Tehachapi City Council
July 20, 2026

?
f,
Kern Council of
Governments
Tehachapi
Transit Development Plan
June 2026
NELSON

NYGAARD
Kimley,>Horn
lt'
I II
Kern Council
of Governments
3 ^"$#.3*1 :sl
TEHAC xaprl
t'
City of
(
,:
.i\
l.\A
.::
v q. \V
h^
l<.

COMMUNICATIONS
r
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Plon Approoch...................

Purpose of Document.......,.....,....,,.,..
2 Overview of Trqnsit in Tehochopi qnd lhe Surrounding Areos..............

I lntioduclion..

Locol Tronsit.,..,..............,..

Moior Activity Generotors............'
-......
5s
I
I
2 3
3 ,l
3 7
Kern Tronsit..,..,..........

Olher Locol Operotors Connecting to Kern Tronsit Roure I 00.........'.'..' lnlercity Operoiors .....,..,.,,.

Popu1otion.,..,.,.....,..,.....

Demogrophic Anolysis
Employmenl ...........
ll
l5
25 3l
Historicol Trends 45
.53
Tronsf ers to Other Providers..'..'..'...

Tronsit Need Anoty1is............".'.........

Expenses ond Revenues..'.....'.'..'.........'..

Fleet ond Focililies
Agency lnterview..

Key Tokeowoys..,..

Resiliency: An Overorching Considerotion.'..............'..

Service Recommendotions...'........'..'.....-
Pop-up Event,..,.....'.....'......

Phose Two Survey.....
..... 55
..... 57
57 58
59 66
68 Tehochopi 201 2 Tronsit Developmenl Plon..'..'..........'..". 60 6 Oulreoch Overview qnd Phqse One Summoly...-.....'-......-- '-""""" 62 Phose One Public Outreoch Summory.......'...'.........'..".'. 63 Phose One Tehochopi Survey Results.....'.. ..... 63
7 Recommendolions """"""""""' 65
Operotions Recommendqtions.

Adminislrolive ond Policy Recommendotions......'
Tehochopi Virtuol Public Meeling.-.----.-.. ............... 86 ......72
......79
8 -----........' 87
_............................ a7
9 lmprovemenl Phosing..........
lmplementolion Phosing Toble
Doto Sources,..,.......... ..r05
Finonciol Model
Limitolions .....,,...
ond Assumptions...
r00
t0l
Kern Council of Governments
r05
r06
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Revenue Sources.....,
Appendix A: Countywide Demogrophic Mops
Final Report
................ I 07
Kern Councll of Governments
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report

TABLE OF FIGURES
Tronsit Network in Kern Counly,..
lntercity Tronsit Routes in Kern County
City of Tehochopi Populqlion Densily
Kern County Hisioricol Populqtion Growlh 2005 io 2025
Populotion Forecost by Regionol Suboreo: 2O24 to 2O5O
Mojor Employers in Kern County.......

Grocery Stores in Tehqchopi...."..'.'
Medicol Fociliries in Tehochopi ----.-
Schools in Tehochopi.....'.....'..

Page
Figure l5
Figure 16
Figure l7
Figure l8
Figure l9
Figure 20
Figure 21
Figure 22
Figure 23
Figure 24
Figure 25
Figure 26
Figure 27
Figure 28
Figure 29
Figure 30
Figure 31
Figure 32
Figure 33
Figure 34
Figure 35
Figure 36
Figure 37
Figure 38
Figure 39
Figure 40
Figure 4l
Kern Tronsit Roure 100 A1i9nmenl..,.............
5 6
9 2
r3
r3
Kern COG Regionol Suboreos Definitions ..,..........,.

City of Tehochopi Proporlion of People of Co1or...................................'..'.'...."......... l6 City of Tehochopi Proporlion of Velerons .......,.... '..'..'..'............ I7 City of Tehochopi Proportion of People with Disobilitie5..........................'..'.'.'..'..'... I I City of Tehochopi Proportion of Older Adults..... .....'..'..'...'..'... 19 Ciry of Tehochopi Proportion of Young Adults.................'.. 20 Ciry of Tehochopi Proporlion of People in Poverty ..........--......................................22 City of Tehqchopi Proporlion of People with Limired English Prof iciency.............-.-.-. 23
14 Public Housing in Tehocho pi ..........
30 35
37 41
43 44
45 45
53 54
56 57
...... 39
Prisons ond Correctionol Focililies in Kern County.......'...

Tehochopi Tronsil Syslem Overview....'...........

City of Tehochopi Orgonizotionol Chort..............'...

Tehochopi Diol-A-Ride Service Spon
City of Tehochopi Diol-A-Ride Fqre Structure..'.....

Possenger Trips by Yeor for Tehochopi Diol-A-Ride...............'..............'..-.....-.......... 46 Revenue Hours by Yeor for Tehochopi Diol-A-Ride..........'.....'.. 47 Produdivity by Yeor for Tehochopi Diol-A-Ride..'...'..'. ........ 48 O&M Co$ by Yeor for Tehochopi Diol-A-Ride............'........... 49 O&M Cosr per Trip by Yeor for Tehochopi Diql-A-Ride..............'..'..'......"""""""" 50 O&M Cost per Revenue Hour by Yeor for Tehochopi Diol-A-Ride....'.'....'--""""' 5l Forebox Recovery by Yeor for Tehochopi Diol-A-Ride.......--.------..--.'..'.." 52 Doily Averoge Ridership by Month for Tehochopi Diol-A-Ride Productivity by Month for Tehochopi Diol-A-Ride.......--.

Tronsit Propensity in lhe City of Tehochopi-----
City of Tehochqpi Tronsit Expenses - FY 2024
City of Tehqchopi Trqnsil Revenues - FY 2024 -.............................."........'."""""""" 57 Kern Council of Governments
Figure I
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure I
Figure 9
Figure l0
Figure I I
Figure l2
Figure 13
Figure l4
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 42
Figure 43
Figure 44
Figure 45
Figure 46
Figure 47
Figure 48
Figure 49
Figure 50
Figure 5l
Figure 52
Figure 53
Figure 54
Figure 55
Figure 56
Figore 57
Recommendolions from Tehochopi 2012 Tronsit Development Recommendotions, FY27-3 I
P1on..................,..............

Final Report
61 88
Sonomo County Tronsit Schedule lncluding SMART Arrivol Times.......................'..... 83 Responses to "Do you normolly ride rhe following?" (n = 3l ) Responses lo "How hoppy ore you wilh lhe lronsit service in Tehochopi?" (n = 20) 89
Responses to "Whot ore your biggesl concerns or chollenges with tqking tronsit in Tehochopi?" (n = 20) 9l
Responses lo "How would you like to find informotion oboul your trqnsporlolion oprions?" (n = l7)-.^-..,..,.. 93
Responses to "Whol is your oge?" {Optionol) (n = 18) ....94 Responses to "Which of the following roces/ethnicilies do you idenlify with?" (Select oll thor opply) (Oprionol) (n = I7)......----..............'.....'.. 95 Responses lo "Whol is the opproximote combined income for your household?" (Optionol) (n = 17) ....... 96
Responses to "How mony vehicles ore in your household?" (Optionol) (n = l8) 97
Responses lo "Do you hove o disobility lhot requires o mobilily device or other ossislonce?" (Oplionol) (n = I 8)... .... 98 Responses to "Are you o veteron of the ormed forces?" (Optionol) (n = 18) 99
Revenue Sources for Tehochopi Diol-A-Ride, FY 2027-2031 .... r 08 City of Tehochopi LTF ond STA Funding Received, FY 2022-2025.-... r09 Expenses for Tehochopi Diol-A-Ride, FY 2027-2031 109
Ciry of Tehochopi's Finonciql Position, Boseline ond with ................... I I 1
Kern Council of Gove.nments
City of Tehachapi Tran5it Development Plan

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Kern Council of Governments (Kern COG) plays a critical role in planning and coordinating transportation in Kern County. This project is a combined effort that seeks to update nine Transit Development Plans (TDPs) for Kern county transit agencies as well as the Coordinated Human Services Transportation Plan. The City of Tehachapi TDP is one of the nine TDPs the Nelson\Nygaard team is updating as part of this project. Kern Transit is contracted by the City of Tehachapi to provide its Dial-A-Ride service.

This project supports Kern COG's Regional Transportation Plan, which is a long-term (20- year) plan for Kern County's entire transportation network. This project is funded by a Caltrans Sustainable Communities grant under the Climate Adaptation Program.

Plan Objectives
TDPS are usually updated every five years and are planning tools focusing on short-term transit needs and improvements.

The City of Tehachapi's previous TDP is now over 14 years old and must be updated to reflect the current environment. The goal ofthe TDP is to recommend improvements to transit service, connectivity, and access.

Plan Approach
The project team started by performing an existing conditions assessment. we analyzed existing data to identify potential issues, challenges, and opportunities for improving transit.

We also conducted an interview with city staff and asked transit riders in Tehachapi for their feedback and insights.

Based on the findings from the existing conditions assessment, Nelson\Nygaard developed recommendations to address the identified issues, challenges, and opportunities once recommendations were developed, we conducted a workshop with city and Kern Transit staff to review and refine the recommendations. After further refinement, the recommendations were presented to the public for input
Final Report
Kern Council of Governments
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Using input from the public, Nelson\Nygaard then developed a five-year plan to implement the proposed recommendations. We also developed a financial model to help the City understand costs associated with implementation.

Key Takeaways
The following are highlights from the TDP existing conditions assessment:
. Span of service is relatively good. Service operates from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on Saturdays. There is no service on Sunday. . As shown by historical trends, the pandemic significantly impacted ridership and productivitlt. Operation and maintenance costs were well controlled through the pandemic and have not risen substantially.
. Productivity is low. ln February 2025, the passengers per revenue hour for Dial-ARide service was 1.6, a very low level. . On-time performance is high. ln February 2025, Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride's on-time performance was 96%, measured with pick-ups and drop-offs occurring within the promised 30-minute window.

Public Outreach
The project team engaged in continuous outreach with the community throughout this project to ensure the Tehachapi TDP reflects the input and priorities of Tehachapi residents.

The project team worked with Kern coc, Kern Transit, and Tehachapi city staff to conduct and advertise the outreach events, gathering input from residents for inclusion in the plan.

There were two phases of community outreach:
. Phase One (June-July 2025): Listen and learn about the community's challenges and aspirations for transit. This phase of outreach involved administering a survey to Tehachapi transit riders in person and online.
. Phase Two (March 2026): Present potential transit recommendations for feedback and confirm if anything was missed. This phase of outreach involved a virtual public meetingtoexplainthepotentialtransitrecommendationsandavirtualsurveyto gatherfeedbackfromTehachapitransitridersaboutthepotentialimprovements' Phase One Outreach
The project team (onducted outreach in Tehachapi on June 25, 2025, riding the Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride vehicle and administering a survey to riders. The bilingual (English and spanish) survey was also available online for three weeks. During the ridealong, bilingual outreach staff (fluent in both English and Spanish) connected with Kern Councll of Governments
city of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report approximately 12 community members. Some riders took the survey, and their results are included in the summary in Chapter 6. For riders that did not want to take the survey, outreach staff engaged with these riders to obtain feedback on transit concerns and potential improvements. Those comments are noted in the narrative of the survey results section.

Overall, riders are satisfied with Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride service. Key takeaways from the small sample size of outreach participants are summarized below.

Service Zone: Transit does not run where respondents need it.

On-Time Performance: Buses are not on time and often wait too long for pick-ups.

Phase Two Outreach
Phase Two outreach took place in March 2026.

The goals of Phase Two outreach were to provide an update on the Transit Development Plan project, present the proposed recommendations to the public for feedback, and identify if any new recommendations needed to be developed.

Phase Two outreach involved a virtual public meeting in Tehachapi, a pop-up event, and an online survey.

Tehachapi Virtual Public Meeting
The consulting team with City of Tehachapi and Kern Transit staff held a virtual public meeting on Tuesday, March 3,2026 at 5:30 p.m. The meeting was hosted on Zoom. Although no community members attended the meeting, the presentation was recorded and posted online. The city and Kern Transit's outreach and promotion efforts for this meeting included posting the meeting flyer on transit vehicles and on social media, handing out flyers to passengers, and distributing a QR code to the meeting along with February's water bill for residents and businesses.

Nelson\Nygaard staff presented on the TDP progress and process for developing recommendations. The meeting was presented in English and Spanish with bilingual slides and translation available throughout.

Pop-up Event
A pop-event was hosted at the Albertsons on Tucker Road in Tehachapi from 10:00 a m to '12:00 p.m. on Wednesday, March 18, 2026. The consulting team spoke to 14 community members. Four community members completed the survey while at the event. one person Themes
Kern Council of Governments
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report completed a paper survey in Spanish. Five individuals took postcards with them, and one person took 10 postcards to distribute at a senior living complex.

Comments were from a mix of people who ride or do not ride transit in Tehachapi. They shared their experience traveling in Tehachapi, concerns with transit, and suggestions for improvements.

Phase Two Survey
A virtual survey administered as part of Phase Two outreach and was open for almost four weeks in March 2026.The City and Kern Transit posted flyers with the survey information on transit vehicles and social media, handed out flyers with the survey QR code to transit passengers, and advertised the survey during the virtual public meeting. ln addition, an announcement was included in the March 2026water bill sent to residents and businesses that included a QR code to the survey. The survey was also administered at the pop-up event.

Like the public meeting, the intent was to receive feedback on the recommendations and identify if any new recommendations needed to be developed. The survey also asked about demographic and socioeconomic data, including transit usage and vehicle ownership, age, ethnicity, and income.

Altogether, 31 people took the survey. Frequent concerns raised about transit in Tehachapi included transit not running late enough on Saturdays, transit not running on Sundays, and buses not being reliable (on time). There were also requests for expansion of service to Stallion Springs and Bear Valley.

Kern Council of Governments iv
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report System Recommendations
Recommendations are specific actions that the City of Tehachapi can take to address current challenges and transportation needs in the community. This chapter lists all potential recommendations that can be implemented.

Sixteen different recommendations are presented on the following pages. The recommendations are divided into four distinct categories:
. Service recommendations would enhance access to transit by improving connectivity in Tehachapi and neighboring communities.
. Operations recommendations focus on improving how service is delivered by integrating mobile apps and coordinating with Kern Transit on new programs for training drivers and identifying and applying for grants. . Administrative and policy recommendations identify approaches to improve customer experience, comply with state guidelines, and smooth the transition to a zero-emission fleet.
. Capital recommendations involve capital projects that would improve transit access for riders.

Kern Council of Governments
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Service Recommendations
Kern Council of Governments
Final Report
s-l
Coordinate uith Cerro Coso
Gommunity College to lmprove
Transportation to Campus
Ceno Coso Community College is
relocating their campus within Tehachapi.

The City of Tehachapi should wok with
the College and Kem Transit to serve
students and staff effectively.

Tehachapi, Kem Transit,
Ceno Coso Community
College
Furher sfudy needed
s.2 Pilot Extended Saturday Service Pilot extending Saturday service into the evening (7:30 p.m.) for six to nine monttrs
Tehachapi, Kem Transit $10,000
s-3
Pilot Sunday service for at least six hours,
potentially 9 a.m. to 3 p.m., for six to nine
months
Tehachapi, Kem Transit $30,000
Responsibility for I
lmplementation
I
Number Recommendation Description Cost
Pilot Sunday Service
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Operations Recommendations
Kern Council of Governments
o-1 lnvestigate Transit App lntegration
for Booking Rides
lnvestigate the use of the popular Transit
App for ride booking, allowing passenger
to book a ride without calling
Tehachapi, Kem Transit Minimal cost to agency
o-20 Establish a Countywide Driver
Training Program
Establish a standard driver training
program across the county by sharing
materials, cenhalizing training, or
developing a program at local colleges
Kem COG lead,
Tehachapi, Kem Transit,
and other agencies
support
Furher study needed
o-3@ Establish a Countywide Grant
Resource Program
Establish a grant resource program with
Kern C0G to centralize information and
opportunities on grant funding
Kem COG lead,
Tehachapi and other
agencies support
Furtha study needed, but
could be minimal cost
o-4@ Jointly Procure New Dispatching
Software
Study the feasibility ofjointly procuring
dispatching software with Kem COG
Kem COG lead,
Tehadrapi, Kem Transit,
and oher agencies
support
Furher sfudy needed
o-50
Explore Opportunities to Share
Zero-Emission Vehicle
Maintenance Expertise
lnvestgate the possibility of sharing
maintenance resources (staff, training, or
both) for 0ial-A-Ride
Kern COG lead,
Tehachapi, Kem Transit,
and other agencies
support
Further study needed
0-6@ Monitor Trip Denials and Explore
Ways to lmprove Produclivity
Respondents in Phase Two outreach
indicated that their trips are sometimes
denied. Kern Transit should monitor trip
denials to determine if this is a common
occurrence or not.

Kem Transit lead,
Tehachapi support
Minimal cost to agency
Responsibility for
lmplementation
Number Recommendation Description cost
Final Report
City of Tehachapi Transit Development PIan
Ad mi nistrative/Policy Recommendations
Kern Council of Governments
Tehachapi lead, Ceno
Coso Community College,
Kem Transit, and Amtak
Thruway support
Minimal cost to agency Update and Create New Marketing
Materials for Using Transit
Working with community partners and
agencies Tehachapi should update hansit
marketing materials to fit existing service
and respond to future needs (e.9. the nal
Ceno Coso Community College campus)
A-1
Tehadrapi lead, Kem
Transit support
Minimal cost to agencl Develop Marketing Materials to
Promote the Transit App
develop materials
use of the Transit App
Tehachapi should i
which promote the
for bip planning
A-2
when new guidance is
compliant
Develop a skategy
released to remain
Kem Transit lead,
Tehachapi support
Minimal cost to agency A-3 Update Farebox Recovery
Compliance Policy
Tehachapi, Kem Transit,
Caltans
Minimal cost to agency.

Additional costs may be
identified once
conversations take place.

Coordinate with Cattrans and Kern
Transit to Evaluate the Feasibility
of a Joint Zero-Emission Charging
and Storage Facility
Tehactapi should develop a collaborative
plan witfr Calkans for the use of a surplus
storage facility for zereemission charging
and kansit vehicle storage
A-40
Tehadapi, Kem Transit Minimal cost to agency
Tehachapi should prepare and conduct a
hands-on travel training campaign to
demystify transit use and familiarize
residenh with hor to ride Dial-A-Ride
A-5 Prepare and Conduct a Travel
Training Campaign
Kem Transit Minimal cost to agency
Kem Transit should note when Meholink
trips arnve in and depart from Lancaster
on heir Route 100 sctedule
A.6
Update Kern Transit Fixed-Route
Schedules to Show Connec{ions
to Me{rolink
Responsibility for
lmplementation Number Recommendation Description Cost
Final Report
vllt
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Capital Recommendations
@: Denotes a recommendation that supports agency resiliency Kern Council of Governments
Final Report
Tehachapi Furher Study Needed c-1@ Continue to Fill Gaps in the Continue filling in gaps in the sidelvalk and bike network to provide safe access
to transit facilities
Number Recommendation Description Cost
ix
Responsibility for
lmplementation
Clty of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Phasing Plan
There are s;xteen recommendations for the City of Tehachapi to implement. Since the TDP is a five-year plan, and the improvement phasing matrix that follows is set up to organize which recommendations should be implemented during which year of the plan.

The recommendations are intentionally staggered throughout the life of the plan to not overwhelm the agency in the first few years. Simpler and lower-cost recommendations can be implemented sooner, including items such as improving customer communications by updating the website or creating educational brochures for the vanpool/carpool program.

This implementation plan was used in the development of financial plan, discussed at the end of the executive summary.

Kern Council of Governments
City of Idarhapi Transit Deelopmen! Plan
K6n Council ol6vsnmsts
TolEhqt, Km Tmit,
cm C@ Cmmdv
cd€go
Sol Lp a @tI{ sh Cm C@
Cmunity Cdloqg lo uat6dend
fw hRrpo.btfr E€ds
oiru and analfzg potfftal
tEn6it irplmmt optfrs
Itrdomt potstal Gn6it s-1 Comrity imffinb, ilany Collage io lrTEw TnnTod.lifi !o C.npua
Mh plot
Ewlub tE pilol and @lld
@tffil€€&e*
d nEta [E plol p€mMl
. Erldilh ildEts mh6 to
ffilualo tE Filot
lt tE plot is sl@dul, eE s-2 Pilot Erbnd.d Sild.y Sdic. T€hadl4i, Xm Trad fundng b mke it p{ffi| to 6dub ttlo Fbt
AaHis rE dl(ld a rxMh tilot
Eval'r$ tE frld and .dld
@tdEfa66.d(
Matr a &cilion b
dsliu d trEk6 ,E prlot
p6anffirt
Ithglotissle3dul, @E T6hds, tudrEbfiElGtp€rltrffit Km Tffin s-3 Pilot Sundry S.dic.

