Clovis City Council
October 6, 2025

October 06, 2025 - 1 - 12:14 PM
A G E N D A • C I T Y C O U N C I L M E E T I N G
October 6, 2025 6:00 PM Council Chamber
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to access the City Council Chamber to participate at this meeting, please contact the City Clerk or General Services Director at (559) 324-2060 (TTY – 711). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the Council Chamber.

The Clovis City Council meetings are open to the public at the physical address listed above. There are numerous ways to participate in the City Council meetings: you are able to attend in person; you may submit written comments as described below; and you may view the meeting which is webcast and accessed at www.clovisca.gov/agendas.

Written Comments
 Members of the public are encouraged to submit written comments at:
www.clovisca.gov/agendas at least two (2) hours before the meeting (4:00 p.m.). You will be prompted to provide:
 Council Meeting Date
 Item Number
 Name
 Email
 Comment
 Please submit a separate form for each item you are commenting on.  A copy of your written comment will be provided to the City Council noting the item number.

If you wish to make a verbal comment, please see instructions below.  Please be aware that any written comments received that do not specify a particular agenda item will be marked for the general public comment portion of the agenda.  If a written comment is received after 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting, efforts will be made to provide the comment to the City Council during the meeting. However, staff cannot guarantee that written comments received after 4:00 p.m. will be provided to City Council during the meeting. All written comments received prior to the end of the meeting will be made part of the record of proceedings.

Council Chamber, 1033 Fifth Street, Clovis, CA 93612 (559) 324-2060 www.clovisca.gov
1 October 06, 2025 - 2 - 12:14 PM
CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION PROHIBITIONS AND MANDATORY DISCLOSURE – Pursuant to Government Code section 84308, a Councilmember shall not accept, solicit, or direct a campaign contribution of more than $500 from any party or their agent, or from any participant or their agent, while a proceeding involving a license, permit, contract, or other entitlement for use is pending before the City or for 12 months after a final decision is rendered in that proceeding. Any Councilmember who has received a campaign contribution of more than $500 within the preceding 12 months from a party or their agent, or from a participant or their agent, must disclose that fact on the record of the proceeding and shall not make, participate in making, or in any way attempt to use their official position to influence the decision.

Pursuant to Government Code section 84308, subdivision (e), any party to a covered proceeding before the City Council is required to disclose on the record of the proceeding any campaign contribution, including aggregated contributions, of more than $500 made within the preceding 12 months by the party or their agent to any Councilmember. The disclosure shall be made as required by Government Code Section 84308, subdivision (e)(1) and California Code of Regulations, Title 2, section 18438.8. No party or their agent, and no participant or their agent, shall make a campaign contribution of more than $500 to any Councilmember during the covered proceeding or for 12 months after a final decision is made in that proceeding. The foregoing statements do not constitute legal advice, and parties and participants are urged to consult with their own legal counsel regarding the applicable requirements of the law.

CALL TO ORDER
FLAG SALUTE - Councilmember Basgall

ROLL CALL

PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS

1. Presentation of Proclamation declaring October 2025, as Domestic Violence Awareness Month.

PUBLIC COMMENTS - This is an opportunity for the members of the public to address the City Council on any matter within the City Council’s jurisdiction that is not listed on the Agenda. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to 3 minutes or less, or 10 minutes per topic. Anyone wishing to be placed on the Agenda for a specific topic should contact the City Manager’s office and submit correspondence at least 10 days before the desired date of appearance.

CONSENT CALENDAR - Items considered routine in nature are to be placed upon the Consent Calendar. They will all be considered and voted upon in one vote as one item unless a Councilmember requests individual consideration. A Councilmember’s vote in favor of the Consent Calendar is considered and recorded as a separate affirmative vote in favor of each action listed. Motions in favor of adoption of the Consent Calendar are deemed to include a motion to waive the reading of any ordinance or resolution on the Consent Calendar. For adoption of ordinances, only those that have received a unanimous vote upon introduction are considered Consent items.

2. Administration - Approval - Minutes from the September 15, 2025, Council Meeting. 2 October 06, 2025 - 3 - 12:14 PM

3. General Services – Approval of Contract Award for Consultant Services for a Strategic Operations Plan (SOP) to Jarrett Walker & Associates, LLC for $169,907.97; and Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Contract on behalf of the City.

4. General Services – Approval - Res. 25-___, Authorize the Federal Funding Under Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5310 (49 U.S.C. Section 5310) with Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG) and the Execution of Certifications and Assurances, Applications, and Documents; and Authorize the Deputy General Services Director to execute all necessary documentation.

5. Planning and Development Services – Approval – Final Acceptance for CIP 21-15 Armstrong Avenue Street Improvements, with a final contract cost of $529,880.88.

6. Planning and Development Services – Approval – Partial Acceptance for Final Map for Tract 6086, and reduction of the Performance Surety and Labor and Materials Surety to the appropriate values of the remaining improvements to be completed, located at the southeast corner of Shaw Avenue and Leonard Avenue (Lennar Homes of California, LLC).

7. Planning and Development Services – Approval – Final Acceptance for Final Map for Tract 6107, acceptance of public improvements with authorization to record the Notice of Completion, and release of sureties as required, located at the southwest corner of Shaw and Highland Avenues (Lennar Homes of California).

8. Public Utilities – Approval – Waive Formal Bidding Requirements and Authorize the Purchase of a 2026 Ford F750 Altec Tree Trimming Truck Model LR856 from Altec Industries, Inc., Utilizing the Sourcewell Cooperative Purchasing Contract in the Total Amount of $211,736.37.

9. Public Utilities – Approval – Res. 25-___, Authorizing the Submittal of an Application Under the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Public Benefit Grant Program - New Alternative Fuel Vehicle Purchase and Authorizing the City Manager to be the Contract Authority; and Approval – Waive Formal Bidding Requirements and Authorize the Purchase of Five (5) 2025 Chevrolet Silverado EV Crew Cab Work Trucks from Hedricks Chevrolet in the Amount of $359,549.40.

10. Public Utilities – Approval – Waive Formal Bidding Requirements and Authorize the City Manager to Enter into a Contract with Golden Bell Products, Inc., for Insect Control in Sanitary Sewer Manholes, in the Amount of $221,120.

ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS - Administrative Items are matters on the regular City Council Agenda other than Public Hearings.

11. Workshop - Presentation on Cybersecurity Awareness.

Staff: Jesse Velez, I.T. Deputy Director
Recommendation: Receive and File

COUNCIL ITEMS

12. Consider Approval – Res. 25-___Adopting a Position of Opposition to Proposition 50 on the November 4, 2025, Ballot, Authorizing Temporary Changes to Congressional District Maps.

Staff: Paul Armendariz, Assistant City Manager
Recommendation: Consider
3 October 06, 2025 - 4 - 12:14 PM

CITY MANAGER COMMENTS

COUNCIL COMMENTS
CLOSED SESSION - A “closed door” (not public) City Council meeting, allowed by State law, for consideration of pending legal matters and certain matters related to personnel and real estate transactions.

13. Government Code Section 54957.6

CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Agency designated representatives: Andrew Haussler, Paul Armendariz, Amy Hance, Bethany Berube, Jay Schengel, Scott Cross
Employee Organizations: Transit Employees Bargaining Unit, Clovis Public Safety Employees Association, Clovis Police Officers Association, Clovis Public Works Employees Association, and Unrepresented Employees

RECONVENE INTO OPEN SESSION AND REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION

ADJOURNMENT

FUTURE MEETINGS
Regular City Council Meetings are held at 6:00 P.M. in the Council Chamber. The following are future meeting dates:

Oct. 13, 2025 (Mon.) (Joint Meeting with CUSD)
Oct. 20, 2025 (Mon.)
Nov. 3, 2025 (Mon.)
Nov. 10, 2025 (Mon.)
Nov. 17, 2025 (Mon.)
4 5
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1.

PRELIMINARY - SUBJECT TO APPROVAL

CLOVIS CITY COUNCIL MEETING
September 15, 2025 6:00 P.M. Council Chamber
Meeting called to order by Mayor Mouanoutoua at 6:00
Flag Salute led by Councilmember Ashbeck
Roll Call: Present: Councilmembers Ashbeck, Basgall, Mayor Pro Tem Pearce Mayor Mouanoutoua

Absent: Councilmember Bessinger
Mayor Mouanoutoua requested a moment of silence in memory of Former Fresno Councilmember and Assemblymember Mike Briggs, Luis Salazar (father-in-law of Former Mayor Jose Flores), and American political activist and author Charlie Kirk.

PRESENTATION – 6:02
6:02 – ITEM 1 - Presentation of Proclamation Recognizing September 17th through 23rd as Constitution Week.

PUBLIC COMMENTS – 6:07
Mayor Mouanoutoua noted for the record that five public comments were received regarding the Clovis Senior Center and the Dance Instructor, the display of “In God We Trust” in the Council Chamber, and support for Proposition 50.

Bill Scott, a resident, commented on the recent passing of Charlie Kirk and then spoke regarding divisive debates on the Council.

Debbie Graeber, Beverly Trenhaile, Shirley C., Henry Wegermann, and Sharon Foster spoke regarding the Senior Center dance classes.

Steven Trevino, a resident, spoke regarding Proposition 50, expressing disagreement with placing the conversation on the agenda, and also commented on the recent passing of Charlie Kirk.

Bob Gallup, resident, spoke regarding the City of Clovis flag.

CONSENT CALENDAR – 6:32
Upon call, there was no public comment.

Motion by Councilmember Ashbeck, seconded by Councilmember Basgall, that the items on the Consent Calendar be approved. Motion carried by 4-0-1, with Councilmember Bessinger absent.

2. Administration - Approval - Minutes from the September 8, 2025, Council Meeting.

3. Finance - Approval - Res. 25-98, Budget Amendment to Increase Expenditures Related to Approved Negotiated Salary and Benefit Adjustments.
6 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

PRELIMINARY - SUBJECT TO APPROVAL

4. Fire – Approval – Res. 25-99, Adopting the City of Clovis Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) Annex as part of the Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP).

5. Fire – Approval – Res. 25-100, Amending the FY 2025-2026 Fire Department Budget to reflect the $31,000 awarded in 2025 State Homeland Security Grant Program (SHSGP) to fund Fire Department radio equipment.

6. Fire – Approval - Various actions related to the purchase of two (2) Type 6 fire engines to be used as fire squad apparatus by the Fire Department: a) Waive the City’s formal bidding requirements, b) Authorize the sole-source purchase of two (2) Boise Mobile Equipment (BME) Type 6 fire engines from Golden State Fire Apparatus in Sacramento, CA for $870,731.26, and c) Authorize the City Manager to sign the purchase agreements.

7. Fire – Approval – Res. 25-101, Confirming Weed Abatement and Rubbish Charges for 2025.

8. Planning and Development Services – Approval – Final Acceptance for CIP 23-02, Herndon Avenue Street Improvements, with the final contract cost of $1,435,781.86.

9. Planning and Development Services – Approval – Final Acceptance for CIP 25-01 Rubberized Cape Seal 2025, with the final contract cost of $1,677,106.08.

10. Planning and Development Services – Approval – Authorize the City Manager to execute a Farm Lease Agreement between the City of Clovis and Gil Management, Inc., for the property located at 3778 East Behymer Avenue.

PUBLIC HEARINGS – 6:35
6:35 ITEM 11 - Consider Approval and Conduct a Public Hearing - Res. 25-102, Amended and Restated Resolution Authorizing the City to Join the Statewide Community Infrastructure Program, Authorizing California Statewide Communities Development Authority (CSCDA) to Accept Applications, Levy Assessments and Special Taxes, Form Assessment and Community Facilities Districts, Approve Form of Acquisition Agreement, and Authorize Related Actions.

Julie Kutka, Land Acquisition and Development with De Young Properties, and Darren Rose, CEO of the Building Industry Association of Fresno-Madera, spoke in support.

The public hearing closed at 7:03
Motion for approval by Councilmember Ashbeck, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Pearce. Motion carried by 4-0-1, with Councilmember Bessinger absent.
7:04 ITEM 12 - Workshop - Mental Health Liaison Officer, A new approach for Clovis Police Department.

Mary Gibson, a resident, spoke regarding an issue with her neighbor and their mental health.

CITY MANAGER COMMENTS – 7:56
City Manager Haussler announced upcoming park tour stops at Pasa Tiempo Park, and Dry Creek Park through September; announced ClovisFest at the end of September; and the community 7 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

PRELIMINARY - SUBJECT TO APPROVAL

survey was distributed to a sample group of residents later; and showed appreciation to Officer Jacobson for her efforts related to mental health for the City of Clovis.

COUNCIL COMMENTS – 7:57
There was no formal Council direction for staff.

CLOSED SESSION – 8:09
Upon call, there was no public comment.

ITEM 13 - GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS AGENCY DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES: ANDREW HAUSSLER, PAUL ARMENDARIZ, AMY HANCE, JAY SCHENGEL, SCOTT CROSS EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION:

UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES

RECONVENE INTO OPEN SESSION AND REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION No action taken.

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Mouanoutoua adjourned the meeting of the Council to October 6, 2025.

Meeting adjourned: 8:48 p.m.
______________________________ ________________________________ Mayor City Clerk
8 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: General Services
DATE: October 6, 2025
SUBJECT: General Services – Approval of Contract Award for Consultant Services for a Strategic Operations Plan (SOP) to Jarrett Walker & Associates, LLC for $169,907.97; and Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Contract on behalf of the City.

ATTACHMENTS: 1. Contract

2. Proposal

RECOMMENDATION
For City Council to approve the contract award for consultant services for a Strategic Operations Plan (SOP) to Jarrett Walker & Associates, LLC, for $169,907.97 and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City successfully applied for and received the Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant FY2024-25, which will finance the development of the City of Clovis - Transit Strategic Operations Plan (SOP). On June 19, 2025, a Request for Proposal (RFP) was issued to obtain consultant services to support Clovis Transit in creating a SOP plan. The RFP concluded on July 9, 2025, and four (4) proposals were received. Staff recommends that Jarrett Walker & Associates, LLC be awarded the contract for $169,907.97. The City Manager will execute the agreement on behalf of the City.

BACKGROUND
The Strategic Operations Plan (SOP) will serve as a roadmap for the trajectory of the City’s transit division, supporting the City of Clovis’ goal of establishing and maintaining a local environment protected from air pollution and harmful emissions. The Clovis Transit SOP will assist the City in providing the vision, direction, and pathway to meet identified strategic goals and objectives, provide performance measures, and guide the transit division to the next generation of a multimodal transportation system which focuses on accessibility, safety, innovation, housing, land use and preservation, air quality, health, and sustainability.

State-funded Sustainable Communities grants aim to implement Regional Transportation Plans (RTPs) to achieve California's greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets of 40% and 80% below 9 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
1990 levels by 2030 and 2050, respectively. Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) allocates $25 million annually for Sustainable Communities Grants, prioritizing projects with a focus on public transportation that enhances multi-modal transportation system. On July 9, 2024, the City of Clovis was awarded a $172,500 Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant for its City of Clovis Strategic Operations Plan. The Caltrans Sustainable Communities grant will fund the Strategic Operations Plan (SOP) and support the transit staff in creating an SOP.

On June 19, 2025, Clovis Transit released an RFP for Consultant Services for a Strategic Operations Plan (SOP). The RFP Scope of Work included seven (7) major tasks, emphasizing community outreach. The proposals were not to exceed the budget amount of $170,000. The RFP concluded on July 9, 2025, and the City received four (4) proposals. An evaluation committee was assembled, and proposals were reviewed, evaluated, and ranked. The evaluation committee ranked the proposals as follows:

PROPOSERS PROPOSAL AMOUNT

1. Jarrett Walker & Associates, LLC $169,907.97

2. Walker Consultants, Inc. $169,830.00

3. VRPA Technologies, Inc. $169,653.46

4. LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. $167,832.00
Jarrett Walker & Associates, LLC, has both international and local experience in the development of transit planning documents. They prioritize community interactions and educating the community on public transit and accessibility. Their proposal also focused on communicating information clearly and concisely to passengers, and plan to include such a design in our SOP. The project is expected to be completed in 16 months, fulfilling the Caltrans Sustainable Communities grant timeline requirement.

FISCAL IMPACT
This contract will have no impact on the existing Transit budget. Caltrans’s Sustainable Communities Grant will fund the total cost. The total project cost is $172,500, with consulting services not to exceed $170,000 and $2,500 for project administration by City staff. The grant provides $152,714 (88.53%) towards the full project cost, and the City will provide the local match requirement of $19,786 (11.47%) with Local Transit Funds (LTF).

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
The City has successfully applied for and received the Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant FY2024-25, which will finance the development of the City of Clovis - Transit Strategic Operations Plan. Jarrett Walker & Associates, LLC, will work with staff to create a comprehensive plan that will serve as guidance for Transit’s current and future needs. Upon completion, the plan will be presented to City Council.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL
The City Manager will execute the contract with Jarrett Walker & Associates, LLC. The signed contract will be shared with Caltrans, and the project kickoff meeting will be scheduled. 10 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.

Prepared by: Susanna Herrera, Management Analyst
Reviewed by: City Manager AH
11 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

CITY OF CLOVIS

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Consultant Services Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into between the City of Clovis, a California general law city ("City"), and Jarrett Walker & Associates, LLC ("Consultant") with respect to the following recitals, which are a substantive part of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be effective on October 15, 2025 ("Effective Date").

RECITALS
A. City desires to obtain professional consulting services, more fully described in Exhibit A (“Services”), and, if applicable, as further set forth in the Consultant’s Proposal attached as Exhibit B, which are incorporated herein by reference, for the development of a Strategic Operations Plan (SOP) for the City’s Transit Department (“Project”).

B. Consultant is engaged in the business of furnishing the Services and hereby warrants and represents that Consultant is qualified, experienced, and capable of performing the Services, and possesses any required licenses, certifications, security/bonding, and/or training necessary to perform the Services.

C. City desires to retain Consultant, and Consultant desires to provide the City with the Services, on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual agreements herein, City and Consultant agree as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. Scope of Services. Consultant shall perform the Services described in the Recitals and detailed in Exhibits A & B. Changes in the Scope of Services, including the work performed and/or deliverables produced, shall be made in writing, and particularly describe the changes in Services, including payment/costs and schedule/term, as applicable.

2. Priority and Conflicts; Exclusions. If the terms and requirements of this Agreement and/or Exhibit A conflict with Exhibit B, this Agreement and Exhibit A shall control. No contractual terms and/or conditions found in Exhibit B shall purport to waive, disclaim, or limit Consultant’s liability indemnification obligations, warranties, damages for breach or delay, or any security, bonding, or insurance requirements, and any such provisions shall have no force or effect with respect to this Agreement and the Services performed by Consultant.

3. Term of Agreement; Commencement of Services; Schedule. The term of this Agreement shall commence on October 15, 2025, and Consultant shall begin performing the Services on that date, unless otherwise instructed by City. This Agreement shall terminate on March 31, 2027. This Agreement may be terminated prior to the end of the term pursuant to Sections 21 and 22 herein.

City and Consultant shall mutually agree on a schedule for the performance of the Services and completion of any deliverables. Consultant shall initially perform the Services in accordance with Exhibit B, but such schedule shall be subject to modification based on the City’s operational needs. City and Consultant shall mutually agree upon any modification to the performance schedule.

4. Payment for Services. City shall pay Consultant for the Services performed pursuant to this Agreement according to the rate(s) stated in Exhibit A. The total amount paid by City to the Consultant shall not exceed One-Hundred Sixty-Nine Thousand Nine Hundred Seven and Ninety-Seven Cents ($169,907.97).

The foregoing is inclusive of all labor, equipment, materials, costs and expenses, taxes, and overhead. City shall ATTACHMENT 1
12 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
pay Consultant for Services satisfactorily performed pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall submit monthly invoices to City containing detailed billing information regarding the Services provided, and unless otherwise specified in Exhibit A, City shall tender payment to Consultant within thirty (30) days after receipt of invoice.

5. Independent Contractor Status. Consultant and its subcontractors shall perform the Services as independent contractors and not as officers, employees, agents or volunteers of City. Consultant is engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business to perform the Services required by this Agreement and is hereby retained to perform work that is outside the usual course of City’s business. Consultant is free from the control and direction of City in connection with the manner of performance of the work. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be deemed to create any contractual relationship between City and Consultant’s employees or subcontractors, nor shall anything contained in this Agreement be deemed to give any third party, including but not limited to Consultant’s employees or subcontractors, any claim or right of action against City. Consultant has complete and sole discretion for the manner in which the Services under this Agreement will be performed.

6. Consultant Representations; Standard of Care; Compliance with Law. Consultant represents that Consultant and any subcontractors utilized by Consultant are and will be qualified in the field for which Services are being provided under this Agreement and Consultant and any subcontractors are now, and will be throughout their performance of the Services under this Agreement, properly licensed, certified, secured/bonded, trained, and/or otherwise qualified and authorized to perform the Services required and contemplated by this Agreement, as may be required by law. Consultant and its subcontractors shall utilize the standard of care and skill customarily exercised by members of their profession, shall use reasonable diligence and best judgment while performing the Services, and shall comply with all applicable laws, regulations, and industry standards.

Consultant shall comply with all Labor Code requirements for public works projects if applicable to Consultant’s work under this Agreement.

7. Key Personnel. Consultant agrees and designates the following Project team members as “Key Personnel”:
● Principal Consultant/Lead Network Planner: Jarrett Walker ● Project Manager: Alvaro Caviedes
● Planner/Deputy PM: Evan Landman
● President/Financial Specialist/Transit Planner: Dennis Brooks ● Community Engagement and Outreach Lead: Elea Carey
● Senior Planner: Andrea Breault
● Senior Advisor: Selena Barlow
Consultant agrees that said Key Personnel and other staff will be able to dedicate the necessary amount of their time to the Services, as needed, for the successful and timely completion of the Project.

8. Identity of Subcontractors. Consultant shall, before commencing any work under this Agreement, provide to City in writing: (a) the identity of all subcontractors, if any, Consultant intends to utilize in Consultant’s performance of this Agreement; and (b) a detailed description of the full scope of work to be provided by such subcontractors. Consultant shall only employ subcontractors pre-approved by City and in no event shall Consultant replace an approved subcontractor without the advance written permission of City, with the understanding that City's permission will not be unreasonably withheld. Notwithstanding any other provisions in this Agreement, Consultant shall be liable to City for the performance of Consultant’s subcontractors.

9. Subcontractor Provisions. Consultant shall include in its written agreements with its subcontractors, if any, provisions which: (a) impose upon the subcontractors the obligation to provide to City the same insurance and indemnity obligations that Consultant owes to City; (b) make clear that City intends to rely upon the reports, opinions, conclusions and other work product prepared and performed by subcontractors for Consultant; and (c) entitle City to impose upon subcontractors the assignment rights found elsewhere in this Agreement.

10. Drug Free Workplace. Consultant acknowledges that City has adopted a policy of maintaining a drug free 13 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
workplace and Consultant agrees to abide by the provisions of City’s substance abuse policy provide to Consultant under separate cover. Violation of this provision may result in immediate termination of this Agreement.

11. Power to Act on Behalf of City. Consultant is not acting as an agent of City and shall not have any right, power, or authority to create any obligation, express or implied, or make representations on behalf of City except as may be expressly authorized in advance in writing from time to time by City and then only to the extent of such authorization.

12. Record Keeping; Reports. Consultant shall keep complete records showing the type of Services performed. Consultant shall be responsible and shall require its subcontractors to keep similar records. City shall be given reasonable access to the records of Consultant and its subcontractors for inspection and audit purposes.

Consultant shall provide City with a working draft of all reports upon reasonable request by City and of all final reports prepared by Consultant under this Agreement.

13. Ownership and Inspection of Documents. All reports, analyses, documents, records, conclusions, opinions, recommendations, and other work product specifically generated by, or produced for, Consultant or its subcontractors solely on behalf of City in connection with the Services, regardless of the medium, shall be and remain the property of City (“Work Product”). The City retains all right, title, and interest in the Work Product and shall be the exclusive and perpetual owner of the Work Product. City shall have the right to use, copy, modify, and reuse the Work Product as it sees fit. Upon City's request, Consultant shall make available for inspection and copying all such Work Product and all Work Product shall be turned over to City promptly at City's request or upon termination of this Agreement, whichever occurs first. Consultant shall not release any Work Product to third parties without prior written approval of City. This obligation shall survive termination of this Agreement in perpetuity.

14. Confidentiality. All Work Product prepared and performed by and on behalf of Consultant in connection with the Services performed pursuant to this Agreement shall be kept confidential and shall be disclosed only to City, unless otherwise provided by law or expressly authorized by City. Consultant shall not disclose or permit the disclosure of any confidential information acquired during performance of the Services, except to its agents, employees, and subcontractors who need such confidential information in order to properly perform their duties relative to this Agreement. Consultant shall also require its subcontractors to be bound to these confidentiality provisions.

15. Professional Responsibility. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement, the review and/or approval by City, or any of its directors, officers, employees, or agents, of any technical specifications, design documents, and all other work products or project communications prepared by the Consultant or any of its subcontractors, or of any acts or failures to act by Consultant or any of its subcontractors, shall not relieve the Consultant or any of its subcontractors of any professional responsibility for the Services performed.

16. Implementation and Integration Services. Consultant will coordinate all activities, including but not limited to implementation and integration services, inspection, field testing of equipment, monitoring and reporting Consultant’s progress with and to City. Consultant will cooperate with and advise City of Consultant’s progress and timing schedules for the Project and shall provide City access to Consultant’s equipment and facilities for City’s inspections of this Project. City shall have the authority to cause Consultant’s work to be stopped if such work is not in accordance with Exhibits A and B. City shall designate a representative (“City Representative”) who shall have the authority to take all actions on behalf of City. Consultant shall direct all notices and other correspondence to the City Representative. Any notices or approvals from City that are not sent by the City Representative shall be subsequently confirmed by the City Representative.

17. Extra Work. In the event Consultant requests a Change Order for extra work required as a result of conditions which are significantly different from those reasonably anticipated when this Agreement was executed, such request shall be submitted to City in writing and shall be accompanied by the following declaration, signed by the Consultant:
14 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

I, _______________(name of Consultant’s authorized representative) being the ___________ (title of Consultant’s authorized representative) of _______________ (Consultant’s name) (“Consultant”) declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, and do personally certify and attest that: I have thoroughly reviewed the attached claim for additional compensation and/or extension of time, know its contents, and know said claim is made in good faith; the supporting data is truthful and accurate; the amount requested accurately reflects the Agreement adjustment for which Consultant believes the City is liable. I am familiar with California Penal Code section 72 and California Government Code sections 12560, et seq., pertaining to false claims, and I know and understand that submission or certification of a false claim may lead to fines, imprisonment, and/or other severe legal consequences.
______________________________
Signature
____________________ ________
Title Date
Submission of a claim, properly certified, with all required supporting documentation, and written rejection or denial of all or part of the claim by the City, is a condition precedent to any action, proceeding, litigation, suit, or demand for arbitration by Consultant.

Consultant’s disagreement over the amount to be paid for extra work shall not relieve Consultant of the obligation to continue to perform all the Services on the Project as required in Exhibits A and B.

18. City Name and Logo. Consultant shall not use City's name or insignia, photographs relating to the City projects or work for which Consultant’s services are rendered, or any publicity pertaining to the Consultant’s Services under this Agreement in any magazine, trade paper, newspaper, television or radio production, internet website, social media, or other similar medium without the prior written consent of City.

19. Conflicts of Interest. Consultant warrants that neither Consultant nor any of its employees have an improper interest, present or contemplated, in the Services which would affect Consultant’s or its employees’ performance of the Services and the Work Product produced. Consultant further warrants that neither Consultant nor any of its employees have real property, business interests or income that will be affected by the Services.

Consultant covenants that no person having any such interest, whether an employee or subcontractor shall perform the Services under this Agreement. During the performance of the Services, Consultant shall not employ or retain the services of any person who is employed by the City or a member of any City Board or Commission.

20. Non-liability of Officers and Employees. No officer or employee of City shall be personally liable to Consultant, or any successors in interest, in the event of a default or breach by City for any amount which may become due Consultant or its successor, or for any breach of any obligation under the terms of this Agreement.

21. Termination of Agreement. Consultant acknowledges that City may terminate the Agreement for cause or for convenience under the Agreement’s terms and conditions, which provide the manner by which termination will be made effective and the basis for settlement. (See Appendix II. subd. (B) to Code of Fed. Regs., tit. 2, pt. 200, “Contract Provisions for Non-Federal Entity Contracts Under Federal Awards,” and FTA Circular 4220.1F, chapter IV, ¶ 2, subd. (b)(6)(b)(4), “Termination.”)
This Agreement shall terminate as provided in Section 3, unless terminated earlier pursuant to the following:
a. Termination by City: For Convenience. City may, at its discretion, terminate this Agreement for convenience and without cause upon thirty (30) days prior written notice to Consultant. Upon receipt of a termination notice pursuant to this subsection, Consultant shall promptly discontinue all Services affected, unless the notice directs otherwise. 15 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
b. Termination by City or Consultant: For Cause. Either party may terminate this Agreement upon fourteen (14) days prior written notice to the other party of a material breach, and a failure within that time period to cure or commence reasonable steps to cure the breach. c. Compensation to Consultant Upon Termination. Consultant shall be paid compensation for Services satisfactorily performed prior to notice of termination. As to any phase partially performed but for which the applicable portion of Consultant’s compensation has not become due, Consultant shall be paid the reasonable value of its Services provided. However, in no event shall such payment when added to any other payment due under the applicable part of the work exceed the total compensation of such part as specified Section 4. d. Effect of Termination. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant shall: (i) promptly discontinue all Services affected, unless the notice of termination directs otherwise; and (ii) within fourteen (14) days of termination, deliver or otherwise make available to the City, without additional compensation, all Work Product and/or deliverables accumulated by the Consultant in performing this Agreement, whether completed or in process. Consultant may not refuse to provide such Work Product for any reason whatsoever.

22. Default/Material Breach. If either party defaults in the performance of this Agreement or materially breaches any of its provisions, the non-breaching party may terminate this Agreement by giving written notification to the breaching party. Termination will take effect immediately on receipt of notice by the breaching party or five (5) days after mailing of notice, whichever occurs first. For purposes of this paragraph, material breach of this Agreement includes, but is not limited to, the following:
a. City’s failure to pay Consultant any undisputed compensation due within thirty (30) days after written demand for payment;
b. Consultant’s material breach of any representation or agreement contained herein, and failure to commence actions to correct such breach within fourteen (14) days of written notice by City; or c. City’s material breach of any representation or agreement contained herein, and failure to commence actions to correct such breach within fourteen (14) days of written notice by the Consultant.

23. Insurance. Consultant shall satisfy the insurance requirements set forth in Exhibit C.

24. Indemnity and Defense. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, Consultant hereby agrees to indemnify, defend and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers harmless from and against all third party claims, demands, causes of action, actions, damages, losses, expenses, and other liabilities, (including without limitation reasonable attorney fees and costs of litigation) to the extent arising out of or in connection with any negligent acts, errors, or omissions of Consultant or its subcontractors relating to the performance of Services described herein to the fullest extent permitted by law, unless the injuries or damages are the result of City's sole negligence or willful misconduct, subject to any limitations imposed by law. Consultant and City agree that said indemnity and defense obligations shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement for any items specified herein that arose or occurred during the term of this Agreement. City shall cooperate with Consultant in the defense of any such claim.

25. Taxes. Consultant agrees to pay all taxes, licenses, and fees levied or assessed by any governmental agency on Consultant incident to the performance of Services under this Agreement, and unemployment and workers’ compensation insurance, social security, or any other taxes upon the wages of Consultant, its employees, agents, and representatives. Consultant agrees to obtain and renew an annual business tax certificate from City and pay the applicable annual business registration tax to City during the term of this Agreement. 16 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

26. Assignment. Neither this Agreement nor any duties or obligations hereunder shall be assignable by Consultant without the prior written consent of City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. In the event of an assignment to which City has consented, the assignee shall agree in writing to personally assume and perform the covenants, obligations, and agreements herein contained. In addition, Consultant shall not assign the payment of any monies due Consultant from City under the terms of this Agreement to any other individual, corporation, or entity. City retains the right to pay any and all monies due Consultant directly to Consultant.

27. Form and Service of Notices. Any and all notices or other communications required or permitted by this Agreement or by law to be delivered to, served upon, or given to either party to this Agreement by the other party shall be in writing and shall be deemed properly delivered, served or given by one of the following methods:
a. Delivered by e-mail to a known address of the party to whom it is directed provided the e-mail is accompanied by an acknowledgment of receipt by the other party. Service shall be deemed the date of acknowledgement.
b. Delivery by a reliable overnight delivery service (ex., Federal Express) receipted, and addressed to the addressees set forth below the signatories to this Agreement. Service shall be deemed the date of delivery.
c. Delivery by deposit in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid. Service shall be deemed delivered ninety-six (96) hours after deposit.

28. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including the Exhibits and any other attachments, represents the entire Agreement between City and Consultant, and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral with respect to the subject matter herein. This Agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both City and Consultant.

29. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns.

30. Authority. The signatories to this Agreement warrant and represent that they have the legal right, power, and authority to execute this Agreement and bind their respective entities. Evidence of Consultant’s authority is attached as Exhibit D.

31. Severability. In the event any term or provision of this Agreement is declared to be invalid or illegal for any reason, this Agreement will remain in full force and effect and will be interpreted as though such invalid or illegal provision were not a part of this Agreement. The remaining provisions will be construed to preserve the intent and purpose of this Agreement and the parties will negotiate in good faith to modify any invalidated provisions to preserve each party’s anticipated benefits.

32. Applicable Law and Interpretation and Venue. This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The language of all parts of this Agreement shall, in all cases, be construed as a whole, according to its fair meaning, and not strictly for or against either party. This Agreement is entered into by City and Consultant in the County of Fresno, California. Thus, in the event of litigation, venue shall only lie with the appropriate state or federal court in Fresno County.

33. Amendments and Waiver. This Agreement shall not be modified or amended in any way, and no provision shall be waived, except in writing signed by the parties hereto. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be deemed, or shall constitute, a waiver of any other provision, whether or not similar, nor shall any such waiver constitute a continuing or subsequent waiver of the same provision. Failure of either party to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of the right to compel enforcement of the remaining provisions of this Agreement.
17 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

34. Third Party Beneficiaries. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to confer any rights upon any party not a signatory to this Agreement.

35. Execution in Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts such that the signatures may appear on separate signature pages. A copy or an original, with all signatures appended together, shall be deemed a fully executed Agreement.

36. Alternative Dispute Resolution. If a dispute arises out of or relating to this Agreement, or the alleged breach thereof, and if said dispute cannot be settled through negotiation, the parties agree first to try in good faith to settle the dispute by non-binding mediation before resorting to litigation. The mediator shall be mutually selected by the parties, but in case of disagreement, the mediator shall be selected by lot from among two (2) nominations provided by each party. All costs and fees required by the mediator shall be split equally by the parties, otherwise each party shall bear its own costs of mediation. If mediation fails to resolve the dispute within thirty (30) days, either party may pursue litigation to resolve the dispute.

Demand for mediation shall be in writing and delivered to the other party to this Agreement.

A demand for mediation shall be made within reasonable time after the claim, dispute or other matter in question has arisen. In no event shall the demand for mediation be made after the date when institution of legal or equitable proceedings based on such a claim, dispute or other matter in question would be barred by California statues of limitations.

37. Performance Requirements. If the Services performed hereunder are not in conformity with the requirements of this Agreement and other pertinent documents, City shall have the right to require Consultant to correct the work in conformity with the requirements of this Agreement at no additional increase in the payment to Consultant. Consultant shall promptly correct the work rejected by City for failing to conform to the requirements of the Agreement. Remedy for non-compliance or non-performance shall commence within twentyfour (24) hours of notice. City shall also have the right to require Consultant to take all necessary steps to ensure future performance of the Services in conformity with the requirements of this Agreement. In the event Consultant fails to correct the work or fails to take necessary steps to ensure future performance of the Services in conformity with the requirements of this Agreement, City shall have the right to immediately terminate this Agreement for default.

38. No Federal Government Obligations to Third Parties. Notwithstanding any concurrence by the Federal Government in or approval of the solicitation or award of the underlying Agreement, absent the express written consent by the Federal Government, the Federal Government is not a party to this Contract and shall not be subject to any obligations or liabilities to Consultant or any other party (whether or not a party to that contract) pertaining to any matter resulting from the underlying Agreement. The Consultant agrees to include the above clause in each subcontract financed in whole or in part with Federal assistance provided by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA).

39. Notification to FTA. If a current or prospective legal matter that may affect the Federal Government emerges, Consultant must promptly notify City, who will notify the FTA Chief Counsel and FTA Regional Counsel for Region IX. Consultant must include an equivalent provision in its sub-agreements at every tier for any agreement that is a “covered transaction” according to Code of Federal Regulations, title 2, sections 180.220 and 1200.220.
a. Types of Legal Matters Requiring Notification. The types of legal matters that require notification include, but are not limited to, a major dispute, breach, default, litigation, or instances where the Federal Government was named as a party to litigation or a legal disagreement in any forum for any reason.
b. Matters Affecting the Federal Government. Matters that may affect the Federal Government include, but are not limited to, the Federal Government’s interests in the Award, the Agreement, and any Amendments thereto, or the Federal Government’s administration or enforcement of 18 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
federal laws, regulations, and requirements.
c. Additional Notice to U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Inspector General. If Consultant has knowledge of potential fraud, waste, or abuse occurring on a Project receiving assistance from FTA, then Consultant must promptly notify City, who will notify the U.S. DOT Inspector General, in addition to the FTA Chief Counsel or Regional Counsel for Region IX. The notification provision applies if a principal, officer, employee, agent, third-party participant (including subcontractors at any tier), or any other person who has or may have submitted a false claim under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729, et seq., or has or may have committed a criminal or civil violation of law pertaining to such matters as fraud, conflict of interest, bid rigging, misappropriation or embezzlement, bribery, gratuity, or similar misconduct involving federal assistance. This responsibility occurs whether the Project is subject to this Agreement or another agreement between City and FTA, or an agreement involving a principal, officer, employee, agent, or Third-Party Participant of City. It also applies to subcontractors at any tier.

Knowledge, as used in this paragraph, includes, but is not limited to, knowledge of a criminal or civil investigation by a Federal, state, or local law enforcement or other investigative agency, a criminal indictment or civil complaint, or probable cause that could support a criminal indictment, or any other credible information in the possession of Consultant. In this paragraph, “promptly” means to refer information without delay and without change. This notification provision also applies to all divisions of City, including divisions tasked with law enforcement or investigatory functions.

40. Program Fraud and False or Fraudulent Statements and Related Acts. Consultant acknowledges that the provisions of the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986, as amended, 31 U.S.C. § 3801 et seq. and U.S.

DOT regulations, "Program Fraud Civil Remedies," 49 C.F.R. part 31, apply to its actions pertaining to this agreement. Upon execution of the underlying contract, the Consultant certifies or affirms the truthfulness and accuracy of any statement it has made, it makes, it may make, or causes to be made, pertaining to the underlying contract or the FTA assisted project for which this contract work is being performed. In addition to other penalties that may be applicable, the Consultant further acknowledges that if it makes, or causes to be made, a false, fictitious, or fraudulent claim, statement, submission, or certification, the Federal Government reserves the right to impose the penalties of the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986 on the Consultant to the extent the Federal Government deems appropriate. The Consultant also acknowledges that if it makes, or causes to be made, a false, fictitious, or fraudulent claim, statement, submission, or certification to the Federal Government under a contract connected with a project that is financed in whole or in part with Federal assistance originally awarded by FTA under the authority of 49 U.S.C. chapter 53, the Government reserves the right to impose the penalties of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 and 49 U.S.C. § 5323(l) on the Consultant, to the extent the Federal Government deems appropriate. Consultant agrees to include the above clause in each subcontract financed in whole or in part with Federal assistance provided by FTA.

41. Access to Records, Reports, and Sites.
a. Record Retention. Consultant and any Subcontractor shall both maintain and retain, and will require its subcontractor(s) of all tiers to maintain and retain, complete and readily accessible records related in whole or in part to the Agreement, including, but not limited to, documents, reports, statistics, sub-agreements, leases, subcontracts, arrangements, other third-party agreements of any type and supporting materials related to those records. b. Retention Period. Consultant agrees to comply with the record retention requirements in accordance with 2 C.F.R. § 200.333. Consultant shall maintain all books, records, accounts, and reports required under this Agreement for a period of not less than three (3) years after the date of termination or expiration of this Agreement, except in the event of litigation or settlement of claims arising from the performance of this Agreement, in which case records shall be maintained until the disposition of all such litigation, appeals, claims or exceptions related thereto.
19 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
c. Access to Records. Consultant shall provide sufficient access to the U.S. Secretary of Transportation, Comptroller General of the U.S., FTA, DOT Office of Inspector General, the State, City, or any of their duly authorized representatives to inspect and audit records, including such records and information City or Consultant may regard as confidential or proprietary, pertaining to the performance of this Agreement as reasonably may be required. d. Access to the Sites of Performance. Consultant shall also permit FTA and its Consultants access to the sites of performance under this contract as reasonably may be required. Consultant agrees to include the above clause in each subcontract financed in whole or in part with Federal assistance provided by FTA.

42. Federal Changes. Consultant shall at all times comply with all applicable FTA regulations, policies, procedures, and directives, including without limitation those listed directly or by reference in the Master Agreement between City and FTA, as they may be amended or promulgated from time to time during the term of this contract. Consultant shall also ensure compliance by subcontractors at any tier of any applicable change to federal requirements

43. Civil Rights.
a. Subcontract. Consultant shall include these requirements in each subcontract entered into as part thereof.
b. Non-discrimination. In accordance with Federal transit law at 49 U.S.C. § 5332, Consultant agrees that it will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, or age. In addition, the Consultant agrees to comply with applicable Federal implementing regulations and other implementing requirements FTA may issue.
c. Race, Color, Religion, National Origin, Sex. In accordance with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and Federal transit laws at 49 U.S.C. § 5332, the Consultant agrees to comply with all applicable equal employment opportunity requirements of U.S. Department of Labor (U.S. DOL) regulations, "Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor," 41 C.F.R. chapter 60, and Executive Order No. 11246, "Equal Employment Opportunity in Federal Employment," September 24, 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e note, as amended by any later Executive Order that amends or supersedes it, referenced in 42 U.S.C. § 2000e note. Consultant agrees to take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, national origin, or sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity). Such actions shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, promotion, demotion or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. In addition, Consultant agrees to comply with any implementing requirements FTA may issue. d. Age. In accordance with the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621- 634, U.S.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (U.S. EEOC) regulations, “Age Discrimination in Employment Act,” 29 C.F.R. part 1625, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 6101 et seq., U.S. Health and Human Services regulations, “Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Age in Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance,” 45 C.F.R. part 90, and Federal transit law at 49 U.S.C. § 5332, the Consultant agrees to refrain from discrimination against present and prospective employees for reason of age. In addition, the Consultant agrees to comply with any implementing requirements FTA may issue.
e. Disabilities. In accordance with section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 794, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., the 20 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § A-27 4151 et seq., and Federal transit law at 49 U.S.C. § 5332, Consultant agrees that it will not discriminate against individuals on the basis of disability. In addition, Consultant agrees to comply with any implementing requirements FTA may issue.

