like to call to order the
Meeting of the Metrolink board of directors for the month of March
And ask for a safety briefing by Cody Nelson our assistant director of system safety
Cody welcome
Thank you. Good morning for our safety briefing this morning. So we're located at the LA Metro building
It's just one Gateway Plaza. We're in the Metro boardroom
The need of CPR rises I'm qualified. I will be the lead
There is AEDs in the building. The closest one is right out this door across from the security guard desk
We have a fire extinguisher right here on the right hand side as well
If we do need to exit we have two exits here
We'll exit this door would be primary secondary back there
We'll go down the escalators meet out in the front of the building there for further direction
They've been of an active shooter procedure to follow will be run hide fight and we do have Sergeant Eggers from our LASD
Sheriff's team in the in the room as well with that that concludes my briefing unless there's any questions
Any questions?
Thank you very much
Now that you've sat down we're gonna stand up
That's the Pledge of Allegiance to be led by our director Middleton, thank you roll call
director Wapner
Director do tray here. Dr. Marquez
vice chair Chafee
director Nguyen
director Murphy
director Dimitri
second vice chair Bergson
director Spiegel
director Middleton
director Vargas
director Tremblay
director Engler here
director Barker
director Korkorian
director Najarian
Director Solis director Hughes Leslie director O'Connor
Director Allen here director presciato
Chair McCallin we do have a quorum present. Thank you very much
We are going to go into closed session first, and I would like to ask if there's any public comment on the closed session item
seeing none
That's the attorney to read us in the closed session
Board will now go into closed session under item 11a and 11b in today's agenda. Thank you
We're we will adjourn and come back shortly
We're back. We'll reconvene in open session. I'll ask the attorney to
Tell us if there was any reportable action
Currently no item to report from closed session chair. Thank you very much
Now we'll have public comment on items on the not on the agenda
we have any public comment madam clerk I do have a written public comment that
will be emailed to the board after the meeting because it's lengthy from Lucas
Chang and then I have a request to speak for general public comment for Andrew
Graves everyone I'm Andrew Graves and I live in East Ventura County I take
Metrolink from Ventura to Los Angeles for work and fun whenever I can to
avoid taking a car. I wanted to express my excitement about Metrolink's commitment
to build out a zero emissions fleet. I think the ZE pilot program for the
Antelope Valley line is a great and smart way to survey prospective
technology. Of all the ways to run a zero emission system, overhead electrification
is the international gold standard and has proven time again to be the cleanest,
cheapest, and most efficient long-term zero emissions implementation. However,
constructing the significant initial capital investment or considering the
initial significant capital investment to get the wires put up, this is
understandably difficult to implement in a short time frame. Due to
these constraints I would like to urge the board to consider battery
operated multiple units as a preferred zero emissions technology for the Antelope
Valley line. I believe this puts us in the right path to our zero emissions
future. In Metrolink's own technical analysis, battery operated multiple units
had an edge over their hydrogen counterparts. The battery electric option
suffers the most in the range and charging
slash refueling categories.
Concerns that can be mitigated with partial overhead
electrification in the operational route.
This is a much cheaper strategy than going all
or nothing with catenary.
Improvements could then be made hypothetically
as part of a rolling program designed
to build out a percentage of the overall system each year.
With 100% electrification, there would not be
any refueling or range concerns.
I also have my concerns with hydrogen,
Mostly regarding the technology's maturity.
Internationally, the last few pilots have come back
with negative results.
Specifically relating to maintenance and fuel costs.
Germany was the first country to attempt
to run hydrogen fuel cell trains at scale.
But after a year of service, their operator LNGV
opted to start switching to battery electric trains
where there was no overhead electrification
due to operational costs being significantly more
than with battery electric train sets.
I would also like to mention that currently,
most of the hydrogen produced is created
from methane or natural gas.
So it's not really green at all.
Producing green hydrogen takes a lot of power,
more than two times more than if the electricity
was just used to charge an equivalent
battery electric train.
Why use that energy to generate green hydrogen
when we could just use the electricity
in the first place to save on fuel costs?
Even if hydrogen is picked for the pilot,
the end goal here for converting Metrolink
needs to be overhead electrification
due to its proven track record,
high operational efficiency,
and lower maintenance and fuel costs.
In conclusion, I understand that hydrogen may seem like a new and exciting technology,
but realistically it has not proven itself as a reliable and responsible choice
to replace our aging diesel fleet.
Electrification is the best solution, and with overhead catenary in mind,
MetroLink should follow the battery electric path to its zero emissions future.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comments.
I don't understand this one.
I'm sorry.
What's the attorney say?
Donald? Donald? You're up.
Hi, I'm Donald Harlan. This is for general comment for Metrolink.
I have a lot of concerns. I mean, first of all, I appreciate what you guys are doing at Metrolink.
It looked like you guys are kind of keeping things tight on the accounts and the books and the numbers for what Metrolink's costing, looking very reasonable. I appreciate that.
But I am concerned about the excessive audits
that people come from all over the government thinking,
hey, we're going to make up stuff at MetroLink and Metro
and stuff, and we're going to figure out
how to spend money in there, figure out money or something,
and there's too many audits.
It's a good idea to keep track of stuff.
They should audit stuff, but it's a little excessive.
I was concerned about the Vista Canyon,
also about the Vista Canyon Station.
