve January 2012 disbursements listed in Attachment #2 

3. Accept report of January 2012 treasury transactions listed in Attachment #3 

4. Accept financial statements for the month of January 2012 in Attachment #4 

FISCAL IMPACT: 

The cash flow for January is summarized below and is detailed in Attachment #1. 

POLICY IMPLICATIONS: 

Beginning balance January 1, 2012 $ 5,606,002.27 

Revenues 2,155,406.33 

Disbursements 

Ending balance January 31, 2012 $ 5,312,989.95 

Disbursements are approved by your Board each month and are shown in 

Attachment #2. Detail of the disbursements is attached as agenda item 12-1. Treasury 

transactions are reported to your Board each month, and are shown in Attachment #3. 

Financial statement are provided for your review in Attachment #4.


16

PUBLIC HEARING 

Northridge Mall Community Room 

796 Northridge Mall, Salinas, CA 93906 


12:00 p.m. 


23 



Hunter Harvath called the meeting to order at 12:04 p.m. in the Northridge Mall 

Community Room. 

Staff: Hunter Harvath Asst. General Manager/Finance & Administration 



Miriam Gutierrez Customer Service Representative 

Christy Sugabo Paratransit Eligibility Specialist 

Public: Leonie Lear MST Rider 

Abi Koch MST Rider 

Roland MV Transportation 

Tony Paredes MST Rider 

Chris Rubrecht MST Rider 


2. PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED SERVICE REDUCTIONS 

Mr. Harvath introduced himself and MST staff, welcoming all members of the 

public. Mr. Harvath gave a PowerPoint presentation, focusing on all proposed service 

changes to the Salinas area. He explained that only 30% of MST’s operating costs are 

covered by passenger fares with the other 70% coming from state and federal funding. 

Anticipated reductions of $600,000 to $1.3 Million in funding from the State of California 

and the Federal Government require MST to reduce bus service to maintain a balanced 

budget. Mr. Harvath stated that the discounted fares on Sundays and Holidays would 

now only be offered to those aged 65 and older, 18 and under, Medicare card holders, 

active military, and those with disabilities. 

3. PUBLIC COMMENT 

Leonie Lear and Abi Koch stated that Lines 41 and 49 often run late. Ms. Lear 

stated that reductions in Line 41 will affect her ability to maintain her work schedule and 

might result in job loss. She requested that the 9:20 p.m. service be maintained in order

to keep her job. Mr. Harvath stated that MST would be able to maintain the 9:20 p.m. 

service and that he would recommend to the only the elimination of the 10:20 p.m. 

service to the Board of Directors. He stated that the Board of Directors will be 

presented with proposed service changes and all public comments on Monday, 

February 13, 2012. Once the changes are approved, new Rider’s Guides will be printed 

and distributed in time for the anticipated April 28, 2012 service changes. 

Tony Paredes and Chris Rubrecht, members of the public, arrived at 12:21 p.m. 

Mr. Harvath ensured them that when he completed his presentation he would discuss 

their concerns individually. 

Ms. Lear asked why Line 29 route costs an additional dollar. Mr. Harvath stated 

that the fares for long distance routes cost more, while the shorter routes cost less. 

Ms. Koch asked why Line 24 Grapevine Express was now serving Carmel-bythe-Sea. 

Mr. Harvath stated that the Carmel City Council unanimously requested the 

service. Ms. Koch provided a detail of her commute route which includes numerous 

route changes to make it to and from Carmel on weekdays. Mr. Harvath stated that 

Line 7 was the only line with substantial changes and that her routes would be affected 

by only five or ten minutes. Ms. Koch stated that most of the MST drivers were very 

kind and helpful and that she liked the safety of riding the bus. She stated that some 

drivers wait more that the two minute wait period in between stops, which is sometimes 

an inconvenience for those with tight schedules. 

Ms. Koch and Ms. Lear were satisfied with the information and concluded their 

comments. 

Mr. Rubrecht requested information on the Line 20 weekend route and stated 

that he rides the 11:15 p.m. to go home on Saturday. Mr. Harvath stated that there 

would be no changes to the 11:15 service. Mr. Rubrecht asked if Line 43 would remain 

the same as he uses this route both weekdays and weekends. Mr. Harvath suggested 

he use Line 23 on the weekend instead of Line 43 to get to the South Main Street and 

East Romie Lane corridors. 

Roland asked if there would be the same number of trips on Line 23 to King City. 

Mr. Harvath stated that there were some changes to Line 23 taking place immediately 

but that he would have to double check before he could provide accurate information. 

Mr. Paredes informed MST staff that he was hearing impaired. He was assisted 

personally by Miriam Gutierrez and Mr. Harvath, who helped him communicate his 

concerns in written format. Mr. Paredes occasionally rides Line 41 at 10:20 p.m, but 

mostly earlier in the evening. Mr. Harvath stated that unfortunately, due to low 

ridership, the 10:20 p.m. route will be cut, but the 9:20 p.m. route will remain. After 

some discussion, it became apparent that Mr. Paredes would qualify for a courtesy card 

and other fare discounts because of his disability. Mr. Paredes stated that he could not 

afford to pay for a doctor’s evaluation and purchases his fares as he boards. Mr. 

24

Paredes’ contact information was taken, and he was told that someone would be 

contacting him personally to make sure he obtains all of the discounts for which he is 

eligible. He was also assured that he would be provided the support he needs to fill out 

applications and obtain his discount cards. 

Roland of MV Transportation asked Mr. Harvath to go over all proposed changes 

to MV service routes. The following information was provided for MV service changes: 

Line 1: No changes 

Line 2: No changes to express 

Line 8: Service during rush hour only. 6:19 a.m., Saturday and Sunday 

service eliminated. 

Line 13: Will serve Del Rey Oaks on Saturday and Sunday to compensate for 

no service on Line 8. 

Lines 9: No changes to MV service. 

Line 10: No changes to MV service. 

Line 24: City of Carmel wants Line 24 to serve downtown Carmel. Service loop 

into neighborhood in Carmel Valley eliminated due to low/no ridership. 

No service into The Barnyard. 

Line 7: Eliminate service. 

Line 4: Extend to CHOMP. 

Line 16: No changes to MV service. Will serve Wal-Mart after 10:00 a.m. 

Line 22: Service eliminated for Off-Season. Will operate from Memorial Day to 

Labor Day. 

Line 27: Will most likely keep service with MV Transportation and will continue 

on weekdays only. 

Line 25: Small buses will continue to serve this line. CSUMB has expressed 

interest in larger buses, but may not be able to afford the cost 

differential compared to the minibuses. 

Trolleys: Carmel grant funding has run out. Salinas grant funding runs out in 

April. Pacific Grove has funding to run for another year. Monterey is 

still funded. 

Line 78: Service depends on Federal funding. 

On Call: Possibly adding Soledad in summer of 2012. 

Roland requested that On Call Service to Forest and Beach be highlighted on 

MST map as it is designated for Cardoza and Crescent. 

Cristy Sugabo asked why On Call Service was not available between Gonzales, 

Greenfield and King City. Mr. Harvath stated that with the large service area, taking 

service to King City, for instance, would mean that the buses were out of the main 

service area for long periods of time. Currently, funding is not available to expand 

service. 

Roland asked if MST could provide service to the Soledad Prison. Mr. Harvath 

stated that Mr. Gallant has met with officials, but to date possibility of service is only 

25

eing discussed. Roland also asked if service in Marina OnCall will be extended 

beyond Gigling Rd. Mr. Harvath stated that the further MST goes out of the core area, 

primary service would necessarily be reduced. 

Miriam Gutierrez asked if the new Hartnell East Campus in the Alisal District 

would be able to take part in the Free Fare Zone. Mr. Harvath stated that the current 

funding from Hartnell College pays only for free fares at the Alisal and Homestead bus 

stops. In order to offer this option, Hartnell College would have to pay more to cover the 

costs. Miriam and Roland informed Mr. Harvath that buses were also picking up free 

fares at College Drive, which is not a designated bus stop for free fares. Mr. Harvath 

will research this. 

4. ADJOURNMENT 

There being no further business, Mr. Harvath adjourned the meeting at 1:13 p.m. 

26

27 




Sunset Center Chapman Room 

San Carlos St. and 9 th Ave., Carmel, CA 93921 


6:00 p.m. 


Hunter Harvath called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Sunset Center 

Chapman Room. 



Sally Cota Customer Service Representative 

Carl Sedoryk General Manager/CEO 

Public: Patricia Colgrove MST Rider 

Jen Dunn MST Rider 

Chris Harrold Carmel Valley Resident 

Edeen Hill MST Rider 

Kim Mitchell MST Rider 

Jacqueline Dupree MST Rider 



Mr. Harvath introduced himself and MST staff, welcoming all members of the 

public. Mr. Harvath gave a PowerPoint presentation, focusing on all proposed service 

changes to the Carmel area. He explained that only 30% of MST’s operating costs are 

covered by passenger fares with the other 70% coming from state and federal funding. 

Anticipated reductions of $600,000 to $1.3 Million in funding from the State of California 

and the Federal Government require MST to reduce bus service to maintain a balanced 

budget. Mr. Harvath stated that the discounted fares on Sundays and Holidays would 

now only be offered to those aged 65 and older, 18 and under, Medicare card holders, 

active military, and those with disabilities. Mr. Harvath took comments and questions 

from members of the public, assisting them individually as necessary. 

Mr. Harvath mentioned that the City of Carmel has requested that Line 24 

Carmel Valley-Grapevine Express, serve downtown Carmel as well as the Carmel 

Valley corridor.


Jen Dunn stated that ridership on Line 4 is low. As a way to increase ridership 

and provide a service to elderly MST riders who are members of the Carmel 

Foundation, she suggested moving the bus stop at Monte Verde to Lincoln. Monte 

Verde is very steep and elderly riders have stopped taking lunch at the Foundation 

because it is too difficult to walk up Monte Verde for transportation. Since there is no 

parking at the Carmel Foundation, if this change was made, they could park at the 

Crossroads and catch the bus on Lincoln. She suggested that the route run from Monte 

Verde to 9 th Avenue, taking Lincoln to 8 th and then back to Monte Verde. Melissa 

McKenzie is the contact at the Foundation. 

Ms. Dunn requested that MST drivers stop before pulling in to the Monterey 

Transit Center to change the destination signage. She also requested that they stop 

putting the “Out of Service” signs on before entering the transit center. 

Ms. Dunn mentioned that the bus shelter at Devendorf Park be checked because 

the City of Carmel has secured a trash can in the sheltered area designated for 

wheelchairs. This causes those in wheelchairs to have to wait in the rain. She 

mentioned that the current schedule makes it difficult to take the bus to MST Board 

meetings. 

Patricia Colgrove asked why some drivers write down passenger info as well as 

recording the info electronically. Mr. Harvath stated that MV Transportation operates 

the mini buses and requires both manual and electronic rider tallies. She requested 

early service on Line 4 to CHOMP. 

Edeen Hill stated that she takes the bus into Carmel Rancho every morning to do 

her banking before opening her store in downtown Carmel at 10:00 a.m. With the 

elimination of service between 9:08 a.m. and 10:08 a.m. she will not be able to keep her 

schedule. She requests that MST consider keeping service during this hour. Mr. 

Harvath stated that he will work with staff to see if this request can be accommodated. 

Ms. Dunn stated that tourists sit in the bus shelter at the Crossroads at Rio Rd. 

waiting for a bus. She requests signage stating service times for this stop, and directing 

them to the kiosk across the street. 

Ms. Colgrove stated that the mini buses have terrible suspension. 

Ms. Dunn stated that she is pleased that service from Carmel to CHOMP will be 

increased to seven days per week instead of five. Tourists use Line 4 and 24 to get 

from the park to Carmel Mission, but she is never able to tell them what time the bus 

picks up for the Mission. She requests info in the Rider’s Guide specific to service to 

Carmel Mission. 

28

Ms. Hill states that she used to travel to Del Monte Center and Monterey on Line 

5 in the evening, but she is no longer going out because it is dark and late at Carmel 

Rancho and she frequently sits alone at the bus stop. She stated that no one uses the 

late night service at Carmel Rancho to Carmel. The current route has added almost an 

hour to the trip since Line 11 was eliminated. She suggested going down Carpenter to 

serve those who live further away from Ocean Avenue. Ms. Dunn suggested making a 

right on Carpenter down to Devendorf Park, taking 6 th Street to a right on Junipero, 

making a left on Ocean Avenue back up to the highway, then into Carmel Rancho. 

Ms. Mitchell is very disappointed that Line 11 has been eliminated. She stated 

that many buses run empty and riders are dropped off in crime-ridden areas. She 

suggested keeping track of ridership before continuing service. Mr. Harvath displayed 

ridership data and stated that MST uses ridership data extensively to determine route 

changes. 

The public generally agreed that Line 11 should be reinstated throughout the day 

instead of only during peak periods. 

Ms. Dunn stated that if Line 8 is reduced, the public will not be able to ride public 

transit to attend MST Board meetings. Mr. Sedoryk stated that staff will re-examine this 

issue. 

Mr. Harvath stated that Lines 9 and 10 is a lifeline service for hospitality workers. 

Line 7 will be eliminated because Line 4 will provide service to CHOMP. This change 

will eliminate duplication of service. 

Ms. Dunn stated that Lines 91, 92, and 93 are viewed by bus drivers as a Pacific 

Meadows service. They will not stop at 6 th and Mission even if there are riders waiting 

at the stop. 

Ms. Dupree works late and must walk all the way up Ocean for bus service. She 

stated that Line 11 would pick her up at the bottom of Ocean and drop her off at 

Carpenter which is closer to her home. Mr. Harvath stated that suggested changes to 

late night service on Line 5 should accommodate her. She asked if Line 13 would still 

serve Ryan Ranch. Mr. Harvath stated that the 6:19 a.m. service will be eliminated, but 

there are no changes to the afternoon route. On Saturday and Sunday, there will be no 

service into Ryan Ranch, but will instead serve Del Rey Oaks and Garden Rd. 

Members of the public expressed concern about homeless people who loiter at 

Monterey Transit Center and at the bus stop at Del Monte Center. Mr. Sedoryk stated 

that Monterey Transit Center is a city park and that MST is not allowed to employ 

security at this location. They request that the bus stop locations are evaluated for 

safety. Mr. Harvath stated that he will be meeting with City of Monterey Police 

Department on February 8 and will discuss this issue with them. Concern was also 

expressed regarding homeless riders who loiter day and night on MST buses. 

29

Ms. Dunn stated that Del Monte Center security does not remove the chain at 

their entrance early in the morning. This causes the bus to be late. 

Ms. Mitchell stated that bus drivers often leave early. Mr. Harvath stated that this 

is never acceptable and encouraged that complaints be submitted so it can be taken 

care of. 

Ms. Dunn requested better signage for Line 24 on Rio Road, at 6 th and Mission, 

and at the bus stops on Lighthouse and Fountain Avenues. She also requested a 

bench at the stop at Fountain. 

Ms. Mitchell asked why small buses do not serve areas with low ridership. Mr. 

Harvath stated that all MST buses are in service and there are no extra small buses 

available. 

Ms. Colgrove stated that MST bus drivers complain about driving 12 hours per 

day. She also asked why she must pay an extra .50 cents on Line 22 to Big Sur even 

though she has a bus pass. Mr. Harvath stated that some of the longer routes have 

been designated as regional routes. 

Ms. Dupree requests that Line 11 be reinstated. 

Mr. Sedoryk elaborated on state and federal funding for transit and stated that 

Monterey County does not have a sales tax measure to offset reduced government 

funding. 



30


Oldemeyer Center Blackhorse Room 

986 Hilby Avenue, Seaside, CA 93955 


6:00 p.m. 


31 



Hunter Harvath called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. in the Oldemeyer Center 

Blackhorse Room. 



Miriam Gutierrez Customer Service Representative 

Carl Sedoryk General Manager/CEO 

Public: Dora Trujillo MST Rider 

Alex Almazon MST Rider 

Jim Fink MST Rider 

Alvin Edwards Seaside Council Member and MST Board Member 



Mr. Harvath introduced himself, welcoming all members of the public. With only 

two members of the public present, Mr. Harvath spoke individually to each, highlighting 

specific PowerPoint slides that related to service reductions on routes used by those 

present. He explained that anticipated reductions of $600,000 to $1.3 Million in funding 

from the State of California and the Federal Government require MST to reduce bus 

service to maintain a balanced budget, and that reductions were being made to all MST 

service areas. Mr. Harvath stated that the discounted fares on Sundays and Holidays 

would now only be offered to those aged 65 and older, 18 and under, Medicare card 

holders, active military, and those with disabilities. 


Ms. Trujillo stated that she is a regular customer of MST and that she takes both 

Lines 4 and 24 regularly. She is pleased that Line 24 will now be serving downtown 

Carmel as she commutes from Seaside to Carmel and Carmel Valley daily. She 

requested a bench at the bus stop in front of the Hacienda on Carmel Valley Road.

