Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout3059-1976- APPROPRIATE 30000 FROM THE FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING TRUST FUNDORDINANCE NO. 3059-1976 AN ORDINANCE TO APPROPRIATE THIRTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($30,000) FROM THE FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING TRUST FUND, FOR CERTAIN ORDINARY AND NECESSARY MAINTENANCE AND OPERATING EXPENDITURES AND FOR CERTAIN ORDINARY AND NECESSARY CAPITAL EXPENDITURES AS AUTHORIZED BY THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF INDIANA AND BY THE ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA. WHEREAS, The State and Local Fiscal Assistance Act of 1972, Title I of Public Law 95-512 was approved October 20, 1972. WHEREAS, Section 51.40 of Part 51, Chapter I:, Subtitle B, Title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations provides as follows: A recipient Government which receives entitlement funds under the Act shall: (c) Provide for the expenditure of entitlement funds in accordance with the laws and procedures applicable to the expenditure of its own revenues; WHEREAS, pursuant to the said State and Local Fiscal Assistance Act, the proper legal officers of the City of Richmond, Indiana, have established a trust fund known as the Federal Revenue Sharing Trust Fund, WHEREAS, revenues are available in said trust fund to be used for cer- tain ordinary and necessary maintenance and operating expenditures and for certain ordinary and necessary capital expenditures, WHEREAS, there is a need for funds for certain ordinary and necessary maintenance and operating expenditures and for certain ordinary and necessary capital expenditures as authorized by law, and WHEREAS, certain extraordinary emergencies have developed since the adoption of the existing annual budget so that it is now necessary to appropriate more money for the various functions of the City Government than was appropriated in the annual budget; NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA: SECTION 1. That for the expenses of the City Government and its institutions for the year ending December 31, 1976, the following amount of money is hereby appropriated and set apart out of the Federal Revenue Sharing Trust Fund for certain ordinary and necessary maintenance and ordinary and necessary capital expenditures, said sum being subject to all laws governing the same and such amount appropriat- ed shall be held to include all expenditures to be made during the year unless expressly stipulated by law. SECTION 2. That for the said fiscal period, there,is hereby appro- priated from the Federal Revenue Sharing Trust Fund for the here- after enumerated purposes the following specified amount to meet the extraordinary emergencies hereby declared to exist: ROSE CITY BUS LINES $30,000.00 SECTION 3. An extraordinary emergency exists for the above appropriation and it has been recommended by the City Controller. SECTION 4. This Ordinanace shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval by the Mayor and is subject to the laws of the State of Indiana governing emergency appropriations. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE Common Coun it of the City of Richmond, Indiana, this t 7` day of 1976. President of Common Council ATTEST: City Clerk PRESENTED y me to the ayor of the City of Richmond, Indiana, this day of 1976. C City Clerk APPROVED b- the Mayor f the City of Richmond, Indiana, this a day of 1976. �yor ATTEST: C)--7Clerk Farm preown ad-. by state"Board of 6CeanIIt% General Form No. 99 P (Rev. Wn QtY-.!G3Arh- Glty .©S'_Uciw ud.......... To_. Palladium Publishing Cor oration Dr. (Governmental Unit) 19 North 9th Street ............................ warw--- ..... County, Indiana ...... 4tg4AOAdr.144 .IMI....... PUBLISFIEWS CLAIM LINE COURT Display Matter (Must not exceed two actual lines, neither of which shall total more than fare solid lines of the type in which the body of the advertisement is set) giber of equivalent lines .............. Head —number of lines Body—mtmber of lanes .......43...... Tax awnber of lines ........ I...... Total umber of lines In notice ....... !k7...... COMPUTATION OF CHARGES 4 .........lines...... AAe coh mus wide equals -- • - • • � � ..... equivalent lines at ..e1$$ .......eents ver line Additional Chop ter Doom staining role or tabular work (W_wr (fit of above aum ant) Charge for extra proofs of publication (so cents for each proof in crews of two) TOTAL AMOUNT OF CLAIM DATA FOR COMPUTING COST Width of Single column „1,1-..ems Number of insertions 2,,. Size of type . ? .Point Size of quad upon which type is east ,. -- -- -- $..1..:54------ $..13.:i4�..____ want to the provblaw and penalties of Ch, lssa Acts i9:53, I h�tel�y xtify that theftegqjugac�wtnt is Imt =4 mot, that the amount e1,wned is 1e01ky due aftm' atlo aft all just daft% Sad that ae Out Of ft am% hu bmu paid, Date; 'FebTaRO,,.Accountin$,lteknit..... ............. .. h PUBLISHEWS AFFIDAVIT . State at ladiana SYr1jPaC .,.....eQ1kF1t17} ss Personany appeared before Tap a notary public m aid for said county and state, R..4iaEtt wba. the um%rs4med....... .--------- .................. beiteg dulg sworn. sags that ...he is_ _ Ia s P.i fi fad, AckViir tislu.g. Manage - of the...._.