Coodin{c with Cm Cos
l{umber RBpnribility Yd One (FY 2O2n Yg TF IFY ZOA) Yar ItE (FY AZ!) Ydr Four (FY m$) Y@ FiE (FY:n3t) City oI Tdarh.pi Tansit Odelopment Platr
Km CouftiloItummsB
o-1 Tdldr$, Km TmNit lncltd. Tnrtit.pp
lnt!!r.tion lor Eooking Rid6
lMtgabT@itry
inbgltff
ll haslr., bqin
irgffilalir ol Tdnsit 4p
boddm ld Oi+ARb
FinalEeandmll ill thprlgEm
B6gin d96i68 sh ots
inMbd Mdl qoaab.! in
Km CoJnV
l4nlit vdtffi b bo pdt
ol a bst b@ b lmlly
@[email protected] trild dt lh€
tffiB o( rE trog6
Cdd rr$ pols,xid
ndlty and addifi
pa.m
C6tnE tE (blEloF6l o{ fu o-20 progM
E.t blirh . Cohtyridc oriw
Tnini4 Progad
Kn@Gld,
T6ndqi, xm Tmm(
ad otBagffii€.
940.t
B€gin d&Ga6! sh oiE
inMbd Msjl ea.em in
(m Counly
ldnlity rd6t ! to b6 pdt
of a bsk h@ to ldmdt
dnlEb ard build dt
shrtE d [u Fo{rm
E.t bli.h . Couityidc Gmt
ReuE Protnm
lead,
Tehdtp ad oua
ag@a s4po.l
l(m coG o-30
panicirlino agmi6
. Cd|drt l@yhininq
BoCin dsi6! wifi oiB
inh3hd trsit (p{8h in
Xm Co6V
O6de stucin lo
rcffitand 6t.hdng o-40 aclEdt! Joinlly Prccurc Nd
Di.p.tching SoltE.

Km COG load,
TdEdci. (n Te*t.
dd o0a ag6.Ea
s{port
8€On rEplmEtfr Contn6 rmldrEntsM
B.gin dffii6! wih otw
inb.Bbd mit ffild3 in
Km Counly
l&nlity vduob€rs lo bo pad
of e Elk bE to lordly
6rdEb and &trnire
lat liv
B6gin rydulim 8nd
lablityassMt
fsltililya.@mt
B€gin buildng d fE
lhfr6 o, tE P@gm
Reid ddE sb a0gE,
Fffi
ErrloE Oppotuniti.r b Sh.G
Zm-Enirion VGticla
tldnbnee E4qti*
Km COG l€d,
T.rudud, l(m T6sil,
&E ots agmB
s.Forl
o-so
ll0mbd Rsohnddilion R6gonsibility Yer one (FY io24 Ya TF (FY:016) Y6r ThE (FY:Oz9) Ydr Fdr (FY 2030) Yd Fic FY 431) Find@ ard rdl dl UE p.oom
City ol TSa.h.pi Tnnsir Deelopmenl Plan
Kdn Councilof &vemmsts
Cstn€ Mibrino fip
&id!
ll tp &nrds aE cffino
lEqFlV, &lEiop aod
indmtdutG
CstoE mirin0 tip
&rid!
ll Up &.rd! 6ts @im
lEqsffy, d6de ad
indffit lduliro
86gin Mitoring tip &nials
Cddd qodx1i ty ardFs
b k anlify poldiial @l
@@ ol lfl prcdxtisty
etrb€a!
Ftr gidxlivity amlyri3,
r&rtt ild idtsffit
pohtd lduliG Io ilxfu$
frww,&l€laard
ifidffil sduld5
pfod,€bvty
. C6tM mibrE hp
&nials
. li tp d6nrals aB ecumng ColinE ffi*h.ing tip
e.i.b
ll hp (E!6lt rE (Mno
lEqtrty, d6de end
rtrdffit ldulia
o-6
ilonilor Tdp t .nid. ild
ErDlon Wayt b li?roE
Prcductjvity
(F Tmit l€ad,
Tehadt4, slpod
Updab tsdnwbtd Alic
brodluE
. Updrb Drd-A-Ri6 sdeqs) A-1 . RdtBh s$sib T€nadA
Updd..d CEd. thr
ihfi.ting liltri.b lor U.ing
Tr.nrit
Dfflap mrkoting mldalB
p.o@tng tE Trffiit 4
R6t6h mbrid! b rMFrate
intrmlM 6 b@king rbs
tB4h tE T@it m,
'f
6€d16d
fdsus as rat ol
RdmB&lxr01
A-2 Dmlop l4.fi.ting liLtcrLlr to
PEmta 6. Tnndt.pt
Updtr FrGbor f,sEry
coiTliec Poliq
T€ha.*|4i l6ad, Xm
Tmn 3$o.t
Km T@it l€d,
T*ed'ry c4pod
Dslcp a MBiffi ihboy A-3 *tE m gubm is rBles€d
Nd sbps b be &Mrn€d A-10 F6ibility ldMrEntialffitffi ol . Joint 2F Enit.ion Ch.Ein! .nd Sbr4!
F$illty
Plw and Condd. Tr&l
Tr.ining Cafrpaiin
Coodin.tG with Caltnnr.nd
T€hdl4(, l(mT@it
Tdldrg, {m Tmn,
cdm
U@b Reb 1m s.h€dJI6 b
Efl*t MeBmk $Mlle dlffi Updab Reb lm sch€dJl6 b
rEi&t Mehink scHrb drrrg6
t-hdab R&b 1m s.rr€dj6 b
Efld [,!ahid sdt€drls dlanga
ll d&us!ffi m posrlre,
MtinuoMtN
Updab R4b 1m larr€dj6 b
Efet l4€tdink s]EdJle d1tl06
Upd.b fm Tmrit Fir.+
KmT@l
Conretiona b Mdolink
A-6
Eogind$lJ!6.eh Cdm
dt (m T€Nit
Prwrtdtddamd
uEinng 6fips0n
rftlu& lredi* aml ard
Number R6ommqdation R6pon!ibility Y.r (he {FY 20Zl YEr Ts (FY A2E) Yed Th@(FY 2029) Y€r Fou. {FY 2030) Y6. FiYe IFY a)31) Numbs Reoffiddion R6ponsibility Year One (FY 2027) Y6r Th (FY :026) Ye.. Thre (FY 2029) Y6r Four (FY 2030) Yar Fire (FY A3l) A-5
Ciry ol Teh.chapi Tra^sit Oeelopment Pran
Ksn Council of Govemmsts
CmtnruirdffibbItrUrMtafurdng6sIEd
Cdtnls ftpkrHtslin -
ldpcBtafundngB@€d
CmttrufiplqMblffItrplml a furl(lng is s6d
Cstllrsitrtsmdbnlniffitstumlmis@tEd Conlino. b FiU Capr in Sidffl.nd Bilc [ctElf TdEha
. oplidd: o.de a lidordk
,d b*. n6ml parditalbn
dan to i&0tily tE aE ot
[email protected] nd 6d Qlin t
plaiq md diruittg
iMtffit
. Cdlilwfrpl.mtst.nItrdcffit a ludng 6
sEd
c-10
Yer Tm (FY Ys Four (FY:t30) YBFiE (FY m3ll ita) llumbd Reommffdation City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Financial Forecast
As part of this TDP, Nelson\Nygaard developed a five-year financial model to understand projected revenues and expenditures for the life of the plan. Using projections built off historical data, these forecasts are meant to provide a high-level view of the City's financial health, upcoming capital projects, and capacity to implement recommendations.

The table on the following page shows the current net position and the reserve for Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride between FY 2027 and the end of the plan in FY 2031. The reserve is calculated from the first year of the financial model (FY 2022) and does not reflect any previous savings the City may have. lt also provides the estimated costs of implementing each recommendation and the net position if all are implemented. These costs are planning-level estimates given in 2025 dollars.
. Nelson\Nygaard's financial model shows that the city of Tehachapi should be able to operate Dial-A-Ride service at existing service levels over the next five years based on projected growth in operating funds.
. The €ity of Tehachapi should be able to implement recommended service pilots within the existing budget.
. Operations and administrative recommendations are likely to be low cost and can be accomplished within the current operating budget and staff hours. . Over the last four years, the City has been spending between 8Y" and 26% oI Local Transportation Fund (tTF) and State Transit Assistance Fund (STA) funding on transit operations. This level is sufficient to fund current operations and proposed service enhancements.
. Besides the facility costs associated with the transition to zero-emission vehicles, which are still uncertain, the City of Tehachapi has no planned caPital costs.

Kern Council of Governments
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride Financia! Position, Baseline and with Recommendations, FY27- 31 Sources: Nelson\Nygaa rd Projection
Projected Baseline Net
Position and Reserve
Net Position $45,440 $88,010 $19,185 $25,300 $31,850
Net Reserve $1,282,040 $1,370,060 $1,389,240 $1,414,540 $1,t146,400 Estimated
Recommendation Costs
S-2 Pilot Extended
Saturday Service $(10,000)
S-3 Pilot Sunday Service $(30,000)
Sum of Costs $(1 0,000) $(30,000)
Projected Position $45,440 $78,010 $(10,815) $25,300 $31,850 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031
Kern Council of Governments XVI
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report 1 INTRODUCTION
Kern Council of Governments (Kern COG) plays a critical role in planning and coordinating transportation in Kern County. This project is a combined effort that seeks to update nine Transit Development Plans (TDPs) for Kern County transit agencies as well as the Coordinated Human Services Transportation Plan. The City of Tehachapi's TDP is one of the nine TDPs the Nelson\Nygaard team is updating as part of this project.

TDPs are usually updated every five years and are planning tools focusing on short-term transit needs and improvements. The City of Tehachapi's previous TDP is now over 10 years old and must be updated to reflect the current environment. The goal of the TDP is to develop recommendations to improve service and enhance transit connectivity and access.

This project supports Kern COG's Regional Transportation Plan, which is a long-term (20- year) plan for Kern County's entire transportation network. This project is funded by a Caltrans Sustainable Communities grant under the Climate Adaptation Program.

PLAN APPROACH
The project team started by performing an existing conditions assessment. We analyzed existing data to identify potential issues, challenges, and opportunities for improving transit.

We also conducted an interview with city staff and asked transit riders in Tehachapi for their feedback and insights.

Based on the findings from the existing conditions assessment, Nelson\Nygaard developed recommendations to address the identified issues, challenges, and opportunities. Once recommendations were developed, we conducted a workshop with the City of Tehachapi and Kern Transit staff to review and refine the recommendations. After this, the recommendations were presented to the public for input.

Using input from the public, Nelson\Nygaard then developed a five-year plan to implement the proposed recommendations. We also developed a financial model to help the City understand the costs associated with implementation.

Kern Council of Governments
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report

PURPOSE OF DOCUMENT
This document is the final report for the City of Tehachapi TDP. Topics by chapter are as follows:
2 2
Overview of Transit in
Tehachapi and the
Surrounding Areas
. Who operates transit in Tehachapi?
. What local and regional services are available?
3 Existing and Future Market
Conditions
. Where do people live and work in Tehachapi?
. What are the population and employment projections for Tehachapi?
. Where are the major activity generators in Tehachapi and the surrounding areas?
4 Service Evaluation . When is kansit provided?
. How has transit performed over the past several years? . Where is the most demand, and need, for transit service? . What is the City's current zero-emission transition plans? 5 Plan Review . What previous studies and plans have been done for Tehachapi?
. What is the implementation status of past
recommendations?
6 Public 0utreach Overview
and Phase One Outreach
Summary
. What outreach was conducted for this project?
. What do transit riders think needs to be improved?
7 Recommendations . How were recommendations developed? . How is resiliency considered in these recommendations? . What are the recommendations for improving fixed-route and Dial-A-Ride transit?
Phase Two Outreach
Summary
. What do residents think of the proposed improvements? . Which improvements should be prioritized?
. Are there any needs that were missed?
8 9
lmprovement Phasing . Which recommendations should be implemented first? . What actions should the City take in each of the five years of the plan to implement the recommendations?
Financial Forecast . What is the City of Tehachapi's current financial position? . What projects and costs are already expected in the future? . How will implementing recommendations impact the City of Tehachapi's finances, and what is an affordable
implementation plan?
10 Chapter Title What questions does the chapter answer? Kern Council of Governments
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report 2 OVERVIEW OF TRANSIT IN

TEHACHAPI AND THE

SURROUNDING AREAS
This chapter discusses regional transit and transit operators, including the local services of neighboring towns and intercity transit operators, to help provide a holistic picture of regional transit and access to opportunities.

The €ity of Tehachapi has a Dial-A-Ride service which is operated by Kern Transit. The service is available on weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and on Saturdays from 7:30 a.m to 5:30 p.m. Dial-A-Ride is available to all riders on a first-come, first-served basis and requires a reservation. Reservations can be made between 24 hours and two weeks in advance, over the phone. Same day service may be provided when available but cannot be guaranteed.

KERN TRANSIT
Kern Transit operates 12 fixed routes and Dial-A-Ride services in six communities (Figure 'l) Route 100 (shown in Figure 2) is the only Kern Transit fixed route serving Tehachapi. The route connects Bakersfield, Keene, Tehachapi, Mojave, Rosamond, and Lancaster. The only stop in Tehachapi is at the Tehachapi Park & Ride.

OTHER LOCAL OPERATORS CONNECTING
TO KERN TRANSIT ROUTE 1OO
Golden Empire Transit in Greater Bakersfield operates 15 fixed routes and Get-A-lift, a paratransit service for eligible riders with a disability. Fixed-route service operates in the City of Bakersfield with varying service hours depending on the route. Get-A-Lift is a shared-ride, curb-to-curb service operating in the same service area as the fixed-route system. The service operates seven days a week, with trips as early as 6:30 a.m. and as late as 7:30 p.m. Golden Empire Transit service can be accessed from Tehachapi via a connection on Kern Transit Route 100.

Kern Council of Governments 3

LOCAL TRANSIT
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Antelope Valley Transit operates 15 local, fixed routes as well as commuter, school, and Dial-A-Ride service in Lancaster and Palmdale. Most routes begin service at 5:00 a.m. and end service between 8:00 p.m. and 1 1:00 p.m. Routes 50, 51, and 52 offer deviations upon request, and the Dial-A-Ride provides curb-to-curb service for rural and urban residents up to the county line at Avenue A, just south of Rosamond. Dial-A-Ride service begins at 5:00 a.m. on weekdays,6:00 a.m. on Saturdays, and 7:00 a.m. on Sundays, ending at 8:00 p.m. all days. Antelope Valley Transit service can be accessed from Tehachapi via a connection on Kern Transit Route 100.

Kern Council of Governments 4
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 1 Transit Nelwork in Kern County
lsaberra I@EED
-<

KERN COUN
Final Report
rt ,0 2c M,te.
@
G@
Delano
\5.
,:) @
@
__@-,
i
Boron
l'4ojaw
Ridge
'_t
Frazier Park
Kern Council of Governments
Sh3fter
a^,
'N.,
5 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 2 Kern Transit Route 100 Alignment
Final Report
4Crdfidlu
fter
Bakersfi
ra
Arvin
:er
Palmdale
5mi A
{6IX 6r i&pbo, @ openstreetMap
Califomia City
nd
Kern Council of Governments 6
Anlelgp€
Valley
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Amtrak
ln Kern County, Amtrak has rail stations in Bakersfield and Wasco. Amtrak's San Joaquins route operates between the San Francisco Bay Area, Sacramento Valley, and Bakersfield. The duration of the full route is 6 hours and 15 minutes long, with multiple departures available daily. Amtrak fares depend on time, destination, and fare class, such as coach or business class.

Amtrak Thruway
Amtrak Thruway is a bus service providing connections from Amtrak rail stations to areas without passenger rail service. Amtrak Thruway routes connect Bakersfield to points south (Santa Clarita, Burbank, and Los Angeies), and polnts east (Tehachapi, Mojave, Barstow, and Las Vegas, NV). Amtrak Thruway fares depend on time and destination. The Amtrak Thruway route serving Tehachapi operates between Santa Monica, California and Las Vegas, Nevada.

There is one trip in each direction daily.

Eastern Sierra Transit Authority
Eastern Sierra Transit Authority (ESTA) operates a route between Lancaster and Mammoth Lakes, with two stops in Kern County at lnyokern and Mojave. Depending on the length of travel, fares on this ESTA route range from $2 to $39. On this route, discount fares are available for riders ages 60 and older, individuals with disabilities, and youth under the age of '1 6. For a trip between Mojave and lnyokern, the regular adult fare (ages 16 to 50) is $3-00, and the reduced fare is $2.00. Passengers must make reservations before midnight Pacific Time on the day of travel. Walk-on seating is also available but not guaranteed.

Kern Council of Governments 7

INTERCITY OPERATORS
Several intercity agencies operate in Kern County. Eastern Sierra Transit Authority (ESTA), Amtrak, and Amtrak Thruway all operate in Southern California with stops in Kern County.

The routes and stops of these intercity services are shown in Figure 3. Metrolink operates only in Los Angeles County but is served by Kern Transit and ESTA. Only Amtrak Thruway serves Tehachapi directly.

City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Metrolink
Metrolink is the Los Angeles regional rail system. The Antelope Valley Line begins in Lancaster. Trains operate hourly in the peak direction (to LA in the morning, from LA in the afternoon). There is less frequent service during the off-peak on weekdays and on weekends Trains take approximately two hours to reach Los Angeles Union Station.

Kern Counci of Governments
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 3 lntercity Transit Routes in Kern County

KINGE COUNIY
Wasco
@
@
Delano

TULARE COUNTY
Final Report
INYO

COUNTY N
a
0nyx @
o Lake lsabella

KERN COUNTY
Bakersrield

SAN LUIS OBISPO
COUNTY
@
r=\j/
Lancaster c
California Citv
l0
Taft
lntscityTramit Rout6
ln KemCounty
rc
-
Amtrek Tn.rwa! RoLrpc E
rc
-
ESTA Route
< amtaakSanJoaqurns
.

I Ccunty Eoundary
FtaTier Park

T OS ANGET E S
VE NT URI\
OOUNTY
COUNIY
Source: Amtrak, ESIA, 2025
Kern Council of Governments 9
Lamont
Arvin
Ridge
Ridgecrest
Kernviile
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report 3 EXISTING AND FUTURE

MARKET CONDITIONS
This chapter reviews key demographic, employment, and activity centers, including a discussion of transit propensity for the region. Unless othenrvise noted, demographic and employment data are from the United States Census Bureau and reported for Kern County. Other notable data sources include the California Department of Finance and Kern COG.

Kern Council of Governments 10
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report

POPULATION
Population Density
Areas with higher population density are more likely to support transit because there are simply more people to use it. Population densities of over 15 people per acre are recommended for fixed-route transit, and densities between two and 15 people per acre are appropriate for on-demand transit, like Dial-A-Ride service. Densities below two are difficult to serve with any kind of transit and may be more appropriate for services like vanpool or carpool.

Land Use Type
Residents
per Acre
Jobs
per Acre
Downtowns &
Hlgh Oenslty Corldors
Urban
HIred-Use
Nelghborhood g
Surburban Mixed-Use
ffirffi
atlmatlat
tllxed
Nelghborhoods
ctatlat
Low Denslly
30-45 15-25
>45 >25
10-15 5-lO
2-10 2-5
Appropraate
Types of Translt
Ught BR? Rrpld Loc.l Rall Bus 8us
Local MlcroBus transit
tllcro- RldeshareVolunleer translt Drlyer Pgm
Frequency
of Servlce
Eeps o
lO mins
or bette.

IO-r5
manutes
30-60
minutes
60 mlns
or less o,
On Demand
BRT Rapid Local
Bus Bus
fi*
votunteer
Orlver Pgm
ft
Local
Bus
,-! t- LJ hC o
Hfift O
<2 On Demand
Rural Ridashara
Tehachapi's population density, shown in Figure 4, is low across the urbanized area. The only pocket of higher density is in Golden Hills, which is outside Tehachapi city limits. Dial-A-Ride service covers this area, as well as almost all areas with a moderate to high population density. Fixed-route service provided by Kern Transit and Amtrak Thruway is available for those living close to the city center.
nl +l <2
Kern Council of Governments '11

LAND USE TRANSIT
ffi
15-30 ro-I5
c
rs-30 o miautes
Sourca:

Final Report
-
0 05 lure
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 4 City of Tehachapi Population Density
N
4 &
o
W Val
Rd
@
o
c
'.
e
o
i
o
;
@
E
o
@
F
Cheyenne Ave
J
o
:
o
o
Population Deosity
People pe. Acr€
<2
f s-ro
! ro-rs
I rs-
-
Kern Jrensit Routes
rc Amtrak Th.uway Routes
i.' i cityBounaary
0ala Sources: ACS 2023 5-Year [stimates
P
Kern Council of Governments 12
Cherry Ln I
Highline
@
o

TEHACHAPI
!
E
o
o
o
a
llr"-*
2 o
o
I
a, @
h E
E
o
o;.'_-__ oi
@:

City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Population Projections
Kern County's population has steadily increased from 751,000 in 2005 to 924,000 in 2025, a 23o/o increase. Tehachapi saw a decrease in population between 2005 and 2025 o'f almost 6%, primarily due to a decrease in the number of incarcerated persons at the California Correctional lnstitution in Tehachapi. The population of the city grew between 2005 and 2010, but has been in decline since. A breakdown forTehachapiand Kern County overall is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5 Kern County Historical Population Growth 2005 to 2025 Source: California Department of Finance, Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State Looking ahead, Kern County's population is expected to continue growing between 2024 and 2050. Figure 6 shows projected population growth by regional subarea in Kern County (see Figure 7 on how regional subareas were defined). Greater Tehachapi is expected to grow at a much lower rate of about 'l%, compared to 12o/o countywide.

