® Metropolitan Transportation Authorityboardarchives.metro.net/BoardBox/BB2015/2015_03_Mar/...Los Angeles County ® Metropolitan Transportation Authority Metro TO: THROUGH: BOARD

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority ® Metro

TO:

THROUGH:

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

ARTHUR T. LEAHY f CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

One Gateway Plaza Los Angeles, CA 90012-2952

213.922.2000 Tel metro. net

March 02, 2015

FROM: NALINI AHUJA \ \~ · EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, FINANCE AND BUD

SUBJECT:

ISSUE

FISCAL YEAR 2014 YEAR END BUDGET FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE

This is the year-end budget financial performance report for FY2014 showing that Metro is able to deliver safe and reliable transportation services within budget as approved by the Board.

DISCUSSION

Summary of Revenues and Expenditures

For the period of July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014, the Combined Net Revenues and Expenditures for the agency was $83.1 million under budget. Total expenditures were $4,698.0 million representing $346.2 million or 6.9% below budget, while Total Revenues were $3,926.2 million representing $263.1 million or 6.3% below budget. Please refer to detailed sections of this report for additional information pertinent to these overall variances.

2

3

4

Revenues/ Expenditures($ in millions) Total Carryover Revenues from Prior Year Total Current Year Revenues Total Expenditures Revenue Over/(Under) Expenditures

FY14 Q4 Financial Performance

Budget ..

$ 854.9 4,189.3 5,044.2

$ 0.0

YTD June 30, 2014

Actual Variance %Variance

$ 854.9 $ -3,926.2 1 (263.1) -6.3% 4,698.0 . 346.2 6.9%

. $ ,. 8~.1 $ 83.1

Page 1

Summary of Revenues

• Sales Tax, TDA & STA Revenues

Sales Tax and TDA ended the year slightly higher than the budget, $60.8 million or 2.3%. Growth of sales taxes was slightly higher than originally forecasted.

State Transit Assistance (ST A) revenue is dependent upon actual consumption of diesel fuel. The information presented below reflects actuals for the year end, which translates into slightly higher than expected diesel fuel usage and revenue.

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Source ($in rrillions)

Sales Tax & TDA Revenues

Proposition A

Proposition C

MeasureR

Transportation Development Act

Subtotal Sales Tax & TDA Revenues

State Transit Assistance Fund Subtotal Sales Tax & TDA Revenues 1

012erating & Other Re-.enues

Passenger fares

Toll Revenue

Advertising

Investment Income

Other Income 2

, Subtotal Operating & Other Revenues

Total Sales Tax & Operating Revenues

Caj2ital Reimbursments

Federal Grants

State Sources including Prop 1B & Other

Local Grants and contributions Subtotal Capital Reimbursements

Total New Revenues

Carryover Revenue from Prior Year Total Revenues

Budget

$ 708.4

708.4

708.4

354.2

2,479.4 115.5 I

$ 2,594.9

$ 331.1

13.4

20.5

5.1

55.2 $ 425.3

$ 3,020.2

$ 552.0

602.3

14.7 $ 1,169.0

$ 4,189.2

854.9 $ 5,044.1

YTD June 30, 2014

Actual Variance %Variance

$ 717.1 $ 8.7 1.2%

717.1 8.7 1.2%

714.2 5.8 0.8%

390.2 36.0 10.2% --

2,538.6 59.2 2.4%

117.1 1.6 1.4%

$ 2,655.7 $ 60.8 2.3'Yc

$ 331.1 $ 0.0 0.0"/o

34.7 21.3 159.0"/o

20.6 0.1 0.5%

28.9 23.8 466.7%

54.0 (1.2) -2.2% $ 469.3 $ 44.0 10.4%,

$ 3,125.0 ; $ 104.8 3.5%

$ 412.0 $ (140.0) -25.4%

382.2 (220.1) -36.5%

7.0 (7.7) -52.4% $ 801.2 $ (367.8) -31.5%

$ 3,926.2 $ (263.0) -6.3%

854.9 - 0.0% $ 4,781.1 $ (263.0) -5.2%

1 Actual figures presented above for Sales Tax and TDA represent actual received in FY14.

Prop A/C actuals excludes Accounting prior years bookkeeping adjustment. 2 Includes CNG tax credits , lease revenues , vending, and other miscelleanous revenues.