Ms. Trujillo stated that she occasionally rides Line 55 and that she is pleased 

there will be no changes. She is disappointed that Line 11 has been eliminated. She 

stated that she must pay $20 for a taxi every Sunday to ride from Monterey to Seaside 

in the late evening because of service reductions on Lines 9 and 10. She requested 

that a 9:15 p.m. service be added to Line 9 or Line 10 on Sunday evening. She also 

stated that the bus driver on Line 9 often honks for the Line 24 bus to pick her up, but it 

often passes her by. 

Ms. Trujillo asked if MST makes their decisions about service reductions based 

on ridership data. Mr. Harvath stated that ridership data is extensively used in making 

decisions and explained PowerPoint slides that detailed ridership data. He stated that 

staff will make an effort to add a late night route on Sundays. 

Ms. Trujillo stated that she liked the route changes on Lines 8 and 16. She 

stated that she has missed the Line 4 bus because the driver was early and did not wait 

for her. She did call MST when this happened and they sent someone to pick her up. 

Mr. Harvath apologized, stating that it is not acceptable for buses to leave early or 

ignore customers. He encouraged her to call MST Customer Service whenever she has 

a problem like this. 

Mr. Edwards asked if complaints made by citizens at a recent MST Board 

meeting regarding previous route changes have been taken care of. Mr. Harvath stated 

that as of Saturday, most problems with these routes have been addressed, especially 

connection issues with Pacific Grove and Carmel Valley buses. 

Mr. Fink arrived at 6:34 p.m. after other members of the public had left. He 

presented Mr. Harvath with a copy of an email detailing his comments and suggestions. 

He stated that he will attend the MST Public Hearing on Monday, February 13, and 

asked Mr. Harvath to review his comments prior to the meeting. He stated that he firmly 

believes that fare increases should be considered over service reductions. He prefers 

alternative #1 to alternative #2 on proposed changes to Lines 1 and 2. 

Mr. Fink requested that Line 43 be retained seven (7) days per week, because 

he needs the route to attend church at St. Ansgar’s. Mr. Harvath stated that ridership is 

too low to justify this route on Sunday. Mr. Fink requested a flag drop in front of St. 

Ansgar’s Lutheran Church on San Joaquin Street in Salinas. 

Mr. Fink requested staff look into route discrepancies on Line 7. Mr. Harvath 

stated that he is aware that there are some problems with the route and will have staff 

research the problem. 

Mr. Fink requested that the MST Rider’s Guides include “interline” information in 

the right hand margins. Sacramento Regional Transit’s Rider’s Guides are printed with 

this information and it is very helpful. Mr. Harvath will check the guides and consider 

adding this information. 

32



33


34


Prunedale Library Community Room 

17822 Moro Rd., Prunedale, CA 93907 


6:00 p.m. 


35 



Staff arrived at 5:30 p.m. and waited until 6:35 p.m. for members of the public to 

arrive. 



Sally Cota Customer Service Representative 


Public: None. 



There being no members of the public present, the presentation was not 

delivered. 

None. 



There being no further business, Mr. Harvath adjourned the meeting at 6:35 p.m.


36


From: Zoé Shoats, Marketing Analyst 

Subject: 2011 Community Stakeholder Survey 


Receive report on the 2011 Community Stakeholder Survey. 


None. 


37 



MST surveys stakeholders annually in its service area to gauge knowledge of and 

opinions regarding this agency. 

DISCUSSION: 

In January 2012, approximately 471 surveys were distributed to community 

stakeholders including elected officials, governmental agencies, social service 

organizations, private citizens, and representatives from private industries such as 

hospitality, agriculture and construction. A total of 35 surveys were returned and yielded 

the following highlights: 

• Familiarity with MST’s services: 

Respondents were most familiar with MST’s regular fixed route service and Line 24 

Carmel Valley Grapevine Express, with the MST Trolley in Monterey ranking third and 

MST On Call in Gonzales ranking fourth most familiar. Of MST’s special event services, 

respondents were most familiar with service to First Night Monterey and Monterey 

County Fair. Service to events at Laguna Seca, the Monterey Jazz Festival, Monterey 

Bay Blues Festival, and the California International Airshow Salinas were notable. Only 

four respondents were familiar with mobility programs including RIDES ADA Paratransit. 

• When rating MST’s attributes from “excellent” to “very poor,” the following areas were 

rated on a scale of one to five (with one as very poor and five as excellent) as follows: 

Safety of service 4.3 

Helpfulness of staff 4.3 

Staff knowledge 4.2 

Staff professionalism 4.2

Overall impression of MST’s administration 4.2 

Overall impression of MST’s services 4.1 

Quality of service 4.1 

Value of service 4.1 

MST’s representation of itself in the community 4.0 

Perceived value of transit in the community 3.7 

Convenience of service 3.6 

• When ranking MST’s priorities “adding frequency to existing routes” ranked highest 

with “adding new routes” second and “add capacity to existing routes” third. 

• When asked how to meet local transportation needs, the following alternatives were 

rated on a scale of one to five (with one as “least effective” and five as “most effective”) 

as follows: 

Buses 4.4 

Improved roads 4.2 

More vanpools/carpool incentives 3.9 

More dedicated bike lanes 3.8 

Bus rapid transit 3.7 

Rail 3.5 

New roads 3.0 

• When asked if respondents would support a “new local sales tax dedicated to funding 

public transit and transportation services,” 73% of respondents said they would support 

it while 27% said they would not. As a follow-up question, individuals who would support 

the new tax were asked what percentage would be appropriate. Thirty percent of 

respondents would support a ¼ percent increase, 35% would support a 1/8 percentage 

increase, 22% would support a 1/10 percent increase, and 13% were undecided. 

Attachment: 2011 Community Stakeholder Survey 

38

39 

ATTACHMENT 1 

2011 COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER SURVEY RESULTS 

(35 Responses) 

1. Which of MST’s services are you familiar with? 

(22) Regular fixed-route buses Mobility Programs: 

(3) Line 12 & 14 Naval Postgraduate School (4) MST RIDES ADA Paratransit 

(7) Line 23 Salinas - King City (0) Travel Training 

(12) Line 24 Carmel Valley Grapevine Express (4) Senior / Disabled Taxi Vouchers 

(9) Line 55 Monterey - San Jose Express (4) Lines 91 – 93 Carmel Senior Shuttle 

(5) Lines 68 - 79 Presidio of Monterey 

(5) Lines 82 & 83 Fort Hunter Liggett 

Special Event Services: 

MST Trolley: (9) Laguna Seca 

(7) Carmel-by-the-Sea Trolley (7) California International Airshow Salinas 

(2) CSUMB Otter Trolley (12) First Night Monterey 

(9) Monterey Trolley (9) Monterey Jazz Festival 

(5) Pacific Grove Trolley (7) Monterey Bay Blues Festival 

(2) Salinas Trolley (12) Monterey County Fair 

(1) Salinas Holiday Parade of Lights 

MST On Call: (1) Sand City West End Celebration 

(1) Marina 

(8) Gonzales 

(6) Greenfield 

(2) King City 

2. What do you believe to be MST’s annual ridership? 

(5) Less than 1 million (10) 1 million - 2 million (3) 2 million – 3 million 

(1) 3 million – 4 million (7) 4 million – 5 million (4) Over 5 million 

3. Please rate the following: 

Excellent 

5 

Good 

4 

Fair 

3 

Poor 

2 

Very 

Poor 

1 

Average 

Overall impression of MST’s services 9 17 6 0 0 4.1 

Convenience of service 4 13 12 2 0 3.6 

Quality of service 4 15 5 1 0 4.1

Safety of service 13 14 4 0 0 4.3 

Value of service 14 8 6 2 0 4.1 

Overall impression of MST’s administration 13 11 8 0 0 4.2 

Helpfulness of staff 9 14 6 2 0 4.3 

Staff knowledge 13 12 3 2 0 4.2 

Staff professionalism 13 12 5 1 0 4.2 

MST’s representation of itself in the community 11 10 9 0 1 4.0 

Perceived value of transit in the community 5 16 7 2 1 3.7 

4. Do you or your employees use MST? Yes (20) No (13) 

5. Are you aware of the tax incentives provided to employers who provide transit passes to their 

employees? Yes (18) No (13) 

If you would like to learn more, please provide your contact information. 

(no contact information given) 

6. What do you believe should be MST’s highest priorities? 

(Please rank in order of importance) 

(2) Add new routes* (3) More special event shuttles 

(6) Add frequency to existing routes* (3) Upgrade vehicles 

(2) Add capacity to existing routes* (6) Improve customer service 

(6) Cut routes* (7) Improve public image of MST 

(1) Other 

*Where / What? 

Improve cost & also availability of reduced cost passes. We used to sell them to our staff 

via payroll deduction, but had to stop. Some of our staff were reselling them. Clearly 

there’s a community need for better pricing on monthly passes & better access 

availability to purchase them. 

Carmel Valley – later. 

Service between South Salinas & Monterey. 

To / from CSUMB. 

Redesign routes to meet consumer needs 

Carmel Valley / Laureles Grade 

40

7. In order to meet local transportation needs in Monterey County, please rate the following 

alternatives: 

Most 

Effective 

5 

41 

4 

3 

2 

Least 

Effective 

1 

Average 

Score 

Rail 13 6 3 6 5 3.5 

Buses 17 12 2 1 0 4.4 

New roads 7 6 7 7 6 3.0 

Improved roads 13 16 4 0 1 4.2 

More dedicated bike lanes 12 9 5 4 2 3.8 

More vanpools / incentive for carpoolers 

Bus Rapid Transit (Road and traffic 

7 15 9 0 0 3.9 

signal improvements that provide faster 

bus service) 

8 14 7 2 2 3.7 

Comments: 

We need light rail from Monterey to Bay Area (San Jose). 

I am not in favor of cutting route 4 in Carmel. 

Consumers still depend on autos. 

8. Community sector that you represent: 

(9) Private Citizen (1) Private industry (0) Agribusiness 

(14) Government (1) Elected official (5) Education 

(4) Hospitality (1) Health / Social services (2) Construction/Developer 

(2) Other 

Organization (optional): 

TAMC 

CSUMB 

9. While Monterey County does not currently have local sales taxes for transit/transportation, 

nearly 90% of the population of the state of California lives in counties that do have such local 

sales taxes. In that regard, would you support a new local sales tax for Monterey County that 

would be dedicated to funding public transit for the community at large including transportation 

services for the elderly and disabled? Yes (24) No (9) 

If yes, what percentage of sales tax would be appropriate? 

1/4 percent (7) 1/8 percent (8) 1/10 percent (5) Undecided (3)


42


43 



From: Michael Hernandez, Assistant General Manager/COO 

Subject: Purchase One Engine Replacement 

RECOMMENDATIONS: 

Authorize the purchase of one (1) replacement engine for MST’s heavy-duty 

diesel fleet from Valley Power Systems. 


$30,742.32. Funding is available in MST’s capital budget. 


Your Board approves all purchases that exceed $25,000. 

DISCUSSION: 

MST operates 80 heavy-duty clean diesel coaches. The bulk of the fleet (76 

buses) are Gillig coaches, the remaining four are newer MCI coaches. MST has 29 

buses, or 36% of the fleet, that are currently eligible for retirement under FTA 

requirements to operate heavy-duty buses for 12 years or 500,000 miles. 

A replacement engine is required for coach 1124, a model year 2003 Gillig with 

approximately 338,000 miles. Coach 1124 experienced a catastrophic gear train failure 

damaging the engine. This is the second engine failure within several weeks. When 

engines fail MST purchases a “rebuilt” engine from either the engine manufacturer or an 

after market distributer. 

Given the overall age of our fleet with 29 coaches in excess of 500,000 miles, it 

is anticipated that additional engine replacements may be required in the coming year. 

The replacement of this engine is essential in order for MST to meet its obligations for 

transit service. 

MST has applied for the Federal Transit Administrations “State of Good Repair” 

grant to replace the 29 coaches eligible for retirement; however, we are in a nationwide 

competition with other transit properties for these limited funds.



45 



Subject: Attitude and Awareness (Non-Rider) & On-Board Passenger Surveys 


Receive presentation by Majic Consulting staff on the 2011 MST Attitude and 

Awareness (Non-Rider) Survey and the 2011 MST On-Board Passenger Survey. 


None. 


These surveys measure customer satisfaction, one of MST’s four key business 

Drivers, and are consistent with the customer and market focus component of MST’s 

business model. 

DISCUSSION: 

Public transit agencies regularly conduct passenger and non-passenger surveys 

to gauge opinions of customers and to find out information about those individuals who 

do not currently take public transit. This data can then be used to improve services for 

existing passengers as well as to increase ridership by marketing MST more effectively 

to non-riders. The last comprehensive passenger and non-passenger surveys were 

conducted in the fall of 2009. 

At the October 10, 2011 meeting, your Board approved a contract with Majic 

Consulting to conduct the 2011 MST Attitude and Awareness Survey of non-riders and 

the 2011 MST On-Board Passenger Survey. During November and December 2011, 

376 randomly selected non-passengers participated in a telephone survey (94 in 

Spanish). Also, 567 passengers (98 in Spanish) were interviewed aboard MST buses 

and at transit facilities. The conclusions of the surveys are summarized in an 

attachment. For a more detailed review of the survey results, Belynda Johnson, 

Managing Director of Majic Consulting, will report to your Board the findings and 

highlights of this project.

Attachment: Attitude and Awareness (Non-Rider) and 2011 On-Board Passenger 

Survey Results 

46

ONBOARD RIDER SURVEY RESULTS 

M S T O n b o a r d R i d e r S u r v e y 

M O N T E R E Y - S A L I N A S T R A N S I T 

Overall, the average survey respondent was an employed, English speaking white female, 18-24 years of age, 

who has lived in Monterey County for more than 10 years and has some college education. She rents a 

residence in Seaside or Marina and has a household income of less than $10,000. She has either a valid 

driver’s license or owns a motor vehicle, but not both. 

The average respondent has been using MST for less than one (1) year, but rides the service five (5) or more 

times per week because she did not have a car available. Both the economic downturn and the September 17 th 

service reductions did not affect the average rider’s use of the service. The average rider finds the service to 

be a value with respect to her distance traveled and the cost of travel. 

The average survey respondent typically pays her MST bus fare using cash and only uses one bus for the 

purpose of her trip, which was either going to or coming from work. The average respondent has access to 

the internet at home, but has not visited the MST website within the past 60 days. The average respondent 

indicates she would ride more often if MST offered more frequent service. 

Driver Safety was rated the highest of all of MST’s listed attributes. The average respondent agrees that the new 

fareboxes are more convenient and also speed-up boarding time. The statement that public transit is good for the 

community was the statement that resonates the most with the average respondent. 

In spite of frequently using cash to pare for her bus fare, the average respondent is aware that she can 

purchase an MST bus pass online. She was also familiar with the fare price prior to boarding the bus. The 

average respondent typically learned about MST service announcements on the bus and is most likely to plan 

her trip on MST by using the MST Bus Riders Guide, even though she is aware that she can plan her bus trip 

by using Google Transit on MST’s website. The Monterey Trolley service is the MST service that the average 

respondent is most familiar with. 

Overall, the average MST respondent is not interested in having MST serve new locations. However, the 

location that received the most interest as a potential new location for MST to serve is Downtown Santa 

Cruz. 

Page | 5

COMMUNITY SURVEY RESULTS 

M S T C o m m u n i t y S u r v e y 

M O N T E R E Y - S A L I N A S T R A N S I T 

Overall, the average community survey respondent was an English speaking white female over the age of 65, 

with a college degree, who has lived in Monterey County for more than 10 years. She lives in Salinas in a 

household where there are more than two licensed drivers and has a household income of more than 

$100,000 per year. 

While the average community survey respondent has access to the internet at home, she has not visited MST’s 

website. Television is the average community survey respondent’s favorite form of media and she engages in it 

for fewer than four hours a day. 

The average community survey respondent estimated that the MST daily bus fare is $2.00. Additionally, the 

average community survey respondent believed that MST’s annual ridership was fewer than one (1) million 

passengers per year. Out of all of MST’s services, the average community survey respondent was most familiar 

with MST Local Bus Routes. 

The economic downturn had not affected the average community survey respondent’s decision to ride the 

bus. The average community survey respondent’s reason for not riding the bus was because she needed her car 

during the day. Closer bus stops was the most common request and most important service improvement 

according to the average community survey respondent. 

According to the average community survey respondent, extending the commuter rail from San Jose to Salinas and 

increase bus service for residents had virtually equal results in regard to future traffic problems. Additionally, she 

felt that building more roads was the worst solution to dealing with future traffic problems. The average 

community survey respondent was familiar with MST’s local routes and felt that MST provided mobility for both 

low-income residents and persons with disabilities/seniors. However, she did not feel that MST improved parking 

availability or reduced traffic congestion. 

Page | 1

49 



MONTEREY-SALINAS TRANSIT BOARD OF DIRECTORS 

FINANCE COMMITTEE MINUTES 


9:00 a.m. 


Present: Fernando Armenta County of Monterey 

Frank O’Connell City of Marina 

Karen Sharp City of Carmel-by-the-Sea 

Susan Kleber City of King City 

Patricia Stephens City of Soledad 

Staff: Carl Sedoryk General Manager/CEO 

Angela Dawson Accountant 

Hunter Harvath Asst. General Manager/Finance & Administration 


Deanna Smith Executive Administrative Assistant/Deputy Secretary 

Kathy Williams Accounting and Budget Manager 

Kelly Halcon Director of Human Resources & Risk Management 

Michelle Overmeyer Grants Analyst 

Other: Dave Laredo General Counsel/De Lay and Laredo 

1. Call to Order. 

Chair Armenta called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. and roll call was taken. 