44. Consultant Assurance. Consultant and SubConsultant(s) shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the performance of this contract. The Consultant shall carry out applicable requirements of 49 CFR Part 26 in the award and administration of DOT-assisted contracts. Failure by Consultant to carry out these requirements is a material breach of this contract, which may result in the termination of this Agreement or such other remedy as City deems appropriate, which may include, but is not limited to: (1) Withholding monthly progress payments; (2) Assessing sanctions; (3) Liquidated damages; and/or (4) Disqualifying Consultant from future bidding as non-responsible. Each subcontract Consultant signs with a SubConsultant must include the assurance in this paragraph.

45. Incorporation of Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Terms. The preceding provisions include, in part, certain Standard Terms and Conditions required by the Department of Transportation (DOT), whether or not expressly set forth in the preceding contract provisions. All contractual provisions required by DOT, as set forth in FTA Circular 4220.1F, are hereby incorporated by reference. Notwithstanding, all FTA-mandated terms shall be deemed to control in the event of a conflict with other provisions contained in this Agreement. The Consultant shall not perform any act, fail to perform any act, or refuse to comply with any City requests that would cause City to be in violation of FTA terms and conditions.

46. Free Speech & Religious Liberty. All Federal funding must be expended in full accordance with the U.S.

Constitution, Federal Law, and statutory and public policy requirements

47. Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility, and Voluntary Exclusion. a. Consultant shall comply and facilitate compliance with U.S. DOT regulations, “Non-procurement, Suspension, and Debarment,” 2 CFR part 1200, which adopts and supplements the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (U.S. OMB) “Guidelines to Agencies on Government-Wide Debarment and Suspension (Non-procurement),” 2 CFR part 180. These provisions apply to each agreement at any tier of $25,000 or more, to each contract at any tier for a federally required audit (irrespective of the agreement amount), and to each agreement at any tier that must be approved by an FTA official irrespective of the contract amount.
b. Consultant shall verify that its principals, affiliates, and subcontractors are eligible to participate in this federally-funded Agreement (which includes review of SAM at sam.gov, if necessary to comply with U.S. DOT regulations, 2 CFR Part 1200) and are not presently declared by any Federal department or City to be: (1) debarred from participation in any federally-assisted Award; (2) suspended from participation in any federally-assisted Award; (3) proposed for debarment from participation in any federally-assisted Award; (4) declared ineligible to participate in any federallyassisted Award; (5) voluntarily excluded from participation in any federally-assisted Award; or (6) disqualified from participation in any federally-assisted Award. c. By signing and submitting its bid or proposal, the bidder or proposer certifies as follows:

The certification in this clause is a material representation of fact relied upon by City. If it is later determined by City that Consultant knowingly rendered an erroneous certification, in addition to remedies available to City, the Federal Government may pursue available remedies, including but not limited to suspension and/or debarment. Consultant shall comply with the requirements of 2 CFR part 180, subpart C, as supplemented by 2 CFR part 1200, while this offer is valid and throughout the period of any contract that may arise from this offer. Consultant further agrees to include a provision requiring such compliance in its lower-tier covered transactions. d. Consultant agrees that it will not enter into any “covered transaction” (as defined at 2 CFR 180.220 and 1200.220) with any “third party participant” (as defined in Section 1 of FTA’s Master Agreement 21 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
(Version 31, dated May 2, 2024), as may be updated or amended) that is, or whose principal is, suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participating in covered transactions except as otherwise authorized by applicable Federal laws, regulations, or requirements regarding participation with debarred or suspended Recipients or Third-Party Participants. Consultant further agrees that it will review the Federal Government’s “System for Award Management — Lists of Parties Excluded from Federal Procurement and Non-procurement Programs,” if required by USDOT regulations (2 C.F.R. Part 1200).

48. ADA Access. Consultant shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), 42 USC section 12101, et seq; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 USC section 794; 49 USC section 5301, subd. (d), which prohibit discrimination on the basis of handicaps, with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101, et seq., which requires that accessible facilities and services be made available to persons with disabilities, including any subsequent amendments to that Act, and with the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4151, et seq., which requires that buildings and public accommodations be accessible to persons with disabilities, including any subsequent amendments to that Act.

49. Lobbying Restrictions. Consultants who apply or bid for an award of $100,000 or more shall certify that it has not used and will not use Federal appropriated funds to pay any person or organization for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any Federal agency, a member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a member of Congress in connection with obtaining any Federal contract, grant, or any other award covered by 31 U.S.C. § 1352 (Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment), as required by 49 C.F.R. Part 20, "New Restrictions on Lobbying." Consultants shall obtain the certification required by 49 C.F.R. Part 20 from any and all subcontractors at any tier.

Consultants shall complete and submit the disclosure form required by 49 C.F.R. Part 20, "New Restrictions on Lobbying” (Standard Form LLL, “Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying”), if the Consultant has made or has agreed to make any payment using non-Federal funds (to include profits from any covered Federal action), which would be prohibited under paragraph (1) of this clause if paid for with Federal appropriated funds. Consultants shall obtain such disclosures, if required, from their subcontractors at any tier for whom a contract in excess of $100,000 is contemplated. Such disclosures shall be forwarded from tier to tier up to SUBRECIPIENT.

Consultants shall complete and submit a disclosure form at the end of each calendar quarter in which there occurs an event that requires disclosure or that materially affects the accuracy of the information contained in any disclosure form previously submitted in accordance with paragraph (2) above. An event that materially affects the accuracy of the information reported includes: (a) A cumulative increase of $25,000 or more in the amount paid or expected to be paid for influencing or attempting to influence a covered Federal action; or (b) A change in the person(s) or individual(s) influencing or attempting to influence a covered Federal action; or (c) A change in the officer(s), employee(s), or member(s) contacted to influence or attempt to influence a covered Federal action.

Consultants shall obtain such disclosures, if required, from its subcontractors at any tier for whom a contract in excess of $100,000 is contemplated. Such disclosures shall be forwarded from tier to tier up to SUBRECIPIENT.

Consultants shall include this clause in each subcontract and require subcontractors to flow down this clause to each lower-tier subcontractor.

50. Safe Operation of Motor Vehicles.
a. Seat Belt Use. Consultant is encouraged to adopt and promote on-the-job seat belt use policies and programs for its employees and other personnel that operate company-owned vehicles, companyrented vehicles, or personally operated vehicles. The terms “company-owned” and “company-leased” refer to vehicles owned or leased either by the Consultant or City. b. Distracted Driving. Consultant is encouraged to adopt and promote workplace safety policies to decrease crashes caused by distracted drivers, including policies to ban text messaging while using an 22 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
electronic device supplied by an employer, and driving a vehicle the driver owns or rents, a vehicle Consultant owns, leases, or rents, or a privately-owned vehicle when on official business in connection with the work performed under this Agreement. Consultant agrees to conduct workplace safety initiatives in a manner commensurate with its size, such as establishing new rules and programs to prohibit text messaging while driving, re-evaluating the existing programs to prohibit text messaging while driving, and providing education, awareness, and other outreach to employees about the safety risks associated with texting while driving.

51. Environmental Protections.
a. General. Consultant agrees to comply with all applicable environmental and resource use laws, regulations, and requirements, and follow applicable guidance, now in effect or that may become effective in the future, including state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and requirements, and follow applicable guidance.
b. National Environmental Policy Act. An Award of federal assistance requires full compliance with applicable environmental laws, regulations, and requirements. Accordingly, Consultant agrees that it will: (1) Comply and facilitate compliance with federal laws, regulations, and requirements, including, but not limited to: (a) Federal transit laws, such as 49 U.S.C. § 5323(c)(2), and 23 U.S.C. § 139, (b) The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321 et seq., as limited by 42 U.S.C. § 5159, and CEQ’s implementing regulations 40 C.F.R. part 1500 – 1508, (c) Joint FHWA and FTA regulations, “Environmental Impact and Related Procedures,” 23 C.F.R. part 771 and 49 C.F.R. part 622, (d) Executive Order No. 11514, as amended, “Protection and Enhancement of Environmental Quality,” March 5, 1970, 42 U.S.C. § 4321 note, and (e) Other federal environmental protection laws, regulations, and requirements applicable to the Recipient or the Award, the accompanying Underlying Agreement, and any Amendments thereto. (2) Follow the federal guidance identified herein to the extent that the guidance is consistent with applicable authorizing legislation: (a) Joint FHWA and FTA final guidance, “Interim Guidance on MAP-21 Section 1319, Accelerated Decision making in Environmental Reviews,” January 14, 2013, (b) Joint FHWA and FTA final guidance, “SAFETEA-LU Environmental Review Process (Pub. L. 109-59),” 71 Fed. Reg. 66576, November 15, 2006, and (c) Other federal environmental guidance applicable to the Recipient or the Award, the accompanying Underlying Agreement, and any Amendments thereto. c. Environmental Justice. Consultant agrees to promote environmental justice by following: (1) Executive Order No. 12898, “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,” February 11, 1994, 42 U.S.C. § 4321 note, as well as facilitating compliance with that Executive Order, (2) U.S. DOT Order 5610.2, “Department of Transportation Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,” 62 Fed. Reg. 18377, April 15, 1997, and (3) The most recent edition of FTA Circular 4703.1, “Environmental Justice Policy Guidance for Federal Transit Administration Recipients,” August 15, 2012, to the extent consistent with applicable federal laws, regulations, requirements, and guidance.
d. Other Environmental Federal Laws. Consultant agrees that it will comply or facilitate compliance with all applicable federal laws, regulations, and requirements, and will follow applicable guidance, including, but not limited to, the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, the Endangered Species Act of 1973, Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, Executive Order No. 11990 relating to “Protection of Wetlands,” and Executive Order Nos. 11988 and 13690 relating to “Floodplain Management.”
e. Use of Certain Public Lands. Consultant agrees it will comply with U.S. DOT laws, specifically 49 U.S.C. § 303 (often referred to as “section 4(f)”), and joint FHWA and FTA regulations, “Parks, 23 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

Recreation Areas, Wildlife and Waterfowl Refuges, and Historic Sites,” 23 C.F.R. part 774, and referenced in 49 C.F.R. part 622.
f. Historic Preservation. Consultant agrees that it will: (1) Comply with U.S. DOT laws, including 49 U.S.C. § 303 (often referred to as “section 4(f)”), which requires certain findings be made before an Award may be undertaken if it involves the use of any land from a historic site that is on or eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. (2) Encourage compliance with the federal historic and archaeological preservation requirements of section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, 54 U.S.C. § 306108. (3) Comply with the Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974, as amended, 54 U.S.C. § 312501 et seq. (4) Comply with U.S. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation regulations, “Protection of Historic Properties,” 36 C.F.R. part 800. (5) Comply with federal requirements and follow federal guidance to avoid or mitigate adverse effects on historic properties.
g. Indian Sacred Sites. Consultant agrees that it will facilitate compliance with federal efforts to promote the preservation of places and objects of religious importance to American Indians, Eskimos, Aleuts, and Native Hawaiians, and facilitate compliance with the American Indian Religious Freedom Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1996, and Executive Order No. 13007, “Indian Sacred Sites,” May 24, 1996, 42 U.S.C. § 3161 note.

52. Clean Air Act & Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Consultant shall ensure that it: (A) will not use any violating facilities; (B) will report the use of facilities placed on or likely to be placed on the U.S. EPA “List of Violating Facilities” to SUBRECIPIENT; (C) understands and agrees that SUBRECIPIENT will report violations of use of prohibited facilities to FTA; and (D) will comply with the inspection and other requirements of the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. §§ 7401 – 7671q); and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended (33 U.S.C. §§ 1251-1387).

53. Energy Conservation. Consultant and any Subcontractor agree to comply with the mandatory energy efficiency standards and policies within the applicable state energy conservation plans issued in compliance with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 6321 et seq and 49 C.F.R. part 622, subpart C.

54. Trafficking In Persons. Consultant and its subcontractors or their employees shall not: (A) engage in severe forms of trafficking in persons during the Agreement Term as defined Section 103 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (“TVPA”), as amended, 22 U.S.C. § 7102; (B) procure a commercial sex act during the Contract Term as defined Section 103 of the TVPA, as amended, 22 U.S.C. § 7102; or (C) use forced labor in the performance of the Agreement. Consultant shall inform City immediately of any information Consultant receives from any source alleging a violation of a prohibition in this section. City may terminate this Agreement for any violation of this section; such right of termination is in addition to all other remedies for noncompliance that are available to City.

55. Private Act. Consultant agrees to: a) comply with, and assures the compliance of its employees with, the information restrictions and other applicable requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. § 552a. Among other things, Consultant agrees to obtain the express consent of the Federal Government before Consultant or its employees operate a system of records on behalf of the Federal Government. Consultant understands that the requirements of the Privacy Act, including the civil and criminal penalties for violation of that Act, apply to those individuals involved, and that failure to comply with the terms of the Privacy Act may result in termination of the underlying Agreement; and b) include these requirements in each subcontract to administer any system of records on behalf of the Federal Government financed in whole or in part with Federal assistance provided by FTA.

56. Section 508 Compliance. Any reports or information that will be provided to DOT or any other Federal agency must comply with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. [Signature Page Follows]
24 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

Now, therefore, the City and Consultant have executed this Agreement on the date(s) set forth below.

CONSULTANT CITY OF CLOVIS
By: __________________________ By: ______________________________ Daniel Costantino, Vice President/Principal Andrew Haussler, City Manager

Date: __________________ Date: ______________________
Party Identification and Contact Information:

Consultant City of Clovis
Jarrett Walker and Associates General Services - Transit Attn: Daniel Costantino Attn: Nick Chin
Vice President/Principal Transit Manager
1021 SE Caruthers St. 785 Third Street
Portland, OR 97214 Clovis, CA 93612
[email protected] [email protected]
(971) 277-3629 (559) 324-2762

ATTEST
_______________________________
Briana Parra, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM
_______________________________
Scott G. Cross, City Attorney
16 September 2025
25 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

EXHIBIT A
Scope of Work (SOW)

1. Review Existing Conditions – Collect and review all existing resources necessary for documenting baseline operations and understanding future needs of the Clovis Transit system. Once a thorough understanding is achieved by the consulting team, a meeting with Clovis Transit will occur to review foundational information. Items to collect and review include, but are not limited to:
a. Transit plans
b. GIS data
c. Regional Transportation Plans/Sustainable Communities Strategies d. Sustainability plans
e. GHG (Greenhouse Gases) reduction plans
f. Circulation elements
g. Transit maps
h. Transit performance indicators
Deliverables:
 Analyses of existing conditions
 An online map showing demographic, land use and transit data  An internal-draft Existing Conditions Report, and a final draft for publication  Trip # 1: Field Trip (plus activities Task 4 and 5)

2. Research and Analysis – The consultant will be required to research and review federal, state, regional, and local sources for planning documents that would provide direction for the City of Clovis. A research summary of the essential documents with reference sections and expectations will be reviewed by Clovis Transit.

Deliverables:
 Research summary on planning documents with noted reference sections and expectations.  This summary will be included as a chapter in the Existing Conditions Report.

3. Visioning Process – Multiple meetings will be scheduled between the consultant and transit staff to discuss the existing conditions and the vision for the transition of Clovis Transit into a new generation of transit. The consultant will provide an explanation as to how the researched and reviewed planning documents will align with transit’s vision of the evolution of Clovis Transit. After said meetings, the consultant and transit staff will generate a draft of the vision, strategies, and objectives for the City of Clovis Strategic Operations Plan.

Additional city staff meetings will be held with various departments to review their involvement with Clovis Transit and decipher the impacts of transit on their specific areas of expertise. The consultant will gather feedback and review the draft with suggested modifications. The consultant will also determine possible future collaboration between Clovis Transit and other City departments.

Deliverables:
 Vision, Goals, and Strategies for the SOP
 Meetings with City departments to gather feedback about the vision, goals, and strategies  Trip #2 - Core Design Workshop
 SOP 10 year network and service improvements
 Equity and performance analysis of 10 year network
26 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

4. Stakeholder Engagement – A potential stakeholder list will be provided to the consultant by transit staff.

Stakeholders will be involved from start to finish of the project through scheduled meetings. Throughout the project, stakeholders will have multiple opportunities to review and offer suggestions to help modify the plan.

At the first meeting, the consultant team will register attendees/include them on the committee list, review the project purpose, discuss stakeholder’s role, and schedule future meetings. The consultant will be responsible for providing agendas, taking notes, and distributing meeting summaries/minutes.

Deliverables:
 Stakeholder list
 Invitations to events
 Event #1: Stakeholder in-person workshop
 Event #2: Vision, goals, and strategies virtual presentation  Event #2 Draft Plan virtual presentation
 Agendas, PowerPoint Presentations, and meeting minutes and summaries for the three stakeholder events.
 Trip # 1: Stakeholder workshop (plus activities Task 1 and 5)

5. Community Outreach and Events – Community engagement is an essential component to ensure that all levels of socio-economic backgrounds, including the disadvantaged and low- income populations are targeted and offered the opportunity to participate. Outreach methods will provide Clovis Transit and the consultant team an opportunity to inform the public of the Strategic Operations Plan and obtain feedback.

Outreach methods will include:
a. Two (2) in-person community events
b. Two (2) pop-up tents at various transit transfer points/points of interest c. Bus shelter postings
d. Bus interior postings
e. Website posts
f. Email distribution through community organizations
g. Social media – Facebook and Instagram
Deliverables:
 Community Outreach and Events Phase 1:
o Public Outreach Plan
o Community Survey Development and Analysis (online and on board) o Public Engagement Outreach Material (bus shelter postings, bus interior postings, social media and website posts)
o Distribution of the survey online, on-board buses, email, and in key community locations. o 1 Community meeting or open house
o 1 Tabling event/pop-up activity
o Community engagement summary
o Trip # 1: Community outreach phase 1 events (plus activities Task 1 and 4) o Trip # 3 Community outreach phase 2 events
27 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
 Community Outreach and Events Phase 2:
o Community Survey Development and Analysis (online)
o Public Engagement Outreach Material (bus shelter postings, bus interior postings, social media and website posts)
o Distribution of the survey online, on-board buses, email and in key community locations
o 1 Community meeting or open house
o 1 Tabling event/pop-up activity
o Community engagement summary

6. Draft and Final Plan – The draft process of the Strategic Operations Plan will begin during the research and analysis of the various planning sources will include federal, state, regional, and local plans. These references will serve as the backbone for the design of the document. Suggestions will be solicited from stakeholders and the community. A draft will be in hand as the consultant presents to the community during outreach and engagement efforts, and the community will have several opportunities to provide feedback.

Once stakeholder and community feedback have been considered, the consultant will finalize the document.

Deliverables:
 Draft plan
o Introduction
o Existing Conditions
o Vision
o Strategies
o Objectives
o Summary of Stakeholder Involvement
o Community Feedback
o Implementation Plan
 Community review with a list of comments from the public and stakeholders  Final plan, including a summary of the next steps towards implementation (must have credits to Caltrans on cover page)
 Bound, unbound, electronic documents (including GIS databases and ArcGIS maps)

7. Presentation, Board Review, and Approval – The consultant will provide a final PowerPoint presentation to be created and shared with city staff and then presented to the City of Clovis City Council for approval. The principal will lead the in-person presentation to the City Council, with potential support from the project manager. The presentation will include the purpose of the project, the generated vision, strategies, and objectives that will serve the City in its efforts to be innovative, equitable, multimodal, and an evolving transportation system.

Deliverables:
 Presentation to the City Council at the beginning of the project  Presentation to deliver the Draft Plan to the City Council and gather feedback for the Final Plan  PowerPoint presentation materials
 Trip #4 City Council Presentation: The principal will lead an in-person City Council presentation, potentially with the project manager
28 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

Cost Proposal
Consultant will not initiate miscellaneous services unless written pre-approval has been provided by City.

These rates/fees represent the total cost for all Services provided under this Agreement, including labor, equipment, materials, costs and expenses, taxes, and overhead, to be paid for services satisfactorily performed.

Total compensation, including expense reimbursement, shall not exceed:

CONTRACT TOTAL: $169,907.97
Task# Task Title Cost
0 Project Management $ 27,322.37
1 Existing Conditions Report $ 37,029.84
2 Research and Analysis $ 8,491.26
3 Visioning Process $ 24,355.13
4 Stakeholder Committee $ 19,713.91
5 Community Outreach and Engagement $ 35,152.17
6 Draft and Final Plan $ 14,957.60
7 Presentation, Board Review, and Approval $ 2,885.69
Total Cost: $ 169,907.97
29 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

EXHIBIT B
CONSULTANT’S PROPOSAL
30 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

EXHIBIT C

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Prior to commencement of the Services, Consultant shall take out and maintain at its own expense the insurance coverage required by this Exhibit C. Consultant shall cause any subcontractor with whom Consultant contracts for the performance of Services pursuant to this Agreement to take out and maintain equivalent insurance coverage. Said insurance shall be maintained at all times during Consultant’s performance of Services under this Agreement, and for any additional period specified herein. All insurance shall be placed with insurance companies that are licensed and admitted to conduct business in the State of California and are rated at a minimum with an "A:VII" by A.M. Best Company, unless otherwise acceptable to the City.
a. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain the following types of insurance with limits no less than specified:
(i) General Liability Insurance (including operations, products and completed operations coverages) in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. If Commercial General Liability insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location (ISO CG 25 03 or 25 04) or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
(ii) Cyber Liability: $500,000 per occurrence or claim, $500,000 aggregate. (iii) Product & Completed Operations: $2,000,000 per occurrence or claim, $2,000,000 aggregate.

If Consultant maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City shall be entitled to coverage at the higher limits maintained.
b. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability policy is to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
(i) For any claims related to the Services performed pursuant to this Agreement, the Consultant’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and shall not contribute with it.
(ii) Each insurance policy required by this section shall be endorsed to state that the City shall receive written notice at least thirty (30) days prior to the cancellation, non-renewal, or material modification of the coverages required herein.
31 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
(iii) Consultant grants to the City a waiver of any right to subrogation which any insurer of said Consultant may acquire against the City by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance. Consultant agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the City has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.
(iv) Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City of Clovis Risk Services. The City may require the Consultant to purchase coverage with a lower deductible or retention or provide proof of ability to pay losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses within the retention. c. Evidence of Coverage. Consultant shall deliver to City written evidence of the above insurance coverages, including the required endorsements prior to commencing Services under this Agreement; and the production of such written evidence shall be an express condition precedent, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, to Consultant’s right to be paid any compensation under this Agreement. City's failure, at any time, to object to Consultant’s failure to provide the specified insurance or written evidence thereof (either as to the type or amount of such insurance), shall not be deemed a waiver of City's right to insist upon such insurance later. d. Maintenance of Insurance. If Consultant fails to furnish and maintain the insurance required by this section, City may (but is not required to) purchase such insurance on behalf of Consultant, and the Consultant shall pay the cost thereof to City upon demand, and City shall furnish Consultant with any information needed to obtain such insurance. Moreover, at its discretion, City may pay for such insurance with funds otherwise due Consultant under this Agreement. e. Subcontractors. If the Consultant should subcontract all or any portion of the work to be performed in this Agreement, the Consultant shall cover the subcontractor, and/or require each subcontractor to adhere to all the requirements contained herein. Similarly, any cancellation, lapse, reduction or change of subcontractor’s insurance shall have the same impact as described above. f. Special Risks or Circumstances. The City reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.
g. Indemnity and Defense. Except as otherwise expressly provided, the insurance requirements in this section shall not in any way limit, in either scope or amount, the indemnity and defense obligations separately owed by Consultant to City under this Agreement. 32 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

EXHIBIT D

SIGNING AUTHORITY
33 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis i

CITY OF CLOVIS

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

CONSULTANT SERVICES
Issue Date: June 19, 2025
Closing Date: July 9, 2025
All Questions and Responses must be electronically submitted on the Bid Page on Planet Bids:

For assistance, contact Susanna Herrera at (559) 324-2485 or [email protected]

CONTRACTOR TO COMPLETE
Undersigned agrees to furnish the commodity or service stipulated in the attached at the prices and terms stated in this RFP.

Bid must be signed and dated by an authorized officer or employee.

COMPANY

CONTACT PERSON

ADDRESS

CITY STATE ZIP CODE

TELEPHONE NUMBER E-MAIL ADDRESS

AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE

PRINT NAME TITLE
Daniel Costantino
Jarrett Walker and Associates
1021 SE Caruthers St
Portland Oregon 97214
(971) 277 3629 [email protected]
Daniel Costantino Vice President
Attachment 2
34 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis ii
Addendum 1
Acknowledgment

CITY OF CLOVIS
ADDENDUM NUMBER: ONE (1)

CONSULTANT SERVICES
Issue Date: July 2, 2025
Closing Date: July 9, 2025 at 3:00 PM
All Proposals must be electronically submitted to the Bid Page on Planet Bids:
https://vendors.planetbids.com/portal/14742/bo/bo-detail/131198 For assistance, contact Susanna Herrera at (559) 324-2785 or [email protected].

NOTE THE FOLLOWING AND ATTACHED ADDITIONS, DELETIONS AND/OR CHANGES TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL AND INCLUDE THEM IN YOUR RESPONSE. PLEASE SIGN AND RETURN THIS ADDENDUM WITH YOUR PROPOSAL.
 Questions and Answers
 Included Trade Secret Form – See “Attachment A – Trade Secret Form”  Updated Checklist – See “Attachment B – Update Checklist”  Updated Proposal Content Requirements – See “Attachment C – Updated Proposal Content Requirements”
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ADDENDUM NUMBER ONE (1) TO RFP.

COMPANY NAME:
(PRINT)
SIGNATURE:

NAME & TITLE:
(PRINT)
1 Jarrett Walker and Associates
Daniel Costantino, Vice President
35 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES <Project Name>
RFP# 0000 | <Client Name> iii
1021 SE Caruthers
St, Portland, OR
97214
971-277-3629
jarrettwalker.com
July 9th, 2025
Subject: City of Clovis, Strategic Operations Plan
To Whom It May Concern,
On behalf of Jarrett Walker & Associates, LLC. (JWA) I am pleased to submit this proposal to the City of Clovis in response to the RFP for a Strategic Operations Plan (SOP)
In light of the significant shifts impacting the transit industry, from evolving clean air regulations to emerging technologies and equity-driven policies, Clovis Transit’s Strategic Operations Plan (SOP) represents a timely and important opportunity to shape the future of transit in the region. The SOP, funded by a 2024 Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant from Caltrans, will help Clovis Transit respond to state and federal requirements, meet the expectations of its community, and plan for an equitable, safe, and sustainable future.

Our team sees this project not just as a planning exercise, but as a chance to reconcile current service realities with long-term aspirations. By grounding the plan in practical insights, such as local ridership patterns, community needs, and operational constraints, while advancing a forward-looking vision, we aim to help Clovis Transit design a road map that is both achievable and transformative.

JWA is one of the nation’s leading firms in transit planning. Some of our betterknown successes include implemented network redesigns for Monterey Salinas (MST), San Jose (VTA), Sacramento (SacRT), Houston (METRO), Dallas (DART), Cleveland (GCRTA), and Dublin, Ireland (NTA). All of these agencies have put network changes based on our work into practice and were happy with the results.

We are pleased to propose Álvaro Caviedes as the Project Manager for this SOP.

Álvaro brings over 8 years of exceptional experience in transit and data analysis and has consistently demonstrated strong leadership, strategic thinking, and a results-driven approach to managing complex projects. Álvaro will be supported in this effort by a team of experts, including our founder Jarrett Walker.

The keys to our approach include:
• A reality-based public conversation. We make collaborative plans guided in large part by public engagement. To make this possible, we educate decision-makers and stakeholders about trade-offs in service design, including ridership versus coverage or complexity versus connections. Our public and stakeholder involvement processes don’t just generate competing “wish lists” from constituent groups that we, or you, have to reconcile. Instead, they generate thoughtful public input on the real, hard choices that transit agencies must make.
• A team of dedicated specialists. As a firm that specializes in transit network planning, we team with other companies that are as dedicated to their core practice area as we are. Besides community engagement, we have included AMMA for their strategic thinking skills and expertise in on-demand response. • We focus on transit's usefulness and its ability to facilitate individual freedom. We've found that we succeed when we talk about freedom. When we study people’s access to opportunity, meaning their freedom to go places 36 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES <Project Name>
RFP# 0000 | <Client Name> iv
1021 SE Caruthers
St, Portland, OR
97214
971-277-3629
jarrettwalker.com
and do things, we come to the most compelling description of transit’s benefits and the best guide on how to make a network better. • Embedding environmental justice and Title VI needs throughout the planning process. In our work, we consider the full range of environmental justice needs and concerns. In a JWA led process we look at these issues when assessing markets and needs, in developing service concepts and alternatives, and in analyzing the outcomes of potential changes. Our analytic processes always include assessments of how access to opportunity and proximity to services change for a wide range of populations. • Distinguishing between technical analyses and value judgments. We are planners, but we are also facilitators, analysts, illuminators, synthesizers, and presenters. In those roles, we ask questions about your community’s values and priorities, but we do not answer them. We know the difference between our technical expertise and your community’s desires for its future. We don’t confuse the two, but we integrate them into a plan that is technically rigorous and clear about its priorities.
• Locally-relevant experience. JWA has worked in several projects in California, including service redesigns, TMP updates, and COAs in Fresno, Monterey-Salinas, Santa Cruz, and Sacramento. We are currently working in the Imperial Valley, Palm Springs, Solano, Glendale and San Jose.

We hope you will agree that our team offers a unique set of capabilities, and look forward to the opportunity to discuss them with your further soon.

Respectfully yours,
Daniel Costantino
Vice President, Jarrett Walker & Associates, LLC
37 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

Image: Photo by Jacob,
Adobe Stock Photos
Clovis Transit - Strategic Operation Plan
City of Clovis | California
Contact Person: Alvaro Caviedes
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 971-277-3629
Address:
1021 SE Caruthers Street
Portland, OR 97214, USA
Submitted by Jarrett Walker + Associates
July 9, 2025
Submitted by: In association with:
38 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis vi
Table of Contents
Addendum 1 Acknowledgment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii Forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Contractor Exceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 A. Proposer Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Consistency in Assignments and Availability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Staff Qualifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Firm Qualifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Project Approach and Work Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Project Understanding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Improve Air Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Service Planning for a Zero-Emissions Fleet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Local Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Regional Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Putting it all together . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Keys to Our Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Focus on the Public Conversation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Learning from COVID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Explain at Every Step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Modern Equity Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Back it up with top quality analysis, maps and visualization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Leverage Staff Expertise through Collaborative Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Work Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Task 0. Project Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Task 1. Review Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Task 2. Research and Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 39 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis vii
Table of Contents
Task 3. Visioning Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Task 4. Stakeholder Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Task 5. Community Outreach and Engagement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Task 6. Draft and Final Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Task 7. Presentation, Board Review and Approval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Cost Proposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Project Cost Breakdown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 Check List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Sample Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 40 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES
Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 1
Image: Photo by Jacob,
Adobe Stock Photos
1 Forms
41 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 2
1 Forms
Conflict of Interest Statement
JWA and its project partners affirm that there is no conflict of interest, as defined by the City of Clovis, with respect to this proposal. None of our team members are current employees of the City of Clovis or any public agency for which the City Council serves as the governing body.

Furthermore, no member of our team has been employed in such a capacity within the past twelve (12) months, nor have any of us participated in developing the specifications for this contract or related services.

Additionally, no team member or affiliate of JWA has a financial interest in, or relationship with, any City employee that would create a real or perceived conflict of interest. We also confirm that none of our staff members are in a position to influence or have been influenced by any City employee involved in the selection process for this RFP.

We are committed to complying fully with all applicable federal, state, and local conflict of interest laws, statutes, and regulations. Should any potential conflict of interest arise during the course of the project, we will promptly disclose it to the City and work collaboratively to address it in a transparent and appropriate manner.

Signature:________________________
Name: Daniel Costantino
Title: Vice President
Date: July 8th, 2025
42 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 3
1 Forms

TRADE SECRET ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Each proposal submitted is a public record under the California Public Records Act (Cal. Gov. Code, secs. 6250 and following) and is therefore open to inspection by the public as required by Section 6253 of the California Government Code. This section generally states that "every person has a right to inspect any public record". The City will not exclude any proposal or portion of a proposal from treatment as a public record except information that it is properly submitted as a “trade secret” (defined below), and determined by the City to be a “trade secret” (if not otherwise subject to disclosure, as stated below). Information submitted as “proprietary”, “confidential” or under any other terms that might state or suggest restricted public access will not be excluded from treatment as public record. "Trade secrets" as defined by Section 6254.7 of the California Government Code are not treated as a public record under that section. This section defines trade secrets as:
"...Trade secrets," as used in this section, may include, but are not limited to, any formula, plan, pattern, process, tool, mechanism, compound, procedure, production data or compilation of information that is not patented, which is known only to certain individuals within a commercial concern who are using it to fabricate, produce, or compound an article of trade or a service having commercial value and which gives its user an opportunity to obtain a business advantage over competitors who do not know or use it."
Such information must be submitted in a separate PDF file named "Trade Secret" and marked as “Confidential” in the Planet Bids system. Contractors must include a clear and concise statement that sets out the reasons for confidentiality in accordance with the foregoing definition of “trade secret.” Examples of information not considered trade secrets are pricing, cover letter, promotional materials, references, and the like.

Information submitted by a Contractor as "trade secret" will be reviewed by the City, with the assistance of the City’s legal counsel, to determine conformance or non-conformance to the foregoing definition.

Information that is properly identified as “trade secret” and which the City determines to conform to the definition will not become public record (if not otherwise subject to disclosure, as stated below). The City will safeguard this information in an appropriate manner, provided however, in the event of a request, demand, or legal action by any person or entity seeking access to the “trade secret” information, the City will inform the Contractor of such request, demand, or legal action, and the Contractor shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, including its officers and employees, against any and all claims, liabilities, damages, or costs or expenses, including attorney’s fees and costs, relating to such request, demand or legal action, seeking access to the “trade secret” information.

Information submitted by Contractor as trade secret and determined by the City not to be in conformance with the foregoing California Government Code definition shall be excluded from the proposal and deleted by the City.

The City shall not in any way be liable or responsible for the disclosure of any proposals or portions thereof, if (1) they are not electronically submitted in a separate PDF that is marked "Trade Secret" and marked as Confidential in the Planet Bids system; or (2) disclosure thereof is required or allowed under the law or by order of court.

Contractors are advised that the City does not wish to receive trade secrets and that Contractors are not to supply trade secrets unless they are absolutely necessary.

I have read and understand, and agree to the above "Trade Secret Acknowledgement." CONTRACTOR MUST CHECK ONE OF THE FOLLOWING:

Has Contractor submitted certain bid information that is a “trade secret,” as defined by Section 6254.7 of the California Government Code, and in compliance with the requirements of this Trade Secrets Acknowledgement? By marking “NO”, Contractor does not claim any confidentiality of any bid information submitted to the City. _____ YES _____ NO
ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED BY CONTRACTOR:

Signature Date
Print Name Title

ATTACHMENT A - TRADE SECRET ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
11 Daniel Costantino Vice President
July 8th, 2025
43 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 4
1 Forms
22 DEBARMENT AND SUSPENSION CERTIFICATION
Check one box below (and provide an explanation if necessary):
□ The Contractor certifies that the Contractor and its principals:

1. Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily or involuntarily excluded from covered transactions by any federal department or agency;

2. Have not, within the preceding three years, been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public or private agreement or transaction; violation of federal or state antitrust statutes, including those proscribing price fixing between competitors, allocation of customers between competitors, and bid rigging; commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, tax evasion, receiving stolen property, making false claims, or obstruction of justice; or commission of any other offense indicating a lack of business integrity or business honesty;

3. Are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity (federal, state, or local) with commission of any offense described in Paragraph 2 of this certification;

4. Have not, within the preceding three years, had one or more public transactions (federal, state, or local) terminated for cause or default.
– OR –
□ The Contractor is unable to certify to all of the statements in this certification and attaches its explanation to this certification. (In the explanation, the Contractor must certify to those statements that can be certified and explain why the other statements cannot be certified.) The Contractor shall require that the language of this certification be included in the contract documents for all subcontractors and material suppliers at all tiers, and that all subcontractors and material suppliers shall certify and disclose accordingly.

The Contractor certifies or affirms the truthfulness and accuracy of the contents of the statements submitted on or with this certification. In addition, the Contractor understands and agrees that the provisions of 31 U.S.C. §§ 3801 et al. are applicable to this certification.

Company: _________________________________________________________________ Name: ____________________________________________________________________ Title: _____________________________________________________________________ Signature: _________________________________________________________________ Date: _____________________________________________________________________ Jarrett Walker and Associates
Daniel Costantino
Vice President
July 8th, 2025
x
44 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 5
1 Forms
23 XI. TAX LIABILITY CERTIFICATION
The Contractor certifies that:

1. It has no unpaid federal tax liability that has been assessed, for which all judicial and administrative remedies have been exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not being paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority responsible for collecting the tax liability;

2. It has not been convicted of a felony criminal violation under any federal law within the preceding 24 months; and

3. It shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all subcontractors and material suppliers at all tiers, and that all subcontractors and material suppliers shall certify and disclose accordingly.

The Contractor certifies or affirms the truthfulness and accuracy of the contents of the statements submitted on or with this certification. In addition, the Proposer understands and agrees that the provisions of 31 U.S.C. §§ 3801 et al. are applicable to this certification.

Company: _________________________________________________________________ Name: ____________________________________________________________________ Title: _____________________________________________________________________ Signature: _________________________________________________________________ Date: _____________________________________________________________________ Daniel Costantino
Vice President
Jarrett Walker and Associates
July 8th, 2025
45 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 6
1 Forms
47 D. EXHIBIT D – LOBBYING RESTRICTIONS FORM
The undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that:

1. No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of an agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.

2. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, “Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying,” in accordance with its instructions.

3. The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all sub-awards at all tiers (including subcontracts, sub-grants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly.

This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by section 1352, title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure.
______________________________________
Signature of Contractor's Authorized Official
_______________________________________
Name and Title of Contractor's Authorized Official
___________________________
Date
Daniel Costantino, Vice President
July 8th, 2025
46 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 7
1 Forms
24 REFERENCE LIST

VENDOR MUST COMPLETE AND RETURN WITH REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL Firm:

Provide a list of at least five (5) customers for whom you have recently provided similar services.

If you have held a contract for similar services with the City of Clovis within the past seven (7) years, list the City as one of your customers. Please list the person most familiar with your contract. Be sure to include all requested information.

Reference Name: Contact:

Address:

City: State: Zip:

Phone ( ) Project Date:

Service Provided:

Reference Name: Contact:

Address:

City: State: Zip:

Phone ( ) Project Date:

Service Provided:

Reference Name: Contact:

Address:

City: State: Zip:

Phone ( ) Project Date:

Service Provided:

Reference Name: Contact:

Address:

City: State: Zip:

Phone ( ) Project Date:

Service Provided:

Reference Name: Contact:

Address:

City: State: Zip:

Phone ( ) Project Date:

Service Provided:

Canby Area Transit Todd Wood
Monterey Salinas Transit
Missoula Urban Transp. District
Santa Cruz Metro
195 S Hazel Dell Way
Canby
266 0751
Transit Master Plan update
OR 97013
503 December 2023-November 2024
Michelle Overmeyer
9 Upper Ragsdale Drive, Suite 200
Monterey
264 5877
Comprehensive Operational Plan
CA 93940
831 November 2020-November 2022
Corey Aldridge
200 West Pine St
Missoula
370 9208
Strategic Service Plan, including a short and long term planning component MT 59802
406 2017-2018
John Urgo
603 Front St.

Santa Cruz
884 8276
Reimagine METRO: Comprehensive Network Review. Both JWA and AMMA worked on this project.

CA 95060
909 December 2022-December 2024
Nancy Strickert
1170 W. Third Street
San Bernandino
884
On Call Assistance includes: continuing technical support on transit, ADA, unmet transit needs hearing process; regional grant solicitation eff orts; public outreach and engagement; transit operator fi nancial reviews; and staffi ng PASTACC, the Public and Specialized Transportation Advisory and Coordination Council.

CA 92410
908 On call assistance from AMMA since 1991
Jarrett Walker and Associates
San Bernandino County Transp. Authority
47 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 8
1 Forms
25 PARTICIPATION
The successful Contractor agrees to allow the City of Clovis and with the City’s consent, other public agencies to purchase additional items at the same terms and conditions as in their submitted proposal for a period not to exceed one year from the date of award. Participating agencies may enter into a contract with the successful vendor for the purchase the services and/or equipment noted herein based on the terms, conditions, prices, and percentages offered by the successful vendor to the City. Purchase Orders issued by other public agencies referencing this agreement, shall be the sole responsibility of the agency placing the order. The City reserves the right to extend the one-year time period with mutual consent of the successful vendor.

Any agency choosing to avail itself of this opportunity, will make purchases in their own name, make payment directly to the contractor, be liable to the contractor and vice versa, per the terms of the original contract, all the while holding the City of Clovis harmless. If awarded this contract, please indicate whether you would extend the same terms and conditions to all tax supported agencies within this group as you are proposing to extend to the City of Clovis. * Note: This form/information is not used for evaluation purposes.

Yes, we will extend contract terms and conditions to all qualified public agencies.

