HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1980/01/10 Item 0CITY OF CHULA VISTA
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMEiVT
Resolution 9921
01/10/80
Item No.
For meeting of 1/10/80
Resolution g !~ ~ Appropriating $116,647 From
ITEM TITLE General Fund to Transit Service Fund and
Appropriating LTF Overpayment for FYl~?78-79 ~nd
Authorizing Refund
Development Services .Administrator f~~~~
SUBMITTED BY l
ITEM EXPLANATION (4/5TH'S VOTE REQUIRED YES x NO )
The Finance Department and tYie Transit Coordinator have
recently completed the attached financial summary for Chula
Vista Transit operations for FY1978--79. The summary
combines both City and Aztec F3us Lines expenses for FY1978--
79 operation of CVT, The Financial Summary, with the aid of
the attached maximum LTF claim calculation and the
calculation of City required subsidy for FY 1978--79, points
out the following four major financial conclusions:
1. Total CVT expenses were $754,745 and total revenues
received were $1,057,90'.
2. City subsidy required is $176,647 ($116,647 over the
$60,000 previously budgeted).
3. The City received $'757:.000 from the LTF. It was.
eligible for only $463-84?_.~ thus resulting in excess
revenues of $~03~15P-
4. Aztec received an allowable profit of $73,574 or about
130 on its FY]_978 79 CVT contract of $534,764.
JAB;nr/DP-006
(continued on supplemental page)
EXHIBITS
Agreement Resolution x Ordinance Plat Notification List
FY1978-79 CVT Financial Summary + 2 other Financial
Other Exhibits ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: Attached Submitted on
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Required City subsidy for FY1978-79 CVT operations is $176,647 due to
the LTF 50% limitation requirement. $60,000 was previously budgeted.
Thus an additional General Fund appropriation of $116,647 is required.
An appropriation $303,158 of excess LTF monies received during
FY1978-79 from the unappropriated Transit Services Fund also is required.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Approve resolution appropriating $116,647 from City General Funds to
the Transit Service Fund and appropriating LTF overpayment for FY1978-79
and authorizing refund of $303,158 to City's LTF reserve account.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
COUNCIL ACTION
q~ z
`-1
__.__
Form A-113 (Rev. 5/77)
Agenda Item No.
For P~eeting of 1 10 80
Supplemental Page Two
The City's local share of financing CVT has been
approximately 530,000 over the past few years. Council
approved a City subsidy of $60,000 for CVT operations during
FY1978-79 budget sessions in May, 1978, based on staff's
expected impact of the LTF 50% limitation requirement. The
actual City subsidy required has been computed to be
$116,647 over the $60,000 that Council originally budgeted.
The following events/facts occurred since the May, 1978
budget session when Council approved the $60,000 subsidy to
transit for FY1978--79:
1, The Council approved in mid-1978 the staff
recommendation not to apply for and accept Federal
capital grant funds for bus purchase and related
transit equipment. This action thus negated the
purchase of capital equipment which, due to the LTF 50~
limitation requirement, would have increased the amount
of eligible capital expenses and decreased the City
subsidy by 535,000,
2. Council approved an interim City/Aztec agreement in
June, 1978 for the first three months of FY1978--79
until a final agreement could be worked out with Aztec.
The interim agreement was at 51.15/mile and the final
24 month agreement Council approved in September, 1978
was at $1.35/mile. This was $.20/mile over staff's
original FY1978 79 estimate for CVT operations which
formed the basis of our transit subsidy estimate. This
resulted in additional unanticipated FY1979 CVT,
operating expenses of about $100,000 which Chad the
effect of increasing the original budgeted $60,000 City
subsidy figure by an additional 550,000.
3. The impact of the City being in its fifth year of
operating new services (primarily out at Southwestern
College) had the effect of reducing the amount of
eligible operating expenses exempted . This impact was
significantly underestimated by staff. LTF funded the
entire amount of new services for the prior four years.
However, the Transportation Development Act states that
the amount of new services exemption allowable be
limited to 75~ in the fifth year, thus increasing the
City's transit share by an additional $30,000.
Transit staff originally estimated CVT operating and capital
expenses to be about $950,000 for FY1978~-79. However, since
it was decided not to pursue Federal transit funding, the
City neither purchased any transit related equipment nor
initiated construction of a transit maintenance facility or
a transit center. These items were originally sct-ed uled to
be purchased or undertaken in FY1978--79.