2. Public comment on matters not on the agenda. 

None. 

3. Review of FY2012 Mid Year Operating Results and recommend budget 

adjustments. 

Kathy Williams presented the operating results covering the period of July 1, 

2011 through December 31, 2011. She reminded the committee that while MST is over 

budget on revenue for this period, MST reports on accrual basis; therefore, not all cash 

has been received to date. She highlighted that MST’s expenses are over budget with 

labor costs contained. Marketing expenses are over budget by $30,000 due to studies 

and surveys, including consulting fees. Services are also over budget, while fuel costs

are under budget. Insurance is over budget, in part because CalTIP deductibles are 

difficult to project. The final YTD Actual Operating Results places MST over budget by 

$788,000. She believes that much of this will be balanced by the effects of the 

proposed April 2012 service reductions. 

Director Stephens arrived at 9:08 a.m. 

Director Armenta asked for more explanation on the revenue and expense 

overages. Ms. Williams explained that, fortunately, the diesel sales tax revenue has 

exceeded budget expectations. Mr. Sedoryk explained that while diesel tax revenue 

has previously been budgeted annually, revenue expectations are now reported 

quarterly. This change makes it difficult to accurately budget on an annual basis. If 

total revenue from this source remains over budget, the surplus could be used for 

capital investments or toward establishing a reserve fund. Additionally, expenses have 

been incurred because of required bus maintenance resulting from approximately 30% 

of the MST fleet either at or overdue for replacement. 

Director O’Connor asked why the YTD totals on page 2 for overtime are not 

stated. Mr. Harvath explained that overtime is built in to the totals for wages as a 

weighted average including overtime and training salary expenses. 

Director Kleber arrived at 9:14 a.m. 

4. Review of Capital Budget and Funding Availability. 

Ms. Williams stated that while MST still has $600,000 in its Capital Budget, there 

really are no funds for bus replacement or major capital expenses. Most of the budget 

is required for safety-related needs, and all revenue is being used to support essential 

facility-related operations. There remains over $2 million dollars in defined project 

needs because of budget shortfalls which does not include deferred bus purchases. 

Grants remain the primary resource for all bus purchases. Mr. Sedoryk stated that the 

capital funds are in effect the only reserve fund MST currently has. 

Director Armenta asked what the “bus sinking fund” was. Mr. Sedoryk stated that 

this is a fund designed to allocate funds for the replacement of MST large buses. Mr. 

Harvath stated that MST has applied for federal grants for bus replacement, but have 

been unsuccessful so far. With federal earmarks now forbidden, federal funding for this 

purpose is very difficult to obtain. 

5. Status of cash flow. 

Mr. Harvath stated that MST is basically floating the federal government $2.5 

million dollars in allocated funding. This federal funding represents 35% of MST’s 

annual budget, and the funding delays have required MST to take no-interest loans from 

TAMC to make payroll. He stated that the Board must make some tough decisions 

about MST’s levels of service moving forward, as he believes the situation in 

Washington, DC, is expected to worsen this year. He stated that 90% of the state’s 

50

population live in counties that have a sales tax measure that directly support public 

transportation. Monterey County is in the 10% without any direct local funding from its 

constituents. 

6. Discuss need/desirability of a reserve policy. 

Mr. Sedoryk stated that with the formation of the Monterey-Salinas Transit 

District, we are now able to hold funds in reserve. He encouraged the Board to discuss 

a policy for establishing a reserve fund and for setting an acceptable amount of 

reserves. 

Director Stephens asked if a 3 month reserve was still an established industry 

standard. Mr. Sedoryk stated that other districts have anywhere from 15% to 30% of 

their operating budget set aside for reserves. Santa Cruz Metro holds a 6 month 

reserve. A 3 month reserve fund for MST would equate to approximately $7 million 

dollars. He reminded the Board that MST needs to fund a capital budget at the same 

time. 

Director Sharp agreed that a 3 month reserve is a good idea. Mr. Sedoryk 

suggested that the Board establish the policy and reserve amount prior to next year’s 

fiscal budget process. 

Director Stephens stated that, unfortunately, the public will probably not be 

supportive of a sales tax measure until they “feel the pain” of reduced transportation 

service. 

Director Armenta asked when the Finance Committee will meet again. Mr. 

Harvath stated that the Finance Committee will meet again in May and the FY 2013 

proposed budget will be presented to the Board for approval in June. Mr. Sedoryk also 

stated that it will be time to work on a new Strategic Plan in January of 2013. 

Director Kleber suggested a policy that required MST to set aside one month of 

reserves each year for three years to reach the 3 month reserve goal without being 

unrealistic. Mr. Sedoryk thought this was an excellent suggestion. Director Armenta 

stated that he supported the concept of accepting “pain” now as opposed to delaying it. 

7. Review FY 2012/13 budget schedule and assumptions. 

Mr. Harvath suggested adding reserves to budget expectations and reminded the 

Board that federal law prohibits MST from cutting services to its RIDES program. He 

stated that local gas tax revenue seems to be ticking upward. 

8. Adjourn. 

There being no further business, Chair Armenta adjourned the meeting at 9:49a.m. 

51


53 



From: Hunter Harvath, Assistant General Manager – Finance & Administration 

Subject: Accessible Taxis Distribution Policy 


1. Adopt policy for distributing accessible taxi vehicles purchased by MST into local 

taxi fleet operations. 

2. Authorize General Manager/CEO to implement accessible taxi cab program and 

execute lease agreements with successful applicants who qualify for receipt of 

vehicles. 


Potential lease revenues of $9,000 per vehicle over 5 years. 


Your board is responsible for approving policies that ensure proper utilization of 

MST assets in compliance with state and federal regulations. 

DISCUSSION: 

In late 2009, MST received a federal New Freedoms grant in the amount of 

$207,360 to purchase wheelchair accessible taxis. Among the goals of the New 

Freedoms program is to assist the mobility needs of seniors and persons with 

disabilities who do not qualify for MST’s RIDES paratransit program, which is an 

existing federal mandate under the Americans with Disabilities Act. New Freedoms 

funds can also support programs (such as same day service) that exceed ADA 

requirements for the benefit of MST’s existing RIDES customers. Subsequently, in the 

spring of 2011, MST received additional federal New Freedoms grant funds in the 

amount of $250,000 to purchase additional wheelchair accessible taxis. While the grant 

funds cover 80% of the cost of the vehicle purchases, MST has pledged 20% of its local 

capital dollars to purchase these vehicles. In October 2011, your Board approved the 

purchase of the first three accessible taxi vehicles, which are specially customized 

Dodge minivans. Now that MST has worked through some procurement issues with 

Caltrans, which administers these federal New Freedoms grant funds on behalf of small 

urban and rural transit agencies like MST, the first three of these accessible taxi 

minivans have been delivered and are ready to be deployed into service.

In coordination with rules and regulations of the federal New Freedoms program, 

staff is proposing for your Board’s consideration the following policy that will govern the 

development of procedures through which these vehicles can be made available fairly 

and equitably to local taxi providers to offer same day transportation services to elderly 

and disabled customers, some of whom may need a wheelchair accessible vehicle. 

Once allocated a vehicle(s), the company would sign a five-year lease contract 

with MST providing a monthly payment of $150, for a total of $9,000 over the life of the 

lease. At the end of the five-year lease period, the vehicle would revert back to MST for 

disposal at its discretion. For example, your Board could decide to sell the vehicle at 

auction, to redeploy it somehow in MST’s mobility services, offer it back to the taxi 

provider for a nominal fee, or disposed of by some other method as your Board sees fit. 

The lease contract would include certain provisions that would ensure the vehicle 

would be used in compliance with all state and federal regulations. For example, the 

taxi company would have to give disabled passengers and seniors priority to hire the 

vehicle before it could be used to carry other passengers. As such, MST would have 

contract language that requires the taxi provider to give first priority to MST emergency 

calls for accessible transportation, second priority to a holder of an MST taxi voucher 

who requires an accessible vehicle, and third priority to a member of the general public 

with a disability requiring an accessible vehicle, before responding to a member of the 

general public without a disability. The federal New Freedom grant also requires that a 

taxi company have a policy of shared-rides. And, MST would insist that the taxi 

provider participate in training on assisting customers with disabilities and special needs 

provided by MST or its designee. 

Other terms and conditions regarding maintenance would be enforced through 

the lease contract, as Caltrans requires that, as the recipient of these grant funds, MST 

is liable for the maintenance, repair and continued good condition and operability of the 

vehicle. Staff will work with MST’s legal counsel to finalize these terms and conditions 

into a lease contract document that will be made available to prospective participants in 

the accessible taxi program. 

Staff seeks Board adoption of the attached Accessible Taxicab Distribution Policy 

and authorization of the General Manager/CEO to enter into lease agreements with 

successful applicants of the Accessible Taxicab program. Once adopted by your Board, 

staff will implement a competitive process for distribution of the vehicles that will include 

the following elements with the program: 

1. MST would solicit applications from local taxi companies using the Monterey County 

Regional Taxi Authority (RTA) mailing list. Interested companies would complete 

and submit the application to MST staff for consideration. 

2. All applicant companies must be in full compliance with the RTA to be considered for 

the Taxi Lease Program, including all drivers and vehicles. 

54

3. MST staff would screen all applicants and score them according to their abilities to 

provide prompt and reliable service according to the requirements of the program. 

4. Extra consideration would be given to companies with a documented history of 

serving seniors and persons with disabilities with a user-friendly dispatch system 

and with technology that provides security and payment options. 

5. An initial lottery of qualified applicants would select up to 3 providers. The 3 vehicles 

currently on hand would be distributed such that at least one of the three is based on 

the Peninsula and another of the three is based in Salinas. 

6. If/when additional taxis are delivered to MST, a second solicitation and lottery would 

be conducted based on the number of vehicles available. Depending upon the 

number of qualified applicants, a company with a significant presence in both 

communities would be eligible to receive more than one accessible taxi, if available. 

55

PURPOSE 

DRAFT 

MST Accessible Taxicab Distribution Policy 

MST’s Accessible Taxicab Distribution Policy is designed so that vehicles can be 

made available fairly and equitably to local taxi providers to offer same day 

transportation services to elderly and disabled customers, some of whom may need a 

wheelchair accessible vehicle. 

The Accessible Taxicab Distribution Policy provides a framework for creating 

procedures to fairly and equitably allocate vehicles purchased by MST to local taxi 

providers to offer same day transportation services to elderly and disabled customers, 

some of whom may need a wheelchair accessible vehicle; ensure the vehicle would be 

used in compliance with all state and federal regulations; and, allow MST to recover an 

appropriate percentage of its local share of capital dollars to purchase of these vehicles. 

ACCESSIBLE TAXICAB DISTRIBUTION POLICY 

To promote the fair and equitable allocation of vehicles purchased by MST to 

local taxi providers to offer same day transportation services to elderly and disabled 

customers, some of whom may need a wheelchair accessible vehicle; ensure the 

vehicles used remain in compliance with all state and federal regulations; and, allow 

MST to recover an appropriate percentage of its local share of capital dollars to 

purchase of these vehicles, staff shall implement procedures and programs that require: 

1. MST solicits applications from local taxi companies using the Monterey County 

Regional Taxi Authority (RTA) mailing list. Interested companies would complete 

and submit the application to MST staff for consideration. 

2. All applicant companies be in full compliance with the RTA to be considered for 

the Taxi Lease Program, including all drivers and vehicles. 

3. MST staff screen all applicants and score them according to their abilities to 

provide prompt and reliable service according to the requirements of the 

program. 

4. Extra consideration is given to companies with a documented history of serving 

seniors and persons with disabilities with a user-friendly dispatch system and 

with technology that provides security and payment options. 

56 

ATTACHMENT 1

5. Distribution of vehicles in such a manner that at an appropriate number of 

accessible cabs are placed within the Peninsula communities and City of Salinas 

based on documented customer demand. 

6. Recovery of an appropriate percentage of MST’s local share of capital dollars for 

purchase of these vehicles allowing the successful applicant to sign a lease 

contract with MST providing monthly payments over the life of the vehicle. At the 

end of the lease period, the vehicle would revert back to MST for disposal at its 

discretion. 

7. The vehicle would be used in compliance with all state and federal regulations 

8. Depending upon the number of qualified applicants, a company with a significant 

presence in both communities would be eligible to receive more than one 

accessible taxi, if available. 

9. Development of terms and conditions regarding maintenance, repair and 

continued good condition and operability of the vehicle to be enforced through 

the lease contract, as required by grant funds. 

57


58


From: Carl Sedoryk, General Manager/CEO 

Subject: MST Board of Directors, Rotation of Officers 


59 



Adopt changes to Monterey-Salinas Transit District bylaws to promote rotation of board 

members in Board leadership positions. 


None. 


Your Board requested staff to recommend changes to the District bylaws to promote 

rotation of board members in Board leadership positions. The Monterey-Salinas Transit 

District bylaws may be amended at any regular meeting of the Board upon the 

affirmative vote of a majority of members. 

DISCUSSION: 

At the June 15, 2011 Board Meeting, Chair Armenta requested that the TAMC 

bylaws regarding Officer Term Limits be researched and considered by the MST Board 

of Directors as a template for future officer positions. At your September, 2011 Board 

meeting, your Board directed staff to propose modifications the MST District bylaws to 

promote the rotation of representation in Board leadership positions from the Peninsula, 

Salinas Valley, and from cities and county representatives. 

To achieve this outcome staff recommends the following addition to Article VI. (b) 

OFFICERS of the MST District Bylaws. 

ARTICLE VI. OFFICERS 

b. The Board shall appoint annually members to a Nominating Committee 

responsible for recommending officer appointments to the full Board. It shall be 

the responsibility of the Nominating Committee to encourage diversity among 

officers and full participation among representatives of each jurisdiction in such 

positions of leadership.

Staff believes that by placing the responsibility with the Nominating Committee 

the Board will have the ability to promote diversity of leadership on the Board, but 

also maintains the flexibility to retain leadership positions should circumstances 

dictate that to be the best course of action. 

A complete set of revised bylaws with additions denoted by underlines and 

deletions denoted by strike-through are attached. The Monterey-Salinas Transit 

District bylaws may be amended at any regular meeting of the Board upon the 

affirmative vote of a majority of members 

ATTACHMENT: Draft Bylaws with recommended revisions 

60

THE BYLAWS OF THE 

BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE 

MONTEREY SALINAS TRANSIT DISTRICT 

These Bylaws are intended to supplement Part 17 (commencing with Section 106000) to 

Division 10 of the Public Utilities Code, relating to transportation. 

These Bylaws outline the basic organization and the administration procedures used by the 

Monterey-Salinas Transit District, successor agency to the Monterey-Salinas Transit Joint 

Powers Agency, and Monterey Peninsula Transit Joint Powers Agency. When serving as the 

Public Transit Operator the Monterey-Salinas Transit District is referred to as the “District”. 

ARTICLE I. COMPOSITION OF BOARD 

The district shall be governed by a Board of Directors which shall be composed of one 

representative from each member jurisdiction. Each member of the Board of Directors shall have 

one vote. Each member jurisdiction shall appoint one regular member and one alternate member 

to the Board of Directors and shall notify the district in writing of its appointments or any change 

of representative. 

ARTICLE II. APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS 

Each member shall serve solely at the pleasure of the appointing member jurisdiction. Members 

shall be either elected officials or officers or employees of the appointing member jurisdiction. 

ARTICLE III. DISTRICT POWERS 

a. Taxes. The District may, with the concurrence of a majority of the member jurisdictions 

represented on the Board of Directors, cause to be submitted to voters of the District a 

ballot measure for the imposition of taxes in accord with the limits set by the District 

enabling Act. 

b. Fees. The District may impose and administer fees and other funding sources secured 

for transportation system operation, maintenance, and improvement, as authorized by 

law. 

c. Fares. The Board of Directors may set fares for public transit service by resolution or 

minute order. 

d. Bonds. The District may issue bonds, payable from revenues of any facility or enterprise 

to be acquired or constructed by the District, in the manner provided by the Revenue 

Bond Law of 1941 (Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 54300) of Part 1 of Division 2 

of Title 5 of the Government Code), all of the provisions of which are applicable to the 

District. 

61

ARTICLE IV. FUNDING 

The District may promulgate a plan for funding transportation projects. 

ARTICLE V. MEETINGS 

a. Regular meetings of the Board shall be held the second Monday of each month 

throughout the year commencing at the hour of 10:00am in the Monterey-Salinas Transit, 

Thomas D. Albert Division Conference Room at One Ryan Ranch Road, Monterey, 

California 93940. Regular meetings may also be held on other days, at other times, and 

places as the business of the Monterey-Salinas Transit District (“District”) requires. 

Unless otherwise determined, meetings shall be held in the Monterey-Salinas Transit, 

Thomas D. Albert Division at One Ryan Ranch Road, Monterey, California 93940. 

b. District meetings are open to the public and are conducted according to the Ralph M. 