No, we will not extend contract terms to any agency other than the City of Clovis. (Authorized Signature)
Title
Daniel Costantino, Vice President
48 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 9
1 Forms
Contractor Exceptions
We have no exceptions to the language of the
RFP.
49 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES
Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 10
Image: Photo by Jacob,
Adobe Stock Photos
2 Vendor Company Data
and Management Plan
50 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 11
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
A. Proposer Profile
Jarrett Walker + Associates
(JWA) was founded in 2011 by
Jarrett Walker, the author of
Human Transit. JWA’s mission
is to foster clear conversations about transit, leading to confident decisions. We specialize in helping communities understand transit choices and their consequences, informed by excellent maps, analysis and presentation. Since its founding, JWA has:
• Led short- and long-range transit network
plans (including assessing existing
conditions, key choices, developing network
scenarios, and integrating public input into
draft and final plans) in more than 40 cities
and towns throughout North America and in
Ireland, Iceland, and New Zealand (12 years).
• Led the development of transit plans that
supported successful ballot measures
for transit funding, including in Missoula,
Indianapolis and Raleigh (12 years).
• Analyzed transit priority and high capacity
corridors in Vancouver, BC; Portland, OR; and
Santa Clara County, CA (12 years).
• Facilitated interactive stakeholder and
elected official workshops for numerous
transit agencies, conferences, cities and
counties (13 years).
• Advised transit agencies on service
branding, including in San Francisco,
Oakland, San Jose, and Vancouver, BC (10
years).
• Designed exceptional transit system maps
for Miami, Oakville, San Antonio and AC
Transit (5 years).

JWA is a Limited Liability Corporation (C Corp)
incorporated in Oregon in December 2011. The
firm is jointly owned by eight of its employees: Jarrett Walker, Scudder Wagg, Michelle Poyourow, Daniel Costantino, Evan Landman,
Gavin Pritchard, Ricky Angueira and Álvaro
Caviedes. JWA has two offices, located in
Portland, Oregon (16 employees) and Arlington,
Virginia (4 employees). We work across the US
and Canada, as well as in Europe, Australia, and
New Zealand.

Figure 1: Map showing where JWA has worked. Red and green dots show transit network plans that are adopted and either partly or fully implemented.
51 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 12
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
AMMA Transit
Planning, Inc. is a
small, public transit-oriented planning firm
founded in 1987 and
newly incorporated in 2022. For the purposes
of this agreement, AMMA will be the sole subcontractor, working with the support of Transit Happy and Transit Marketing. AMMA’s foundation
is a strong background in paratransit operations
through implementation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990, with extensive credentials in the evaluation and improvement of public demand response services. Expansion
into coordinated planning with its focus on older
adults, persons with disabilities and persons of
low-income led AMMA authorship of dozens of
coordinated public transit-human services transportation plans across California and in other western states. AMMA’s public engagement and
outreach focus – honed through these many
Coordinated Plans – is effective in reaching
under-represented community members.

AMMA’s coordinated planning work led to a
range of multi-modal service planning projects to address fixed-route service planning, bus and rail connections, rural transportation,
non-emergency medical transportation, call
center evaluation, fleet electrification, and more.

AMMA worked on multiple Short Range Transit
Plans and Comprehensive Operations Plans and
has promoted transit ridership as a key area of
focus. AMMA’s planning approach recognizes the
important intersection of service planning and
marketing to retain and expand the transit rider
base. Ridership growth has become ever more
critical in the wake of the COVID-19 Pandemic
with AMMA embracing tools of rider education,
awareness and transit promotional campaigns to
introduce people to public transit and build confidence in its use.

Paratransit, on-demand transportation planning expertise, another long-time strength of AMMA’s, has readily translated to new micro
transit services. Our team’s understanding of the
reservation, scheduling and dispatching technologies includes implementing selected software platforms, with the result that we bring tested
guidance to clients.

As a small firm, AMMA has long viewed its
strategic partnerships, with like-minded firms and
colleagues, as a critical way of bringing value and
adding breadth to client projects. These partnerships, in both prime and subcontractor roles, have enabled AMMA to take on a wide-ranging array of projects throughout California; in other states that include Oregon, Arizona, Ohio,
Alaska, Kansas and North Carolina; statewide for
the CalAct organization; and national projects
for the Transit Cooperative Research Program
(TCRP), Community Transportation Association of
America (CTAA), and the American Association
of Retired Persons (AARP). AMMA is certified by
Los Angeles METRO and the California Unified
Certification Program as a small business and as
a disadvantaged business based in Riverside,
CA.

Further information can be found at www.

AmmaTransitPlanning.com
52 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 13
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
Jarrett Walker + Associates (JWA) would be
the prime contractor. JWA would perform all
tasks, and help guide the key themes and issues
to address in public outreach, participate in
select stakeholder conversations, and present
to Clovis Transit board, committees, local city
councils and/or other decision-making bodies as
appropriate.

AMMA would be a subcontractor to JWA. AMMA
would lead the planning and execution of most
of the public outreach activities. This would
include stakeholder interviews, surveys, tabling
events, one-on-one meetings, project website
updates and public engagement material. AMMA
would also perform tasks related to demand
response and help defining the vision and goals.

The structure of this team and key personnel
involved are resumed in the Organization Chart
and Key Personnel descriptions that follow.

Consistency in Assignments and
Availability
We understand that consistency and predictability in project staffing is critical to the success of any major network design study. As such, we
commit that the key personnel proposed will
be available to perform the proposed services
Álvaro Caviedes | JWA
Project Manager
Shreja Jain | JWA
Lead Analyst
Jarre
Walker | JWA
Lead Planner / Principal-In-Charge
Evan Landman | JWA
Technical Expert / Backup PM
JWA Planning
& Analysis Sta

Andrea Breault
AMMA
Senior Planner
Dennis Brooks
Financial lead
Elea Carey
AMMA
Outreach Lead
Selena Barlow
AMMA
Senior Advisor
AMMA
Figure 2: Team Organization Chart
for the duration of this contract, and that no
person designated as "key" to the proposed
service shall be removed or replaced without
the prior written concurrence of Clovis Transit.

We have a highly capable team currently supporting multiple projects, and we are pleased to confirm that we have sufficient capacity to
take on this engagement without impacting the
quality or timeliness of our other commitments.

For this project, our assigned Project Manager
will dedicate 60% of their time to ensure focused
leadership, timely communication, and efficient
delivery. Additionally, our core technical team has
availability to support project needs and scale
as necessary based on the timeline and deliverables. This allocation reflects our commitment to delivering high-quality results while maintaining
the agility to respond to project needs as they
evolve. We estimate staff's availability based on
the level of commitment and attention necessary,
based on the person's position in the organizational chart. Hours dedicated in our budget estimates (see Cost Proposal).

There has not been contracts terminated before
completion with the last five years.

No lawsuits or legal actions that are currently
pending, or that have been resolved within the
last 5 years.

No Payment problems that JWA had with the City
within the past three years.
53 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES 14
Staff Qualifications
54 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 15
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
Jarrett Walker + Associates
Álvaro Caviedes
Project Manager
Álvaro is a project manager, transit planner, and
data analyst at Jarrett Walker +
Associates. Alvaro's combination
of technical and people-focused
experience has honed his ability
to communicate complex information in English and Spanish to a diverse range audiences and
support policymakers in confident decision-making. As Project Manager, Álvaro will lead all of the consulting team's efforts. Álvaro will be ultimately responsible for the quality and timeliness of all project deliverables. Álvaro has managed
the recent Transit Master Plan update for the
City of Canby, and participated as a lead analyst
in bus network redesign projects like Imperial
County California, Monterey Salinas Transint,
PACE ReVision Network, and Santa Cruz METRO.

Jarrett Walker (JWA)
Role: Lead Network Planner
Jarrett is an international consultant in public
transit planning and policy. In his 28 years of
transit consulting, he has worked on more
than 200 public transit planning
projects. He has led network
design projects in more than 50
cities, many of which have been
implemented successfully. As
Lead Network Planner, Jarrett's
primary role will be to facilitate in network
design workshops. He will also provide follow-on advice as needed, and review first drafts of any reports on existing conditions and the
service implementation plans.

Evan Landman
Planner / Deputy PM
Evan is the most technically skilled principal at
JWA. In addition to managing network design
studies, in his 10+ years with the
firm, Evan has led the development of all of JWA’s signature spatial analysis, cartography
and visualization.Evan was part
of the team to redesign the
FAX network back in 2013-15, which was implemented in 2018. Evan will provide planning guidance to the Project Manager, review Clovis
Transit schedule and operation agreements,
and he will also be available as the back-up
Project Manager if Álvaro becomes unavailable.

Shreya Jain
Lead Analyst
Shreya will serve as an analyst and cartographer as well, supporting the team through the analysis of existing
conditions and the development
of material to build the SOP presentations and reports. As Lead Analyst, Shreya will lead our
team on all technical, mapping, and analysis-related issues. Shreya offers experience in municipal planning, geographic analysis, data
analysis and cartography. She is knowledgeable
about California transportation plans and challenges thanks to her work in Solano, San Jose and Santa Cruz.

Liz Marchalonis
Analyst Support
Liz provides cartography, data analysis and
publication support for JWA’s
transit network planning efforts.

She brings her professional experience in the architecture industry, and an eye for detail and clear
communication, to her work on
behalf of JWA’s transit agency clients. Liz has
been the lead analyst in the Imperial County
project in Southern California.
55 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 16
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
AMMA
Dennis Brooks
President, Financial Specialist/Transit
Planner
Dennis Brooks, AMMA’s President and Transit
Planner, with a specific background in financial analysis, has been with AMMA for 19 years,
since 2006. He recently concluded the Riverside County Transportation Commission
project to prepare the Transit
Funding Policies and Procedures Manuals for
both the Commission’s and the county’s public
transit operators. He recently concluded a paratransit “interoperability” project to improve data exchange in a coordinated paratransit program
among Ecolane, 5M, and TransTrack software
platforms. Among extensive small-operator
technical assistance roles, he assisted VCTC and
211 Ventura in designing a call-center program
and securing FTA 5310 funds. Mr. Brooks is
just concluding a field assessment and program
evaluation of 22 Riverside County paratransit
and specialized transportation programs and is
closing out the county’s development of a Transit
Funding Handbook.

Andrea Breault
Senior Planner
Andrea Breault has 19 years' experience in the
transportation operations and
planning fields, including in the
field of university shuttle and
parking services, fleet operations, and transit planning.

Andrea began her work in transportation as the Transportation Demand Management Supervisor at Princeton
University, where she developed programs
aimed at reducing campus traffic and emissions. She then served as Assistant Director of Parking and Transportation Services at
Tufts University, overseeing shuttle operations
and parking services across four campuses
in Massachusetts. Prior to last fall, Andrea led
Cascades East Transit (CET) as Transportation
Director for six years, managing a fleet of 85
vehicles and a team of 70 staff. She guided the
agency through the challenges of the COVID19 pandemic while advancing CET’s fixed-route and demand-response programs. She is currently working on Coordinated Plan efforts for Riverside and San Bernardino counties, an SRTP
for Mountain Transit, and an integration of nine
dial-a-ride agencies in Ventura County.

Elea Carey
Community Engagement and Outreach
Lead
Elea Carey has 30 years of marketing experience, including introducing new marketing ideas in emerging environments.

When the pandemic hit, she
shuttered her Silicon Valley marketing consultancy and opened Transit Happy to serve public
transit agencies nationwide. She
promotes transit surveys and
outreach efforts to gather meaningful community input. Her recent work in California includes planning and developing community engagement efforts in San Bernardino and Riverside counties and developing marketing plans for
SRTP updates for the Yosemite Area Regional
Transportation System, and in Butte and El
Dorado counties. Elea also develops strategic
marketing plans, launches creative, PR, and
paid-media campaigns, and implements marketing tactics on behalf of clients. Promoting transit to multilingual audiences is one of her greatest
passions.

Selena Barlow
Senior Advisor
Selena Barlow, sole proprietor of Transit
Marketing, has more than 30
years of experience marketing
and planning public transportation services throughout the U.S.

Selena has worked with dozens
of small-urban and rural transit
agencies throughout the nation,
including in Fresno County and its adjacent
counties. She’s experienced in developing and
leading nuanced, tailored community outreach
plans that yield unique and accurate rider, stakeholder, and potential-rider feedback. She most recently supported Transit Happy’s rider interviews and stakeholder engagement processes in Butte County.
56 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 17
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan Álvaro Caviedes Senior Associate
Álvaro Caviedes is a transit planner and data analyst at Jarrett Walker + Associates. He brings experience in urban planning, social equity, statistical and spatial analysis, cartography, and research from his work in North and South America. He is also skilled at programming and automation of large analysis tasks. Álvaro holds a dual master’s degree in Urban Planning and Civil Engineering. He has also helped JWA creating products and translating documents into Spanish to reach a broader audience.

Education
Master of Urban and Regional Planning, Portland State University, 2017 Master of Science, Civil Engineering, Portland State University, 2017 Bachelor of Science, Civil Engineering, Universidad de los Andes, 2012 Positions Held
2019 – present Senior Associate, Jarrett Walker + Associates 2018 Data Analysis Intern, Puget Sound Regional Council 2017 – 2018 Consultant, Inter-American Development Bank 2014 – 2017 Research Assistant, Portland State University Transit Network Plans
Álvaro Caviedes has taken a lead role in many transit planning projects, including:
» Project Manager for the Transit Master Plan in Canby, Oregon, and co-managed the second phase of the network redesign project in Dallas, Texas.
» Deputy Project Manager for full bus network redesign projects in the Chicago suburbs (PACE); Santa Cruz, California; Monterey County, California; and Dallas,Texas.

Spatial and Transportation Data Analysis
Álvaro is skilled in statistical analysis, data visualization, spatial analysis, and GIS. His experience in JWA includes:
» Consultant project manager and analyst for the current Canby Transit Master Plan, Canby, Oregon. » Assisting on the Service Planning Redesign for Santa Cruz Metro. Álvaro managed and designed the new public-facing newtork and route maps for Headways, METRO’s schedule magazine. » Transit network design, access analysis and cartography for the Forward Together Analysis for TriMet, in Portland, Oregon. This analysis included an evaluation of different corridor options for one of the main segments in the network in order to identify the best frequency and terminus options. » Detailed transit performance assessment and access analyses in support of a DART New Bus Network, implemented in 2022. He managed a 5 and 10 year plan to improve service in the service area. This analysis includes an evaluation of transit fl exible options (GoLink) and their integration into the overall network.

Álvaro also facilitated online community meetings in Spanish. 57 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 18
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan Jarrett Walker Founder and Principal Consultant
Jarrett Walker is an international consultant in public transport planning and policy, including the links between transport and all aspects of community planning and urban structure. His clients include transport authorities, cities, developers, and non-profits – anyone who wants to make better use of public transport to support their goals.

In his over 30 years of consulting, Jarrett has been the lead planner on more than 100 public transport planning projects in North America, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand.

Jarrett is also known for his work educating stakeholders about the choices that public transport requires, building clear public consultation processes, and helping organizations form coherent and implementable transport goals.

He is author of the popular book Human Transit, which explains transit concepts to the general reader, and HumanTransit.org, a blog and collection of articles explaining key transport concepts and emerging issues.

Education and Past Employment
He holds a Ph.D. from Stanford University (1996) and a BA from Pomona College (1984). His past employers are Nelson/Nygaard (1993-2005) and MR Cagney in Australia (2005-10). He founded Jarrett Walker & Associates in 2011. At JWA, he serves as project director and lead planner for all of the firm’s major network design projects.

Transit Network Design Studies
Since 1993 Jarrett has led the planning on about 100 bus network redesigns, most of them successfully implemented, including recent ones in Houston (2013-15); Dublin (2017-20); San Jose and Silicon Valley (2018-20); Auckland, New Zealand (2015-21), Cleveland (2019-22), Dallas (2018-22), Miami (2022) and many others.

Transit Expansion Programs
Jarrett has led the transit planning behind many successful funding proposals for transit expansions, including in Raleigh, North Carolina (2016) and Indianapolis (2016).

Transit Infrastructure and Land Use
Jarrett was worked on many projects integrating transit infrastructure with land use – including major transit station projects in Vancouver, BC; Surrey, BC, and Edmonton. He frequently provides input on the design of transit facilities to improve transit service performance.

Publications
Book: Human Transit: How Clearer Thinking about Public Transit Can Enrich Our Communities and Our Lives.

Island Press, 2011 (first edition), 2024 (revised edition).

Scholarly Papers:
» 2008 “Purpose-driven public transport: creating a clear conversation about public transport goals.” Journal of Transport Geography, 16 (6): 436-432.
» 2018 “To Predict with Confidence, Plan for Freedom,” Journal of Public Transportation, 21 (1): 119-127 Many articles on public transport topics in news publications, including the Washington Post, The Atlantic, the Sydney Morning Herald, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and The Times (Ireland). 58 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 19
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan Evan Landman
Principal Associate
Evan Landman is a project manager and analyst who fills many roles at Jarrett Walker + Associates.

In addition to managing major network design studies, in his 10 years with JWA, Evan has led the development of all of JWA’s signature spatial analysis, cartography and visualization techniques. Evan has a rare ability to turn columns of data into compelling visual and narrative explanations that help people understand how transit works and the choices it presents.

Education
Bachelor of Arts, Human Geography (Urban Studies), The University of British Columbia, 2012 Major Project Experience
Evan has been engaged in all phases of JWA’s major transit planning projects, as a project manager, lead analyst, and planner. Examples include:
» Akron, OH, Akron METRO Reimagine
METRO (2021 - 2023) * Δ
» Portland, OR, TriMet Comprehensive
Operations Analysis (2021 - 2023)* Δ
» Chicago, CTA Bus Vision Study
(2020 - ongoing)
» Portland, OR, PBOT Rose Lanes Project (2019
- 2021)*
» Salt Lake City, UT, UTA Service Choices (2018
- 2020)*
» Cleveland, OH, RTA System Redesign Study
(2019)* Δ
» Dublin, Ireland, BusConnects network
redesign (2017 - 2019) Δ
» Vancouver, BC, TransLink Bus Improvement
Plan (2017 - 2018) Δ
» San Jose, CA, Transit Ridership Improvement
Program (2015 - 2017) Δ
» Houston, TX, METRO Transit System
Reimagining (2013 - 2015) Δ
JWA’s Analysis Leader
JWA’s projects rely on Evan’s expertise in spatial analysis and map design. Evan has spearheaded the development of critical tools used in JWA’s practice working for transit agencies and other clients, including:
» GTFS-based methods of schedule analysis
used in dozens of transit network studies.
» Access and travel time analysis workflows
based on OpenTripPlanner that allow direct
before and after comparison of network
redesign studies without the need to prepare
a schedule.
» Web-based, interactive transit trip planner and
travel time isochrone tools for use in transit
agencies public processes.
» Numerous methods and visualizations used to
understand patterns of transit ridership, speed
and reliability.
* Project Manager
Δ Implemented Network Plan
59 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 20
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan Shreya Jain
Senior Associate
Shreya Jain is a transit planner and data analyst at Jarrett Walker + Associates. Through her work on municipal planning, programs and infrastructure at the City of Portland, as well as her educational background, Shreya has developed broad skills in stakeholder engagement, plan development, data analysis, mapping and visual communication.

Education
Master of Urban & Regional Planning, Portland State University, 2020 Bachelor of Science, Environmental Science, Portland State University, 2017 Positions Held
2022 – present: Senior Associate, Jarrett Walker + Associates 2021 – 2021: Associate, Kearns & West
2019 – 2021: Planning Assistant, Portland Bureau of Transportation Transit Network Planning & Analysis
Shreya has contributed to service planning, mapping, analysis, cost estimates, and public involvement eff orts on several projects, including the following:
» Des Moines, IA, Reimagine DART Network Plan (Lead Analyst) » Canby, OR, Transit Master Plan (Lead Analyst)
» Solano County, CA SolTrans Comprehensive Operational Analysis (Lead Analyst) » Portland, OR, TriMet Forward Together Long Range Plan » South Bend, IN, Connect Transit Comprehensive Operational Analysis » Albuquerque, NM, ABQ RIDE Forward Network Plan
» Greensboro, NC, GoBORO Long Range Transit Plan
Cartography & Design
Shreya has contributed cartography and graphic design services for JWA projects including:
» Portland, OR, TriMet Forward Together Long Range Plan: Shreya worked on mapping eff orts involving a signifi cant expansion and redesign of service for TriMet. » Santa Cruz, CA Reimagine METRO: Shreya supported the development of public-facing transit network maps and individual route maps for METRO’s bus rider’s guide. » Wilsonville, OR SMART Transit Master Plan: Shreya led the development of planning maps and public-facing transit maps for this project.
60 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 21
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
Liz Marchalonis
Associate
Liz provides cartography, data analysis and publication support for JWA’s transit network planning eff orts. She brings her professional experience in the architecture industry, and an eye for detail and clear communication, to her work on behalf of JWA’s transit agency clients.

Education
GIS Certifi cate, Portland Community College, 2023
Bachelor of Architecture, University of Arizona College of Architecture, Planning and Landscape Architecture, 2004
Positions Held
2023 - Present Associate, Jarrett Walker + Associates
2014 - 2021 Architectural Designer, WDP
Project Management, Concept Development, Space Planning, Property Research, Commercial and Residential Code Research and Permitting, Custom Fabrication Drawing, 3-D Modeling and Rendering, Commercial Tenant Improvement

Transit Network Planning & Analysis
» Basin Transit SRTP | Morongo Basin, CA: Participation in public outreach events and on-site bus stop assessment. On-demand productivity and zone mapping. » Pace ReVision Suburban Bus | NE Illinois: Design support and preparation of network alternatives report and creation of public survey.
» MARTA Bus Network Design | Atlanta, GA: Network design support and preparation of fi nal reports and public outreach documents
Cartography & Design
» ATI | San Juan, Puerto Rico: Design and production of bilingual public-facing network and route maps.
» MARTA Bus Network Design | Atlanta, GA: Preparation of public-facing maps showing a proposed new network and analysis results
» Pace Suburban Bus, RTA | Northeastern Illinois: Mapping demographic and Census data and network cartography
» IVT | Imperial Valley CA: Maps of Census and Replica data for existing conditions report 61 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 22
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
Dennis Brooks
President
ABOUT
Dennis Brooks’ considerable financial and mathematical abilities are coupled with his own highly organized style, enabling him to provide strong analytic products that are foundational to project efforts and shape project recommendations. He has been with AMMA for 19 years and brings considerable experience as technical assistance liaison for discretionary grant programs and analytical assessments of demand response programs. Mr. Brooks is effective in helping agencies navigate transit regulations and requirements, including for example, Zero Emission Bus rules in rural Calaveras and Tuolumne Counties and conduct of
Transportation Development Act (TDA) triennial performance audits for five San Luis Obispo County agencies.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE
• Short Range Transit Plan for Ventura County | Demand
Response Lead. Dennis leads the regional demand
response analysis and countywide integration assessment effort for transit operations in the County of Ventura. • Butte County Association of Governments (BCAG):

Non-Emergency Transportation Needs Assessment for
Butte County | Co-Project Manager. Dennis led this
needs assessment with Valerie Mackintosh to identify
NEMT needs and feasible solutions for this rural and small urban county. Recommendation included a suite of
strategies to address rural and small urban medical
transportation needs.
• Placer County Transportation Planning Agency: South
Placer Transit Information Center | Project Manager.

Dennis led an in-depth assessment of the South Placer
Transit Information Center, demand response call reception and scheduling center to inform decisions in addressing rising operating costs and diminishing funding sources. • San Luis Obispo Council of Governments: Central
Coast Rail Services Study | Route Scheduling and
Logistics. Dennis developed bus schedules and
timetables for two intercity bus services over three
projected timeframes, across multiple scenarios, to
supplement anticipated increased coastal rail service
between Salinas, Santa Barbara and the Central Valley.
• Pomona Valley Transportation Authority: Technology
Integration Assistance | Project Manager. Ensured that
three software systems of TransTrack, Ecolane and 3M
were communicating effectively, sharing data through
standardized protocols, and generating data to be reliably used for NTD reporting.

OTHER RELEVANT

PROJECTS
San Bernardino County
Transportation Authority
(SBCTA): Transit and
Specialized Transit Staff
Support and Technical
Assistance | Project Manager
Riverside County
Transportation Commission:

Transit Funding Handbook
Development | Project
Manager

EXPERTISE
• Technical Assistance
and Grant
Development
• Performance
Reporting and
Documentation
• Auditing and
Functional Analyses
• Coordinated
Planning and
Outreach
• Operational Analyses
and Short-Range
Planning

EDUCATION
Associate Arts, Administration
and Information Systems,
Riverside City College
Associate Arts, Social and
Behavioral Studies, Riverside
City College
University of the Pacific's
Transit and Paratransit
Management Certificate
program
62 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 23
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
Andrea Breault
Senior Planner
ABOUT
With eighteen years of comprehensive experience in transportation operations and planning, Andrea Breault has developed expertise in both the public and private sectors. Over the course of her career, Andrea has worked across a variety of transportation systems, contributing to the efficient and sustainable management of university shuttle and parking services, and fleet management.

Specifically, Andrea served as Transportation Demand Management Supervisor for Princeton University, developing TDM programs to reduce traffic and emissions on campus; and then as Assistant Director of Parking and Transportation Services at Tufts University, where she managed parking operations and shuttle services throughout four campuses in Massachusetts.

In addition to her work in higher education transportation, Andrea has spent six years as Transportation Director for Cascades East Transit (CET), where she oversaw a fleet of 85 vehicles, a team of 70 employees, and lead the team through the COVID-19 pandemic. Her focus was on improving CET’s demand response program, fixed-route transit, and grant management program. During this time, she helped design and implement innovative transit technology that cater to the needs of a wide range of communities, from urban areas to underserved regions. Her work in the public sector has focused on primarily meeting the needs of rural communities throughout Central Oregon, improving the customer experience, and ensuring sustainability through thoughtful planning and operations.

SELECTIVE PROJECT EXPERIENCE
• Short Range Transit Plan for Ventura County | Integration Strategies Support – Developed countywide demand response integration and impelentation strategies for seven transit operations across Ventura County • Comprehensive Opertional Analysis of Imperial Valley Transit | Demand Response Planning Consultant - Currently leading the existing conditions analysis for demand response properties in rural Imperial County • Riverside County’s Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Cooridnation Plan | Developed demograhics analyses, provider inventories, survey analysis and project strategies
• Central Oregon’s Council of Governments | Tranportation Director – Led Cascades East Transit’s first Transit Master Plan and Mobilty Hub Feasibility Study
• Central Oregon’s First Employer Vanpool Program | Transportation Director – Colaborated with State DOT and local TMA to generate over 60 employer vanpools throughout Central Oregon
• Tufts University Shuttle Program and Parking Services | Assistant Director of Transportation – Developed safe and effective late-night student shuttle service across four university campuses • Princeton University’s Transportation Demand Management Program | Coordinator– Developed first TDM program to reduce parking and traffic throughout the campuses, as well as lower emissions and meet sustaibility goals

EXPERTISE
• Demand response and
fixed-route operations
• Grant writing
• Federal and State audit
requirements
• Transit Technology
• Call Center/Dispatch
Operations

EDUCATION
Masters in Urban and
Regional Planning – Rutgers
University
Bachelor of Science,
Economics – University of
Dayton
63 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 24
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
Elea Carey resume
Elea Carey
[email protected]
415-941-1477
Expertise
I am a longtime communications and marketing consultant with experience in launching new ideas and initiatives.

Education and Training
Master of Fine Arts in English, Pacific Lutheran University, 2008 Bachelor of Arts in English, San Francisco State University, 1989 Experience
Founder, Transit Happy, San Francisco (August 2020 to present) I founded Transit Happy during the COVID 19 pandemic to support an industry I love. I work with transit agencies on creative campaigns and communications strategies to increase ridership and raise the profile of this vital public service.

Recent work
• San Bernardino County Transportation Authority: Creative development, media strategy, media buying and management to raise awareness and increase ridership for multiple transit agencies in America’s largest county; developed and implemented comprehensive, network-wide conduct and awareness campaigns; promoted community engagement efforts.
• National Rural Transit Assistance Program: Revised and developed a complete online marketing education and implementation resource for National RTAP, the resource library for small urban and rural transit systems. • Butte County Association of Governments: Developed and implemented stakeholder and community outreach campaigns and conducted onboard interviews.

Launched an expanded public relations program to engage stakeholders and the community and to build ridership in Butte County, CA.
• El Dorado Transit: Researched and wrote three-year marketing plan as a part of 2023 SRTP update; conducted stakeholder outreach and community interviews. • King County Metro Transit: Led two regional ad campaigns aimed at recruiting operators and tradespeople; led marketing for the launch of the first Metro BRT in nine years; worked with community engagement leads to develop marketing plans sensitive to community concerns.
• Bluegrass Community Action Partnership: Creative consultation, three-year 64 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 25
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
marketing plan, media strategy, and public relations for a rebrand and transit system upgrade.

Founder, Zero to 1, San Francisco (January 2014-August 2020) I worked with tech startup founders in multiple verticals and with their investors.

Co-founder, Women’s Startup Lab, Menlo Park (2013)
Having supported multiple male tech startup founders, I co-founded WSL to provide female entrepreneurs much-needed support and access to Silicon Valley investors.

Vice President of Content, Milsal+McCaull/Now Labs, San Francisco (2010-2013) I worked with early-stage tech startup founders to bring their ideas to life and market them to investors and customers.

Founder, Milagro Marketing, Albuquerque (1996-1998)
I founded Milagro Marketing to produce bilingual communications materials with a team of subcontractors in translation and design.

Vice President, National Marketing Director, Towery Publishing, Memphis (1991-1996) The youngest vice president in the history of this multi-faceted business publications group, I oversaw marketing and communications for 100 regional publications. Towery was one of the first digital publishing companies in the world and helped launch web development for clients in early 1995
65 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 26
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
Resume

SELENA BARLOW
Transit Marketing
www.transitmarketing.com
Expertise
Ms. Barlow has more than 30 years of experience marketing public transportation services. She works exclusively within the public transportation industry and has clients throughout the US.

Additional details regarding her experience can be found at www.transitmarketing.com. Ms.

Barlow’s areas of expertise include:
■ Marketing Plan Development
■ Market Research
■ Branding and System Identity Development
■ Design and Production of Passenger Information Materials ■ Creation of Promotional and Collateral Materials
■ Development of General and Targeted Ridership Campaigns ■ Community Involvement in Support of Transit Planning Efforts Education and Training
Master of Business Administration, Concentration: Marketing, University of Arizona, May 1988 Bachelor of Science, School of Journalism, Major: Advertising, University of Florida, June 1977 Relevant Experience
Owner, Transit Marketing, (1988-present)
Provides marketing and market research consultation and services exclusively to public transportation agencies. Has worked for more than a hundred transit systems since 1988. Services include marketing plan development, market research coordination and analysis, community outreach and engagement, development of marketing programs and materials. Certified WBE.

Transit Marketing Instructor/Trainer (1988-present)
University of the Pacific, Transit/Paratransit Management Certificate Program, (1997- 2012) CTAA, CalACT, New Mexico Public Transit Association, AzTA and other organizations (on-going) Teaches a one day course in Community Transportation Marketing, as well as targeted courses in market research, passenger information tools and public speaking.

Chief of Marketing, Metro-Dade Transit Agency, Miami, FL (1985-87) Headed a comprehensive marketing division which included advertising, promotion, public affairs, community services and passenger information branches. Responsible for all marketing activities for a tri-modal transit system (rail, bus and people-mover). 66 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 27
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
Director of Marketing, Sun Tran, Tucson, AZ (1982-85)
Responsible for all aspects of marketing for a 150-bus system, including advertising, promotion, market research, media relations, community outreach and customer service/information. Involved in short-range planning, development and implementation of new services and major capital projects.

Recent Transit Marketing Plans and Campaigns
■ City of Sedona, AZ (in progress)
Participated in research and development of an implementation plan for a new transit system targeting tourists in Sedona. Developed marketing and branding plan and currently working with City of Sedona introduction of microtransit.
■ Verde Shuttle, Cottonwood, AZ
Developed updated branding and marketing campaign for the Verde Shuttle which connects Cottonwood and Sedona. Campaign includes passenger information tools, print and radio advertising, a marketing toolkit for use by employers, promotional video and social media imagery.
■ Calaveras Connect, CA (2019-on-going)
Subsequent to rebranding the transit system, developed a comprehensive passenger information program and promotional campaign to launch the identity. Continue to work with agency to provide on-going marketing support.
■ San Bernardino County Transportation Agency (2019)
Design and implementation of ridership campaigns for four transit agencies in San Bernardino County – Victor Valley Transit Authority, Mountain Transit, Morongo Basin Transit Authority and Needles Area Transit. On-going work to facilitate collaborative marketing efforts by six transit agencies operating in San Bernardino County.

Sample Branding Projects
■ CAT and MST, Concord, NH
■ Calaveras Connect, San Andreas, CA
■ Sedona Shuttle, Sedona, AZ
■ El Dorado Transit, CA
■ Stanislaus CTSA, CA
■ Capital Transit, Helena, MT
■ Kern Transit, Bakersfield, CA
■ Sage Stage, Modoc County, CA
■ Douglas Rides, Roseville, OR
■ Mountain Transit. Big Bear, CA
■ Durango Transit, Durango, CO
■ e-tran, Elk Grove, CA
67 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES 28
Firm Qualifications
68 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 29
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
Canby - Transit Master Plan Update
Canby Area Transit (CAT) provides fi xed-route and demand response transit service to the public within the Canby Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). CAT operates the 99X, a bus service along the Highway 99E corridor from Oregon City to Woodburn. The second fi xed route is the Canby Loop, a circulator operating inside the Canby city limits with stops near schools, city facilities and businesses. In late 2023, CAT hired Jarrett Walker + Associates (JWA) to lead the consultant team on updating the Transit Master Plan (TMP).

JWA evaluated the existing conditions and transit planning choices facing Canby.

The public was then asked for input on key transit trade-off s, such as: investment in local vs. regional service, increasing frequency vs. adding new routes, and more weekday service vs weekend service. JWA and EnviroIssues utilized a blend of data-driven methods and public and stakeholder outreach to assess over arching issues with CAT service and the community's priorities for change.

Various outreach methods were employed, included online and on-board public surveys, interviews with a wide range of stakeholder organizations, tabling events.

Based on the public input JWA developed a set of improvements and implementation phases to expand the local and regional destinations Canby residents can travel to within a reasonable amount of time:
• Maintaining the local coverage while extending hours Weekdays and Saturdays.
• Improving connections between Canby and neighboring cities: Wilsonville, Woodburn, and Oregon City. • Improving travel times beyond CAT's service area by facilitating connections with TriMet.

The Transit Master Plan is completed and was adopted by the City Council by the end of November 2024.

In preparation for some service changes, JWA worked with the agency to design new public-facing network and route brochures for the public.

Canby, Oregon
Status
TMP adoption in Nov 2024.

Cost
$199,925 (total budget)
$119,951 (JWA contribution)
Dates
December 2023 - present
Key Staff
Michelle Poyourow, Lead Planner
Álvaro Caviedes, Project Manager
Shreya Jain, Lead Analyst
Reference
Todd Wood
Canby Area Transit
Transit, Fleet and IT Director
[email protected]
(503) 266-0751
69 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 30
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
MST Comprehensive Operational Analysis
In 2019 and 2020, Monterey-Salinas Transit (MST) experienced a series of setbacks. The U.S. Department of Defense, which had funded over 20% of fi xed-route service, stopped doing so in 2019. This was followed in 2020 by the COVID-19 pandemic, which temporarily shut down much of the local civilian economy. These events compelled MST to reevaluate its network from the ground up for the fi rst time in twenty years. MST hired Jarrett Walker + Associates (JWA) to lead the consultant team on this project.

JWA and its partners at AMMA Transit Planning and Dan Boyle & Associates used data-based approaches to identify big-picture issues and constraint, and led extensive outreach to understand the community's priorities.

Outreach included focus groups with English- and Spanish-speaking riders, conversations with stakeholder organizations, and a phone survey of county residents.

The team used the information gathered to help MST focus on key issues like the increasing distance between new development and existing activity centers; inequitable distribution of service between diff erent parts of the county, and simplifying an extremely complex network of mostly infrequent routes. JWA and MST then developed a Draft Network Plan that would signifi cantly reduce rider travel times, by:
• Focusing on consistent all-day service patterns connecting many people and jobs, with minimal deviations.
• Maintaining coverage to more isolated low-income areas and key public service facilities.
• Shifting more service to Salinas and South County, growing areas that are mostly Latino and low-income.
• Creating a system of timed transfers enabling seamless cross-town and cross-county trips.

The Draft Network Plan received very positive community feedback, and required very few changes to become the Final Network Plan adopted by MST's Board of Directors in February 2022. The JWA team has since assisted MST with identifying new bus stop locations, proposing updated Title VI service standards, and developing customer-facing tools like an updated system map and a before vs. after trip comparison web tool.

Monterey County, CA
Status
Final Plan Adopted, February 2022
Cost
$349,033
Dates
November 2020 - November 2022
Key Staff
Jarrett Walker, Lead Planner
Daniel Costantino, Project Manager
Álvaro Caviedes, Lead Analyst
Reference
Michelle Overmeyer
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Director of Planning & Innovation
[email protected]
(831) 264-5877
70 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 31
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
Strategic Transit Plan
In 2017, the Missoula Urban Transportation District (Mountain Line), hired JWA to develop a new Strategic Plan, including short- and long-range elements. Missoula is a small but fast-growing city in Montana and home to a major university.

Also in 2017, the City and MPO adopted an ambitious Long-Range Transportation Plan aiming to triple transit’s mode share while cutting in half the percentage of trips made by driving by 2045.

The transit agency had recently completed several phases of its last transit plan, including investing in 15-minute all-day frequency on two core routes, longer evening hours of service and a fare-free program.

Combined, these investments caused a 70 percent growth in ridership between 2015 and 2017. With that recent success under their belts, and ambitious new regional mode share goals, Mountain Line needed to refresh its blueprint for the future.

Working with local partner DJ&A and with Mountain Line staff, JWA led a planning process focused on public and stakeholder input. JWA facilitated two phases of public consultation including stakeholder workshops, web surveys and public meetings, to gather actionable input on service investment priorities.

JWA produced a detailed phasing plan for the implementation of a short-term network, and a long-term network that responds to zoning and planned growth. The Plan was adopted by the Missoula Urban Transportation District
Board of Directors in August of 2018.

In 2020, Mountain Line used the Strategic Plan to create a clear and compelling ballot measure for voters, who voted 60% in favor of additional tax funding for transit.

Missoula, Montana
Cost
$151,834/ Team
$140,824/ JWA
Dates
2017 – 2018
Key Staff
Michelle Poyourow, Project Manager
Jarrett Walker, Project Director
Daniel Costantino, Lead Planner
Evan Landman, Lead Analyst
Reference
Corey Aldridge
Then-CEO of Mountain Line
Now CEO of Santa Cruz Metro
[email protected]
406-370-9208
90 93
12 93
Routes Serving
Southgate Mall
1 2 7
8 Downtown
Transfer Center
9 6
9 9
9 8
8 8
8 6
5 3
12 12
12 12
15 7
7 6
6 2
2 1
1 SOUTH

CLEMENTS
7TH
3RD

BANCROFT

HIGGINS
ARTHUR

STEPHENS

RUSSELL
BROOKS

GHARRETT
23RD
39TH

RESERVE

SPURGIN
ORANGE
5TH
6TH

VAN BUREN

PHILLIPS

RUSSELL

JOHNSON
EATON
14TH
10TH
CATLIN

HIBERTA
TOWER
ORANGE

WHITAKER
MULLAN
R
SPRUCE

HIGGINS

BROADWAY

BROADWAY

UPPER MILLER CREEK
5TH
DI

WYOMING
36TH
56TH
SOUTH

ORCHARD BECKWITH
HOMES

UNIVERSITY OF

MONTANA

SOUTHGATE
MALL

COMMUNITY

HOSPITAL

DOWNTOWN
71 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 32
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
FAX Strategic Transit Plan
Starting in 2013, Jarrett Walker + Associates supported Parsons Brinckerhoff in a Strategic Transit Plan for Fresno Area Express (FAX), the public transit operator of Fresno, CA. Fresno is a metro area of one million people in the agricultural heart of the state.

Fresno achieves high transit ridership on a very minimal network.

JWA led all tasks pertaining to bus network design and policy, including stakeholder engagement. This included the development of several contrasting network scenarios showing how the network could look if designed to achieve different goals. Following public outreach and surveying on these scenarios, JWA led the development of a single draft service plan including several new high-frequency bus services. JWA also handled City Council presentations and numerous briefings with senior staff and elected officials.

After the original project completed the short-term network plan in 2015, JWA continued to assist FAX in refining these changes as part of a team led by VRPA Technologies. In this phase of work, JWA helped make subsequent adjustments to the plan, and conducted Title VI service equity analyses.

In 2018, FAX implemented the short-term network plan designed by JWA, alongside their first Bus Rapid Transit line.

Fresno, California
Status
Implemented 2018.

Cost
$85,000 (both contracts)
Dates
2013-2018
Key Staff
Jarrett Walker, Project Manager
Evan Landman, Lead Analyst
References
Bruce Rudd, City Manager
City of Fresno, Room 2064
2600 Fresno St., Fresno CA 93721
[email protected]
(559) 621-7770
45 45
22 22
22 35 35 35
35 35
35 35
39 39 39 39 39 39
33 33 33
33 33
32 32
20 20
22 33
22 34
34 28
28 28
26 26
26 26 26
26 26
34 28
28 38
38 38
BRT

BRT BRT
BRT
38 38
38 29
29 29
29 41
41 41
41 41
99 180
180
180
99 41
41 41
168
99 180

CENTRAL
ORANGE
0 1
72 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 33
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
Fresno County Gap Analysis and Coordination Plan
(2013-14)
Client: Fresno Area Express
2223 “G” Street, Fresno, CA 93706
Reference for Mobility Planners, Transit Marketing &
AMMA Transit Planning
Jeff Long
(559) 621-1436
[email protected]
Project Description:

Mobility Planners, a team consisting of Transit Marketing and AMMA Transit Planning, was contracted by FAX to conduct a countywide transit gap analysis, to quantify the needs of transportation for disadvantaged populations, and to update the County’s Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan. To accomplish this, our team conducted an extensive, multi-faceted market research and outreach effort that provided both qualitative and quantitative data on which to develop actionable coordination strategies. Elements of the data collection effort included:
n Demographic analysis of Fresno County residents with focus on older adults, persons with disabilities and persons of low-income.
n In-depth personal interviews with 45 stakeholders representing 28 organizations that work with transportation disadvantaged populations. The interviews collected information about needs, gaps in service, subsidized fares and specialized services being provided.
n An e-survey of social service providers that collected information from more than 600 front-line staff about the transportation habits and needs of their clients. n An intercept survey of 573 individuals who are transportation disadvantaged due to age, disability or low-income.
n Focus groups with transportation disadvantaged populations, including Indigenous people, veterans, Spanish-speaking adults from rural communities, and low-income residents of target neighborhoods.
n Inventory of public transportation and human service agency transportation services.