I feel it's an unnecessary station.
You see what it's doing, what it's doing,
I want the Vista Canyon Station removed
because it's in the riverbed.
There's a lot of illegal real estate development there
around Vista Canyon.
There's a big problem with illegal real estate development
in Canyon Country.
I had one of my cousins was killed over there in Canyon Country and those people that did
that have committed billions of dollars of fraud over there in Canyon Country developing
real estate and unfortunately that those members of my family were deceased and there's nobody
to fight over that.
But that's my property over there in Canyon Country and somebody that killed my family
members don't deserve to be developing on my property at all. And they certainly don't
belong. They don't deserve their own Metrolink station at Vista Canyon. Also, I'm concerned
about Metrolink selling bonds. Metrolink is a private incorporation. You guys don't need
to be selling bonds. There should be plenty of money. There shouldn't be outside investors.
Another thing I'm worried about is Metrolink doesn't develop real estate.
You guys are a little more tighter than just Metro, but I'm really concerned about that.
You know, I'm obligated for people working at Metro to allow them to live in the area
and to have housing available, but Metro's not, Metrolink is not to be developing real
estate.
and please don't invite government people failing,
I mean fired from the government back here,
even though they need jobs.
Thank you for your comments.
We'll go on now to our consent calendar.
Is there any need to pull any of those items?
If not, is there a motion?
Berger moves and Wapner seconds.
Is there any objection to the motion?
Any abstentions?
Seeing none, it's unanimously approved.
Onto our regular calendar, 7A, Title VI Public Hearing
for Antelope Valley Line Schedule Expansion,
presented by David Huang, our planning manager
for Juan and Sylvia Novol, public affairs manager.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and member of the board.
My name is David Huang, planning managers.
I'm here with my colleague, Sophia Novot,
Public Affair Managers,
over here to request both approval
for starting the Title VI update outreach
on the Andover Valley Line's scheduled expansions.
Next slide, please.
So last year's Metrolinx expanded Andover Valley Line
service from 11 weekday round trip to 15s.
As the operator of the AVL service,
We're required by the FTAs Title VI
to conduct our public outreach for any major service change
that remain in effect for more than six months.
Next slide, please.
So the new schedule add five new afternoon
and evening service for the Inbound to LA Union Stations
and the four mornings and the evening outbound train.
The new service will help fill the service gap
during the day and the evenings.
The new AVL schedule demonstrate our commitment
effort to provide a convenient transit service throughout the day.
Next slide, please.
Good morning.
My name is Sylvia Navoa, and I'm the public outreach manager for Metrolink, and we are
now commencing or asking for your permission to commence the public outreach portion of
the Title VI process.
So what we will do is, as we have done in the past, is that we will notify community
members that there will be a meeting on April 18th, and we encourage their comments regarding
that what their views and thoughts are on the expansion of the Antelope Valley
line. We will send notifications to CBOs to other community groups and let them
know of this meeting. We will post notices in the limited English
proficiency newspapers so that people know that this process is taking place
and we will also hold the April 18th public outreach meeting in both English
and in Spanish and if somebody speaks a language other than English or Spanish if they let
us know ahead of time, we will make sure that we provide them an opportunity to speak or
make comments at such meeting.
From there, next slide please.
So above you'll see the list of activities that we will be performing as part of the
Title VI outreach process.
Today we're asking for your approval to start the outreach process.
On April 19, we will hold a virtual community meeting so that people can let us know what
their thoughts are on the expansion.
On May 10, we will present a summary of what the comments that we have received because
we also have a website that people can leave comments.
We have a survey so people can leave comments and give us their thoughts if they're not
willing to or unable to attend a meeting.
And on May 24, 2024, we will present to you the findings of the equity analysis and what
the public has said regarding the expansion of the AVL line.
Thank you.
Any questions for myself or for David?
We would be happy to answer them.
Thank you very much.
Any comments?
Director Berger.
I want to thank you for putting this together.
And I would just encourage you, I know that like Santa Clarita is very engaged, some of
of council members. And I think it's important to get the feedback. But if you would just
I can ask just because I represent the area, let me know exactly how you're doing the outreach
would be helpful so that maybe we can help you partner to get some of that out into the
community. We appreciate that. Thank you very much. We
will be in touch with your office. Thank you. Other comments, questions? Seeing
Seeing none. This is an action item. Is there a motion?
Are there moves?
In the second any objection to the motion any abstentions?
Seeing none. It's passed unanimously
Under 7b a proposed amendment to the agency's classification and salary plan and market adjustments
To employment compensation presented by Roxanne Randolph our interim chief people officer Roxanne
Good morning, Chair McCallan and members of the board. I'm presenting item 7b proposed amendments to the agency's
classification and salary plan and market adjustments to employee compensation
next slide, please
HR policy number two point one states that
Salary studies shall be conducted at least once every five years by an independent consultant.
In 2022, the Segal group initiated the agency-wide study.
The findings were presented at the January 12th ECOM meeting as well as the January 26th board meeting.
The primary goal was to review Metrolinx classification and salary plan
and make recommendations to, number one,
ensure internal equity and external market competitiveness,
number two, ensure that employees are compensated consistent
with their job responsibilities, and number three,
to ensure the pay structure is competitive with the market.
Next slide, please.
As a result of the study,
the following are the proposed changes.