FY14 04 Financial Performance Page 2

• Passenger Fare Revenue

Passenger fare revenue ended the fiscal year at the revised budgeted level of $331.1 million. Metro's fare revenue was driven by actual boarding's of 475.5 million resulting in $.70 fare revenue per boarding.

• Toll Revenue

Metro Expresslanes generated $34.7 million in toll revenues during FY14, the program's inaugural year of operation. This toll revenue far exceeded the budget of $13.4 million. A number of variables contribute to the higher than expected toll revenues including issuance of nearly 300,000 transponder units almost triple the original estimate of 100,000. Additionally, the market was willing to pay higher than expected market toll prices for travel during peak traffic hours. Future year toll revenue budgets will use the baseline information established in FY14 to budget closer to actual.

• Advertising Revenue

Metro's advertising revenue finished FY14 on budget based on the terms of the new contract. The small variance is due to the prior year-end accrual.

• Investment I nco me

Investment income of $28.9 million exceeded the budget by $23.8 million due to greater than anticipated cash balances. The higher than anticipated balances were related to slower than expected draw-downs for capital projects and planning subsidies during the period. Metro continues to invest the unused funds according to the Board approved policy.

• Other Income

Other income of $54.0 million for the year was $1.2 million lower than the budgeted amount of $55.2 million due to slightly lower than projected lease revenues.

• Capital Reimbursement Revenues

Capital reimbursements are comprised primarily of federal, state and local grant revenues which ended the reporting period below budget by $367.8 million, or 31.5%. Capital grants are recognized on a reimbursements basis driven by related capital and planning expenditure activities which also came in below budget for the period. Details of the related capital expenses can be found in the "Summary of Expenditures" section of this report.


Summary of Expenditures

Overall, expenditures totaled $4,698.0 million, which is $346.2 million, or 6.9%, below the $5,044.2 million budgeted amount. Variance explanations are discussed below.

• Summary of Expenditures by Program

Expenditure ($in rrillions) Budget Metro Bus & Rail Operations $ 1,344.9 Other Metro Operations 17.0 Metro Capital/Construction 1,630.8 Subsidies 1,252.6

2

3

4

5

6

7

Planning, Highway and Other Projects 466.3 Debt Service 332.5 Total Expenditures $ 5,044.2

• Summary of Expenditures by Department

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

12

Expenditure ($in rrillions)

!Board Of Directors Chief Executive Office Communications Congestion Reduction Engineeering And Construction Finance And Budget Information Technology Operations Planning And Development Vendor/Contract Management Total Expenditures


Budget $ 28.8 $

261.2 37.1 72.4

1,651.8 1,088.5

42.2 1,513.7

303.4 45.1

$ 5,044.2 $

YTD June 30, 2014

Actual Variance %Variance $ 1,325.8 $ 19.1 1.4%

13.6 3.4 20.1% 1,407.9 222.9 13.7% 1,247.1 5.5 0.4%

385.6 80.7 17.3% 318.0 14.5 4.4%

$ 4,698.0 $ 346.2 6.9%

YTD June 30, 2014 Actual Variance %Variance

20.4 $ 8.4 29.1% 208.1 " 53.1 20.3%

36.8 0.3 0.7% 55.4 17.0 23.4%

1,600.1 51.7 3.1% 1,061.2 27.3 2.5%

42.4 (0.2) -0.5% 1,437.3 76.4 5.0%

194.6 108.8 35.9% 41.7 3.4 7.7%

4,698.0 $ 346.2 6.9%

Page4

• Composition of Unspent Budget

Llllit\11 • . ~

11• r.!mJ;UJI

~ .. ~nlt.it.-ma'!11'1>.i1 i!IT!•• I I

2 Metro Bus & Rail Operations $ 19.1 $ 0.1 $ 19.1 Available for operations.

3 Metro Other Operations 3.4 1.3 2.1 Restricted to Express Lanes & Union Station Properties

I

Local funds; Mostly MR 35% and Bond Proceed and others funds used as match to 4 Metro Capital/Construction 222.9 141 .0 $ 81.9 State or Federal Grants. These funds will remain with the grant funded capital

projects.

5 Subsidies 5.5 . $ 5.5 Sales Tax re-..enues

I Rental, lease, Street & Highway other miscellaneous re-..enues , plus indirect costs Planning, Highway & Other Project 80.7 . $ 80.7 6 not yet allocated to projects.