The findings of the study were used to develop a set of objectives and targeted strategies for closing transportation gaps and enhancing mobility for residents throughout Fresno County.

A Mobility Enhancement Workshop brought together 30 key stakeholders who had provided 73 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 34
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
On-Call Staff Support on Transit Programs and Functions SBCTA, San Bernardino, CA Nancy Strickert, Transit Manager (909) 884-80276 [email protected]
AMMA has assisted SBCTA with its transit programs since 1991, providing on-call technical assistance and planning support to the Authority, to its two large urbanized area transit providers and three smaller rural systems, and to two dozen specialized transportation providers. Assistance includes:
continuing technical support on transit, ADA, unmet transit needs hearing process; regional grant solicitation efforts; public outreach and engagement; transit operator financial reviews; and staffing PASTACC, the Public and Specialized Transportation Advisory and Coordination Council.

With the goal of improving mobility across the County, recent projects include:
§ Conduct of a public safety/ sexual harassment outreach effort to identify strategies to improve riders’ perception and experience of safety on public transit; § 2026 & 2020 Update to the Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan for San Bernardino County;
§ Assessment, monitoring of operator revenues and expense, through TransTrack and recurring preparation of the San Bernardino County Quarterly Transportation Performance Report; § 2023 and 2015 Needles Short Range Transit Plan Development; § 2017 Needles Title VI Program Update and 2014 Program Development; § Multiple 5310 grantees’ Title VI Program technical assistance; § Veterans Transportation and Community Living Initiative One Call/One-Click Project: Grant Development, Technical Support and Staffing the Steering Committee; § Vanpool 5309 Discretionary Grant Coordination;
§ Rural Operator Short Range Transit Plan updates
§ Annual assistance in conducting the annual Transportation Development Act Unmet Transit Needs Public Hearings and supporting staff with all associated activities. § Ongoing assistance in the administration of the Section 5310 capital grant program, overseeing SBCTA’s hybrid urbanized area Call for Projects and supporting Caltrans rural areas Call for Projects; grant development assistance to nonprofit agencies and public operators as needed Other on-call transit planning functions have included:
§ Quarterly reports to document transit operating and functional performance, as well as ongoing initiatives to grow ridership in San Bernardino County
§ Schedule assessments of Omnitrans’ Ontario Airport to Metrolink shuttle and downtown San Bernardino circulator;
§ Ridership growth campaigns in support of SBCTA’s Multi-Modal Working Group on public campaigns and group projects;
§ Victor Valley Corridor Commuter Services Feasibility Study Plan [staffing support role]; § Non-Emergency Medical Needs Study;
§ Title VI Program Development and implementation assistance for SBCTA and San Bernardino County rural operators (MBTA and Needles Area Transit)
§ Ongoing ADA technical assistance to ensure compliance, monitoring legal issues and any proposed regulatory changes for San Bernardino County rural operators. § Ongoing staffing support to PASTACC [Public and Specialized Transportation Advisory and Coordination Council] quarterly meetings.
74 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 35
2 Vendor Company Data and Management Plan
Santa Cruz METRO Reimagining Project (2023)
Client: Santa Cruz METRO
920 Pacific Ave, Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Reference: John Urgo, Santa Cruz METRO, [email protected]. (831) 420-2537 Project Description:

Selena Barlow, as an AMMA team member, served as Outreach Lead for this JWA project. An extensive outreach eYort explored the needs of existing riders, the views and perceptions of stakeholders, and the desires of Santa Cruz County’s diverse population. Selena planned and orchestrated the overall eYort, was the facilitator for stakeholder groups and focus groups and led the survey eYort. She also organized and oversaw the online public meetings that were conducted by JWA.

Phase 1 of the outreach eYort was conducted at the start of the planning process to understand awareness and usage of, and satisfaction with existing services. This phase included:
• Stakeholder List Development: Extensive research by the outreach team produced a list of 100 stakeholders representing Social Services, Education, Medical Services, Employment, Advocacy, and Jurisdictions within Santa Cruz County.
• Stakeholder Groups: Nineteen small group discussions were held with stakeholders representing 33 organizations.
• Online Public Meeting: A community-wide public meeting was held to share early findings and invite further input. There were more than 75 participants. • Rider E-Survey and Focus Groups: An e-survey of more than 600 riders was conducted and used to recruit focus groups of riders representing the diversity of METRO’s user base. In addition, informal intercept-interviews were conducted at Transit Centers.

Phase 2 of the outreach eYort was conducted to secure rider, stakeholder and public feedback on short-term alternatives for service changes. This phase included:
• Online Community Survey: The survey of 800 respondents was promoted via social media, stakeholder communications, news coverage and contacts with prior participants. • Stakeholder Workshops: Alternatives were presented in detail and representatives of 20 organizations provided feedback.
• Rider Focus Groups. Riders from the original focus groups were invited back to review the alternatives and provide feedback.
• To increase participation by the Latinx community, targeted outreach was conducted at the Watsonville Farmers Market and Watsonville Night-Out Community Event.

In a third phase of outreach the project website and community-wide online public meetings were used to preview the draft mid-range plan and invite feedback from diverse audiences, including all prior participants in the outreach eYort.
75 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES
Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 36
Image: Photo by Jacob,
Adobe Stock Photos
Project Approach and
Work Plan
4 76
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 37
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
Project Understanding
Clovis Transit was awarded a Sustainable
Transportation Planning grant by Caltrans
for the creation and adoption of a Strategic
Operations Plan (SOP) at a moment of great
change, learning and opportunity:
• The pandemic has brought new awareness of which trips and workers are truly essential to the functioning of our economy.

Meanwhile, some workers will be able to
commute less, or not at all, therefore changing geographic and temporal patterns of demand for transportation.
• Policy shift to clean energy and emission
reductions, moving towards zero emission
vehicles/ New clean air regulations such as
the California Air Resources Board Innovative
Clean Transit.
• Better technologies for customers and agencies have made possible a revolution in demand response transit (“microtransit”) as
well as car-, bike- and scooter-share services.

Our team of experienced planners can help
Clovis Transit and its stakeholders think through
the implications of these changes, and more.

Improving Air Quality
Goal #1 of the City of Clovis General Plan and
this SOP is to improve air quality for the city,
county, and region. Clovis Transit has already
made significant progress toward this goal
on the technology front, notably through the
Zero-Emission Bus (ZEB) Rollout Plan and the
Electrification Feasibility Study. These initiatives
lay the foundation for a cleaner, zero-emission
fleet that aligns with the city’s environmental
objectives.

While electric buses reduce emissions per
vehicle, there is another opportunity to improve
air quality lies in reducing the number of cars on
the road and that requires a useful and convenient transit service people want to use.

A useful transit system gives people a viable
alternative to driving. It offers service that is frequent, direct, and reliable, connecting people to jobs, education, healthcare, and daily needs.

When transit is designed to be useful, more
people choose to ride it, which in turn reduces
car dependence and harmful emissions.

At JWA, we approach this challenge through
a ridership-oriented lens. A ridership-oriented
network focuses on high-frequency routes that
serve densely populated or high-demand corridors. These routes are designed to be simple, fast, and easy to understand, traits that make
them competitive with driving. In practice, this
means investing more frequency and longer
service hours where the most people are likely
to ride.

But every transit system must also consider
coverage. Coverage-oriented service spreads
transit thinly across a larger area to ensure basic
access, even in low-density or hard-to-serve
areas. These routes may only run a few times
a day, but they provide a lifeline to those who
depend on transit the most, often older adults,
people with disabilities, or those without access
to a car.

This brings us to a key concept in transit planning: the ridership–coverage trade-off. Clovis, like most communities, does not have unlimited
transit resources. Every dollar spent on high-frequency routes is a dollar not spent covering low-demand areas, and vice versa. Moving
toward a ridership model can lead to significant
gains in air quality and mode shift, but it also
requires honest conversations about priorities
and values.

Throughout this process, we will work closely
with the City of Clovis Departments, Clovis
Transit, and the community to explore these
trade-offs transparently. We are proposing a
first phase of engagement where we ask the
stakeholders and the community:
• Where do we invest to generate the most
riders?
• Should Clovis Transit cover areas that are not
covered today, or offer more service to the
areas that are currently served?
77 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES 38
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
• Where do we maintain service to ensure
equitable access?
• What are the implications of leaving some
areas with little or no fixed-route service?
We will support these conversations with
clear analysis, community engagement, and
mapping tools that make these trade-offs easy
to understand. Our goal is to help Clovis build
a more useful, equitable, and sustainable transit
system that supports both the city's climate
goals and its residents' mobility needs.

Service Planning for a ZeroEmissions Fleet
As part of this planning effort, we will help
Clovis Transit think strategically about where
and how to add service in alignment with the
goals of the Zero-Emission Bus (ZEB) Plan.

Transitioning to a ZEB fleet introduces important operational constraints—particularly around charging requirements, range limitations, and
vehicle availability. Fortunately, most of Clovis
Transit’s existing routes are relatively short,
which makes them well-suited for electrification from a range and charging standpoint.

However, these routes also operate at moderate-to-high frequency, which increases overall energy demand and requires thoughtful planning around charging schedules and vehicle rotation. If additional service is introduced,
whether through longer spans, new routes,
or increased frequency, we will consider how
these changes affect the feasibility of a fully
zero emission network. We will support the
Clovis Transit in designing for service growth
that is both useful and practical to operate
with electric buses, identifying routes that are
easier to transition due to their shorter lengths,
layover opportunities, or proximity to charging
infrastructure, and opportunities to look at
other technologies like Hybrid.

Local Service
Clovis Transit plays a vital role in meeting
the transportation needs of Clovis residents by offering local fixed-route and demand-response services. Clovis Transit
provides service coverage to most of the city,
offering residents broad access to many destinations. Several segments of the routes operate as one-way loops, which can be an efficient
way to serve low-density areas. However, there
is an opportunity to enhance the rider experience by exploring options for more direct or bi-directional travel, especially for those making
time-sensitive or return trips. Additionally,
extending service hours, particularly on
Saturdays and Sundays, could significantly
improve access for evening workers, students
with late classes, and residents running errands
or enjoying leisure activities, helping to make
transit a more flexible and reliable option for a
wider range of needs.

One of the first steps we envision is engaging
riders and stakeholders in a conversation about
service span, particularly the need for later
evening service and the potential for Sunday
service. In addition to span, we will explore
how well the current routes connect key destinations such as Sierra Vista Mall, Old Town Clovis, Clovis Community Medical Center,
Fresno State University, and major residential
neighborhoods. At the same time, we will invite
the community to weigh in on the ridership vs.
coverage tradeoff, an important conversation
to have as the City's vision is pursuing better
air quality. Should Clovis Transit focus on more
Figure 1: Clovis Transit Network, with FAX routes. Source: Remix 78 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 39
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
frequent service along major corridors where
ridership is likely to be highest, or should it also
provide coverage service to areas that currently
have little or no access with fixed routes or
demand response service, such as the eastern
parts of the city? These are important questions that involve tradeoffs, and community input will be essential in identifying the right
balance between frequency, reach, and equity.

Clovis Transit has also recently completed a
route redesign, scheduled for implementation in late 2025. This work presents a strong foundation for long-range planning. As part of
the SOP, our team can evaluate the projected
equity and access benefits of the redesign,
assess ridership potential, and identify how the
redesign positions the agency for future growth
and how does it support long-term goals
around sustainability, regional connectivity, and
equitable access.

Regional Service
By working collaboratively with FAX and other
regional providers (FCRTA), the SOP can help
ensure seamless, multi modal access across city
boundaries. There is an opportunity to enhance
these regional connections through better
transfer coordination, shared mobility hubs,
and aligned service standards.

An essential part of this planning process will
be engaging the public and key stakeholders
in a collaborative and forward-looking dialogue about the role and priorities of local and Figure 2: Map of the existing transit network in Santa Cruz, CA. Our network maps use color to highlight frequency so people can see network structure and the distribution of investment. Our maps are drawn manually to ensure clarity, so that client staff, decision makers, stakeholders and the public have the information necessary to understand exactly what changes to the transit network are proposed or illustrated in a network planning study.
79 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 40
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
regional transit service. While the Strategic
Operations Plan will explore exciting long-term
possibilities, it will also be grounded in realistic
financial considerations, ensuring that recom-
mended improvements are both impactful and
achievable. With thoughtful community input,
we’ll explore how to prioritize local enhance-
mens vs improved regional connectivity with
smoother transfers to other agencies routes
(FAX, FCRTA).

These conversations will help clarify which
improvements are most valued by the com-
munity and which investments will deliver
the greatest benefit. We will develop out-
reach tools that communicate service costs
and operational implications in a transparent,
accessible way, allowing the public to make
informed choices. The insights gathered will
directly inform the vision, goals, and strategies
of the SOP, ensuring that the plan reflects the
lived experiences and evolving mobility needs
of Clovis residents while setting a clear and
achievable direction for the next decade.

Putting it all together
The JWA approach to a project like this is dis-
tinctive because it focuses on narrative and
conversation. What story does Clovis Transit
want to tell about itself? What data and anal-
ysis are needed to support that story? What
kind of conversation can be sparked amongst
the public? And what questions need to be
answered to continue the process of network
improvement?
The team we have assembled for this project
brings together some of the best in the business
at crafting that sort of narrative, delivering an
inclusive public process, and supporting it with
a deep bench of technical expertise in transit
planning, scheduling, and shared mobility.
80 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 41
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
Keys to Our Approach
Focus on the Public
Conversation
JWA's approach to network planning is distinctive in that we place great importance on public engagement.

A technically sound plan is useless if it cannot
be approved and implemented. Approval and
implementation require agency officials and
staff to persevere in the face of all the difficulties
associated with change among the public and
within the agency.

Without new resources, all changes, by definition, will disturb someone’s existing travel patterns. When additional resources are available, it’s easier to make improvements without impacting existing riders, but disruption is
inevitable.

For an ambitious plan to be worth implementing, decision-makers and opinion leaders must believe that the benefits are worth it.

Our plans have been successful not just
because we provide clear and thoughtful technical work, but because we are thinking about the approval and implementation challenges
throughout the process. At every step we think
about:
• When, during the process, public input can
have the biggest impact on the plan.
• How to communicate the plan’s big questions and ideas. • What graphics and media can engage and
enlighten a broad audience.
• How to build trust, understanding and confidence among transit stakeholders.

We’ve designed the proposed Work Plan to integrate all of the planning decisions with earnest public engagement. We’ll do preliminary assessments of the transit system so that we anticipate the questions about the future that need to be
answered, and identify difficulties Clovis Transit
will need to overcome. This helps the riders and
members of the public give us actionable input
that directly affects the recommendations of the
Plan.

We seek to educate stakeholders so they
become better advocates for their interests and
better partners with their transit agency. We
focus peoples’ attention when they are able to
have the most influence over the big decisions.

We encourage actionable public input that represents the diversity of transit stakeholders.

Our team is united in our belief that planning is,
fundamentally, a conversation with the public
about values. The most important part of the
Clovis Transit's Strategic Operations Plan (SOP)
will be public engagement.

Earnest, purposeful, culturally-specific public
engagement takes a lot of effort and skill, but it
is worth it. It makes a Plan implementable and
resilient over time, and it builds trust within a city
and a community.

We would collaborate with Clovis Transit's
staff to reach current riders, potential riders,
and historically under-served communities in
English and Spanish, delivering robust public
involvement that centers on equity. In our communications, we will clearly explain challenges and opportunities, in ways that each audience
can relate to, so that people can develop their
own opinions about how Clovis Transit could be
improved.

Clear, consistent communication throughout this
process is key to building trust and momentum
with the public, key stakeholders, and existing
riders. Though talking points may change as the
planning work progresses, the Plan’s purpose
and the public’s valued input would remain a
steady foundation.

We would also demonstrate to the public how
their input was used to inform and shape the
Plan. This feedback loop is key to ensuring continued engagement and excitement, and buy-in for the Plan’s implementation.

We understand planning to be a process of
co-creation. Rather than coming in as experts
who write a plan, we see our role as that of
conveners, facilitators, and curators. Planning
processes are opportunities to strengthen existing community partnerships and relationships, as well as initiate or repair these relationships.
81 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 42
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
Through meaningful engagement rooted in partnership and collaboration, community leaders and individual residents understand their roles
in seeing plans through to implementation. The
burden cannot be on the service boards or the
transit agency alone, and our process includes
discovery of the integration and collaboration
needed by all stakeholders to achieve their
vision.

Learning from COVID
The COVID-19 pandemic has reshaped public
participation and has disproportionately
impacted lower-income, minority and immigrant
communities. It also shone a light on how significantly our society depends on the successful commutes of lower-wage workers. This is already
changing the debates in large and small cities
alike about what type of transit service is truly
essential, and a top priority for investment.

Throughout the pandemic, we have successfully
used online open houses, virtual community
meetings, webinars, videos, project websites,
email updates, social media, digital surveys and
other digital tools to engage the public in planning choices. While not everyone has a phone or a computer to use to join a virtual meeting, it
is beneficial that more people can join in a virtual
setting than in a physical one.

In addition to learning more public engagement
techniques from COVID, there is also a great deal
to learn about how people’s travel has changed,
both geographically and temporarily. We have
been using anonymized data on cell phone
movements to understand how travel demand
has changed as remote work becomes more
common, identify new travel patterns, and assess
how service changes could make transit more
useful in a community. It also gives us an idea
of the change of trips before and after the pandemic, giving us an idea how many employees are working remotely and no longer commuting.

One big advantage of this data source, as a supplement to Census data on homes and jobs, is that it shows where people are traveling to shop,
to visit friends, to reach services, and for all of
the other trip purposes besides just the trips to
school or work.

This was always important, even before the
pandemic, when trips to work across the U.S.
accounted for only about 20% of all trips. But the
reduction in office commuting since COVID has
given many agencies permission to shift their
focus from traditional commutes to the wide
variety of trips that people make, for which transit
can be relevant, important, and even in some
cases very efficient.

Explain at Every Step
We believe that good explanation is good
planning. At every step, we ask not just “Is this
right?” but also “How do we make this clear to an
interested member of the public?”
To that end, we see data analysis as more than
a technical tool. The best analyses help build
narratives that clarify how different facts relate to
each other, and what outcomes could change.

When we report data, we use compelling visuals
that engage people’s curiosity about how public
transit works and help them truly understand the
consequences of public transit design choices.

These include maps and illustrations that can be
understood at many levels of detail.

Our goal is not just to write a report or make a
recommendation. We build understanding, so
that when a final plan is adopted, stakeholders
and elected officials understand the network,
including what choices had to be made and what
outcomes can be expected.

Modern Equity Measures
JWA has been responsible for pushing the envelope on measures of equity in transit plans. In the industry-wide conversations among academics,
advocates, planners and civic leaders, we’ve
contributed certain innovations that are now
widespread.

In the past, limits of technology and data made
it hard to measure with much sophistication
how a transit proposal would affect a certain
demographic group. Simple measures – like the
percentage of people within 1/4 mile of some
kind of transit service – had to suffice. Now, we
use equity measures that speak to:
• How the Plan would affect existing riders.
82 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 43
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
• The diverse reasons people care about
transit in their communities.
• Transit’s potential to give people access to
freedom and opportunities, beyond the trips
they can make today.

An important element of some of these measures is access. For an individual person, access describes the places someone can go in a reasonable amount of time, and therefore the places they could work, study, visit, shop, or do anything
that makes their life complete. For an entire
city, access measures of a transit proposal can
describe:
• How the average resident’s access to jobs
or schools would change, and how equitably those benefits would be shared among people of different races or incomes.
• Whether average travel times to jobs would
change, and how travel times for lower-income residents to low- or medium-wage jobs would be affected.
• How easily zones intended for employment,
retail or service use could be reached by
residents, by transit, and by which residents.

Not only access but every measure we use
includes equity. No benefit or impact of a transit
change should be considered without an understanding of how it would affect Title VI-protected groups and other vulnerable people.
83 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 44
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
Back it up with top quality
analysis, maps and visualization
At JWA we are constantly developing tools that
help people see transit more clearly. A technological revolution has made it possible to show more transit data than ever before, and we use
these tools to create visual displays that reward
people’s curiosity without overwhelming them.

Cartography. Without clear maps, it is hard to
understand how a transit network works. Our
maps are grounded in cartographic best practices, and refined through our work on service branding and customer information. Their immediate purpose is to support clear conversations about the plan, but they can often be re-purposed to create public-facing maps after the plan is finished. The map below is an example of
some of the high-quality map design JWA routinely executes, both in planning studies and in standalone cartography projects.
20 20
A/B
A/B
1 2
1 2
8 1/2
1/2
7 7
91 91
91 91 91
94 94
94 5
5 5 24
24 94
8 A
A
B
B
94 94
48/49
48/49
41/42
41/42
41/42
45 23
23 96
96 96
45 29
29 44
44 43
43 43
41 41
41 49
95 95
95 95
46 46
28 28
17 17
17 17
18 18
18 61
61 61
61 61
17/18
17/18
17/18
17/18
20 20
20 20
20 20
20 61
1 2
2 1
23X
23X
Lovers Point
Sally Griffin Center
Library
Visually
Impaired
Center
Monterey
Bay Aquarium
Carmel H.S.

Cannery
Row
Point Piños
Lighthouse
Asilomar Conference Center
The Inn at Spanish Bar
The Lodge at
Pebble Beach
Carmel Foundation
Carmel Mission
Pacific Meadows Retirement Community
The Crossroads
Carmel
Rancho
Del Mesa
Retirement
Community
Hacienda
Carmel
Marina
Municipal
Airport
Monterey
Regional
Airport
Monterey
County
Fairgrounds
Ryan Ranch
Business Park
MST
Administrative
Office Stone Creek Shopping Center
The
Barnyard
Childrens Library
Pacific Grove H.S.

Country Club Shopping Center
Veterans Memorial Park
Merrill
Gardens
Del Monte
Center
Hospice of the
Central Coast
Monterey
County Courthouse
Presidio of
Monterey
Naval Postgraduate School
Monterey
Peninsula
College
City Hall
Social Services
City Hall
Commissary/PX
Cardinale
Stadium
Otter
Sports
Center
The Dunes MPC
Veterans
Transition Center
Marina H.S.

Seacrest Plaza City
Hall

UC MBEST
MPC Satellite Campus
Los Arboles M.S.

PostOffice
Marina
Village
Walmart Library
Salinas Valley
Memorial Hospital
Monterey County
Office of Education
Social
Services
Housing Authority
Creekbridge Village Post Office
Laurel
West
Center
Library
County Government Center
Social
Security
Administration
Monterey County
Department of
Child Support
Calworks Employment Services
Food Bank
Constitution Soccer
Complex
BACS
SHARE
Center
Natividad Plaza
Shaker
Square
Natividad
Medical
Center
Boys and
Girls Club
DMV
Library
Community
Center
Salinas
Sports Complex
Harden
Ranch Plaza
Gateway Center
Salvation
Army
Montage Wellness Center
Westridge Center
Boronda Adobe
History Center
Post
Office
VA-DOD Clinic
Department of Defense/
Silas B Hayes Building
California Central Coast
Veterans Cemetery
Monterey Child
Development Center
Library
DMV
Community Hospital of Monterey Peninsula
Carmel Hill
Professional Center
Monterey H.S.

Post Office
Santa Catalina H.S.

Seaside
H.S.

Monterey
Adult
School
Seaside M.S.

York H.S.

Carmel M.S.

Salinas
Municipal
Airport
Hartnell College
Alisal Campus
Alisal H.S.

Palma
H.S.

Salinas H.S.

Everett Alvarez H.S.

North
Salinas
H.S.

Rancho San Juan H.S.

CSUMB @ North Salinas
Mt Toro H.S.

Salinas Adult School
Boronda
Square
Salinas Amtrak/ Greyhound Station
Hartnell College
Notre Dame H.S.

Del Monte
Del Monte
David
Sinex
Pico
Congress
17 Mile Dr
Asilomar Asilomar
Del Monte
Forest
Fountain Pine
Patterson
Prescott
Pacific
Lighthouse
Lighthouse
San Carlos
Lincoln
Rio Rio
Ocean
Carmel Valley Rd
Garden
Noche Buena
Hilby
Kimball
Fremont
Fremont
Fremont
Munras
Euclid
Casanova
Yosemite
Broadway
San Pablo
Ord Grove
Coe
Coe
General Jim Moore
General Jim Moore Mescal
Monterey
Del Monte
Beach
Reservation
Carmel
Reindollar
9th St Second Ave
8th St
11th Ave
California
De Forest
Del Monte
Imjin
Imjin
Abrams
Gigling
Inter-Garrison
Rossi
Rico
Harkins
Harris
Market
Abbott
Work
Abbott
Romie
Moffett
Alisal Alisal
Alisal
Skyway
Bardin Alisal
Market Market
Market
Alisal
Central Davis
Davis
S Main
Pajaro
Salinas
Monterey
Lincoln
S Main
Blanco
Blanco
Sherman
Sloat
La Mesa
Espinosa
Laurel
Davis
Boronda Rd
Larkin
Alvin El Dorado
Natividad
Natividad
McKinnon
Chaparral
Sherwood
Laurel
Laurel
Rider
Garner Boronda Rd
San Juan Grande
Russell
Rogge
N Main Harrison
N Main
Sanborn
Town
Sanborn
Boronda Rd
Buckhorn
Mesquite
Williams Williams John
Del Monte
Canyon del Rey
Pacific
Foam
Lig h thouse
Ocean View
Serra
Pacific Meadow
Del Mesa Carmel
BarnettSegal
Glenwood
Aguajito
Marin a Heights
Abr ams
Schoonover
Airport Blvd
Blan co
San Miguel
Harden
Calle del Adobe
Monte Bella
Sanborn
C onstitution Beacon Hill
Independe nce
Nantucket
Freedom
17Mil e Dr
Santa Lucia
Sunset
Junipero
Monterey Salin a s Hwy
Carmel ValleyRd
Carmel Valley Rd
Preston
Ac acia
17 Mile Dr
Fo rest
Van Buren
Alisal
101
101
101
101
101
101
68 68
68 68
68 68 68
68 68
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
218
183
183

PACIFIC
GROVE
PEBBLE
BEACH
CARMEL

BY-THE-SEA

LA MESA
CARMEL
VALLEY

DEL REY
OAKS
MARINA

CSUMB EAST GARRISON
FORT

ORD DUNES
BOLSA
KNOLLS

BORONDA

CREEKBRIDGE

SEASIDE
SAND
CITY

PACIFIC
OCEAN
Salinas River
Salinas River
Salinas River
Carmel River
Carm el River
Monterey Transit Plaza
A/B 1/2 5 20
7 8 91 94
Northridge Mall
41 48 95
Carmel Rancho
5 24 91
Salinas Transit Center
41/42 48/49
20 43 23 44
45 46 96
23X 28 29 61
Sand City Station
A/B 17/18 20
94 Marina Transit Exchange
17/18 20 61
to/from
Watsonville
via Castroville
28 to/from
Watsonville
via Prunedale
29 to/from
Gonzales,
Soledad,
Greenfield,
and King City
23 23X
to/from
Carmel
Valley Village
24 15 minutes | 15 minutos
From 7am to 7pm, a bus comes every...

De 7am a 7pm, un autobús pasa cada...

System Map | Mapa del Sistema
Bus Routes | Rutas de Autobuses
30 minutes | 30 minutos
60 minutes | 60 minutos
more than 60 minutes | más de 60 minutos
timed transfer | transbordo programado
0 0
¼ ½ 1 mi
½ 1 km N
See Regular Service table (at bottom right) for other times.

Vea la tabla de Servicio Regular (abajo a la derecha) para otros horarios.

See Timed Transfers map for more information.

Vea el mapa de Transbordos Programados para más información.

Timed Transfers
Transbordos Programados
Every 30 minutes, dark blue lines meet at transfer points.

Passengers can easily connect to other dark blue lines.

Cada 30 minutos, las líneas azul oscuro se encuentran en los puntos de transbordo.

Los pasajeros puede conectar fácilmente con otras líneas azul oscuro.

Every 60 minutes, dark blue and light blue lines meet at transfer points.

Passengers can easily connect to dark blue and light blue lines.

Cada 60 minutos, las líneas azul oscuro y azul claro se encuentran en los puntos de transbordo. Los pasajeron puede conectar fácilmente con otras líneas azul oscuro y azul claro.

A/B A/B
48/49
41/42
45 8 7
24 28/29
96 23
46 44
20 1/2
43 17/18
20 20
1/2
5 CSU Monterey Bay
Marina
Transit
Exchange
Sand City
Station
MONTEREY Seaside

TRANSIT PLAZA
CARMEL
RANCHO

SALINAS

TRANSIT
CENTER
10min
5 min
5 min
Northridge
Alisal
Social
Services
Creekbridge
Watsonville
King
City
Ryan
CHOMP Ranch
Carmel
Valley
Cannery
Row
Boronda
South
Salinas
Natividad
Pacific
Grove
Transfer location
Ubicación de transbordo
From 7am to 7pm, a bus comes every...

De 7am a 7pm, un autobús pasa cada...
15 minutes | 15 minutos No timed transfer | No hay transbordo programado 30 minutes | 30 minutos
60 minutes | 60 minutos
Regular Service | Servicio Regular
Line
Línea
Weekday
Entre semana
7am-7pm 7pm-10pm
15 30
30 30
60 60
30 60
60 30
60 60
30 60
60 30
30 30
60 60
60 30
30 60
30 60
60 -
-
-
60 -
-
60 -
60 60
-
-
60 60
30 -
-
30 60
60 -
30 60
60 30
60 60
60 60
60 60
-
60 60
60 60
60 60
30 30
60 30
60 60
-
Weekend
Fin de semana
During this period, a bus comes every...

Durante este periodo, un autobús pasa cada...

A/B
A
B
1/2
1 2
5 7
8 17/18
17 18
20 23
24 41
41/42 15 30 30
42 43
44 45
46 48
48/49 15 30 30
49 96
23X 28 29 61 91 94 95
Check route schedules for more details.

Vea los horarios de las rutas para más detalles.

These routes operate less than once per hour.

Estas rutas operan menos de una vez cada hora.

Figure 3: Public-facing map of the new Monterey-Salinas Transit Better Bus Network, released in late 2022 as part of preparations for implementation of the new network
Replica. We use Replica to understand recent
travel patterns, remote workers' travel patterns,
mode share, and traffic and demographic data.

The understanding we gain from our use of this
tool can inform the local and regional service
ideas that we develop for the service implementation plans.

Figure 4: In this example, the Replica dashboard shows the number of trips between that started in Clovis on a typical day during the Fall of 2024. This data is going to be key to understand transit demand, commute trips, and remote work.

Isochrones. One of the best tools for explaining
the mobility outcomes of a transit change is a
map showing the area a person can go in a given
amount of time, based on a known starting point.

Isochrones show freedom in an immediate way:
"here is where you can go." In doing this, isochrones measure how transit can contribute to opportunities, like going to a certain school or
holding a certain job. And because isochrones
can show the local benefits of a service change
in any place, they can be responsive to a city
councilor, neighborhood, or local business.

Access Analysis Mapping. We create our access
analyses by generating isochrones for hundreds
of points, and calculating how many people and
jobs are in each isochrone, comparing existing
service and the scenario under consideration.

This tool highlights the trade-offs that come from
pursuing different goals, and makes the big-picture consequences of any network change immediately visible.
84 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 45
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
Interactive Data Viewers. We create certain
visualizations specifically for the project and
agency staff. This includes an interactive data
viewer that we prepare in advance of each Core
Design Retreat. The data viewer is an online
mapping tool that allows project staff to visualize and overlay key data about the network, demographics, ridership, and other operating
characteristics relevant to network design.

Figure 3: Isochrones (left, step 1) are maps of access outcomes starting from a particular location. By running isochrone analysis throughout a whole city or county, we can map the degree to which access to destinations improves or deteriorates in different areas (step 2). We can then weigh those outcomes against population density, to demonstrate whether more people are positively or negatively affected.

Figure 4: Screenshot from an Interactive data viewer prepared for network design in Limerick, Ireland. This shows an overlay of high-poverty areas (orange) with the paths and observed boardings on the two most frequent routes in current service. 85 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 46
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
Figure 5: A Core Design Retreat we held in Sacramento. JWA's collaborative workshops can bring together transit agency and city staff, as well as neighboring jurisdictions and other key stakeholders at critical points in the design process.

Leverage Staff Expertise through
Collaborative Design
How do we design the network concepts,
and later, refine them into the implementation
plans? Whenever possible, JWA develops new
network ideas in collaboration with local staff.

We call this a Core Design Retreat. This is an
intensive workshop, where consultants and staff
work together to develop network design ideas.

We call this a “retreat” because it should feel like
an event: calendars cleared, phones off, and no
interruptions.

Planning collaboratively in a Core Design Retreat:
• Ensures we have the benefit of lived experience and knowledge, not just data. • Ensures key staff are fully engaged in and
have ownership of the ideas after we leave.
• Produces better network designs than any
consultant could create on their own.

Who should attend this retreat? At minimum,
Clovis Transit planning staff and people familiar
with operations and scheduling, as well as staff
engaged in the planning and design of Clovis
Transit's rapid transit program and approach to
shared mobility. We also recommend inviting
land use and traffic staff. These groups can add
insights about their own plans and learn how the
transit plan’s success depends on matters under
their control.

JWA puts a lot of thought and work into the
design and preparation for these retreats. Crucial
data will be carefully deployed on basemaps
and in our online data viewer. Google Maps
and Street View are also consulted whenever
the group needs to see a particular street or
intersection.

While they require a big investment of valuable
staff time, Core Design Retreats result in durable
ideas that staff can own and explain and have
a better chance of political and organizational
acceptance. Agency staff sometimes tell us that
the Retreat was one of the most rewarding experiences of their transit career.

Not everyone can afford the time, however.

That’s why each retreat day ends with a “4 pm
check-in.” This is a time when a larger group of
invited professionals and agency executives can
view the work in progress and can comment
while it is still easy to revise.

While lots of tweaking and revision is common
after the rush of the Core Design Retreat, we
have found in every case that developing the
bulk of the network concept or plan collaboratively, with many people involved, results in a better product reflecting that collective knowledge and expertise. 86 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 47
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
Work Plan
Task 0. Project Management
Project Management Plan
Before the project kickoff, JWA will develop a
draft Project Management Plan (PMP) with milestones and deliverables. The PMP establishes the overall workplan, organizational chart, staff
assignments and responsibilities, task lists and
descriptions, and schedule. This plan will be
refined during kickoff, and updated throughout
the project if changes are needed. We are estimating we can accomplish this work in 16 months starting in August 18th ( assuming contract is
ready in August 15th as stipulated in the pre bid
meeting).

Project Virtual Kickoff
JWA organizes the kickoff as a series of meetings over one to two days, covering topics critical to carrying out the project.

Some of the most important discussions and
decisions we would address at kickoff include:
• Reviewing the Project Management Plan
with staff and refining it to fit the project
schedule, especially regarding key decision
dates involving policymakers (e.g., Board of
Directors).
• Clarifying overall goals of the project and
how this project can integrate with other
relevant studies and planning initiatives;
identifying the main challenges facing Clovis
Transit in their service area.
• Discussing the objectives and key elements
of the Public and Internal Outreach and
Engagement Plans.
• Establishing a schedule for bi-weekly
project-management calls throughout the
project.
• Establishing data needs and channels of
communications between agency and consultant technical staff.

We expect each meeting during the kickoff
would include consultant staff relevant to that
meeting. JWA’s Project Manager would likely
attend all meetings, while other JWA staff would
attend meetings relevant to their topics.

We are proposing to have this meeting virtually,
to save resources for in-person events, for a field
visit and in person public engagement, soon
after the kick off meeting.

Ongoing Project Management
Following kickoff, we plan on holding a project
management call every two weeks for the anticipated 16-month duration of the project. This meeting would be consistently attended by
JWA's Project Manager, with other consultant
team staff attending as needed. JWA will also
provide agenda and meeting materials to attendees before the meeting and summary notes after the meeting.

Project Status
JWA will provide monthly progress reports as
part of its regular invoicing. These invoices
will include a record of hours worked by team
member, direct expenses, subcontractor costs,
as well as a table tracking the amounts spent
and budgeted for each task. In addition, the JWA
Project Manager will include a progress report
as part of the invoice that provides a written
description of the work JWA and the consultant team engaged in during the period of the invoice.

Deliverables for Task 0
• Kickoff meeting
• Refined Project Management Plan and
Schedule
• Bi weekly update meetings
• Monthly project status as part of the
invoice
Task 1. Review Existing
Conditions
Immediately following the kickoff meeting and
establishment of the Project Management Plan,
and in preparation for asking the community to
help guide this SOP, we will educate ourselves
about existing conditions for Clovis Transit
87 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 48
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
current service and markets, and what choices
most need to be addressed in this process.

JWA's approach to this task is about more than
just offering a tour of the relevant information
about the existing system; instead, we will use
Task 1 to explain how the travel market context
and existing system set up the network planning
trade-offs that will be presented to the public
and stakeholders.

By visualizing and explaining the strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities and challenges
present in the existing system (and later in the
2026 redesign network), and understanding of
service performance at the route and network
levels, we can create a report that informs
the remainder of the project and serves as an
important resource for the project team, decision
makers, and the public.

Our goal with this type of document is to provide
a deep but accessible narrative that helps
people understand where Clovis Transit is today,
how it got there, and what decisions it will face in
the near future as it carries out service planning.

Current Service Network
One of the most important goals of this task is
to develop a detailed assessment of the current
state of the network. The JWA team will analyze
a wide range of available data on Clovis Transit
routes to support a narrative that explains the
current design of the system, its strengths,
and any challenges or opportunities to make
improvements that have the potential to benefit
riders or the agency.

One challenge we anticipate in analyzing the
transit network is that Clovis Transit is planning to
implement a major redesign by the end of 2025.

As a result, there will be limited data available on
ridership and productivity for the new system.

We propose to analyze the existing network
service, usefulness and performance during the
first months of this project. We are also including
in our timeline 5 to 6 months of data collection
on the redesigned routes to analyze, just before
we begin developing ideas for the SOP's 10-year
project horizon.

This assessment will encompass at least the
following avenues of inquiry into the current
system:
• Route-by-Route Performance. Analysis of
ridership, productivity, frequency, connectivity, and usability of Clovis Transit routes. This will include insights gained at the network,
route-by-route and stop level. Exact paths
of investigation will be defined through data
exploration and in conversation with staff
during kickoff and in subsequent meetings.

JWA will develop a route profile document summarizing the transit performance indicators.
• Operational Analysis. Review of available
speed, on-time-performance, and reliability
data. Identification and analysis of relevant
issues. We will also analyze how Clovis
Transit is connecting to other bus networks,
and how easy rider transfers are between
systems.
• Proximity and Access Analysis. One of
the most powerful tools to evaluate the
performance of the existing network and
new network concepts is access analysis.

Access analysis refers to methods that help
us understand where people can go on
transit, which jobs are within reach, which
educational opportunities they can access,
what range of choices they can use transit
to reach in terms of shopping, medical
and other destinations. We will conduct
an access analysis that will set the baseline for the mobility outcomes the existing network delivers for people in the service
area at various time horizons (e.g., 45 or 60
minutes), broken down for different areas
and ethnic, racial or socioeconomic groups.

In Task 6 we will then compare outcomes
with the Network developed in the Draft
Plan to those produced by the existing
system.
• Budget Analysis. During Task 1, we will
schedule meetings with relevant staff to
begin to establish a clearer sense of the
future operating resources likely to be available for SOP 10 year horizon. We will review all available information and projections to
date on how key cost drivers are changing
in the post-COVID period, and ultimately
propose a "design budget" that represents
the total amount of service that should be
88 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 49
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
allocated in the Draft Plan process.

This task will also involve visiting the city and
riding transit there, and interviewing Clovis
Transit staff (planners, schedulers, drivers). We
will pay attention to both local and regional
service, including the connections made among
the transit providers in other cities. We will use
up-to-date information about services and connections where all of these services touch one another (whether they make a good connection
or not!).

Travel Market Assessment and Demographic and Socioeconomic Profiles Any transit planning project must begin with a
clear understanding of the existing context of
travel demand and market potential for transit.

In Task 1, we will bring together a wide array of
data to provide a multifaceted account of Clovis
Transit current and potential market. This will
include:
• Analysis of existing 2020 Census and 2024
ACS demographic and socioeconomic data.

As the only public, comprehensive data
source for the entire US, our travel market
assessment always begins with the production of a clear set of maps highlighting key demographic factors, including population
density, race and ethnicity, commuting data,
income and poverty, and language proficiency. Census helps set a baseline that we can then enrich and extend as we integrate
other sources.
• Analysis of all existing applicable data available on Clovis Transit customers, including any available analyses and surveying.
• Mapping and analysis of access to key
transit destinations, including major commercial, medical, and educational facilities. • Analysis on how travel demand has changed
as remote work becomes more common.

We will use Replica data to understand the
following items but not limited to: travel patterns by mode and time of day, origin and destination flow maps, travel purposes, and
local vs. regional mobility.
• JWA with Clovis Transit will reach out to
other City departments to gather plans and
data related to how the City will grow in the
future. The existing conditions phase would
also include an assessment of all relevant
data on future land use and travel flows
information. This would include mapping
and other visualizations showing where
demand is expected to change due to the
City's expected growth, and new locations
for new residential and commercial developments, which would serve as an important guide for the development of the SOP
network.

We will also publish an online, interactive reference map, as a tool for consultants and staff and, if desired, for use by the public.

Once we have improved the Existing Conditions
Report based on staff comments and corrections,
we will adapt the content to the project website
and prepare the report for the public. Some of
the information in the report, and the key choices
we establish with Clovis Transit staff, will guide
our development of the surveys and other public
engagement tools.

A sample existing conditions report can be found
in the Appendix, page 64. This report illustrate
the analysis and narrative we use to communicate to stakeholders and the community.