Figure 6 Population Forecast by Regional Subarea: 20241o2050 Source: Kern COG 2024to 2050 Growth Forecast Update
Tehachapi -5.7% 700 12,200 '14,500 1 3,1 00 13,000 11,500 County Total 23.0Y0 173,000 751,000 837,100 873,500 907,400 924,000 % Change in
Population
(2005-2025)
Population
Growth
Kern County (200$202s) 2005 20't0 2015 2020 2025
Greater Tehachapi 32,1 00 32,1 00 32,400 300 0.9%
Countywide Total 890,500 922,200 998,300 107,800 12.10/o Estimated
Pop. Growth
12024-20501
Estimated %
Pop. Growth
2024 20s0 12024-20501
Kern Council of Governments 13
RegionalSubarea 2029
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Figure 7 Kern COG Regional Subareas Definitions
E c&Ooeduy
Ore C{$um 01, . G.dE kfdd &dG we I hdpffa$d Cty
oaE {ldd edr Ra8EGI ko 8a6!il A,a
&.srB Ii;Mk kura $.1!s
&eab Lak r#i G@tc lfr
Source: Kern COG 2024 to 2050 Growth Forecast Update
Kern Council of Governments 14
_.-& '{n
^1"'too
J"it
T
t
I L
e[top:

City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report

DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
The demographic factors illustrated in the following maps provide an indication of potential transit demand and vulnerable groups within Tehachapi and its immediate surroundings. The demographic groups included are:
. People of color
r Veterans
. People with disabilities
. Older adults (age 65 and above)
. Younger adults (age 18 to 24)
. People in poverty
, People with limited English proficiency
. Zero vehicle households
Some of these groups were also included in a transit propensity analysis, which identifies demographics which have a higher-than-average tendency to use transit and creates a composite index identifying where transit demand is strongest.

The results of this transit propensity analysis are discussed in Chapter 4, but the underlying data is displayed here to provide background information.

Demographic maps produced showing the entirety of Kern County are included in Appendix A.

Kern Council of Governments 15
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report People of Color
Based on census data examined by the project team, people of color are more likely to use transit than their white peers. Most of the urbanized area of Tehachapi, shown in Figure 8, has a high proportion of people of color, which is typical of many parts of Kern County.

Golden Hills also has a high proportion of people of color. Although not all of these areas are served by fixed-route transit from Kern Transit and Amtrak Thruway, the entire urbanized area has access to Dial-A-Ride which can be used to connect to fixed-route transit.

Figure 8 Gity of Tehachapi Proportion of People of Color Percentage of People
of Color
),tot"-zot"
f,zoz-ssz
I ,rs%
{Kern Translt Routes
-
Amtrak Thruway Routs
i -i
CityAounoary

0.1. Soure6: ICS 2m3 s-Yrr E$imets
Kern Council of Governments to
l
';)
I
-
t_
/
E
.\rl- '1t tr
5^ L(IY
\r,
,1. p
T
jT
B
i
r
11 : Miie
i,'
l
rl
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Veterans
Transportation is critical for veterans to access medical care, government services, and other essential services. Many areas of Tehachapi have a moderately high proportion of veterans, shown in Figure 9. The area with the highest proportion of veterans, in Golden Hills to the west of Tehachapi, is served only by Dial-A-Ride. Residents in this area may use Dial-A-Ride to connect to fixed-route transit to regional destinations like Veterans Affairs hospitals. The nearest Veterans Affairs hospital is in Bakersfield and can be accessed using Kern Transit Route 100 or Amtrak Thruway.

Figure 9 City of Tehachapi Proportion of Veterans
o
o
o
I
a
@
J
Parcontaga of Veterans
o% -61.
>5ro - 10%
] 'ro-.. - zo:a
| "zoz-tst
< Kean Transit Roltes
-Amtrak
Thruway Routes
I i CityOounaary
lhra So6e: AtS 2mJ 5-Y.s EstiMr6
o
q o
x

0.5 I Hile
Kern Council of Governments 17
'^'
J'1,

TEHACHAPI
B lvd
o
&
ts
Highline Rd
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report People with Disabilities
People with disabilities may be more likely to rely on transit, paratransit, and human services transportation to meet their transportation needs and maintain an independent lifestyle. The proportion of people with disabilities is shown in Figure 10. Portions of Tehachapi north of State Route 58 as well as between Pinon Street/Abajo Avenue and Highline Road have higher proportions of people with disabilities. Portions of Golden Hills also have high proportions of people with disabilities. Most of the inhabited portions of these areas are served by Dial-ARide, except for the northern part of Golden Hills near State Route 58.

Figure 10 City of Tehachapi Proportion of People with Disabilities tto
I
2 o
o
q
a
tu
Cherrv Ln (rc,
i--"'i
B lvd
E
o Pinon c
I J
o
,-
o
@
:
:
='a
F
a
Hiqhline Rd
cheyenne Ave
Percentage ot People
with Disabilities
0%-5%
>5% - t0%
|,tor"-zoz
],ao-""-:s:a
{ Kean Lanslt Routes
-
Amtrak Thruway Routes
i i cttyBounoaty
bta $urc6, lCS 2021 5-Yetr flriffi t6
Kern Council of Governments 1B
;..1---1-P
r*i\
E
E

0.5 i Hile

TEHACHAPI
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Older Adult Populations
Older adults (ages 65 and older) may no longer be comfortable driving or may not be able to drive. Transit, paratransit, and human service transportation providers can allow them to live independently, access healthcare, and meet essential needs. Most areas in Tehachapi have a high proportion of older adults, and there are two neighborhoods where older adults make up more than a third of the population, as shown in Figure 1 1. One area with especially high concentrations of older adults is in Tehachapi between E Tehachapi Boulevard and W Valley Boulevard and the other is in Golden Hills, north of Westwood Boulevard and east of Woodford Tehachapi Road.

Figure 11 City of Tehachapi Proportion of Older Adults
Percentage of Adults
85 Years and older
0:i -5"4
f ,roi. - zo.a
I ,lor; - 35'.

I,rs?.
{ Ke.n Transit Routes
-
Amtrak Thruway Routes
i i cityBounaary
odr $uiccs, ACS 2025 5-Y.e €sim.t.s
Kern Council of Governments 19
.1.

E
t
lXile
l-<
L
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Young Adults (18-24)
Young adults (ages 18-24) may be enrolled in college, the armed forces, orjust entering the workforce and may not be able to afford their own personal vehicle. Based on census data, young adults are more likely to ride transit compared to their older peers. Tehachapi has a relatively low proportion of young adults in most block groups, shown in Figure 12. The Golden Hills area has a slightly higher concentration of young adults, who are served by DialA-Ride. Residents in this area may use Dial-A-Ride to connect to fixed-route transit to regional destinations.

Figure 12 City of Tehachapi Proportion of Young Adults
'^
.N.

TEHACHAPI
@
o
&
a
-
F
o
o
=
%'9
t
o
d
I
k W Val
i
.rl
ii
5 o
Eq
.!
oi
@l
Cherrv Ln
G99
Pinon St ,-..]
I
I
I
o
@
]
=
='a
F
Highline Rd
@
t
o
6 Cheyenne AYe
-

0.5 I Hile
Perceotage of Young
Adults(Age 18-24)
0?" - 5e.
>5'r '10:;
f ,r0.. - zo.t
{ Kern Transit Routes
-
Amlrak Ihruway Routes
I cttyBounoary
03ta Sources: ACS ?02! s-Yetr Estimal6
Kern Council of Governments 20
Et (i
.

F
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report People in Poverty
Based on census data examined by the project team, people in poverty (below the Federal Poverty Level) are more likely to take transit in Kern County. The Federal Poverty Level is defined at a national scale and calculated by household. The exact income threshold varies by household size, number of people over the age of 65, and number of children. As of 2024, it was $25,249 for a family of three with one child.l More information about how the Census Bureau measures poverty can be found here: How the Census Bureau Measures Poverty.

Poverty is high throughout much of Kern County, including in Tehachapi, as shown in Figure '13. The proportion of people in poverty is highest in Golden Hills, to the south of Westwood Boulevard and east of Woodford Tehachapi Road, which is served by Dial-A-Ride. Residents in this area may use Dial-A-Ride to connect to fixed-route transit to regional destinations. 1 2024 Povertv Tllejholds
Kern Council of Governments 21
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 13 City of Tehachapi Proportion of People in Povefi N
@
o
&
o
c
F
!
o
o
B
Final Report
l
J
Perccnt geo,P.opla
ln PoY.rty
0'6 - 5%
>5% - 10'6
! 'to"t - zov.
! 'zo't-ss:r
I ,3s%
r- Kern Transit Routes
-
Amtrak Thruway Routes
i i Cltyaounaary
oaa Sourc6s: ACS2023 iY., Estiror6
Kern Council of Governments 22
--/
@

TEHACHAPI
I
Highline Rd
:'___i
-i lE
a
,i
a
3 -:3
Cheyenne Ave
-

0.5 I Hile
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Limited English Proficiency
People with limited English proficiency (LEP) are potentially more likely to take transit2 and may have difficulty accessing transit and participating in community outreach events. ln communities where LEP is high, special language accommodations may be needed. Areas with the highest proportion of people with limited English proficiency are generally located outside Tehachapi city limits, to the south and west, shown in Figure 14. These areas are served by Dial-A-Ride and can be used to access fixed-route transit.

Figure 14 City of Tehachapi Proportion of People with Limited English Proficiency N Prrcrntagc of Foplation
wlth Llmltrd EngllCr
o% 51"
>5'a - t0%
! ,to* - 26'.
< Kern Transit Routes
-Amtrak
Thruway Routes
: i cttyBounaary
[hr3SNc6: ACS 20235-Yeil Esrim.t6
4 &
o
t
E
ts
!
o
o
=
h,
I
a
?
o
g
q
W Val Blvd

TEHACHAPI
Pinon St
@
h
@
q
o
@
G
ot
@.

J
x
-

0.5 l HilE
2 Using Census Data for Transportation Applications, 2013. pg. 63.

Kern Council of Governments 23
Cheyenne Ave
0 t-
)
t
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Zero Vehicle Households
Based on census data examined by the project team, households without a vehicle are more likely to use and rely on transit. Areas of Golden Hills adjacent to Westwood Boulevard have the highest concentration of households without vehicles, shown in Figure 15. These areas are served by Dial-A-Ride and can be used to access fixed-route transit.

Figure 15 City of Tehachapi Proportion of Households with Zero Vehicles N
Perc.otage ot Hou.eholds
wlth Zaro Velrhles
0'i - 5"/"
>5% - 10'6
!,ro:,;-26a
.{ Kern Transit Routes
{Amtrak Thruway Rout6
' i ctty Bounoary
ka$urc6: ACS 2mJ 5-Yea tstirores

TEHACHAPI
@
Cherry Ln
o
&
o
z
E
F
a
o
o
e
q
@
o
E
.9
o
E
E
J
@
@
o
Highline Rd
cheyenne Ave
o
c
o
o
':
3 'a
c
E
F
-

0.5 Kern Council of Governments 24
ui Gl
F
Pinon
0 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report

EMPLOYMENT
Employment Density
Employment density is a key indicator of where there is a market for transit, and the level of service that the market could support. Similar to population density, the more jobs in an area, the greater the potential demand for transit. Employment densities of over 10 people per acre are recommended for fixed-route transit, and densities between two and 10 people per acre are appropriate for on-demand transit, like Tehachapi's Dial-A-Ride service. Densities below two people per acre are difficult to serve with any kind of transit and may be more appropriate for services like vanpool or carpool.

Employment density in Tehachapi is shown in Figure 15, and is highest in the city center. This area is served by fixed-route transit operated by Kern Transit and Amtrak Thruway, in addition to Dial-A-Ride.

Kern Council of Governments 25
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 16 City of Tehachapi Employment Density
N
Final Report
,"\

4.&
o
F
E
!
o
=
o
o
o
e
a
*
@
E
G
o
o
Cherry Ln
Highline Rd
Cheyenne Ave
.I
o
@
i
=9
='a
o
G
E
F

0.5 I Hile
EEploymont llsn3ity
Jobs perAcre
12 I z-s
!s ro
I ro.
<) Amtrak Thruway Routes
i i cltyBoundary
03laSourcls: LElo 2022
Kern Council of Governments 26

TEHACHAPI
@
ul cl
o:

F
i;d
lo
o PinonSt :
aa 3
b
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Low-Wage Job Density
People who work low-wage jobs are less likely to be able to afford to own and maintain a car and are more likely to rely on public transportation. Like employment density, a high number of low-wage jobs concentrated in one area demonstrates a potential market for transit. There are no areas of Tehachapi with a distinguishable density of low-wage jobs, as shown in Figure 17.

Figure 17 Cig of Tehachapi Low-Wage Employment Density
,1.
rl l,
Low WaE6 Jobs
Employment Denstty
Jobs per Acre
"2
..O Kern Transit Routes
rc Amtrak Thruway Routes
l -'
c;ty Bounoary
oata Souces LtH0 2m2
TEHACHAPI tt^-9
4 &
o
F
!
o
o
=
e
o
o
o
I
a @
Cherrv Ln G9'
P non St
a
t
o
G
,9
o
f Highline Rd
@
a
'i
q
i
;
'a
F
cheyenne Ave
E

0.5 l Mlle
Kern Council of Governments
F
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Projected Employment Growth
Projected employment growth indicates how transit demand may increase in the future.

Within Greater Tehachapi, employment growth is projected to increase 14.9o/o over the next 25 years, which is similar to the Bakersfield Area, but less than the county as a whole, shown in Figure 18.

Figure 18 Projected Employment Growth in Kern County
Source: Kern COG 2024to 2050 Growth Forecast Update
Major Employers
Like employment and job density, the location of major employers can be a generator of transit demand based on employment and services provided. Major employers are more likely to have a large number of employees who can be served by transit. Major employers are the 25 largest employers in Kern County and have greater than 500 employees each.

As detailed in Figure 19 and Figure 20, the only major employer in Greater Tehachapi is the California Correctional lnstitute. This employer is not served by Kern Transit fixed-route service or the Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride service zone.

Greater Tehachapi 9,400 10,000 10,800 1,400 14.9Y0
Metro Bakersfield Area 234,100 240,900 270,000 35,900 15.3Yo Countywide Total 351,600 366,400 430,000 78,400 22.30/o Estimated
Job Growth
from 2024 to
2050
Estimated %
Job Growth
from 2024 to
Regional Subarea 2024 2029 2050 2050
Kern Council of Governments 28
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 19 Major Employers in Kern County

KINGS COUNTY
o Wasco ?o.:,

SAN LUIS CBISPO
COI]NTY
TULAR€ COUNTY
Final Report
INYO
C OU NTY N^
a
o
Taft

VENTURA
COI]NTY
Source: State of California Employment Development Department, 2025 Kern Council of Governments
@

I OS ANGEI E S

COU N TY
Calitornia City
E
r0
Frazier Park
29 KERN COUNTY
lsabella
Arvin
@
Ridge l,taJor Enploy6rs
in Kern County
@ map, Ernptoyer
r Kern Transit Roules
rc Amtrak Thruway Routes
ESIA Route 395
{ Amt.ak San Joaqu,ns
I County Boudary
RidueeLest ---@zs
.
@
/
L.-. -
t\. | '\.

I
1 Paramount Farms Huller 4 Lost Hills 500-999
2 Wasco State Prison Fire
Department
Wasco 1,000-4,999
3 California Department
Conectional lnstitution
Delano 1,000+,999
4 WonderfulCitrus, LLC Delano 500-999
5 Marko Zaninovich, lnc. McFarland 1,000+,999
6 Amazon Fulfillment Center
- Shafter Shafter -1,000
7 Frito-Lay lncorporated Bakersfield 500-999
I
Nabors CompletionProduction
Bakersfield 1,000-4,999
o Vasinda lnvestments, Inc. Bakersfield 500-999
10 Chevron Corporation Bakersfield 1,000-4,999
11 Kern High School Diskict Bakersfield 1,000-4,999
12 Community Action
Partnership
Bakersfield 500-999
13 Adventist Health
Bakersfield Bakersfield 1,000+,999
14 Dignity Health Memorial
Hospital
Bakersfield 1,000-4,999
15 Amazon Fulfillment Center
- Bakersfield Bakersfield -2,000
16 Foster Care Human
Services
Bakersfield 1,000-4,999
17 Bolthouse Farms Bakersfield 1,000+,999
18 Grimmway Farms Arvin 1,000+,999
19 Sun Pacific Bakersfield 500-999
20 '1,00G4,999 Californ ia Correc{iona!
lnstitute Tehachapi
21 Robertson's Ready Mix California City 1,000-4,999
Edwards Air Force Base
and Family Readiness
Center
22 Edwards 10,000+
Major Employer ldentifier
(See Figure 19) Major Employer Location Number of Employees City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 20 Major Employers in Kern County
Final Report
Kern Council of Governments 30
23 NASA/Armstrong Flight
Research Edwards 1,000-4,999
24 Ridgecrest Regional
Hospital
Ridgecrest 500-999
25 Naval Air Weapons Station
China Lake
Ridgecrest 5,000-9,999
Major Employer ldentifier
(See Figure 19) Major Employer Location Number of Employees City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Source: State of California Employment Development Department, 2025; 23ABC News, "Am-azo-nlulfll!-menl Center coming to Shafter. will create 1.000 new jobs." 2021;23ABC News, "Amazon Fulfillment Center ooens in Bakersfield." 2020

MAJOR ACTIVITY G EN ERATORS
Major activity generators, such as hospitals, healthcare facilities, schools, and grocery stores can produce large numbers of both driving and transit trips and indicate where people might travel via transit. Providing transit services to these destinations can connect people in the community to essential services, employment, and education. Major activity generators identified in this report include:

Affordable, low-income, mobility-impaired, and senior housing Grocery stores
Medical facilities
Educational institutions
Correctional institutions
Kern Council of Governments 31
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Repod
The Kern Housing Authority provided an inventory of affordable, low-income, mobilityimpaired (defined as houslng for people with disabilities), and senior housing (public housing) for the previous Coordinated Human Services Transportation Plan. These housing locations are shown in Figure 21.

Public housing options are concentrated in N4etro Bakersfield and along Kern Transit and other regional transit routes. There are five housing developments (one senior housing and four affordable housing developments) in Tehachapi, which may be more likely to have populations who are in poverty or do not have access to a vehicle. All five developments are served by Dial-A-Ride service. Four of the five developments are also less than a 1s-minute walk away from the Kern Transit Route '100 and Amtrak Thruway stop at the Tehachapi Park and Ride.

Kern Councll of Governments 32
Affordable, Low- lncome, Mobility- lmpaired,
and Senior Housing
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Public Housing
in Tehachapi
Ct PublicHousing
-
KemTransitRoutes
rl Amtrak Thruway Routes
r._. City Boundary
ru
0 i 5 lMile
Figure 21
N
Public Housing in Tehachapi
4 &to
6 o
F
!
o
E
o
o
3 b^
,.
o

TEHACHAPI
!
E
o
J
@
c
J
o
6 oq
c
a @
@ o E
E o
:
@
@
W Valle
Cherry Ln
Highline Rd
y.8lvd
Cheyenne Ave
o
'a
q
@
3 :
'a=
G
c
o
o
F
Source: Kern Housing Authority
Kern Council of Governments 33
ol e1
oi s'l
-,- ol j
F
o
.2
ilnon St E
?- i---; oi-- ;ioi
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Grocery Stores
Grocery stores and other fresh-food stores are located throughout Kern County in incorporated areas. Figure 22 shows grocery stores within greater Tehachapi which include the Walmart Supercenter. Albertsons, DG Market, and Save Mart. These are all located off Tucker Road and are served by Dial-A-Ride. People who live in unincorporated or rural areas may have to travel farther to access these stores.