Brown Act (Govt. Code Section 54950 et seq.) and Roberts Rules of Order. Time will be 

allotted at each meeting for the public to present their views to the District on 

transportation items, as set forth in Govt. Code Section 54954.3. Public presentations on 

transportation matters not on the District’s agenda are limited to three minutes each, 

unless extended at the discretion of the Chair. The Chair may establish reasonable 

limitations on the time allotted for public presentations on any District agenda item. 

c. The voting members of the District may meet in closed session to discuss those matters 

authorized by state law. Only appointed District representatives and, in their absence, 

their appointed alternates may attend Closed Sessions. Ex-officio members shall not be 

authorized to attend Closed Sessions. 

d. The District Chair in consultation with the General Manager/CEO may cancel any 

regular meeting if there are no items presented that require the District's immediate 

attention. 

e. The District Agenda will be prepared by the District staff and will close at noon 

Wednesday nine (9) working days before the regular meeting. Any member may request 

in writing an item to appear on the agenda. The request shall be made by the agenda 

deadline and any supporting papers must be furnished by that time or be readily 

available. 

f. Agenda packets shall be distributed to District members, alternates, and ex-officio 

members. 

ARTICLE VI. OFFICERS 

a. The Board shall elect a Chair ,Vice-Chair, Secretary, Deputy Secretary, Treasurer, and 

Deputy Treasurer at the first regular meeting in July of each calendar year to serve until 

the first regular meeting in July of the next succeeding calendar year. If the positions of 

62

Chair and Vice-Chair are both vacated at any time, the elections for the remainder of the 

terms shall be held at the next regularly scheduled meeting. 

b. The Board shall appoint annually members to a Nominating Committee responsible for 

recommending officer appointments to the full Board. It shall be the responsibility of the 

Nominating Committee to encourage diversity among officers and full participation 

among representatives of each jurisdiction in such positions of leadership. 

The Nominating Committee will meet prior to the month of July of each calendar year 

and make their recommendations for Board approval at the July Board meeting. 

c. Duties of elected officers are defined as follows: 

The Chair shall preside at all regular and special meetings and shall preserve order 

and decorum and shall decide all questions of order and procedure not otherwise 

provided for in these By-Law subject to the will of the majority of the board quorum 

in attendance. The Chair shall be entitled to make or second any motion, discuss and 

present any matter as a member of the Board without having to step down from the 

Chair. The Chair may appoint committees from time to time for any purpose he or 

she deems proper for the conduct of Board business. 

The Vice-Chair shall assume all duties of the Chair in the latter’s absence from any 

meeting. 

The Secretary shall be the General Manager/CEO and keep the official minutes of all 

meetings of the Board, and shall perform such other duties as determined by the 

Board. 

The Deputy Secretary shall be a staff member and assume all duties of the Secretary in the 

latter’s absence from any meeting. 

The Treasurer shall be a staff member, and shall review and monitor the financial 

condition of the District, ensure that the Board is adequately informed of its financial 

condition, and act as the fiscal agent of the Board. 

The Deputy Treasurer shall be a staff member and assume all duties of the Treasurer in the 

latter’s absence from any meeting. 

ARTICLE VII. BOARD RESPONSIBILITIES 

a. The Board shall consider staff recommendations, adopt policies, conduct hearings, make 

appointments, and perform all other activities required via motion, resolution, or ordinance 

to further the mission and goals of the District; comply with federal, state, and local laws; 

and provide staff guidance and oversight to fulfill its fiduciary responsibilities to the 

constituencies it serves. 

63 

Formatte 

Deleted 

Formatte 

numbering 

Asian text, 

numbers, T 

Formatte 

numbering 

Formatte 

numbering 

Asian text, 

numbers, T

. Subject to the will of a majority of the Board, the Chair, or the Vice-Chair in the Board 

Chair’s absence, may establish permanent and ad hoc committees as are determined 

necessary. These committees shall act to provide advice and recommendation to the Board 

of Directors on policy matters relative, but not limited to transportation services, facilities, 

compensation and benefit programs, legislation, marketing and finances affecting the 

District. These committees shall be members of the Board of Directors as selected by the 

Chair and such other persons, including District staff and public members as selected by 

the Board. Any establishment of a committee shall specify the purpose of the committee, 

the length of time the committee shall serve and the times and methods by which the 

committees shall report to the Board. Meeting times and dates of this committee shall be 

established by a majority of the 

committee members. Written minutes of each meeting shall be maintained. 

c. Pursuant to the AB644, the enabling legislation creating the District, the Board shall: 

Adopt an annual budget; adopt an administrative code, by ordinance, which prescribes 

the powers and duties of the district officers, the method of appointment of the district 

employees, and methods, procedures, and systems of operation and management of the 

district; and cause a post audit of the financial transactions and records of the district to 

be made at least annually by a certified public accountant. 

ARTICLE VIII. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. 

The Board shall appoint a Chief Executive Officer to serve as administrative head of the District. 

a. The duties of the Chief Executive Officer subject to the discretion and control of the 

Board include: 

1. All duties and responsibilities assigned, delegated or allowed by Federal, State and 

local law, rule, statute, regulation and/or ordinance to the administrative head of a 

State transportation district. 

2. All necessary liaison activities between the District and Federal, State and local 

public agencies relating to public transportation services originating or terminating 

within the geographical boundaries of Monterey County. 

3. All necessary activities required by law to plan, organize, coordinate, direct and 

evaluate the activities of the District, including (a) the organization and 

administration of Board and committee meetings; (b) the development and 

management of the operating and capital budgets of the District; (c) the 

management of transportation-related projects; (d) the performance of contract 

negotiations, monitoring and administration. 

4. All personnel matters including the hiring, compensation, promotion, and 

disciplining of District staff, including employee termination consistent with Board 

adopted personnel policies and procedures and related labor agreements. 

64

5. All duties and activities related to procurement, construction, general 

administration, maintenance and operation of MST facilities, equipment and transit 

programs as necessary and required to carry out Board approved District policies. 

6. All necessary activities related to Federal and State legislative matters concerning 

public transportation in the District. 

7. All necessary activities required of the Secretary to the Board. 

8. Such other duties and responsibilities as may be, from time to time, assigned or 

delegated by the District Board of Directors. 

ARTICLE IX. LEGAL COUNSEL. 

The Board shall appoint its legal counsel and shall determine the duties and responsibilities of its 

legal counsel. 

ARTICLE X. QUORUM. 

No action of the Board shall be taken unless a quorum thereof is present. A majority of the 

entire voting membership of the Board shall constitute a quorum. 

ARTICLE XI. VOTING. 

a. Voice Vote. Subject to the will of a majority of the voting Board Members in attendance, 

the Chair may call for voting on a motion by voice vote without calling the roll. A 

member’s silence shall be recorded as an affirmative vote 

b. Calling the Roll. Any voting member may call for a roll call vote. 

c. Minimum vote. Except as may otherwise be required by State law and except as 

otherwise indicated in these Bylaws, no action or recommendation of the Board shall be 

valid unless a majority of a quorum of voting Board Members concur therein. 

d. Abstaining Vote. A vote to abstain is not to be construed as a vote for or against a motion. 

ARTICLE XII. STIPEND. 

The voting members and non-voting ex-officio members of the Board of Directors shall be paid 

a stipend for each MST meeting actually attended where a quorum is present. An alternate shall 

be entitled to a stipend only if the appointed member is not present at the meeting and only one 

stipend per meeting shall be paid per jurisdiction. This stipend amount shall be determined by an 

action of the Board. 

65

ARTICLE XIII. BUDGET PROCESS. 

a. For each fiscal year (July 1 to June 30), the Board shall adopt a District budget for capital 

and operating expenses, as well as capital and operating revenues. 

b. The Board shall adopt at least a preliminary budget by June 30 which shall serve as the 

tentative District budget pending adoption of a final budget. A final budget shall be 

adopted no later than August 30 of each year. 

ARTICLE XIV. RESOLUTIONS. 

Resolutions of the Board may be adopted conditionally and referred to the District Chief Executive 

Officer for drafting in the proper form. Resolutions shall be numbered consecutively and annually 

and copies thereof shall be maintained by the Secretary to the Board Members and made available 

to the Public. A copy of each Resolution shall be delivered to each Board Member. 

ARTICLE XV. APPEALS 

a. All Board decisions are final. A motion to reconsider action taken by the Board may be 

made only on the day the action was taken. The motion to reconsider may be made only by 

a Board member who voted with the prevailing side. This does not prevent a Board 

member from making or remaking the same or any other motion at a subsequent meeting of 

the Board. 

b. Any judicial review of a Board decision shall be undertaken within the time limits 

established by law. 

ARTICLE XVI. AMENDMENT OF BYLAWS. 

These bylaws may be amended at any regular meeting of the Board upon the affirmative vote of a 

majority of members. 

66



67 



Subject: Authorize adding discounts for residential complexes serving the elderly 

and disabled to the Group Discount Program 


Include monthly passes for residents of senior and disabled housing in Group Discount 

program and offer a 50% discount for pre-paid passes for all residents of a senior 

and/or disabled housing complex. 


Unknown at this time. 


Your board is responsible for setting fares and approving discounts. 

DISCUSSION: 

MST currently has a Group Discount program which allows organizations, such 

as local employers, community groups, and residential complexes to purchase monthly 

bus passes in bulk for their employees, members, and residents at a discounted rate. 

The program encourages the use of public transportation by making riding the bus an 

outstanding benefit, with reduced administration costs to MST. 

With the current Group Discount program, the amount of the discount for each 

pass type is based on quantity purchased (see table, below). The program only 

provides discounts on full-fare passes for adults and does not further discount the halfprice 

passes for youth, elderly, disabled, Medicare cardholders and active duty military. 

Staff is proposing extending the same rates of discount for half-price monthly 

passes for residential complexes serving the elderly and disabled as shown in the 

shaded columns of the table. As developers of residential complexes are required to 

have a minimum number of parking spaces, this program would, with approval of local 

government, allow developers of senior and disabled housing to reduce the number of 

required parking spots while encouraging the use of public transportation for their

esidents. Similar parking reduction programs are already in place in several Bay Area 

communities. 

Quantity Discount 

Super 

Pass 

68 

Basic Pass 

Super 

Discount 

Pass 

Basic 

Discount 

Pass 

1-2 passes None $150.00 $75.00 $75.00 $37.00 

3-5 passes 10% $135.00 $67.50 $67.50 $33.30 

6-9 passes 15% $127.50 $63.75 $63.75 $31.45 

10-19 passes 20% $120.00 $60.00 $60.00 $29.60 

20-25 passes 25% $112.50 $56.25 $56.25 $27.75 

26-30 passes 30% $105.00 $52.50 $52.50 $25.90 

31+ passes 35% $97.50 $48.75 $48.75 $24.05 

In addition, staff is also proposing to allow residential housing complexes for the 

elderly and disabled the ability to pre-purchase monthly bus passes in bulk at a 50% 

discount should the complex pay upfront for a full year of passes for all of their 

residents. This would make the Super Discount pass $450 per resident annually 

($37.50 per month) and the Basic Discount pass $222 per resident annually ($18.50 per 

month). Passes would be distributed as needed so as not to encourage fraud.


From: C. Sedoryk, General Manager/CEO 

Subject: January 2012 Monthly Report 

69 



Attached are the most recent monthly statistics and the reports from the 

Administration and Operations/Maintenance Departments. 

I traveled to San Diego to participate in an Executive Committee strategic 

planning and business meeting for the California Transit Association on January 19 – 

20. At the meeting we reviewed and adopted association budget and state legislative 

advocacy program for the coming year. Additionally, we received updates and reviewed 

policies associated with the association financial oversight, member services, and 

educational programs. 

I traveled to Washington DC on January 26 – 27 to conduct legislative advocacy 

meetings with staff members from the House of Representatives and Senate as well as 

representatives of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Topics discussed included 

Reauthorization of SAFETEA-LU, Federal Transit Commuter Fringe Benefits, and 

proposals affecting the Bus and Bus Facilities funding programs. Attachment 4 is an 

itinerary of meetings that were held in Washington DC. 

I attended the American Public Transit Association General Manager/CEO 

conference in Orlando, FL on January 28 – 31. At the conference I provided a 

presentation on MST risk-management and safety/security programs as part of a 

session on transit industry best practices. At the conference I also received updates on 

the latest federal policies and regulations, trends in labor contract negotiations, new 

technologies, and customer service programs from other leaders within the transit 

industry. 

Attachment #1 – Operations Department Report January 2012 

Attachment #2 – Facilities & Maintenance Department Report January 2012 

Attachment #3 – Administration Department Report May January 2012 

Attachment#4 – Itinerary of January 26 – 27 meetings in Washington DC.

PREPARED BY: ____________________________ 

Carl G. Sedoryk 

70

71 

ATTACHMENT 1 

March 2, 2012 

To: M. Hernandez, Assistant General Manager / C.O.O. 

From: R. Weber, Director of Transportation Services 

Cc: MST Board of Directors 

Subject: Transportation Department Monthly Report January 2012 

FIXED ROUTE BUS OPERATIONS: 

System Wide Service: (Fixed Route & DART Services): 

Preliminary boarding statistics indicate that ridership decreased by 5.98% in January 2012, 

(300,008), as compared to January 2011, (319,097). Fiscal year-to-date, passenger boardings 

have decreased by only 0.67% for the same period last year. 

Productivity decreased slightly from 14.4 passengers per hour (January 2011), to 14.1 PPH in 

January of this year. 

Trolley Services: 

MST Salinas Trolley: carried 874 passengers in January, which represents a 43.28% increase 

from January of 2011 (610). 

MST CSUMB (Otter) Trolley: Carried 652 passengers in January, averaging 766 passenger 

boardings per month in its first year of operation. 

Supplemental / Special Services: 

None to report 

System Wide Statistics: 

Ridership: 300,008 

Vehicle Revenue Hours: 21,204 

Vehicle Revenue Miles: 340,723 

System Productivity: 14.1 Passengers Per Vehicle Revenue Hour 

Scheduled One-Way Trips: 33,244 

Time Point Adherence: Of 118,262 total time-point crossings sampled for the month of 

January, the TransitMaster system recorded 15,199 delayed arrivals to MST’s published timepoints 

system-wide. This denotes that 87.15% of all scheduled arrivals at published time-points 

were on time. (See MST Fixed-Route Bus ~~ On Time Compliance Chart FY 2012.)

Service arriving later than 5 minutes beyond the published time point is considered late. The ontime 

compliance chart, (attached), reflects system wide “on-time performance” as a percentage 

to the total number of reported time-point crossings. 

Trips With 10 or More Standees: There were twenty seven (27) reported trips with 10 or more 

standees for the month of January. (See Operations Summary report for further information) 

Cancelled Trips: As listed below, there were a total of thirteen (13) cancelled trips for the 

month of January for both directly operated and contracted services. 

Reason MST MV Transportation % Of All Missed 

Extended Pass Boarding 6 0 46.15% 

Mechanical Failure 3 0 23.08% 

Staffing 3 0 23.08% 

Traffic 1 0 7.69% 

Totals 13 0 100% 

Documented Occurrences: MST Coach Operators are required to complete an occurrence 

report for any unusual incident that occurs during their work day. The information provided 

within these reports is used to identify trends, which often drive changes in policy or standard 

operating procedures. The following is a comparative summary of reported incidents for the 

month(s) of January 2011 and 2012: 

CONTRACTED SERVICES: 

MST RIDES ADA / ST Paratransit Program: 

Occurrence Type January-11 January-12 

Collision: MST Involved 0 2 

Medical Emergency 2 0 

Object Hits Coach 0 1 

Passenger Conflict 4 1 

Passenger Fall 5 4 

Passenger Injury 2 0 

Employee Injury 0 0 

Other 4 4 

Near Miss 1 0 

Unreported Damage 1 0 

Fuel / Fluid Spill 0 2 

Total Occurrences 19 14 

Preliminary boarding statistics for the MST RIDES program reflect that for the month of January 

there were 9,225 passenger boardings. This represents an 11.78% increase in passenger 

boardings from January of 2011, (8,253). Fiscal year-to-date, passenger boardings for this 

program have increased by 5.88% over the same period last year. 

72

For the month of January, 87.73 % of all scheduled trips for the MST RIDES Program 

arrived on time, increasing from 86.34 % in January of 2011. (See MST RIDES ~~ On 

Time Compliance Chart FY 2012.) 

Productivity for January of this year was at 2.4 passengers per hour, increasing from 

1.94 in January of 2011. 

Paratransit Certification Statistics: 

For the month of January, 54 applications were reviewed, resulting in 53 approvals and 

1 denial. Of the approvals, 44 were new program participants, and 9 were 

recertifications. 

36 participants were deactivated in the database. 

A total of 78 applications were received – 24, (30%), did not complete the application 

process. 

As of January 2012, there are 3,096 registered / active program participants. 

COMMUNICATIONS CENTER: 

In January, the Communications Center summoned public safety agencies on three (3) 

separate occasions to MST’s transit vehicles and facilities: 

Agency Type Incident Type Number Of Responses 

Police Passenger Incident / Other 3 

ATTACHMENTS: 

MST Fixed-Route Bus ~~ On Time Compliance FY 2012. 

MST Fixed-Route Bus ~~ Boarding Statistics FY 2012. 

