- General Manager’s report dated 10 Jun 99

Mr. Pat Larkin, Director, ParaTranspo, presented the report. It describes the service provided under contract by Laidlaw Transit Ltd. to 9,000 permanently registered customers and to an additional 1000 temporary users. Mr. Larkin pointed out that 72% of clients are 65 years or older and 81% of new clients are 65 years or older. ParaTranspo’s 1998 operating budget was $15.6 million; only 8.2% of costs are recovered and every trip is subsidized at a cost of $21 dollars per trip.

Mr. Larkin highlighted the following points:

Mr. Larkin noted that, while daily bookings represent only 5% of total service, this percentage is expected to increase as staff gain experience with the new automated reservation and scheduling system.

The results of the registration process are as follows:

Customer concerns center around busy phone lines, especially after 9:00 a.m., and requests for trips to medical appointment that cannot be accommodated. Mr. Larkin said one option is to establish a priority system to accommodate medical appointments before all others. Such a system was in place in 1985 but it was abandoned for a variety of reasons, one being the difficulty administrating a system where clients are not required to state the purpose of their trip. Establishing a priority system could mean;

Some negative aspects might include:

Mr. Larkin noted that, should medical trips be given priority, these would have to be defined to mean trips to see a physician or to go to a hospital for treatment. Medical trips would be accepted before all advance bookings: regular bookings for people going to work and requests from persons in wheelchairs for any purpose would then be accepted. At 9:00 a.m., only medical calls from ambulatory persons would be accepted, moving all other requests to a later time.

Mr. Larkin spoke about the need to reduce the current and future abuse of regular bookings, highlighting two major problems:

Mr. Larkin indicated there will need to be detailed discussions with the Accessible Transit Advisory Committee (ATAC) on all options. He added that, currently, because of the new computer system, it would be difficult to implement a priority system immediately. He suggested implementation be delayed for a few months.

In response to a request from Chair Loney, Mr. Larkin spoke about the impact of the decision to reduce seniors’ passes to $19.99 for conventional transit for 1999, the Year of the Older Person. The current rate of refusal for one-way trips per year (40,000), coupled with the fare reduction would mean increased demand on Paratranspo and the accompanying increase in the number of refusals and the loss of $85,000 in revenue per year. For these reasons, senior pass users were asked to top-up with one ticket every time they board a vehicle. This has resulted in:

40% of senior pass users paying between $28 and $57, the cost of the adult Transpass.

Mr. Larkin noted that 10% of senior pass users use Paratranspo so often it would be to their advantage to purchase the Transpass. Because of concerns related to increased costs for seniors, and to ensure no one missed a medical trip because of this, financial assistance was provided to persons whose costs increased substantially due to their monthly medical trips. Persons going to work, volunteering or involved in adult training would not pay more than $28 dollars and would be provided with tickets for top-up. All would be able to keep medical appointments and would be given tickets on an exceptional basis after the first 10 trips.

RECEIVED

2. PARATRANSPO CANCELLATION POLICY

The Director, Paratranspo service, Mr. P. Larkin, began by saying that, in 1998, 735,000 trips were provided, 40,000 single trips were refused, fifty thousand customers cancelled one day in advance to cancel trips and 130,000 cancelled trips on the say of service itself. This leaves little opportunity of fitting requests into existing schedules.

Mr. Larkin posited that, by reducing the number of last minute cancellations, Paratranspo will be able to provide more customers with transportation. The Draft Policy will reduce the number of customer cancellations but will not remove transportation from clients. Paratranspo will notify clients, in writing, of the Policy, and ask for their cooperation. Should last minute cancellations continue, the privilege of making regular bookings will be taken away for a one-week period, leaving clients the option of getting transportation at other times. An appeals process will be put in place.

Commissioner J. Legendre indicated he had not realized the full impact reducing seniors’ fares would have and he thanked OC Transpo for taking measures to assist those most financially troubled by the change. With respect to the cancellation policy, he asked whether the same individuals are responsible for same day cancellations. Mr. Larkin replied that a group of approximately 50 individuals are canceling up to 90% of their service. Many customers have fewer trips booked and are not using them regularly and this has been ongoing since the early nineteen-nineties. In response to a further question from Commissioner Legendre, Mr. Larkin indicated that no bookings are made which would be physically impossible to keep. When asked to outline the differences between the current and the proposed policies, Mr. Larkin said staff currently have no authority to deal with the matter. The proposed policy sets up a process to correct the problem.