►.1?a�Ekkxt-t�F1 a ...:. Da?77�-------------- newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the English language in the ATTACH COPY OF Riehr�x© rd= Indiana__,„_ ,__..__.in state and eamtly (City) C�3 of------ -.... ADVERTESEMENr HERB afures ' and that the printed_ matter attached heretG is a true copy, which was duly -;.c. published in said paper fore-.-time_..,ghe dates of publication being as follows: -.................. ............ Subscribed and sworn to before _'new- �. day of.. _. FBb � tyI ]97�_ Notary Public My Coauniaalon ftpiras January 23, 1979 NOTICE TO TAXPAYERS OF ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS Notice is hereby given the taxpayers of the City of Richmond, Wayne County, Indiana, that the proper legal officers of said City, in their regular meeting in the Council Chambers in the Municipal Building, in said City, will on the 16th day of _February , 19 76, at the hour of 7:30 P.M. consider the following additional appropriations to meet the extraordinary emergencies existing at this time. That for the expense of the FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING TRUST FUND for the year ending December 31, 19y_, the following sum of money is hereby appropriated and set apart out of the fund named and for the purpose specified, subject to the laws governing the same. Such sums appropriated herein shall be held to include all expenditures to be made during the year unless other- wise expressly stipulated by law. That for the said fiscal period, there is hereby appropriated out of the fund named, the amount apecified to meet the extraordinary emergencies which are hereby declared to exist: ROSE CITY BUS LINES W ,000.00 Taxpayers appearing at such hearing shall have the right to be heard thereon. The additional appropriations as finally made will automatically be referred to the State Board of Tax Commissioners. This Board will hold an additional hearing within the fifteen (15) days at the Wayne County Courthouse in the Auditor's Office or at such other place as may be designated. At such hearing taxpayers objecting to any such additional appropriations may be heard. Interested taxpayers may inquire of the Wayne County Auditor when such hearing will be held. JoEllen Trimble City Clerk Publish: INTERFAITH 34 N.W. 5th STREET, A— RICHMOND, INDIANA 47374 ;Aarch 1, 1976 15r. Greg "ierchanthouse Richmond City Councilman 5th District Richmond, Indiana 4.'1371. Dear Sir: "What's future of Revenue Sharing Funds?" (Palladium -Item February 26, 1976). Certainly a most timely question. On November 13, 1974. Interfaith residents directed a letter to your attention regarding subsidy of Richmond buses in the hope that Common Council would authorize funds to keep the buses running. You counented in your letter to Interfaith residents, November 21, 1974...... "Government agencies all too often provide facilities for the young and middle-aged citizens, while forgetting those senior citizens of the conrz:iunity -,rho have paid their share of taxes for years." According to published figures about �'90,000.00 has been allocated the Rose City Bus Line operation, not including expected r,M ,000.00 to be (hopefully) approved by Common Council on '4arch 1, 1976. We call attention to other published figures. The largest single expenditure 5?'1,129,803.00 from the city share of Federal Funds is going into the doimtown parking garage. Redevelopment bou ht the site with other Federal Funds. We have no bone to pick with owners driving private cars and their need for Parking ..... but, we ask this question. Is there any sound reason that Federal Funds should be budgeted for many, many other city services, including provision for private parking of cars, and when bus subsidy rears it's ugly head, there is alcrays a question..... Can The City Afford It? We sincerely hope this letter will be read at C =,ion Council meeting, P4arch 1, 1976 and repeat, sincerely hope, that a way will be found to ,, FP THE ROSE CITY BUS LINEz OPERATING ..... NMI AiD IW THE FUTURE. Sincerely, Interfaith Apartment Residents, 34 N. W. 5th Street, Richmond, Indiana 1,7374. INTERFAITH 34 N.W. 5th STREET, A—_ RICHMOND, INDIANA 47374 ?'".arch 1, 1976 Hon. Greg iierehanthouse Richmond City Councilman 5th District Richmond., Indiana 47374 Dear !,tr. Jerchanthouse s During recent weeks and months there has been varied. opinions, as to the continuing, of the bus service in the city of Richmond. These opinions have been made public by the local radio station and. the Pal -Item. i4any of the Senior Citizens of Richmond, regardless of ,,There they live, depend largely or solely, on the bus service as their means of transportation. Perhaps many of the citizens in this age bracket, may not be paying taxes now as such; they have ;paid their share of taxes to support the various programs in the city of Richmond-, such as swimming pools, golf courses, tennis courts, parking lot areas, and the downtown parking garage. As stated in the local paper of February 26, 1976, more than one million dollars has been spent on the d-o,.mtorm parking garage, and about ninety thousand has gone into the Pose City Bus mine operation. Both of these expenditures have been taken from the "Revenue Sharing Funds." Since the do,mtown garage furnishes accommodations and con- veniences for both individual or family transportation, surely, very thoughtful