~~21
Agenda Item No.
For Meeting of 1 10 80
Supplemental Page Three
Thus the City's claim for LTF monies submitted in April,
1978 requested more money (5707,000) than was actually
allowable ($463,842) under current Transportation
Development Act laws. This necessitates the City refunding
5303,158 back through CPO into its LTF reserve account held
by the County Auditor.
~~~~
.~
i
1 d it
..
.~.•nc1-~ ~ ' '. ~f r» '
~
~
~ V
t '
•. a ~ ~ ~7f ~'
_ .~= _~'-~,,.3 1 _ ~''+7
Vi, t t~ ."_~ ;(ft~f~ '~..~'.r':MI ~..,:~~~~~ Y- .1 ~:114~
_ .
. `~
_
~.J~ ~~ ~;} ~~l~~a ~ listr~
C.iLii~ OFiNIA
September 28, 1979
File No.: DP-006
Crair Scott
Senior Transportation Planner
CP O
Suite X24
Securit~.~ °acific ?laza
1200 T°.ird :,venue
San Diego, C? 92101
C:iL'L~ ~'ISTe~-, TRr~;:;SIT - r INA~ICIAL SiJP~11ti1ARY 1978-79
~lttaci:eci i s ~ : ~ =
- ~•~~ -~nancial summary for Chuia Vista Transit
.or t.e !078-;9 L3cal year.. P.evenues and expenses sho~~n
under the column entitled, Cit
11
o~=icial City records. y~l are audited figures from
The amounts under the column
entitled, ~,',ztec" Ire unaudited and w°re provided by the
co:~~any.
:1'_~o included i.;
:e ma:{imum LTr claim
deveioaed moron our caicuiation
calculi -,d .., discussions with you. I have also
t~ ~•.e additional City subsidy reG-uired for FY197b-
79 C','T ~r~er3,=' o;,s due to 'the 50 ~ LTE'
limitation requirement.
If ~~ou nave ar,y :ru`,;tions, please call me.
1 _ `~1.
Transit Coorc:inator
~~~•~.nr
::ncLc,s~~res
cc: ~d. ,; . Robens
~ener ran;;en
Cus Ze:~ba, ~;ztec
~y zI
\r
~~van~.:es
=-:_____
~3S~°fl~nr ;=?rnS
i..-'~ r"ands
~e^ar31 ~r.nt
Cltf JUDS1u%
Total revenues
-~= n=?~
Oo?r3tions
rans:.~r:- ~~ ~~~
~e~reciation
Total Operations
~- ----_
c~,c.,cr..
=----
:~~n~ra1 a rc:~ini '-
s ~. r ~ ;, i ; ;~
insura~c~
:~•It;cn
~r~f~ssi~nai :;ervlc~s
~.'f. ~~jus*~~ent
Tcta1 ~~~a~r~
.:cis, "v~n;:e ., ; ~r•
•Yc~r.ci'~_~r~s
C U!.a 'JIST:a T,~A(~SIT
`'nsn cidi Sur^~arv
i9 73 - 1979
'. I t'; n r;~ `r- ~Z
c~7
i11~~dti '.0:01 il?ri
'
.
ons J
L3= a~--
~.,,,.~5 x534,754
_ '•",(~;
-
w -
707 , X300 _ 89 , 325
'3.25 _ - 767,000
I ,~
, _ _
~
,V,2..o
7.00 4
ib~
~76;~47 _ ,
i,~oo
- 175.547
r1,0;,7,y03 $634,754 5(&3a ,-
,704)
S
1,057,?03
.,
~3Y,i'~~ '258 .,fin
3,917
- ~i ~„
i ,. J
. n
:'J
3,917
'.1 71~
__ , I :J.~
~ ~.34,c64 S2S4,174
X12 12~ ,;;51
2^~i ,.ii T
^' Y 57,545
- %;7 ,
? 1
5
~ 11
^
/
- ~I'J Y
~
_0.31 ~~
~,U~7 _
r ~ /
31
(5.:4,754)
-i;,~~., ;~1
3 294,274
129 ,~53
85,220
70,315
'y Jy~
7 i n3
2~,31~
J,/
,r ~J
a 20~ „i?6
~ ~ ,.~i J ~
.l .l''
,_ _
X70. /.,~
°° notes .o Financial cc„~ rY
l
i
io~ai ~xp_nses:
iota ~ ,~e'~~ :.erv, f_~
~xe:roti ~n
~1ax?;nu:n LTF Clain
,. .