Segal recommended amendments to our classification and salary plan,
including moving from 22 grades, which currently are grades A to B,
to 18 grades, grades 1 through 17,
with grade 11 split into two separate ranges.
Segal's proposed salary range also ensures a consistent 55% spread
between the minimum and the maximum of a salary range.
Additionally, changes to some classification titles and grades were recommended.
Also recommended were market adjustments to 15 employees' compensation.
Generally, the recommended adjustment was between 5 and 10% and
the total cost around $140,000.
Next slide, please.
Therefore, staff recommends approval of the salary resolution to amend the classification
and salary plan, and approval of the market adjustments to the 15 employees' compensation.
Next slide, please.
Thank you.
That concludes my item, and I'm happy to answer any questions you have.
Thank you, Roxanne.
Director Ralton.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, help me with this, the recommendation of the consultant is 55% spread between the
lowest rank and the highest rank within the classification, correct?
Actually that's between the minimum and the maximum for each salary range.
Okay, so within the salary ranges, how many steps are there?
Like at what pace are they going to get up to the 55%?
So there aren't any steps in our salary range, we just have the minimum, mid and maximum,
So an employee will progress based on cost of living adjustments and merit increases.
Is this a 55% for a classification?
This sounds like a lot.
Do we have a lot of folks at the top of the range now?
Currently we do have a number of employees who are at the top of the range.
But with the proposed changes, it will give more employees room for merit increases.
When they reach the top of the range, we have to pay merit increases in a lump sum payment,
so with this proposal, a number of employees will no longer be at the top of the range.
So the 15 that would be recommended for the actual increase at this point, are they at
the top of their range?
Is that where we're doing that?
No.
The 15 employees, it was related to the study, so either it was based on an internal equity
issue, or possibly the external market. They weren't being paid at market.
Thank you.
We don't have automatic step increases in metric, Director Spiegel.
So when we did these, and that range is so large, we did drop a couple of the bottom
levels off.
You mean the lower grades, or?
Well, when you have widespread, and we're trying to increase it for market rate, usually
if you're increasing a couple, if you call it grades, then you decrease or take off some
of the bottom ones, because if somebody comes in new, where do they start in that position?
If we want to start them as new, then they would start at the very bottom, and then we're
going back to the same challenge.
So, my experience is, as you've increased the top, you sometimes pull off the bottom.
there's very few in that lower. So I'm not sure if I'm fully understanding the
question but in terms of when we bring new hires in they can be brought in you
know depending on their experience anywhere within that range so I'm not
sure if that's answering your question. So when you're adding on the top of the
range so you're expanding that range even greater quite often you take some
the bottom part of the range off, so you're just jumping the whole range to meet the market.
I think what you're trying to say is if you're looking at the equity and trying
to make it more of a level playing field and already at the low level, it's not,
is that your point that you would adjust how we're paying at the lowest level so that there
is an equity issue? Or if there's nobody there, then they get bumped up just because equity is
not going to be the lowest level. I mean, you're going to find that. If it's truly going to be one
that we're looking into comparisons which is as a competent class of study is, then
you those bottom ones would be eliminated. And what happens is if an
agency doesn't eliminate the bottom of the range, it just expands the range and
it doesn't give the opportunity just to move the whole range up to keep the market.
If I might, Director Spiegel, you move the top up and you keep the 55% range, it
automatically brings the bottom up? That's what I'm confirming. Right. That's... I just
want to make sure, it wasn't said that was dropped. I mean you can still get the
55, but if there's nobody in the bottom. So I'm just confirming. So is everybody
understanding what I'm saying is confirming that the bottom of the range
is being brought up or dropped off? I called it dropped off. You're me calling it
brought up. Yes, the bottom of the range. Thank you for understanding my
complex of mine. My second question is just confirming that what positions are
not included in this particular study. Is that directors and above? Well all
positions were included in the study. Even except for the CEO? Yes, except the
CEO and then also you know any other classifications that report directly to
the board so in that guy sit over there yes and also our director on it okay so
those are three okay thank you any other questions or comments seeing none this
is an action item is our motion if he moves sir sir you go suck it's any
objection to the motion any abstentions seeing none it's unanimous approval
Thank you.
Thank you very much, Roxanne.
Next we have fiscal year 24 financial results for the seven month ending January 31st, 24,
presented by Christine Wilson, our senior manager of finance, and you have a new hat.
I do.
It's Easter.
It's Easter, right?
Go ahead, Christine.
It's Easter, right?
Go ahead, Christine.
Yeah, I am Chris Wilson, presenting item number 7C,
which are the financial reporting items for the seven
months ended January 31 of 24.
Next slide, please.
This slide displays ridership versus forecast
over the fiscal year.
The green bars are the actual, while the blue line
is the forecast.
As you can see, we were significantly over forecast for the month of January, and that
we have been over almost every month since the beginning of the year, with the exception
of that period in December when we had a shutdown.
The ridership numbers do include the student adventure pass riders.
Next slide, please.
This slide shows Fairbox revenue over the fiscal year.
The green bars, once again, are the actual, the blue line, the budget.
we are over budget on revenue.
This does include the Student Adventure Pass.
Next slide please.
These are the budget and actual
Fairbox revenue numbers by month.
Through January, revenue was budgeted at 20 million,
or a 45% recovery, while the actual revenue is 21.8 million,
a 48% recovery and over budget by 1.8 million.