and compassionate consideration, should be given to keep the city buses in Richmond. running, for the entire community, that so desperately needs them. Respec6fully yours, Interfaith Residents, 34 N. W. 5th Street, Richmond, Indiana 4.7374 WHY CITY TUSES 7 That -,Deems to be a big question rcund town today. There are many argLments for and against the `rises. The biggest argument seems to be; Why should the buses be subsidized? First of all you most understand that I am in no sway a trans:ortation expert or do I claim to be a ::ricer, hat you are reading is jut one mans opinion who deals with.the citTbu.es each end every day. If you haven't gues_eo by now the reason I am ::rittinr this is because I'm a.cit,y bus driver. So you see I'm not -eomza ptely ignorant of the situation of the bus lines. To understand ":dhy we need the buses" one has to ride them to know w1h . The eo_ae who depend on the buses to run are mostly- people who cannot afford automobiles, Such is: retired p:ot,le, school children, and 1py income families. They are not the only one'!.,rho ride. People f_•crr all ;calks of life ride for di2- ferent reasons. Such as, to save money, bad weather or someone else in the family is using the family auto. So when one says we don?t need the buses I feel that there are other programs that use Federal n.oney which do not benefit the public as much as the city buses. If you were in these Leo :les shoes hc,,. would you feel if you were to lose your onlj loanLyortation. We must not forget also thLt we are the U.S.A. and we should all do thin,•s to c:enefit our_grpwth. So.people out there if you feel ?",e need our loses la your coune:ilrrnn know about it If you haven',t.ridden the buses '-�efore, leave your car =t home a day or two a WIN and leave the worry of driving to us, I ho e tc hear that you people let your councilmen know how you feel and I would like to see now faces on the bus lines. Whether you ride the base:, or not, it's hick, time we all begin to realize the value of our city Noes. .,e cannot deny the fact "they are needed So what are. YOU going to do about it? One other th:1n,•, have you already Torgotten about the day the city was all ice? `r7ell I haven't and neither have the rest of the faithful eDolo7ees of the Rose City Bus Lines. So people, it's in your hands. What you do with it is up to you. Mike Moore ?pus Operator Rose City Sus Lines 77 3 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL ON FEBRUARY 4, 1976 MEETING OF TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE Those individuals attending the committee meeting were Vic Frisch, Don Meredith, Cliff Dickman, Darrell Sheffer, Jerry Haynes, Matt Nepote, Bob Goodwin and Jim Carter and Tom Austerman representing Council. Marion Williams could not attend the meeting because of conflict in working hours and a short lunch hour. However, I talked by telephone with Marion prior to the meeting and he gave his thoughts and comments on our bus system and these were brought out at the meeting. The actual income and expense figures for year 1975 were given by Don Meredith and total income as indicated by the copy of his report attached hereto was $176,234.56. This includes $62,000. in Federal Revenue Sharing Funds approved by Council. Total expenses were $151,786.04. This results in a surplus of $24,448.52 for the year. However, the prior years of operations resulted in a build up of losses amounting to $19,290.59 and we bagan the year 1975 with this deficit. While we were able to reduce the deficit there is still a slim cash balance with which to operate. Expenditures for month of Jan. 1976 were $9,973.86 and income totaled'$8,793.61 so we further depleted slightly our balance of $11,991.41. After considerable discussion during the meeting it was brought out that we have perhaps 4 alternatives regarding our bus transit plan. 1. We can do away with it completely. 2. We can put it on the tax roll and tax all citizens a fair share of the subsidy cost. 3. We can continue to subsidize through Federal Revenue Sharing. 4. We can raise rates to break even. (This is theory, because if we raise rates it may result in a loss of users and thereby reduce gross dollars.) Various methods of improved and expanded service were discussed as well as the need for additional equipment, etc. All of these are analyzed and summarized and recommendations are made in the recently completed survey and draft of the 5 year Transit Develop- ment Plan as prepared by Dalton, Dalton, Little and Newport of Clevelend, Ohio for our city. A preliminary copy of this final draft has been made available to members of the former City Council and the final draft should be made available to each present member. To conclude this report, the transportation committee recommends to Council that we cut runs to one round trip per day on some of the weakest routes; that we seek Federal monies for capital expense for a new fleet of smaller busses (100% of cost of these can be had?) and that Council consider increasing fares to basic fare of 35f,' with corresponding increases for tokens. Finally we recommend that we cut the 60,000 request for Fed. Rev. Sharing Funds to 30,000. We have been assured that this will be sufficient funds for the system until they complete their plans and investigation of replace- ment of busses