MST Trolley Service ~~ Boarding Statistics FY 2012 

MST RIDES ~~ On Time Compliance FY 2012 

MST RIDES ~~ Boarding Statistics FY 2012 

73 

Robert Weber


74

MST FIXED ROUTE 

ON-TIME COMPLIANCE FY 2012 

FY 11 FY12 FY12 FY12 

ON-TIME TIME POINT DELAYED ARRIVALS ON-TIME 

MONTH PERFORMANCE COUNT 5 + MINUTES PERFORMANCE 

Jul 84.86% 118,325 17,036 85.60% 

Aug 83.25% 139,320 24,060 82.73% 

Sept 83.31% 121,794 23,969 80.32% 

Oct 86.54% 116,442 21,649 81.41% 

Nov 86.62% 112,468 19,434 82.72% 

Dec 88.10% 120,189 18,810 84.35% 

Jan 89.30% 118,262 15,199 87.15% 

Feb 88.11% 

March 89.79% 

April 86.19% 

May 87.87% 

June 88.36% 

Total N/A 846,800 140,157 N/A 

YTD Average 86.00% 120,971 20,022 83.47% 

On-Time Compliance 

100% 

90% 

80% 

70% 

60% 

50% 

40% 

30% 

20% 

10% 

0% 

Jul 

Aug 

Sept 

Oct 


FY 2012 

Nov 

Dec 

Jan 

FY11 FY12 

75 

Feb 

March 

April 

May 

June 

Jan 2012 

Data Sampled: 87.0% 

Goal 

87%

MST FIXED ROUTE BOARDINGS 

FY 2012 Monthly Boardings 

MONTH FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 % CHANGE 

July 385,052 406,623 412,265 1.39% 

Aug 420,751 429,204 449,737 4.78% 

Sep 394,189 418,155 418,519 0.09% 

Oct 376,171 386,961 376,475 -2.71% 

Nov 333,974 343,922 336,982 -2.02% 

Dec 308,937 311,123 303,533 -2.44% 

Jan 280,327 319,097 300,008 -5.98% 

Feb 303,307 321,023 

Mar 350,500 358,403 

April 350,469 337,070 

May 363,614 364,594 

June 382,331 375,977 

TOTAL 4,249,622 4,372,152 2,597,519 

YTD Avg. 357,057 373,584 371,074 -0.67% 

YTD Comparison 2,499,401 2,615,085 2,597,519 -0.67% 

Boardings are inclusive of all On Call, Trolley, & Fixed Route Services 

500,000 

450,000 

400,000 

350,000 

300,000 

250,000 

200,000 

150,000 

100,000 

50,000 

0 

MONTHLY RIDERSHIP 

July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar April May June 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 

76

INPUT of Resources OUTPUT END PRODUCT 

VEHICLE VEHICLE TOTAL 

TOTAL REVENUE REVENUE BOARDINGS 

EMPLOYEES OPERATING COST MILES HOURS (UNLINKED TRIPS) 

MONTH FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2011 FY 2012 

JUL 240.0 248.0 $1,927,614 $2,235,897 341,909 384,558 21,949 24,255 406,623 412,265 

AUG 237.0 247.0 $2,093,268 $2,468,451 338,511 398,293 21,764 25,072 429,204 449,737 

SEP 234.0 247.0 $2,545,265 $2,546,233 334,253 364,818 20,981 22,733 418,155 418,519 

OCT 235.0 246.0 $2,105,961 $2,699,738 341,855 348,283 21,322 21,791 386,961 363,043 

NOV 238.0 245.0 $2,177,880 $2,452,286 320,533 325,718 19,991 20,415 343,922 336,982 

DEC 238.0 245.0 $2,848,523 $2,970,950 336,441 343,596 20,880 21,498 311,123 303,533 

SUBTOTAL $13,698,511 $15,373,555 2,013,502 2,165,266 

126,887 135,764 

2,295,988 2,284,079 

JAN 241.0 246.0 $2,243,787 $2,548,070 333,567 340,723 20,638 21,204 319,097 300,008 

FEB 245.0 $2,160,033 315,750 19,446 321,023 

MAR 253.0 $2,460,010 361,376 22,211 358,403 

APR 250.0 $2,454,335 366,221 22,558 337,070 

MAY 247.0 $2,322,640 374,013 23,065 364,594 

JUN 248.0 $3,196,674 371,981 23,252 375,977 

TOTAL - - $28,535,990 $17,921,625 4,136,410 2,505,989 258,057 156,968 4,372,152 2,584,087 

AVERAGE 242.2 246.3 $2,377,999 $2,560,232 344,701 357,998 21,505 22,424 364,346 369,155 

Service Efficiency Cost Efficiency Service Effectiveness Measures Cost Effectiveness 

VEHICLE COST/ 

COST/ 

REVENUE HRS/ REVENUE BOARDINGS/ BOARDINGS/ UNLINKED 

EMPLOYEE HOUR REVENUE MILE REVENUE HOUR TRIP 


JUL 91.5 97.8 $87.82 $92.18 1.19 1.07 18.5 17.0 $4.74 $5.42 

AUG 91.8 101.5 $96.18 $98.45 1.27 1.13 19.7 17.9 $4.88 $5.49 

SEP 89.7 92.0 $121.31 $112.01 1.25 1.15 19.9 18.4 $6.09 $6.08 

OCT 90.7 88.6 $98.77 $123.89 1.13 1.04 18.1 16.7 $5.44 $7.44 

NOV 84.0 83.3 $108.94 $120.12 1.07 1.03 17.2 16.5 $6.33 $7.28 

DEC 

SUBTOTAL 

87.7 87.7 $136.42 $138.20 0.92 0.88 14.9 14.1 $9.16 $9.79 

JAN 85.6 86.2 $108.72 $120.17 0.96 0.88 15.5 14.1 $7.03 $8.49 

FEB 79.4 $111.08 1.02 16.5 $6.73 

MAR 87.8 $110.76 0.99 16.1 $6.86 

APR 90.2 $108.80 0.92 14.9 $7.28 

MAY 93.4 $100.70 0.97 15.8 $6.37 

JUN 

TOTAL 

93.8 $137.48 1.01 16.2 $8.50 

AVERAGE 84.1 91.0 $105.16 $114.17 1.10 1.03 17.7 16.5 $6.53 $6.94 

Note - All statistics include contracted-out service. 

* - Preliminary data for current year. 

MST FIXED ROUTE BUS Program 

Comparative Statistics 

FY 2011 - FY 2012 

77

5,000 

4,500 

4,000 

3,500 

3,000 

2,500 

2,000 

1,500 

1,000 

500 

Total Ridership 

YTD Average 

YTD Comparison 

0 

MST TROLLEY - SALINAS 


Did Not Operate 

MONTH FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 % CHANGE 

Jul 

Aug 

Sep 966 993 906 -8.76% 

Oct 1,642 1,143 1,486 30.01% 

Nov 1,258 1,016 1,418 39.57% 

Dec 922 589 717 21.73% 

Jan 648 610 874 43.28% 

Feb 1,205 1,114 

Mar 1,523 1,334 

Apr 1,425 918 

May 1,227 1,126 

Jun 

10,816 8,843 5,401 

1,087 870 1,080 24.13% 

5,436 4,351 5,401 24.13% 

SALINAS TROLLEY MONTHLY RIDERSHIP 

Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun 

FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 

78

5,000 

4,500 

4,000 

3,500 

3,000 

2,500 

2,000 

1,500 

1,000 


YTD Average 


500 

0 

MST CSUMB TROLLEY 


Did Not Operate 

MONTH FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 % CHANGE 

Jul 

Aug 368 N/A 

Sep 1,010 N/A 

Oct 1,054 N/A 

Nov 940 N/A 

Dec 573 N/A 

Jan 652 N/A 

Feb 

Mar 

Apr 

May 

Jun 

4,597 

766 N/A 

4,597 N/A 

CSUMB TROLLEY MONTHLY RIDERSHIP 


FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 

79

MST RIDES 

ON TIME COMPLIANCE FY - 2012 

MONTH FY11 FY12 

Jul 85.85% 84.47% 

Aug 85.44% 84.92% 

Sept 86.06% 83.95% 

Oct 86.56% 83.48% 

Nov 86.56% 84.62% 

Dec 87.47% 86.36% 

Jan 86.34% 87.73% 

Feb 86.30% 

March 86.27% 

April 86.47% 

May 85.87% 

June 86.12% 

YTD Average 86.33% 85.08% 


100% 

90% 

80% 

70% 

60% 

50% 

40% 

30% 

20% 

10% 

0% 

Jul 

Aug 

Sept 

MST RIDES 

On-Time Compliance FY - 2012 

Oct 

Nov 

Dec 

Jan 

FY11 FY12 

80 

Feb 

March 

April 

May 

June 

Goal 

90%


YTD Average 


11,000 

10,000 

9,000 

8,000 

7,000 

6,000 

5,000 

4,000 

3,000 

2,000 

1,000 

0 

MST RIDES Program 

Monthly Boardings 

MONTH FY 2010 FY 2011 FY2012 % CHANGE 

Jul 8,939 8,663 8,665 0.02% 

Aug 8,514 8,794 9,638 9.60% 

Sep 9,386 9,354 9,718 3.89% 

Oct 9,335 9,189 9,807 6.73% 

Nov 8,275 8,900 9,485 6.57% 

Dec 8,147 8,626 8,874 2.88% 

Jan 7,454 8,253 9,225 11.78% 

Feb 8,112 8,155 

Mar 9,406 9,266 

Apr 9,219 8,739 

May 9,263 8,720 

Jun 8,837 8,793 

104,887 105,452 65,412 

8,579 8,826 9,345 5.88% 

60,050 61,779 65,412 5.88% 

MST RIDES MONTHLY RIDERSHIP 


FY 2010 FY 2011 FY2012 

81

INPUT of Resources OUTPUT END PRODUCT 

VEHICLE VEHICLE TOTAL 

TOTAL REVENUE REVENUE BOARDINGS 

EMPLOYEES OPERATING COST MILES HOURS (UNLINKED TRIPS) 


JUL 41.0 46.0 $237,015 $220,118 80,427 83,056 4,544 4,428 8,663 8,665 

AUG 42.0 46.0 $238,374 $217,185 80,569 87,416 4,616 5,210 8,794 9,638 

SEP 44.0 46.0 $264,418 $217,506 85,883 87,833 4,992 4,972 9,653 9,718 

OCT 45.0 46.0 $257,503 $237,001 87,487 91,668 5,052 5,160 9,189 9,807 

NOV 45.0 54.0 $242,626 $221,259 82,945 76,581 4,639 4,534 8,900 9,483 

DEC 45.0 55.0 $240,625 $224,592 85,293 84,841 4,673 4,894 8,626 8,874 

SUBTOTAL $1,480,561 $1,337,661 502,604 511,395 28,516 29,198 53,825 56,185 

JAN 45.0 55.0 $232,814 $181,836 81,593 83,948 4,257 4,860 8,253 9,225 

FEB 45.0 $233,818 81,036 4,310 8,155 

MAR 46.0 $262,661 91,823 4,828 9,266 

APR 45.0 $253,388 88,003 4,613 8,739 

MAY 45.0 $260,110 90,121 4,735 8,720 

JUN 46.0 $259,398 89,446 4,545 8,793 

TOTAL 272 $55 $2,982,750 $1,519,497 1,024,626 595,343 55,803 34,058 105,751 65,410 

AVERAGE 44.5 49.7 $248,563 $217,071 85,386 85,049 4,650 4,865 8,813 9,344 

Service Efficiency Cost Efficiency Service Effectiveness Measures Cost Effectiveness 

VEHICLE COST/ 

COST/ 

REVENUE HR/ REVENUE BOARDINGS/ BOARDINGS/ UNLINKED 

EMPLOYEE HOUR REVENUE MILE REVENUE HOUR TRIP 


JUL 110.8 96.3 $40.62 $49.71 0.11 0.10 1.9 2.0 $21.25 $25.40 

AUG 109.9 113.3 $42.25 $41.69 0.11 0.11 1.9 1.8 $22.21 $22.53 

SEP 113.5 108.1 $40.59 $43.75 0.11 0.11 1.9 2.0 $21.41 $22.38 

OCT 112.3 112.2 $42.88 $45.93 0.11 0.11 1.9 1.9 $22.65 $24.17 

NOV 103.1 84.0 $43.17 $48.80 0.11 0.12 1.9 2.1 $23.12 $23.33 

DEC 103.8 89.0 $42.05 $45.89 0.10 0.10 1.8 1.8 $23.39 $25.31 

SUBTOTAL 108.9 $41.93 0.11 1.9 $22.34 

JAN 94.6 88.4 $50.08 $37.41 0.11 0.11 1.8 1.9 $27.29 $19.71 

FEB 95.8 $52.20 0.11 1.9 $27.14 

MAR 105.0 $48.30 0.11 1.9 $25.14 

APR 102.5 $51.73 0.11 1.9 $27.35 

MAY 105.2 $52.58 0.11 1.9 $27.36 

JUN 98.8 $52.92 0.11 1.9 $27.34 

TOTAL - - - - - - - - - - 

AVERAGE 104.5 97.9 $46.55 $44.61 0.11 0.11 1.9 1.9 $24.60 $23.23 

Note - All statistics include contracted-out service. 

* - Preliminary Data 

MST RIDES Program 

Comparative Statistics 

FY 2011 - FY 2012 

82

Monterey-Salinas Transit 

Operations Summary Report 

Fixed Route Services 

January 2012

Service Delivered Service Quality 

Ridership 300,008 On-time Time Points 103,063 

Passengers / Vehicle Revenue Hour 14.1 Delayed Time Points 15,199 

Revenue Miles 340,723.3 On-time Passenger Boardings 263,146 

One-way Trips Scheduled 33,244 Percent On-time Boardings 88% 

Seasonal Service: 

The MST Trolley Salinas had 874 boardings this month compared to 610 boardings last January. Line 22-Big Sur 

had a total of 131 boardings compared to 155 boardings last January. The CSUMB Otter Trolley had 652 

boardings in January - it did not operate last year. 

Supplemental Service: 

Fixed Route Operations Summary Report 

January 2012 

Systemwide Service: 

For the month of January, ridership on fixed-route service fell 6% compared to January 2011, when 319,097 

boardings were recorded. Revenue hours operated over the same timeframe increased by 2.7%, resulting in a 

8.5% drop in productivity (measured in passengers per hour). 

Ridership for the fiscal year-to-date (July - January), is 0.7% less than it was last fiscal year. However, as a result 

of revenue hours operated having increased by 6.4% during the same timeframe, fiscal year-to-date productivity 

has fallen by 6.6%. 

None. 

5,000,000 

4,000,000 

3,000,000 

2,000,000 

1,000,000 

20.00 

15.00 

10.00 

5.00 

- 

- 

2,499,401 

Systemwide Ridership 

2,615,085 

2,597,519 

FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 - YTD 

Jul-Jan Jul - Jun 

Systemwide Pax / Revenue Hour 

17.67 

16.94 16.55 

FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 - YTD 

1.00 

0.90 

0.80 

0.70 

0.60 

0.50 

0.40 

0.30 

0.20 

0.10 

0.00 

85% 

Jul 

83% 

Aug 

On Time Passenger Boardings 

81% 

Sep 

81% 

Oct 

83% 

Nov 

84% 

Dec 

88% 

Jan 

Feb 

Mar 

Target 87% 

No supplemental or special event service operated 

this month. 