Deliverables for Task 1
• Analyses of existing conditions as
described above.
• An online map showing demographic, land
use and transit data.
• An internal-draft Existing Conditions
Report, and a final draft for publication.
• Trip # 1: Field Trip (plus activities Task 4
and 5)
Task 2. Research and Analysis
The SOP is not a blank-slate approach to service
plan development. Instead, it rests on a deep
framework of past plans and processes. Task
2 is an opportunity to review this documents
and identify any major themes or mandates that
should inform Clovis Transit's long-term planning.
89 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 50
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
In Task 2, JWA will identify and review relevant planning documents at the federal, state, regional and local levels, for guidance on key
directive, policy priorities and expectations applicable to Clovis Transit.

As part of this process, JWA will also identify and
highlight any federal, state, or county policies
that may conflict with local policies and guidance documents in the City of Clovis. Identifying these potential policy misalignments early will
help clarify where adjustments or coordination
may be necessary to ensure consistency across
planning frameworks. This step will be particularly valuable in preparing for the visioning and goal-setting phase, as it will allow the project
team and stakeholders to address any conflicts
proactively and establish a foundation of aligned
policy direction before moving forward with longterm strategies.

JWA will highlight sections relevant to service
planning, capital improvements, performance
metrics, environmental considerations, and
funding strategies and prepare a written
summary that synthesizes the key findings
from each document. We will submit the draft
research summary to Clovis Transit staff for
feedback and incorporate revisions and finalize
the deliverable for internal use or future planning
documents.

Deliverables for Task 2
• Research Summary on planning documents with noted reference sections and expectations
• This summary will be included as a chapter
in the Existing Conditions Report
Task 3. Visioning Process
After the existing conditions report is ready, and
we have heard from the public, stakeholders
and City leaders about their priorities for service
improvements, we will present that input to
Clovis Transit staff and start a discussion about
how the service improvements can reflect those
priorities. JWA will start discussing with staff the
vision, goals and strategies for the transition of
Clovis Transit into a new generation of transit
JWA will meet with Clovis Transit staff to present
the key takeaways from the Existing Conditions
Report and the first phase of public engagement.

This discussion will focus on how these findings
can inform the development of a shared vision
to guide the SOP. AMMA will participate in these
meetings to help translate public feedback into
actionable goals and strategies that reflect community needs and priorities.

In parallel, JWA will conduct separate meetings
with staff from other City departments—including Planning and Development, Public Utilities, and Housing and Facilities—to gather input on
the draft vision, goals, and strategies. These
cross-departmental conversations will ensure
the SOP is aligned with broader City priorities
and initiatives. We also recommend inviting City
staff to participate in the first stakeholder workshop (as described in Task 4). This workshop will serve as an opportunity for internal stakeholders
to gain a deeper understanding of transit operations, challenges, and trade-offs faced by Clovis Transit.

Once the vision, goals, strategies, and core
principles of the SOP have been established, we
propose hosting a collaborative workshop (we
call it Core Design) with Clovis Transit staff and
key stakeholders to co-develop a set of network
service improvements. These improvements will
reflect the SOP vision and help guide the agency’s service investments over the next 10 years.

During this phase, we recommend working
closely with Clovis Transit to define the scale
and nature of future service growth, including
potential expansion of service hours, days of
operation, and the modification or addition of
routes. This process can be carried out in one
in-depth, in-person session where routes and
service concepts are sketched collaboratively,
or through a series of rapid virtual iterations
where ideas are refined over multiple Zoom
meetings. We will coordinate with Clovis Transit
to determine the level of future investment being
considered for fixed-route service and tailor our
planning process accordingly. After the end of
the Core Design Day, we recommend inviting
City leaders, key stakeholders, planners from
other agencies e.g. FAX, Fresno County RTA)
to the check in hour at 4 pm to learn about the
changes we are proposing and gather any relevant feedback. 90 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 51
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
After developing the service recommendations,
we will map and analyze them. Our analysis will
measure impacts and improvements for all residents and workers, as well as for existing riders, lower-income residents, minority residents,
seniors, young people and local businesses.

We propose to pay particular attention to the
following measures:
• Proximity. Residents, jobs and key destinations within walking distance of various kinds of service, including low-income and minority
residents.
• Changes in the number of people who can
access key destinations.
• Analysis of overall access change by geography, and by demographic group. • Equity, i.e., who and where would be
advantaged or disadvantaged compared
to existing service, and how that relates to
patterns of income.
• Example Trips. Illustrations showing how
Clovis residents and workers would use the
conceptual networks compared to the existing network.

Deliverables for Task 3
• Vision, Goals and Strategies for the SOP
• Meetings with City departments to gather
feedback about the Vision, Goals and
Strategies
• Core Design Workshop
• SOP 10 Year Network and service
improvements
• Equity and Performance Analysis of 10
Year Network
• Trip # 2: Core Design
Task 4. Stakeholder Committee
In addition to technical network planning, JWA
excels at engaging the public and stakeholders,
in ways that provide policy-makers with actionable feedback in setting policy goals.

Our public and stakeholder involvement
processes don’t just generate competing “wish
lists” from constituent groups that we, or our
clients, have to reconcile. Instead, they generate
thoughtful public input on the real, hard choices
that transit agencies must make.

We propose to conduct the stakeholder engagement in three phases:

Phase 1
At the beginning of the project, JWA, AMMA and
Clovis Transit will agree on the stakeholders that
will be involved from start to finish of the project
through scheduled meetings.

The first meeting we would like to hold is an
intensive half-day or evening workshop in
January 2026 with a group of people chosen by
Clovis Transit and your trusted partners who
represent key organizations with a stake in
transit and/or an important role to play in the
public con-versation about the SOP. This
workshop would feature a fun and interactive
Transit board game so participants can develop
an intuitive sense of how transit planning works,
while also present-ing the ways in which the
Productivity/Coverage trade-off might express
itself concretely in the City of Clovis. This
workshop will also include live polling, a briefing
presentation by the con-sultants, and discussions
among stakeholders. During this workshop we
would also like to invite City staff from other
departments as their involvement since phase 1
will be key throughout the whole project.

The AMMA team will facilitate meeting logistics including securing location and room rental (with Clovis Transit guidance); make arrangements for set-up and breakdown, refreshments, food, and audio-visual needs. The Clovis Transit
Project Manager must approve the meeting
logistics, meeting format, subject matter, our
team member attendance, and presentation
materials prior to finalization of the meetings We
will produce sign-in sheets, agendas, comment
cards, meeting displays, and assist with content
and design, as directed, of the PowerPoint
presentation.

Phase 2
JWA and AMMA will host a virtual stakeholder
presentation to share and discuss the vision,
goals, and strategies identified in Task 3. The
91 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 52
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
presentation will also highlight key findings from
the Existing Conditions Report (Task 1) and summarize community input gathered during Phase 1 of Task 5. In addition to sharing these updates,
the session will provide an opportunity for stakeholders to offer feedback and insights before development of the Draft Plan begins. This
engagement will help ensure the plan reflects
both technical analysis and community and
stakeholder priorities.

Phase 3
Finally, once the Draft Plan is complete, JWA
and AMMA will host a final virtual meeting with
stakeholders to present its key elements, including proposed service strategies, implementation timelines, and funding considerations. This
meeting will serve as a critical checkpoint to
ensure the plan aligns with stakeholder expectations and community needs. Stakeholders will have the opportunity to provide feedback,
ask questions, and suggest refinements before
the plan is finalized. Input gathered during this
session will be incorporated, as appropriate, into
the plan before it is formally presented to the
Clovis Transit Board for review and adoption.

Deliverables for Task 4
• Stakeholder list
• Invitations to events
• Event #1 Stakeholder in person workshop
• Event #2 Vision, goals and strategies
virtual presentation
• Event #2 Draft Plan virtual presentation
• Agendas, PowerPoint Presentations and
meeting minutes and summaries for the
three stakeholder events.
• Trip # 1: Stakeholder workshop (plus activities Task 1 and 5) Task 5. Community Outreach and
Engagement
AMMA will lead our engagement efforts and
will also be integrating into the goal-setting
and service-planning steps that follow. Public
engagement will be divided into two main
phases:
• Phase 1: Informing the public of this process
to the public, and listening to the community
about travel needs
• Phase 2: Outreach on the Draft Plan
JWA will shape the overall conversation with
the public and foster the conversations needed
to gather actionable input. Since we will work
closely with AMMA, everything we hear from
the public through surveys, tabling events, workshops, interviews, and other outreach efforts will feed directly into our service planning process.

JWA has proposed a Hispanic project manager
(Álvaro) who can perform work in both English
and Spanish, without the need to relay communication through a translator.

We know that many of our public engagement
successes will be thanks to local organizations
who are already knowledgeable, connected and
trusted in the community. If we can get a fast
start we may, for example, be able to lean on
some of these organizations to allow us to do
outreach at their events. The Library and schools
may also be helpful organizations and good
venues for reaching diverse residents who care
about transit.

Phase 1
During this phase, we will run several activities to
inform the community about this project and also
use both on-board and online surveys to understand who is currently using the Clovis Transit system and to garner feedback on community
priorities related to transit service. Throughout
this phase of engagement we will listen to the
community about what is important to them,
what currently adds value and what could add
value to Clovis Transit service. This is the time
when we would ask them about the trade offs of
more ridership service that aligns with the City's
goals of reducing harmful emissions, vs adding
coverage service in more areas with limited
service.

We will work with the Clovis Transit team to
conduct an initial assessment of audiences, to
plan and design engagement based on Clovis’
unique profile, preferences and expectations.
92 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 53
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
Understanding our audience is critical to developing engagement that will meet your objectives, reach a broad range of riders and community
members, solicit meaningful and inclusive feedback, and inform your decision-making.

At the kickoff meeting, AMMA will start developing an Engagement Plan that emphasizes equity.

They will establish clear public involvement
goals, opportunities for engagement, key messages and guidelines for how consultants and Clovis Transit will incorporate public input into
the new SOP.

In this phase, AMMA, with support from JWA, will
develop a community survey to be distributed
both online and in print, in English and Spanish,
ensuring accessibility to a broad cross-section
of Clovis residents. The survey will be administered online, on-board routes, at the first pop-up event, and distributed through Clovis Transit and
partner community organizations to increase
reach and response rates.

AMMA will conduct a pop-up event in a locations
with a diverse range of potential participants,
potential options are:
• Clovis Transit Center
• Clovis Regional Library and the Clovis Civic
Center
• Clovis Community College
• Saturday morning Farmers’ Market
• WalktoberFest Oct 19
• Spooktacular Oct 26
• Old Town Flea Nov 1-2
• Two-Cities Marathon Nov 3
In addition to the pop-up, AMMA and JWA will
either attend an existing community event or
host a dedicated open house. Whenever possible, we recommend aligning with an existing community event—such as a farmer’s market,
neighborhood festival, or school function—
because these events already attract a diverse
and engaged audience. Tagging along an
existing event reduces the burden of outreach,
increases visibility and participation, and helps
build trust by meeting community members
where they already gather. This approach
creates a more natural and welcoming environment for conversations, leading to richer, more representative input. At the event, AMMA and
JWA will share information about the ShortRange Operations Plan (SOP), answer questions, and gather community feedback through the
survey and informal in-person dialogue.

Input from this phase 1 of engagement will inform
the Visioning Process and a summary will be
included as a chapter in the Existing Conditions
Report.

Deliverables for Task 5 -
Phase 1
• Public Outreach Plan
• Community Survey Development and
Analysis (online and on board)
• Public Engagement Outreach Material (bus
shelter postings, bus interior postings,
social media and website posts)
• Distribution of the survey online, on-board
buses, email and in key community
locations.
• 1 Community meeting or open house
• 1 Tabling event/pop-up activity
• Community engagement summary
• Trip # 1: Community outreach phase 1
events (plus activities Task 1 and 4)
• Trip # 3 Community outreach phase 2
events
Phase 2
The second round of consultant-led public
engagement will focus on presenting the Draft
Plan to the public and seeking to hear about
what works and what doesn't. Activities in this
phase of outreach will include:
• Post the Draft Plan as part of the final
project website update. Work with Clovis
Transit staff and stakeholders to publicize
the Plan’s availability.
93 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 54
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
• Design and implement another general
public e-survey to provide feedback on the
network scenarios Provide Clovis Transit
staff and all stakeholders with appropriate
tools for promoting the survey.
• Conduct a rider and stakeholder forum
inviting all participants previously contacted
to preview and comment upon the network
scenarios. This would allow us to present
the alternatives to a group of people with
deep connections and the ability to amplify
the message to generate more public input
and survey responses.
• One pop-up event to talk to the community, discuss the plan and gather feedback through the survey
We would also email the project list and reach
out to key stakeholders and local community
groups, to invite comments on the Draft Report.

Once the public comment period has closed,
we would then meet with staff to discuss how to
improve the Draft Plan in response to the comments, before preparing the Final Report for the Board of Directors' adoption.

Deliverables for Task 5 -
Phase 2
• Community Survey Development and
Analysis (online)
• Public Engagement Outreach Material (bus
shelter postings, bus interior postings,
social media and website posts)
• Distribution of the survey online, on-board
buses, email and in key community
locations.
• 1 Community meeting or open house
• 1 Tabling event/pop-up activity
• Community engagement summary
Task 6. Draft and Final Plan
One we have worked with Clovis Transit to set
the over arching goals and policies for the SOP,
we will develop draft service proposals. These
proposals will address fixed route and demand
response, at the local and regional scales.

We will analyze service proposals to measure
impacts and improvements for existing riders,
lower-income residents, minority residents,
seniors, young people, employers, and potential
future riders.

These proposed enhancements and innovations
will be delivered to staff in an internal report,
including, the existing conditions report, vision,
goals, strategies, summaries of stakeholder and
community outreach process and feedback,
implementation plan and any maps of proposed
new services. Once we have improved the proposals based on staff comments, we will move on to planning for the operational, programmatic
investments and steps to implementation that
are required by the proposed services.

This is intended to be a readable, friendly document, that anyone can use to understand Clovis Transit's current situation and future
plans. Technical material that is unlikely to be
interesting to the general public will be kept
in appendices. We will also prepare a Draft
Executive Summary of the SOP.

Clovis Transit staff will be asked to review an
internal draft of the Draft SOP, after which we will
prepare it for publication.

Once the public comment period has closed, we
would summarize comments on the SOP and
organize them for staff’s review. We would then
meet with staff to discuss how to change the
SOP in response to the public and stakeholder
comments, before preparing the third and Final
SOP document for Board consideration.

A sample of Final reports are in the Appendix
page 217. The first report is a Transit Master Plan
for the City of Canby, and the second report is
the Final Comprehensive Operational Analysis
and Network Plan for Monterey Salinas.

Deliverables for Task 6
• Draft Plan
• Summary of comments from the public
and stakeholders
• Final Plan, including list steps to
implementation
94 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 55
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
Task 7. Presentation, Board
Review and Approval
To ensure transparency, involvement, and
informed decision-making throughout the plan-
ning process, we recommend presenting to the
Clovis Transit Board of Directors at two key mile-
stones. These presentations will provide updates
on progress, incorporate input from both the
Board and the public, and help build support for
the final SOP.

The first presentation will take place during
Phase 1 of public engagement. During this
session, we will brief the Board on key insights
from the Existing Conditions Report, outline the
goals of the community outreach phase, and
invite their input on additional community con-
tacts or engagement opportunities. We will also
ask for their help in spreading awareness about
the project and encouraging public participation.

The second presentation will take place once the
Draft SOP is complete and has been reviewed by
the public and key stakeholders. At this stage,
the principal, Jarrett Walker, will deliver an in-per-
son PowerPoint presentation summarizing the
plan’s recommendations, community feedback,
and implementation strategy, while also gather-
ing feedback from the Board to make any final
changes to the SOP. Depending on the budget,
we may also include the project manager, Alvaro
Caviedes, in this presentation once the commu-
nity outreach process is complete.

Deliverables for Task 7 • Presentation to the Board at the beginning of the project
• Presentation to deliver the Draft Plan to
the board and gather feedback for the
Final Plan.
• PowerPoint presentation materials • Trip #4 Board Presentation 95 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 56
4 Project Approach and Work Plan
The tables on this page (rotated vertically in
order to fit) describe the timeline our work plans
would follow within 16 months.
dm
Work & Coordination Phase Major Report or DeliverableMeeting or Presentation 96 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES
Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 57
Image: Photo by Jacob,
Adobe Stock Photos
5 Cost Proposal
97 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 58
5 Cost Proposal
Project Cost Breakdown
The following tables provide an estimate of
labor hours, labor costs and direct costs by
project task, and the way in which these add up
to a total estimated cost.
• The labor rates are fully loaded and
include all anticipated labor costs.
• Direct costs are estimated to the best of
our abilities. In practice, the consultant
team would only charge actual direct
costs, as justified by receipts and/or
invoices.
•
•
Total Cost: $169,907.97 JWA
contribution: $115,342.94 (68%);
AMMA contribution: $54,565.03 (32%)
• Staff Standard hourly billing rates as of July
2025
Task Cost Breakdown
Task Task Title/Deliverables Estimated Cost-Total Not
to Exceed $170,000
0 Overall Project Management $ 27,322.37
1 Review Existing Conditions $ 37,029.84
2 Research and Analysis $ 8,491.26
3 Visioning Process $ 24,355.13
4 Stakeholder Committee $ 19,713.91
5 Community Outreach and Engagement $ 35,152.17
6 Draft and Final Plan $ 14,957.60
7 Presentation, Board Review and Approval $ 2,885.69
Total $ 169,907.97
Rates
Jarrett Walker
Evan Landman
Alvaro Caviedes
Shreya Jain
Liz Marchalonis
Zach Tucker
Dennis Brooks
Andrea Breault
Elea Carey
Selena Barlow
Heller
JWA
AMMA
Rates
Jarrett Walker $307.50
Evan Landman $163.73
Alvaro Caviedes $166.87
Shreya Jain $138.03
Liz Marchalonis $114.75
Zach Tucker $88.41
Dennis Brooks $153.07
Andrea Breault $135.26
Elea Carey $135.00
Selena Barlow $165.00
Heller $75.00
JWA
AMMA
Staff rates
98 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 59
5 Cost Proposal
Kickoff Preparation 5 $ 806 $ -
Kick-off Meetings with staff, team 5 $ 806 8 $ 1,177
Refined project schedule and Asana 3 $ 497 $ -
Data request list 3 $ 414 $ -
On-going Team project management 32 $ 4,850 $ -
Monthly update internal meetings 45 $ 6,521 12 $ 1,728
Bi-weekly project team calls 34 $ 5,385 36 $ 5,138
127 $ 19,279 56 $ 8,043 $ 27,322
Data organization 14 $ 1,990 $ -
Replica license $ 2,000
Analyze land use, demographics, replica data 44 $ 5,630 $ - Analayze street connectivity and build environment 11 $ 1,361 $ - Cartography existing and 2026 network 14 $ 1,711 $ -
Field visit 32 $ 7,161 $ -
Analyze existing transit network 40 $ 5,193 $ -
Analyze existing Demand Response 12 $ 1,772 $ -
Route profiles and service perf. Analysis 18 $ 2,170 $ - Ridership Analysis on 2026 network 8 $ 918 $ -
Online maps - Data viewer 8 $ 1,104 $ -
Draft Ex. Cond. & Choices Report 24 $ 3,826 $ -
Final Ex. Cond. & Choices Report 13 $ 2,195 $ -
238 $ 37,030 $ - $ 37,030
Research on planning documents 20 $ 3,222 26 $ 3,658
Summary of documents with noted reference sections and expect. 10 $ 1,611 $ - 30 $ 4,833 26 $ 3,658 $ 8,491
Establish vision, strategies and goals; discuss policy choices, draft doc 22 $ 3,952 4 $ 600 Meetings with City Departments 12 $ 1,945 $ -
Summary of Information, and suggestions by cit deparments Core Design retreat 26 $ 8,524 $ -
Refine Networks based on staff feedback 11 $ 1,745 $ -
Fix Remix + Costing 10 $ 1,438 $ -
Proximity analysis 12 $ 1,528 $ -
Isochrones and access analysis 18 $ 2,449 $ -
Maps and frequency tables 18 $ 2,170 $ -
Demand response recommendations 2 $ 334 2 $ 271
$ - $ -
131 $ 24,085 6 $ 271 $ 24,355
Project database & outreach to stakeholders and leaders 2 $ 334 $ - Stakeholder Workshop (1/2 day or eve with dinner) 12 $ 1,979 34 $ 5,097 Stakeholder interviews 1 $ 167 80 $ 9,677
Meeting # 2 Goals and vision presentation 1 $ 167 $ -
Meeting # 3 Presentation of the draft plan to solicite for comment 1 $ 167 $ - Agendas, PowerPoint Presentatins, meeting notes, summaries 14 $ 2,128 31 $ 4,941 114 $ 14,773 $ 19,714
Community engagement plan, event list 1 $ 167 16 $ 2,317 Printing for events and materials (flyers, posters, surveys, snacks) $ 1,250 Travel AMMA events $ 5,300
City of Clovis webpage content and announcements, social media 2 $ 334 8 $ 1,080 Survey (x2) 18 $ 2,378 24 $ 3,433
Pop up events (x2) 6 $ 886 32 $ 4,467
Open houses or community events (x2) 8 $ 1,231 36 $ 5,007 Analysis of survey input (x2) 14 $ 1,815 22 $ 3,151
Memo summarizing input and community feedback (x2) 6 $ 793 11 $ 1,545 55 $ 7,603 149 $ 27,549 $ 35,152
Internal draft SOP document 36 $ 6,339 $ -
Internal draft SOP Exec Summary 4 $ 667 $ -
External ADA Draft SOP document including Credits to Caltrans 16 $ 2,324 $ - External ADA Draft SOP Exec Summary including Credits to Caltrans 4 $ 610 $ - Meeting with staff to decide on changes 4 $ 610 2 $ 271 Final ADA SOP for Board consideration including Credits to Caltrans 10 $ 1,611 $ - Final ADA SOP after Board adoption including Credits to Caltrans 12 $ 2,526 $ - 86 $ 14,687 2 $ 271 $ 14,958
Presentation #1 to the Board (including PowerPoint file) 5 $ 2,080 $ - Presentaiton # 2 to the Board (including PowerPoint file) 5 $ 806 $ - 10 $ 2,886 $ - $ 2,886
Total 708 $ 115,343 353 $ 54,565 $169,907.97

7. Presentation,
Board Review and
Approval

1. Review Existing
Conditions

3. Visioning Process

4. Stakeholder
Committee

5. Community
Outreach and
Engagement

6. Draft and Final
Plan
Proposed Tasks
2 Research and
Analysis

0. Overall Project
Management
Subtotal Cost
for Task

JWA AMMA
Subtotal
(Hours)
Subtotal
Labor ($)
Subtotal
(Hours)
Subtotal
Labor ($)
99 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES
Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 60
Image: Photo by Jacob,
Adobe Stock Photos
6 Check List
100
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 61
6 Check List

CHECKLIST
This Checklist is provided to assist vendors in preparing their RFP responses. Included are important requirements the Contractor is responsible for submitting with the RFP package to make the RFP compliant.

Check off each of the following (if applicable):

1. Signed cover page of Request for Proposal (RFP).

2. Check https://vendors.planetbids.com/portal/14742/bo/bo-detail/131198 for any addenda.

3. Signed cover page of each Addendum.

4. Provide a Conflict of Interest Statement.

5. Signed Trade Secret Form as provided with this RFP (Trade Secret Information, if provided, must be electronically submitted in a separate PDF file and marked as Confidential).

6. Signed Debarment and Suspension Certification as provided with this RFP.

7. Signed Tax Liability Certification as provided with this RFP.

8. Signed Participation Form as provided with this RFP.

9. Completed the Reference List as provided with this RFP.

10. Signed Lobbying Restrictions Form (Exhibit D)

11. Indicate all of Contractor exceptions to the City’s requirements, conditions and specifications as stated within this RFP.

12. Contractor’s proposal, in PDF format, electronically submitted to the Bid Page on Planet Bids.

Return the Checklist with your RFP response

ATTACHMENT B - UPDATED CHECKLIST
12 x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
101
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES
Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis 62
Image: Photo by Jacob,
Adobe Stock Photos
Appendix
A
102
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

Strategic Operations Plan
City of Clovis JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES 63
Sample Reports
103
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

Comprehensive Operational Analysis
Choices Report
May 27, 2020
“Advocating and delivering quality
public transportation as a leader within
our community and industry.”
Dan Boyle
& Associates, Inc.
104
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report | 2 Monterey-Salinas Transit Table of Contents
1 Introduction...................................................................................................... 4 MST provides local and regional public transit in Monterey County...............................................5 Most of MST’s network is in the Monterey and Salinas areas. .........................................................6 Why does the MST network need a redesign?................................................................................7 How has the pandemic impacted MST service and ridership?........................................................11 The Challenge of Planning a Good Transit Network in Monterey County.......................................13 2 What makes transit useful? ............................................................................. 16 What goals should transit serve?.....................................................................................................17 Ridership and coverage goals conflict. ...........................................................................................18 Transit is useful because it expands where people can go..............................................................19 Frequent transit is useful to more people and more trips. ..............................................................20 Transit’s ability to expand access depends on the build environment. ...........................................21 Density and Walkability in Monterey County ..................................................................................22 Who lives near jobs?........................................................................................................................23 Linearity in Monterey County..........................................................................................................24 Proximity in Monterey County.........................................................................................................25 3 The Challenges and Opportunities of Monterey County’s Geography......... 26 The Market and Need for Transit ....................................................................................................27 Indicators of Demand: Residential Density .....................................................................................28 Indicators of Demand: Job Density.................................................................................................30 Indicators of Demand: Activity Density...........................................................................................32 Indicators of Demand: Walkability ..................................................................................................34 Indicators of Demand: Commute Patterns......................................................................................35 Indicators of Demand and Need: Zero Vehicle Households ...........................................................36 Indicators of Demand and Need: Residents in Poverty...................................................................38 Indicators of Need: Seniors and Youth............................................................................................40 Civil Rights: Race and Ethnicity .......................................................................................................43 4 MST’s Fixed-Route Network ........................................................................... 45 Regional Network ...........................................................................................................................46 Core Local Network ........................................................................................................................47 Service Frequency by Line and Time of Day ...................................................................................48 Many bus lines are not currently operating. Some may not come back. .........................................49 In the urban areas, most people are near transit but frequencies are low.......................................50 Outside urban areas, most people live far from transit...................................................................51 In several important corridors, lines overlap but don’t produce frequency.....................................52 Line productivities are low, reflecting a coverage-oriented system. ...............................................54 The network is hampered by a lack of consistent timed transfers...................................................55 MST service levels and ridership are low compared to peers. ........................................................56 105
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report | 3 Monterey-Salinas Transit Table of Contents - cont’d
5 MST Paratransit and Specialized Services ................................................. 57 MST specialized services include RIDES paratransit and other programs.......................................58 MST RIDES is a comprehensive, countywide program. ..................................................................59 RIDES performance indicators document a solid, responsive program. .........................................60 RIDES users report very positive experiences. ...............................................................................61 Opportunities for Improvement......................................................................................................62 6 MST’s Financial Outlook ................................................................................... 63 Operating costs are growing ..........................................................................................................64 Revenue Trends...............................................................................................................................65 MST has budgeted conservatively. .................................................................................................66 7 Insights from Preliminary Community Outreach .............................................. 67 MST’s strategic focus on customer satisfaction is evident...............................................................68 Intercity service is key to jobs access. Local transit is a priority in Salinas. ......................................69 MST fares are high and often do not reflect the relative value of the trip. ......................................70 8 Key Choice and Next Steps .............................................................................. 71 Key Choice: Ridership vs. Coverage................................................................................................72 Local vs. Regional Service ...............................................................................................................73 Key Choice: Needs-Based vs. Population-Based ...........................................................................74 What we’ve heard from the public. .................................................................................................75 Next Steps ......................................................................................................................................77 Appendix A
A Survey of The General Adult Public in Monterey County, California, 2021, for MST 106
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
| 4 JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report Monterey-Salinas Transit
1 Introduction
107
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 5
1 Introduction
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
MST provides local and regional public transit in Monterey County.

Figure 1: Map of MST’s regional network in early 2021, with lines color-coded by frequency. Local lines are shown in gray.

MST Services
Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) is the
public transit agency for Monterey County.

MST’s services include:
• Fixed-route transit. This includes all MST’s
numbered bus lines (1 to 95), as well as the
JAZZ A and B. MST divides its fixed route
services into:
o Local lines provide service in the
greater Monterey and Salinas urban
areas. They account for about 2/3 of
MST’s fixed-line service and ridership.
o Regional lines run longer-distance trips
between Salinas, Monterey, cities in
southern Monterey County, Watsonville
and other destinations.
• Demand-response services, where people
reserve a ride in advance. This includes:
o Paratransit provided to passengers
eligible under the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA).
o On-call service in Marina, Gonzales,
Soledad, Greenfield and King City.

This minibus service is available to the
general public and allows for local rides
within the on-call area and transfers to
the nearest fixed route.

MST also operates a wide variety of specialized fixed and demand-responsive services, including the Monterey Trolley, Del Rey Oaks
Shuttle, long-distance medical trips to the Bay
Area, and a taxi voucher program for seniors
and veterans.

Nonetheless, most people experience MST
service as fixed-route buses. These account
for about 75% of MST’s in-service hours and
95% of ridership.

MST’s regional role
MST’s county-wide scope and governance
structure both tend to emphasize service to
many communities over a large area.

This is reinforced by local geography:
the Monterey Bay and Salinas Valley have
historically developed as a string of small
to mid-sized cities following Highway 1
and Highway 101. These communities
have overlapping retail, social services and
employment markets resulting in large
amounts of intercity travel.

Furthermore, there has long been a gap
in commercial long-distance bus service
between Paso Robles and Salinas, reflecting the relatively “empty quarter” of California’s central coast.

As a result, MST has carved out a relatively
unique role as a public agency that handles
both local and long-distance services, with
service extending as far as Paso Robles to
the south and San Jose to the north.

As of early 2021, several of MST’s intercity lines have been suspended due to COVID-related service shifts. This includes
long-distance services to San Jose and
Santa Cruz, as well as secondary intercity
lines like Marina-to-Watsonville.

MST Operations
As of 2019, approximately 60% of MST
service is directly operated. The remaining 40%, including paratransit, on-call and most small-bus fixed routes were operated
under contract by MV Transportation.
108
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 6
1 Introduction
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Most of MST’s network is in the Monterey and Salinas areas.

Figure 2: Map of MST’s fixed-route network in the greater Salinas and Monterey areas in early 2021, with lines color-coded by frequency.

The MST fixed-route network in the greater
Monterey and Salinas areas1 is represented
in Figure 2. Together, these areas account for
about:
• 5% of the county land area
• 65% of the county population
Because so much of Monterey County’s
population is concentrated in this relatively
small area, this is where buses have the most
potential to connect many people to many
destinations at relatively low cost to the public.

Accordingly this is where most of MST’s service
is provided and where the most people ride.

As of 2019, the greater Monterey and Salinas
areas accounted for about:
• 85% of MST service
• 90% of MST ridership.
1 Including Carmel-by-the-Sea, Del Monte Forest, Pacific Grove, Monterey, Seaside, Del Rey Oaks, Sand City, Marina, Salinas, Boronda and adjacent developed area.
109
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 7
1 Introduction
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Why does the MST network need a redesign?
Figure 3: Map of MST’s fixed-route network in Monterey and Seaside, with lines color-coded by frequency.

This document is the first step in MST’s
Comprehensive Operational Analysis (COA).

The COA is an opportunity to review MST’s
array of public transportation services, evaluate their performance, and help set a direction for the future.

Based on our initial assessment of the network,
there are good reasons to envision a blankslate redesign.

1. The last full system
review was over two
decades ago.

Many transit agencies review their entire
network every five to ten years, to make sure
service matches the community’ needs. The
last time MST undertook such a comprehensive study was in the late 1990s.

Since then, MST has conducted several subarea studies1 , launched the JAZZ line, and
responded to many community requests for
shifts in service.

Many of these changes have taken place
without a consistent policy on where and
how much service to provide. In this context,
responding to individual requests meets
well-identified needs but does not always
contribute to a more effective network for
everyone.

The result is a network of many overlapping
lines, each doing something that someone
requested, but mostly running too infrequently
to be worth the wait for anyone else travelling
in the same direction.
1 Including reviews of service in the Peninsula (2006), Marina (2009), South County (2010; 2019) and Salinas (2005 and 2012).

2. Most lines operate at
very low frequencies.

Only two MST lines consistently run every
30 minutes or better on weekdays: Line 41 in
Salinas, and Line 20 from Monterey to Salinas.

Almost everything else runs once an hour or
less2.

In fact, nearly half of MST lines operate just
a few times a day3, connecting very small
numbers of people to specific buildings or
facilities. These specialized and very infrequent
services tend to overlap with other lines for
most of their run, resulting in a very complex
web of bus lines.

This is especially pronounced in the Monterey
and Seaside area shown in Figure 3.

Many of the lines on this map operate less
than once an hour, and have very short unique
segments. Because each line has to operate
on its own schedule, overlapping lines don’t
result in high combined frequency.

For example, there may be four direct buses
per hour between Monterey Transit Plaza and
Del Monte Center on weekdays from 7 AM to
6 PM, but there is a 30-minute gap between
southbound buses at least 9 times in that time
period.
2 There are two main exceptions: (a) the JAZZ A and B, which each run every 36 minutes on weekdays, and combine to every 18 minutes on Fremont Blvd, and (b) Line 24 from Monterey to Carmel Valley, which operates every 40 minutes on weekdays.
3 As of early 2021, 14 of the 32 MST lines currently in operation run 8 times per day or less.

A number of MST lines operate just a few
times per day, connecting small numbers of
people to specific buildings or facilities.
110
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 8
1 Introduction
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit

3. It can take a very long time to get from A to B, even when those places are nearby.

Transit is useful to people when it extends the range of places they can go. But low frequencies on the existing network mean that few people can use transit to get anywhere in a reasonable amount of time. This is true even when travelling relatively short distances between relatively prominent locations, as in the following examples.

Example no. 1: How do you get from Seaside to Pacific Grove? Let’s imagine you are a retail worker living in the center of Seaside, and you need to reach your job at Country Club Gate Center in Pacific Grove (6 miles away) and your shift starts at noon on weekdays.

Here’s what you would need to do:

Notice that this trip only includes a total of 29 minutes actually riding the bus, and that you would spend more time waiting at your destination than you would getting there.

The key problem in this example is the low frequency of Line 2. If Line 2 came every 30 minutes instead of once an hour, this could halve the length of the trip. In that case, you could catch a later Jazz B at 11:15, wait only 10 minutes in Monterey to connect to Line 2 at 11:48, and wait only 6 minutes at the end, for a total of 48 minutes.

Example no. 2: How do you get from North Salinas to South Salinas? Let’s imagine you are a hospital worker living near North Salinas High School, you need to reach your job at Salinas Valley Memorial Hospital (4.5 miles away) and your shift starts at 9am on weekdays.

Here’s what you would need to do:

Notice that this trip only includes a total of 21 minutes actually riding the bus, and that you would spend more time waiting at Salinas Transit Center than on either bus. A healthy adult could walk from Salinas Transit Center starting at 8:10 and arrive at the hospital and arrive at the same time as someone who had waited for Line 48.

The key problem in this example is both low frequencies and the lack of a timed transfer at Salinas Transit Center. If Lines 48 and 49 were timed to arrive together at Salinas Transit Center at 8:25am and leave together at 8:30, you could leave home 15 minutes later. If they both came every half hour and were timed to leave Salinas Transit Center at 8:15 and 8:45, you could leave home 30 minutes later, for a 48 minute trip.

These are just two of many possible
examples. Many prominent destinations are
served once an hour or less, and people
traveling to them by transit would have
similar or even longer trips.
1 Hour 27 Minutes
5 minutes walking, 53 minutes waiting, 29 minutes riding Start trip at home at Olympia & Terrace (Seaside) at 10:33am.

Walk 3 minutes to the stop at Olympia & Broadway.

Wait 3 minutes for the Jazz B to the Aquarium.

Ride Jazz B for 23 minutes to Foam & Irving (Monterey).

Arrive 11:02am. Wait 16 minutes for Line 2. Get on at 11:18am.

Ride Line 2 for 6 minutes to Forest & Forest Hill (Pacific Grove) Walk 2 minutes to get to Country Club Gate Center at 11:26am.

Wait 34 minutes for start of work at 12:00pm.
1 Hour 18 Minutes
17 minutes walking, 40 minutes waiting, 21 minutes riding Start trip at home at Alvin & McKinnon at 7:42am.

Walk 11 minutes to the stop at Alvin & Main.

Wait 3 minutes for Line 49 to Salinas Transit Center.

Ride Line 49 for 14 minutes to Salinas Transit Center.

Arrive 8:10am. Wait 20 minutes for Line 48. Get on at 8:30am.

Ride Line 48 for 7 minutes to Abbott & Los Palos.

Walk 6 mins. to get to Salinas Valley Memorial Hospital at 8:43am.

Wait 17 minutes for start of work at 9:00am.
111
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 9
1 Introduction
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit

4. Where people live and
work has changed.

The last 25 years have seen important shifts
in where people live and work. Since the late
1990s:
• The population of the greater Monterey
area and rural areas of the North County
have stagnated.
• Marina experienced a significant decline
in the 2000s, but has had the strongest
growth of any community in the 2010s and
continues to have the largest number of
ongoing residential development projects.
• Salinas has grown slightly but unevenly. The
population has grown significantly in North
Salinas, while it has tended to decline or
stagnated in East and South Salinas.
• Cities in the Highway 101 corridor south of
Salinas grew strongly in the 2000s, but that
growth slowed down significantly in the
2010s.
• The prominence of the military as a source
of economic development has decreased
following the closure of Fort Ord.
• The agriculture, retail, service, hospitality and higher education sectors have all become correspondingly more important.

Although some cities on the Monterey
Peninsula are now showing renewed interest
in growth and development, the structure
of existing water rights means that future
growth will likely be concentrated in the
the Highway 101 corridor south of Salinas.

Figure 4: Regional map of change in population density. Growth has largely been concentrated in the outer neighborhoods of Salinas and in the cities of Gonzales, Soledad, Greenfield and King City. 112
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 10
1 Introduction
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Figure 6: Map of MST’s fixed-route network in Salinas, with lines color-coded by frequency. All but two lines (20 and 41) operate once an hour or less.

5. There is unmet demand
for service in Salinas.

Salinas is the largest population and job center
in Monterey County, accounting for 36% of
the population and 30% of jobs. And there are
good reasons to think many of the trips that
happen in Salinas could be served by transit.

For one, Salinas is relatively compact and
dense. The entire city of 155,000 people fits
in a 5x5 mile area, and a large share of its
jobs are located either Downtown or on long,
straight main streets. As a result:
• Most bus stops in Salinas are located within
a 1/2-mile of several thousand residents.
• Many of the places people need to go can be
reached in a relatively short trip, that could
be effectively served by frequent transit.

Salinas also has a relatively high poverty rate,
implying that many people are in need of
public services, including transportation. Many
people in Salinas live in large households,
where there are often fewer cars than people
who need to go places.

Despite this, large parts of the city are served
by lines that operate once an hour or less.

With such infrequent service, an able bodied
adult can walk most of the way across Salinas
in the time it takes before the next bus comes.

But very few people have the time to do that.

6. The pandemic has
altered everyone’s reality.

This is a good time to
reassess MST’s future role.

The impacts of the pandemic on MST’s ridership and services are described in more detail in the following pages.

Figure 5: Table comparing the population and ridership in the Monterey and Salinas areas to the amount of MST weekly scheduled in-service hours.

Population Jobs
% MST Service
(Fall 2020)
% MST Ridership
(Fall 2020)
Monterey Bay and Peninsula
(includes Carmel, Del Monte Forest, Pacific
Grove, Monterey, Del Rey Oaks, Seaside, Marina)
27%
(115,000)
28%
(48,000)
52%
(2,000 hours/week)
45%
(13,000/week)
Salinas
(includes Salinas, Boronda)
36%
(157,000)
30%
(51,000)
35%
(1,350 hours/week)
42%
(12,200/week)
113
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 11
1 Introduction
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
How has the pandemic impacted MST service and ridership? The COVID-19 pandemic has presented MST
with many significant short-term challenges,
and establishing the way out of pandemic-era
planning is another key reason for this study.

Fall 2020 patterns of ridership suggest that
most pandemic-era transit users are likely
essential workers with daytime hours, and
people on non-work trips. These riders are
using transit despite much lower service levels.

In response to reduced ridership and reduced
driver availability, MST reduced service by
over 30% in 2020.

As the pandemic recedes, transit ridership will
likely increase and may return to pre-pandemic
levels. But it will remain important to understand the needs of the people who rely most on transit, and whose travel purposes are so
essential to society that they continue even in
a public health emergency.

Ridership is way down.

As shown in Figure 7, comparing Fall 2019 to
Fall 2020:
• Weekday ridership is almost 75% lower,
from over 13,500 to less than 3,700 boardings per day on fixed routes. • Weekend ridership is about 60% lower,
and at par with weekdays. On weekends,
boardings went from about 9,000 boarding
per day to just under 3,500 per day.

Figure 7: How MST ridership
changed from Fall 2019
to Fall 2020, by day of the
week.

Figure 8: How MST
boardings (left) and total
bus departures (right) per
hour on weekdays changed
from Fall 2019 to Fall 2020.

Rush hour is nearly gone.

Prior to March 2020, MST experienced significantly higher ridership on weekdays between 7 and 8 AM and between 2 and 5 PM, and
provided a higher level of service in response.

As schools, offices, and many hospitality
businesses have either closed or significantly
reduced their operations, rush hour ridership
has come down to midday levels. Figure 8
shows that MST now experiences about the
same level of ridership from 7 AM to 6 PM,
and no longer provides additional service at
peak hours.
114
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 12
1 Introduction
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Ridership change has been
unequal
The chart in Figure 9 shows how ridership has
changed by area. The maps in Figure 10 and
Figure 11 give us further context for what we
observe. Specifically:
• Ridership has dropped the least in lowincome areas and communities of color.

This reflects the areas that are most likely to
house many essential workers, and where
people are most likely to lack alternatives
to transit for their mobility needs.
• During the pandemic, college-related
ridership has dropped the most. The
stops that experienced the largest drops
in ridership directly serve Hartnell College,
California State University - Monterey
Bay (CSUMB), and Monterey Peninsula
College (MPC). This can be explained by
the prevalence of remote learning, and the
cancellation of college-specific lines.
• Military ridership also largely disappeared in 2020, but this is due to events that occurred just before the pandemic.