versus repair of present ones, etc. Many of your questions concerning all of this may be answered by reading the draft of the 5 year Plan and others may be answered in our subsequent discussions on these matters. Respectfully submitted, Jim Carter Chairman, Transportation Committee of Common Council CITY PLAN COMMISSION RICHMOND, INDIANA February 12, 1976 Dear Councilman: This is a brief summary of the transportation study conducted for the bus lines in 1975. This is in no way an attempt to guide your thoughts or influence your decisions. The study was conducted with the following goals and objections in mind: a) Provide a minimum standard of service to transit dependent citizens. b) Stabilize costs to patrons. c) Reduce costs per passenger to the system. d) Reduce subsidy from the City. e) Provide dependable transit service. f) Provide service to meet existing and potential demand. g) Lncrease the use of transit through improved scheduling and marketing. Survey showed more people use buses from home to work than from work to home. This indicates that bus service which ends at 6:00 P.M. is not available on return trips for many workers. The on board survey showed the following: 1) 45% of those surveyed were from families with no cars. 2) 18% of those surveyed were 65 or older. 3) 37% of those surveyed were from familes with only one (1) car. This indicates the high degree to which those using the service really are dependent on it. These individuals represent 1400 trips per day on the buses or approximately 700t persons. Survey questions regarding how service could be improved were asked and the following reflects the responses: On board surve 698 interviews 21.3% - later hours 15.4% - .extended routes 11.9% - Sunday service 11.6% - improved buses 8.8% - lower fares 6.0% - improved schedules and better distribution 0 F Page 2 COUNCILMAN February 12, 1976 Telephone Survey of randomly selected citizens 13.4% - extended routes 6.5% - Sunday service 6.2% - later hours 5.5% - bus stops closer to home The on board survey and telephone survey identified the following needs: 1) Evening hours of service. 2) Extended routes and closer service to home. 3) Sunday service. 4) Improved condition of buses. 5) Lower fares. 6) Improved schedules. i 7) Better distribution of schedules, The financial analysis of past fare changes showed that a 5t increase in fare resulted in the following: 1) 19.57% fare increase based on an average fare. 2) Increased daily income by $42.68. 3) Decreased ridership by 5.47%. 4) Resulted in 79 fewer trips made by Richmond citizens per day. It would appear that any fare increase should be made only after other improvements had failed to increase ridership. Three items are the primary deficit factors of operation; payroll, fuel and repair parts and supplies. These items are expected to continue increasing. It is suggested that bus maintenance should be improved with a $30,000 increase in funding per year to cover only maintenance. MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION A brief history reveals that since 1969, decreased revenues and increased costs of the previously mentioned deficit factors have contributed to the de- cline of both service and profit of the bus line. Personnel, generally, are responsible workers and satisfied with their job and conditions. .Proper facilities for good maintenance do not exist, although chronic mechanical problems with the following are frequent: Page 3 COUNCILMAN February 12, 1976 Brakes - extremely short life Transmissions - short fatigue life Heaters - units burn out quickly Belt drives - too frequent replacement required Fuel pumps - operation failure Speedometers - all but one has failed -- causing mileage to to have to be estimated, based on route miles Fuel consumption - about 4.5 m.p.g. - tank too small Steering gear boxes - too light - needs frequent retightening Turn signals - repeated failure This list does not include all problems, but maintenance records are now kept and will soon identify other problem areas. It should be mentioned that the grant possibilities mentioned in the studies are technically correct. However, we have checked into all of them and they would be difficult for us to obtain. The capital improvement grants and operational assistance are primarily for cities over 50,000 population. Grants available for cities under 50,000 population are primarily for rural areas of 15 to 30,000 population. So, we're too big for one and too small for the other. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 1) These buses cost $17,000 when purchased. Our consultant feels that they are worth about $24,000 each now. 2) The buses serve over 700 people each day. 3) Many people base their purchase of a home on its location relative to a bus stop. Respectfully submitted, Robert B. Goodwin Project Manager Transportation Study RBG:vl sn P 3 ; s �a r� � (p i ro ' � iG • 5 ai sly .L;Ti �:r� \\\�' s 1 ® l".. • i!1 (•a fw» 0 G C, ° (T Cfl !°f !7 °° Ct' 6"1' iTk • (7 m CA us In 0 � : or a: cn sa p V� cr CL V : R Pi P aa•.St .:TAi� o w B . \ a : yv� s o a �rorv�n•:.r�:wra�»�ra'�'me;mr�v.=°.r, n•r-wc-r�.5'*�•..�msur�' .xu.::�:uam�- .uma®:egsaacs�c.� .e •• •'^" • . 9Q, : . Ll . ............... ... .. ............ o • � e _ • .uva.� .r.r n.m..raesvnwb• rNn.!tISYC ° a F. �o L e F44 ^m p t 6