Debt Service 14.5 - $ 14.5 Restricted to Debt. Result of Accounting reconciliation and reporting changes.

7

8 Total Expenditures $ 346.2 $ 142.4 $ 203.8

• Metro Bus and Rai l Operations Expenses

2

3

4

5 6 7

8

'

Metro Bus and Rail operating expenses show an favorable variance of $19.1 million, less than 1.4% under the $1,344.9 million budgeted amount. This is the net result of favorable variances in services offset by unfavorable variance in other categories. Much of the favorable variances are the result of the execution, schedule/milestone performance, timing, and billing of contract and professional service contracts. Other favorable variances were attributed to cost control in the area of travel and training. Unfavorable variances occurred in workforce labor staffing. We implemented Operator staffing and scheduling efficiencies, but this was offset by overtime to perform maintenance campaigns and cleanliness initiatives at the rail stations. Processes have been implemented to achieve additional cost savings to address the use of overtime.

YTD June 30, 2014 Expenses($ in millions) Budget Actual Variance %Variance Comments Labor & Fringe Benefits $790.7 $797.1 ($6.4) -0.8% Positi-,e variances in UTU Labor resulting from

scheduling and assignment efficiencies were offset by excessi-,e 0/T in A TU Rail Fleet Services for maintenance issues and TCU 0/T for an added emphasis placed on station cleanliness.

Contract & Professional Services $190.3 $170.7 $19.6 10.3% Positi-,e variances in Contract Services due primarily to Contract Execution Schedules and project milestone schedules were offset somewhat by an extension of the Xerox Contract which will be terminated when the TAP Call Center is brought in-house.

Consumable Parts and Materials $85.7 $88.3 ($2.8) -3.3% Increased costs for Cleaning Supplies related to greater emphasis on rail station cleanliness and increased TAP card sales

Fuel, Propulsion Power & Uti lities $74.4 $77.0 ($2.5) -3.4% Greater than planned increase in CNG rate per therm affected Fuel costs and an increase in Peak Hour Seruce Hours affected Propulsion Power costs

Insurance, Workers' Camp & PUPD $85.7 $84.3 $1.4 1.6% Costs closely followed budget Purchased Transportation $40.7 $40.1 $0.6 1.5% Costs closely followed budget Other Expenses $77.5 $68.3 $9.2 11.9% Cost cutting measures and some timing considerations

resulted in a significant cost underrun Total Bus and Rail Operations $1,344.9 $1,325.8 $19.1 1.4%


' I

• Other Metro Operations

Other Metro Operations expenses are related to the operation of Union Station, Parking Program and the 1-1 0/1-11 0 Express lanes. These expenses show a favorable variance of $3.4 million, 20% below the $17.0 million budgeted amount. Much of the favorable variance are the result of less than planned expenses associated with CHP maintenance contracts and execution schedules based on project milestones for other contracts associated with Expresslanes operation.

YTD June 30, 2014 Expenses($ in millions) Budget Actual Variance %Variance Comments Labor & Fringe Benefits $1.0 $0.9 $0.1 10.0% I Cost on target with the budget

2 Contract & Professional SeNces $14.5 $12.2 $2.3 15.9% !Initial year operating expenses were o~.erestimated for the Expresslanes projects

3 Other Expenses $1.6 $0.5 $1.1 68.8% Underspent in planned Training, Seminars & Periodicals. More a result of timing issues than real cost savings

4 Total Other Metro Operations $17.0 $13.6 $3.4 20.0%


• Metro Capital

FY14 Q4 Capital is 222.9 million or 13.7% under budget due to contract award I NTP delays, invoice processing delays, various re-procurements, and schedule variances. Measure R & Planning projects (items 9-16) comprise $259.9 million of the FY14 underrun. Operations Capital & Major Construction Projects (items 1-8) offset the program underrun by exceeding the group allocation by $36.1 million, largely due to the Rail Vehicle Acquisition project (under item 5) exceeding the FY14 budget, but will remain within the approved LOP.