Replying to a question from Commissioner D. Holmes, Mr. Larkin said the new computerized system has contributed to improved reliability in the first few weeks. However, the schedules are using up more kilometers, and Paratranspo is working with the consultant to correct this problem. Mr. Larkin noted that other factors such as reduced demand for service in the summer, and traffic congestion, are not system problems. The is being adjusted, and staff anticipate it will take a few months of experimentation before reaching the desired level of operation.

Commissioner M. Bellemare asked a number of questions to clarify the percentage of cancelled trips re-directed for service and the net ridership. Mr. Larkin indicated that, after re-direction, the number of trips is 734,000. By adding the 131,000 cancellations (1998), and providing there were no cancellations, an additional 850,000 trips could be accommodated.

He added that, with the old system, staff accepted more transportation than could be handled because of cancellations and reliability was affected; with the new system, efforts are being made to reduce cancellations.

Commissioner Bellemare wanted to know if OC Transpo provides any vehicles to the contractor, Laidlaw, for on-street service. Mr. Larkin replied that 11, high-capacity vehicles, Orions 1 and 2, are leased to the contractor for group travel and the contractor charges a smaller hourly rate for those vehicles. The contractor is responsible for maintenance and servicing under OC Transpo’ supervision and OC Transpo would pay for the replacement of the vehicles if required.

The Committee heard from Mr. Steven St Denis, Accessible Transit Advisory Committee (ATAC). He said that ATAC takes the issue of customers not being able to get to medical appointments very seriously, however there are concerns about implementing any priority system for medical purposes. He indicated that, unless the Commission feels strongly that a priority system should be implemented immediately, ATAC feels the best approach is to wait and see whether efficiencies can be made through the new scheduling system. In addition, given that cancellations for regular bookings account for 131,000 trips or 20% of the service, the most prudent thing to do would be to implement the late cancellation policy and wait a few months to see what effect it has in reducing the numbers. Mr. St-Denis expressed the hope the reduction will be large enough to accommodate people looking for trips for medical purposes.

Replying to a question from Chair Loney, Mr. Larkin said understanding the Policy will be a slow process for clients, but it will result in improvements. At a recent ATAC meeting, it was agreed the cancellation policy has to move forward and that the regular booking process has to be examined and recommendations made. From an administrative perspective, Mr. Larkin said he would prefer to put the cancellation policy in place now and deal with a medical priority policy in a few months’ time. Commissioner W. Byrne spoke in support of ATAC’s position.

Commissioner L. Davis said the problem is how to assign a number of equitable uses as opposed to having a group of persons enjoy considerable usage while others have difficulty accessing service. She wondered whether there have been discussions with hospitals and physicians about establishing certain areas of priority. Mr. Larkin replied that Paratranspo enjoys a good relationship with the General Hospital’s dialysis unit but generally, hospitals dictate times. He spoke about the Communibus having come about as a result of examining travel patterns in areas where a high concentration of seniors resides, and about the ongoing work with regular transit to find alternate ways of providing transportation through low-floor, accessible buses, as recommended by the KPMG report.

 Chair Loney said the Commission will need to undertake a major review of criteria for use of Paratranspo and will have to make the difficult decisions needed to improve the service. He spoke about the fact there already exists a two-tiered system in cost, given the difference in price between taxis and Paratranspo service, postulating that the latter could probably fill the demand for transportation if it had the resources. Chair Loney pointed out that the arrival of 140 new low-floor buses, the designation of additional routes and the use of a computerized system will all assist in this regard.

Mr. Nicholas Patterson, a resident of Ottawa-Carleton and an economist, addressed the Committee. He asked why Laidlaw, the principal provider of Paratranspo service, was not in attendance, since the opinion of the direct service provider would be beneficial. Mr. Patterson also wanted to know why Paratranspo would not use taxis, at an average cost of $8.00 per trip, as opposed to paying $21 dollars for a one-way trip on Paratranspo. He said he couldn’t imagine Laidlaw would not have knowledge and advice to offer Council on this matter. He added that, even if the cost of taxi service were half that of specialized vehicles this would still be a good reason to examine the possibility.