The contribution of the student adventure pass was $685,000 in the month of January
and $2.9 million year to date.
Next slide.
This slide shows the ridership for each month of the physical year compared to budget.
Next slide, please.
These are the ridership numbers by month.
Through January, ridership was forecast at $3.1 million or a 44% recovery.
the year-to-date actual is 3.4 million or a 49% recovery. The Student Adventure
Bask contributed 94.6 thousand in the month of January and 422
thousand year-to-date. Next slide please. Now we're onto the operating statement.
The January operating statement shows operating revenue of 36.2 million or
or 5.3 million over plan.
The expenses here to date are 160.3 million
or 16.9 million under budget.
These expenses are based on accruals and not actuals
and there may be additional spending
into the end of the year.
Next slide, please.
You see here the revenue portion
of the Metro League operating statement.
As you can see, the student adventure pass
is shown here as a separate line.
The large variance in other revenues
is the result of improved interest
resulting from revised banking.
Next slide.
This slide shows expenses through operations.
In total, the train operations are under 7.4 million
with the largest contributor
being train operators or Amtrak.
Next slide, please.
This slide shows MOW expense, which is under 1.4 million,
administrative under 6.4 and legal under 1.5.
Next slide, please.
This shows the results of special trains and total loss.
In other words, the support required,
which is $124.1 million or $22.2 million under budget.
Next slide, please.
Here we show the past two accounts receivable
as of January 31st.
Now, of course, by now, some of these amounts
been collected. Next slide, please. These are the details of accounts receivable
showing the individual items which are both current and past due. Next slide,
please. This is the CAS position and it shows that we are above our five
million dollar threshold in January as we were in December. Next slide, please.
Moving to Aero Service. Next slide. Here we see revenue and ridership by
month for Aero Service. Year to date through January, FairBox revenue is a
hundred and thirty five thousand and ridership is fifty nine thousand. The
Student Adventure Pass has contributed eighteen point four thousand in revenue
and fourteen thousand in boardings. Next slide please. Reviewing the Aero
operating statement. Total operating revenue through January is a hundred
141,000 total expenses are 6.9 million or 3.3 million below plan
Support is 3.9 million below plan next life that concludes my report may answer any questions
Thank You Christine
questions
Mr. Chair if I could make just one good news report
We generally hover right around one day a week. We get about 20,000
Boardings that's been our history. It's usually on Tuesdays. We get 20,000 riders. This is our first week
in the new in our new normal of three straight
consecutive days Tuesday Wednesday Thursday in excess of 20,000 boardings, so
you know we're making progress is slow, but progress is progress and so that was
The best we'd had before was two days in a week and now we're up to three
So we're not gonna stop here, but it just wanted to share that this week
we had some some good ridership members. That's good news. Thank you. Everything's
going swimmingly. Yes. Other comments? Talk about that later. Other comments or
questions. Saying this is a receive and file and without objection that's what the
board will do. Thank You Christine. Next we have brand awareness study wave 4
presented by Sabrina Davis our director of marketing and partnership Sabrina.
Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
This item is a receiving file with the results
of our latest brand tracker survey.
Next slide, please.
The brand tracker is a public awareness survey
that Metrolink conducts twice a year to measure awareness
and perception of the Metrolink brand and service
among the general population.
Our first survey was conducted in November of 2022
to establish a baseline prior to the rollout
of the Metrolink brand refresh, including the new logo.
The most recent survey was conducted in November of 2023
and received 1,300 responses from both riders
and non-riders throughout the Metrolink service area.
Next slide, please.
The latest survey findings reveal that awareness
of Metrolink remains high,
with 68% of respondents indicating they know,
they either know a little or know a lot about Metrolink.
However, only half of the respondents demonstrated
a true understanding of the Metrolink brand
or services provided.
Next slide, please.
Metrolink's new logo was launched in the summer of 2022.
Since then, the awareness of the logo has increased to 16%,
that is up from 11% a year earlier.
And we also measured the public's awareness
of our two major fair programs,
The low income fair discount program mobility for all
reached 15%, the awareness reached 15%
and that's up from 11% shortly after the launch
of the program and awareness of our student adventure pass
has reached 22% and that was just barely
after two months after the launch.
Next slide please.
The findings are consistent with the earlier
potential rider survey and informs our brand strategy
which is an ongoing and evolving process.
We continue our focus on security and safety,
free connections, and how to ride,
and we are aligning our programs and campaigns
with an overarching brand strategy
across multiple channels,
including digital print and social media
to maximize reach and engagement
for current potential riders.
Next slide, please.
I'd be happy to answer any questions.
Thank you, Sabrina, any comments or questions?
Seeing none, now this is a receiving file
and without objection, that's what the board will do.
I do have a written public comment
that will be emailed to the board
after the meeting for this item.
Thank you very much.
Next we have a March legislative update
presented by Jeff Dunn,
our Director of Government and Community Relations.
Jeff, you're up.
Good morning, Chair McCallum, members of the board.
Next slide, please.
As noted in your report,
our community relations team
following action of the board today
will initiate the title six public hearing process
to assess potential impacts of the expanded
Antelope Valley Line Service
as reported to you earlier this morning.
We have assimilated all of the relevant information
concerning the process into a page on the Metrolink website
that goes live today,
now that the board has opened the title six process.