Kern Council of Governments 34
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Grocorys:tores
ln Tohachapl
! GroceryStores
-
Kern TransitRoutes
-
Amtrak Thruway Routes
City goundary
-
Figure 22
N
Grocery Stores in Tehachapi
Cherry Ln
Hig hline Rd ;
Source: Nelson\Nygaa rd
-e
%"n
to
o
c
o
c
o
F
!
o
p
0 B
@
2 o
o
o
c
a
E
E
c
o
.2
a
c
o
a
Pinon St
!
G
@
o
)
o
o
c
J
o
o
6 @
a
-
o
o
cheyenne Ave
.q
q
@
3 ;
'a
-
G
E
o
F
T
a
Kern Council of Governments 35

TEHACHAPI
P:

EI
l
F
City of Tehachapi Transit Development plan Final Report Medica! Facilities
Medical facilities include hospitals, dialysis centers, VA clinics and hospitals, urgent care facilities, and other medical facilities such as medical plazas and doctor's offices. These are common locations for human service and non-emergency medical transportation providers.

Figure 23 shows there are several medical facilities in Tehachapi, including the Adventist Health Tehachapi Valley Hospital, multiple general practitioners and clinics, and the Sanderling Dialysis Treatment Center. All medical facilities, including the Adventist Health Tehachapi Valley Hospital, are served by the Dial-A-Ride zone.

Kern Council of Governments 36
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report iledlcel Facilltieg
O Hospitals
@ va losoitats
C LjrgentCareandClinics
!i oiatysis caters
-
Kern Trasit Routes
t) Amtrak Thruway Routes
urtY HounoarY
--
0 Ll5 lHriD
Figure 23
N
Medical Facilities in Tehachapi
4 &
'-o
E
c
o
F
!
o
!
o
o
=
o
Highline Rd ltl----------------l

TEHACHAPI
Pi
E
E
o
'=
non JI -
'-'- a: '
o
a
*\
p
e
o
o
,
o
2 o
o
o
c
a
@
W valley Blv
6 Ln I
d
@ dSherrY
o
o
@
c
J
o
o
o
'-
o
@
=
:
'a=
o
c
G
E
o
F
Cheyenne Ave
T
Sou rce: Nelson\NYgaa rd
Kern Council of Governments 37
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Educationa I I nstitutions
Educational institutions that are typically transit generators include middle schools and high schools as well as colleges, universities, and community colleges. Figure 24 shows middle schools and high schools are scattered throughout Kern County, and every incorporated jurisdiction has at least one middle school and high school. Tehachapi has a branch of the Cerro Coso Community College, along with a middle school (lacobsen Middle School) and a high school (Tehachapi High School). All three are served by Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride.

Kern Council of Governments 38
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan

TEHACHAPI
Final Report
Schools in Tehachapi
g! Middtescnoots
g! HignScnoots
i CollegesaodUniversities
-
Kem Transit Routes
-
Amtrak Thruway Routes
, City Boundary
Figure 24
N
Schools in Tehachapi
Cherry Ln
Highline Rd
4 &
d
@
E
t
o
F
o
!
o
o
3 @
tt-
-o
2 o
o
e
q
a
Valley. El vd
li
o
@ !
&
@
,
o
a
Pinon St
i--'-i
a
c
c
o
o
* o
c
E
o
o
3 :
='a
o
c
o
c
o
F
!
E
o
4 @
c
J
o
o
o Cheyenne Ave
I
Source: Nelson\Nygaa rd
Kern Council of Governments 39
City of Tehachapi Transit Development plan Final Report Prisons and Correctional Facilities
Prisons and correctional facilities in Kern County are major employers and drive demand for transit for their employees. They can also be a destination for friends and family visiting those who are incarcerated. Figure 25 shows most prisons and correctional facilities in Kern County are located on Highway 99 in northern Kern County, including Bakersfield and areas north of Bakersfield. There is one large correctional facility in Greater Tehachapi, which is the city's largest employel and which is outside of the Dial-A-Ride service zone.

Kern Council of Governments 40
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 25 Prisons and Conectional Facilities in Kern County ^,/-\ )\
-;Onyx a66
Final Report
Calitornia City
)+-.+r
Eoron
41 N
0elano
@
Wasco .,!- I lsabella
hachapl
I
L"lnont
i
8 rafto
msons and Coroctimal
Faclltles in Kern Co{rnty
^ Frrsolsanc:orrectoral
I .atrttres
-
(e.n Iransit Routes
< AmtraF IhrJway R0ut.s
CSIA ROUIE J95
< Amtral Sar JosqJirs
aounty Boundarv
Source: Nelson\Nygaard
Kern Council of Governments
Ridge
Frazier Park
Lancaster
rL
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report 4 SERVICE EVALUATION
This chapter reviews the performance of local transit over the past several years and summarizes Tehachapi's Dial-A-Ride service in greater detail, covering items like organization, transit need analysis, fleet and facilities, and more.

LOCAL SERVICE SUMMARY
The city of Tehachapi's Dial-A-Ride service, operated by Kern Transit, can be reserved from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on Saturdays lt does not operate on Sundays. Reservations must be made at least one day in advance but can be made up to two weeks before the ride date. Reservations are available on a first-come, firstserved basis and are made over the phone. Day-of reservations may be made if there is availability, but they are not guaranteed.

Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride operates as a curb-to-curb demand response service with a 30-minute pick-up window. The passenger must be available and ready for pick-up at any point within that window. The Dial-A-Ride service area, as well as the Kern Transit fixed route (Route 100) and Amtrak Thruway route passing through the City, is shown in Figure 26 Kern Council of Governments 42
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 26 TehachapiTransit System Overview
.^
N

TEHACHAPI
Final Report
r- Kem Translt Routes
-Amtrak
Thrsay Routes
OIaFA-Ride Zone
---i
Ctty Bounoary
T-
-
0 0.S I yie
o
&
o
o
-
c
o
F
!
o
E
o
3 l4ro
I
,.
oq
9 a @
Valley Blvd !
E
o
.9 nSt E
o
a
Pino
a
o
o
@ Cherry Ln
E
e
o
a
F
!
t
o
!
)
o
q
o
.9
oq
3 :
='a
o
F
Highline Rd
Source: City of Tehachapi and Nelson\Nygaard,2025
c
J
o
6 Cheyenne Ave
Kern Council of Governments 43
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Repoft Organization
Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride is operated under contract by Kern Transit for the City of Tehachapi.

Kern Transit, in turn, contracts out the service with WeDriveU (formerly National Express).

Day-to-day operation of Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride is provided by Kern Transit, but transit is managed through the City's Finance Department. The five-member Tehachapi City Council is the principal policy-making body for the City's transit service. The City's organizational chart is shown in Figure 27.

Kern COG is responsible for transit planning for the City of Tehachapi through the periodic development of a Transportation Development Plan, the most recent of which was published in 2012.

Figure 27 City of Tehachapi Organizational Chart
Source: City of Tehach aPi,2026
Kern Council of Governments 44
Ay'P, A,iR &
Utility BillinB
Accounting
Technicians
Office Assistant

TEHACHAPI CITY COUNCIL
City Manager
Payroll/
Personnel
HR Coordinator
Communications Director Finance Director
Accounting,/ Marketing
Administration
Engagement
Specialist Accountant
Financial Analyst
Kern Transit
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Span of Service
Figure 28 summarizes Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride's span of service. All service operates Monday through Saturday. Reservations must be made at least one day in advance but can be made up to two weeks before the ride date. Reservations are available on a first-come, first-served basis. Day-of reservations may be made if there is availability, but they are not guaranteed.

Figure 28 Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride Service Span
Fares
Tehachapi's Dial-A-Ride service follows Kern Transit's fare structure, with regular and reduced fares for single trips and 31-day passes, as shown in Figure 29.

Figure 29 City of Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride Fare Struc{ure
Source: Kern Transit t\,1ay 2025

HISTORICAL TRENDS
Historical trend data helps build an understanding of how Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride has performed in recent years and the direction they are heading. This section analyzes ridership, revenue hours, productivity, operations and maintenance costs, and farebox recovery values from 2015 to 2023 using data from the National Transit Database (NTD).

Data Notice: The intent of this section is to provide a historical reference of where Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride has been and to help frame the discussion of how the agency evolved over time.

Potentiat data issues have been identified as follows:
. NTD reported data may be missing or questionable for some metrics due to past data reporting issues. ln cases where NTD data was unavailable, data from the California State Controller was used if available. However, it should be recognized that these sources may not be exactly comparable due to potentially different methodologies.

Dial-A-Ride service area 6a.m.-7p.m 7:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. No service Weekday Service
Hours
Saturday
Service Area Service Hours
Single Trip $2 $1
3'l-oay Pass $45 $22 50
Fare Type Regular Fare Reduced Fare
Kern Council of Governments 45
Sunday
Service Hours
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Ridership
Dial-A-Ride ridership, expressed as unlinked passenger trips, is shown in Figure 30. Ridership has been on a downward trend since 20'15. Between 2021 and 2023, ridership was steady, but was well below pre-pandemic levels and slightly more than half of ridership in 2019.

Figure 30 Passenger Trips by Year for Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride 8,000
7,058
6,358
6,000 5,663 5,730
5,243
4,637
4,385

3.338 3,351 3,408
4,000
o'trF
ol c
o-
!
.E
=l
2,000
0 2014 2015 2016 2011 2018 2019 2020 2021
Source: National Transit Database (NTD), 2015-2022, California State Controller, 2023 2022 2023
Kern Council of Governments 46
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Revenue Hours
Revenue hours are measured by the amount of time vehicles are in service and either transporting passengers or waiting for a ride request. Revenue hours provided are shown in Figure 31. They were generally increasing before the pandemic but fell slightly in 2021 and 2022 and remain lowerthan in 2019.

Figure 31 Revenue Hours by Year for Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride 2,300
2,201 2,20s 2,218
2,200 2,119 2,159 2,161 2l4g
2pa4 2,094
2,015
1,600
1,500
2014 2015 2016 ?O17 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Source: National Transit Database (NTO), 2015-2023
2,100
e
l
f 2,ooo
o
f
c
9 l,eoo
(,,
d.
o)
; r,aoo
q)
'1,700
Kern Council of Governments 41
City of Tehachapi Transit Deve opment Plan Final Repon
Productivity, measured as passengers per revenue hour, is shown in Figure 32. Productivity has declined from a high of 3.3 in 201 5 and sits at 1 .5 as ol 2O?3.

Figure 32 Productiyity by Year lor Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride 35 3.3
30 2.8

2.6 2.0

1.5 0.5

0.0 2014 2o1s 2015 2017 2018 20',19 2020 2021
Source: National Transit Database (NTD), 2015-2023, California State Controller, 2023 )
o 2q r--
a)
c=
a 2.0
d.
o_
g 1.5
o
o) c
OJ
3 r.o
o1.6 1.6
2022 2023
What is Productivity?
Productivity measures the number of passengers served per revenue hour of operation' High productivity means service is being provided efficiently and at a lower cost per passenger.

For on-demand transit like Dial-A-Ride, productivity is computed as the number of passengers divided by all the hours that the driver is ready and able to provide service.

Five passengers Per levenue hour is considered good for on-demand service Ten passengers per revenue hour is very high for on-demand service and indicates that fixedroute service should be considered to meet some or all of the demand.

Kern Council oI Governments 4B
Productivity
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Operations and Maintenance Cost
Operations and maintenance (O&M) costs, which are not adjusted for inflation, for Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride are shown in Figure 33. Costs have risen steadily since 2014, increasing by about 50% between 2014 and 2019. Since peaking in 2021, costs have gone down and are below where they were in 2019, right before the pandemic. The reduced number of vehicle revenue hours in 2022 and 2023 have helped to keep costs down.

Figure 33 O&M Cost by Year for Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride
$3s0,000
$305,301
$300,000 $273,719
$262,563 $260,7 54 $247,288
$2s0,000 $240,065
$216,608
$197,24
$203,452
7 000 E1s3,392
$50,000
$200,
o)
c
o
q')
C.F
o
o
$
$ 00,
50,000
000
$0
2014 2015 20',16 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Source: National Transit Database (NTD), 20'15 2022, California State Controller, 2023 2022 2023
Kern Council of Governments 49
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Cost per Trip
Cost per trip, shown in Figure 34, has increased substantially since 2014. Costs nearly doubled between 20'15 and 2020. Between 2020 and 2021, costs increased almost 60%, to a high of $9'1. Since 2021, cost per trip has gone down and remained steady in 202? and 2023.

Figure 34 O&M Cost per Trip by Year for Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride $1oo
$91
$s9
$47
$41
$32
$28
$o
$39
$80
o'tr
F
(,
P goo
.J
oOJo
o $40
c
a
$20
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Source: National Transit Database (NTD), 20'15 2022, California State Controller, 2023 2022 2023
Kern Councrl of Governments 50
$72 $73
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Cost per Revenue Hour
O&M costs per revenue hour, shown in Figure 35, have also risen, although not as quickly as cost per trip. Costs increased from $91 per revenue hour in 201 5 to $'124 in 2019 before beginning to decline. However, costs subsequently spiked in 2021. Since then, costs have fallen and are now below what they were in 2019.

Figure 35 O&M Cost per Revenuo Hour by Year for Tehachapi Dial'A'Ride $150 $140
$124
$119 $'t 18 $115 $118
,
o
-
f
c
OJ
o) d.
oc
o
o-
$ 101
$1oo $91 $91 l%
$50
90 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Source: National Transit Database (NTD). 2015-2022, California State Controller, 2023 2022 2023
Kern Council of Governments 51
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Farebox recovery for Tehachapi's demand response service is low, hovering between 2 to 3% before the pandemic. Farebox recovery has dropped since the pandemic and was less than 2% in 2023.

Figure 36 Farebox Recovery by Year for Tehachapi Dial.A'Ride 3y. 2.9v.
2l% 2.3yo 2.3Vo

2.0v.
'1.7%

1.570
'1.470
oqo
.
o
o)
G,
o
_o
yo 2
20't4 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Source: National Transit Database (NTD), 2015-2022, California State Controller, 2023 2022 2023
Kern Council of Governments 52
Farebox Recovery
1vo
City ot Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report

CURRENT PERFORMANCE
System Ridership
Figure 37 shows the ridership for Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride from January to December 2024.

Ridership has seasonal variation. with the lowest levels of ridership in May through July and the highest in late summer and early fall.
ln February 2025, which was chosen as a representative month, the service averages about 26 riders per weekday, and 1'l riders on Saturdays. There is no service provided on Sundays.

Figure 37 Daily Average Ridership by Month for Tehachapi 0ial'A'Ride 35 31.9
30 27.7

25.4 22.1

23.7 21.6 22.1

20.9 't9.4
25 20
o
p
:
o

14.6 15.0 14.6
ll
5 0
5 0
.6} ^tr *r" ^o.| 5r} .,g" "f) "d," dF "d| "d) "..|
-S ..ar" ""'
oo"' ort""€" r"s"
"""" r...C;oo..*oo"od...-.."n
Kern Council of Governments 53
Source: City of Tehachaqi,2024.

City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Productivity
For a local service like Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride, passengers per revenue hour is a useful metric to evaluate the productivity of the system. As shown in Figure 38, productivity over 2024 shows the same seasonal variation as ridership. Using February 2025 data as a representative month, weekday productivity was 1.6 riders per hour. Saturday productivity was lower, at 1.4 riders per hour. There is no service provided on Sundays.

Figure 38 Productivity by ilonth for Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride

3.0 1.9
'1.8

1.7 '1.6

1.5 '1.5

1.4 1.3

0.0 Source: City of Tehachaqi,2024.

2. 5
o
I

9. 2.0
- 1.5
oPrn

0.5 llll
"6} "".) .'.") ""tr "r"| "or} "S "dl "d) "s) "d) "&" -"r..-r""a" "o"" $' r"""' t"s'"""""r.uC *otn""t'..C
Kern Council of Governments 54

2.1 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report On-Time Performance (OTP)
All Dial-A-Ride reservations have a 3o-minute window for pick-up, and riders must be ready at the beginning of the window. Passengers can opt to receive a s-minute advisory call before the driver arrives through the automated phone service. lf the passenger does not board the bus during the pick-up time window, it is considered a "no-show" and any additional rides on that day from the no-show rider will be automatically cancelled. Drivers are permitted to wait up to 3 minutes before calling dispatch to report a no-show.

For Dial-A-Ride, the ride is considered late if the actual pick-up or drop-off time is 15 minutes before or after the scheduled pick-up or drop-off window. Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride has between a 937o and 9970 on-time performance depending on the type of reservation, with an average of 96%.

Kern Council of 6overnments 55

TRANSFERS TO OTHER PROVIDERS
There is no data on the number of transfers to or from other providers, however Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride passengers can transfer to Kern Transit Route '100 or Amtrak Thruway service at the Tehachapi Park and Ride.

TRANSIT NEED ANALYSIS
Using select demographic and socioeconomic data can help determine the overall transit demand for a given area. Areas of higher demand are more likely to generate ridership and support transit service that is provided.

Nelson\Nygaard's analysis utilized a composite index of demographic groups that are more likely to ride transit, also known as transit propensity. The groups included in the index are:
. People of color
. Zero vehicle households
. Low-incomeindividuals
. Veterans
. People with disabilities
. Older adults (age 65 and above)
r Young adults (age 18 to 24)
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report As shown in Figure 39, most areas in the City of Tehachapi with the highest transit demand are currently served by Dial-A-Ride service, along with Kern Transit fixed-route service. The area of Golden Hills at the corner of Woodford Tehachapi Road and W Valley Boulevard has the highest relative transit propensity of the entire Dial-A-Ride service area. The Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride zone has good coverage of areas that show moderate to high demand.

Figure 39 Transit Propensity in the City of Tehachapi
.tl
4 &
o
@
o
@
Source: ACS 2023 5-Year Estimates
!
&
o
!
f
o
@
g
o
.=
oq
a
o
}
E
o, EI
(
i
Cheyenne Ave
-
Translt Propenslty
lndex of people ol color, adults
ag6 18-24, adults ages 65 dnd
older, veterans, people with
disabilities, people in poverty,
and households without a
vehicle, per acre
''
< Kern Translt Routes
rc Amtrak Thruway Routes
! otat-a-atc"zore
i-"; cityaounoary
o.raSour.6: ACS 202J tYeat Eslimd6
I
o
o
o
6-
q
Blvd E
E
c
o
.2
c
o
o
o
Pinon St
l Hiqhline Rd
E
S
!
G
Cherry Ln
€t
-
a
@
o
a
Kern Council of Governments 56
)
t
u.b
lil'3
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report

EXPENSES AND REVENUES
ln total, the City of Tehachapi's Transit program incurred expenditures of $274,973 for FY 2024.The agency successfully offset over two-thirds of these costs by utilizing various revenue streams, including passenger fares, and state and federal funds.

Figure 40 City of Tehachapi Transit Expenses -FY 2024
Source: Tehachapi - Transit Operators' Financial Transactions Report (2024).

Figure 41 Cig of Tehachapi Transit Revenues -FY 2024
Source: Tehachapi - Transit Operators' Financial Transactions Report (2024).

FLEET AND FACILITIES
All vehicles used for the City of Tehachapi's Transit program are owned by Kern Transit. The County does not have dedicated vehicles for the Tehachapi service - any Kern Transitbranded Dial-A-Ride vehicle may be utilized.

Kern County provides maintenance for all Kern Transit vehicles at its Bakersfield terminal.

When maintenance is required, the vehicle is rotated out to Bakersfield, and a replacement vehicle is provided for revenue service.

Operators' Salaries and Wages $57,598
Fringe Benefits $20,488
Labor
Subtotal $79,096
Casualty and Liability Expenses $4,723
Purchased Transportation $167,907
Other Operating Expenses $24,257
Category Subcategory
Total $274,973
Operating Revenues Passenger Fares $1,485
State Government Funds Local Transportation Fund $53,454 Federal Funds Funds for Operating Assistance $84,558
$50,000
Other Sources $85,476
Category Subcategory Amount
Total $274,973
Kern Council of Governments 57
Amount
Other Federal Funds
Zero-Emission Transition Plan
Beginning in FY 2032 Kern Transit plans to operate battery-electric buses in Tehachapi. Kern Transit leases two parking spots at the Tehachapi Municipal Airport, where it stores its vehicles. Because Kern Transit does not own this storage location there is no guarantee that the County can obtain permission to install charging infrastructure there.

There are two Level 2 ChargePoint chargers at Tehachapi City Hall, which could support charging for transit vehicles. However, the chargers are in a parking lot which can be challenging for a larger vehicle like Kern Transit's cutaways to navigate. ln discussions with Kern Transit, there is also the possibiiity of using either the former Caltrans site or the new Caltrans facility in Tehachapi for vehicle storage and charging.

AGENCY INTERVIEW
As part of the existing conditions assessment for this project, the Nelson\Nygaard team interviewed City of Tehachapi staff in person the week of May 19, 2025. The intent of these interviews was to allow the project team to ask the agency questions about their operations, including the riders they serve, agency challenges with operating service, desired outcomes and recommendations as part of this planning effort, and questions about the data received This was also an opportunity for the project team to tour the agency's facilities and fleet, as well as see the community in which the agency operates. Below is a summary of what was discussed as working well and what some of the challenges and potential opportunities might be.