Mr. Larkin indicated that weekly meetings are held between Laidlaw and Paratranspo, and the contractor is fully aware that demand is not being met. The contractor is not involved in the reservation process and operates via a schedule provided by Paratranspo for the pick-up and delivery of customers. With respect to using a cheaper alternative, Mr. Larkin said this option has been examined in the past and requests for pilot projects have come to the Commission. The KPMG report has restated the need to investigate this option and the matter will be the focus of a future report to the Commission.

Pursuant to these comments and observations, the Committee considered the staff recommendation.

Moved by W. Byrne

CARRIED

OC TRANSPO COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW -

- General Manager’s report dated 7 Jun 99

The Interim General Manager, Mr. Sheflin, cited the following as some of the factors that have contributed to OC Transpo’s past situation:

Mr. Sheflin continued by saying OC Transpo will be fully engaged in the process of renewal. It will use information as it becomes available to make changes and to plan for future changes. TransPlan 2000 will incorporate ideas for service outside the Greenbelt, as TransPlan 99 did inside the Greenbelt. The company will be successful when its employees like to come to work and are respected in the community. The company must be customer-driven: it is unique in that it delivers daily service through over 1200 people in direct contact with customers. There must be a collaborative approach with the employees and with the Unions, as there are common needs, and there must be a win/win philosophy.

The Assistant General Manager, Dick Palmer, indicated that the issue of employee morale does not specifically emerge from the report. However, every member of the Comprehensive Review Steering Committee has pointed out that employee morale, workplace relationships, pride, respect, and collaboration have all improved significantly in the last few months. Mr. Palmer went on to say management agrees completely with the recommendations of the KPMG Report and has begun implementing some of them. He expressed the view that the downward spiral has ended: the company is at the early stages of a turn around and is looking seven or eight years of significant change. Mr. Palmer thanked the members of the Steering Committee for their dedication and hard work during the last two years. He thanked the Transit Services Committee for its support and he acknowledged the leadership shown by Chair Loney and Commissioner Holmes.

Chair Loney pointed out that a number of initiatives undertaken prior to the completion of the Comprehensive Review did so because of management’s support. He expressed the view that the new contract with the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) is the result of mutual trust. This was illustrated by the fact that both parties agreed to forego the strike and lock-out provisions of the collective agreement, a major change from past experience. Chair Loney added that, if there is to be a positive legacy from the OC Transpo tragedy earlier in the year, it is that relationships between co-workers have improved. This is an indication that the company has begun to successfully move forward.

Commissioner J. Legendre called the KPMG report the way to move forward and he expressed the hope most of its recommendations will be implemented. He made particular reference to Recommendation 2, saying he hoped staff will hold the line on the number of occupants needed for vehicles using High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes, and Recommendation 19, the implementation of smart card based fare collection, the use of the Global Positioning System. Commissioner Legendre said he looked forward to the eventual implementation of a fare by distance structure.

Speaking to the recommendation on HOV lanes, Commissioner D. Holmes said she assumed the Transportation Department would report back on the experience with HOV lanes across the country. She added her understanding is that, unless there is strict permanent enforcement of HOV lanes during peak hours, they are useless. She asked that the department take a more comprehensive look across Canada, and not move into this area without further research. She asked for a report back on enforcement, costs, criteria for success and proof that HOV lanes are not a detriment to buses.

Chair Loney suggested that any Motion brought forward be considered "free-standing" in an effort not to make changes either to the consultants’ recommendations or to management’s response.

Moved by D. Holmes

CARRIED

The following delegations were heard:

Mr. Nicholas Patterson, Economist, asked that the Committee bear in mind that OC Transpo is expending upwards of $300 million this year, including capital expenditures and subsidies, and recovering only $85 million from customers. Mr. Patterson called this a mammoth subsidy of 15% of the population that takes the bus by 85% of taxpayers who don’t. He went on to say that, having studied the matter extensively, it was his view that privatization of transit will be the inevitable result. He posited that, in a few years, this will be accepted, even though it is prohibited under the collective agreement at the moment. Regional staff should begin studying this option immediately so it isn’t done in as sloppy a fashion as the ambulance service is now.

Mr. Patterson posited that the prevailing policy at OC Transpo, that of penalizing people for using private vehicles through parking fines, gasoline taxes and other measures, is "absolutely wrong-headed". He pointed out that people prefer to use their cars by a factor of 500%, and this is their right. He felt people shouldn’t be coerced into being intelligent according to a formula devised by politicians or bureaucrats; if they cannot see the wisdom of taking a bus over using their cars, this has to be accepted. Mr. Patterson asked that staff respond to his comments on privatization and on taxpayers preferring to use their cars.