This includes notices of the virtual public meeting
Metrolink will hold on April 18th,
followed by the public hearing held by the board
at its May meeting.
It has surveying information in English and Spanish that participants will complete to
assess and comment on impact that they experience from the expanded service with translation
to additional languages available upon request.
In addition to advertisements, noticing the public meeting, Metrolink will place in local
newspapers and through social media, including Facebook, X, Nextdoor, and other platforms.
Metrolink will also reach out to dozens of community-based organizations that are located
along the line, many of which are newly added to our CBO database that we've
been building throughout last year in this to increase participation in
efforts such as this and to build stronger ties to all of our communities.
We look forward to robust participation and community input to share with the
board to inform its action when it holds the public hearing on May 24. Next slide,
please. The state matters as noted in your report CEO Mr. Kettle last month
participated in the Mobility 21 state advocacy trip to Sacramento.
This is held every year shortly after release of the governor's budget to transmit initial
messages and input from Southern California's transportation, transit, and related business
communities to the proposed budget.
As you may know, from prior budget years, the budget likely will change substantially
with the release of the May revise, and once the state revenues for the fiscal year are
more fully known.
Much of this year's advocacy effort will be focused on playing defense, if you will,
on the robust $5.1 billion of transit funded provided in the current state budget that
grants broad flexibility for use of funds for both capital and operational purposes.
In light of the LAO's projected possible budget deficit this year, which has climbed
to as high as $73 billion after initial reporting a projected deficit of $68 billion, it is
important to note that the State Department of Finance has pegged the estimated deficit
at $38 billion, roughly one half the LAO estimated amount. And in prior years, initial estimates
of both LAO and DOF have been off the mark by as much as tens of billions of dollars.
With respect to bill updates, SB 1098, as described in the report, offered by Senator
Katherine Blakespear, who chairs the Senate Subcommittee on Low Sand Corridor Resiliency,
will be heard in its first policy committee on April 9.
Mr. Kettle, with strategy and government relations staff held a meeting earlier this month with
Senate Transportation Committee consultants to discuss the bill and we will be meeting
with our partners in the corridor to assess whether any clarifying amendments are necessary
or would help achieve the bill's objectives, which are to improve the operation of and
to prioritize investment into the corridor.
These efforts are just beginning, and they will be closely coordinated with OCTA and
with the other impacted agencies.
And we will keep you apprised of any developments, and we are very closely tracking this bill.
Next slide, please.
Turning to federal matters.
As you know, the president signed the budget agreement that passed the House and Senate
earlier this month, which includes the T HUD appropriations bill, which funds our agency.
Bear in mind, because the federal fiscal year runs from September, this should have passed
by or before September 30 of last year.
It was delayed due to differences both between the parties and within the caucuses of each
party on spending levels.
We are hopeful, however, that the FY25 appropriations process will proceed without delay and result
in passage of a bill by or before September as we are in an election year, and thus there
as strong impetus to pass a bill before the election.
To that end, we are presently compiling earmarked requests for FY25 that will include approximately
a dozen requests throughout the network at present because we have not received submission
forms from the majority of our delegation offices.
We cannot provide a lot more information on these submissions except that they are ongoing.
And we have been and will continue to be contacting our board chair, vice chair, and other board
members in whose jurisdictions the earmarks are located for support letters.
We will follow up these submissions directly with congressional delegation members and
staff on the Hill week after next April 8th through 10th at the APTA legislative conference
in Washington.
Additionally, we will have opportunity to carry forward these and the Board's adopted
legislative platform objectives led by our CEO at the annual Mobility 21 D.C.
trip in early June, as well as the California Transit Association federal trip later in
the year, days to be determined.
Our issues will continue to focus on a few things, including our most recent reapplication
through the RAISE grant program, funding for Tier 4 locomotives, resubmitted at the direct
suggestion of FRA Administrator Amit Bose, and in recognition of the larger award of
of matching state funds from the Carl Moyer Program
by the South Coast Air Quality Management District.
Thank you, Chair McCallum,
for your direct and valuable support in that effort.
This will help us advocate not only the need for,
but the robust participation of state
and local funding sources to justify an award
allowing us to purchase this critically needed rolling stock.
We will urge direct congressional delegation support
the application on the APTA trip in two weeks.
Additionally, we will continue to press the case for our Olympics needs in 2028 and the
need for federal support now or as soon as possible to ensure that we have enough time
to prepare our network and service for the Games.
We understand from the Administration that any significant assistance that will be forthcoming
federally will occur in the FY26 appropriation cycle after the Paris Olympics have concluded.
Our CEO did, at the administration's request, send a letter to the president reiterating
Metrolinx Olympics needs, previously reported to the board for FY26.
We will keep the board a prize, and in particular the Olympics ad hoc committee that has been
formed and will work closely with those members as we press forward this advocacy in partnership
with the city, LA28, and our impacted member agencies.
This concludes my report and I'm happy to answer any questions.
Thank you, Jeff. I don't share your optimism about the T-HAD being funded in a timely manner.
Any other comments or questions?
Seeing none, this is a receiving file and without objection, the board will do so. Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
Next, we have System Safety, Security, and Compliance Department activities from Cody Nelson, our Assistant Director of System Safety, Cody Europe.
you're up. Good morning, Chairman Callan members of the board. Next slide please.