Apr 

May 

Jun

30 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

9 

7 

11 

Fixed Route Operations Summary Report 

January 2012 

Cancelled Trips by Month - Fiscal Year to Date 

29 

10 

12 

13 

0 0 0 0 0 


Cancelled Trips by Reason - Fiscal Year to Date 

Passenger Boarding - 34 

Trips 

37% 

Mechanical Failure - 17 

Trips 

19% 

Traffic - 16 Trips 

17% 

Non-MST Accident - 2 

Trips 

2% 

Other - 7 Trips 

8% 

MST Accident - 9 Trips 

10% 

Employee Error - 6 Trips 

7%

Ridership by Line - January 2012 

Total Passengers 

41-East Alisal-Northridge 

20-Monterey-Salinas 

10-Fremont-Ord Grove 

9-Fremont-Hilby 

23-Salinas-King City 

14,446 

16-Monterey-Marina 

13,522 

29-Watsonville-Salinas 

12,240 

76-Presidio-Stilwell Park Express 

11,759 

2-Monterey-Pacific Grove 

10,390 

69-Presidio-Dunes 

9,882 

49-Northridge 

8,451 


7,945 

11-Edgewater-Carmel 

7,220 

43-Memorial Hospital 

7,066 


6,837 

5-Monterey-Carmel 

6,136 

24-Carmel Valley-Grapevine Express 

5,587 

42-East Alisal-Westridge 

5,296 

45-East Market-Creekbridge 

5,015 

74-Presidio-Preston Park Express 

4,302 

75-Presidio-Marshall Park Express 

3,975 

44-Northridge 

3,561 

48-East Salinas-Airport Business Center 

3,056 

46-Natividad 

3,007 

8-Ryan Ranch-Edgewater 

2,502 

MST On Call Greenfield 2,341 

19-Marina-Monterey 2,257 

25-Marina-Salinas 2,177 

4-Carmel-Carmel Rancho 2,081 

55-Monterey-San Jose Express 2,048 

79-Presidio-San Jose Express 1,955 

77-Presidio-Seaside 1,799 

MST On Call Marina 1,718 

71-Presidio-Marina Express 1,504 

27-Watsonville-Marina 1,465 

14-NPS-Monterey 1,208 

7-Monterey-Carmel 1,175 

70-Presidio-La Mesa 1,143 

MST Trolley Salinas 874 

73-Presidio-Prunedale Express 863 

13-Ryan Ranch-Monterey 819 

72-Presidio-N Salinas Express 785 

21-Monterey-Salinas 740 


68-Presidio-Salinas Express 664 

MST On Call Gonzales 662 

CSUMB Otter Trolley 652 

83-Ft Hunter Liggett-Paso Robles … 648 

MST On Call King City 645 

12-Monterey-Dunes 625 

82-Ft Hunter Liggett-Salinas Express 359 

91-Pacific Meadows-Ryan Ranch 256 

93-Pacific Meadows-Monterey 209 


92-Pacific Meadows-CHOMP 153 

22-Big Sur 131 

78 78-Presidio-Pacific Presidio Pacific Grove 

124 

21,822 

20,989 

36,061 

35,991 

- 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000






49-Northridge 



71-Presidio-Marina Express 


77-Presidio-Seaside 


46-Natividad 

70-Presidio-La Mesa 


73-Presidio-Prunedale Express 


14-NPS-Monterey 

72-Presidio-N Salinas Express 




19-Marina-Monterey 

22-Big Sur 

MST On Call Greenfield 





44-Northridge 


68-Presidio-Salinas Express 

79-Presidio-San Jose Express 






15-Ryan Ranch-Monterey 

78-Presidio-Pacific Grove 

MST Trolley Salinas 

4-Carmel-Carmel Rancho 

83-Ft Hunter Liggett-Paso Robles Express 

93-Pacific Meadows-Monterey 

MST On Call Marina 

12-Monterey-Dunes 

27-Watsonville-Marina 


91-Pacific Meadows-Ryan Ranch 

55-Monterey-San Jose Express 


MST On Call King City 

92-Pacific Meadows-CHOMP 

25-Marina-Salinas 

MST On Call Gonzales 

82-Ft Hunter Liggett-Salinas Express 

CSUMB Otter Trolley 

Productivity by Line - January 2012 

Passengers Per Hour 

28.5 

26.4 

25.9 

25.7 

25.0 

24.1 

22.5 

21.9 

21.3 

20.8 

19.7 

17.9 

16.4 

16.1 

15.9 

15.0 

14.4 

14.2 

13.7 

13.3 

13.0 

12.8 

12.8 

12.4 

12.3 

12.1 

12.0 

11.8 

11.3 

11.0 

10.4 

10.0 

9.7 

7.9 

7.3 

7.0 

6.2 

6.1 

5.9 

5.7 

5.4 

5.4 

5.4 

5.2 

5.2 

5.0 

4.5 

4.3 

4.3 

3.8 

3.4 

3.4 

3.3 

2.4 

1.8 

1.4 

44.5 

- 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

MST Trolley Salinas 

44-Northridge 


83-Ft Hunter Liggett-Paso Robles Express 

14-NPS-Monterey 

12-Monterey-Dunes 


CSUMB Otter Trolley 

77-Presidio-Seaside 





72-Presidio-N Salinas Express 

71-Presidio-Marina Express 

25-Marina-Salinas 


4-Carmel-Carmel Rancho 









79-Presidio-San Jose Express 

78-Presidio-Pacific Grove 

19-Marina-Monterey 


22-Big Sur 



70-Presidio-La Mesa 


73-Presidio-Prunedale Express 


68-Presidio-Salinas Express 



27-Watsonville-Marina 





55-Monterey-San Jose Express 

82-Ft Hunter Liggett-Salinas Express 

49-Northridge 

46-Natividad 


Schedule Adherence by Line - January 2012 

Percent On-time Timepoints 

86.8% 

86.7% 

86.7% 

86.5% 

85.6% 

85.3% 

85.1% 

84.5% 

84.4% 

83.9% 

83.1% 

82.8% 

82.4% 

79.0% 

77.6% 

76.9% 

76.2% 

71.5% 

64.8% 

64.2% 

60.5% 

97.7% 

97.6% 

97.4% 

97.1% 

96.7% 

96.5% 

96.5% 

95.7% 

95.7% 

95.3% 

95.1% 

94.3% 

94.2% 

93.8% 

93.2% 

93.1% 

91.9% 

91.8% 

91.0% 

90.7% 

90.2% 

89.8% 

89.5% 

89.1% 

89.0% 

87.7% 

87.6% 

87.3% 

87.3% 

0% 20% 40% 60% 

87% adherence 

standard 

80% 100%

January 2012 

Primary Routes 

Systemwide Ridership: 300,008 

Systemwide Revenue Hours: 21204:48 

Systemwide Revenue Miles: 340,723.3 

Ridership VRHrs VRMi Pax/Hr % Riders % Hrs 

1-Monterey-Pacific Grove 7,945 645:24 6,200.2 12.31 2.6% 3.0% 

9-Fremont-Hilby 20,989 794:34 7,074.7 26.42 7.0% 3.7% 

10-Fremont-Ord Grove 21,822 848:45 9,575.7 25.71 7.3% 4.0% 

41-East Alisal-Northridge 35,811 1591:12 16,178.4 22.51 11.9% 7.5% 

42-East Alisal-Westridge 5,296 437:42 4,570.5 12.10 1.8% 2.1% 

Total 91,863 4317:37 43,599.5 21.3 30.6% 20.4% 

Local Routes 


2-Monterey-Pacific Grove 10,390 883:40 10,706.7 11.76 3.5% 4.2% 

3-Ryan Ranch-Monterey 666 147:00 1,782.0 4.53 0.2% 0.7% 

4-Carmel-Carmel Rancho 2,081 385:07 3,957.5 5.40 0.7% 1.8% 

5-Monterey-Carmel 6,136 381:59 4,577.3 16.06 2.0% 1.8% 

7-Monterey-Carmel 1,175 166:57 1,999.2 7.04 0.4% 0.8% 

8-Ryan Ranch-Edgewater 2,502 343:30 5,271.0 7.29 0.8% 1.6% 

11-Edgewater-Carmel 7,220 299:30 4,333.5 24.11 2.4% 1.4% 

13-Ryan Ranch-Monterey 819 213:00 3,192.3 3.84 0.3% 1.0% 

15-Ryan Ranch-Monterey 205 33:36 653.1 6.09 0.1% 0.2% 

16-Monterey-Marina 13,522 987:51 17,417.9 13.69 4.5% 4.7% 

43-Memorial Hospital 7,066 332:20 3,702.5 21.26 2.4% 1.6% 

44-Northridge 3,561 314:20 1,786.1 11.33 1.2% 1.5% 

45-East Market-Creekbridge 5,015 378:24 6,104.2 13.25 1.7% 1.8% 

46-Natividad 3,007 168:00 1,923.9 17.90 1.0% 0.8% 

48-East Salinas-Airport Business Center 3,056 496:39 6,249.6 6.15 1.0% 2.3% 

49-Northridge 8,451 338:05 2,967.9 25.00 2.8% 1.6% 

91-Pacific Meadows-Ryan Ranch 256 59:30 1,113.0 4.30 0.1% 0.3% 

92-Pacific Meadows-CHOMP 153 45:30 743.4 3.37 0.1% 0.2% 

93-Pacific Meadows-Monterey 209 38:51 396.9 5.38 0.1% 0.2% 

Total 75,490 6013:49 78,878.0 12.6 25.2% 28.4% 

Regional Routes 


19-Marina-Monterey 2,257 176:03 3,160.5 12.82 0.8% 0.8% 

20-Monterey-Salinas 35,743 1811:31 34,998.7 19.73 11.9% 8.5% 

21-Monterey-Salinas 740 67:12 1,342.5 11.01 0.2% 0.3% 

23-Salinas-King City 14,422 1205:27 34,856.9 11.96 4.8% 5.7% 

24-Carmel Valley-Grapevine Express 5,587 709:48 14,505.0 7.87 1.9% 3.3% 

25-Marina-Salinas 2,177 653:48 12,274.5 3.33 0.7% 3.1% 

27-Watsonville-Marina 1,465 293:39 7,732.2 4.99 0.5% 1.4% 

28-Watsonville-Salinas 6,837 706:15 19,316.6 9.68 2.3% 3.3% 

29-Watsonville-Salinas 12,240 941:25 15,506.4 13.00 4.1% 4.4% 

55-Monterey-San Jose Express 2,048 481:54 14,359.2 4.25 0.7% 2.3% 

Total 83,516 7047:02 158,052.5 11.9 27.8% 33.2%

Military Express Routes 


12-Monterey-Dunes 625 121:06 2,190.3 5.16 0.2% 0.6% 

14-NPS-Monterey 1,208 84:00 816.9 14.38 0.4% 0.4% 

68-Presidio-Salinas Express 664 64:03 1,180.2 10.36 0.2% 0.3% 

69-Presidio-Dunes 9,882 346:19 3,708.3 28.54 3.3% 1.6% 

70-Presidio-La Mesa 1,143 69:39 772.8 16.41 0.4% 0.3% 

71-Presidio-Marina Express 1,504 68:36 1,140.3 21.92 0.5% 0.3% 

72-Presidio-N Salinas Express 785 55:18 1,138.2 14.19 0.3% 0.3% 

73-Presidio-Prunedale Express 863 54:15 1,197.0 15.91 0.3% 0.3% 

74-Presidio-Preston Park Express 4,302 165:54 2,885.4 25.93 1.4% 0.8% 

75-Presidio-Marshall Park Express 3,975 264:57 3,660.3 15.00 1.3% 1.2% 

76-Presidio-Stilwell Park Express 11,759 264:15 3,196.2 44.50 3.9% 1.2% 

77-Presidio-Seaside 1,799 86:27 1,022.7 20.81 0.6% 0.4% 

78-Presidio-Pacific Grove 124 21:00 263.5 5.90 0.0% 0.1% 

79-Presidio-San Jose Express 1,955 194:36 5,126.1 10.04 0.7% 0.9% 

82-Ft Hunter Liggett-Salinas Express 359 202:18 7,229.0 1.77 0.1% 1.0% 

83-Ft Hunter Liggett-Paso Robles Express 648 120:29 5,062.2 5.38 0.2% 0.6% 

Total 41,594 2183:12 40,589.4 19.1 13.9% 10.3% 

MST On Call 


MST On Call Marina 1,718 327:50 4,466.0 5.24 0.6% 1.5% 

MST On Call Gonzales 662 273:00 1,680.0 2.42 0.2% 1.3% 

MST On Call Greenfield 2,341 189:00 2,100.0 12.39 0.8% 0.9% 

MST On Call King City 645 189:00 2,604.0 3.41 0.2% 0.9% 

Total 5,366 978:50 10,850.0 5.5 1.8% 4.6% 

Seasonal / Supplemental 


22-Big Sur 652 51:00 1,274.4 12.79 0.2% 0.2% 

MST Trolley Salinas 874 153:18 1,039.5 5.70 0.3% 0.7% 

CSUMB Otter Trolley 652 460:00 6,440.0 1.42 0.2% 2.2% 

Total 2,179 664:18 8,753.9 3.3 0.7% 3.1%

To: Carl G. Sedoryk, General Manager/CEO 

91 

ATTACHMENT 2 

March 2, 2012 

From: Michael Hernandez, Assistant General Manger/COO 

Subject: Monthly Maintenance Report for December 2011 

This monthly report summarizes information about fuel prices and the activities of 

the Maintenance/Facilities Departments during the month of December. Detailed 

statistical information is also attached. 

Fuel Prices: 

Fleet Status: 

Dec Dec Nov Dec % 

Low High Average Average Change 

Diesel $3.15 $3.36 $3.52 $3.28 -6.8% 

Gasoline $3.26 $3.41 $3.48 $3.28 -5.7% 

Road Call Rate 

Goal: 7,000 Miles or 

More 

Miles 

Between 

Road Calls: Operating Cost Per Mile: 

December 18,506 December $1.29 

Past 12 Months: 15,171 FY12 Year To Date $1.19 

Comments: 

In December there were a total of 14 road calls, of which 14 were maintenance 

related. The highest road calls were due to electrical and cooling issues during the 

month. 

The MCI coach that arrived in November was placed into service on December 

19 th . Major work efforts included removing a failed engine in coach 1808 and repairs by 

Facilities staff to the TDA bus washer. During the month of December through January 

2012 the AssetWorks maintenance management software system was upgraded to a new 

version. Some monthly reports or data were not accessible, or only provided partial data 

during the upgrade. 

Michael Hernandez


92

Active Fleet 

Series 

Manufacturer 

Model/Year Quantity Engine Fuel Type MPG 

1101 - 1121 Gillig - 2000 21 

1122 - 1129 Gillig - 2003 

Gillig Low-floor 

8 

1701 - 1712 2002 12 

1713 - 1724 

1725 - 1729 

1801 - 1804 

1805 -1808 

2001 - 2010 

4501 - 4504 


2003 12 


2007 5 

Gillig Suburban 

2002 4 


2003 4 


2007 10 

MCI D4500 

2009/10/12 4 

Historical 

Fleet Number Manufacturer Model Vehicle(s) Fuel Type 

80 

Fuel Used 

January 2012 

MST Operated Fixed Route Bus Fleet - Summary Information 

Fageol Twin Coach 

1948 1 Gasoline 

Revenue Fleet 

Miles: 277,589 40,308 

Gallons: 

Average 

Miles Per 

57,062 1,482 

Gallon: 4.86 27.20 

Repeat Road Calls 

0 

Cummins ISM 

280 HP Clean Diesel 4.29 

Detroit DC 

Series 50 ERG 

Cummins ISM 

Clean Diesel 3.98 


Detroit DC 

Series 50 ERG Clean Diesel 4.88 

Cummins ISM 

280 HP 

Cummins ISM 



Detroit DC 


Cummins ISM 


Cummins ISM 


Non-Revenue 

Fleet Inventory Value 

93 

Fuel, Coolant, 

Lubricants $112,652.04 

Parts/ 

Supplies $269,335.93 

Total Value $381,987.97

Diesel Fleet - Cost Per Mile 

Fleet Series, Year 

and # of Vehicles Labor Parts Fuel Oil/Fluids Total Cost Miles 

Cost Per 

Mile 

1100s (2000 - 21) $19,641.02 $36,314.23 $30,756.61 $1,887.54 $88,599.40 69,060 $1.28 

1100s (2003 - 8) $4,284.89 $2,226.89 $23,574.52 $916.20 $31,002.50 24,843 $1.25 

1700s (2002 - 12) $9,749.63 $11,474.00 $30,303.65 $814.87 $52,342.15 30,424 $1.72 

1700s (2003 - 12) $9,376.21 $9,182.50 $3,633.60 $69.94 $22,262.25 36,255 $0.61 

1700s (2007 - 5) $3,159.94 $2,290.98 $15,090.69 $880.65 $21,422.26 17,669 $1.21 

1800s (2002 - 4) $6,946.29 $5,188.25 $16,338.54 $442.64 $28,915.72 16,665 $1.74 

1800s (2003 - 4) $2,952.89 $1,382.08 $16,338.54 $442.64 $21,116.15 19,189 $1.10 

2000s (2007 - 10) $7,357.85 $7,177.81 $28,610.02 $1,052.60 $44,198.28 30,067 $1.47 

4500s (2009/10/12 - 4) $4,216.30 $2,216.92 $16,195.69 $625.85 $23,254.76 14,918 $1.56 

Total Dec 2011: $67,685.02 $77,453.66 $180,841.86 $7,132.93 $333,113.47 259,090 $1.29 

Labor Parts Fuel Oil Cost Per Mile 

Dec Fleet Average: $0.26 $0.30 $0.70 $0.03 $1.29 

FY12 Cost Per Mile: $0.18 $0.23 $0.75 $0.03 $1.19 

100% 

75% 

50% 

25% 

0% 

Cost Per Mile: 

Fleet Series & 

Model Year 

2.1% 

41.0% 

22.2% 

34.7% 

$1.28 

1100s 

(2000) 

December 2011 

Fleet Cost Per Mile 

December 2011 

Fleet Miles: 259,090 Average Fleet Cost Per Mile: $1.29 

3.0% 1.6% 0.3% 4.1% 1.5% 2.1% 2.4% 2.7% 

7.2% 

13.8% 

76.0% 

$1.25 

1100s 

(2003) 

21.9% 

18.6% 

57.9% 

$1.72 

1700s 

(2002) 

41.2% 

42.1% 

16.3% 

$0.61 

1700s 

(2003) 

10.7% 17.9% 

14.8% 

70.4% 

$1.21 

1700s 

(2007) 

94 

24.0% 

56.5% 

$1.74 

1800s 

(2002) 

6.5% 

14.0% 

77.4% 

$1.10 

1800s 

(2003) 

16.2% 

16.6% 

64.7% 

$1.47 

2000s 

(2007) 

9.5% 

18.1% 

69.6% 

$1.56 

4500s 

(09/10/12) 

Oil 

Parts 

Labor 

Fuel

Road Calls 

20 

18 

16 

14 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

MECHANICAL ROAD CALLS BY BUS SERIES 

December 2011 

Total Diesel Miles: 259,090 Roadcalls: 14 

3 

4 

2 

Bus Series & Model Year 

3 

95 

1 

0 0 

1 

0


96

To: Carl G. Sedoryk, General Manager/CEO 

97 

March 2, 2012 

From: Michael Hernandez, Assistant General Manger/COO 

Subject: Monthly Maintenance Report for January 2012 

This monthly report summarizes information about fuel prices and the activities of 

the Maintenance/Facilities Departments during the month of January. Detailed statistical 

information is also attached. 