What is working well for t.ansit in Tehachapi?
r Strong partnership with Kern Transit relieves the City of multiple roles . Strong local leadership through initiatives such as marketing and community engagement strategies
. Strategic vision that connectivity improves regional access and benefits tourism Challenges and areas with possible room for improvements . Serving the broader community outside of the city limits is challenging City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Kern Council of Governments 58
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report

KEY TAKEAWAYS
Span of service is relatively good. Service operates from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on Saturdays. There is no Sunday service.

Same day service is available but not guaranteed. Reservations can be made between 24 hours to two weeks in advance over the phone.

Weekend ridership is lower than on weekdays. ln February 2025, the service averages about 26 riders per weekday and 1 1 riders on Saturdays.

Productivity is low. ln February 2025, the passengers per revenue hour for Dial-ARide service was 1.6, a very low level.

As shown by historical trends, the pandemic significantly impacted ridership and productivity. Operation and maintenance costs were well controlled through the pandemic and have not risen substantially.

On-time performance is high. ln February 2025,lehachapi Dial-A-Ride's on-time performance was 95olo, measured as pick-ups and drop-offs occurring within the promised 30-minute window.

Nelson\Nygaard's transit need analysis shows the areas with the highest transit propensity are served by the Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride service and Kern Transit's fixedroute service.

Kern Council of Governments 59
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Repoft 5 PLAN REVIEW
This chapter summarizes the document that was reviewed to help provide context of previous planning efforts that are of consequence to transit and specialized transportation in Tehachapi. The data, strategies, and identified needs from this plan can provide insight into possible persistent gaps and transportation challenges. This plan was produced prior to 2020 and may Iack the context and consideration of impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.

TEHACHAPI 201 2 TRANSIT

DEVELOPMENT PLAN
The Tehachapi 2012 Transit Development Plan (TDP) was an update to the 2003 TDP. The TDP presented a summary of existing conditions and an overview of current Dial-A-Ride and intercity transit services. lt also defined goals, objectives, and service standards for Dial-ARide service, evaluated future service options, and presented a blueprint for operations and funding. Key issues identified in the plan include farebox recovery ratios being below the TDA requirement of 10%, increasing operating costs, and declining ridership.

Recommendations in the 2012 TDP focused on improvements to Tehachapi's Dial-A-Ride service included the following:

Kern Council of Governments 60
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 42 Recommendations from Tehachapi 2012 Transit Development Plan Source: Tehachapi Transit Development Plan, 201 2
Final Report
lncrease Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride fares lmplemented - fares updated from $1 to $2 Examine and remedy fuel and maintenance costs Unclear if implemented. lmplement a substantial marketing and education
outreach program
lmplemented - ongoing marketing strategies
Decrease hours of operation Unclear if implemented - service hours appear unchanged.

Special Saturday service lmplemented - Saturday service is provided.

Service to/from Bear Valley Springs Not implemented - service to Bear Valley Springs is not operational
Recommendation lmplementation Update
Kern Council of Governments 61
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report 6 OUTREACH OVERVIEW AND

PHASE ONE SUMMARY
The project team engaged in continuous outreach with the community to ensure the Tehachapi TDP reflects the input and priorities of Tehachapi residents. This chapter summarizes the project team's work with Kern COG, Kern Transit, and Tehachapi city staff to conduct and advertise the outreach events and gather input from residents for inclusion in the plan.

There were two phases of community outreach:
. Phase One (Jun+July 2025): Listen and learn about the community's challenges and aspirations for transit. This phase of outreach involved administering a survey to Tehachapitransit riders in person and online.
. Phase Two (March 2O26): Present potential transit recommendations for feedback and confirm if anything was missed. This phase of outreach involved a virtual public meeting to explain the potential transit recommendations and a virtual survey to gather feedback from Tehachapi transit riders about the potential improvements.

This chapter summarizes Phase One of public outreach. The results of Phase Two are presented in Chapter 8.

Kern Council of Governments 62
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report

PHASE ONE PUBLIC OUTREACH

SUMMARY
Phase One outreach occurred in.June and July 2025 and involved all nine agencies in Kern County updating their TDPS. The goals of Phase One outreach were to introduce the TDP and accompanying Coordinated Human Services Transportation Plan (CHSTP) planning processes to the public and collect feedback to inform draft recommendations for each transit agency.

A countywide survey was conducted to gather feedback on transportation needs and challenges.

The project team conducted outreach in Tehachapi on June 25, 2025, riding the Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride vehicle and administering a survey to riders. The bilingual (English and Spanish) survey was also available online for three weeks. During the ride along, bilingual outreach staff (fluent in both English and Spanish) connected with 12 community members. Some riders took the survey, and their results are included in the summary in the next section.

The survey asked community members which transit services they use in the county, what concerns they have, and how transit could be improved. Respondents who said they do not currently ride transit were asked why they do not and what improvements would encourage them to take transit. The survey also collected optional demographic information on age, ZIP code, racelethnicity, and household income.

PHASE ONE TEHACHAPI SURVEY

RESULTS
Six people who responded to the countywide survey indicated they most frequently rode Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride. The results from these individuals are summarized in this section. Due to the small sample size, this section touches on broader themes from the responses. No demographics data from the survey is reported due to the small sample size.

Rider Satisfaction
The surveyed six riders appear mostly satisfied with Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride service. Four respondents said they are very happy, while one said they are somewhat happy. One respondent said they are neither happy nor unhappy with the service.

Kern Council of Governments 63
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Transit Concerns and lmprovements
The respondents noted the following concerns:
. Transit does not run when I need it to (2 respondents) . Buses are not reliable (on time) (1 respondent)
. I need to travel with a stroller, groceries, bicycle, or other bulky items (1 respondent) Each respondent could select multiple concerns, if applicable. Two respondents said they have no concerns with Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride service. There were no write-in comments for concerns with Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride.

Respondents were asked an optional, open-ended question about what one improvement to transportation would help them, as well as if they have any other suggestions or comments.

This question received two written responses.

Requested improvements from the two respondents were:
. "More clear rules and regulations, such as if bikes can be brought into the bus or not, and when the transit service is open or closed."
. "lt would help if the bus was able to be spontaneous. I think they are VERY patient." The outreach team did not hear any additional comments outside of the survey.

Kern Council of Governments 64
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report 7 RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations are specific actions that the City of Tehachapi can take to address current challenges and transportation needs in the community. This chapter lists all potential
recommendations that can be implemented.

The recommendations in this chapter were developed based on the existing conditions analysis conducted earlier in the project, which included feedback from the public via a survey, discussions with city stafl and industry best practices.

These recommendations were discussed with the City of Tehachapi and Kern Transit staff in a virtual workshop. The feedback received during these meetings was used to refine the recommendations before they were presented to the public for their input. Feedback from the public during Phase Two outreach, which is summarized in Chapter 8, was used to further refine the recommendations into their current state. New recommendations were added based on the feedback received during Phase Two outreach. Recognizing there are limited financial resources, Chapter 9 provides an implementation plan that would phase improvements across the five-year horizon of this plan.

Sixteen different recommendations are presented on the following pages. The recommendations are divided into four distinct categories:
. Service recommendations would enhance access to transit by improving connectivity in Tehachapi and neighboring communities.
. Operations recommendations focus on improving how service is delivered by integrating mobile apps and coordinating with Kern Transit on new programs for training drivers and identifying and applying for grants. . Administrative and policy recommendations identify approaches to improve customer experience, comply with state guidelines, and smooth the transition to a zero-emission fleet.
. Capital recommendations involve capital projects that would improve transit access for riders.
65 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report A summary table provides a brief overview and the estimated costs of all recommendations in each category. Each recommendation is then described in greater detail on the following pa9es.

Some of the recommendations include potential costs as a way to help prioritize investment and provide an idea of the resources needed for implementation. Costs are preliminary estimates and not intended to be exact. Recommendations that are expected to be very low cost (under $10,000) or accomplished by City or Kern Transit staff as part of their normal duties are not assigned a cost.

RESILIENCY: AN OVERARCHING

CONSIDERATION
Resiliency is a key consideration in transportation planning because it ensures transportation systems can continue operating or quickly recover from disruptions such as climate hazards,l natural disasters, equipment failures, or economic hardship (e.9., funding challenges). A resilient transit system should be able to plan for and adapt to changing conditions, whether that means rerouting service during wildfires or floods, maintaining service during power outages, or responding to changes in travel from the community.

Within the framework of the nine TDPS Nelson\Nygaard is producing for Kern County transit agencies, resiliency is an overarching consideration. By incorporating resiliency into these TDPs, agencies can protect rider safety, maintain access to essential destinations, and minimize service interruptions. Ultimately, investing in resiliency helps create a more reiiable, sustainable, and equitable transit net\ivork that can withstand future uncertainties. r Per the Kern Area Regronal Goods Movement Operations (KARGOI study. climate hazards specifically identilied for Kern County include "increased incidences of extreme heat events, prolonged drought, and associated increases in the risk of wildfires [... and] with longer dry spells combined with increased precipitation from singular storm events, the risk of llooding to the region also increases." Resiliency Inounl:

An ability to recover from or adiust easily to adversity or change 66 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report From Nelson\Nygaard's perspective, resiliency can be categorized into one of six buckets:
. Resiliency of fleet
. Resiliency of facilities
. Financial sustainability/resiliency
. Emergencypreparednessresiliency
. Staffing resiliency
. Resiliency in operations (community mobility)
Aside from emergency preparedness, the recommendations developed in this TDP directly address these five elements of resiliency. Emergency preparedness is not directly addressed in this TDP. More information on emergency preparedness is included in the callout box below. Within this chapter, there are seven recommendations that support system resiliency and are denoted by a leaf @ in tf," header. Resiliency recommendations include improving reliability of service, improving infrastructure, expanding fleet and personnel capacities, and enhancing customer-facing information.

What is emergency preparedness?
Emergency preparedness is the process of ensuring a transit agency can prevent, respond to, and recover from emergencies that affect riders, employees, and service.

Emergencies may include natural disasters (earthquakes, floods, wildfires), severe weather, major accidents, hazardous materials incidents, cyber disruptions, or security th reats rhe soa r''il::T::ll'li
ilf Y;fl ]ff :,';]ln r
,., *io n' a nd restore
Emergency preparedness is a multi-dimensional issue that requires extensive planning and coordination both within and between various City departments, as well as externally with neighboring jurisdictions, Kern Transit, and Kern County government.

How can the City prepare for an emergency?
The City of Tehachapi should develop an emergency preparedness plan if one is not already developed. This should include considerations for transit, including identifying key risks, defining staff roles and decision-making authority, and establishing clear procedures for communication, service changes, and coordination with first responders.

Consideration should be given to transit's role in evacuations, resource sharing (e.9., what happens if the facility Kern Transit uses in Tehachapi burns down), and regional coordination in the event an emergency extends beyond Tehachapi. Regular training, drills, and updates help ensure plans remain effective and staff are prepared to respond if an emergency occurs.
67 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan

SERVICE RECOM M EN DATIONS
There are three service recommendation, which would enhance access to transit by improving connectivity in Tehachapi and neighboring communities.
@: Denotes a recommendation that supports agency resiliency Final Report
68 s-1
Coordinate with Cerro Coso
Community College to lmprove
Transportation to Campus
Ceno Coso Community College is
relocating their campus within
Tehadrapi. The City of Tehachapi
should work with the Collqe and Kem
Transit to serve studenb and staff
effectively.

Tehachapi, Kem Transit,
Ceno Coso Community
College
Furher study needed
s-2 Pilot Extended Saturday Service
Pilot extending Saturday service into
the evening (7:30 p.m.) for six to nine
months
Tehachapi, Kem Transit $10,000
s-3 Pilot Sunday Service
Pilot Sunday service for at least six
hours, potentially 9 a.m. to 3 p.m., for
six to nine months
Tehachapi, Kem Transit $30,000
Responsibility for
lmplementation
Number Recommendation Description Cost
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report S-1 Coordinate with Cerro Coso Community College to
lmprove Transportation to Campus
Cerro Coso Community College is planning to relocate its Tehachapi campus to a new location adjacent to the Tehachapi Park and Ride lot. The Park and Ride lot serves as a stop for Kern Transit's Route 100 as well as Amtrak Thruway. The new location's proximity to these transit services makes transit a viable option for some students and faculty who may be commuting to the campus. Despite this, there may still be transit improvements that are needed to improve access to the new campus.

The City of Tehachapi should coordinate with campus officials and Kern Transit to discuss if transit improvements are needed to the new campus location. Potential options for improving transit service could include modifying existing fixed-route service or extending the hours of operation for Dial-A-Ride. The City and Kern Transit should meet with campus officials to understand the transportation needs and challenges of students and staff. lf available, the City and Kern Transit should analyze anonymized student and faculty home ZIP code data to better understand where people are traveling from. This coordination can be conducted while the construction of the new site is underway to allow ample time to discuss and implement potential transit improvements. These transit improvements can enhance student and faculty access to the campus, encourage transit ridership, and reduce the number of single-occupancy vehicle commuters generated by the site.

Any changes to transit service should be incorporated into the marketing materials developed as part of Recommendation A-1 (Update and create new marketing materials for using transit).

S-2 Pilot Extended Saturday Service
Currently, Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride operates until 5:30 p.m. on Saturdays. Based on the Phase Two public outreach, respondents suggested that transit is not available when they need it on Saturdays.

Tehachapi should work with Kern Transit to extend Saturday service to 7:30 p.m. as part of a pilot program.

Since staffing could be challenging with only two drivers, Kern Transit will likely need to use overtime hours to staff this pilot service.
lf extended weekday service is made permanent, Kern Transit would need to explore if the staffing arrangement in place during the pilot can continue or if other options (e.9., hiring a part-time driver) should be considered.

Guidance on conducting a pilot program is included below. 69 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report S-3 Pilot Sunday Seruice
Currently, Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride does not operate on Sundays. ln the Phase Two public outreach, riders noted transit does not run when they need it, including on Sundays.

The City should work with Kern Transit to pilot Sunday service with a minimum span of six hours, potentially between 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., as part of a pilot program.

At other transit agencies nationwide, Nelson\Nygaard has seen weekend ridership rebound faster than weekday ridership in the post-pandemic period. This is largely because weekend travel is driven by social, recreational, and discretionary trips, which have returned more quickly than traditional commute trips.

While ridership on Sunday may still not be as high as on weekdays, transit still plays an important role in providing mobility to the community. Kern Transit and the City may wish to evaluate the success of this pilot not based on how many riders it serves but rather on who is using the service and what kinds of trips they are taking. lf riders without personal vehicles are using the service and/or there are Sunday riders who cannot take trips on weekdays, this may indicate the pilot is successfully improving mobility for the community. 70 Guidelines for Conducting Pilot Programs
Nelson\Nygaard recommends pilots have a six-month minimum duration and establish a series of metrics to gauge their success and future viability. These metrics can include traditional quantitative measures such as ridership, cost per passenger, or productivity (passengers per revenue hour).

However, they can also include more qualitative items, including customer satisfaction or providing mobility to access services or to workers with non-standard schedules.

A rider focus group could help the agency develop these metrics, and with launching and monitoring the pilot service.

The metrics are up to the agency to set and should reflect how the agency would like to measure success. Many agencies use ridership, but fuifilling transportation needs that cannot otherwise be met can be an equally important, if not more important, metric. The most important thing is to have an evaluation framework in place before the start of the pilot program to measure whether the pilot should continue beyond its targeted end date.

City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Possible implementation methods for securing drivers for the pilot include:
. Overtime. Overtime paywould likely not be a long-term solution, but could be an acceptable solution for the duration of the pilot program. . A temporary part-time driver. Kern Transit could hire a temporary part-time driver to provide Sunday service and possibly the extended Saturday pilot as well (see Recommendation S-2).
lf the Sunday service is made permanent, Kern Transit would need to explore if the staffing arrangement in place during the pilot can continue or if other options (e.9., hiring a permanent part-time driver) should be explored. Kern Transit is hoping to restore Sunday service by mid 2025, which should help alleviate any issues with dispatching and maintenance.
11 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan

OPERATIONS RECOM M EN DATIONS
There are six operations recommendations that focus on improving how service is delivered by integrating mobile apps and coordinating with Kern Transit on new programs for training drivers and identifoing and applying for grants.

Final Report
72 o-1 lnvestigate Transit App
lntegration for Booking Rides
lnvestigate the use of the popular
Transit App for ride booking, allonring
passenger to book a ride without
calling
Tehachapi, Kem Transit Minimal cost to agency
o-20 Edablish a Countywide Driver
Training Program
Establish a standard driver training
program across the county by sharing
materials, centralizing training, or
developing a program at local colleges
Kem COG lead,
Tehachapi, Kem Transit,
and other agencies
support
Furfier study needed
o-3 0
Establish a Countyryide Grant
Resource Program
Establish a grant resource program
with Kern COG to cenkalize
information and opportunities on grant
funding
Kem COG lead,
Tehachapi and other
agencies support
Further study needed,
but could be minimal cost
o-4@ Jointly Procure New
Dispatching Software
Study the feasibility ofjointly procuring
dispatching software with Kern C0G
Kem COG lead,
Tehachapi, Kem Transit,
and other agencies
support
Further study needed
o-sG)
Explore Oppodunities to Share
Zero-Emission Vehicle
Maintenance Expertise
lnvestigate the possibility of sharing
maintenance resources (staff, training,
or both) for Dial-A-Ride
Kem COG lead,
Tehachapi, Kem Transit,
and oher agencies
support
Furher study needed
Responsibility for
lmplementation
Number Recommendation Descrip(ion Cost
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
@: Denotes a recommendation that supports agency resiliency 0-6 @
Monitor Trip Denials and
Explore Ways to lmprove
Productivity
Respondents in Phase Two outreach
indicated that their trips are sometimes
denied. Kern Transit should monitor trip
denials to determine if this is a
common occurrence or not.

Productivity is also low on Tehachapi
Dial-A-Ride compared to other services
in Kem County. This may or may not
be related to trip denials. A productrvity
analysis should be undertaken to
determine the potential root causes of
the low productivity
Kem Transit lead,
Tehachapi support
Minimal cost to agency
Responsibility for
lmplementation
Number Recommendation Description Cost
Final Report
13 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Reporl O-1 Investigate Transit App lntegration for Booking
Rides
Currently, calling a phone number is the only way riders can access the Tehachapi Dial-ARide service. Transit, a popular app that has been adopted by Kern Transit, allows users to check schedules, plan trips, and track buses in real time. At I other transit agencies, the Transit app can also be used to ([| tfQnSlt' buy tickets and reserve Dial-A-Ride trips. I
The City of Tehachapi should collaborate with Kern Transit to investigate the feasibility of allowing Dia!-A-Ride trips to be booked on the Transit app. This would make it easier to book a trip and may help increase Dial-A-Ride use among young adults and students. lf determined to be feasible, instructions on how to book trips in the Transit app should be incorporated into any marketing materials developed as part of Recommendation A-1. A live demonstration of how to book a trip can also be included in the travel training program (Recommendation A-5).

O-2 Establish a Countywide Driver Training Prog ram @
Currently, each transit agency in Kern County trains its own drivers. With the tight labor market, agencies are competing for a small pool of Commercial Driver's License (CDL) certified drivers, many of whom are being recruited by freight or delivery companies, private companies, or larger transit agencies, like Golden Empire Transit. Establishing a unified countywide training program can increase the pipeline of qualified applicants, reduce training costs, and ensure applicant quality. Various agencies, including Kern Transit and the City of Tehachapi, have expressed interest in establishing a countywide driver training pro9ram.

The City of Tehachapi and Kern Transit should work with Kern COG and other transit agencies in Kern County to establish a driver training program. While Kern Transit is the operator of the service, the City should be allowed to provide input on these discussions as there may be local partnership opportunities (e.9" with the local community college) to leverage. This driver training program could be discussed at a future Kern COG transit operators meeting to gauge interest and discuss next steps.

A driver training program can take many forms. A few possible options are listed below:
. Ensuring existing trainings are shared with all Kern County transit agencies. ln cases where training is charged as a per-course or per-session fee, rather than perperson, there is an opportunity to invite other agencies and either share in the costs or attend free of charge. As an example, Kern Transit is already paying for Americans 74 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report with Disabilities Act (ADA) training with a fixed per-course fee. lf desired, other agencies should also send staff to attend the training. . €entralizing trainings. lnterested transit agencies in Kern County could work together to develop a consolidated training program that would be accepted by all participating agencies. This could take many forms, including working with Kern Transit's existing contractor who does their own trainings, hiring a different contractor, or having a single agency provide the training. The content should include all required trainings, including ADA training, sensitivity training for passengers with disabilities, drug and alcohol testing, and other certifications necessary to drive a transit vehicle.
. Developing a training program with local colleges. When Nelson\Nygaard spoke with local community colleges in Kern County, there was interest in establishing a driver training program to help build the pipeline for future employees. This idea would need to be explored further but should include the trainings mentioned under the centralized training scenario to ensure employment can be secured after graduation.