Up to late 2019, local military bases had
funded 11 MST lines, 7 of which served the
Presidio of Monterey. Budget shortfalls and
changes in base command led to the cancellation of those services.

Figure 9: How
MST ridership
changed from
Fall 2019 to
Fall 2020,
by area of
Monterey
County.

Figure 10: How MST ridership changed from Fall 2019 to Fall 2020, by bus stop. The size of each dot on this map indicates weekday boardings in 2019. Red dots are stops where ridership fell the most. Green dots are where ridership fell the least.

Figure 11: Density of residents living in households below 150% of the federal poverty line. The darker and more purple the area on this map, the more people in poverty are concentrated in that area. 115
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 13
1 Introduction
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
The Challenge of Planning a Good Transit Network in Monterey County

1. Relatively few people
live in cities.

Fixed-route transit relies on the ability and
willingness of strangers to share a vehicle. To
make this possible, several people along any
bus line need to be interested in going to
places the bus is going. To achieve high ridership, you must have many people near bus lines going to many destinations.

There are people and jobs throughout
Monterey County. But there are very few
places where many people live in close
proximity, or where many jobs are located
in a small area.

Almost all of those places appear shaded in
color on the map in Figure 12, and all of MST’s
most productive lines (in ridership terms) focus
on these areas:
• JAZZ A/B: Monterey-Seaside-Sand City.
• Line 18: Monterey-Seaside-Marina
• Line 20: Salinas-Marina-Sand
City-Seaside-Monterey
• Line 41: East Salinas-Downtown Salinas
• Line 49: North Salinas-Downtown Salinas
With few exceptions1
, these are the areas
where a well-funded, well-designed and welloperated transit system might be expected to generate high ridership, in the absence
of a global pandemic. Taken together, they
account for only half the population and jobs
of Monterey County.
1 Most notably CSUMB, which does not appear in this map but is a large and growing center between Downtown Marina and Seaside.

Figure 12: Map of combined population and job density in the greater Monterey and Salinas areas. 116
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 14
1 Introduction
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit

2. There is no one
“Downtown”.

Even in a spread-out community, it may
be possible to generate significant transit
ridership if there are places where almost
everybody needs to go on a regular basis.

We can identify these places on a map, by
counting how many jobs are within walking
distance of any point. Offices, retail, hotels,
restaurants, social services, colleges, hospitals
and many other destinations are all places
where there are jobs and where people need
to go. Places where many such destinations
are within walking distance of each other are
natural hubs for transit service.

The map in Figure 13 shows us that the largest
such centers are in Downtown Monterey and
Downtown Salinas. This is why MST builds
most of its service around the Monterey Transit
Plaza and the Salinas Transit Center.

But the map also shows a major challenge
in generating high ridership even with this
design: neither of the county’s two largest
centers account for a large share of countywide jobs1.

This reflects what anyone who lives in
Monterey County already knows: there’s no
one “Downtown” where someone could go for
nearly everything they might need.

That means that any successful transit system
in Monterey County needs to connect the
centers of Monterey and Salinas with a wide
variety of smaller destinations that also generate many trips, like colleges, hospitals, smaller town centers and suburban shopping centers. 1 There were over 170,000 civilian jobs in Monterey County in 2017.

The most central point in Downtown Monterey was within 1.5 miles of 9,900 jobs (6%) The most central point in Downtown Salinas was within 1.5 miles of 14,900 jobs (9%).

Figure 13: Regional map showing the number of job within walking distance, defined as 1.5 miles, or a 30 minute walk by an able bodied adult.
117
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 15
1 Introduction
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit

3. A growing number of
people live very far from
the places they need to go.

The places that are growing the fastest are the
places that are the farthest from significant
concentrations of jobs: Marina, and the cities
of Gonzales, Soledad, Greenfield and King
City.

Even in a future with fast bus service and more
rail, when so many people live so far away
from the places they need to go, someone
has to pay the price of distance. Distance
must be crossed, which takes time and money
that can’t be spent towards other things
people value.
• More people bear the cost of owning and
maintaining more cars, to access opportunities that might be accessible by transit if they lived closer in.
• Those who can’t drive or get a ride from a
friend spend hours on transit, and hours
waiting, to cover that distance.
• To serve these often disadvantaged communities more equitably, MST needs to spend more of its budget on distance,
which means less can be spent on high
frequencies or long hours of service, undermining ridership potential. • A long cascade of social, health, economic
and environmental problems follow.

This network redesign will examine ways
that transit access can be increased despite
the high cost of distance. But unless future
housing development can be redirected closer
to where most people work, shop, and access
services, the problems caused by distance will
grow worse, and transit alone will not be the
savior.

Figure 14: Regional map showing the number of people living in locations that are near many jobs (in blue) vs. in locations that are near very few jobs (in red).

The fastest growing
places are far from
jobs and services.

Unless future housing
can be directed
closer to where
people need to go,
the problems caused
by distance will
grow worse. More
MST service to farflung places can only
mitigate this issue,
not solve it.
118
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
| 16 JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report Monterey-Salinas Transit
2 What makes transit useful?
119
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 17
2 What mak
e
s transit u
s
e
f
u
l?
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
What goals should transit serve?
Possible Goals for Transit
Transit can serve many different goals.

Different people and communities value these
goals differently. Understanding which goals
matter most in Monterey County is a key step
in redesigning the transit network.

Possible goals for transit include:
• Social Safety Net. Transit can help meet
the needs of people in situations of disadvantage, with access to essential services and jobs.
• Economic Development. Transit can give
businesses access to more workers; workers
access to more jobs; and students more
access to education and training.
• Environmental. By reducing car trips, transit
use can reduce air pollution and greenhouse
gas emissions. Frequent transit can also
support compact development and help
conserve land.
• Congestion Mitigation. Because buses
carry more people than cars, transit use
can mitigate traffic congestion by reducing Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT). This is especially important in communities with
significant jobs-housing imbalances and a
preponderance of long commutes.
• Health. Transit can support physical activity. This is partly because most riders walk to their bus stop, but also because riders
will tend to walk more in between their
transit trips.
• Personal Liberty. By providing people the
ability to reach more places than they otherwise would, a transit system can be a tool for personal liberty, empowering people
to make choices and fulfill their individual
goals.

Some of these goals are only served if many
people use transit. For example, transit can
only mitigate congestion and pollution if many
people ride the bus rather than drive. We call
such goals “ridership goals” because they are
achieved through high ridership.

Other goals are served by the simple
presence of transit. A bus line through a
neighborhood provides residents insurance
against isolation. A line may fulfill political
or social obligations, for example by getting
service close to every taxpayer or into every
municipality. We call these types of goals
“coverage goals” because they are achieved in
large part by covering geographic areas with
service, rather than by high ridership.

High ridership is not
transit’s only goal
If MST wanted to maximize transit ridership, it
would focus service where and when it could
be useful to the most potential riders. MST
would then be thinking like a business, focusing on places where its service is competitive for a large number of people.

Businesses are under no obligation to operate
where they would spend a lot of money to
reach few customers. People understand that
less populated areas will naturally have fewer
stores. We don’t describe this as stores being
unfair to those areas; they are just acting like a
business, maximizing profits.

Transit agencies are not for-profit businesses.

Most agencies have some obligation to cover
most or all of their service area. The officials
who make transit decisions hear their constituents say things like “We pay taxes too” and “If you cut this bus line, I will be stranded”. So
they decide that some coverage, even in lowridership places, is important to provide.

Transit agencies are often accused of failing to
maximize ridership, as if that were their only
goal. But in many cases, transit agencies are
intentionally operating coverage services in
areas that are not expected to generate high
ridership. Coverage services are sometimes
visible to the public as mostly-empty buses.

Agencies must balance the competing goals of
high ridership and coverage. The smaller the
agency’s budget relative to its service area, the
harder the trade-off between those goals.

Transit can serve
many purposes; which
purposes it should serve
depends on your values.

Figure 15: Is an empty bus failing? It depends why you are running it. 120
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 18
2 What makes transit useful?
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Ridership and coverage goals conflict.

Ridership and coverage goals are both justifi-
able, but they lead us in opposite directions.

Here is an illustration of how ridership and
coverage goals conflict with one another, due
to geometry and geography.

In the fictional area at top right, the little dots
indicate dwellings and commercial buildings
and other land uses. The lines indicate roads.

Most of the activity is concentrated around a
few roads, as in most places.

A transit provider pursuing only a ridership
goal would focus service on the streets where
there are large numbers of people, where
walking to transit stops is easy, and where the
lines feel direct and fast to customers. Because
service is concentrated onto fewer lines, fre-
quency is high and a bus is always coming
soon. This would result in a network like the
one at bottom-left.

If the city were pursuing only a coverage goal,
on the other hand, it would spread out services
so that every street had a bus line, as in the
network at bottom-right. As a result, all lines
would be infrequent, even those on the main
roads.

On a fixed budget, designing transit for both
ridership and coverage is a zero-sum game. In
the networks at right, each bus that the transit
provider runs down a main road, to provide
more frequent and competitive service in that
market, is not running on the neighborhood
streets, providing coverage. While an agency
can pursue ridership and provide coverage
within the same budget, it cannot do both
with the same dollar. The more it does of
one, the less it does of the other.

These illustrations also show a relationship
between coverage and complexity. Networks
offering high coverage are naturally more
complex. In high coverage networks, riders are
more likely to use just one or two lines regu-
larly. In high frequency networks, more riders
use many lines regularly, because transferring
among lines is easier and more reliable thanks
to the high frequencies.

In this imaginary place, any person could keep
the very simple high frequency network in
their head, since it consists of just two lines,
running in straight lines. They would not need
to consult a schedule to catch a bus because a
bus would always be coming soon. The coverage network would be harder to memorize, requiring people to consult a map (to understand the routing) and a schedule (to catch these infrequent services).
121
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 19
2 What mak
e
s transit u
s
e
f
u
l?
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Transit is useful because it expands where people can go.

Access and Freedom
Wherever you are, you can only reach so many
places in a reasonable amount of time. These
places can be viewed on a map as a blob
around your location, as in Figure 16.

You can think of the edges of this blob as a
“wall around your life.” Beyond this area are
things you can’t do on most days because it
simply takes too long to get there. The extent
of this area affects your options in life: for
employment, school, shopping, or any other
places you might want to reach.

The technical term for this is access, but it’s
also fair to call it freedom, in the physical
sense. If you can go to more places, you have
more choices, so in an important sense you are
more free.

How Transit Expands
Access
Transit provides value when it increases
people’s freedom. That happens by increasing the number of useful places people can access in a reasonable amount of time
without driving. On transit, the extent of your
access is determined by:
• The network, including transit lines with their
frequency, speed, and duration. These features determine how long it takes to get from any point on the network to anywhere else.
• The layout of the city. This determines
how many useful destinations can be
located near transit stops. For example,
where there are more people or useful
destinations near a given stop, good access
from that point is of value to more people.
• Your location determines which lines are
close and frequent enough to be useful.

Access and Ridership
On an individual level, access represents
convenience and the ability to do the things
you need. As such, the level of access transit
provides is part of what determines ridership, but it is also something that many people will see as a worthy goal in itself.

Here is a person.

S
S S
S
S
... in a city full of possible destinations.
45 min
...anywhere in the
highlighted area.

In 45 minutes
this person can get to...

S
S S
S
S
You can
count
the jobs
or schools
or shopping
in that area to
estimate their access.

Their access to destinations
is the number of
destinations
in that
area.

WHAT IS ACCESS?
For example:
• Access to jobs is a key concern for keeping
people employed.
• Access to many amenities from a particular location gives that location value. Real estate firms routinely outline where you
can get to by car from a particular development parcel, and this is the same analysis for transit. In cities, transit access can be an
important factor in overall property value.

If you are deciding where to live based on
whether you’ll be able to get to your job,
school, or relatives, you are asking a question
about access. Access by transit may be a factor
in that decision.

Figure 16: Access is the ability to get from your current location to places you need to go. The more places you can access in a reasonable amount of time, the more freedom you have to live your life in the way you need. 122
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 20
2 What mak
e
s transit u
s
e
f
u
l?
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Frequent transit is useful to more people and more trips.

A transit network is a pattern of lines and services, where each line:
• follows a path,
• at certain days and times (its span),
• at a given average speed, and
• buses come every certain number of
minutes. This is known as the headway or
frequency.

Frequency is invisible and easy to forget, and
yet on transit it is often the most important
factor determining where you can get to in a
given amount of time.

Frequency Is Freedom
More frequent service dramatically
improves access. High frequency reduces
travel time by providing several linked benefits:
• Shorter Waits. Unless you plan your life
around a bus schedule, the average wait
for transit is half the frequency. If a bus
comes every 30 minutes, your average wait
will be 15 minutes. But if it comes every
15 minutes, your average wait will be 7.5
minutes.
• Faster Transfers. To go further than the
places on the bus line you happen to be
on, you’ll need to connect to another line.

Frequency makes this easy, because the
next bus is always coming soon.
• Easier Recovery from Disruption.

Frequent service is more reliable, because
if a bus breaks down you don’t have to wait
as long until the next one shows up.
• Spontaneity and Freedom. When transit
comes every few minutes, there’s no need
to build your day around a bus schedule.

You can turn up at the stop and go, whenever you want.

Frequency and Ridership
The plot in Figure 17 shows all the lines operated by 33 different U.S. transit agencies, at various points in the 2010s.

Each line is located on the plot based on its
frequency and its productivity (boardings per
service hour). More frequent service is to the
left, and more productive service is higher
up. The shade of each hexagon indicates the
number of lines in that place on the graph.

The plot shows that higher productivity is correlated with higher frequency, even though higher frequencies require more service hours. In other
words, ridership appears to rise exponentially as frequency increases.

This is a two-way street: transit agencies rarely
run high frequency service in places where
they expect low ridership. But conversely, if
frequency isn’t very high, the amount of ridership transit can attract is fundamentally limited.

What is frequent enough?
Frequency is expensive, so it’s important to
think about just how frequent service needs to
be.

A frequency of 15 minutes or better has
a good chance of being useful to someone
whenever they need to travel, especially if that
frequency extends over many hours of the day,
every day.

Adequate frequency depends on trip
length, because it doesn’t make sense to wait
long to go a short distance. For many people,
it wouldn’t make sense to wait 15 minutes
to go half a mile, because you could probably walk to your destination in that time. But it might make sense to wait that long to go
several miles across town.

Figure 17: Transit Productivity and Frequency in 34 cities across the USA. Lines that operate more frequently tend to attract a higher number of riders per hour of service. This is because frequency makes transit trips shorter and more reliable. 123
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 21
2 What mak
e
s transit u
s
e
f
u
l?
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Transit’s ability to expand access depends on the build environment.

Creating a high-access transit network isn’t just
about faster or more frequent service. Many
factors outside the control of MST – such as
land use, development, urban design, street
networks – affect transit’s usefulness. This is
why land use and infrastructure decisions
made by the cities and other agencies are
an essential part of transit’s success.

The built environment factors shown in Figure
18 are critical to facilitating a broadly useful
transit network:

1. Density. Where there are many residents,
jobs and activities in an area, there are
many places people might want to go.

2. Walkability. An area only becomes accessible by transit if most people can safely and comfortably walk to and from the nearest
transit stops.

3. Linearity. Direct paths between many
destinations are faster and cheaper for MST
to operate. Straight lines are also easier to
understand and more appealing to most
potential riders.

4. Proximity. The longer the distance
between two places to serve, the more
expensive it is to connect them. Areas with
continuous development are more costeffective to serve than areas with big gaps.

5. Mix of Uses. When there is a mix of landuses along a direct path, transit can provide direct access to a broad range of destinations. Mixed-use transit corridors also tend to be very productive, because people ride
in both directions at many times of the day.

Regardless of the intricacies of local geography, these five elements determine where transit can be useful for many people, at a
relatively low cost.

The Ridership Recipe: Higher Ridership, Lower Costs
Density
Linearity Proximity
WaLkabiLity How many people, jobs, and activities are near each transit stop? Can people walk to and from the stop? Can transit run in reasonably straight lines? Does transit have to traverse long gaps? It must also be safe to
cross the street at a
stop. You usually need
the stops on both sides
for two-way travel!
The dot at the center of
these circles is a transit
stop, while the circle is
a 1/4-mile radius.

The whole area is
within 1/4 mile, but
only the black-shaded
streets are within a
1/4-mile walk.

Short distances between many destinations are faster and cheaper to serve.

Long distances between destinations means a higher cost per passenger.

A direct path between any two destinations makes transit appealing.

Destinations located off the straight
path force transit to deviate,
discouraging people who want to ride
through, and increasing cost.

Many people and jobs are within walking distance of transit.

Fewer people and jobs are within walking distance of transit.

1. The Ridership Recipe: Higher Ridership, Lower Costs
Density
Linearity Proximity
WaLkabiLity How many people, jobs, and activities are near each transit stop? Can people walk to and from the stop? Can transit run in reasonably straight lines? Does transit have to traverse long gaps? It must also be safe to
cross the street at a
stop. You usually need
the stops on both sides
for two-way travel!
The dot at the center of
these circles is a transit
stop, while the circle is
a 1/4-mile radius.

The whole area is
within 1/4 mile, but
only the black-shaded
streets are within a
1/4-mile walk.

Short distances between many destinations are faster and cheaper to serve.

Long distances between destinations means a higher cost per passenger.

A direct path between any two destinations makes transit appealing.

Destinations located off the straight
path force transit to deviate,
discouraging people who want to ride
through, and increasing cost.

Many people and jobs are within walking distance of transit.

Fewer people and jobs are within walking distance of transit.

2. 3. 4.

5. These geometric facts pose a difficult
political challenge. A transit system focused
on cost-effectively providing the most useful
service possible tends to serve its constituents
unevenly, concentrating service in areas where
buses can run straight and demand is high.

Figure 18: More Freedom, Lower Costs - Five key built environment factors that determine how useful a transit network can be.
124
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 22
2 What mak
e
s transit u
s
e
f
u
l?
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Density and Walkability in Monterey County
Because dense areas often support multiple
land uses in close proximity, density and walkability often go hand in hand. Nonetheless, there’s nothing inherently walkable about a
high-density neighborhood.

These aerial photos at right show three
typical mixes of density and walkability in the
Monterey County region. Specifically:
• High density/high walkability-Cannery
Row: This area features one of the densest
mixes of commercial and residential uses in
the County, although it is worth noting that
even here, most buildings don’t exceed
three stories. Many features make this area
attractive for walking. Sidewalks and paths
abound. There are relatively few places like
this in Monterey County, and they tend to
be economically exclusive.
• High density/low walkability-North
Salinas: This area in North of Salinas
has fairly high density, but is much less
walkable. A combination of landscaping, extremely wide streets, serpentine roads, and dead-end roads backing into
Highway 101 makes it impractical to walk
in a straight path. There are several similar
areas in Monterey County, particularly in
Salinas, Seaside, and Marina. They tend to
be disproportionately low-income.
• Low density/low walkability-Monterey
Vista: This area of Monterey includes
detached houses on a street network with
numerous dead ends. There are no services
or shopping destinations to walk to nearby.

Because these three neighborhoods are
built very differently, providing the exact
same amount of transit service in each area
will result in very difficult access and ridership outcomes.

Cannery Row, Monterey
High Density; High Walkability
North Salinas
High Density;Low Walkability
Monterey Vista Neighborhood
Low Density;Low Walkability
Prescott
Lighthouse
Hoffman
Cannery Row
David
Eardley
Laurel
Laurel
Main
Main
Mar Vista
Gayuba
Ventura
Gayuba
Figure 19: Examples of
Density and Walkability in
Monterey County
125
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 23
2 What mak
e
s transit u
s
e
f
u
l?
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Density and Walkability in Monterey County. Who lives near jobs? Another way to see this is by thinking about
how many opportunities (density) are near me
in a walking distance (walkability).

The map on the right shows how many jobs
are within 1.5 miles (roughly a 30 minute walk
for an able-bodied adult) in most of Monterey
County. Areas represented with a dark shade
of blue have many jobs nearby, while areas in a
light shade of blue have few.

Depending on where you live, the likelihood
you are able to walk to your job or other places
you might need to go is reflected by your
neighborhood’s shade on this map.

In cities like Salinas and Monterey, as you move
farther from Downtown, it becomes harder to
walk to jobs, services, recreation, etc.

In some areas, like central Marina and the
northeast side of Salinas, there are both
relatively high population densities and relatively few places to walk to within 30 minutes walking. These are the kinds of conditions
which can create significant demand for transit.

Cities in the South County tend to have connected street grids in a compact area, but they are still not very walkable in that there are
not that many jobs and destinations available
locally. As a result, South County residents
tend to need to travel longer distances to get
to the places they need to go. MST can serve
some of these long trips, but many of them will
inevitably be more practical by other means.

Figure 20: Regional map showing the number of job within walking distance, defined as 1.5 miles, or a 30 minute walk by an able bodied adult.
126
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 24
2 What makes transit useful?
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Linearity in Monterey County
The major factor governing transit operating
cost is a vehicle and driver’s time on the line.

Longer distances take more time to drive. So,
the more people and destinations a line can
serve in a short distance, the less it costs to
serve each rider.

Because of the way the cities in the County
have developed, some major destinations can
be served very directly by transit, while others
require the bus to twist and turn off its path.

The examples on this page contrast two situa-
tions a major destination requires more or less
deviation from a straight path: • Somewhat Linear: Salinas Valley Memorial Hospital. The hospital is located
directly on a reasonable straight street
(Romie) with pedestrian facilities that can
accommodate people getting on and off a
bus. A logical transit line can connect this
place in a direct path to other origins and
destinations.
• Not Linear: Community Hospital of the
Monterey Peninsula (CHOMP). Similar
scale facility, but impossible to serve linearly.

Any bus lines serving this hospital must
deviate off Highway 1. As a result, anyone
travelling between Carmel-by-the-Sea and
Monterey on the bus has to sit through the
time it takes to pull off of the freeway, drive
through the parking lot, and come back.

Putting development at the top of a hill or at
the end of a long cul-de sac makes it harder
to serve conveniently.

To support good transit service, it’s impor-
tant that major destinations locate on the
way between other places that support
good transit service. A linear street pattern is
critical for MST to be able to run straight lines,
but beyond that, a linear pattern of density
and development is also important.

Salinas
Valley
Memorial
Hospital
Salinas
Valley
Memorial
Hospital
CHOMPHighway 1 High way 1 Romie Ln Pajaro
Figure 21: Examples of Linearity in Monterey County
127
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 25
2 What makes transit useful?
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Proximity in Monterey County
MST decides where transit goes, but it has
no control over where jobs, housing and
opportunities are located. Housing and job
locations are decided by cities, counties, state
and federal authorities, banks and businesses,
but they directly impact MST’s potential to be
useful to people.

The map in Figure 22 shows how many civilian
jobs are within 10 miles of most locations in
Monterey County and adjacent areas. Areas
shown in a dark shade of blue have many jobs
within 10 miles, and areas in a light shade have
few.
10 miles is significant as a distance, because
transit tends to be most cost-effective at
serving trips that are in the range of 1-15
miles. Dark blue areas on this map are areas
where a bus could in theory take people
to many places in a reasonable amount of
time.

People who live in the white and light blue
areas in South County need to travel very far
to reach economic opportunities. It is possible
to serve them with transit, but the cost per
rider will inevitably be higher, and the service
will inevitably be less effective. People who
have no choice but to live far from where they
need to go will spend more time than they
want travelling, be it on the bus or in a car.

Figure 22: Jobs within a 10 mile distance
128
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
| 26 JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report Monterey-Salinas Transit
3 The Challenges and Opportunities
of Monterey County’s Geography
129
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 27
3 The Challengesand Opportunitiesof Monterey County’s Geography Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
The Market and Need for Transit
In this chapter, we present and discuss data
that inform two different types of considerations in transit planning: • Where are the strongest markets for transit, with potential for high ridership
and low operating costs?
• Where are there moderate or severe
needs for transit, where coverage ser-
vices may be important even if they do
not attract high ridership?
A “strong transit market” is mostly defined by
where people are, and how many of them are
there, rather than by who people are. We learn
about transit needs mostly by examining who
people are and what life situation they are in.

Measuring Demand and
Need
On the following pages, these maps and
diagrams help us visualize potential transit
markets and needs
1 :
• Residential density • Job density • Activity density (combined residential and jobs)
• Maps of walkability • Pre-pandemic commute patterns • Zero-Vehicle households • Poverty density map • Density of Residents under age 18 (Youth) • Density of senior residents 1 The maps in this chapter are based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau (2010 Census and 2018 American Community Survey) How to Use These
Measures
No one measure tells us that a place has high
ridership potential or high needs. Rather, we
must consider them in combination.

Designing for Ridership
If you asked a transit planner to draw you a
very high-ridership bus line, that planner would
look mostly at densities of all residents and
jobs; at the walkability of streets and neighborhoods; and at the cost of running a bus line long enough to reach them.

Only secondarily would that planner look
into the income or age of those residents or
workers. However, the “who” attribute that
has the strongest influence on transit ridership potential is income. A lower income person is often more likely to choose transit
than someone with a higher income. This is
especially true in outlying areas where driving
and parking cars is so easy, so transit tends to
be used mostly by people who don’t have the
option to drive.

Designing for Coverage
If you asked a transit planner to draw a line
that helped as many people with severe needs
as possible, they would look at where low
income people, seniors, youth and people with
disabilities live and where they need to go.

The densities at which these people live
matters, because at higher densities a single
bus stop can be useful to more people in
need. However, the transit planner might also
try to get the line close to small numbers of
people. In fact, the more distant and scattered
people are, the more isolated they can be and
the more critically they might need access to
transit.

Civil Rights and Equity
Another important set of maps in this chapter
is not strictly related to need but rather to civil
rights. These maps show where members of
different racial and ethnic groups live.

Unequal treatment on the basis of race or
ethnicity is prohibited by Civil Rights Act of
1964. (Unequal treatment on the basis of other
characteristics, including income and age, is
also prohibited by law.)
A person’s race or ethnicity does not tell us if
they need transit, or if they have a propensity
to use transit. However, we know that race and
ethnicity are correlated with income.

Providing equitable and supportive levels of
service to people of all races and ethnicities,
even in areas that are costly to serve or that do
not generate much transit ridership, can be an
important element of a coverage goal.

Data Limitations
Detailed Census 2020 data is not yet available
at the time of publication of this report.

The majority of the maps shown in this chapter
are based on 5-year American Community
Survey (ACS) data produced by the U.S.

Census Bureau for the 2014-2018 period.

As such, they may not reflect very recent
changes in population and job distribution
that may have occurred in 2019 and 2020, or
changes that started after 2014.

While the larger patterns of population distri-
butions and population change shown in the
maps likely reflect current reality, there may be
deficiencies in specific locations of high growth
(or population loss) in the second half of the
2010s.
130
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 28
3 The Challengesand Opportunitiesof Monterey County’s Geography Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Indicators of Demand: Residential Density
Figure 23: Map of residential density in the Monterey-Salinas area Anyone who travels makes at least one roundtrip from their home each day. This makes residential density an essential consideration
when thinking about transit market and where
to locate service.

Figure 23 is a map of residential density taking
a closer look at Monterey and Salinas, and the
adjacent cities. Figure 24 on the next page is a
map of the same data, but zoomed out to see
the Gonzales, Soledad, Greenfield and King
CIty.

It is important to understand that these maps
only represent one side of the overall transit
market. The other half is where people go
once they leave their homes, such as offices,
schools, universities, retail, recreational areas,
houses of worship and other gathering places.

This map shows that the areas of highest
residential density are located in Seaside and
Salinas. Most of the residential density in these
cities consists of tightly spaced one to two
story house units on small lots.

Density in Seaside is located mostly east of
Fremont Blvd, in an almost totally residential
area with very little mix of uses.

Salinas in general has the highest density rela-
tive to other cities in the County. However, the
mostly undeveloped area south and east of
Natividad Hospital (around Laurel Drive) splits
the areas of high density into two zones: one
starting in the core of the city and spreading
north, and the other one in the Alisal neigh-
borhood, east of the city.

The highest density pockets in Salinas and
Seaside are also located in very walkable
streets, making them capable of generating
substantial transit demand.

There are other isolated pockets of density
in Marina, Monterey, Pacific Grove and
131
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 29
3 The Challengesand Opportunitiesof Monterey County’s Geography Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Indicators of Demand: Residential Density
Castroville. Marina has grown faster than any
other community over the last ten years, and
it seems likely that similar map prepared five
to ten years from now would show significantly
higher density in the area around CSUMB.

In the North County, the development pattern
of Castroville (a small town) contrasts clearly
with Prunedale (a large semi-rural area). But
Castroville is too small to be a significant
transit market on its own. However, it is on the
way to Watsonville, where many people and
jobs are located.

In South County, the only pockets of density
are the series of small towns around Highway
101.

Figure 25: Housing typology in Salinas. Figure 24: Regional map of residential density. 132
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 30
3 The Challengesand Opportunitiesof Monterey County’s Geography Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Indicators of Demand: Job Density
Figure 26: Map of job density in the Monterey-Salinas area Job density can tell us not just about where
people might be going to work, but also about
important destinations people travel to: where
they go for services, shopping, social life and
other activities. Civic and service destinations
like hospitals and universities also appear on
job density maps because they have so many
employees.

Only 5% of people in Monterey County live in
areas where job densities exceed 5,000 jobs
per square mile. And most of the highest job
density in the county is concentrated in a few
places in Monterey and Salinas.

Monterey has relatively low residential densi-
ties, but the map in Figure 26 shows that it
does hold high job densities, especially by
the Aquarium (Cannery Row) and Downtown,
along the commercial streets of Washington
St., Alvarado St., and Munras Ave.

These areas matter not just because they
are places where people work, but also
places that are likely to have a high density
of customers, particularly in the retail and
service sectors. Smaller centers of employ-
ment and services also appear on this map,
in Pacific Grove, Sand City, Marina and
Carmel-by-the-Sea.

Salinas also has a high density employment
between Blanco Road and Highway 101. A few
of the main spots in this area are Downtown
Salinas, Salinas Valley Memorial Hospital, and
Hartnell College.

One place notably missing on this map is
California State University (CSUMB) in Marina.

This is mostly due to a quirk of census geog-
raphy: CSUMB is located in a large census
block group and so its job density appears to
be low. Nonetheless, MST knows that many
people will travel to and from CSUMB for work
and school.
133
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 31
3 The Challengesand Opportunitiesof Monterey County’s Geography Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Indicators of Demand: Job Density
Outside of the greater Monterey and Salinas
areas, the nearest areas of high employment
density are in Watsonville, particularly along
highway 129 and Main St.

Areas in the rest of the region tend to have
significantly lower job densities, even if they
support many jobs. This is particularly true for
agricultural jobs, which tend to be spread out
over a very large area.

Smaller cities like Soledad, Greenfield and King
City have relatively low job densities overall
compared to more urban areas, despite the
presence of some regionally-significant loca-
tions like the Soledad prison complex, Mee
Memorial Hospital in King City.

Figure 27: Regional map of job density.
134
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 32
3 The Challengesand Opportunitiesof Monterey County’s Geography Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Indicators of Demand: Activity Density
Figure 28: Map of combined population and job density in the Monterey-Salinas area The maps in Figure 28 and Figure 29 allow us
to see not only high density, but also the mix
of activities in an area, which contributes to
ridership potential.

Transit lines serving purely residential neigh-
borhoods tend to be used in only one
direction each morning and evening rush hour.

In contrast, on corridors where residential,
commercial and other uses are mixed, people
are traveling in both directions so buses can
be full in both directions. Travel demand also
goes beyond the weekday rush hours, and
is high throughout the midday, evening and
weekends, as people move in all directions for
work, socializing, shopping and other activities.

These maps use a three-color scale: residential
density is shown in shades of blue, job density
is shown in shades of yellow, and places where
residents and jobs are both present are shown
in shades of red. The darker the color, the
greater the number of jobs or residents in the
area.

Note that some busy places like malls and
hospitals are underrepresented on these maps,
because only the workers are counted, and
not the many visitors. In addition, data from
schools and universities counts only employ-
ees, not students, even though many students
commute every day.

By comparing this map to the map of the
existing network on page 6, we can see
that many places in Salinas have both relatively
high density and a significant mix of uses, and
yet are mostly served by infrequent lines. We
can also see that all the densest places in the
Monterey Peninsula have at least some transit
service, but these areas tend to have high resi-
dential density or high employment density,
not both.
135
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 33
3 The Challengesand Opportunitiesof Monterey County’s Geography Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Indicators of Demand: Activity Density
Ultimately, the activity density maps allow us to
see three ingredients in the Ridership Recipe:
high density, arranged in linear patterns, and
proximate to other dense places.

We can see how some mix dense places like
Monterey, Seaside and Salinas are dense
and proximate to each other, and others
like Soledad, Greenfield and King City are
placed along a linear path, but very far from
opportunities.

Figure 29: Regional map of combined population and job density. 136
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 34
3 The Challengesand Opportunitiesof Monterey County’s Geography Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Indicators of Demand: Walkability
Figure 30: Map of Street Grid Connectivity in the Monterey-Salinas area Walkability is the second ingredient in the
Ridership Recipe because it governs whether
the people nearby can actually reach the
transit stop. How many potential riders nearby
can actually reach a transit stop?
Street connectivity is fundamental to walk-
ability – it governs whether a walking trip is
possible at all, and how long it is. It also has
influence over how safe and comfortable a
walking trip is, because poor street connectiv-
ity causes arterial roads to be wider, and safe
crossings of those roads to be farther apart.

The map in Figure 30 illustrates how con-
nective the street network is, as a proxy
for walkability. Only the street network is
considered, so areas lacking in sidewalks,
lighting, or safe crossings are generally less
walkable than they appear on this map.

In historic neighborhoods that were laid out
before the private car was dominant, nearly
all transportation was originally done on foot,
by bicycle or by transit. A walkable and wellconnected street network was therefore of existential importance to the usefulness and
value of land, and so neighborhoods built in
those times have very high street connectivity.

Old town centers in Monterey, Pacific Grove
and Salinas epitomize this urban form.

More recent developments can have high
street connectivity, even without a traditional
grid of streets. However, many newer develop-
ments are designed to minimize car traffic past
the most valuable real estate. This is done in
part with intentionally poor street connectivity,
as is evident in some of the more recent devel-
opments at the northern edges of Salinas.

Areas adjacent to highways (e.g. Highway 101
in Salinas, or Highway 1) and areas surrounded
by big lots and cul-de-sac developments are
mostly inaccessible on foot, due to a lack of
connections.
137
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 35
3 The Challengesand Opportunitiesof Monterey County’s Geography Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Indicators of Demand: Commute Patterns
The map in Figure 31 shows the major prepandemic (2017) commute patterns in most of Monterey County. Specifically, this map shows: • For each community, a dot sized according to the number of people who commute
daily within their community. For example,
about 25,000 people commuted daily from
a home in Salinas to a workplace in Salinas.
• Between communities, arrows that show
where people commute to and from. For
example, about 3,400 people commuted
on a daily basis from Salinas to Monterey.

To make this map more legible, we only show
communities with at least 1,000 total commute
trips, and flows of at least 1,500 daily com-
mutes between communities.

But there is also a ridership-related rationale
to this simplification: transit can only efficiently
serve commute flows where many people are
going to similar places. So while a few people
do commute from, e.g. the Carmel Valley to
Del Monte Forest, the numbers are too low to
justify designing a ridership-oriented transit
service that connect these two areas.

This map tells us two important things: • Salinas is the largest internal commute market, by far. This is consistent with
Salinas’ position as the place with the
highest population and number of jobs.
• Monterey is the largest attractor of
commute trips from other places, but
especially from Salinas, Marina, Seaside and
Pacific Grove.

The implications of this are clear: a purely
ridership-oriented transit network would
concentrate on local lines within Salinas,
and on lines connecting Salinas, Marina,
Seaside, Monterey and Pacific Grove.

Figure 31: Regional map of major commute patterns.
138
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 36
3 T
he Chall
eng
e
sand Opport
uniti
e
sof Mont
e
rey C
o
unty’
s Geograph
y
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Indicators of Demand and Need: Zero Vehicle Households
Figure 32: Map of the density of zero-vehicle households in the Monterey-Salinas area Another factor affecting transit’s competitiveness in an area is the availability of personal vehicles. The map at right shows the density of
households with zero vehicles.

While people who don’t own cars don’t use
transit by default, they have fewer options than
those people who do have access to personal
automobiles. As a result, if transit is a useful
method (fast, reliable, available when they
need to travel) of reaching the places they
need to go, it can be a compelling option.

If transit does not present a realistic travel
option, then people without cars will find
other ways of reaching the places they need
to go, by getting rides from friends or family
members, cycling, walking, or using taxis or
ridesharing services.

Only 5% of the households in Monterey
County don’t have a vehicle. In the MontereySalinas area, the highest densities of zero-vehicle households are found in Seaside
and Salinas, in many of the same areas that
have high densities of residents in poverty.

There also appears to be a relationship in
some areas (e.g. Pacific Grove) between concentrations of seniors and households with zero vehicles.
139
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 37
3 T
he Chall
eng
e
sand Opport
uniti
e
sof Mont
e
rey C
o
unty’
s Geograph
y
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Indicators of Demand and Need: Zero Vehicle Households
Overall, the concentration of households with
zero vehicles is low outside the urbanized area.

This reflects the higher importance of vehicle
ownership when people need to travel very
long distances on a regular basis. This is true
even though many rural communities have
relatively high poverty rates.

Figure 33: Regional map of the density of zero-vehicle households. 140
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 38
3 T
he Chall
eng
e
sand Opport
uniti
e
sof Mont
e
rey C
o
unty’
s Geograph
y
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Indicators of Demand and Need: Residents in Poverty
Figure 34: Map of the density of residents below 150% of the Federal Poverty Level in the Monterey-Salinas area When many people live on low incomes in a
given area, this can either suggest a strong
market for transit or a significant need for
coverage service, depending on the built
environment around them.

The more carefully a person must manage
their money, the more attractive transit’s value
proposition may be. This doesn’t mean that
lower-income people will automatically choose
transit because it’s the cheapest option.

Transit service must be useful and reliable
for the kinds of trips they need to make, to
compete for their ridership. For a long time the
transit industry has described lower-income
people as “dependent” riders and higher-income people as “choice” riders. Yet the drop in ridership over the past decade demonstrates that lower-income people have some choices too!
If transit doesn’t actually allow people to make
the trips they need in a reasonable amount of
time, even lower-income people will not use it.

They will seek other options, such as buying a
used car or getting a ride from a friend, even if
those cause financial or social stress.

The maps in Figure 34 and Figure 35 show the
density of people in poverty in the Monterey
and Salinas area. Around 25% of residents
in Monterey County are under 150% of the
federal poverty line.

In Salinas, Seaside and Marina, the densest
areas in Salinas tend to also be home to many
people in poverty. These three communities
together account for about 60% of County
residents under 150% of the federal poverty
level.

These concentrations of low-income residents
in the densest places in the county, relatively
close to job opportunities suggest significant
141
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 39
3 T
he Chall
eng
e
sand Opport
uniti
e
sof Mont
e
rey C
o
unty’
s Geograph
y
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Indicators of Demand and Need: Residents in Poverty
markets for transit service, if it is convenient
enough.

On the other hand, areas with high densities
of low-income residents in southern Monterey
County are not near many opportunities. It is
much more costly for MST to serve these areas
than similarly disadvantaged neighborhoods in
Salinas or Seaside because of the long distances with low demand that MST buses have to traverse.

So although these communities are places that
MST might want to serve due to high needs,
their isolation should limit any expectations of
high ridership on bus lines serving them.

Figure 35: Regional map of the density of residents below 150% of the Federal Poverty Level. 142
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 40
3 The Challengesand Opportunitiesof Monterey County’s Geography Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Indicators of Need: Seniors and Youth
Figure 36: Map of the density of seniors (ages 65 and above) in the Monterey-Salinas area The map in Figure 36 show the density of
senior residents in the Monterey-Salinas area.

Seniors constitute around 13% of the total
population of Monterey County.

Seniors tend to be spread out among the
general population, and so senior density is
similar in many places to overall population
density. The main exceptions to this here are
the notably high concentrations of seniors
in Pacific Grove and parts of Carmel-by-theSea, as well as the tendency for seniors to live mostly in outlying neighborhoods in Salinas.

Some seniors cannot drive and may be more
likely to use transit. As a group, senior-headed
households are less likely to own cars than the
general population, an advantage for transit in
places where other characteristics for high rid-
ership (such as density, walkability) are present.

But seniors’ travel needs and preferences are,
on average, different from those of younger
people. Seniors tend to be more sensitive to
walking distance, because of limits on their
physical ability. Seniors also tend to be less
sensitive to long waits, because many are
retired and have a relatively flexible schedule.

For the same reason, seniors are, on average,
less likely to be discouraged by slow or indi-
rect lines that take them out of their way.

Because of these factors, transit service
designed primarily to meet the needs of
seniors rarely attracts high overall rider-
ship. Most riders who are employed, in school
or caring for kids in school will find service
with long waits to be intolerable. Thus, the
amount of focus that transit agencies place on
meeting the needs of seniors should be care-
fully balanced with the needs and desires of
the broader community.
143
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 41
3 The Challengesand Opportunitiesof Monterey County’s Geography Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Indicators of Need: Seniors and Youth
Figure 37: Map of the density of youths (ages 18 and under) in the Monterey-Salinas area Just as transit coverage can meet the needs
of seniors who cannot or choose not to drive,
transit coverage can also meet the needs of
children and teenagers who are too young to
drive.

The map at right shows the density of resi-
dents under the age of 18 in each Census
block group in the Monterey-Salinas area.

Children under the age of 18 constitute around
26% of the total population in the County, or
twice as many people as the senior population.

Because low-income households in Monterey
County tend to have more children, the
highest densities of residents under 18 tend
to correlate with higher densities of people in
poverty.
144
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 42
3 T
he Chall
eng
e
sand Opport
uniti
e
sof Mont
e
rey C
o
unty’
s Geograph
y
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Indicators of Need: Seniors and Youth
Figure 38: Regional map of the density of seniors (ages 65 and above) Figure 39: Regional map of the density of youths (ages 18 and under) 145
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 43
3 The Challengesand Opportunitiesof Monterey County’s Geography Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Civil Rights: Race and Ethnicity
Figure 40: Map showing where people of different races and ethnicities live in the Monterey-Salinas area The map in Figure 40 shows where people
of different races and ethnicities live in the
Monterey-Salinas Area. Each dot represents
5 residents. Where many dots are very close
together, the overall density of residents is
higher. Where dots of a single color predomi-
nate, people of a particular race or ethnicity
make up most of that area’s residents.