Bob Mannion, CUPE Local 5500, speaking as the representative of the transit and garage supervisors, plant supervisors, technical staff and security department, thanked the Commissioners for their support and feedback during a difficult time. The changes in management at OC Transpo have brought about many positive changes. Mr. Mannion specifically highlighted the contributions made by the Assistant General Manager, Dick Palmer. He said morale is improving, and he expressed the view the company will succeed in becoming "the best of the best".

Rob Vye, Amalgamated Transit Union Local 279, began by saying that numerous studies have shown that privatization is not the way to proceed. In practically every transit property where the experiment was tried, with the exception of one, privatization has resulted in higher costs. Mr. Vye noted that the Executive of Local 279 has been a willing supporter of the Steering Committee and of the KPMG recommendations. He pointed out that the changes at OC Transpo are the result of management, the Unions and the Transit Commission realizing that things had to change. There is a new, open relationship with the employer, the barriers to change are being torn down and this will help the company become "the best of the best".

Richard White, Salaried Employees Advisory and Communications Committee, spoke about the improved relationship between his group and management, the lack of confrontation, the sharing of ideas, and the open discussion. He expressed the hope this will continue in the coming years.

Commissioner W. Byrne thanked both management and the Unions for providing information on how the process has impacted on them. Commissioner Byrne said it was encouraging to hear from all levels that what the Commission hoped would happen is actually happening, and that the company is moving in the right direction.

Chair Loney thanked all the representatives of employee groups, noting it has been very encouraging to the Commission to see all the efforts being put forward.

Commissioner Legendre, responding to Mr. Patterson’s comments about Recommendations 5 and 6, clarified that the intent is not to attack the use of automobiles, but to consider the entire transportation system. He suggested this be placed in the context of the continued "tax grab" at the gas pump by the senior levels of government. At one time, this was legitimate, since both Ontario and Canada were funding roads, but in Ontario this is no longer being done. Municipalities have been given the responsibility for 95% of roads and receive little or no revenue, whereas the senior levels of government have 100% of revenues. Commissioner Legendre expressed the hope that revenues from automobile use would someday be used to reflect this new reality.

Commissioner Holmes proposed there be joint efforts similar to those related to the Tax Exempt Transit Passes, in an effort to bring about a more equitable sharing of revenues generated by automobiles.

Moved by D. Holmes

CARRIED

Speaking to Recommendation 6, Commissioner Holmes expressed the view this matter was defeated at Council because no differentiation was made between short and long term parking, and Councillors with Business Improvement Areas in their wards were concerned about the impact on shopping. She proposed the following Motion to try to address this:

Moved by D. Holmes

CARRIED

Commissioner Holmes made reference to the lack of communication between the various Planning Departments and OC Transpo planners. She suggested there needs to be better co-ordination to ensure a strong emphasis is placed on OC Transpo’s needs in any planning exercise. In addition, there must be less hesitation in taking municipalities to the Ontario Municipal Board if necessary. Mr. Sheflin pointed out there is a close relationship between the Region’s Planning and Development Approvals Department and OC Transpo’s Planning and Development. He posited the difficulty is governance and the fact that some recommended measures are left behind for other considerations between the developers and municipalities.

Chair Loney said staff may well argue very strenuously that certain measures are needed, but they have not been given a strong enough mandate to ensure them support. He added that any appeal to the OMB would need Commission ratification, and staff cannot be faulted if this is not done.

Moved by D. Holmes

CARRIED

Committee discussion focused on Recommendation 12, Commissioner Holmes proposing that staff undertake a more global search for vehicles that meet the Commission’s needs. Commissioner Legendre pointed out that currently in North America, Canadian companies are in the lead in bus manufacturing, American companies preferring to manufacture smaller vehicles. Chair Loney said he was amazed that, at an average cost of $440,000, a decent vehicle can’t be built. He made reference to the fact that the Region is now free of purchasing constraints imposed by the Province, but the problem is that there is no money to buy vehicles. The General Manager, M. Sheflin, added that the basic problem is the volume of sales, noting that 700 buses per year are sold in Canada and 7,000 in the United States.