The program could be funded with National Rural Transit Assistance Program grants, which should be sufficient to cover most, or all, of the costs associated, further reducing costs to the participating agencies.

O-3 Establish a Countywide Grant Resource Prcgram@
Grant funding opportunities can be difficult to identify and complicated to navigate, especially for small agencies. Various agencies, including the City of Tehachapi, expressed interest in Kern COG establishing a countywide grant resource program that would allow them to better find and apply for grants. Kern COG currently provides two Grant Finder licenses to each member agency.

The City of Tehachapi should work with Kern COG and other interested agencies to establish what this program could look like. This could be discussed at a future Kern CoG transit operators meeting to gauge interest and discuss next steps. The COG could model the program off ones already established elsewhere in the United States. These programs often include lists of relevant grant opportunities, lists of third-party resources on grant identification or application, and training or help sessions from agency staff.

Establishing a grant training program would help local transit agencies find and secure more funding, thus improving the service they provide to their communities. 75 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Repod O-4 Jointly Procure New Dispatching Software @
ln conversations with the City of Tehachapi, Kern Transit, and other agencies in Kern County, there is interest in exploring a joint procurement to acquire demand-response transit dispatching software.

The City of Tehachapi should work with Kern Transit Kern COG, and other interested transit agencies in Kern County to evaluate the feasibility and costs of a joint procurement of dispatching software. While Kern Transit is the operator of the service, the City should be allowed to provide input on these discussions due to the potential cost savings or increases and the potential impacts to the rider experience associated with this change. This can be a topic of discussion at a future Kern COG transit operators meeting.

By pooling resources, agencies can get a better deal, lowering the cost for entry to all transit agencies. ln addition, this would allow data to be shared across Kern County, making it easier to coordinate trips between multiple providers (i.e., trips can automatically be tracked on the computer rather than by calling dispatch).

Software currently in use at other Kern County agencies, like Ecolane and TripSpark, should be evaluated, but the software chosen must be capable of working across multiple agencies.

O-5 Explore Opportunities to Share Zero-Emission
Vehicle Maintenance Expertise @
Kern Transit does not currently operate zero-emission vehicles but may do so in the near future. At the City of Shafter, for example, city staff have indicated specialized electrical vehicle work requires a mechanic from Los Angeles. This results in high costs to perform the maintenance and long delays getting vehicles back into service. Other transit agencies in Kern County have expressed similar concerns. There could be an opportunity for better coordination and sharing of maintenance resources in Kern County to service zero-emission vehicles. This could reduce costs and the time necessary to repair vehicles.

The City and (ern Transit should work with Kern COG and other interested transit operators who utilize zero-emission vehicles to investigate the feasibility of sharing zero-emission vehicle maintenance expertise. This could involve sharing staff, training, or both. This could be discussed at a future Kern COG transit operators meeting to gauge interest and discuss next steps. While Kern Transit is the operator of the service, the City should be allowed to provide input on these discussions due to the potential cost impacts associated with providing the service and possible partnership opportunities in the Tehachapi a rea.

As an initial step, a search should be conducted to identify all available maintenance personnel in Kern County that can perform maintenance on zero-emission vehicles, which 75 City of Tehachapi Transit Deveiopment Plan Final Report can include other transit agencies (e.9., Golden Empire Transit), local governments (e.9., City of Bakersfield, Kern County), or private companies.
lf locally available maintenance personnel are identified, agencies can begin discussions on the feasibility of sharing zero-emission vehicle mechanics amongst interested parties. A costsharing agreement could also be negotiated. lf no zero-emission maintenance personnel are available, agencies should discuss and evaluate establishing staff in Kern County by either making strategic hires and/or training existing mechanics to perform zero-emission work.

The training curriculum should be coordinated among Kern County agencies so mechanics can maintain all vehicles in operation.

The need for specialized expertise in zero-emission vehicles in Kern County will only continue to grow as more zero-emission vehicles continue to be added to many transit agency fleets. 0-6 Monitor Trip Denials and Explore Ways to lmprove
Productivity @
Respondents in Phase Two outreach reported that their trips are occasionally denied due to lack of capacity, even when scheduling in advance. Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride operates with one driver in the early morning and later afternoons (there are two drivers between 9:30 a.m. and 2:30 p.m.) and there is a greater possibility trips will be denied during times where there is a single driver if there is a scheduling conflict.

Kern Transit should begin tracking trip denials. By tracking the denial rate and times of day in which they happen, Kern Transit can identify whether these are isolated incidents or a more widespread problem. The ultimate solution will depend on when and why denials occur. lf they are occurring throughout the day, particularly when only one vehicle is available, that could be an indication that a second vehicle is needed. If they are occurring during a brief, concentrated window, it may be possible to adjust operator schedules so that there is two-vehicle service during that time.

The City of Tehachapi should be kept informed of the results of this monitoring program and involved in any discussions necessary to correct any identified problems. ln parallel with monitoring trip denials, Kern Transit should explore ways to improve productivity. Productivity on Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride (and every other Dial-A-Ride service Kern Transit operates) is less than 2 passengers per revenue hour, which is lower than almost every other provider in Kern County. Low productivity is an indicator there may be an issue or inefficiency that needs to be addressed. Although it is unclear why Kern Transit's Dial-A-Ride productivity numbers are low, it is concerning when, at the same time, passengers are reporting denied trip requests due to lack of capacity. 71 City of Tehachapi Translt Development Plan Final Report A root cause analysis can help to identify if there are any issues. Potential issues could include overly conservative dispatching or reservations practices, lack of ability to group trips, lack of demand, and/or operator shifts not aligning with demand. Once the root cause(s) are identified, Kern Transit and the City can develop an action plan to correct any issues.

Depending on the issue(s) that are identified, this may include updating dispatching practices, increasing awareness of the Dial-A-Ride service in Tehachapi (Recommendation A1), or changing operator schedules. 7B
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report

ADMINISTRATIVE AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
There are six administrative and policy recommendations which identify approaches to improve customer experience, comply with state guidelines, and smooth the transition to a zero-emission fleet. @: Denotes a recommendation that supports agency resiliency 79 A-1
Update and Crede Neu
Marketing Materials for Using
Transit
Working with community partners and agencies
Tehachapi should update transit marketing materials to
Iit existing service and respond to future needs (e.9.
the nanr Ceno Coso Community College campus)
Tehaciapi lead, Ceno
Coso Community
College, Kem Transit,
and Amtrak Thruway
support
Minimal mst to agency
A-2 Develop Marketing Materials
to Promote the Transit App
Tehachapi should develop materials which promote the
use of the Transit App for trip planning
Tehachapi lead, Kern
Transit support
i,linimal cost to agency
A-3 Update Farebox Recovery
Compliance Policy
Develop a strategy when new guidance is released to
remain compliant
Kern Transit lead,
Tehachapi support
Minimal cost to agenry
A-40
Coordinate with Caltrans and
Kern Transit to Evaluate the
Feasibility of a Joint ZeroEmission Gharging and
Storage Facilig
Tehachapi should develop a collaborative plan with
Caltrans for the use of a surplus storage facility for
zero-emission charging and transit vehicle storage
Tehachapi, Kem
Transit, Caltrans
Minimal cost to agency.

Additional costs may be
identifi ed once conversations
take place.

A-5 Prepare and Conduct a Travel
Training Campaign
Tehachapi should prepare and conduct a hands-on
kavel training campaign to demystify transit use and
familiarize residents with how to ride Dial-A-Ride
Tehachapi, Kem
Transit
Minimal cost to agenry
A-6
Update Kern Transit Fixed.

Route Schedules to Show
Connections to Metrolink
Kem Transit should note when Metrolink kips arnve in
and depart from Lancaster on their Route '100 schedule Kem Transit Minimal mst to agency Responsibility for
Recommendation Description lmplementation
Number
Gost
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report A-1 Update and Create New Marketing Materials for
Using Transit
ln the Phase Two public survey, community members stated they do not feel comfodable or do not know how to use transit. City of Tehachapi staff have also noted that the video showing how to ride Dial-A-Ride on their website is outdated and needs to be refreshed.

The City of Tehachapi should update their how to ride Dial-A-Ride video. This update should remove reference to the free rides promotion that took place last year. lnformation on what to expect, and not expect, out of Dial-A-Ride should also be added (e.9., there is a 3O-minute pick-up window, it is a shared ride, so others may be picked up or dropped off along the way to one's destination, etc.). lf riders can eventually book trips on the Transit app (Recommendation O-1), this should also be added to the video. ln addition, the City should include information on how to take Kern Transit's Route 100 fixed-route service (e.9., where the stop is in Tehachapi, how to pay, how to find the schedule, etc.), either as part of the same video or a separate one.

The City of Tehachapi should also update their brochure summarizing the various transportation optionJ available. This should include a link to information on Dial-A-Ride, Kern Transit Route 100, and Amtrak Thruway. The brochure should also include information on vanpools and carpools, as these may be more appropriate options for some individuals.2 This brochure will help the City raise awareness of transit and other potential transportation options for members of the public.

This brochure should be posted on the City's transportation website and distributed to Cerro Coso Community College's students and staff (complementing Recommendation S-1, Coordinate transportation to the college), the local senior center, and other local community I rou ps.
2 A vanpool is a group of commuters who share in the cost of using a passenger van for regular trips.

Vanpools are often coordinated through an employer, and the employer may also subsidize some or all of the cost. A ca.pool is a group of two or more people who share a personal vehicle to travel together for a common trip, usually to work or school.

There are existing vanpooland carpool resources in Kern County. Commute Kern has more inlormation about carpool and vanpool options. Vans are available for rent through CalVans and Enterprlse. Commute KernhasaRdeAm o5 platform for carpool matching, which Kern COG helps to promote 30 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Finai Repoft The City of Tehachapi should also refresh their transportation web page to include:
r A system map indicating where Dial-A-Ride service is provided. The City could use the system map developed as part of this TDP if desired (see the map at beginning of Chapter 4).
. lnformation on Amtrak Thruway service, including where the stop is, typical fares, and how to find the latest schedule
. The refreshed "how to ride" video(s), displayed more prominently on the page . The new transportation options brochure
. Carpool and vanpool information
A-2 Develop Marketing Materials to Promote the Transit
App
Kern Transit pays for "Royale" access to the Transit App, [::'lJ::i',#::X:;:il#,'.Jff*:["-::;l:il[' @ tronsrt'
customers are unaware of the Transit app and the features offered. Note, this app is different than the Ecolane mobility app that was piloted by Kern Transit. The Ecolane app was used to request rides on Dial-A-Ride but is no longer available.

The City of Tehachapi should work with Kern Transit to develop materials promoting the use of the Transit app and instructions on how to use it. These materials should advertise "Royale" features such as trip planning and can be posted on the Tehachapi transportation website. lnformation on the Transit app can be included in the new brochure and refreshed video(s) developed as part of Recommendation A-1. lf it is feasible to book Dial-A-Ride trips through the Transit app (Recommendation O-1), the new option should be promoted.

A-3 Update Farebox Recovery Compliance Policy
The 10% farebox recovery standard set by the state has been suspended since 2020, but a working group, the Transooftation Transformation Task Force, recently recommended changes to the Transportation Development Act (TDA), which includes removing penalties associated with meeting farebox recovery standards.

Because the farebox recovery requirement currently remains in the TDA, the City of Tehachapi should coordinate with Kern Transit to develop a strategy to meet the requirements and maintain full compliance with state guidance. This will ensure that the City avoids findings during TDA triennial performance audits. 81 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Flnal Report A-4 Coordinate with Caltrans and Kern Transit to
Evaluate the Feasibility of a Joint Zero-Emission Charging and Storage Facility @
While Kern Transit does not currently utilize any electric vehicles as part of its Dial-A-Ride or fixed-route transit operations in Tehachapi, these vehicles may be adopted by the agency at some point in the future. There are two potential opportunities in Tehachapi that should be explored for future zero-emission vehicle storage and charging. One is at the old Caltrans site in Tehachapi that is currently vacant but is being used for construction staging. The other is the new Caltrans Maintenance Station that recently opened in Tehachapi in 2025.

The City of Tehachapi and Kern Transit should coordinate with Caltrans to evaluate the feasibility of either purchasing the old Caltrans facility or sharing the new site for zero-emission vehicle charging and storage. These discussions would better position Kern Transit to operate zero-emission vehicles in the future and potentially reduce the capital costs associated with the fleet change.

A-5 Prepare and Conduct a Travel Training Campaign
ln the Phase Two public survey, community members stated they do not feel comfortable or do not know how to use transit. As a supplement to developing new marketing materials (Recommendation A 1), the City and Kern Transit should develop and conduct a travel training campaign.

A travel training program is designed to demystify the riding experience by providing handson instruction for how to use transit. Prospective riders are trained, in person or remotely, by volunteers and agency staff about the full transit riding experience. Some of these trainings, like riding the bus, are in person, hands-on experiences. Tops for Dial-A-Ride service should include where and when service operates, how to book a trip, how to board the vehicle, and how to pay. For fixed-route service, they should include how to read the schedule, where to wait for the bus, how to board (including how to use the bike rack and wheelchair ramp), how to pay, and how to signal when you want to get off.

An effective travel training campaign can directly address rider anxiety and remove some of the fear of using transit for the first time. This initiative can serve as both a way to break down barriers and encourage riding transit, while also serving as a broader grassroots marketing campaign. The City and Kern Transit should work with the Tehachapi Senior Center, Cerro Coso Community College, and other suitable partners to conduct these "trytransit" sessions. Transit app may be able to support these training sessions with customer service staff, and they should include information on how to book trips through Transit if Recommendation O 1 (Transit app integration for booking rides) is successful.

City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report A-6 Update Kern Transit Fixed-Route Schedules to Show
Connections to Metrolink
During Phase Two outreach, community members shared that there are challenges with connecting to Metrolink service. Kern Transit's Route 100 fixed-route schedule does not currently publish when buses meet with Metrolink trains. Kern Transit should publish Metrolink arrivals and departures at the Lancaster Station on the Route 100 schedule to help riders plan their trips more easily. An example schedule from Sonoma County Transit is shown below in Figure 43 with published transfer times with SMART, the regional train service.

Figure 43 Sonoma County Transit Schedule lncluding SMART Arrival Times tr
o
I
E
d
F
v
B
2 I
o
E
Roosb L.fe Rd. J Go{ Co/rso 0r.

Wal'Ll8( tR€dmd & & Chir si
Gisbn Rosorl - l.&dh Entarue
Uartn i !i8€dl
R!6,pod 0r / RP &pry(Mr[re$ Frn)
Cmre 8l!dr RP Expiy iAms,
Co(lr!68 8Ml RP ErFw)r. (&peie,
Adr6a r Se$st
Cddi $fART $ation
7!6
l:tl
722
}25
129
t31
739
f:41
?47
7:52
8r0

6.04 8106
81'
&{5
&o
$r2
$05
909
q14

9.r9
92 936
942
or7
9:52
955
l0:04
:8 C9
10:I?
956

10.02 1Cf'
1&r5
10 !q
rfrl
10 26
1G31
10 37
txt2
10 4i
ro50
10 34
1059
!1 07
!1:38
11,!?
11:47
11 55
1l 59
rt0t
,r.'00
LOt
,:0f
l:E
l:lf
,:b
l:t
l:29
ltU
l:lt
?j1'
2:11
tfl
*00
3:0a
*06
3:11
t5,
3i5/
a!2
*10
a:14
1:16
1:21
5:,6
5:22
L'f
132
i,J
iro
tra
5ia,
*o
5:18
i{0
aa
6i0t
&t3
6:t,
c?t
&2J
,JO

4.35 tt
6;36 l:14
6:a2 7:52
8:1f
t{t
6;59
,{l
7,,6
tr5
x09
al
t;r6
t{6
9:A
,':21
9:32
935
9:39
t:U
9:19
j.az
S,i({Rf iliErt&pdesdftbqrd Ir* 9'14 1t41 l:i9 5.55 6:Zl SIIAff ,rrtas,t epr,s{o.fi boird I** 9i09 tt15 ,o15 1:10 5r2I d.2r g:43 Soffi Shls trrG$ity
CdiHub
tl5 10J5
10:32
1t rl
1212
l:10
Ilt 1:27
5155 6:11
l:12
9:55
ln addition to publishing connections to and from Metrolink, Kern Transit should consider publishing timed transfers to other routes (e.9., the timed transfer that is available for trips between Ridgecrest and Bakersfield via Routes 130 and 227, as well as Routes 230 and 100).

This change will help improve awareness of regional transit options and help riders plan their trips without needing to consult multiple timetables. Kern Transit will need to update these timetables at least twice per year, whenever Metrolink changes their schedule. 6J
I
6 H
I
)
x
x
L
I
I 5*3 ,:n
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan

CAPITAL RECOM M EN DATIONS
There is one capital recommendation which involves an ongoing capital project that would improve transit access for riders. @: Denotes a recommendation that supports agency resiliency Final Report
84 c-1@ Continue to Fill Gaps in the
Sidewalk and Bike Nelwork
Continue filling in gaps in the sideu,alk
and bike network to provide safe
access to tansit facilitres
Tehachapi Furher Study Needed
I R..p*.ibility for
I lmplementation Number Recommendation Description Cost City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Repoft C-1 Continue to Fill Gaps in the Sidewalk and Bike
Network @
The Tehachapi sidewalk and bike networks have notable gaps near the Kern Transit stop, near common Dial-A-Ride pickup and drop-off points, and near the new location of Cerro Coso Community College. This affects riders' ability to safely access transit, especially youth, older adults, and riders with disabilities. Access to transit was also included as a key concern collected from community workshops conducted as part of the Kern Area Regional GoodsMovement Operations (KARGO) Community Prosperity/Protection Study Project Phase lll in 2024.

The City of Tehachapi should continue to fill gaps in the sidewalk and bike networks to provide safe access to transit facilities. The costs associated with this recommendation are indeterminate and depend on the local cost of sidewalk construction, the amount of sidewalk to be constructed, available right-of-way, and site-specific conditions and constraints. The City should target areas around the transit stop, schools, and community centers to get the largest benefit, because vulnerable groups, such as children, older adults, and people with disabilities, often frequent these locations.

The City may want to consider producing a sidewalk and bicycle network prioritization plan to identify the areas of greatest need and options for phasing and continuing investment.

B5
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Flnal Report 8 PHASE TWO PUBLIC

OUTREACH SUMMARY
This chapter summarizes Phase Two outreach, which took place in March 2026.

The goals of Phase Two outreach were to provide an update on the Transit Development Plan project, present the proposed recommendations to the public for feedback, and identify if any new recommendations needed to be developed.

Phase Two outreach involved a virtual public meeting in Tehachapi, a pop-up event, and an online survey.

TEHACHAPI VIRTUAL PUBLIC MEETING
The consulting team with City of Tehachapi and Kern Transit staff held a virtual public meeting on Tuesday, March 3,2026 al5:30 p.m. The meeting was hosted on Zoom. Although no community members attended the meeting the presentation was recorded and posted online. The City and Kern Transit's outreach and promotion efforts for this meeting included posting the meeting flyer on transit vehicles and on social media, handing out flyers to passengers, and distributing a QR code to the meeting along with February's water bill for residents and businesses.

Nelson\Nygaard staff presented on the TDP progress and process for developing recommendations. The meeting was presented in English and Spanish with bilingual slides and translation available throughout.
85 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report POP.UP EVENT
The project team hosted a pop-up event at the Albertsons on Tucker Road in Tehachapi from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. on Wednesday, March 18, 2026. The project team spoke to 14 community members. Four community members completed the survey while at the event.

One person completed a paper survey in Spanish. Five individuals took postcards with them, and one person took 10 postcards to distribute at a senior living complex.

Comments were from a mix of people who ride or do not ride transit in Tehachapi. They shared their experience traveling in Tehachapi, concerns with transit, and suggestions for improvements.

Discussions with community members during the event are summarized below:
. Several community members said transit connections to Bear Valley would be beneficiai. Another community member said extending service to Stallion Springs would be helpful.
. Many respondents shared positive feedback with the service, such as the transit being centrally located within Tehachapi and easy to access by walking, riding Route 100 to travel to Bakersfield, and using Dial-A-Ride for shopping or appointments. . Several comments included the need to support seniors in Tehachapi with transit, such as a nearby senior living complex that does not use Dial-A-Ride. Many seniors currently rely on carpools or rides because they are not comfortable with Dial-A-Ride. . Other concerns from community members included difficulty boarding due to step accessibility, drivers arriving early and marking riders as no-shows, and confusion about service when drivers appear to be waiting in parking lots.

PHASE TWO SURVEY
A virtual survey was administered as part of Phase Two outreach and was open for almost four weeks in March 2026. The City and Kern Transit posted flyers with the survey information on transit vehicles and social media, handed out flyers with the survey QR code to transit passengers, and advertised the survey during the virtual public meeting. ln addition, an announcement was included in the March 2026 water bill sent to residents and businesses, with a QR code linking to the survey. The survey was also administered at the pop-up event.