While information about people’s income tells
us something about their potential interest in
or need for transit, information about ethnicity
or race do not alone tell us how likely someone
is to use transit. However, avoiding placing
disproportionate burdens on minority
people, through transportation decisions, is
essential to the transit planning process.

Transit agency policies that protect minority
people from negative impacts are one type
of coverage goal, because they pursue an
outcome that is valuable regardless of ridership. Such policies might state, for example, that service to high-density and high-minority
neighborhoods should be prioritized even if
such service would not maximize ridership.

It is important to understand where large
numbers of non-white people live, so that
public outreach during this project can be sen-
sitive to language and cultural barriers, and so
that service changes can be evaluated in light
of impacts to protected people.

As of 2018, approximately 70% of the
population in Monterey County identified
as non-White. The largest group is Latinos,
who account for 58% of the population. In
Salinas, 80% percent of people are Latino,
while they account for 37% of the population in
Seaside/Marina/Sand City, and only 13% in the
Monterey Peninsula.

Outside of the urbanized areas, cities in
the South County and Castroville are all
146
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 44
3 The Challengesand Opportunitiesof Monterey County’s Geography Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Civil Rights: Race and Ethnicity
Figure 41: Regional map showing where people of different races and ethnicities live predominantly Latino, while Prunedale and the
hills south of Monterey and Salinas are pre-
dominantly white.

It’s important to note that Latinos are most
likely to be living in dense neighborhoods
where many people have low incomes, and
Latinos are also the predominant population in
the more isolated high-need communities.

This suggests that all of MST’s public-facing
communications should be available in both
English and Spanish, including messages
provided at transit centers and on the buses
themselves.
147
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
| 45 JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report Monterey-Salinas Transit
4 MST’s Fixed-Route Network
148
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 46
4 MST’
s Fixed-R
o
u
te Network
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Regional Network
Figure 42: Map of MST’s regional network in early 2021, with lines color-coded by frequency. Local lines are shown in gray.

MST’s regional role
MST’s county-wide scope and governance
structure both tend to emphasize service to
many communities over a large area.

This is reinforced by local geography: the
Monterey Bay and Salinas Valley have historically developed as a string of small to mid-sized cities following Highway 1 and
Highway 101. These communities have overlapping retail, social services and employment markets resulting in large amounts of intercity
travel.

Furthermore, there has long been a gap in
commercial long-distance bus service between
Paso Robles and Salinas, reflecting the relatively “empty quarter” of California’s central coast.

As a result, MST has carved out a relatively
unique role as a public agency that handles
both local and long-distance services, with
service extending as far as Paso Robles to the
south and San Jose to the north.

As of early 2021, several of MST’s intercity lines
have been suspended due to COVID-related
service shifts. This includes long-distance
services to San Jose and Santa Cruz, as well
as secondary intercity lines like Marina-toWatsonville.

Regional Lines, early 2021
As of early 2021, MST is operating the following regional lines, shown on the map in Figure 42:
• Line 20. Salinas to Monterey.
• Line 21. Salinas to Pebble Beach.
• Line 22. Monterey to Big Sur.
• Line 23. Salinas to King City.
• Line 24. Monterey to Carmel Valley.
• Line 28. Salinas to Watsonville (via
Castroville)
• Line 29. Salinas to Watsonville (via
Prunedale)
As can be seen on the map, the frequency and
distances covered by these lines vary greatly.
• Lines 20 (Salinas-Monterey) and 24 (Carmel
Valley) operate all-day at consistent
frequencies (every 30 and 40 minutes,
respectively).
• Line 23 (King City) operates almost hourly
all day, but has extra runs at peak hours,
and two 2-hour gaps in the middle of the
day.
• Lines 28 and 29 add up to hourly service
between Salinas Transit Center and
Watsonville, but for anyone on the way, it’s
every two hours.
• Line 21 (Salinas-Pebble Beach) is a peakonly extension to Line 20. It runs three times in the morning, and three times in the
afternoon.
• Line 22 (Big Sur) runs only three times per
day.
149
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 47
4 MST’
s Fixed-R
o
u
te Network
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Core Local Network
Figure 43: Map of MST’s fixed-route network in the greater Salinas and Monterey areas in early 2021, with lines color-coded by frequency.

The vast majority of MST service (85% of
in-service hours1) is operated in the greater
Monterey and Salinas areas, represented on
the map in Figure 43.

Some important facts about the MST network
can be gleaned from this map:
• The greater Monterey and Salinas areas
each have their own local network. Local
lines in Salinas are generally numbered in
the 40s.
• Three lines stand out in particular:
o Line 41 in East Salinas. This line operates every 15 minutes, seven days a week. This is MST’s only “frequent”
line, in the sense that the bus comes
often, and consistently throughout the
day and week.
o The JAZZ A and JAZZ B, from the
Aquarium to Sand City via Monterey
and Seaside. These two lines combine
to operate nearly every 15 minutes on
weekdays and every 30 minutes on
weekends. However, the JAZZ lines’ frequency is more variable, largely because the JAZZ A does a long deviation to
serve Monterey Peninsula College in the
southbound direction.
o Line 20 from Salinas to Monterey, MST’s
primary regional line, which runs every
30 minutes, seven days a week.
• All other lines operate once an hour or less.

These lines tend to have long and circuitous
routings, with many deviations, intended to
maximize the area covered by bus service.
1 The total number of hours spent by all MST buses on the road and in service.
150
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 48
4 MST’
s Fixed-R
o
u
te Network
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Service Frequency by Line and Time of Day
15 20 30 60 90 ●
4 AM
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
PM
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
AM
4 AM
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
PM
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
AM
Jazz A/B Aquarium-Sand City 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 Jazz A 30 30 30 36 36 36 36 30 30 30 30 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 Jazz B 30 30 30 36 36 36 36 30 30 30 30 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 1 Asilomar-Monterey 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 2 Pacific Grove-Carmel 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 3 CHOMP-Monterey ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 7 Del Rey Oaks-Monterey ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
11 Carmel-Sand City ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 16 Marina-CSUMB 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 18 Monterey-Marina 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 20 Monterey-Salinas 60 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 60 60 60 60 60 90 60 60 60 60 60 60 30 30 30 30 30 30 60 60 60 21 Pebble Beach-Salinas ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 22 Big Sur-Monterey ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 23 Salinas-King City 25 60 60 60 60 90 90 90 90 90 60 30 60 60 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 24 Carmel Valley 40 30 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 60 60 60 60 60 30 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 28 Watsonville-Salinas ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 29 Watsonville-Salinas ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 41 Salinas-Alisal 35 30 30 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 30 30 30 40 40 40 25 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 30 60 60 Longline to Northridge 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 40 40 40 25 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 30 60 60 42 Westridge-Alisal 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 44 Northridge-Salinas 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 45 Northridge-Salinas 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 48 Airport Business Center 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 49 Salinas-Santa Rita 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 61 Veteran's Shuttle ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 84 King City-Paso Robles ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 91 Sand City -Pacific Meadows ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 92 CHOMP-Pacific Meadows ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 93 Ryan Ranch-Monterey ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● 94 Sand C ity-Carmel ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
95 Williams Ranch-Northridge ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

WEEKDAYS WEEKEND
Monterey-Salinas Transit 2020 Route Frequencies
The bus comes about every:
15 minutes
or better
16-25
minutes
26-39
minutes
40-60
minutes
Over 60
minutes
Limited (8 trips or less
per day)
Figure 44: Frequency table, showing how often buses on MST lines operate, by time and day of the week.

Low frequencies on nearly
every line mean that transit
in Monterey County is
difficult to use and unlikely to
attract new riders.
151
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 49
4 MST’
s Fixed-R
o
u
te Network
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Funding source Why cancelled?
2020 Lines covering
the same areas Areas no longer served
4 Carmel - Carmel Rancho 22,91,92
8 Ryan Ranch - Sand City Jazz A and B, 7, 94
12 Monterey - The Dunes Jazz B, 11, 20, 21 ,94 General Jim Moore Blvd 14 Monterey - NPS via La Mesa La Mesa
19 CSUMB-Monterey/DMC 18, 21,91
25 Salinas - CSUMB 16, 20
26 CSUMB - East Campus 16
27 Watsonville - Marina 28
46 Natividad Natividad Rd.
47 Hartnell East Alisal - W Alisal Colleges closed 41
55 Monterey - San Jose Express General/Amtrak San Jose, Gilroy 56 Monterey - Salinas via Hwy 68 General Highway 68
67 Presidio - Marina 20, 21
68 Presidio Shuttle
69 Presidio - Del Monte Center 2
70 Presidio - La Mesa 7 La Mesa
72 Presidio - North Salinas 20 Presidio
74 Presidio - Toro Park 18
75 Presidio - Marshall Park 18, 20
76 Presidio - Stillwell Park 20, 21
78 Presidio - Santa Cruz Santa Cruz
82 Salinas - Fort Hunter Liggett 23
85 Fort Hunter Liggett - PASO
86 San Jose - King City 23 San Jose
920 Del Rey Oaks DRO Shuttle General 7, 20
950 Monterey Trolley Contract Suspended Jazz A, Jazz B, 1, 21 2019 MST Line
not currently operating
No military contract
Low ridership
Colleges closed
Low ridership General
General
Military Service
CSUMB
Military Service No military contract
General/5311f
Low ridership
Presidio
Presidio
Fort Hunter Ligett
Low ridership
Many bus lines are not currently operating. Some may not come back.

Nearly half of the fixed routes that had been
operating until early 2020 (26 out of 55) are no
longer in service as of early 2021. Together, these
lines accounted for over 30% of MST’s weekly
service hours in 2019. These massive service suspensions occurred in response to two separate events.

Pandemic-related cuts
11 lines have been suspended due to pandemicrelated considerations. Specifically:
• Lines 4, 8, 27, 46, 55, 56, 86 and the Del Rey
Oaks Shuttle were low-ridership lines suspended to allow lines with more riders (such as the 20, 41 and JAZZ) to operate at higher
frequency and avoid overcrowding.
• Lines 19, 25, 26 and 47 were suspended
because CSUMB and Hartnell College have
been operating remotely.
• The Monterey Trolley operated under a
special contract with the City of Monterey that
was suspended during lockdown and has not
yet restarted.

Military-related cuts
Leading up to March 2020, Department of
Defense budget cuts led to the loss of MST’s
prior contracts with local military facilities. As a
result, all of the lines previously targeted to those
facilities have been cancelled, although ongoing
discussions with base command has led to some
very limited MST buses again stopping at the
Presidio in June 2020.

What does this mean for the future?
Barring changes to base budgets, the prior
military lines are unlikely to be restored, although
ongoing discussions with base command may
lead to some MST buses again stopping at the
Presidio.

College-related lines are likely to return in
Fall 2021, if schools are open at that time.

They may change slightly in response to this
network redesign. The Monterey Trolley is also
likely to be restored at some point, as pandemic restrictions ease and pending the City of Monterey’s willingness to restore funding.

The future of general-fund lines that were cut
due to low ridership is less clear, and depends
in large part on the outcome of this network
redesign. If the redesign results in a more
ridership-oriented network, it’s unlikely they
will be restored.

Figure 45: Table of recent MST lines
cancelled or suspended as of early
2021.
152
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 50
4 MST’
s Fixed-R
o
u
te Network
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
In the urban areas, most people are near transit but frequencies are low.

Monterey Peninsula Seaside / Marina / Sand City
Salinas
Figure 46: Charts showing the number of people and jobs within a 1/2-mile walk of a bus stop in the Monterey Peninsula (top left), Seaside/Marina/Sand City (top We can see that most of the greater Monterey right), Salinas (bottom center), and in all of Monterey County (lower left). and Salinas areas are served by some form
of bus service, just by looking at the map in
Figure 43 on page 47.

The charts on this page go deeper, showing
us what percentage of actual people and jobs
are within walking distance of service, and how
frequent that service is on weekdays in the
middle of the day.

Based on these charts, we can see that, within
the greater Monterey and Salinas areas:
• Most people live near some transit service.
o 66% of residents and 69% of jobs are
within 1/2-mile of a bus stop.
o 69% of residents and 64% of job in
Seaside/Marina/Sand City are within
1/2-mile of a bus stop.
o 77% of Salinas residents are within a 1/2-
mile of a bus stop, compared to only
62% of jobs. This is likely because there
are many agricultural and warehousing
jobs at the very edges from Salinas, just
beyond reach of the bus network.
• Proximity to transit is relatively equitable across income and race. o Low-income residents are slightly more
likely to live close to bus service than all
residents.
o Non-white residents are not more or
less likely to live near bus service than
all residents.
• Most people live near very infrequent
service, or no service at all.
o Only 50% of Salinas residents, 49% of
Seaside residents, and 31% of Monterey
Peninsula residents live near service
that comes at least every 30 minutes on
weekdays.

Countywide
153
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 51
4 MST’
s Fixed-R
o
u
te Network
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Outside urban areas, most people live far from transit.

Figure 47: Regional map representing the location of residents within and beyond 1/2-mile from the nearest MST bus stop with weekday service.

In Figure 47, every 25 residents in Monterey
County is represented by a dot. If those 25
residents live within 1/2-mile of a bus stop, the
dot is blue. If the closest bus stop is farther
away, the dot is red. The location of the dots
is based on Census population estimates at
the block group level, but only in areas located
within 100 feet of a road.

This map shows that outside the urbanized
area, very few people are near a bus stop. In
rural Monterey County, MST fixed route coverage is limited to:
• The centers of the county’s small towns:

Castroville, Gonzales, Soledad, Greenfield
and King City.
• Narrow strips along rural roads in the
Carmel Valley, and between Prunedale and
Watsonville.

Looking closely at this map, we can also see
the kinds of places that are far from service
within the urbanized areas. These are either:
• The hilly edges south of Monterey, which
are in large part not operable by buses.
• Neighborhoods of Marina and Salinas
where poor street connectivity makes
walking distances farther than 1/2-mile.

We can also see that many of the people not
covered by the transit network live in North
County, at densities that are high for rural
areas but too low to feel suburban.

It’s important to note that some of the
residents represented in red dots do have
access to MST’s on-call service. This service
allows people to reserve for point-to-point
travel within several cities: Marina, Gonzales,
Soledad, Greenfield and King City1
.
1 Note that On-Call service does not allow for direct travel between cities. However, it is possible to use On-Call service to collect to an MST bus line.
154
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 52
4 MST’
s Fixed-R
o
u
te Network
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit

1. Munras/Highway 1
between Monterey and
Carmel-by-the-Sea
No fewer than 9 bus lines operate in diferent parts of this corridor linking Downtown Monterey, CHOMP and Carmel-by-the-Sea.
• Each of these lines is designed individually
to meet a particular travel pattern, at a different frequency. • Some lines deviate off the main path on
the way (e.g. Line 3). Only five lines stop
at CHOMP; and only five lines continue
all the way to Carmel-by-the-Sea (but not
exactly the same five that go to CHOMP).

In several important corridors, lines overlap but don’t produce frequency. • Coming into Monterey and Carmel-by-theSea, lines split into multiple paths.

As a result, the actual frequency between
major destinations is completely random from
one hour to the next. It would be impossible
for a casual customer to understand which
line to take to get from A to B without using
an app like Google Transit, or poring through
multiple schedules. And it’s quite likely that
existing riders are not taking full advantage
of all the service in this corridor, because they
can’t predict what will happen if they get on a
different bus than their usual line.

Even assuming someone had gained perfect
knowledge of which bus went where, the
effective frequency of service experienced by
customer would remain low. Between 7 AM
and 6 PM:
• Monterey Transit Plaza -> Del Monte
Center. Average of 4 direct buses per hour,
but nearly every hour features a 30 minute
empty period between two buses.
• Monterey Transit Plaza -> CHOMP. Average
of 2 direct buses per hour. Most of the
time, the interval between two of these
buses is 40 minutes.
• Monterey Transit Plaza -> Downtown
Carmel-by-the-Sea. Average of 3 direct
buses per hour. Most the time, the interval
between two of these buses is about 30
minutes.

In other words, it might be as convenient
for most customers if the nine lines and
four buses per hour operating in this
corridor were simplified to a single line,
operating every 30 minutes. It might then
be possible to reinvest the remaining service
in either higher frequency, or more service
elsewhere.

2. Fremont between
Monterey and Sand City
The primary overlap in this corridor is between
the JAZZ A, JAZZ B and Line 18. All three
lines serve the corridor from Monterey to Sand
City, but they split into three distinct patterns
in Seaside.

The JAZZ A and B schedules are mostly coordinated, with the goal of achieving a shared high frequency from Monterey Transit Plaza
to Seaside. However, because the JAZZ A
and JAZZ B are slightly different lengths, the
overlapping frequency is imperfect in the
southbound direction.

When the JAZZ buses are scheduled to a
combined 15 minutes apart northbound, they
come every 10 to 20 minutes southbound.

When they are scheduled to a combined 18
minutes apart northbound, they come every 13
to 23 minutes southbound.

If the JAZZ lines were the same length (and,
in particular, if either both or neither of them
deviated into Monterey Peninsula College), the
frequency could be scheduled to be the same
in both directions.

Line 18 operates only once an hour, and continues from Sand City to CSUMB and Marina.

Because of this, it does not add any effective
frequency between Monterey and Seaside.

Once an hour, a lucky rider may find out that
their expected wait is much shorter than usual
thanks to a lucky strike, but they cannot count
on a regular bus every 12 minutes.

Several other lines operate in various parts of
Fremont between Monterey and Seaside (7,
11, 21, 91, 93, 94). However, nearly all of these
lines are extremely infrequent, operating just a
few times a day. And nearly all of them do not
continue to Monterey Transit Plaza directly, but
instead go to Del Monte Center first.

Figure 48: Map of bus lines between Monterey
Transit Plaza, Del Monte Center, and CHOMP.

Figure 49: Map of bus lines between Monterey and Sand City.. 155
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER
+ ASSOCIATES | 53
4 MST’s Fixed-Route Network
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit

3. Main Street in Salinas
Main Street is the main arterial corridor con-
necting North, Downtown and South Salinas.

Many important destinations lie on Main Street
or within a short walk, including Northridge
Mall, Harden Ranch Plaza, North Salinas High
School, Salinas DMV, Salinas Sports Complex,
Downtown Salinas, Monterey County Social
Services, and many other stores and places of
employment.

Furthermore, the Salinas Valley Memorial
Hospital, while not on Main Street, is on a
logical path that a bus coming from Main
Street might follow on its way to the govern-
ment and healthcare offices on Blanco Road.

Despite this, there is relatively little service on
North Main Street, even on weekdays in the
daytime. • The vast majority of service on North Main
Street is provided by Line 49, which runs
only once an hour.
• Line 29 operates every two hours on North
Main Street. It is, however, spaced such
that every other hour the wait between two
buses is reduced to 30 minutes.
• Line 95 operates only four times per day,
and only in the southbound direction, as
it is part of a much larger one-way loop
around nearly every major destination in
Salinas.

There is even less service on South Main
Street, which has just Line 95, plus a few runs a
day on Line 61, which is actually designed as a
regional veterans’ medical shuttle from Salinas
to the VA outpatient facility in Marina.

In other words, the four lines that operate
on different parts of Main Street add up to
only hourly service on North Main Street,
and less than hourly service on South Main
Street.

This contrasts markedly with the high level of
service available between Downtown Salinas
and Alisal on Line 41, which operates every 15
minutes.

Figure 50: Map of bus lines on and near Main
Street in Salinas.
156
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 54
4 MST’
s Fixed-R
o
u
te Network
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Line productivities are low, reflecting a coverage-oriented system.

Productivity is a measure of how efficient
a transit system is at attracting ridership.

It is usually expressed as boardings per hour
of service, i.e. the number of people who get
on a bus for every hour that bus is out on the
road, following a transit line.

For longer distance lines, productivity is sometimes measured in terms of boardings per bus trip. This adjusts for the fact that long-distance
buses inevitably spend long amounts of time
not picking up more passengers.

As explained in Chapter 2 on page 20,
more frequent lines tend to be more productive. This is partly because transit becomes exponentially more convenient as it becomes
more frequent, so frequent lines attract more
riders. The other part is that transit agencies tend to locate more frequent lines in the places where the most people might ride.

The graphs in Figure 51 show that this
relationship doesn’t hold for MST’s bus
network. These graphs compare frequency
and productivity in 20191
. These graphs show
that:
• Productivity averaged about 17 boardings
per hour, and under 20 boardings per trip.

This is generally very low.
• Lines that come every 2 hours are almost
as productive as lines that come every 15
minutes.

These patterns suggest that MST has generally not invested in high frequency in places where high ridership might be expected in
return. MST has instead preferred to maximize
coverage, spreading service out to as many
places as possible, even though that results in
lower ridership overall.
1 This is because pandemic ridership conditions are so uniquely low and reflect fast-changing conditions that are not necessarily comparable to the past or the future.

Figure 51: Charts showing the relationship
between frequency of service and productivity of
different MST bus lines pre-pandemic (2019).
157
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 55
4 MST’
s Fixed-R
o
u
te Network
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Current Situation
The existing MST network features transfer
points at Monterey Transit Plaza, Sand City
Station, Marina Transit Exchange and Salinas
Transit Center. But because most MST lines
operate on unique frequencies, have different lengths, and operate from different start and end points, there are very few
timed transfers in the existing network.

This means customers end up waiting a
long time. This is illustrated by the tables
in Figure 53, which show how long it would
take to connect to and from Line 49 at Salinas
Transit Center in the middle of the day on a
weekday.

Furthermore, MST customers are discouraged
from transferring by the requirement to pay
a new full fare every time they change buses.

This is discussed further in Chapter 7.

The network is hampered by a lack of consistent timed transfers.

Figure 52: In a “pulse” timed transfer system,
multiple low-frequency lines are scheduled to
come together regularly, dwell for a few minutes
so that passengers may transfer among them, and
then depart again.

It’s unlikely that all the places you might want
to go will be located on the bus line nearest
to your house. Transit agencies like MST know
this, and organize their system to allow for
transfers, or connections between different
lines.

Connections allow people to travel in many
directions. But the amount of time a transfer
takes depends largely on the frequency of the
connecting lines.

If you are connecting to a frequent line, you
can rely on a short wait, since the next bus is
always coming soon. But you could wait a long
time to connect to a bus that only comes every
hour or two, if the line schedule is not deliberately designed to connect with other lines.

Timed Connections at Transfer Points
To make connections between low-frequency
lines more tolerable, many transit networks
are often operated with a “pulse” at key
locations. To offer a pulse, an agency must
design its lines to be a certain length so
that buses can all arrive at the central hub at
the same time, each hour or half-hour. The
buses dwell together for a few minutes, passengers connect among them, and then they depart again. This can happen at any regular
interval, though half-hourly and hourly pulses
are common in most networks with a timed
connections.

Pulses dramatically improve people’s ability
to get where they need to go in a reasonable amount of time on infrequent transit networks. Well-functioning pulses tend to
increase ridership, through the increased
convenience they provide.

Figure 53: Tables showing how long you would have to wait if you were trying to connect to or from Line 49 (North Main Street) at Salinas Transit Center, coming from or going to seven other locations.

Because most MST lines operate at unique frequencies, there are relatively few opportunities for timed connections in MST’s existing system. People trying to transfer from one line to another often have to wait a very long time.
…to go to… ..leaving at… …on MST Line… Why?
Monterey 11:15 20 Consistent timed connection
South County 11:15 23 Lucky timed connection
Alisal 11:15 41 Frequent service on Route 41
Salinas Airport 11:30 48 Untimed connection
Boronda 11:30 44 Unlucky - Frequency mismatch
Watsonville 11:45 29 Untimed connection
South Salinas 11:55 95 Unlucky - Frequency mismatch
You would have to wait…
If you were arriving from North Salinas on Line 49 at 11:10 AM, how long would you wait at Salinas Transit Center?
45 minutes
5 minutes
20 minutes
35 minutes
…coming from… …arriving at… …on MST Line… Why?
Alisal 12:08 41 Frequent service on Route 41
Boronda 12:00 44 Unlucky - Frequency mismatch
Monterey 11:43 20 If you take the bus that arrives at 12:13, you might miss your connection.

Watsonville 11:39 28 Untimed connection
Salinas Airport 11:19 48 Untimed connection
South County 10:47 23 Unlucky - Frequency mismatch
South Salinas 10:30 61 Unlucky - Frequency mismatch
If you were trying to go to North Salinas on Line 49 leaving at 12:15 PM how long would you have to wait at Salinas Transit Center? You would have to wait...
7 minutes
15 minutes
32 minutes
36 minutes
56 minutes
1 hour 28 minutes
1 hour 45 minutes
158
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 56
4 MST’
s Fixed-R
o
u
te Network
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
MST service levels and ridership are low compared to peers.

Figure 54: Charts comparing MST to peer agencies on three measures: service investment per capita (top left), relevance in annual boardings per resident (top right), and productivity in boardings per hour (bottom right).

In preparing this report, the project team compared MST to agencies serving similarly-sized communities. We focused on agencies with a
relatively large service area, in mid-sized counties, at the edges or just outside major metro areas. Specifically, we compared MST to:
• San Joaquin RTD in Stockton, CA.
• Gold Coast Transit in Oxnard/Ventura, CA.
• Marin County Transit in Marin County, CA.
• Santa Cruz Metro in Santa Cruz, CA.
• Santa Barbara MTD in Santa Barbara, CA.
• Lane Transit District in Eugene, OR.
• Intercity Transit in Olympia, WA.

This analysis reveals that:
• MST provides relatively little service.

Only 2 of the 7 peers compared provided
less service per capita than MST. And in the
case of Gold Coast Transit, this is probably
because intercity transit in Ventura County
is handled by a different agency.
• MST ridership is correspondingly low.

Studies comparing many agencies over
time show that the single largest contributor to ridership is the amount of service provided. So it is not surprising that,
among the agencies we compared, those
that provide more service generate more
ridership.
• MST productivity is very low. We have
seen how MST ridership has likely been
suppressed by low frequencies. As a result,
MST’s average productivity has tended to
be lower even than other agencies who
provide similar total amount of service.

These facts are not permanent, nor are
they inevitable. They reflect conditions in
pre-pandemic times, and the likely outcomes if
not much changes in MST’s funding model and
service planning practices post-pandemic. But
this trajectory can still change.

MST provides the amount of service it can
afford within existing public funding sources.

Monterey County voters could approve more,
as they did with Measure Q in 2014.

And MST’s relatively low productivity compared to peers could change as a result of a network redesign that more deliberately
matched service location and frequency with
ridership potential.
159
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
| 57 JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report Monterey-Salinas Transit
5 MST Paratransit and Specialized
Services
160
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 58
5 MST Paratransit and S
p
ecialized Servic
e
s
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
2013 Contract
Basis FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020
Paratransit Rev. Hours 60,000 67,285 75,830 65,167
On-Call Rev. Hours 13,328 14,019 13,932 13,921
Fixed Route Rev. Hours 48,906 62,379 62,298 58,498
Trolley Rev. Hours + Extra 2,859 2,961 3,287 3,903
Out-of-County Spec. Medical 0 8 0 14
Misc. Rev. Hours 207 258 687
0 10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
Revenue Hours
Contract Service - Revenue Hour History by Prorgram
MST specialized services include RIDES paratransit and other programs.

MST RIDES is a civil rights
obligation.

MST is required by the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 to provide a
complementary paratransit service to persons
who are unable to use public transit fixed route
services. MST provides this service under the
name RIDES.

Two recent Federal and State audits found
the MST organization to be in full compliance
with relevant Federal ADA regulations. This
analysis, therefore, examines selected aspects
of the RIDES program to identify opportunities for improved cost efficiency and service effectiveness
Paratransit is Just
One Component
of the Contractor’s
Responsibilities
A private operator operates MST’s RIDES
ADA paratransit program and other assigned
services under a contract secured through
competitive processes conducted every seven
years. MV Transportation, MST’s contractor, is
responsible for all service operations and uses
MST-provided vehicles to do so.

MST RIDES hours comprised 46% of contractor-provided service in FY 2020. The chart in Figure 55 shows the growth in contractor
hours, by service type, since 2013. Note that
MV Transportation’s contract also extends to
some of the fixed routes discussed in Chapter

4. MST provides other
specializes transportation
services
In addition to RIDES, MST also provides a
general public demand response service,
where riders book a trip through an app to
secure a shared-ride trip to their destination
within that community.

On-Call services operate in Soledad, Gonzales,
Greenfield and King City on weekdays and
in Marina on weekdays and weekends.

Greenfield has shown the highest use levels, as
illustrated in Figure 56.

Special Medical Transportation provides nonemergency medical trips to out-of-county facilities, as requested. Use levels are low, less
than one round-trip per month.

Figure 55: This chart presents revenue hour history by program for contracted services Non-Vehicle Programs
MST supports several non-vehicle programs
oriented to older adults, persons with disabilities and military veterans. Funded with Measure Q tax receipts, these include:
• Taxi Voucher Program – providing taxi
coupons to older adults and ADA certified
riders at half-off, to subsidize taxi trips -
o 48,083 taxi trips provided in FY 2020
• MST’s TRIP Mileage Reimbursement
Program – providing a per-mile stipend to
volunteer drivers assisting older adults and
persons with disabilities –
o 4,579 trips provided in FY 2020
• Travel Training – providing one-on-one
training assistance to persons who need
support in learning to use MST fixed route
services
o 487 training session in FY 2020
Figure 56: This chart presents MST On-Call ridership by city for October 2019, October 202 161
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 59
5 MST Paratransit and S
p
ecialized Servic
e
s
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
MST RIDES is a comprehensive, countywide program.

MST received 15,877 trip booking requests in
October 2019. Of these, 21% were not completed due to various types of cancellation, with MST providing 12,489 completed trips.

Figure 58 depicts the full set of trip booking
origins. These cover the majority of the populated areas in the county, although origin and destination must typically be within 3/4 mile of
an MST fixed-route to qualify as ADA complementary paratransit.

Key origins and destinations (with 500+ trips
per month) were concentrated in the Monterey
and Salinas areas. They included adult day
health care programs, sheltered workshops,
behavioral health programs, dialysis facilities
and Monterey Peninsula College.

Figure 57: These maps present MST RIDES bookings in October 2019. Distribution of these trips was: Salinas area: 55%; Peninsula area: 20%; Marina/Seaside: area: 12%; South County area: 10%; North County area: 3%.

RIDES service includes:

ADA Service - RIDES provides complementary paratransit to MST’s fixed route services .

ADA certified riders can travel within ¾ mile of
an MST line with an advance reservation.

Beyond the ADA - RIDES also serves limited
trips outside the ADA service area to ADA
certified riders traveling into the service area.
162
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 60
5 MST Paratransit and S
p
ecialized Servic
e
s
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
RIDES performance indicators document a solid, responsive program.

Boardings steadily
increased Pre-COVID.

RIDES passenger boardings, by ADA certified persons, showed steady increases, prior to COVID-19 impacts which began in the final
quarter of FY 19/20. FY 18/19 increased 9%
over the prior year and FY 19/20 was on track
to increase similarly, until the fourth quarter.

The chart at the right shows ridership for the
past three years, illustrating the growth before
and decline after the pandemic.

RIDES operates with both dedicated vehicles
and taxi back-ups, a best practice employed in
many ADA paratransit programs to cost-effectively provide for supplemental taxi service when on-time pick-ups cannot otherwise be
achieved. During FY 2020, dedicated MST
vehicles provided 85% of trips. Non-dedicated,
private taxis provided 15% of trips.

RIDES Unit Costs are Reasonable
Measure Q, passed in 2014, supports transportation for seniors and persons with disabilities, including funding the RIDES program. FY 2019
costs of $35.66 per passenger boarding1, were
just above the median per trip cost of $32.45
for a group of 29 public paratransit programs,
reported in TCRP Synthesis 135, Paratransit
Service Models (2018).

No-Show, Late Cancel and Missed
Trips Collectively Run High
Overall, 21% of MST RIDES booked were not
completed in October 2019. Most of these
(12%) are due to passenger no-shows, late cancellations, or because the vehicle can’t connect with the rider. These represent lost resources
as the vehicle was dispatched.
1 As reported in the National Transit Database.

Subscription Trips Running High
Subscription trips are recurring reservations,
useful to building overall trip manifests.

Pre-COVID, 59% of trips were subscription.

Managing the proportion of subscription trips
to 50% or less, particularly during peak travel
times, helps to ensure that riders with single
trip requests can also travel.

Productivity Above Contract Standard
of 1.9 Trips per Hour
A favorable 1.97 in passenger boardings per
hour was documented for 2020, up from 1.91,
and well above the median rate of 1.57 documented in TCRP Synthesis 135, Paratransit Service Models (2018). Ensuring that vehicles
are efficiently dispatched is critical for demand
response services which have overall low productivities in contrast with fixed route services.

High Proportion of Long Trips
About 40% of RIDES trips are between 5 and
10 miles, while a quarter are between 10 and
15 miles and another quarter and greater than
15 miles. Reflecting Monterey County’s size,
these long trips make it difficult to provide
highly productive service and represent substantial deadhead, as vehicles travel empty for significant distances.

On-Time Performance Lags Behind
90% Standard
On-time performance analyzed for a threemonth pre-COVID period shows that 79% of trips were provided within the on-time window
of 15-minutes before to 15-minutes after the
promised time. The demand for trips over the
course of the day, trip distances to be covered
and congestion on the roadways all impact
on-time performance.

Figure 58: This chart presents MST RIDES boardings by month for three years, including supplemental taxi. 0 500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
0:00 2:00 4:00 6:00 8:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00 22:00 0:00 Bookings by Time-of-Day
Scheduled Pick-Up at Origin
Actual Arrival at Origin for Pick-Up
34,776 trips in March, August, October 2019
Figure 59: This chart shows MST RIDES trips are highest in the morning and afternoon, peaking at 8am and 2pm. 163
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 61
5 MST Paratransit and S
p
ecialized Servic
e
s
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
RIDES users report very positive experiences.

Customer Experiences
MST riders are certified by MST’s Mobility
Services Center as unable to use fixed route
public transit some or all of the time. By the
end of FY 2020, over 5,000 unique persons
had taken 77% of RIDES trips. Among the trips
provided, 22% were provided to personal care
attendants (PCAs) who can measurably shorten
vehicle dwell times at the curb. Just 1% of
persons riding during FY 2020 were fare-paying companions.

In the course of preparing this report, the
project team interviewed focus group participants representing a range of persons who were substantially disabled by diabetes, liver
disease and chronic illness, as well as very
frail elderly persons. RIDES users also include
persons with cognitive impairments of varying
severity or persons with behavioral disabilities,
a wide range of disabilities.

Speaking with eight persons about their RIDES
experience (including three in Spanish), each
of these users expressed appreciation for the
service. Six persons lived alone and reported
that RIDES was their primary means of mobility; for some without family in the area, it was their only means of transport. Almost all riders
spoke of the helpfulness of drivers with one
reporting that his driver called 9-1-1 for transport to the hospital when he’d fallen into a diabetic coma while on the MST vehicle.

Figure 60: FY 2020 customer service reports received by MST Rider Suggestions
Riders offered just a few areas of concerns:
• Communication difficulties with dispatch
were described by one rider who noted that
she calls frequently to determine when her
vehicle is arriving for a regular, recurring trip.
• Two riders described missed trips that
occurred when waiting for a vehicle in one
location while the driver went to a different location to pick them up. Both were living in larger residential communities with
multiple buildings.
• Two riders described negative experiences
with taxi drivers,contrasting these with very
favorable experiences with MST van drivers.

Low Level of Complaints
Customer service reports (CSRs) are received by
the contractor (MV Transportation), whose managers document, address and report these to MST. The rate of customer complaints received
was at 0.04 per 1,000 trips for FY 2020 for van
trips, and higher at 0.24 for taxi trips.

Call Center Performing
Above Standards
Customers interact with MST’s Call Center to
book RIDES trips or ask follow-up questions.

The call center received 30,000 to 34,000 calls
monthly pre-pandemic. Despite this, call wait
times were favorably low: highest on Mondays,
averaging 1-minute 48 seconds, less than one
minute on other days, and well below MST’s
2-minute wait-time standard. Abandoned calls,
where individuals do not connect with a dispatcher, are around 9% of calls, rising to 10% of calls on Saturdays and Sundays.

Figure 61: MST’s state-of-the-art Mobility Services Center “I feel well taken care of by the RIDES
program.”
- Anna Maria
“I am really thankful for the MST RIDES
service that is provided and is key to my
life. I am glad MST took the time to hear
my input and experiences using MST
RIDES.”
-Charles
“MST is fantastic.”
- Bridgette
“Drivers are wonderful.”
- Patricia
164
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 62
5 MST Paratransit and S
p
ecialized Servic
e
s
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Opportunities for Improvement
Providing ADA complementary paratransit is
a complicated and expensive effort, but it is
critical to those who need it. This analysis identified seven areas to address, to improve the RIDES’ program cost-efficiency or its service
effectiveness.

1. Reduce deadhead miles with a
South County garaging location.

Reducing demand response deadhead miles is
strongly advised, and may become potentially
feasible if MST can allow MV Transportation to
garage some demand response vehicles at the
new South County facility in King City. About
20% of RIDES trips start or end in the Highway
101 corridor south of Salinas, and about 25%
of RIDES trips are 15 miles or longer.

Although MST may not pay for deadhead time
directly in its contract, the costs associated
with deadhead end up being paid indirectly
through higher overhead rates. Deadhead
miles add to the wear and tear on MST-owned
vehicles and can errode on-time performance.

2. Improve on-time performance with
trip scheduling and trip negotiation
modifications.

MST’s contractor uses a sophisticated scheduling program, Trapeze. This tool must be carefully calibrated to local conditions to
achieve maximum effectiveness, and improve
on-time performance.

On-time performance can be improved by
greater use of Trip Negotiation in the reservations process. Analysis revealed high proportions of trips scheduled on the hour and
half-hour. Moving some of those trips even
fifteen minutes can contribute to improved
operational efficiencies by spreading demand
peaks and softening their impacts.

Recommendations include:
• Adjust Trapeze parameters to reflect congested travel times and ensure that Trapeze provides call takers optimal pick-up times
that push for greater efficiency, requiring
call takers to formally negotiate with riders.
• Employ trip optimization functions, to
adjust schedules in real-time to accommodate cancellations. • Require on-going scheduling software training for contractor staff, and include MST staff, to ensure effective use of most recent
software functions and modifications.

3. Reduce call volumes through use of
scheduling software.

Implementing an automatic call-back on the
day before scheduled trips and while the
vehicle is on the way has been shown to significantly reduce call volumes into dispatch. These time-consuming calls are common among an
anxious and dependent ridership population.

The PASS Web module “Where’s My Ride”
was successfully implemented in 2019 by LA
Access, OCTA and Omnitrans in Southern
California to provide arrival times to riders. LA
Access documented a 30% reduction in calls
to dispatch. Automated call-backs help by:
• Reminding passengers to cancel in
advance, if needed;
• Reassuring riders that their trip is on the
manifest for the next day;
• Advising riders, in real-time, of imminent
vehicle arrival;
• Reducing vehicle dwell time at the beginning of the trip. Passengers are more likely to begin moving toward the curb, a process
that takes time for many RIDES users.

4. Actively develop Demand Management opportunities.

Focusing increased attention on demand
management would help manage RIDES’
trip growth rates, which were very high prepandemic. An active demand management program would include expanded travel
training opportunities, to introduce existing
and potential ADA riders to fixed-route travel
opportunities and to build confidence in using
the bus1.

Program components of an enhanced Travel
Training program could incorporate those
sucessfully implemented by Riverside Transit
Agency that focused on selected, existing
riders, as well as young persons leaving the
public school systems.

5. Revisit supplemental programs to
improve effectiveness or terminate.

The data indicate extremely low utilization
of the Special Medical Trips program. Such
out-of-county non-emergency medical transportation services are important and can be well utilized. But they need to be understandable to consumers, predictable and promoted.

It is not clear that the program provides
enough value to continue in its current form.

The Taxi Voucher program, in contrast, has
considerably higher use levels. However,
there was some confusion among focus group
participants as to when they were taking a
taxi under the voucher program and when a
supplemental taxi was dispatched as a RIDES
trip. Clarifying rider expectations and improving communications around this, particularly on the website, will be useful.
1 See Transportation Research Record #2419 “Americans with Disabilities Act Cost Savings and Increased Fixed-Route Ridership through Transit Agency Travel Training”, H. Menninger, V. Werly.

Washington, DC, 2014, pp. 88-89.

6. Develop performance-based reporting structures for the RIDES program and beyond.

The RIDES contractor provides a considerable amount of reporting on a monthly basis.

However, this reporting is not readily helpful in
tracking service delivery trends. MST should
consider using performance reporting software, such as TransTrack, for two purposes:
• To compile operations and performance
data at the program level or route level;
and to also compile it at the mode level
and at the system level, allowing MST to
track both aggregated and disaggregated
experiences;
• To present operations and performance
information in relation to standards for
performance. As one example, “Late
Trips” currently detailed by trip, can be
categorized, as groups, by minutes past
appointment time.

Strategic Goal: Provide
Quality Transit and
Mobility Management
Services
The data suggest MST is largely
meeting this goal, with certain
avenues of improvement possible.
165
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
| 63 JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report Monterey-Salinas Transit
6 MST’s Financial Outlook
166
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 64
6 MST’
s Financial Outlook
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020
Salaries and benefits $23,564,649 $26,572,590 $26,286,386 $26,587,419 Purchased transportation $8,042,897 $8,935,084 $10,661,634 $10,425,043 Materials and supplies $4,447,433 $4,909,665 $5,104,905 $4,403,552 Insurance $710,712 $704,306 $1,526,270 $1,139,673
Utilities $435,719 $426,940 $588,380 $633,207
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
$30,000,000
MST Financial Trends: Major Expense Items
Salaries and benefits Purchased transportation Materials and supplies Insurance Utilities Operating costs are growing
MST’s systemwide operating expenses have
been increasing over the past four years,
with a slight decline experienced in FY
19/20 during the COVID-19 pandemic (see
Figure 62). The main drivers for increase in
operating expense are attributed to:
• A 13% rise in salaries and benefits between
FY 2017 and FY 2018
• A 35% increase in purchased transportation
between FY 2017 and FY 2019.
• Insurance expense more than doubled in
FY 19, from $700,000 to over $1,500,000
(see Figure 63).