Fuel Prices: 

Jan. Jan. Dec. Jan. % 

Low High Average Average Change 

Diesel $3.35 $3.52 $3.28 $3.41 4.0% 

Gasoline $3.38 $3.42 $3.28 $3.40 3.7% 

Fleet Status: 

Road Call Rate 

Goal: 7,000 Miles or 

More 

Miles 

Between 

Road Calls: Operating Cost Per Mile: 

January 13,879 January $1.03 

Past 12 Months: 15,436 FY12 Year To Date $1.22 

Comments: 

In January there were a total of 25 road calls, of which 20 were maintenance 

related. The highest single road call category was due to engine issues. 

A new Diesel Emissions Fluid (DEF) tank was installed at TDA. The use of the 

DEF fluid is required in the exhaust system of all new transit buses. Facilities completed 

some parking restriping in the TDA bus yard for increased safety. 

During the month of December through January 2012 the AssetWorks 

maintenance management software system was upgraded to a new version. Some 

monthly reports or data were not accessible, or only provided partial data during the 

upgrade. 

Diesel and gasoline fuel prices increased by approximately 4% during the month of 

January. 

Michael Hernandez


98

Active Fleet 

Series 

Manufacturer 

Model/Year Quantity Engine Fuel Type MPG 

1101 - 1121 Gillig - 2000 21 

1122 - 1129 Gillig - 2003 


8 

1701 - 1712 2002 12 

1713 - 1724 

1725 - 1729 

1801 - 1804 

1805 -1808 

2001 - 2010 

4501 - 4504 


2003 12 


2007 5 


2002 4 


2003 4 


2007 10 

MCI D4500 

2009/10/12 4 

Historical 

Fleet Number Manufacturer Model Vehicle(s) Fuel Type 

80 

Fuel Used 

January 2012 

MST Operated Fixed Route Bus Fleet - Summary Information 

Fageol Twin Coach 

1948 1 Gasoline 

Revenue Fleet 

Miles: 286,401 40,308 

Gallons: 

Average 

Miles Per 

57,062 1,482 

Gallon: 5.02 27.20 

Repeat Road Calls 

0 

Cummins ISM 


Detroit DC 

Series 50 ERG 

Cummins ISM 



Detroit DC 


Cummins ISM 

280 HP 

Cummins ISM 



Detroit DC 


Cummins ISM 


Cummins ISM 


Non-Revenue 

Fleet Inventory Value 

99 

Fuel, Coolant, 

Lubricants $112,652.04 

Parts/ 

Supplies $269,335.93 

Total Value $381,987.97

MILES 

Miles 

Goal: 

7,000 

Miles 

36,000 

33,000 

30,000 

27,000 

24,000 

21,000 

18,000 

15,000 

12,000 

9,000 

6,000 

3,000 

0 

40,000 

35,000 

30,000 

25,000 

20,000 

15,000 

10,000 

5,000 

0 

Feb 

2011 

MILES BETWEEN MECHANICAL ROAD CALLS 

January 2012 - Miles: 277,589 

Mar 

2011 

April 

2011 

May 

2011 

June 

2011 

July 

2011 

Aug 

2011 

Sep 

2011 

Oct 

2011 

Nov 

2011 

Fleet Wide Miles Between Roadcalls 

FY11 vs. FY12 Year to Date Comparison 

Dec 

2011 

Jan 

2012 

Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun 

FY11 15,068 9,884 10,679 19,935 9,195 8,714 9,263 9,453 9,707 12,790 15,227 24,334 11,820 

FY12 16,586 14,659 13,711 20,563 17,503 18,506 13,879 16,487 

January 2012 100 

Goal: 

7,000 

Miles 

Aver. 

YTD

OCCURENCES 

110 

100 

90 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

* "Other" category includes: Fluid leaks, Lights, Windshield Wipers other items. 

January 2012 

All ROAD CALLS - BY CATEGORY 

FY 2011 & 2012 

CUMULATIVE YEAR-TO-DATE 

Air Sys. Brakes Exhaust Cooling Doors Electrical Engine Trans Fare box 

101 

Other 

Mech. 

Pass/Sick 

Radio/ 

ACS 

Tire Vandal W/C Lift Total 

FY11 19 7 96 12 2 68 65 4 15 8 11 7 12 2 9 337 

FY12 - YTD 7 4 25 19 5 32 18 4 10 15 5 6 2 0 6 158 

Jan-12 0 1 0 3 1 3 5 1 0 7 1 1 1 0 1 25

January 2012 

Total PM Inspections 

120 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE INSPECTIONS 

PAST TWELVE MONTHS 

Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 May-11 Jun-11 Jul-11 Aug-11 Sep-11 Oct-11 Nov-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 

Total PMIs 84 89 98 109 100 119 104 104 104 93 84 90 

% On Time 96% 60% 77% 98% 98% 94% 90% 91% 94% 97% 92% 96% 

102 

100% 

90% 

80% 

70% 

60% 

50% 

40% 

30% 

20% 

10% 

PMs for Dec/Jan based on AssetWorks data during system upgrade 

0% 

% of PM Inspections On-Time 

Goal 

80%

100% 

75% 

50% 

25% 

0% 

Cost Per Mile: 

Fleet Series & 

Model Year 

November 2011 

4.0% 4.5% 3.6% 2.9% 4.4% 3.0% 3.6% 3.5% 4.4% 

7.6% 

15.9% 

72.4% 

$1.05 

1100s 

(2000) 

Fleet Cost Per Mile 

January 2012 

Fleet Miles: 277,589 Average Fleet Cost Per Mile: $ 1.04 

13.8% 

20.3% 

61.4% 

$1.32 

1100s 

(2003) 

23.0% 

19.4% 

53.9% 

$1.07 

1700s 

(2002) 

18.0% 

23.8% 

55.3% 

$1.22 

1700s 

(2003) 

5.7% 

11.4% 

78.5% 

$0.72 

1700s 

(2007) 

103 

11.1% 

11.2% 

74.7% 

$0.98 

1800s 

(2002) 

12.9% 

15.3% 

11.6% 

16.9% 

68.1% 67.9% 

$1.04 

1800s 

(2003) 

$0.84 

2000s 

(2007) 

5.9% 

6.1% 

83.6% 

$1.09 

4500s 

(2009/10/12) 

Oil 

Parts 

Labor 

Fuel

Road Calls 

7 

6 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1 

0 

MECHANICAL ROAD CALLS BY BUS SERIES 

January 2012 

Total Diesel Miles: 277,589 Roadcalls: 20 

5 

1 

January 2012 104 

0 

Bus Series & Model Year 

6 

0 0 

4 

3 

1

$4,000.00 

$3,500.00 

$3,000.00 

$2,500.00 

$2,000.00 

$1,500.00 

$1,000.00 

$500.00 

$0.00 

VANDALISM COSTS - PAST 12 MONTHS 

Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 May-11 Jun-11 Jul-11 Aug-11 Sep-11 Oct-11 Nov-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 

Buses $467.32 $48.27 $0.00 $0.00 $390.42 $33.12 $129.18 $51.01 $58.90 $33.06 $88.83 $0.00 

Bus Stops $594.00 $250.00 $707.00 $234.00 $309.92 $1,155. $616.00 $186.50 $489.50 $679.50 $736.00 $1,158. 

STC $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $68.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $12.50 

MTX $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $12.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,500. $0.00 $0.00 

MTP $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 

January 2012 105

Total Inventory & Fuel Value 

12 Month Rolling Inventory, Fuel & Fluids Value - January 2012 

Total Inventory: $ 381,987.97 Value Per Bus: $ 3,367 12 Month Average: $ 3,275 

$350,000 

$300,000 

$250,000 

$200,000 

$150,000 

$100,000 

$50,000 

$0 

106 

$5,000 

$4,800 

$4,600 

$4,400 

$4,200 

$4,000 

$3,800 

$3,600 

$3,400 

$3,200 

$3,000 

Inventory Value 

Fuel Value 

Inventory Value / Bus 

Inventory $ Value Per Bus

$5.25 

$5.00 

$4.75 

$4.50 

$4.25 

$4.00 

$3.75 

$3.50 

$3.25 

$3.00 

$2.75 

$2.50 

$2.25 

$2.00 

12 Month Rolling Fuel Cost - As of January 31, 2012 

Diesel Gasoline 

107 

FY 2012 Fuel Budget: 

Diesel 3.50 Gallon 

Gasoline $3.75 Gallon


108

Date: March, 2012 

To: C. Sedoryk, General Manager/CEO 

109 

ATTACHMENT 3 

From: Hunter Harvath, Assistant General Manager Finance & Administration; Mark 

Eccles, Director Information Technology; Kathy Williams, General Accounting 

Manager; Kelly Halcon, Director of Human Resources/Risk Management; 

Tom Hicks, CTSA Manager; Sonia Bannister, Office Administrator; Zoe 

Shoats, Marketing Analyst 

Subject: Administration Department Monthly Report January, 2012 

The following significant events occurred in Administration work groups for the 

month of January 2012: 

Human Resources 

A total employment level for January 2012 is summarized as follows: 

Positions Budget FY11 Actual Difference 

Coach Operators / Trainees 143 135 -8 

C/O on Long Term Leave * 2 10 8 

Coach Operators Limited Duty 2 2 0 

Operations Staff 26 26 0 

Maintenance & Facilities 48 47 1 

Administration (Interns 2 PT) 24.5 23.5 -1 

Total 245.5 243.5 -2 

January Worker’s Compensation Costs 

Indemnity (paid to employees) $27,592.44 

Other (includes Legal) $2,931.54 

Medical includes Case Mgmt,UR, Rx & PT $9,671.61 

TPA Administration Fee $4,000.00 

Excess Insurance $3,493.58 

Total Expenses $40,195.59 

Reserves $1,217,625.20 

Excess Reserved ($392,084.15) 

# Ending Open Claims 46

Training 

Description Attendees 

Annual VTT Training 0 

Risk Management Update 

January 2012 January 2011 

Preventable Preventable 

Description Yes No Yes No 

Vehicle hits Bus 0 1 0 2 

Bus hits object 0 0 1 0 

TOTAL 0 1 1 2 

During the month of January 2012 there were no preventable collisions. This continues 

our outstanding safety and accident frequency ratio (AFR). 

Number of Accidents 

13 

12 

11 

10 

9 

8 

7 

6 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1 

0 

Accident Statistics 

110 

non-preventable 

preventable

Miles Traveled 

400,000 

350,000 

300,000 

250,000 

200,000 

150,000 

100,000 

50,000 

There were no claims paid and $8,149.02 recovered during this period. 

Accounting Update 

0 

Miles Between Preventable Collisions 

During the month of January, staff focused on year end payroll and reporting 

items. In addition, all finance staff continued to focus on the implementation of our 

newly upgraded financial system (Navision). 

General Accounting: 

Staff is focused on ensuring that the financial information of the agency is properly 

stated and recorded on many reports. Accounts payable and payroll continue to meet 

their weekly deadlines. 

Grants and Compliance: 

Staff continues to attend training to ensure MST is compliant in many areas. A 

continued area of focus is continually seeking grant funding from numerous sources. 

Purchasing: 

Staff continues the daily challenge of managing inventory levels while MST‟s fleet 

continues to age. Managing cost, lead times, and necessity are a daily task. 

111 

Series2 

Series1 

Series3 

MBPC = Miles 

Between 

Preventable 

Collisions 

Standard = Not 

more than 1 

preventable 

collision per 

100,000 miles

CTSA Update 

In January, a group of four staff members from ParaCruz, the ADA Paratransit 

service of Santa Cruz Metro, visited MST at the Monterey Mobility Management Center 

to share information about their county‟s paratransit operations and learn about the 

recent changes to MST‟s paratransit service. The group agreed to meet again within 

the year and to include their respective advisory committees in future meetings. The 

CTSA Manager also met with the Monterey County Veteran‟s Services Collaborative 

regarding MST‟s specialized transportation programs for persons with disabilities and 

how MST might assist with the Stand Down planned for Monterey County veterans in 

June 2012. 

The MST Mobility Advisory Committee (MAC) met January 25th at the 

Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC) office in Salinas and new member 

Melissa McKenzie from the Carmel Foundation was welcomed. The committee 

received a presentation from Interim, Inc. about the transportation need of adults with 

mental illness. Also, Andy Cook of TAMC asked for public input on unmet transit needs 

within Monterey County. In 2011, the MAC became the official review body for 

overseeing the unmet needs process as it pertains to the transportation needs of travelchallenged 

individuals. 

For the month of January, the Mobility Trainer attended the S.C.O.R.E (South 

County Outreach Efforts) meeting in Soledad, the P.A.R.T.S (Preventing Alcohol 

Related Trauma in South County) meeting in Greenfield, and our very first MST 

Navigators meeting in Monterey. The Mobility Trainer also gave eight presentations to 

the Prundale Senior Center, where 22 people attended; Los Ositos in Salinas, where 17 

seniors attended; San Andres Regional Center (meeting with 1 staff member); Regency 

Court (meeting with 1 staff member), CHISPA (meeting with 2 staff members); North 

High special education department (meeting with 2 staff members), Sherwood Village 

(meeting with 7 staff members), and Alisal Family Center (meeting with 1 staff member). 

In addition, the Mobility Trainer completed 33 ADA Paratransit physical 

assessments, 3 travel training assessments, and a total of 2 referrals to MST 

Navigators. 

Total person trained (including RIDES assessments): 33 

Total # people contacted during public presentations: 39 

Total persons otherwise contacted: 13 

For the month of January, the Mobility specialist completed 33 ADA Paratransit 

physical assessments and a total of 2 travel training sessions. The Mobility Specialist 

spoke with 5 Rides applicants about travel training and its benefits. 

For the month of January the MST Navigator volunteers provided shopping 

assistance for the residence of Pacific Meadows by carrying grocery bags on and off 

Line 92. Additionally, the volunteers provided travel training to two individuals for a total 

of 18 hours. The Navigators met at Pacific Meadows to answer transportation 

112

questions twice this month as well. They also met with patrons of the Scholze Park 

Center twice this month. There is one volunteer who helps in the office with RIDES 

certification letters, and she volunteered 10 hours of her time for that purpose. All told, 

the MST Navigators volunteered 66 hours for the month of January. 

Total person trained (including RIDES assessments): 35 

Total # people contacted during public presentations: 00 

Total persons otherwise contacted: 03 

Total volunteer Navigator service hours: 66 

Customer Service Update 

Service Report Type 

Jan 

'12 % 

113 

Jan 

'11 % 

Valid 

Employee Compliment 5 7.35% 3 3 5.08% 

Service Compliment 2 2.94% 1 0 0.00% 

Improper Employee 

Conduct 18 26.47% 6 14 23.73% 

Passed By 7 10.29% 

3 5.08% 

Request To Add Service 6 8.82% 

4 6.78% 

Improper Driving 5 7.35% 

9 15.25% 

No Show 4 5.88% 2 3 5.08% 

Late Arrival 

Inaccurate Public 

4 5.88% 1 3 5.08% 

Information 4 5.88% 1 2 3.39% 

Fare / Transfer Dispute 3 4.41% 

5 8.47% 

Early Departure 2 2.94% 

3 5.08% 

Bus Stop Amenities 2 2.94% 

0 0.00% 

Service Schedule 2 2.94% 

0 0.00% 

ADA Compliance 1 1.47% 

2 3.39% 

Off Route 1 1.47% 

1 1.69% 

Agency Policy 

Request To Reduce 

1 1.47% 

0 0.00% 

Service 1 1.47% 

0 0.00% 

Passenger Injury 0 0.00% 

2 3.39% 

Facilities Vandalism 0 0.00% 

1 1.69% 

Carried By 0 0.00% 

1 1.69% 

Late Departure 0 0.00% 

1 1.69% 

Service Other 0 0.00% 

1 1.69% 

Vehicle Maintenance 0 0.00% 

1 1.69% 

68 100.00% 

59 100.00%

“Improper Employee Conduct” (18) represented 26.47 % of overall service reports and 

“Improper Driving” reports (5) represented 7.35 % of overall service reports for January 

2012. 

MST received five “Employee Compliments” and two “Service Compliments” reports in 

January. Of the seven compliments, two involved MST contracted service. 

Employee Compliments 

Passenger states “Monterey-Salinas Transit has the most wonderful Coach 

Operators; they make the trip from San Jose to Monterey very pleasant.” 

