Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES TRANSIT ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES DECEMBER 22, 2010 4:30 P.M . MEMBERS PRESENT: Diane Hoffman, Jessica King, Mary Louise Lewis, Mike Norton and Jeffrey Olmstead MEMBERS ABSENT: Diane Lowe and Troy Monday OTHERS PRESENT: Christopher Strong, Transportation Director Chairperson Lewis called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. NEW BUSINESS 1. PUBLIC HEARING ON PUBLIC HEARING ON 2011 PROGRAM OF PROJECTS. The public hearing opened at 4:33 p.m. No comments were received. The public hearing closed at 4:34 p.m. Mr. Olmstead asked if we were keeping any of our 1997 buses. Mr. Strong said we are planning on disposing of four buses due to the FTA spare bus ratio regulation. Mrs. Hoffman moved to recommend approval of the 2011 Program of Projects. Ms. King seconded the motion. Motion carried (5-0). 2. PARATRANSIT COMPLAINT PROCEDURE. Mr. Olmstead felt there should be a single point of contact and Oshkosh Transit System is the best place for this to take place, either by phone, email or letter. He heard that customers have been very happy with the drivers but wait times are an issue. Some customers have waited over an hour. A major complaint has been the new dispatcher is not doing a reliable job. When OTS originally talked about paratransit service, we talked about a 20 minute response time. Mr. Norton asked how customers would obtain a complaint form. He noted that not all customers have email access. Mr. Strong said we could take the information over the phone because conversation is sometimes more effective in getting all the information. Mr. Olmstead asked if staff could fill out the form for the complainant. Mr. Strong said staff would be more than willing to enter the data on the complaint form. Mr. Strong said that on a single point of contact there’s a challenge because our contractor provides medical assistance (MA) trips which has nothing to do with us. If OTS receives complaints for MA trips, we forward the information to Oshkosh City Cab. However, we do not know how complaints on the MA side are handled. Mr. Strong asked if these forms would be used regardless of whether the service is used for medical assistance or OTS service. How it’s routed from there is a question. TAB MINUTES 2 DECEMBER 22, 2010 Ms. King said it could be a perception issue by the customer. The population doesn’t necessarily understand the difference between the services, and we can’t put our service over the county service. Mr. Strong said another thing we could do is when the consumer gets an ADA letter, provide them with a cover letter explaining the program and what to do when they have concerns. Mrs. Hoffman asked if the form could be available at different locations throughout the city. Ms. King said to post a phone number inside the vehicles where customers can call with concerns. She suggested small decals similar to those on trucks asking “How’s my driving?” She suggested placing them somewhere visible inside the vehicles. There was some discussion as to whether customers would be intimidated from indicating their opinions on the OTS paratransit service. Some consumers’ perspective is this is the only game in town; so they don’t want to make them angry because it will affect their service. Mr. Strong noted we did conduct a customer survey this year, where customers mailed back the survey to us with their concerns. The mailback format allowed for greater freedom in customer responses. Mr. Olmstead questioned if people know OTS oversees Oshkosh City Cab. Mr. Bob Poeschl from ARC said his clients are not clear about this. They receive the application from OTS, obtain their card from Red Cross and the service is provided through Cabulance. Mr. Strong said OTS has included in the new contract language that we can brand the paratransit service. Other systems give some sort of name to the paratransit service; i.e. Valley Transit II. He felt this could help customers understanding when the service is being provided as a part of OTS. Ms. King felt branding may help with this confusion. Mr. Olmstead agreed with Ms. King. Mr. Olmstead asked about feedback. Will someone get back to a customer who has made a complaint? Mr. Norton asked about a timeframe for a response. Mr. Olmstead suggested seven business days. Mr. Norton agreed with a specific timeframe. Mr. Strong said the investigation process can take time. Some issues require obtaining data, audio recordings from contractor and talking to a specific driver. We couldn’t always guarantee a full summary of everything in seven days. Mr. Norton felt we need a specific timeframe. Ms. King questioned the expectation we want for a result. It’s more of when we get the complaint and refer the complaint to the contractor. We don’t have any recourse against the contactor until the contract is up. Mr. Strong said the new contract requires the contractor to provide more data to us, which will show if there are recurring problems. TAB MINUTES 3 DECEMBER 22, 2010 Mr. Olmstead asked if we have many complaints about Cabulance. Mr. Strong said other systems basically have the same kind of complaints that we do. Mr. Olmstead reiterated that time is the issue. He felt the resolution to this issue is they need to hire more drivers. Mr. Strong said we can’t make the customers whole for these complaints but we can document the problems for contracting purposes. Ms. King suggested letting the customer know that we have received the complaint, our procedure on handling the complaint, the result from the complaint and ultimately, it will be used to negotiate better service. 3. POTENTIAL PARATRANSIT SUBCOMMITTEE. Mr. Strong asked if this would be a formal committee, informal working group, how it was related to this committee and who should be members. Mrs. Lewis and Mrs. Hoffman felt having another committee would be more confusing. Mr. Norton would like to see an informal committee, with 1 staff member, 1 member from the Transit Advisory Board, and 3-5 other members. Mrs. Lowe left at 5:34 p.m. Mr. Olmstead felt the biggest plus to having a committee was for consumers to know a committee existed. This could help keep things tight and running appropriately. Ms. King said this is an inter-jurisdictional issue. She felt it would be valuable and agreed on an informal committee. This could help improve communications. TH 4. OSHKOSH TRANSIT 5 GRADE POSTER CONTEST Mr. Strong provided a brief re-cap of this contest, which was very successful. 5. OVERVIEW OF 2011 BUDGET Mr. Strong provided a brief overview of the ADA paratransit support contract and the re- branding contract which were included in the 2011 budget. 6. 2010-11 TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN UPDATE Mr. Strong said the plan will come to this committee for review at a future meeting. STAFF STATEMENTS 7. SEPTEMBER 2010 AND OCTOBER 2010 RIDERSHIP STATISTICS TAB MINUTES 4 DECEMBER 22, 2010 AGENDA ITEMS FOR FUTURE MEETING Mr. Norton expressed his interest in seeing Route 11 modified so that it would continue up thth Koeller north of 20 Avenue, as it did when the 20 Avenue overpass was under construction. Mr. Norton noted Valley Transit holds open town hall meetings twice a year. He suggested we could do this so customers can come in and voice their opinions, suggestions, etc. There being no more business to come before the Transit Advisory Board and upon duly . being made and seconded (King, Norton), the meeting adjourned at 5:48 p.m