te of te Mayor tend, cattorta 206 |) Ciry oF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA 61 Est Bondy, Sot 200 Te S18 546-4044 fax 8851-6740 May 19,2016 Phillip A. Washington, CEO METRO One Gateway Plaza Mail Stop 99-25-1 Los Angeles, CA 90012-2952 Re: Measure R2 Dear Mr. Washington’ ‘This letter is writen in response to Metro's request for comments during the public review ofthe draft expenditure plan and funding allocation structure ofits proposed sales tax measure (known as Measure 2). We understand that Metro will be considering public comments received as it finalizes the draft expenditure plan and the Board decides whether to adapt the final structure and components in June oF Joly 2016 to meet the submittal deadline for a November 2016 countywide ballot measure ‘After reviewing and analyzing Metro's potential ballot measure (Measure R2), the City of Glendale has the following comments on the draft Expenditure Plan, ‘Tier 2 Transit Operators ‘The cities of Los Angeles, Burbank, Glendale and Pasadena, current recipients of Tier 2 Operator transit funding from Metro, are requesting a 4% annual allocation in funding from the proposed new Los Angeles County transit sales tax measure currently being considered by Metro, as outlined in our letter dated March 24, 2015 (attached). If approved by the voters, this requested allocation is envisioned to replace the current year-to-year Tier 2 Operators funding provided by Metro that is capped at $6 million annually and represents only a small percentage of the total annual service ‘operating cost. Jn 2010, the Metro Board approved the Tier 2 Operators program to help fund regionally significant service that was unable to access the regional operating funds currently dedicated to municipal ‘operators. The funding provided to the Tier 2 Operators is budgeted year to year and is contingent on the availability of a surplus in the Proposition A growth over CPI funds. The Tier 2 funding is also ‘capped at $6 million per yeat which only covers approximately 18% ofthe total annual operating expenses, The request of 4% allocation ofa ¥4 cent transit sales tax will allow the Tier 2 Operators 10 Page 1of3recover an estimated 80% of our operating expenses. This new funding source would allow for the continuation and expansion of needed transit services inthe Tier 2 cites. ‘The year-o-yezr allocation leads to uncertainty forthe operators and their riders. The ability to have a dedicated funding source for these regionally significant fixed route services will ensure that these services can continue to provide vital mobility for our residents and visitors. A stable, dedicated funding source is needed to ensure that these vital transit services ean continue and grow. Increase the Local Return ‘Our City and many of the region's cities have requested an increase in the Local Return from the proposed 16%. This proposal is far below the Proposition A return of 25% and the Proposition C return ‘of $20%%, The surrent 165 proposal is only one percentage point above the Measure R Local Return of 15%. ‘The cities and counties are dealing withthe precipitous drop in State Gas Tax revenues. Our gas tax revenues have fallen from a high of $6.5 million in 2013 10 $4.4 million this year (projection for current year). This is a structural and permanent revenue loss, as more vehicles become less dependent ‘upon fossil fue's. The same declines in revenue are happening atthe federal level. These dramatic losses in revenues are already adversely impacting our ability to reduce congestion, improve access and safety of our local streets and highways Based on past history, we doubt that either the State or Federal government will effectively deal with these preciitovs declines in federal and state funding for streets and highways. This leaves the cities and the County stranded and local highways deteriorating ata rapid rate, while congestion increases, (Our City estimates that over $6 million annually is needed to maintain the City’s existing steets and. highways in our 30 square mile community. The proposed 16% Local Return is simply insufficient for the 40 year time period, especially considering that on top of the maintenance issues we must deal with the new federal and state envisonmental requirements, North Hollywood to Pasadena Fixed Transit Glendale would like to reiterate the City's support for the proposed North Hollywood to Pasadena transit link deseribed in uhe Measure R2 plan as “BRT Connector Orange/Red Line to Gold Li Aditionally, we would like to ensure that this project remains in the fst 15 year build out plan. Giendale believes this transit ink to be vitally important to ongoing success of our Downtown, which has built out aver the past ten years, and continues to grow, according to the best principles of compact, smart, “iransit-ready” mixed-use development. Providing residents, workers, and visitors t0 our Downtown and surrounding neighborhoods with mobility options to journey to-from our neighboring cities in the San Fernando and San Gabriel Valleys is a necessary step towards alleviating trafic congestion on the 134 Freeway Corridor, which is heavily transted by drivers moving between the two valleys. Page 20f 3Burbank-Glendale-Downtown Los Angeles Regional Rail Following upon the motion introduced by Board Member (and Glendale Councilmember) Ara Najarian at the March 24, 2016 Metro Board meeting (Iiem 39, 2016-228) we request that the Measure R2 expenditure plan includes funding to pursue potential rail connectivity with Metrolink, High Speed Rail and Burbank-Glendale-Los Angeles Rail Project and Local Bus Services. ‘We thank you forthe opportunity to comment upon the proposed expenditure plan and look forward to working with the Metro Board and Staff to construct a robust, equitable and realistic plan for enhancing mobility in Glendale and across the County. Sincerely, Fane Qnarcen Paula Devine, Mayor City of Glendale Ce: METRO Board Members Page 30f3