So this slide shows our FY 24, quarter one, quarter two strikes, conductor
assaults and vandalism. So we'll start off with our strike data. In quarter one
and quarter two of FY 24 we had a total of 53 strikes versus 38 strikes in
quarter one and quarter two of FY 23 which was an increase of 39 percent. Some
of the things that we're doing to continue our efforts to mitigate these
strikes on our system.
We've working with local law enforcement in the areas
where we're having high strikes to increase patrols.
We've deployed CCTV units on our Ventura subdivision
as well as our San Gabriel subdivision
to help with our trespasser reporting,
using this data to hopefully engineer out
or do some more enforcement
where we're having these issues of strikes.
Moving on to conductor assaults.
In FY24, quarter one, quarter two,
there were five assaults on conductors.
We averaged 0.67 assaults per month, systemwide and FY23,
compared to 1.33 assaults a month in July 23
through December of 24.
Systemwide, we encountered nine reports
of vandalism related to wire thefts,
and in regards to the wire thefts specifically,
we've increased our law enforcement presence
around our system, used our allied security as well
for additional patrol.
LASD has brought in a major crimes unit
to further investigate these thefts we've been having.
We've looked into the homeless encampments
in the areas of the vandalism,
as well as looked at recycling centers in the areas,
provided samples of the wire to our LASD staff
to share and go visit these recycling centers.
So we've peeled back the layers quite a bit,
and we've been seeing a decrease in wire theft
around our system.
Next slide, please.
Increased law enforcement presence on the platforms,
train and grade crossings.
So our department meets with our partners with Amtrak
as well as law enforcement and security, biweekly.
And we look at our unusual occurrence reports
as well as our passer instrument reports.
And we use that data to deploy our resources
around the system.
And so we've increased our train rides as you see
from quarter one, quarter two of 23 to 24
by quite a bit, 413 to 1174.
We've also increased our platform fare enforcements,
Great classing details kind of stayed pretty equal there
and then our right-of-way details increased as well.
Next slide, please.
This slide shows our FRA reportable injuries
for FY23 versus 24.
So FY23, we had 15 FRA reportable injuries
and we saw that decrease down to nine in FY24,
quarter one, quarter two.
So these injuries, they're not catastrophic injuries.
There are a lot of strains, sprains, contusions,
things of that nature.
And so we're still, of course, we hold root cause meetings
to try to see what the root cause of the issue was.
And of course, put corrective actions in place
to prevent those from happening again in the future.
Next slide, please.
So rule violations, FY 24, quarter one, quarter two,
we experienced a total of 14 rule violations.
We had some movement violations
within side of our maintenance facilities.
One of the corrective actions we did
was increase our video review
as well as event recorder download review
with our contractors to further oversee
what our equipment operators and engineers are doing
while making movements inside of our maintenance facilities
as well as holding root cause investigations
to again determine the root cause
and assign corrective actions as appropriate.
Next slide please.
And this last slide just covers our training
that our department has done.
So this slide, the pictures you see on this,
this slide here was from our 239, our annual 239 drill
that's required, that we held
at our Arrow maintenance facility back in November.
We partnered with our San Bernardino County Sheriff's
Department and hosted an active shooter drill
onboard an Arrow train.
Very successful, looking forward to,
we actually have one coming up here
in a few weeks next month.
Next slide.
That concludes my presentation,
unless there's any questions.
Thank you, Cardi.
Director Schmigle.
So, I'm assuming the wire thefts,
no one was caught with those?
Not in the act, no.
Some of the recycling centers did say
they've seen some come through,
but we haven't been able to identify anything.
Connected, right?
Yeah.
What about the assaults?
So again, we've increased or we use the data
that we get from our train crews,
and we place security on those trains
where we're getting more passenger incident reports
as well as our LASD staff to ride the trains
where we're seeing an increase in unruly passengers.
Have we been able to prosecute any of the assaults that have occurred?
Um, I would have to, I don't know that an information on top of my head.
I'd have to get back to you on that.
My third question is on the fair enforcement.
When you talk about the details that we do on fair enforcement, what is the process
of that, are they just getting people to go buy their tickets?
What kind of enforcement are they doing?
A lot of times they'll do street carring operations is where they'll open one
the door of the train and we'll have the conductor
as well as LASD there checking tickets
as individuals are boarding the train.
Okay, so we are basically just making people
aware that they're being watched.
And check and verify and fair as they're correct.
Do we notice any improvement on those same cars
that were the same line route
that's being enforced that day?
Do we see it over a week or two?
Do we notice it dropping?
So just recently, we redeployed some of our resources
and increased some presence at Union Station here.
And over the last two weeks, since we've done that,
we did see a decrease.
Because it really cuts down on the,
maybe the issue boarding the train
and causing the issue along the line.
It's kind of stopping it right there at the beginning.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Director Rauchner.
Sure, going on toward Director Stegel's questions,
what about violations found on the train?
were they asked to leave the train at the next stop
in addition to getting their citation
or how does that work?
Yes, so if there was an unruly they would,
if they didn't have fare, for example,
they would be asked to get off at the next stop.
If that continued then we would notify
our security operations center as well as
who would then notify LASD who could respond
and remove the individual if necessary.
Not necessarily unruly, just they didn't pay.
I mean, it used to be that you had the opportunity
to pay on the mobile app and that didn't make sense
because the officer would say, let me see your fare.