Like the public meeting, the intent of the survey was to understand rider satisfaction and main concerns with transit in Tehachapi to identify if any new recommendations needed to be developed. The survey also asked respondents demographic and socioeconomic 87 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report questions, including their transit usage and vehicle ownership, age, ethnicity, and income.

Altogether, 31 people took the Phase Two survey.

Survey Results
Transit Ridership
3o/o
45%
40o/o
35%
30o/o
25o/o
20"/o
15"/,
100/,
5o/o
0o/o
At the beginning of the survey, respondents were asked to select which transit service they normally ride. Respondents could select all that apply. The most frequent response was Kern Transit Route 100 (14 respondents), followed by Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride ('10 respondents).

Only one respondent rides Amtrak Thruway (Figure 44).

Figure 44 Responses to "Do you normally ride the following?" (n = 31) 50o/o
45o/o
42o/o
32Vo
Amtrak Thruway None of the above
Satisfaction with Transit in Tehachapi
Respondents were asked to state how happy they are with transit service in Tehachapi from a scale of "very unhappy" to "very happy." Most respondents (8 respondents) said they are "somewhat happy." The next most popular response was "neither happy nor unhappy" (5 respondents). Three respondents said they are "very unhappy," while two said they are "very Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride Kern Transit Route 100
8B
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
happy." Two respondents said they are "somewhat unhappy" with transit service in Tehachapi (Figure 45).

Figure 45 Responses to "How happy are you with the transit service in Tehachapi?" (n = 20) 45o/o
40o/o
40o/o
35"/o
30o/o
25"/o
25"/o
20o/o
15"/o
1 5o/o
10o/o 10o/o
10"/o
5o/o
Very happy
0o/o
Somewhat
unhappy
Final Report
Somewhat happy Neither happy nor Very unhappy
unhappy
89 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Concerns and Cha!lenges with Transit
Respondents were asked to select their biggest concerns or challenges with taking transit in Tehachapi from a provided list. Respondents could select more than one response. The concerns with the most responses (8 respondents for each) were "transit doesn't run late enough on Saturdays," "transit doesn't run on Sundays," and "buses are not reliable (on time)" (Figure 46).

Six respondents also provided comments for the "other" response:
. "lt is too inconvenient having to call Dial-A-Ride so far in advance only to be told there's no room the day needed"
. "There could be snow or too cold in the winters"
' "Not available and totally [booked]. Often the bus is not full but is labeled as unbookable"
. "Stop trying to bring LA County ways here. I moved here to get away from that." . "lt is occasionally unreliable."
. "l believe the schedule posted can [give] us an update on time bus is scheduled to stop and how to get a ticket to ride the bus."
Respondents who selected "transit doesn't go where I need it to" specified the following locations where they would like transit to serve:
. Bear Valley (4 respondents)
' Stallion Springs (2 respondents)
. Alpine (1 respondent)
. Golden Hills (1 respondent)
One respondent left this comment in response to what locations they would like transit to serve:
. "l have attempted to schedule morning pickups forthe 100 bus connection multiple times and am consistently told there is no room, yet I see the buses operating.

Furthermore, I have had a scheduled pickup no-show, and a driver recently took a detour that delayed my arrival significantly."
90 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Figure 46 Responses to "What are your biggest concerns or challenges with taking transit in Tehachapi?" (n = 20)
40o/o 40o/o 40/o
30%
45o/o
40o/o
35o/o
30o/o
25o/o
20o/o
15%
10o/o
5o/"
0o/o
20%
llllliiiii ::
qonoLo^!
(ooiI_O.).=-CO-:z'= ; E.i e es i: sc E
: € i s fi;:; i E I
: E H;: E } E.g E E
:E3;ioruitEP B ! B. I s * $ fl q 5
IoPod)-oo9.l .9E| EUsPHo€ rooCCIO)YP ; X B s f;€ 51x P
rlur\:o-c
--f,v i E; EEE a3 SEPf,xli,c-- oF.g!.o-vb ro=rg_cv.o
=Pzc'o 2==oE goru; FEE
66L
(o(IJtr-C
UUI
:CP(J
io,ao
LAc6or O-O
o) - oJ
=?L oc! o(J 6qc s.t€E
6P(E 'A tA CCO) f(!(^
LLJ
tFco c
Vt
O.)
E
E
c
C,
F
91 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Flnal Report I mprovements to Transit
Respondents were asked to share one improvement to transit in their community that would help them, as well as any other suggestions or comments.

Eleven respondents provided comments:
. "Extended services on the weekends would be extremely helpful. I can't work weekends even when myjob wants me to because of the low-to-no transit provided." . "1\4oreavailability"
. "Have Sunday service"
. "Some people in Bear Valley use next door for rides. Service to Bear Valley." . "Other than Dial-A-Ride in the moment"
. "Have [the bus] be on time and do not weave in traffic. Do not have drivers tailgate" . "Be on time, if the bus is getting canceled say so at least a day before, notjust a couple hours before the bus is supposed to leave. Some of the bus drivers drive unsafely."
. "The biggest improvement would be accountability for the Dial-A-Ride dispatching and scheduling. I am frequently told there are no openings even when I call early, yet I see buses on the road. There needs to be a more reliable way to guarantee pickups for the 100 bus connection to Bakersfield, as no-shows and dispatchers denying rides have made it impossible to rely on this service for essential travel." . "Definitely need more scheduled bus time and better timing. For example, if you want to take route 100 to the Metrolink in Lancaster [you] would have to [arrive] hours early or the [bus] times get there right after the Metro would have left, makes no sense."
"Extend service to underserved areas. Dial-A Ride even on a limited basis would be able to be planned on."
"l would appreciate it if someone could update the schedule for the area west of the park and [ride]. As for time and date and how to get a bus ticket as well." 92 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report lnformation on Transportation Options
A question was asked about how respondents would prefer to receive information about theirtransportation options. Most respondents (13 respondents) said they preferto look up information online and navigate it themselves (Figure 47).

Figure 47 Responses to "How would you like to find information about your transportation options?" (n = 17)
90o/o
80"/o
70o/o
60Vo
50Vo
40o/o
30o/o
20"/o
10o/o
0o/o
7 60/o
12Vo
0o/o
60/o 6o/o
Look up Text messaging Phone call with a Online chat with a information online with a professional professional professional and navigate it coordinator/broker coordinator/broker coordinator/broker myself who h.andles the who handles the who handles the rssue rssue rssue
Have a friend or
caretaker handle
the issue
93 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Demographics
At the end of the survey, respondents were asked to fill out anonymous, optional demographic information on age, race and ethnicity, annual household income, vehicle ownership, and whether they have any disabilities or are a veteran.

Age
As shown in Figure 48, out of 18 responses, 670/o (12 respondents) were adults between the ages 25 to 54 years old. Four respondents were 65 years old or older, while the younger age groups had one respondent each.

Figure 48 Responses to "What is your age?" (Optional) (n = 18) 80o/o
67%
22o/o
60/o 6o/o
70"/"
50Vo
50%
40o/o
30o/o
20o/o
10o/o
0% I I
1 7 years old or younger 1 8 to 24 years old 25 to 64 years old 65 years old or older 94 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Race and Ethnicity
Figure 49 shows the results for the question about racial and ethnic identity. Out of 17 respondents, 88% identified as white (15 respondents). Four respondents identified as Hispanic, Latino, Latina, or Latine, and one respondent identified as Native Hawaiian or Pacific lslander.

Figure 49 Responses to "Which of the following races/ethnicities do you identify with?" (Select all that apply) (Optional) (n = 17)
100o/o
90"/o
80"/o
70o/o
60"/o
5jVo
4Q"/o
30"/o
20o/o
10o/o
0'/o
BBo/o
24o/o
0o/o 0o/o 0o/o 0o/o 0o/o
White
6Vo
I
Hispanic, Native American East Asian
Latino, Hawaiian or Indian,
Latina, or Pacific Alaska
Latine lslander Native, or
lndigenous
Black or South Asian Other
African identity
American (please
describe)
95 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Annual Household lncome
Figure 50 shows the annual household income of the respondents. Out of 17 responses, 47o/o of respondents (8 respondents) reported an annual household income of less than $50,000, and29o/o of respondents (5 respondents) reported an income of $50,000 to $99,000.

Figure 50 Responses to "What is the approximate combined income for your household?" (Optional) (n = 171
5jVo
45o/o
40"/o
35"/o
3lVo
25o/o
20"/o
15o/o
1Ao/,
5o/o
0o/o
47o/o
29o/o
12"/o
60/o 60/o I
Fewer than
$s0,000
$50,000 to
$99,999
$100,000 to
$149,999
$150,000 to
$199,000
$200,000 or
greater
96 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Vehicle Ownership
Respondents were asked how many vehicles their household has, and the results are shown in Figure 51. Half the respondents (9 respondents) have two or more vehicles in their household, while four respondents have zero vehicles.

Figure 51 Responses to "How many vehicles are in your household?" (Optional) (n = 18) 60o/o
50o/o
50o/o
40o/o
30o/o 28o/o
22o/o
20Vo
10o/o
2 or more
0o/o
0 97
80o/o
70%
60"/o
50"/o
40Vo
3l1o
20o/o
'l0o/o
Qo/o
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Riders with Disabilities
Respondents were asked if they have a disability that requires a mobility device or other assistance (such as a cane, walker, wheelchair, scooter, or service animal), and the results are shown in Figure 52. Three respondents indicated that they have a disability. One respondent specified that they use a cane, and the other two respondents did not specify.

Figure 52 Responses to "Do you have a disability that requires a mobilig device or other assistance?" (Optional)(n = 18)
9oa/o
g3%
a 10/ l, lo
No Yes (please specify)
98 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Veterans
The last demographic question asked respondents if they are a veteran of the armed forces, with the responses shown in Figure 53. Almost 90'/o(16 respondents) said they are not veterans, while two respondents said they are veterans.

Figure 53 Responses to "Are you a veteran of the armed forces?" (Optional) (n = 18) 100o/o
89o/o
1 1o/o
No
90o/o
80"/o
70"/"
60o/"
50"/o
40"/"
30o/o
20o/o
10"/o
0"/o
Yes
99 City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report 9 IMPROVEMENT PHASING
This chapter outlines how Nelson\Nygaard believes the sixteen recommendations detailed in Chapter 7 should be implemented by the City of Tehachapi. The TDP is a five-year plan, and the improvement phasing matrix that follows is set up to organize which recommendations should be implemented during which year of the plan.

The recommendations are intentionally staggered throughout the life of the plan to not overwhelm the agency in the first few years. Simpler and lower-cost recommendations can be implemented soonel including items such as improving customer communications by updating the website or creating educational brochures for the vanpool/carpool program.

Some recommendations are interdependent on others. For example, Recommendation A-2 (Develop marketing materials to promote the Transit app) should ideally be implemented after investigating Transit app trip scheduling integration (Recommendation O-1). lnterdependent recommendations are indicated in the matrix.

This implementation plan was used in the development of the financial plan, discussed in the next chapter.
100
Ciry of leha.h:pi Transit Developme.t Plan

IMPLEMENTATION PHASING TABTE
t0l
s-1
Csrdin.t.fith Cm Co$
Comunity Colbg. b ldpoE
Tmrpoddid to C.mp6
TolEdrCr, Xd Tmrt
CmC@CmMity
Cdbge
S€t lp a retn! wS Cqrc Ce
Cmunity College to und66tEnd
UEir transrhtim n€€ds
Dius and anelyz6 polstal
hnsit impffit etss
ItrPffil pbnlislhnsd
rrprmmb, il any
s-2 Pibt EnErdcd S.trrdry S.dic. Tdwha, Km Tmnsit
Esldish *dGlim mlric
to mlub tB tilot
Adr€di$ and edst a 9rmh Filot
Ewlub tD prlot and cdld
dsmrl€€6ek
Mak6 a docision b
clstjn@ s mls tE prlot
p€mMt
Itheglot is strGsfu|, sm
lundng b mko it pqfiEnent
s-3 PalotSund.y SeM@ T*adroi, Km Transt
Esdish dd@li6 mri6
to@l@b trFbt
Ad\dlE€ and udst ! rixMh filol
Evalub the Olot ard cdld
6toffil€d*k
Mak6 a &cBm b
dstn6 d mk6 tE glot
psrflaMt
lltEprlol is$@ssful, s€
lundirE b mk6 it lffinont
Numb6 R*ommddion R6pnsibility Year One (FY 2027) Year Tw {FY 2028} Ys Tt@ (FY 20Za) Ye.r Four (FY ABll) Ye.r Five (FY 2031) C;ty of T$achapi Transit Daelopmenl Plao
102
o-1 lndh* Tmill .o!
iii,e-fr- ri, iiiiil'c Rid6 TdEctEFi' xm rffir
lMdgabTEreit+
inb0ralio
lf lbqiblo, bsg'i
irdffilatm ol TEn$l m
b@ting fd Dial-A-Rrde
o-20
Km COG load
Ett blith . Countyr.id. DriG TshadEfr, (m Tmit,
Tninin! Proe m and ors aoffid
ceoat
B€gin cii@sio! rih ofE
inmbd hBit efabB n
Km Counv
ldontty rclunbG.s to b6 pad
ol a bsk loB lo tmlly
eal€to and h.rild dt the
strEUB of fE paogm
CdEt sit! pohtial
indr$y and €dslim p€ffi
Cmtnm tE d66loprmt ol tn
prcgEm Fi@liz6 and rcll et UE progEm
o-30 Km COG load,
T*Edqi and ots
aga.Es sFpoat R6our Proarah
Bogin dsi6s witr orE
inbl6bd hNt qarah in
(m CosV
l&nlity ldunm b be pad
ol a hrk lo@ b lmally
sdEte and buiH dl
sbum ol fE FES6
Finali4 and dl dt tlE FDgEm
o-40
Km COG l6ad,
T6hadqr. Km TeIl,
and ot8a0ffii6
s.9port
Joinlly Pmcurc Nry
oi.p.tching Soltr.re
8€0in drcims rih otw
inMHtrad(mhin(m
CdnV
ooEl.p lhrctE fq
p.@lmlad cl sharing
a9ffils
Sdet vsdor ad orboard all
pdliciEting ag*4
CsdEllwryhin'ng
o-50 ErpbE Opportunith. b St.E
[email protected] V.iicl!
I{.inbnrne Erpcrti*
Km CoG 166d,
Tehdl4i, Km Tmit,
ait(, ots ag6arj6
sflort
inMbd Mdt cpqam in
Km Counv
l&rtty volunbds to b6 pad
ot a bst to@ to fornally
dal@to dd &lmire
ldeltlity
Eogin mlulio and
leetilityasml
Cslin$ ovalwtir and
l8rbilityss$mnt
Bogin bliBing @t th6
structuE ot he prcgm
Rilr plans with 4ry pal's
8€gin ifipleMtaton Cdtns rnplqMhtDn
l,lumber R@ll'Mdation R6pon3ibilily Year OE {FY &27) Year Tm (FY z)28) YearThre (FY2023) YH Fou. {FY 2030) Yeil Five (fY 2ll3t) City of leha(hapi Transit Deveropment Pran
t0l
o-6
MonibrTrip D.nirl3.nd
Erplorc W.ys b lmprow
Produdjvity
Kffi TEnsl lead,
Teh&h4i $Iport
Eegin monitoing fip denials
Ctrdrct pmdJclivity amlysis
to idotily pobntal mt
eus ol l* prDdutuity
NUtr]b€G
Conlin@ mibing hp
donials
ll fip daniab aE GcuFing
fqffi[y, ddelQ and
itrplamnl $lutons
For pEdrct'vity analyss,
i&nUty and imdement
ptslia slutions to ill@$
p@d!ctvity
Csljnw mibnry hp
&ials
lf trp donials am mudng
lrE+dlt, dryelQ ard
irPffitslutss
Cmlins Miuim hp
&rials
f fi, denEis aB @mng
lEq$ty, &lrclop alld
itrdemt sdutos
Cmtnw Mib.ing tip
&niab
ll !i, &itsls ac @mng
ftEqs0y, &!dcp and
indffitddims
A-1
Upd.t .nd CEt ila
Tenzch?l
Tnn!it
Updab DiaLA-Rde vid€o(s)
Refr6h wEusib
Updeb ranlpo.hlio O0ons
b.oduG
A-2 oelop ir.*eting iLtsi.lr to
Pomtc lhc Tnn.it.pp
Tehad4, ls.4 Km
Tmsrt s4port
DeElcp mateling mtsials
Fomting he TEnst 4p
RelrBh mbdds b rn@Gb
inlffition s b@king iclos
thdgh tho TEBI am, il deftr€d
l@lro as pad of
RMmsndaton Gl
A-3 Upd.tr Fr.bor R@sy
CoiTli.ne Policf
(m Tmit load,
T€*EdEf, c.md
Dftle a @rpliam slEt€gy
Ttrs nil guklanE rs ml6s6d
A-40
A-5
Km Tr.n{t lo EElu.lr thG
F6ibility ol. JoirtZmEmi..ion Ch.rging .nd Stor{.

F&ility
Td$ha, Km TEBit PE rc
Tnining
TdEdra, Km TEBit,
CallEN
.nd Condud. Trel
Camp.ign
PBr6 and trd{t a [Ml
hining @trpaign
B€gindr$usdsuh Cdhns
and Xem Transit
ldisu$ions are positE,
mntnle @nreMbons
A-6 l(m TENit
t pd.t! Kcm Tmtil Fix.+
Route Sch.duLr b Show
ConGliona to lldolir*
Ljpdab Rolte 100 $hedu s b
depatue nlomalion
lJpdate Route 100 shedues to
€ll6t Metrclnk $hedue changes
u@b Roub 100 $h€drla b
cllel M€hlink $h€dule chilgs
U@b R@b 1m $Mrl6 b
mfid Mohir* sn€drl€ chilgs
Updab Reb 100 sdEdjs b
crlet tleholink $h6dio chaE6
Number Reomm6ddion R6Frsibilty Ye, One (FY 2027) Year Tm (FY m28) Year llrE (FY Zl29) Y€r Four (FY aKl) Year Five (FY 2031) ilun$d R6ommsdalion R6ponsibility Year Ore lFY 2027) Y6r Tm (fY 2ll28) Year ThE (FY z)29) Y6r fo{r (FY 2()3(l) YEr Five {FY 2031) N€n sbs to b€ d6bmrn6d
folliling inrtel@Iffidons
r04
Ci! ofT€hachapi lranst Odelopment PIan
c-l0 Continucb Fill GaD! in
Sidmlt rnd Bik. t&nF* T€hehapr
Op[dal: Dd8lq e siddmlk
and bik6 retrclt pndilizatjon
dan to i&ilify he aM ol
gEaBt n€ed ad optbns {or
phasing and olinuing
ilwtunt
Cmtinuous itrph@hton -
lrplffint 6 tuding is
gUIEd
Conlinws fdffiblbn -
ItrploMl as funding is @rEd
CstnlsifidffitatmItrplffitafundigEsur€dCdtnes ifiEffibtim - Itrdffil6 furdng is m6d
Cdlinru itrpbMhtih -
lEdffit * fundn! is siEd
Nunber R6oltllGddion Ydr OE IFY 2ll27) Yer Trc (FY 2028) Year T1@ (FY 2029) YEr Four (FY 2030) Yer Five City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report 1O FINANCIAL FORECAST
As part of this TDP, Nelson\Nygaard developed a five-year financial model to understand projected revenues and
expenditures for the life of the plan. Using projections built off historical data, these forecasts are meant to provide a high-leve! view of the City's financial health, upcoming capital projects, and capacity to implement recommendations.

DATA SOURCES
Data for past revenues and expenditures was primarily obtained from California State Controller reports. ln cases where data from the California State Controller was missing or incomplete, data was supplemented by agency budgets and the National Transit Database (NTD). Data on ridership and revenue hours primarily came from NTD reports and has been supplemented by State Controller reports in more recent years if NTD data is missing.

Kern COG provided data on grant and state formula funding, such as Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP), Federal 5311, and Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds.

FINANCIAL MODEL AND ASSUMPTIONS
The model relies on a series of assumptions that allow current revenues and costs to be forecast in the future. Changing one or more of the assumptions can dramatically impact the future financial forecast. Assumptions built into the model include:
. Vehicle replacement costs and timeframes, including agency-provided data and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) useful life schedules , Scheduled capital projects
, Cost for providing an hour of revenue service
. Number of service hours budgeted per year
105
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report . lnflation rates for administrative labor, fuel, maintenance contracting, and other necessary costs
. Population and employment growth (used as an indicator for the potential groMh of revenues)
. Necessary administrative and overhead costs
Projections are in nominal dollars, and future years are adjusted based on past performance or reliable projections, when available. Some important notes about projections and assumptions include:
. lnflation forecasts are based on Federal Reserve 1o-year projections. . Revenues from sales and use taxes and formula grant funding are projected based on a composite of inflation, population growth, and employment growth for Kern County.
. Labor, fuel, and other expenditures that increase or decrease along with service provided are calculated at a per-service-hour rate, then adjusted upward for inflation.