Moved by D. Holmes

CARRIED

RECEIVED

ADDITIONAL ITEM

6. LONGWOOD HOUSING DEVELOPMENT - CITY OF NEPEAN

- Co-ordinator, Transit Services Committee report dated 21 Jun 99

Commissioner D. Holmes circulated a letter from a resident of Nepean relating how OC Transpo was unsuccessful at getting what it needed from the developer of the Longwood Housing Development. She said this is an example of how the Commission should change its way of operating so it is successful. She asked that staff report back on its original comments, what was being requested, why this was not achieved and what options are available to ensure future success. Commissioner J. Legendre suggested the report back be timed for consideration by the Planning and Environment Committee in July.

Chair Loney informed the Committee he had met, early on, with the agent of the developer. The developer was willing to accommodate the request for a pathway, but he did not want to be responsible for acquiring a pathway through a property he did not own. At issue is residents losing a semi-park (never dedicated as such) and Chair Loney thought the Commission should stay clear of this matter and focus on transit issues.

Commissioner Holmes asked that the staff report be available for the Planning and Environment Committee meeting in July and subsequently for the Transit Services Committee.

INFORMATION PREVIOUSLY DISTRIBUTED

7. SEASONAL VARIATIONS IN TRANSIT SCHEDULES

- General Manager’s report 10 Jun 99

Councillor M. Bellemare asked what was the target date for reducing service in the Spring. The Manager, Planning and Development, Dr. Helen Gault, said the date this year was April 25^th, adding that the post-secondary institutions significantly change their patterns at the end of April. Councillor Bellemare made reference to the fact that the graph in Exhibit A of the report is not accurate if it still shows service at 100% in both April and December. Dr. Gault replied that the graphs represent the service scheduled. She added the graphs are at a conceptual level to try to illustrate that, although there are seasonal variations in service, this is not done to the extent of reduction in demand: OC Transpo is trying to balance convenience and using resources appropriately.

Commissioner Bellemare wondered whether or not reducing service in April isn’t affecting ridership for the rest of Spring and Summer and sending the message that customers should be seeking alternate modes of transportation. He asked whether any consideration has been given to tapering off service by the end of Spring and completing the reduction by the Summer.

Dr. Gault pointed out the service reduction is nowhere near to the ridership drop and that the prevailing weather has a huge influence on ridership. She said the reduction could be made later in April, as Spring changes are relatively minor. Dr. Gault added that the May 1999 ridership was 4.5% higher than that of May 1998, and staff are very pleased about this.

Commissioner Bellemare thought there may be some flexibility for a single reduction and that this might impact positively on ridership. He presented a Motion calling for staff to examine the feasibility of service reduction in early June and to report on the cost implications. Staff should also examine the possible advantage of holding on to ridership for a longer period of time in Spring and Summer, in keeping with the Commission’s focus on reliability. Commissioner Bellemare reminded Committee members it has decided that air-conditioned buses will be purchased, and this indicates the Commission wants to increase ridership during the summer months. Staff need to address the complaints from riders about service decreasing at a time when demand doesn’t and the feeling this is an arbitrary measure.

Commissioner H. Kreling said that, while there may be validity in considering one service reduction instead of two, any decision should be taken from the vantage point of actual usage. He indicated he could not support directing staff as to when the change should occur, preferring to interpret from usage when the appropriate time might be. Commissioner Bellemare indicated he was prepared to remove any reference to June in his Motion.

Replying to a question from Commissioner J. Legendre, Dr. Gault indicated that OC Transpo will be providing considerably more service to students of the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board (OCDSB) at the end of August. She pointed out that school start and stop times dictate the end of the Spring booking and the start of the Fall booking for the Commission. Dr. Gault added one of the concerns about reducing service further in July and August is the pass-using customer of the not-so-busy express routes. If the Commission were trying to match supply more closely to demand for these clients, the head-way of the service would have to stretch out so far this would by itself be a dis-incentive.

Chair Loney said he agreed with the general thrust of the Motion, suggesting that overall changes have to be reviewed in terms of their potential impact on clients. Mr. Sheflin reminded the Committee that putting out service when there is less revenue results in fewer total bus hours on the street and this can be examined from that particular perspective.

Moved by M. Bellemare

CARRIED, as amended

INQUIRIES

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting adjourned at 11:45 a.m.

_____________________________ ____________________________

CHAIR CO-ORDINATOR