He goes, oh, let me look for it.
They go down the aisle, they come back
and they bought the fare.
So what happens with someone sent down violation
on the train itself?
And they're not unruly, they just didn't pay.
I would believe most of the time
they would have the opportunity to buy the fare.
If they couldn't or wouldn't,
then they would be asked to get off at the next stop.
Yeah, that doesn't make any sense.
Yeah, that's actually, just to cover Cody on this one.
So our conductors will check for a ticket.
If they do not have a ticket,
that is oftentimes, then they become classified
as an unruly.
Oh, okay.
And so they're, at that point we call,
we ask them to get off the train.
If they refuse, then we contact sheriffs.
Oftentimes, Director Wapner, what'll happen is
it takes us two or three station stops
before we have a sheriff's deputy able to remove
the individual from the train,
at which the point they've already gotten off.
But they're still receiving a citation, correct?
Don't think of citation for what you've got.
Our conductors do not have citation authority.
One of the things that we started training
our conductors on was de-escalation
to try to reduce the number of assaults on our conductors,
because our conductors were getting assaults.
So our training is step away, deescalate, contact Sheriff
and have them come out.
So in the interest of really protecting our conductors.
So that has been our path.
And oftentimes again, by the time a deputy is able
to get to a train, the person's elided.
So what would it take to train our conductors
and allow them to issue citations?
I know law enforcement can give them that right.
What would we need to do?
Excuse me, Darren, if you wanna,
I just want to correct a statement.
Our conductors are trained to write the citations.
We've asked them not to, because of the number of assaults
over the last two years, with the de-escalation training
that Darren mentioned, we asked them not to really
enforce the citations and call the sheriff out,
but they are trained.
They do have the ability to write citations,
and we see a very small amount of that.
Generally, the sheriff or dispatcher,
but it's an unruly where it goes to that classification,
but generally we tell them, hey,
you need to get off the train at this stop.
And 80% of them do get off at that stop.
I don't want them to get involved in a confrontation either,
but issue the citation.
Obviously, if they start fighting,
then just walk away from it.
But it's something to think about.
Yes.
And our contractors do have, our train crews,
contractually, they have an obligation to scan 30%.
And we're seeing about 50% of the riders today
being scanned for valid tickets as well.
But the scanning doesn't mean anything
if there's no consequences.
And we all know there's some folks out there
just playing the system.
The second question now for you
as far as fear enforcement of platforms,
is Union Station the only place
that we do platform fear enforcement?
We do any other platforms throughout the system?
No, we do them at other platforms around the system.
San Bernardino Transit Center would be another example
of where we've done similar operations.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman.
Yes.
I was wondering the concern I would have.
I think finding out if these people are being prosecuted
is one thing, but another thing,
finding out if we have repetitive offenders
saying, folks, that we need to target those individuals
if that's the case.
And then the other thing is that the strikes,
I mean 39% increase in the strikes,
That really creates a problem.
And we need to continue to work on efforts
to try to prevent them as best as we can.
But a 39% increase is quite a bit.
I appreciate the fact that you're continuing to work on it,
but we need to try to find some other solutions,
perhaps, to deal with the strikes.
Understood.
One thing we are doing is looking towards technology.
As I mentioned, the CCTVs that are out on the right of way.
Thank you.
Thank you, any other comments or questions?
Go ahead, Dr. Krekorian.
Thank you very much, and thank you for the report,
particularly on the wire theft vandalism
and the collaborative effort that you're pursuing
with other agencies.
I know every single one of the agencies
that every single one of us is involved with
is struggling with this problem,
and it's almost a fool's errand to try to chase
individual thieves of wire, it has to be an upstream targeted process at the
unscrupulous metal dealers that are purchasing this stuff, so I appreciate
that you're pursuing that. Can you talk a little bit about the system impacts of
those nine wire thefts? Was this lighting, was it signalization
infrastructure, what sort of stuff was impacted? Yeah, so the majority were our
our signaling system on the orange subdivision
as well as our Ventura subdivision.
And it does create or has the potential
to have major service disruptions.
Obviously, the signal system will go down,
it can affect crossings, and if it's during peak time,
then that's going to have a tremendous impact
on our service.
Thank you.
Others?
Seeing none, this is a receiving file and a rejection.
That's what the board will do.
Thank you very much, Cody.
Next we have our quarterly capital program status report
presented by Kelly Fernandez, our PMO endless.
Kelly.
Good morning, Chair McCallum and members of the board.
Next slide, please.
For the period ending December 2023,
the authority expended 16.4 million
in state of good repair projects.
The state of good repair program has 155 active projects
with a total budget of 413 million.
Since this presentation was prepared,
the RCTC FTA grant has been executed,
allowing the all share projects to move forward.
Next slide please.
The authority has also expended 9.9 million
in new capital projects.
This program has 77 active projects,
including SCORE with a total budget of 1.1 billion.
Next slide please.
I'd like to highlight a few of the accomplishments
in the capital program starting with SCORE.
On the Antelope Valley line, 60% design was completed
for Balboa double track extension, canyon siting,
and Lancaster terminal projects.
On the Orange County line, 100% design was completed
on the signal re-spacing La Palma to Avery project.
Next slide, please.
Displayed here is the score construction schedule
for phase one.
Seven projects have completed construction.