This allows service hour projections to directly affect costs. Other expenditures that do not vary with service provided, like utilities or facility costs, are adjusted based on inflation alone.
. Farebox revenue is projected using the average revenue per passenger from the last reported fiscal year multiplied by projected ridership. Since fares are not automatically adjusted for inflation each year, per-passenger revenue remains consistent even if ridership is projected to change.
. For capital spending, if the agency had estimates, those estimates were used. When no agency estimate was available, capital costs were estimated based on a variety of sources, including the California Air Resources Board's (CARB) Transit Fleet Cost Model, vehicle price menus from the Washington and Ohio state governments, and the CALSTART lnfrastructure lnsite cost estimation tool. . The model assumes replacement of vehicles using standard FTA useful life timelines unless otherwise specified in agency documents.

LIMITATIONS
The financial model's output and summaries are only as accurate as the data and assumptions inputs into the model. The model and associated outputs are Nelson\Nygaard's best attempt at capturing the City's revenues and expenses. Model reliability to predict cashflow into the future with a reasonable degree of certainty assumes a stable regional economy.
106
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report

REVENUE SOURCES
Transit agencies in Kern County receive funding from a variety of sources, including state and federal grants, local taxes, and fares. Revenue sources can be used on operating and maintenance (O&M). capital, or both. The following list summarizes the revenue sources included in the model along with a brief description of what they can be used for.

State Funding Sources
. Local Transportation Fund (LTF)
- A 74 cent sales tax that is administered at the state level and then allocated to the jurisdiction where the funds are generated, through Kern COG. While this funding is intended for transit use, jurisdictions are allowed to flex these funds for road construction and maintenance, provided certain criteria are met. . State Transit Assistance Fund (STA)
- This funding is generated by a statewide tax on diesel fuel and allocated in a similar manner to LTF funding.
. Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP)
- This funding is generated by California's Cap and Trade program and allocated to transit providers for use as operating or capital funds. . Zero-Emission Transit Capital Program (ZETCP)
- ZEICP is a state grant formula funding program administered by Kern COG and eligible for use purchasing zero-emission vehicles or refueling infrastructure. The ZETCP program has received additional funding through SB 125 as a one-time infusion.
. Transit and lntercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP)
- TIRCP is a formula grant administered by Kern COG that can be used for a variety of capital purposes, including electrification and capital projects that improve service or safety. The TIRCP program has received additional funding through SB 125 as a one-time infusion.
. State of Good Repair (SGR)
107
The model is sensitive to operations revenue inputs. A significant portion of funds come from state Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funding; however, in some circumstances, jurisdictions are allowed to flex these funds to other transportation uses, including road construction and maintenance. lt is sometimes unclear how much LTF funding is being used for transit, and small changes in allocation can substantially change the projection.

Final Report
State of Good Repair funding can be used to replace or repair transit capital assets, including vehicles and facilities.

Federal and Local Funding Sources
5311 Grants
5311 grants are provided by the FTA to support rural transit operations and are based on a formula, which includes service area population, ridership, and other factors. The money can be used for operations or capital.

Fares and Local Revenue
Figure 54 displays the projected revenues for Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride for the next five years.

These projections are based in part on historical trends and projections from Kern COG.

Figure 54 Revenue Sources for Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride, FY 2027-2031 Sources: Nelson\Nygaard Projection
I
Projected
Operating
Revenue
Fares and local
revenue
$1,400 $1,370 $1,350 $1,320 $1,290
$114,320 $1 20,030
TDA Funds
(LTF, STA,
Schedule B)
$98,750 $103,690 $108,870
LCTOP $32,040 $33,650 $35,330 $37,1 00 $38,950
FTA 531,1 $75,840 $79,630 $83,620 $87,800 $92,1 90
Projected
Capital
Revenue
SGR $20,530 $21,040 $21,570 $22,110 $22,660
ZETCP $37,260 $74,530
Total Revenue $265,830 $31 3,920 $250,730 $262,640 $275,1 30 Revenue
Source FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031
108
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report The City of Tehachapi is seeing steady growth in most funding sources, especially TDA and 5311 grants. LCTOP funding, which provides a smaller share of total operations funding, is also growing. The operating budget is balanced in this projection and should have room to implement the recommended service expansions.

The City has access to additional TDA revenues, which are currently allocated primarily for non-transit purposes. Figure 55 shows the historical allocation of these funds towards transit.

Our projections assume that the City continues to dedicate 10% of TDA funding to transit.

Figure 55 City ofTehachapi LTF and STA Funding Received, FY 2022-2025 Source: Kern Council of Governments, 2025
The City of Tehachapi also receives a steady stream of capital funding in the form of SGR grants, which can be used to repair or replace vehicles and facilities.

MAJOR EXPENSES
Transit agencies incur two main types of costs, operating and capital. Operating costs are those related to day-to-day transit operations, including labor, gas, and office space. Capital costs include fleet and facility costs. The City of Tehachapi is responsible only for the capital costs associated with the Tehachapi Park & Ride facility, and half of allocated vehicle depreciation costs. Given the uncertainty of the facility costs associated with the transition to zero-emission vehicles these costs were not included in the TDP. There are no other proposed capital projects within the five-year timeframe of the TDP, and Figure 56 shows only the anticipated operating expenses for Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride. Details on what is included or not included follows the table.

Figure 56 Expenses for Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride, FY 2027-2031 Total LTF and STA Funding $601,257.57 $727,710.71 $867,435 44 $857,028.60 Percent Used on Transit 26Yo }Yo 6% 1}Yo
Revenue Source FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025
$237,340 $243,270
0perating
Expenses
(Labor, Fuel,
and
Maintenance)
$220,390 $225,900 $231,550
Total Costs $220,390 $225,900 $231,550 $237,340 $243,270 Cost FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031
Sources: Nelson\Nygaard Projections
109
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report Operating costs can be broken down into variable costs, which increase or decrease along with service, and fixed costs, which are relatively steady. Variable costs include driver labor, fuel, maintenance, tires, and possibly contracted services. Fixed costs include administrative labor, utilities, or facilities costs, which do not change with small changes in service. The costs included in Figure 56 shows the anticipated costs to continue operating transit service in the future at existing service levels.

Capital Expenses
Besides the facility costs associated with the transition to zero-emission vehicles, which are still uncertain, the City of Tehachapi has no planned capital costs. 110
Operating Expenses
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report

RECOMMENDATIONS AND

IMPROVEMENT COSTS
Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride currently has a stable financial position. There are two recommended service enhancements which would increase operating costs. Other recommendations are likely to have minimal financial impact or be spread across Kern Transit's entire operating budget and will not directly affect the City of Tehachapi's contribution to operations.

Figure 57 shows the current net position and the reserve for Tehachapi Dial-A-Ride between FY 2027 and the end of the plan in FY 2031. The reserve is calculated from the firstyearof the financial model (FY 2022) and does not reflect any previous savings the City may have. lt also provides the estimated costs of implementing each recommendation and the net position if all are implemented. These costs are planning-level estimates given in 2025 dollars.

As shown, the agency's net financial position is positive most years.

Facilities needed for zero-emission vehicles are not accounted for in this analysis due to a lack of data on costs. lt is likely that a substantial portion of the cost can be covered by grant funding, but the overall cost and the proportion that will need to be covered by other funds is unknown.

Figure 57 Ci$ of Tehachapi's Financial Position, Baseline and with Recommendations, FY27-31 Sources: Nelson\Nygaard Projection
Projected Baseline Net
Position and Reserve
Net Position $45,440 $88,010 $19,185 $25,300 $31,850
Net Reserve $1,282,040 $1,370,060 $1,389,240 $1,414,540 $1,446,400 Estimated
Recommendation Costs
$(10,000) S-2 Pilot Extended
Saturday Service
S-3 Pilot Sunday Service $(30,000)
Sum of Costs $(1 0,000) $(30,000)
Projec{ed Position $45,440 $78,010 $(10,815) $25,300 $31,850 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031
111
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Final Report

KEY TAKEAWAYS
Nelson\Nygaard's financial model shows that the City of Tehachapi should be able to operate Dial-A-Ride service at existing service levels over the next five years based on projected growth in operating funds.

The City of Tehachapi should be able to implement recommended service pilots within the existing budget.

Operations and administrative recommendations are likely to be low cost and can be accomplished within the current operating budget and staff hours.

Over the last four years, the City has been spending between 8% and 26% ol Local Transportation Fund (LTF) and State Transit Assistance Fund (STA) funding on transit operations. This level is sufficient to fund current operations and proposed service enhancements.

Besides the facility costs associated with the transition to zero emission vehicles, which are still uncertain, the CiQr of Tehachapi has no planned capital costs. 112
APPENDIX A:

COUNTYWIDE

DEMOGRAPHIC MAPS
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan Appendix A Countywide Demographics Kern Council of Governments A-1
City of Tehachapi Transit Development PIan
Figure 1 Kem County Population Density
Appendix A Countywide Demographics
,N
Ridgecrest
---------=
+
1 Delano Kernville
@
Wasco
o lsabella

KERN COUNTY
Populatlon DeBlty
People per Acre
<2
2-5
! s-ro
I ro-rs
! ts-
-
KernTransitRoutes
-
Amtrak Thrtray Routes
*. ESTA Roilie 395
-Amtrak
San Joaquins
i : coumy Bou:day
&1a Sr€: [S M tl.n €3Iimfle.

Source: ACS 2023 5-Year Estimates
Kern Council of Governments
'{/ Californla Clty I
Taft
Ridge
Fn?ie( Pa(k
Boron
! tc :ovtr,t
A-2
I ancaster
a
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figute 2 Percentage of People of Color in Kern County
Appendix A Countywide Demographics

KINOS COUNTY

SAN LUIS OBISPO
COUNTY

TULARE COUNTY
IN YO
COUNIY
Porcemage of P.ople
ot Colot
>5% - 10?.
|,tuit-toz
f 'zo:-ss".

I isr
-
Kern Translt Routes
-
Amtrak Thruway Routes
,. ESTA Routp 395
< Amtrak San Joaquins
' i cumty Boundary
ha So!.e€s: [S 202]tsYear tilimite
Source: ACS 2023 5 Year Estimates
Kern Council of Governments

VE NTURA

COU NTY
tOS ANGELFS
COUNTY
L ancaster
A-3
N
ffitsRN ffiffilw
?
!0 2orilrles
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 3 Percentage ofVeterans in Kern County
Appendix A Countywide Demographics
K]NGS COUtiT INYO

COU NT Y
a
TULARE COUNTY !!l
@
Wasco
@
*
SAN tUIS OBISP
COUNTY
I
o Callfornia Ciry
;

TJENTURA

OOLINTY

OS ANGELES
COUNTY
--- ! l! 21Mi..

Source: ACS 2023 5-Year Estimate
Kern Council of Governments A-4
Percentage of Veterans
011 - 5r"
:: >5'a - 10'1
! ro"r'zo'.

I'20r.-ls't
I 'rs,;
-
Kern Transit Roules
-
Amtrak Thruway Routes
ESTA Route 395
< Am!rakSanJoaquins
.

Courrly Buu,rdary
krSorces ACS202ltY.arE droB
Taft
Dela no
Ar rin
n
Frazier Park
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 4 Percentage of People uith Disabilities in Kern County Appendix A Countywide Demographics
[. ancaster
i---
I l! 2! Mrlet
A-5
KiN6S COUNTY

SAN LUIS OBISPO
CO NTY

IULARE COUNTY

VENTURA
COUNIY

LOS ANGELES
COUNTY
Source: ACS 2023 5-Yeil Estimates
Kern Council of Governments
Percentage of Peopla
with lxsabiliti.3
0'r - 5%
>5% - 101;
I'lua'2Ub
! 'zo"'-ssu;
| ':sz
-
(e.o Transif RoUt*
rc Amtrah Th.uway Roltes
' ESTA Route lg5
..O Amfiak San Joaquins
I Cuuoty Boorraary
&ta SMcs: ACS 202J $Year E rinats
N
0elano
@
-1
\t !
Arvin
L
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 5 Percentage of0lderAdults (65Yearc and Olde{ in Kern County Appendix A Countywide Demographics
Lancaster
-
-a' :

A6

SAN LUIS OBISPO

TULARE COUNTY

OS ANGI
Percentage of Aduhc
85 Yea.s end oldar
0% - 5?;
>5?; - t0%
I roz-zo"t
! ,20."-ss";
! 'rs"r
-
<ern Translt Routes
-
Amtaak lhrwav Routes
.:. ESTA R.n(€ 395
< AmtrakSan Joaquins
_-_'
Counly Eoundary
&l!SourcBsr ACS202J 5-Y.!r fsnma$s
Source: ACS 2023 5'Yeil Estimates
Kern Council of Governments
@
N
California City
,
MEffi G@NTV
7 E
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 6 Percentage ofYoung Adults (18-21 Years Old) in Kem County

KINGS CCUNTY

SAN LUIS OBISPO
COUNTY

1. Source: ACS 2023 5-Yeil Estimates
Kern Council of Governments
Appendix A Countywide Demographics
IN YO

TULARE COUNTY N

LOS ANGELES
COUNTY
0 t0
A-7
Ridge
Psrccntag€ of Yoqrg
AdutB (Agc. 18-24)
0'! - 5.a
>5'6 - l0'1
f roz"-zor"
!,:0".-rl"r
-
(ein Transit Rou{es
-
Amtrak Thruway Rout?s
" ESTA Rr,ute 395
{ Amtrah SanJoaquin5
:'__' County Boundary
@
&rlifornia City
Boron
\
Delano
K Lrl
o Arvin
Taft
F raz er Park
,
f

KERN COUN
lsa bella
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 7 Percentage of People in Poverty in Kem County
Appendix A Countywide Demographics

KINGS COUNTY

SAN LUIS OBISPO
COUNTY

TULARE COUNTY
INYO
CCUN]Y
P.Jcant g.ofP.opls
tn PoE;ty
0%-5%
>5 - 10ii
] ,ru:"-zoz
! ,zoz-s:z
! ,ssz
-
KemTransltRfrtes
m Amtrak Thruway Routes
a. ESTA Roule 395
-l'o Amtrak San Joaquins
; I County Bournjary
tur. Soorc..: AB 2023 5 Y6.r Es$fties

VENTURA
COUNTY

LOS ANGELES

C OU NTY
I ancaster
Source: ACS 2023 5-Yeil Estimates
Kern Council of Governments A-8
.'^. rN
Delano
GD
Wasco
\
5 California City
r
t.
lo 2orHile.

City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 8 Percentage of Population with Limited English Proficiency in Kern County Appendix A Countywide Demographics
KINGS COUNT! j\ IN YO

TULARE COUNTY COLJNTY N
i
J
Ridge

LOS ANGEI LS
COUNTY
@
California City
::_:::__i:::-
A-9
Park

VENTURA

OCI'NTY
Lancaster
Source: ACS 2023 5-Year Estimates
Kern Council of Governments

SAN LUIS OBISI
COUNTY
lsabella

KERN COUNTY
P.rcent geotPopdetlon
wlth Umited English
a% -5%
>5% - r0:4
I -10"" 20'a
!,ro:.-r::t
I ,is.(
r KernTransltRoutes
-
Amtrak Thruway Routes
' ESTARilIte395
< Amtrok San Joaquins
'''_ county Eoundary
Lla S6urc6: ACS202l E-lear Esiml.s
Ridgecresl
I
!
i
:
f
I
itl
i r------
a
t___-_-
City of Tehachapl Transit Development Plan
Figure9 PercentageolHouseholdswithZeroVehicles in Kern County

KINGS COUIITY
Appendix A Countywide Demographics
INYO

COUNTY N
t0
A10
TULARE
@

SAN LUIS OBISPO
COt]NTY
VETiTURA

COIJN TY
Source: ACS 2023 5 Year Estimate
Kern Council o{ Governments

KERN COUNTY
Percentage ot
with Zero Vehicles
O'a -5%
>5% - l0%
>to% -20%
>207" - 35%
>35%
Kern Transtt Routes
rc Amtrak Thruway Routes
ffi ESTARoute39S
{ Amtrak SanJoaquin!
I ':

CountyBounoary
€
I
:

Delano
Wasco
U
Ridgecresr
ts
i
U
Ridge
California City
Taft
-
:l
Lancaster
-=
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 10 Employment Density in Kern County
@
Wasco
Source: LEHD 2022
Kern Council of Governments
Appendix A Countywide Demographics
,
N
€
r
Delano
o
lsabella
KERN COUNTY Lamont
Taft
Arvin
Ridge
California City
I- l:Y P:

A-11
FGzier Patk
Lancaster
Employment Dmslty
Jobs perAcae
l-2
J z-s
! r'ro
I tc-
-
Kern Trans,t Roltes
rcAmtrak Thrway Routes
,', ESTA Roure 195
{Amtrak Safi J€quins
''
CountySounUary
ftra Sour.os: 1t10 2022
Ridgecrest
-t'
t
t
City of Tehachapi Transit Development Plan
Figure 1l Employment Density of Lou.Wage Jobs in Kern County Appendix A Countywide Demographics
N
@ _-l Ridgecrest
o
)
aE',
(",,
Wasco
0elano
t?l \7
lsabella
@
Ba

KEFN COUNTY
Low-Wbge Jobs
Employmsnt lrsnsity
Jobs per Acre
.2
!,s-r;
! 'ro-rs
Irs
-
Kern Translt Qoues
rc Amtrak Thruway Routes
".,; FSTA Rorne 395
{ Amtral San Joaquins
l_': CountyBounoary
&taSosrc6: ltHo 2022
Source: LEHD 2022
Kern Council of Governments
L_
Ridge
California City
Boron
Frazier Park
Lancaster
A12
I
'--a

TEHACHAPI

COUNCIL REPORTS

APPROVED

DEPARTMENT

CITY MANAGE
TO:

FROM:

DATE: JULY 9, 2025
SUBJECT: 26.27 MEASURE S PAVING PROJECT AWARD

HONORABLE MAYOR POGON-CORD AND COUNCIT MEMBERS

ANDREW NORTON, CITY ENGINEER
BACKGROUND:
ln accordance with the previously presented 10-year pavement management plan and funding from Measure S, the City of Tehachapi seeks to rehabilitate streets by full replacement or grind/overlay in order to extend the life of city roads for the benefit of traffic circulation. This project represents the third in a series of major rehabilitation efforts requested by the Council and supported by Measure S.

On May29,2025, advertising began forthe project. Staff open ed bids for this project on Ju ne 30, 2026. The results of the bid opening are listed in the table below:

Contractor Name Base Bid Additive 1 Total Bid
Griffith Company S 918,s9s.00 Sss4,140.oo 5r,472,73s.o0 Westrock General Engineering s1,073,681.00 sss6,318.00 s1,629,999.00 Bowman Asphalt, lnc. s7,L74,L40.OO ss29,760.00 s1,703,900.00 G ra nite Construction Company s 1,180,525.00 ss88,666.00 S1,769.191.00 Burtch Construction S 1,331,334.20 567s,127.80 52,006,462.00 RC Becker, lnc. 5L,424,oo2.02 s990,414.60 52,414,476.62 clrY ot

CALIFORNIA
MEETING DATE: JULY 20,2026 AGENDA SECTION: DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RESPONSIVENESS REVIEW:
ln compliance with the Public Contract Code, City Staff undertook a review of the bids received to confirm that the apparent low bidder provided a responsive bid. The bid provided by Griffith Company has been deemed to be responsive.

FISCAL IMPACT:

This project is budgeted for FY 2026/2027 usinB Measure S Local funds with a total value of 52,230,000.

RECOMMENDATION:

AWARD THE 25-27 MEASURE S PAVING PROJECT TO GRIFFITH COMPANY FOR THE TOTAT BID AMOUNT OF $L,472,735,OO AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER To APPRoVE ANY NECESSARY CHANGE oRDERS UP To THE PROJECT BUDGET AMOUNT.
?age 2ol 2
vN
o) o
ct) N
o)INo=oocd
U' !
A'
s.

GI !ooo
6 =. ocoo{fo{l@oo
! I i 7
fl.- If I I
t/
t
,I aE
@.
t,
ooo*
t
'^l I t' ,
I'i a z>
nN
o)o
ct) N
o)INoq)o
t-oo!
!,
s.

GIE
s.oo
ol f
o)oJ
0)
p.€
6- €aE
=. f
(o7o
0)
o- 6o€oolm
at f
0)of
0)
!.@?o
q)ao-{
(,@
ooo
(o
6- m(})
-t5 I o
I. I
[,, I I C
"l
'it
ir
':i.
.:' il
g
r
r I t
'lp ,l I _-.(",
a,
a,
t I
t.
l! I
f, I