..aiculat~on 1973-7^
a737,~7~.00 -
~~.~µ~.87 cX02nO1tJr2S
1~i,372.C0) ~ncumarances
( 2.55j ri or Year Grant Rer'und
~r10r Year ~nC.
~,-
'~7.; ~~.?2
d.7 us,.l~,
~ ant
747245.'2 ,;?;ount subs
„ect to ne1~~ service
~xzmpi:ion
.,,,o.
~.~ .+ .J
~~~
iii ,.,SE.~O
'~7=='~ ?mount of
3 { 1
Y ne;N service exemption
`
S1Z8,ogg ~Jn
-----~1J C/
la~' e
~3'' I ~ ~' ~' i i c„
IOt3l "Dens ~
4x ,gyp ~i an
.:a~i ~~ i
I Tf' 7n,:~1v'',
,,_..
:,n~ :~~
~;~+7,2?5
,,~ $747 245
T _~~~ (12a;9oo~
~~ (380,000
X66,=07 238,345
~) ~'~ `.
'~~~ ~
'=' '~~
`J~'' ~ ~
119,172
i~3,900
:1 •'3.3 128,900
. 3g~ 000
w ~ ;,' ~ a 2
~-
a~628,07?
767,000
-=---='' 628___- , p72
~`-` a~138,928
~~2i
~' ;
~'~t'S '_'0 i.,iu l a `1 i S .a i i"3.15 ice, C i i13nCl :1 ~u";iTiarV ? 978_79
°n;. hr_?~.Vn di~'fers =ro tya
audi* ''°port as follows:
°- '-:.'Q1 ~ ^~ ~~- :`r VoaY, r?V~nU~ adjU T~, t ,.
=ar s ,.en of X28 ~QO
r ~ s:. nc1 ~1::._c
:n a_ccunts -•ece ~ "ai year ;?77-7~3 i '
vd~le. I~l? r?yt?!?Ua tydS a ~ f'~'1., dTOUnt 3S
df1 try wd5 revers ea 1 n T 1 SCd I c N n~V:_r reC2i Ved , SO the
. r~nsi ~ ~ :;~~~~i 1 y_a. 1973-79. Ti`te Chu '
d 3u:~:,,ary dio+ at is Vista
-gar - -7_; :~a ;.;~` 2T~ '~ ~ncluc~ this revenues in
yesr 1973-7~, ~ ~~ r ,Jre, "o "°~1ersal is reeuir~ad for fiscal al
"?oorr., j, ?^OUiI ~ ShOtVS I, 'ii0~'!`1 aS d I i a^111 iy i n T.ha zUd i t
aS ' eXC°SS r? o JD in rate Chu1d ~/1St3 `1ndnCidi SU~T~t*1drV
V..nUe OV~r ?;tpenOjtUrZ$".
.. ..-', yC ~ L~eS -.^,°- rat31 r°~!.1 r r?Q Ci'-
---~ - " ^Jr`, --. ;; _, J "^0 a ~l subsidy or X175,547. The
~_..,'"'~.; ~~ v.~,..,3~~i'.'j,wllij ~ .n lilLCrftlr:~ ~;'anSr~er and X025 nOt
Burin; The-]979-;0 fiscal year "'Wien ;ri11 ~-aouirt an a~~rooriation
1
°5 .;OL '"C:UC-d _^? r`_ 1', rS ~'ro-~ ~;?? gUQlt rn1 r i
~_TF C131n. _ ~ +UnO LO ;,;'~~ OT ::97,;;72 dttl"ib;.'tacle in ghat i±
~~ th 1977 -73
~i9 zi
.~
,~
_alcu;a~ion o- Ci'~v R~:auire` Sub,idy
- n C C:'1?
~ '.:;^
°~°ral errant 105.i5o
0~3~ ~-'
_ :,i8, X98
74 %=j
'.7 ~V SUSS i;~V ;~pn~ ~~
sir
116,54;
Less: 1973-79 3udy~t
~di ~ ~a 1 ?~^~: ra~± - 60.000)
_~,~
qq aI