These projects include signals from Burbank to LA,
signals from Atwood to Orange, LA-US-R-Y-R-M,
OC set out track, Burbank Junction,
Chatsworth signals rehab package,
and signals from Avery to songs.
The signals from La Palma to Avery project
is anticipated to begin construction this year.
There are five additional projects
anticipated to begin construction in calendar year 2025.
Next slide please.
Now for some highlights on the state of good repair program.
The Bombardier car rebuild program,
conditionally accepted and has put into service 20 cars.
Two additional cars are expected to arrive next week.
On the Antelope Valley line, the Authority installed
over 11,000 feet of rail during the December outage.
That work is pictured on this slide.
Next slide, please.
The Authority also replaced 15,000 ties on the Orange Line
between Fullerton and San Juan Capistrano.
On the San Bernardino line, the Authority completed
of drainage improvements to the twin pipe culverts
at MP 28.86 and abandon an adjacent box culvert.
That work is pictured on this slide.
Next slide please.
That concludes my presentation.
I'll be happy to answer any questions.
Thank you, Kelly.
Any questions?
Seeing none, this is a receiving file without objection.
That's what the board will do.
Next, our chief executive officer's report, Darin.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
So a brief report today.
Next slide, please.
We are very pleased to share the news that earlier this week on Monday, a week ahead
of schedule, we were able to restart service in the San Clemente region after being down
for close to eight weeks.
It was, again, a week ahead of schedule.
It would not have happened were it not for a massive partnership, not just our public
agency partners in the Orange County Transportation Authority in the state of California that
have helped provide the emergency funding.
But our contractors, Condon Johnson was the primary contractor that did a design build
to build that barrier wall that you see in the left slide at the base of where the dirt
was moving.
We had Joshua Grading, our own contractor, Herzog, who takes care of track and signal
maintenance of way and HDR engineering consultant. So that's the good news.
We're really pleased that we did get it done ahead of schedule and and we're
still you know there's still bits and pieces that are being wrapped up but it
not just required the placement of the barrier wall but a huge amount of track
work that was done after the barrier wall was completed just because the the
trackbed was just so deteriorated from all the flooding the flooded material.
Alright, so it's baseball season and we're really pleased that with the support of OCTA
and RCTC, we have brought back Angel Express trains on the OC and IEOC lines.
You can see the details here, so we had a successful first run and you can see that
it will have another 39 trains for Angel Home Games
and a few Dodger Angel Home Games later in the season
where you'll be able to use the special ticket
to take your family to a ballgame.
So this is the kind of thing that we really are excited
about that if we're successful in putting together
our optimized schedule that is very similar
to the Antelope Valley Line service
that we've now recently expanded,
You won't even have to look at doing special trains.
This will be trains that you can do every day,
every weekend, and not have it be something that's special.
It's just gonna be part of our fabric.
So today, right now, you live in the Antelope Valley,
in Antelope Valley, you can go to a ball game,
you can go to a Dodger game, come here to Union Station,
hop on Metro's Dodger Express,
and never have to worry about whatever
the parking prices are at the Dodger Stadium ever again.
We'll do the same thing with Anaheim.
And so we're particularly on that Orange County line.
So there's a lot of energy around that,
and we're going to track the success of the Angels Express
over the course of this summer.
Next slide.
Jeff mentioned the fact that we've had some success with our,
Jeff Dunn mentioned that we've had some success with some
grant applications as well as appropriations requests.
This is particularly good news that we've received a $1.3
million U.S. DOT smart grant.
We've just recently, just moments ago,
spoke about intrusion detection and trespasser strikes
and where we have a couple of hotspots in our system.
And so thanks, in large part,
to support from Congressman Brad Sherman
and now a U.S., a $1.3 million U.S. DOT smart grant,
we're going to be able to start introducing
more of this technology that identifies
trespassers on our system that oftentimes can become a trespasser strike.
So this is, you know, cutting edge for us.
We want to be able to pilot it on, we will be piloting it on the Ventura County line
where we do have our, probably our greatest number of strikes that we have to wrestle
with and see how we are ultimately able to implement it throughout the system.
And next slide.
And this was late breaking news.
We talked a little bit about the rail yard modernization and rehabilitation project.
That was the project that was close to $80 million, a three year project here at Union
Station, all the work that went into it.
We had the shutdown at the end of December that allowed us to put the finishing touches
on all of the switching elements.
We were really pleased to get the news that the Southern California chapter of the Construction
Management Association of America, recognized it as a project with a project achievement
award.
So hats off to rail pros, who was our construction management consultant, rail works, who was
our construction contractor, and our whole team that made that project a reality and
is really very much modernized LA Union Station.
So as we go in as a user of our system, we're able to, we're moving in and out of Los Angeles
Union Station much more efficiently than we did a year ago.
Next slide.
And then just lastly, we will be operating our normal service on Cesar Chavez Day on
April 1st.
So if you happen to have the day off and you feel like taking a train ride for something
other than a work trip, use it to come in and be a part of wherever you might want to
be whether it's in downtown Los Angeles or anywhere else that our trains travel.
Next slide. I think that wraps it. All right, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you very much. Questions of our CEO?
Remember comments? Any none? My only comment is I want to thank everyone for
coming in early today and I want you all to be safe this weekend with all the
rain that's coming and be safe and I want to wish everyone a happy Easter. So
thank you for being here and we are adjourned.