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16 17

Project/Category($ in millions)

Bus Acquisition

Congestion Relief Projects

Bus Facilities Imps & Bus Maintenance

Rail Fac Imp & Wayside

Rail Veh Acquisition & Maintenance

ITS, Communications & Safety Security

Non Rev Veh/Equip, Ware-house & Other Projects

Major Construction & Closeout Projects

Foothill Extension

Regional Connector

Green Line Ext So Bay

Crenshaw LAX Transit Corridor

Westside Subway Extension

Mid City Expo Light Rail Phase 1

Mid City Expo Light Rail Phase 2

Adm Capital Program I Planning & Construction

Total Capital/Construction


Budget

$ 115.2

6.8

88.1

59.0

44.9

24.9

45.3

10.0

169.3

130.9

0.4

272.0

176.2

59.9

396.9

31.3

$1,630.8

YTD June 30, 2014

Actual Variance

$ 115.0 $ 0.2

9.3 (2.5)

97.7 (9.7) I

54.9 4.0

84.8 (39.9)

24.6 0.3

29.1 16.2

14.8 (4.8)

219.7 (50.4)

62.5 68.4

0.0 0.4

338.2 (66.2)

52.6 123.5

38.3 21.6

249.4 147.5

16.9 14.3

$1,407.9 $ 222.9

%Variance Comments

550 40' Bus Jl.cquisition is on target. Includes closeout charges for the 150 45' Bus Jl.cquisition & underruns for

0.1 o/o the Zero Emission Bus (ZEB) purchase. Closeout related project costs & operational costs inadvertently charged to the CROP Projects. Will be corrected in FY15. Delays to Patsouras Plaza project due

-36.6% to procurement. Div 13 anticipated acceleration and LOP increase; Bus Mid life & Engine Replacement behind schedule; work

-11.0% carryover to FY15. MRL to MOL Pedestrian Underpass award delay; termination & rebid for Div20 Car-wash contractor, MBL

6.8% Traction Power & Rail Replacement delays. Jl.ccelerated P301 0 LRV progress for Expo II & Foothill Vehicles. Negative variance offsets with Exo and Foothill projects positive variance below. Ongoing HRV

-88.8% Consultant procurement. ITS Projects on schedule. Delays to Security Kiosk contract award & development of the Emergency

1.1% Operations Control Center Project. Jl.ccelerated Union Station Renovation, Gateway Renovation, & Rail Station Gating work offset by delays to the MGL Material Warehouse construction prep & Vertical

35.8% Lift Module System procurement. Orange Line N/S project overrun due to closeout I claims payment. Offset by delayed UC Ped Bridge NTP due to

-48.2% extended negotiations. Construction progress ahead of FYbudget plan. Project

-29.8% anticipates remaining within approved LOP budget.

Delayed NTP to the DB Contractor, ROW Jl.cquisitions delayed. Delay in awarding Mvanced Utility Relocation

52.2% contract & COLA delays in approving traffic control plans.

Locally Preferred .Alternative incomplete resulting in delay 97.4% to engineering activities.

ROW Jl.cquisitions for SWYard; design & construction progress greater than FY plan. Project anticipates

-24.3% remaining within approved LOP Budget. Delayed award of Utility Relocation contract; Delayed ROW Jl.cquisitions & 3rd party invoicing. Forecasted FY14

70.1 o/o underruns realized. Underrun largely due to offset negative variance with Rail Vehcicle Jl.cquisitions above. Washington Siding work

36.0% delayed. Underrun largely due to offset negative variance with Rail Vehicle Jl.cquistions above. Invoicing delays from DWP.

37.2% Closeout & change order negotiations ongoing. Timing delays for MeasureR Transit Planning Projects. Under runs for Eastside Quad Gate Study, Gold Line Ph 2, Eastside Light Rail Jl.ccess, Green Line, SFV 1-405 &

45.9% East SFV N/S.

13.7°/c

Page 7

• Subsidies

Subsidies were $74.2 million, or 5.9%, over the $1,252.6 million budgeted amount primarily due year-end Accounting adjustments.