At the same time, operating expenses in total
only declined by 2% in FY 2020, while many
services were suspended or experienced low
utilization. This may be due to increased unit
operating costs during the pandemic (e.g.
cleaning and disinfecting), combined with a
higher rate of excused driver absences for sickness, or to take care of loved ones.

In the short term, coming out of the pandemic, MST must find a way to bring unit operating costs back to their pre-pandemic
levels.

What major expense categories can
be controlled?
In FY 2018, MST hired four new staff members,
made a significant contribution to the Public
Employees Retirement System (PERS) account
and had an increase in Workers Compensation
expense. This resulted in a $3 million increase
in salaries and benefits.

At the same time, the cost of contracted
operations is increasing at rates that are not
sustainable, growing from $8 million in FY 18
to almost $10. 7 million in FY 19.
• Purchased transportation, including MST
RIDES and Measure Q service costs are the
main drivers for the increase in contractor
costs.
• Paratransit service hours increased by

12.1% in FY 2018 and continued to grow
in FY 2019. MST’s financial health in the
medium-term depends on finding ways
to reduce the rate of growth of these
trips.

Figure 62: Chart showing systemwide financial trends, FY 2017 to FY 2020.

Figure 63: Chart showing major MST expense items, FY 2017 to FY 2020 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020
Operating Expense $40,871,848 $45,144,871 $47,633,526 $46,751,492 Revenue $34,740,369 $39,033,971 $43,287,692 $48,168,916 Farebox $10,370,500 $10,817,163 $8,715,328 $5,316,913
$0
$10,000,000
$20,000,000
$30,000,000
$40,000,000
$50,000,000
$60,000,000
MST Financial Trends: Systemwide
Operating Expense Revenue Farebox
167
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 65
6 MST’
s Financial Outlook
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026
Fixed-Route bus fares $6,367,094 $8,437,793 $8,606,549 $8,778,680 $8,954,253 RIDES paratransit fares $277,626 $277,535 $283,086 $288,747 $294,522 Sales tax (Measure Q) revenues (net) (2) $8,952,912 $9,947,519 $10,146,470 $10,349,399 $10,556,387 Federal grants $8,890,778 $9,842,643 $10,039,496 $10,240,286 $10,445,091 State operating funds (4) $4,909,973 $5,229,322 $5,412,349 $5,601,781 $5,797,843 Local transporation funds $16,551,692 $18,283,973 $19,198,172 $20,158,080 $21,165,984 Federal - CARES Act funding $6,187,588 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
Please note: MST anticipates an additional $22.4 million in recovery funds from the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (CRRSAA) and the American Rescue Plan (ARP), beginning in FY 2022. As of the publication of this report, it Revenue Projections: 5-Year Forecast
Revenue Trends
The trends so far have been positive.

Revenue from federal, state and local sources
increased year-over-year from FY 2017 through
FY 2020, growing by a total of 39%.

Local and state funding account for approximately half of non-fare revenue1 .

Federal assistance grew modestly until FY
2020 where the addition of CARES Act funding
related to COVID-19 recovery was introduced.

This funding has been bolstered by subsequent stimulus packages.

Sales tax revenue increased by 15% in FY 19
then declined in FY 20.
1 Note: MST’s classification of fare revenues includes not only fares and passes but also revenues associated with service contracts, e.g. with the military, CSUMB, Amtrak etc.

Can revenue streams continue to keep
pace with rising operating costs?
The events of 2020 presented challenges and
opportunities for both sides of the ledger. Low
ridership generated less fare revenue and state
funding declined after its peak in FY 19. At the
same time, funding from the CARES Act and
subsequent stimulus packages has helped to
make up the difference.

But can MST maintain current service levels
when all recovery funding has been expended
and if sales tax generated revenues decrease?
MST also lost its military contracts and other
contract services were suspended in early
2020. Can lost partner funding agreements be
reinstated?
Figure 64: Chart showing operating assistance received by MST, FY 2017 to FY 2020 Figure 65: Chart showing MST’s five-year revenue forecast, FY 2022 to FY 2026 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020
Sales tax revenues $8,922,912 $8,990,950 $10,365,729 $9,542,722 Federal grants $8,758,334 $9,272,663 $9,842,643 $16,722,997 Fares $10,370,500 $10,817,163 $8,715,328 $5,316,913
Local and state (LTF/STA) $17,442,001 $20,809,630 $23,513,295 $21,998,905 Other $296,186 $335,906 $431,302 $308,190
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
MST Financial Trends: Revenue - Operating Assistance
Sales tax revenues Federal grants Fares Local and state (LTF/STA) Other Please note: MST anticipates an additional $22.4 million in recovery funds from the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (CRRSAA) and the American Rescue Plan (ARP), beginning in FY 2022. As of the publication of this report, it is not yet clear how this amount will be distributed from one year to another, so those funds are not included in the chart above. 168
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 66
6 MST’
s Financial Outlook
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
MST has budgeted conservatively.

Annual Budget and Actual
Performance
In FY 2018 and FY 2019, the variance between
budgeted expenses and actual expenses was
in the range of -2% to -2.6%, where actual
expenses were lower than what was expected.

The budget variance grew to -10.6% in FY 2020
due to the COVID-19 pandemic, where actual
expenses were much lower than expected.

The variance between budgeted and actual
revenue was greater than the variance in
expense, ranging between +6.9% and +10.6%
over a 3-year period.
• MST has brought in more revenue than
expected. This reflects a conservative
approach, where MST has been careful
not to overestimate the amount of
forthcoming state and federal operating
assistance.
• Expense estimates have been fairly accurate and MST has managed actual costs effectively. To the extent expense have
been lower than planned for, this is largely
because MST has made cautious assumptions about payroll and material costs, particularly fuel costs.
• Budgeting during the pandemic is challenging due to difficulty estimating the wide variety of unknowns in the future. It remains
unclear how FY 2021 and FY 2022 budgets
will compare to actual performance.

Figure 66: Chart comparing expected budget and actual expenses, FY 2018 to FY 2020.

Figure 67: Table comparing expected budget to actual expenses, FY 2018 to FY 2020.

MST has planned balanced
budgets. Revenues have
consistently exceeded
expectations while
expenses have come in
lower.
-2.0% -2.6%
-10.6%

8.1% 6.9%

10.6%
-15.0%
-10.0%
-5.0%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%
Systemwide Budget Variance
Expense Variance Revenue Variance
FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020
Systemwide
FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020
Budgeted Expenses 46,541,112.00 49,560,852.00 52,961,712.00 Actual Expenses 45,625,367.44 48,259,200.20 47,334,849.08 Budgeted Revenue 46,541,112.00 49,560,852.00 43,823,496.00 Actual Revenue 50,300,147.85 52,988,768.64 48,460,682.58 Expense Variance -2.0% -2.6% -10.6%
Revenue Variance 8.1% 6.9% 10.6%
169
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
| 67 JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report Monterey-Salinas Transit
7 Insights from Preliminary
Community Outreach
170
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 68
7 Insights from P
r
eliminary Comm
unity Outr
each
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
MST’s strategic focus on customer satisfaction is evident.

In interviews with well over a hundred stakeholders and riders, we heard virtually no “complaints” about MST service quality.

While stakeholders recognized the limitations
of MST’s services, they described the agency
as proactive, responsive to community needs
and willing to partner with other organizations
to serve their constituents.

While they described a network that is confusing and takes a long time to get places, riders had high praise for the quality of
service. Multiple riders described drivers as
“awesome,” in that they are courteous, helpful
and look out for the safety of riders. They
were also very appreciative of the cleaning
and safety efforts put into place to combat the
spread of Covid 19.

Comments about late or early buses arose, but
most riders said that’s only the case about 10%
of the time. They can generally count on MST
to operate as scheduled.

Effective Communications
Have Enhanced Customer
Satisfaction
Gatekeepers for key target populations repeatedly mentioned MST’s outreach staff and how helpful they were in educating constituents
about the services. Several stakeholders mentioned the effectiveness of working through trusted messengers to reach “hard-to-reach”
populations such as Indigenous Groups.

Riders have embraced the Transit App and
Google Maps to help navigate a network of
lines that is otherwise confusing. In Salinas,
the apps allow riders to see which of multiple
low-frequency lines is available at the time they
need a ride.

The website and text for schedule functions
are also used, though less frequently. Spanish
speaking riders noted that they previously
used the bilingual printed guide, but now rely
on the website or signage at the bus stop. Due
to the language barrier, they are often unable
to use drivers as a source of information,
something that is important to other riders.

Spanish Language Communications
are Critically Important
Stakeholders stressed the importance of
providing all passenger information and conducting promotional efforts in Spanish.

This need was also reflected in the focus
groups where 17 out of 40 participants
spoke Spanish, though only eight were fully
monolingual.

In the county wide telephone survey, nearly
4 out of 10 respondents completed the interview in Spanish and 59% indicated they were of Hispanic origin.

Strategic Goal: Educate
the Public on MST Services
MST’s outreach and marketing efforts appear to be highly effective.

Strategic Goal: Provide
Quality Transit and
Mobility Management
Services
Both rider focus group participants and community
stakeholders were highly
complimentary of MST’s customer service and community
engagement.

We heard from Stakeholders
Small group interviews were conducted with
over 80 community stakeholders to secure
their input regarding transit needs and priories. Participants included representatives of:
• Jurisdictions served by MST
• Social Service Agencies
• Medical Facilities
• Seniors and Persons with Disabilities
• Employers
• Hospitality Industry
• Schools, Colleges and CSUMB
• Military Programs
• Non-English-Speaking Populations
We talked to MST Riders
Nine focus groups were conducted with
English and Spanish speaking MST riders to
explore their experiences with and priorities
for the MST service network.

We surveyed the Community
A random survey of 500 households throughout Monterey County was conducted via telephone. The survey provided input as to
how the general population believes MST
should prioritize its various roles and allocate
“MST is responsive to its resources within the County.
community needs. They
authentically want to
serve.”
171
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 69
7 Insights from P
r
eliminary Comm
unity Outr
each
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Intercity service is key to jobs access. Local transit is a priority in Salinas.

Generally, stakeholders and riders perceived service between communities as most critical because of the disparity
between where potential transit users live
and work.

For example, most hospitality and service
sector jobs are located on the Monterey
Peninsula, while these workers reside in
Seaside, Marina and Salinas. Similarly, CSUMB,
Monterey Peninsula College and Hartnell
College attract students from throughout the
County.

Inter-community transit is also important
because many services are only available in
Salinas, such as social services, courts, community health services and methadone clinics.

Several riders noted that within their community they have travel options – walking, biking or calling a rideshare service - but these
alternatives are not practical for longer intracommunity trips to work or school.

The one community where local transit is
as important as inter-community service is
within Salinas. The larger size of the city and
the fact that more residents rely on transit as
their primary travel mode make local transit
critical. Several riders in the focus group used
the bus almost exclusively within Salinas, for
work, college, shopping, medical appointments, and recreation.

Local circulation within Salinas is also important
for South County residents and others who
come to Salinas for work, college, or services.

Smaller markets for local travel exist within
the Monterey area and around the CSUMB
campus.

Monterey Peninsula
Seaside/Marina
for
hospitality jobs,
military, medical
Hospitality and Service Jobs
Visitor Destinations & Hotels
Education – MPC/MIS
Military – Presidio/NPS/La Mesa
Medical – CHOMP
Education – CSUMB
Military – Fort Ord
Hospitality/Service Workers
Castroville
Prunedale
Watsonville
County social services
Medical – Natividad Medical Ctr
Mental health/Methadone services
Education – Hartnell College
Courts
Agriculture jobs & workers
Indigenous populations
Education – Hartnell Extensions
Military – Camp Roberts, Fort Hunter Liggett
some
local
travel
for services,
medical
for
hospitality and
service jobs
for CSUMB
for
CSUMB
for jobs
for
work,
college,
services
for services,
medical, shopping,
school, jobs
Salinas
East & North
Salinas
North County
South County
some
local
travel
heavy
local
travel
some
travel
between
communities
Lower income residents
Ag workers
Affordable housing
Figure 68: Within Monterey County, there are a wide variety of travel patterns, both local and inter-community. This graphic illustrates some of the key transit trip needs voiced by stakeholders and riders.
172
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 70
7 Insights from P
r
eliminary Comm
unity Outr
each
Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
MST fares are high and often do not reflect the relative value of the trip.

During outreach, the most frequent
“complaint” heard from both riders and stakeholders related to fares and fare payment.

Fares are high relative to the incomes of
many riders. A one-way ride within Salinas can
cost $5.00 while inter-community rides can be
more. Dissatisfaction with fares was expressed
in several ways.
• Monthly passes, priced at $95.00 to
$190.00 are not affordable for many
riders. For working riders it takes “a big
chunk of your earnings.”
• The lack of free transfers means that
trips requiring two or three buses cost
much more. “Not only do you have to wait,
you have to pay again.”
• The fact that fares are based on the line
used, rather than the distance traveled,
means that riders making short trips often
pay high fares relative to the length of their
trip. One example given was that a trip
between King City and Greenfield costs
the same amount as a trip all the way to
Salinas.

One-Way Trip
Route(s)
Used Miles
Wkday
Fare
E Salinas to Northridge Mall 95 6 $1.50
E Salinas to Northridge Mall 41 6 $2.50
King City to Salinas Transit Center 23 48 $3.50
Greenfield to King City 23 13 $3.50
CSU to Monterey 20 8 $3.50
E Salinas to CSU 41-61 11 $4.00
E Salinas to County Social Services 41-48 3 $5.00
CSU to Monterey 16-18 8 $5.00
Pacific Grove to MPC 1-Jazz 3 $5.00
E Salinas to Monterey 41-20 21 $6.00
Salinas to MPC 45-20-Jazz 22 $8.50
Soledad to MPC 23-20-Jazz 43 $9.50
Figure 69: Fares for common trips calculated using the Google Trip Planner.

GoCard Reloads
Riders appreciate the discount given when
they load cash on their GoCard, however we
heard repeated requests for a way to add
value on-line or on their phone. Having to go
to the transit center often means making an
extra trip or stop which adds time and cost1.
1 Note: MST has now launched a 6-month demonstration project for a contactless fare payment system that allows riders to pay by distance traveled and pay with certain credit cards and mobile wallets.

More information at https://mst.org/fares/contactless-payment/.

Figure 70: Fares for common trips calculated using the Google Trip Planner.

One-Way Trip
Route(s)
Used Miles
Wkday
Fare
E Salinas to Northridge Mall 95 6 $1.50
E Salinas to Northridge Mall 41 6 $2.50
King City to Salinas Transit Center 23 48 $3.50
Greenfield to King City 23 13 $3.50
CSU to Monterey 20 8 $3.50
E Salinas to CSU 41-61 11 $4.00
E Salinas to County Social Services 41-48 3 $5.00
CSU to Monterey 16-18 8 $5.00
Pacific Grove to MPC 1-Jazz 3 $5.00
E Salinas to Monterey 41-20 21 $6.00
Salinas to MPC 45-20-Jazz 22 $8.50
Soledad to MPC 23-20-Jazz 43 $9.50 173
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.
| 71 JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report Monterey-Salinas Transit
8 Key Choice and Next Steps
174
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 72
8 Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Key Choice: Ridership vs. Coverage
Figure 71: Comparing an imaginary town where transit is run with the goal of maximizing frequency and ridership (left) vs. the same town where transit is run with the goal of providing a little service near everyone (right). The maximum ridership (left) network has very frequent service, but only on the roads where the most people live and work. The maximum coverage network has service on every road, but it doesn’t come very often.

The MST COA is a unique opportunity to rethink the purpose of Monterey County’s transit system. The most basic choice is the degree to which the transit system should be pursuing ridership or coverage.

What is planning for High Ridership?
Designing a network for high ridership serves several popular goals, including:
• Enabling people to use transit to easily get to many jobs and services. • Minimizing pollution and climate impact by replacing car trips with transit trips. • Limiting the growth of congestion.
• Supporting dense and walkable development.

Prioritizing ridership means buses come more often and are convenient for more trips (higher frequency, longer hours) but are available only in places where many people, jobs and destinations are located.

What is planning for High Coverage?
Designing a transit system for high coverage serves different popular goals:
• Ensuring that as many people as possible have insurance against isolation through access to some transit service, no matter where they live. • Ensuring that every community in the county has some service, even if relatively few people live and work there.

Prioritizing coverage means buses serve as many places as possible, but because they are spread out they don’t come often (once an hour or less) and aren’t convenient for many trips.

Why can’t MST do both?
MST can pursue high ridership and extensive coverage at the same time, but the more it pursues one, the less it can provide of the other. Every dollar that is spent providing high frequency along a dense corridor is a dollar that cannot be spent bringing transit closer to each person’s home.

Should MST focus more on the services likely to generate the highest ridership, or continue to focus on covering as many places as possible?
175
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 73
8 Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Local vs. Regional Service
Because MST is the transit agency for all
of Monterey County, there will always be a
tension in deciding how much transit service
should be provided for:
• Local trips, mostly in the greater Monterey
and Salinas areas.
• Regional trips connecting all parts of the
county to Salinas, Monterey, Watsonville
and points beyond.

This tension is inevitably bound up in the ridership vs. coverage trade-off, because:
• Longer lines cost more to operate at the
same frequency than shorter lines.
• Longer lines cross large areas where no one
gets on the bus, so they serve fewer riders
for every hour the bus runs.

This means that regional bus service tends to
be more expensive to operate, while serving
fewer passengers, than local lines.

This is especially true for MST’s longest lines,
like Line 23 (Salinas to King City); Line 84 (King
City to Paso Robles); or the pre-pandemic lines
to San Jose and Santa Cruz.

The more MST spends on regional service,
the fewer resources are available to
provide lower-cost, higher-ridership lines in
urbanized areas. But if MST did not provide
regional lines to the small towns in southern and northern Monterey County, it is unlikely anyone else would step in.

Figure 72: Regional map of combined population and job density. 176
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 74
8 Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Key Choice: Needs-Based vs. Population-Based
Should MST focus mostly on the travel needs of
disadvantaged communities, or consider all travel
demand equally regardless of people’s circumstances?
Figure 73: Regional map of the density of people living in households below 150% of the federal poverty line.

Almost everybody needs to go to various
places on a regular basis. But some people
have more choices than others about how to
get around.
• People who don’t own cars can’t drive
their car to get around. But this does not
necessarily mean they strongly need transit.

Many people without cars choose to live
in a location where they can walk or bike
to the places they need to go. They may
use transit only occasionally, and even then
they may have other options like a taxi or
ridehailing service like Uber and Lyft.
• Some seniors and people with disabilities
can’t drive, and so they are more likely to
need to use transit to get around. Many of
the people who fit this description will also
have difficulty using transit and may require
ADA complementary paratransit.
• People with low incomes generally have
fewer choices about where to live, and
whether or not that place is near the places
they need to go. They are less likely to
own a reliable car, and more likely to live in
a household with fewer cars than drivers.

These factors make it more likely that a lowincome person might need to use transit.

But if transit isn’t available or convenient
enough, they are more likely to rely on
friends and family to give them rides, or to
walk or bike very long distances.

In 2014, Monterey County voters decided to
explicitly support the transit needs of seniors,
veterans and people with disabilities. Measure
Q collects an 1/8 cent sales tax that goes
to funding 6 fixed bus lines and most of the
county’s paratransit trips.

But there has been no explicit funding commitment (by county voters or otherwise) to prioritize needs of people with low incomes,
who tend to have the fewest choices about
where they need to go and how to get there.

MST does not currently have the funding
tools to make a commitment comparable to
Measure Q. But MST could decide to prioritize low-income communities in planning its general-public services.

Would that be the right decision? It depends
on your values.

If you are most interested in universal coverage
with basic transit service, you might not want
to see service to some communities prioritized
over others. If you are most interested in a
system that maximizes ridership, you might not
want to prioritize service to far-flung and isolated low-income areas.

But the initial outreach suggests that such
“purist” views about the ridership vs. coverage
trade-off are rare. Local opinion somewhat
favors a stronger focus on ridership, but overwhelmingly favors prioritizing the needs of disadvantaged people and communities in
designing transit service.
177
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 75
8 Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
What we’ve heard from the public.

Outreach Process
In preparing this report, MST and the consultant team conducted outreach to hear the community’s opinion on the key choices for the
transit network.

We heard from stakeholder groups. Small
group interviews were conducted with over
80 community stakeholders to secure their
input regarding transit needs and priories.

Participants included representatives of:
• Jurisdictions served by MST
• Social Service Agencies
• Medical Facilities
• Seniors and Persons with Disabilities
• Employers
• Hospitality Industry
• Schools, Colleges and CSUMB
• Military Programs
• Non-English-Speaking Populations
We talked to regular MST riders. Nine focus
groups were conducted with English and Spanish
speaking MST riders to explore their experiences
with and priorities for the transit network.

We surveyed the general public. A representative survey of 500 households throughout Monterey County was conducted via telephone. The survey provided input on how the general population believes MST should prioritize services and allocate resources. For further details on the survey, please refer to Appendix
A to this report, “A Survey of the General
Adult Public in Monterey County, California,
2021, for MST”.

The community values
transit for ethical and
practical purposes.

When asked to rate how important it would
be for MST to focus on any of twelve aspects
of service design, the great majority of survey
respondents considered all of them to be
either “extremely” or “very” important. Very
few consider any of them unimportant.

Simply put: People value public transit. Also,
they are decisive about this: almost everyone
expressed an opinion. Very few answered “Not
sure.”
Differences of opinion regarding the importance of transit priorities are matters of degree.

The service design aspects with the greatest
percentages rating them as “extremely important” are of two types:
• Empathetic: Ethically, people feel it
is important to serve those in need
because of age, disability, or lack of
a personal vehicle. These factors were
rated as extremely important by the largest
numbers of respondents.
• Instrumental: As a practical matter, service
is important as a means to an end.

Specifically, this includes getting people
to jobs, to school, to shopping, and
reducing pollution/greenhouse gases.

Thus, for example, only 15% consider it
extremely important to increase the overall
amount of MST service (i.e. service increase
with no specific objective), but 26% feel
as strongly that MST should help reduce
pollution and greenhouse gases, and get
workers to places where most jobs are
located. In other words, transit is important
not so much as an end in itself, but as a
means to valued ends.

Factors least highly valued are special services for tourists and service to all corners of Monterey County even in places where
few people would use it.

Figure 74: How Monterey County residents rated the importance of different possible priorities for MST transit service in a phone survey.
12%
14%
14%
15%
18%
23%
25%
25%
26%
26%
34%
41%
45%
40%
46%
49%
48%
49%
58%
53%
57%
50%
56%
52%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Special tourist services to reduce traffic congestion
Service to all places, even where few people ride
Support denser, walkable development
Increase overall amount of service
Help reduce the growth of traffic congestion
Transportation to high schools
Transportation to colleges & universities
Routes for people to get to stores and appts
Routes that get workers to places where the most jobs are Help limit air pollution and greenhouse gases
Affordable transportation where many people lack vehicles Routes tailored to needs of elderly and disabled
How important is it for MST to provide....

Extremely important Very important Somewhat important
Not very important Not important at all Not sure
178
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 76
8 Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Frequency is more valued
than coverage. Serving
those who need it matters
most.

In discussing the choice between ridership
and coverage with the public, the project team
specifically referred to the most tangible elements of the trade-off:
• Whether they were most interested in high
frequency or service to many places
• Whether they valued high frequency so
much that they would be willing to sacrifice
coverage in return.

Broadly speaking, people in Monterey
County appear willing to invest more in
high-frequency services, but only if the
remaining coverage resources are invested
on meeting the needs of high-need groups.

Stakeholder Interviews
Most interviewed stakeholders expressed a
desire for more frequent transit, for reasons
such as:
• “Service workers often have multiple jobs
and need more frequency to make transit a
viable option.”
• “Lack of frequency is a barrier to use.

People would rather get a ride because
transit takes too long.”
• “Frequent transit would open up opportunities for affordable housing grants.” However, other stakeholders noted that
enhanced convenience for some should not
outweigh access for those who lack transportation options.

Rider Focus Groups
Among riders, there was broad belief that
if lines ran more often, more people would
ride and that current riders would ride more
often: “People want to ride the bus, if it’s good
enough.”
When asked if they would trade reduced
coverage for increased frequency, many riders
had difficulty choosing frequency unconditionally and offered “hybrid” solutions to avoid the choice.
• “Frequency on a few well-planned routes
would be better, but please focus on
people who really need the service.”
• “Increase frequency but offer special
services for seniors and persons with
disabilities.”
• “Frequency, but not if it is inequitable.”
These views are mirrored in what we
heard from the general public. When asked
directly about the key trade-offs, phone survey
respondents:
• Favored frequent, high-ridership service
(64%) over extensive coverage (35%).
• Favored focusing first on disadvantaged
communities (69%) over treating all communities equally (30%).

The strength of feeling in favor of service
for those who need it most was even more
evident in questions about which types of
service MST should prioritize.

Over 90% of respondents thought that
“routes tailored to the need of the elderly
and disabled” and “affordable transportation where many people lack vehicles” were either “extremely” or “very” important.

Figure 75: How Monterey County residents responded to key trade-offs in a phone survey.

Telephone Survey Tradeoffs: Should MST…
Focus on providing service to as many places as
possible, even if that means the bus only comes
every hour or two and most trips take a very long
time
OR
Focus on providing fast and frequent service, that
comes every 15 minutes and takes the most direct
routes, even if that means transit is only available in the areas where the most people live and work?
Focus on service every 15 minutes in areas with lots
of jobs and schools, so that many people can rely on
buses to get to work or school on time, but that
means some people don't have any service.

OR
Provide service every hour or two throughout the
county, so everyone has a little bus service but very
few people can rely on it to get to work or school on
time?
Focus more on the benefits of fairness to all by
providing at least a little service to everyone in all
communities large and small even if it is slow and the
bus doesn’t come very often?
OR
Focus more on supporting the local economy by
providing fast and frequent service in the areas
where many people could use it to get to work,
school, shopping and other everyday needs?
Focus first on needs of communities where many
people have low incomes, or don’t have reliable
access to a personal vehicle?
OR
Provide service equally to all communities,
regardless of need, income or access to a personal
vehicle?
69%
30%
35%
64%
65%
27%
72%
33%
179
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES | 77
8 Comprehensive Operational Analysis - Choices Report
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Next Steps
Project Timeline
The Monterey-Salinas Transit COA is combining technical analysis and broad-based community input to develop a post-pandemic
transit network. This will include the following
steps:
• May 2021: Choices Report. This report
provides facts about the existing network,
and describes the key choices for future
service. It has been developed through a
combination of technical and broad-based
community input.
• May 2021: Committee Direction. The
MST Board of Directors’ Operations
Committee will provide the project team
with direction on the key trade-offs, based
on input from the public and policymakers.
• June-August 2021: Develop a Draft
Network Plan. The project team will
develop a draft of a redesigned bus
network, and any recommendations for
changes to paratransit and specialized
services.
• September-October 2021: Public Review
of Draft Plan. The Draft Plan will be presented to the public. There will be multiple venues for input, including an online survey.
• December 2021: Final Plan. The project
team will make changes to the Draft Plan,
taking into account public input.
• MST is targeting implementation in the
second half of 2022.

Figure 76: Project timeline.

Analyze the Network
Community Input
Choices Report
May 2021
Committee Direction
June 2021
Draft Network Plan
August 2021
Community Input Final Plan
December 2021
Board Decision
Early 2022
Redesign the Network
Implementation by MST
180
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

Prepared by
Canby Area Transit

TRANSIT MASTER PLAN
NOVEMBER 2024
181
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
| 2 Existing Conditions Report
Canby Transit Master Plan Update
Contents

1. Introduction.................................................... 4 Why is Canby Area Transit updating the Master Plan? .....5 Why is Canby Area Transit updating the Master Plan? .....6 What have we heard from the public? ..............................8 Highlights of this Transit Master Plan................................9

2. Public Engagement Overview ...................... 10 Overview........................................................................ 11 Stakeholder workshop....................................................12 Stakeholder interviews ...................................................15 Community Survey # 1 ...................................................16 Community Survey # 2 ...................................................20 Tabling Events ................................................................23

3. Existing Conditions Overview ...................... 24 Existing 2024 CAT Routes ..............................................25 2024 Service Frequency by Route and Time of Day .......26 What did we find in the Existing Conditions Report?.....27

4. Transit Recommendations ............................ 28 Recommended 2029 Transit Network............................29 2029 Service Frequency by Route and Time of Day.......30 Recommended Route: Canby Loop ...............................33 2029 Regional Connections ...........................................35 2029 Regional Connections ...........................................36 Recommended Route: 99X going North........................37 Recommended Route: 99X going South........................39 Recommended Route: 3X ..............................................41 Public comments on the Draft Transit Master Plan.........43 Community Survey # 3 ...................................................45

5. Dial a Ride Service ........................................ 48 Background....................................................................49 Service expansion into Clackamas County.....................50

6. Costs and Funding........................................ 51 Fixed Route Operating Costs.........................................52 Transit Grant Funding Sources and Opportunities .........54

7. CAT’s Capital Assessment and
Recommendations ............................................ 62 CAT Vehicle Fleet...........................................................63 CAT Bus Stops................................................................67 Bus Stop Recommendations ..........................................68 Technology Assessment.................................................74

8. Policy for Transit-Supportive Infrastructure. 77
Policy assessment and recommendations ......................78 Appendix A: Public Engagement...................... 88
Appendix B: Bus Stop Inventory .................... 152 Appendix C: Summary of Recommended Policies
175
Appendix D: Existing Conditions Report ....... 180
Anytime you see a symbol like A or B in
this document, look for the same symbol in a
nearby map or image.
182
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

Consultants The Transit Master Plan for the City of
Canby was completed in 2024, with contributions from the following people.

City Council
Brian Hodson, Mayor
Traci Hensley, Council President
James Davis, Councilor
Jason Padden, Councilor
Scott Sasse, Councilor
Daniel Stearns, Councilor
Herman Maldonado, Councilor
City Staff
Todd Wood, Transit & Fleet Director
Heidi Muller, Transit Operations Manager
Acknowledgments
183
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

1. Introduction
184
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

1. Introd
uction
CAT Transit Master Plan | 5
Why is Canby Area Transit updating the Master Plan?
Dial-A-Ride
Fixed route
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
60%
80%
100%
120%
60%
80%
100%
Change from 2019
120%
Ridership Revenue Hours
Dial-A-Ride and Fixed-Route Service
CAT Ridership and Service 2015-2022
Canby Area Transit (CAT) operates public
transit for the city and its residents, moving
people within and outside of Canby’s
Urban Growth Boundary (UGB).

The Transit Master Plan (TMP) lays out
a set of improvements to Canby’s public
transit system that respond to residents’
travel needs, the City’s goals for mobility,
economic opportunity and the environment, and priorities expressed throughout public outreach conducted in 2024. These
improvements could be implemented over
the next 3-5 years.

CAT went through a Transit Master Plan
process in 2017. This effort generated
ideas for route structures based on extensive analysis and conversations with the community. Most of these ideas have been
the source of service improvements that
have been made since then. CAT is now
looking at how to improve service in the
next 5 years.

In the past few years, the region has
experienced sudden and potentially lasting
lifestyle and economic shifts, prompting
CAT to reassess its priorities. Looking
ahead, we considered three significant
changes:
• Changes in Need and Demand
• Changes in Financial Resources
• Changes in Goals and Priorities
The Transit Master Plan has been an
opportunity to have conversations with
the community about how the agency’s
service should change in the face of these
questions.

Changes in Need and
Demand
The past two years have presented major challenges for all transit agencies. Ridership
declined substantially for virtually all US transit operators, and many were forced to make
major service cuts as a result
of either financial instability or
driver shortages. CAT has been
one of the few agencies that
has bounced back from the
pandemic.

Figure 1 shows that after the
pandemic, ridership started to
decline but CAT kept service
constant. In 2021, the Canby
Loop service was implemented
and ridership started to grow.

This means that CAT’s service
planning can now focus on
network improvements, rather
than restoring service cuts from
the past few years.

While major disruptions in daily life due
to the pandemic are past, some of the
changes introduced over the last two
years and people’s mobility patterns are
likely to persist, creating new demands
and expectations of transit providers.

As more people can work from home,
commuter trips are decreasing and more
Figure 1: CAT Ridership and Service change since 2015.
185
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

1. Introd
uction
CAT Transit Master Plan | 6
Why is Canby Area Transit updating the Master Plan?
multipurpose trips are spread out throughout the whole day, as shown in Figure 2.

This chart shows that the majority of trips
originating in Canby are happening in the
afternoon (from 12 to 4PM). It also shows
that there is similar travel demand on
Saturdays, only without the morning rush
hour present on weekdays.

One part of this planning process was to
determine what direction the community
wanted CAT to go in the future. This
conversation included changes to when
transit is offered, as well as where transit is
offered.

While CAT worked on the Transit Master
Plan update there was a parallel process
happening: the Comprehensive Plan
Update. This effort will give direction on
where the city will grow and by how much.

Throughout this process we worked with
the City to inform this plan. New neighborhoods, commercial zones and communities are places where transit service may be
appropriate and needed in the future. 0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
024 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Time of day
Number of trips
Weekday Weekend
Trips by hour and day
Figure 2: Canby trips by hour and day of the week. Source: Replica data 2023. 186
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

1. Introduction
CAT Transit Master Plan | 7
Changes in financial
resources
This Master Plan Update provides recom-
mendations based on realistic financial
growth in state and local funding.

Transit agencies in the US have been
experiencing devastating service cuts due
to a shortage of bus drivers. Drivers are
quitting or retiring early much faster than
agencies can replace them. A successful
strategy to keep existing drivers or hire
new ones is to provide better wages, which
is costly for agencies.

CAT currently contracts-out operations
(which includes driving and supervision)
through a third party provider. This cost
will likely go up due to driver retention
issues. The agency is also considering the
idea of hiring drivers directly. Regardless
of the direction CAT takes, a portion of
any increase in resources will go towards
keeping drivers to operate its existing
service.

The revenue level assumed in the Master
Plan update is not a statement about
how much transit service Canby needs or
should have; it’s a description of what CAT
anticipates it can afford, given the current
funding sources.
187
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

1. Introduction
CAT Transit Master Plan | 8
What have we heard from the public?
The foundation of this effort is the need
to update our priorities. Transit plays a
central role in many issues that people
care about, including urban development,
social equity, racial justice, traffic, safety,
and climate change. Each of these issues
suggests certain priorities for CAT, but
they can each push the transit system in
different directions.

We asked the community to help CAT
determine what priorities the agency
should follow in the next five years.

Since early 2024, the project team has
gathered input from hundreds of Canby
residents and organizations. This has
included conversations with stakeholder
focus groups, online and on board surveys,
and outreach at community events.

Chapter 2 describes the engagement
process and findings. Based on this work,
CAT has identified issues with existing
services and a clear set of priorities for
improvement. These include: • Additional local service in the City of Canby. We asked the community
what additional service meant to them,
and we heard that their preference is
having the Canby Loop operate in two
directions as it would shorten their
local trips.
• Additional service on Sundays.

In the first survey and stakeholder
workshop, we heard that adding
service on Sunday is a priority as
people don’t have any service today.

In the second survey, we asked the
public again about this in relation to
the other improvements and taking
into account the very high cost of
adding Sunday service. With that
additional context, Sunday service
didn’t emerge as respondents’ first
priority. Other improvements to local
service and regional connections were
more important to respondents in the
second survey.
• Better weekend and evening service.

People’s lives don’t end at 6 PM, and
many essential activities take place
on Saturdays and Sundays. This is
especially true for many low-wage and
essential workers, who often bear the
brunt of worse weekend and evening
frequencies, or services that stop
running before their work shifts end.
• More regional service. Many people
rely on CAT for all-day travel between
Canby, Oregon City and Woodburn.

One of the most important priorities
we heard from the community was
improving connections to neighboring
cities, especially to Oregon City, down-
town Portland, Wilsonville, Clackamas
and Woodburn.
188
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

1. Introd
uction
CAT Transit Master Plan | 9
Highlights of this Transit Master Plan
The Transit Master Plan is a document
to rethink how transit should work in
Canby. Key goals include:
• How do the transit routes work today?
• What are the community values in relation to CAT’s service, and how can CAT work to serve these values?
• What should CAT do in the following
five years and how will it get there?
This plan recommends enhancing CAT’s
fixed routes by adding new routes to
additional locations and improving existing
services.

Some of the key improvements for the next
five years that would improve local and
regional trips include:
• Better frequency. The Canby Loop
and part of Route 99X would run every
30 minutes consistently throughout the
whole day.
• Better local service. The Canby Loop
would run in two directions every 30
minutes.
• Better service on Saturdays. Route
99X (from Canby to Oregon City)
would have 30 minute service on
Saturday, twice as much as today.
• Better regional connections. Route
99X would provide service to downtown Woodburn about every 60 minutes. Route 99X would provide
service to Oregon City, and Milwaukie,
connecting to the Milwaukie/Main
Street MAX Orange Line Station. CAT
would also provide additional service
to Wilsonville’s SMART Route 3X,
resulting in a bus coming every 30
minutes.

Document guide
The document is organized into 7 chapters:
• Chapter 2 provides a summary of
public engagement in this plan and
how the public informed the Plan.
• Chapter 3 provides a summary of
the Existing Conditions Report. This
report is also available in “Appendix D:

Existing Conditions Report”.
• Chapter 4 describes the 2029
Recommended Network.
• Chapter 5 provides a description of
what will happen with Dial a Ride
Service in the next years.
• Chapter 6 provides a description of
this plan cost, and potential funding
sources.
• Chapter 7 focuses on the assessment
and recommendations for CAT’s fleet
of vehicles, bus stops, and its current
technology systems.
• Chapter 8 outlines policy findings and
recommendations for the City of Canby
to make that will help create transit-supportive infrastructure. 189
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

2. Public Engagement
Overview
190
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

2. Public E
n
g
a
gement Overview
CAT Transit Master Plan | 11
Overview
CAT and the consulting team led an inclusive process to engage a diverse group of existing and potential transit users, including historically underserved communities, seniors, people with disabilities, and others
who live in Canby and travel to population
centers for appointments, shopping, or
visiting family and friends.

Goals of engagement
The goals for engagement included:
• Collaborating with key stakeholders
throughout the project to understand
constraints and identify potential solutions for future transit service in Canby and connected cities.
• Gathering input directly from potential
users and current riders regarding
transit service, travel preferences, and
preferred destinations.
• Collecting feedback from the public on
the Draft Network.
• Communicating the engagement
process and informing the public
when their input would have the greatest impact, allowing for actionable feedback that influences the Plan’s
recommendations.
• Providing consistent, reliable, and
accessible information with a
designated CAT contact person.
• Sharing information on the Canby Area
Transit webpage.

Our outreach approaches included:
• Developing a Public Involvement Plan
to guide the community involvement
process. Special consideration was
given to senior facilities, apartment
complexes, schools, lower-income
residents and workers, and people who
predominantly speak Spanish to reach
underrepresented groups.
• Conducting four stakeholder interviews with stakeholders identified by CAT.
• Hosting a stakeholder workshop on
March 28th, where project staff guided
participants through the service planning decisions being considered in the Plan update. Staff invited around
150 participants by email or phone,
and a total of 10 people attended the
workshop.
• Administering a community survey,
both online and in person (onboard
buses). The first survey, launched from
March 11 to April 15, asked the community about their transit needs and priorities for the Transit Master Plan.

The survey received 87 responses,
including 7 in Spanish.
• Conducting a second online survey
focused on potential network improvements, launched from June 6th to July 8th. A total of 102 responses were
collected, with 11 in Spanish.
• Tabling at community events. During
the Spring and Summer of 2024, CAT
and the project team attended two
community events to invite participation in the Plan update. They collected feedback by asking people to take
the surveys and mark a map with their
thoughts on route improvements.
• Sending email blasts to an Interested
Parties List to keep people informed
about the project.
• Providing updates to the Transit
Advisory Committee and City Council.

The engagement process started at the
beginning in Spring 2024. This chapter
summarizes the process and what we
heard from the community.
191
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

2. Public E
n
g
a
gement Overview
CAT Transit Master Plan | 12
Stakeholder workshop
On March 28th, CAT held a workshop
to address key questions regarding the
planning of future transit within and
around Canby. The workshop took place
from 5:00 to 7:30 pm in the public meeting
space of the Police Department building.

Staff and consultants reached out to 150
stakeholders, with a total of 10 participants
attending the event.

Participants included multiple members of
the Transit Advisory Committee, Planning
Commission, City of Canby employees,
and representatives from the Canby Adult
Center and Hope Village.

The workshop included:
• Presentation: The project team provided an overview of CAT’s routes and presented the key findings from the
existing conditions analysis.
• Interactive Transit Planning Game:

Participants engaged in a game that
introduced the trade-offs and service
considerations for transit in and around
Canby. They were divided into small
groups to create transit maps for the
City of Canby, incorporating both local
and regional services. Each group had
to weigh the trade-offs of operating
at various distances and frequencies
throughout the region.
• Live Polling: Participants were invited to
respond to key questions through live
polling.
• Questions and Discussion: An open
forum for participants to ask questions
and engage in discussions with the
project team.

Interactive game
The project team assisted participants and
engaged in discussions about the types
of trips and services they hope to see in
future CAT offerings. Some general sentiments were:
• Participants acknowledged the
challenges of planning a transit system
that works for everyone.
• They noted the difficulty in choosing
between higher frequency service and
service that covers more areas.
• Many participants, who were not
regular riders, expressed a desire to
better understand the needs of current
riders.
• During the service exercise, participants
made minimal changes to the Loop
but concentrated on updating regional
service. Improving the connection
to Wilsonville was a common theme
across groups.
• Participants explored
how transit planning intersects with future needs,
such as multifamily residential developments and the
impact of tolling on I-5 for
accessing Wilsonville.
• Overall, participants
said they gained an
understanding of the
trade-offs between providing frequency or service
coverage.

Figure 3: Networks created by stakeholder workshop participants. 192
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

2. Public E
n
g
a
gement Overview
CAT Transit Master Plan | 13
Stakeholder workshop
Polling
Participants responded to a set of polling
questions. During this stage of the workshop, there was also an open discussion where participants could elaborate on their
answers or ask additional questions.