Passenger compliments MV Coach Operator Michael Roland, for Marina-On 

Call, saying that she, “was trying to get to a new destination, and not only did he 

assist her with information, he made sure to drop her off at a stop where she 

could catch her new bus.” 

Passenger states that Coach Operator Danny Alvarado, “Was extremely safe in 

his driving skills. When they were on Hwy 1, in their lane was a refrigerator, and 

he safely, skillfully avoided hitting it and kept everyone safe. She was very 

impressed.” 

Mr. Dave McIntosh (passenger) states Coach Operator V. Fraley “Went above 

and beyond to help him make his connection.” 

Mr. Robert Rosenthal (passenger) compliments Coach Operator Ernie Sanchez, 

“Ernie is very conscientious, friendly, helpful and very punctual. I feel very safe 

knowing he is my driver.” 

Service Compliments 

IT Update 

RIDES Passenger states “Thank you for providing a service that I greatly 

needed, and consider it my salvation.” 

Ms. Helaine Clark (passenger) “Thanks Hunter Harvath and staff for providing 

service at midnight for passengers to get from „First Night Monterey‟ back to 

Rippling River.” 

Staff configured the Trapeze ITS Transitmaster system. Staff continued to 

monitor and configure software and hardware for the Assetworks Maintenance system. 

Staff continued to support and monitors the Navision Payroll system. Staff coordinated 

with the MST HR Department regarding the HR Module upgrade. Staff continued to 

configure data for the GIRO DDAM Timekeeping system. Staff updated software 

114

components of MST workstations. Staff continued developing functionality of the 

Customer Service and RIDES databases. Staff kept the MST web page updated and 

made the appropriate changes as required. 

Staff continued to support MST staff as needed, proactively ensuring MST staff 

was supported fully with their IT needs. 

Marketing and Sales Update 

Published news stories include: “Transit tax is simply ignorant” (The Californian, 

1/2/12); “Woman hit in Salinas crosswalk by pickup truck” (KSBW, 1/11/12); “Salinas 

police search for hit-and-run driver” (The Californian, 1/11/12); “Transit bus depot 

makes no sense at Fort Ord” (The Californian, 1/11/12); “Soapbox: 2012 transportation 

challenges in Monterey County” (The Californian, 1/12/12); “Woman suffers hit-and-run” 

(Monterey County Herald, 1/12/12); “Maria Orozco: Transport agency has a good year” 

(Monterey County Herald, 1/13/12); “MST offers limited holiday schedule” (Monterey 

County Business Council‟s Friday Facts, 1/13/12); “San Francisco to Mexico (via L.A. 

and San Diego) on public transit – 6 trains, 12 buses, 49 hours” (californiastreets.org, 

1/16/12); “Hot topics in district 4” (Monterey County Weekly, 1/19/12); “Proposal before 

county” (Monterey County Herald, 1/12/12); “Business park vote delayed as Board of 

Supervisors seeks Whispering Oaks deal” (Monterey County Herald, 1/24/12); 

“Whispering Oaks hearing set for Feb. 14” (Monterey County Herald, 1/25/12); “MST 

schedules hearings on proposed service changes” (Monterey County Business 

Council‟s Friday Facts, 1/27/12); “Hooked on towing” (Monterey County Herald, 

1/30/12); “Wrong place for MST” (Monterey County Herald, 1/31/12). 

Press releases sent include: “MST bus service on Martin Luther King Jr. Day” 

(1/11/12); “Public hearings on proposed service changes effective April 2012” (1/20/12); 

“MST service modifications effective Saturday, February 4” (1/30/12). 

Marketing activities: Updated the employee of the year photo in the lobby; made 

edits to the annual report mailing list; mailed out annual report and community 

stakeholder surveys; scheduled MST‟s “Cry” and “Scream” TV commercials on 

Comcast and Central Coast ABC with funds from CMAQ grant; delivered GoPasses to 

Salinas Library with funds from CMAQ grant; delivered GoCards to the Veteran‟s 

Transition Center with funds from CMAQ grant; made modifications to service effective 

February 4 which included updating maps and schedules pages in the Rider‟s Guide, 

updating online maps and schedules and posting car cards notifying passengers of the 

modifications; sought Spanish translation for April service change public hearing 

presentation; attended Monterey Peninsula Chamber of Commerce Membership 

Luncheon recognizing MST for 20 years of continuous chamber membership; ordered 

MST promotional materials; managed MST website content and Facebook page; 

coordinated delivery of printed promotional materials. 

115

Planning Update 

During the month of January, staff finalized preparations for the February 4 th 

minor service change and began conducting public hearings on additional service 

changes and reductions for a spring service change. Staff began working with its 

consultant, Nelson Nygaard, on the Salinas Area Service Analysis study, designed to 

assess transit services in Salinas and recommend new routes and schedules to meet 

current transit demands. Staff continued to work with MST‟s military partners on 

improving and fine tuning services to the Presidio, Fort Hunter Liggett and Naval 

Postgraduate School. Staff also continued working with CSUMB and Hartnell College 

on the transit partnerships MST has with those educational institutions. Staff continued 

planning efforts with the JAZZ Bus Rapid Transit program. 

Staff attended meetings with TAMC, FORA, AMBAG and other local agencies. 

Staff traveled to Washington DC to conduct legislative advocacy and subsequently 

traveled to Orlando, Florida, to attend the American Public Transportation Association‟s 

Transit CEOs Seminar. 

116

TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY 

www.tamcmonterey.org 

HIGHLIGHTS 

February 22, 2012 Meeting 

INDEPENDENT TRANSPORTATION NETWORK 

BEGINS IN MONTEREY COUNTY 

The Transportation Agency for Monterey received a presentation on the Independent 

Transportation Network Monterey County (ITNMontereyCounty). ITNMontereyCounty 

is a new non-profit volunteer based transportation service that provides arm-through-arm, 

door-to-door rides 24 hours per day, 7 days per week for any reason to adults over the age 

of 60 and adults 18+ with visual impairments. 

ITNMontereyCounty’s service provides a travel option in Salinas and the greater 

Monterey Peninsula that is safe and dignified and will allow members the independence 

to travel when and where they wish without having to rely on family or friends, or drive 

in unsafe situations. 

Volunteers provide the majority of the rides while paid drivers provide a back up when 

volunteers aren’t available. Volunteers commit to driving three hours per month and 

indicate blocks of time they will be available to drive. They provide assistance as needed, 

such as offering an arm down stairs or bring a bag of groceries to the rider’s kitchen 

counter. Everyone who uses the service becomes a dues-paying member of the nonprofit 

organization. Annual membership costs $50 for individuals and $75 families. 

Member-riders call the ITNMontereyCounty dispatcher to schedule a ride. Scholarships 

are available for individuals who meet the federal poverty criteria. No money is 

exchanged when the ride is provided and gratuity is not allowed. Member-riders receive 

a monthly invoices accounting for the number and cost of the rides taken. 

For more information about ITNMontereyCounty visit their website at: 

www.ITNMontereyCounty.org. 

TRANSPORTATION FOR LIVABLE COMMUNITIES GRANT 

TRANSFERRED TO CHISPA PROJECT

On a vote of 11-3, the Transportation Agency Board approved the City of Marina's 

request for a transfer of the $300,000 Transportation for Livable Communities Transit- 

Oriented Development incentive grant awarded for the MST Transit Village project to the 

CHISPA De Forest apartment building. The Board also approved a deadline extension to 

the time of the next round of TLC grants, at which time the City must reapply for the 

funds, or for one year, whichever is shorter. 

The Transportation Agency enacted the TLC grant program in 2003 to incentivize the 

creation of affordable housing in existing communities close to transit, which reduces the 

demand on regional road networks and increases transit ridership. The goal of the 

program is to promote walkable, relatively high-density development near transit options, 

thereby increasing living and transportation choices while reducing reliance on 

automobiles. The Board also directed staff to initiate a third round of TLC grant awards 

upon resolution of the funding scenario for the US 101 - San Juan Road interchange 

project, expected by this summer. 

SAN JUAN ROAD AT HWY 101 INTERCHANGE PROJECT 

RECEIVES LOCAL FUNDS 

The San Juan Road at Highway 101 Interchange project maybe under construction as 

early as Fall 2012. The Transportation Agency for Monterey County approved allocating 

$17.875 million in local funds to match the $28.325 million of Trade Corridor 

Improvement Funds State bonds awarded to the project. 

Safety on Highway 101 is the primary concern behind plans for a new interchange near 

the intersection of San Juan Road and Highway 101. With over 85 accidents occurring at 

this intersection over the past five years (one fatal) plans for this intersection will make 

entering and exiting the highway safer and congestion free. 

The Transportation Agency originally committed to provide a one for one non-state fund 

match to the $28.325 million Trade Corridor Improvement Funds State bonds awarded to 

the US 101 San Juan Road Interchange Project. Subsequently, $10.450 million of federal 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds were programmed to the project 

reducing the commitment to $17.875 million. Transportation Agency controlled funds, 

including Regional Surface Transportation Program and development impact fees, are 

being put aside to cover the remaining $17.875 million commitment. 

The US 101 San Juan Road Interchange Project is on schedule to be “Ready to List” in 

early April 2012. Upon meeting this milestone projects can request state funding 

allocations from the California Transportation Commission. The local funding 

commitment could be less than $17.875 million if Corridor Mobility Improvement 

Account bond funds are allocated to the project. Corridor Mobility Improvement 

Account funded projects must be under construction by December 2012.

REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE 

REDUCTIONS 

The Transportation Agency Board approved reductions to the regional development 

impact fee for new developments located in infill areas and designating areas eligible for 

reductions. The Regional Development Impact Fee, approved by the County and all the 

cities in the county in 2008, provides for new development to pay their share of 

transportation improvements as mitigation for impacts of traffic generated by their 

projects. 

It was determined that development in built up areas promotes more use of alternatives to 

driving. Under the discount program, fees would be reduced by 10% for residential or 

industrial area, 15% for retail areas and 20% for office developments. To make 

implementation of the revised fees easier for the jurisdictions, infill area maps were 

prepared that designated areas in the region that meet the specific characteristics of infill 

development. Developments falling outside of these areas would still be eligible for trip 

reductions through the existing appeals process. The following criteria were used to 

identify appropriate sites as infill: 

1. Locations with 5,000 or more employees working within a l-mile radius; 

2. Residential with a minimum density of 12 dwelling units per net acre, or nonresidential 

with a minimum floor area ratio of 1.0; 

3. Transit service located within a ½ mile; 

4. A parcel has to be currently vacant to be considered infill; 

5. Under-developed parcels would qualify as refill parcels; and 

6. A parcel must be privately owned and located in an “urban” environment. 

The proposed trip rate reductions for infill developments could reduce revenues up to 

$6.4 million. With these changes, the fee program is expected to generate $243 million, 

with one-percent reimbursing the agency’s fee program administrative expenses, to year 

2030. 

CITY OF SAND CITY RECEIVES 

STATE TRANSPORTATION FUNDS 

The Transportation Agency allocated more than $17,000 in Regional Surface 

Transportation Funds to the City of Sand City to connect the California Ave, Sylvan- 

Tioga, overlay project to their Sand Dunes Drive Coastal Bike Path Interconnect Project. The 

purpose of the project is to provide a designated crossing or travel lane for bicycles and

pedestrians from the north end of Sand Dunes Drive at Tioga Ave, across the Highway 1 

over-crossing to the existing sidewalk on Tioga. Projects eligible for Regional Surface 

Transportation Program funding include local street and roadway rehabilitation, local match 

for federal transportation funds, bike lanes, pedestrian facilities, public transit capital, and 

signal coordination. 

NEW BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 

ADVISORY COMMITTEE COUNCIL MEMBER 

The Transportation Agency approved Megan Tolbert as the primary and Richard Dawson 

as the alternate to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Advisory Committee representing 

California State University Monterey Bay. Ms. Tolbert is a Transportation Planner and 

Mr. Dawson is the Outdoor Recreation Coordinator for CSUMB. 

Transportation Agency staff continues to actively pursue candidates for vacancies on the 

Committee. Vacancies remain for Monterey County District 3, and the cities of Carmel, 

Del Rey Oaks, Sand City, Seaside, Greenfield, Gonzales, King City and Soledad. Staff 

requests that Board members in these areas recruit any possible interested individuals and 

refer them to staff for more information.

TO: Carl Sedoryk 

FROM: Thomas P. Walters 


Washington, D.C. Office 

123 



March 5, 2012 

The following report summarizes recent actions taken on behalf of Monterey-Salinas 

Transit. 

TPW:dwg 

Arranged advocacy meetings for MST staff in Washington, D.C. 

Contacted House Delegation to request support for funding the Mass Transit 

Account of the Transportation Trust Fund in SAFETEA-LU Reauthorization 

legislation. 

Contacted Senate Finance Committee to request support for S. 1034, the 

Commuter Benefits Equity Act of 2011. 

Participated in APTA Washington Area Transit Industry Representatives Task 

Force conference call to coordinate advocacy on H.R. 7, the American Energy 

and Infrastructure Jobs Act of 2012, and S. 1813, the Moving Ahead for Progress 

in the 21st Century Act. 

Provided updates to MST on transportation and appropriations legislation.


124

DATE: March 1, 2012 

TO: Carl Sedoryk, General Manager/CEO 


FROM: John E. Arriaga, President 

SUBJ: February 2012 Activity Report 

125 



MEMO 

Week of February 6, 2012 

Monitored gubernatorial appointments 

Monitored California Transit Association activities 

Monitored California Transportation Commission activities 

Monitored all new and old legislation that may be relevant to MST and eventually be 

monitored on their legislative track 

Provided MST with JEA & Associates Capitol Weekly Report on key events and 

activities in Sacramento/the Capitol 




Monitored California Transportation Commission activities



JEA meeting with Assembly Member Alejo staff to discuss possible legislation 





JEA meeting with Assembly Member Alejo staff to discuss possible legislation 





Prepared MST legislative track for Carl Sedoryk 









Monitored all new legislation that may be relevant to MST 

Prepared MST legislative track for Carl Sedoryk with old and new legislation 



Please feel free to contact me at (916) 669-1340 with any questions or concerns you may have 

regarding information contained in this report. 

126

To: Carl Sedoryk 

127 



March 5, 2012 

From: Hunter Harvath, Assistant General Manager – Finance & Admin. 

Subject: TRIP REPORT 

On January 26-27, 2012, I traveled to Washington, DC, to conduct legislative 

advocacy meetings with professional staff members from both the House of 

Representatives and the Senate as well as from the Federal Transit Administration 

(FTA). These included representatives from the following offices: 

Senator Barbara Boxer 

Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren 

Congressman Sam Farr 

Congressman John Olver 

Congressman Pete DeFazio 

Congressman Mike Honda 

Senator Dianne Feinstein 

FTA Office of Budget and Policy 

On January 28-31, 2012, I traveled to Orlando, FL, to participate in the 

American Public Transportation Association’s Transit CEOs Seminar. While at the 

seminar I participated in the following sessions: 

Bus & Paratransit CEOs Committee Meeting 

Opening General Session – Public Transportation Takes Us There 

Policy & Trends in Surface Transportation 

Executives Exchange: Views and Insights 

Chair & President’s Roundtable 

Workforce Development – Next Gen 

APTA President & CEO’s Breakfast for Deputy Chief Executives 

Peer-to-Peer Presentations: Case Studies, Best Practices and New 

Programs 

Labor Relations Overview 

Leadership & Public Transportation Security 

New Business Models 

Staying on Message 

Wired: How Your Customers Have Changed and What to Do About It 

Hunter Harvath


128

Mr. Carl G. Sedoryk 

General Manager/Chief Executive Officer 

Monterey Salinas Transit 

One Ryan Ranch Road 

Monterey, CA 93940 

Dear Mr. Sedoryk: 


On behalf of the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), I thank you 

for your participation at the 2012 APTA Transit CEOs Seminar in Orlando, FL. 

Your session received high ratings. Participants responded that the session was 

relevant to their needs and provided new information. We are grateful for your candid 

presentation. We fully recognize that we would not receive such positive feedback from 

participants without the excellent presentations and stimulating discussions provided by 

talented individuals like you. 

Thank you for helping make the seminar a success. We appreciate your continued 

involvement and unique contributions. I hope to see you at the Legislative Conference or 

another APTA conference very soon. 

MPM/lm:jr 

Sincerely yours, 

Michael P. Melaniphy 

President & CEO 

1666 K Street, N.W., 11th Floor Washington, DC 20006 Phone (202) 496-4800 FAX (202) 496-4324 

Executive Committee 

Chair 

Gary C. Thomas 

Vice Chair 

Flora M. Castillo, CHIE 

Secretary-Treasurer 

Nathaniel P. Ford, Sr. 

Immediate Past Chair 

Michael J. Scanlon 

Members-at-Large 

David J. Armijo 

Ronald L. Epstein 

Greg Evans, M.Ed. 

Joseph J. Giulietti 

Sharon Greene 

Crystal Lyons 

Reginald A. Mason 

Sharon McBride 

Gary W. McNeil 

Thomas F. Prendergast 

Phillip A. Washington 

Alice Wiggins-Tolbert 

Charles R. Wochele 

Alan C. Wulkan 

President & CEO 

Michael P. Melaniphy 

www.apta.com

Agenda - Monterey-Salinas Transit

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?