YTD June 30, 2014

Category ($in rrillions) Budget Actual Variance % Variance Variance Explanation

-~1--=---=~~~--··-- - -------'-·-----------------------Access Services $ 67.2 $ 67.2 $ 0.0 0.0%

Transit

3

4

5

6

7

-~5>~.rl_l_~-~l!!_~~!!_ _______________________ -----------~~:.~ --------~~-~ ---------~:_!!__ ________ _2~?_!~ Underun due to delays in Metrolink proje~~-Metrolink Capital 6.0 2.1 3.9 65,3% Delays in Metrolink Capital projects -F;;;;-;:~;i;i·~-~~~--------------------- -------1-o~s- -------1-o:s ·--------·a-:o r----------o~i-o/~ - -----------------------Municipal Operators 332.3 319.6 12.7 3.8% .. --------------------------------------------------- ------------------ ·----------------- ---------------- t-----------:-:-:- De I ayed m u n 1 c1 pal ope rata r drawdowns Planning & Admin 6,7 1.7 5.0 74.3% ' -~_:::_....:...--------11------;--~-+---t-------lproject delays and prior year-end accrual

8 Prop A Incentive 12.9 9.8 3.0 23.7% reversal.

9 Transit Total $ 496.5 $ 469.9 $ 26.6 5.4o/c

10 ~~-!! _ _F._~~-!.'-~.<?J.~-~~----------------------- r-,-----,-,- --_---------- --------- 1--------- --------------------------------------11 Bus Capital Operations $ 1.0 $ (0.0) $ 1.0 103.6% Project did not start yet.

Task 8355, 1-5 HOV ahead of schedule by $39

million, Task 6376, Carmenita, and Task 4292, I

S Widening were over by $25 million due to

12 £.~~~~~!'_________________________________________ ---------~-~_?_:~- ------~~:~ _____ j~~:.~) _________ :~-~~~-% Accounting year end accruals. 13 Local Traffic System 12.3 14.0 (1. 7) -14.0% 3 Projects ahead of budget

Project delays, Task 2210- Magic Mtn Pkwy

$2m, Task 8002, Alameda Corridor $7.8m, Task

14 -~~-~!5>.~-~!-~-~-~~~-::.!.~~~~--------------------- ------------~3:~. -----------~-~:-~-- ----------~-~-~?.- ------------3~:~~~ ~;Q?! .. ~-~-~b!.':l.~!~-~--~~Y.~:-~~~~-~}-~~-?..?.:?.~-------------15 Transportation Demand Mgmt 2,2 1.0 1.2 55.3% Delayed munidpal operatordrawdowns

16 Miscellaneous 0.6 0.6 (0.0) 100.0%

17 Call For Projects Total $ 184.2 $ 218.2 $ (34.0) -18.5o/c

18 ~~.!:>-~-~~!!.<?.~---------------------------------------------- ----------·········· ------------------- --··············· ---------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------19 Local Return $ 412.5 $ 417.1 $ (4.6) -1.1%

20 Pedestrians & Bikes 9.5 9.2 0.3 3.2% ------------------------------------------------- - ------------- ---------- ----------------- _______________ , 21 Street & Hwys 23.5 24.2 (0,7) -2.9%

22 Population Total $ 445.5 $ 450.5 $ (5.0) -1.1%

23 Federally Funded

24 rc;~P Closure Project $ 8.0 $ 1.2 $ 6.8 84.6% 25 -i=ii9h';~;;-p-;;~~-:rh;~~9h'____________________ T-------2~2- --s··------o:s- -$------1:7 ---------77~o-;i;

·---------------------------------------------------- ----------------- ----------------- ------------- --------------26 JARC Program Capital & Ops 5.0 1.0 4.0 79.7% Federally funded pass through projects. Delays

27 -~~!!:? .. ~~!?!~!?-~~--------------------------- ---------~--~-- ------------~:?_ ----------~:!: -------~3:_~~- due to sub-grantee's implementing and 28 New Freedom Capital & Ops 4.8 1.0 3,8 78.9% moving projects forward.

29 Regional Grantee-FTA

30 Very Small Wilshire Bus Lane

31 Federally Funded Total $ 32 MeasureR

5.0 3.1 1.8

15.1 3.0 12.1

44.1 $ 10.3 $ 33.9

36.4%

80.0%

76.7%

33 H1ghway Cap1tal (20%) I $ 75.9 $ 92.9 $ (17.0) -22.4%

34 ·=r~~~~ii·c;;r;1i·;;j·-::·M;i~~-R;;Ii-·cp--(2o/~- ,------------·-6:4 ------------i-0-------------i4. ·········-··52:6;;i. See details in MeasureR schedule below, Sub

35 Transit Capital- New Rail (35%) 2.4 (2.4) 0.0% Fund, Subtotal of Subsidy

36 Measure R Total

37

$ 82.3 $ 98.3 $ (16.0) $ (0.2)

38 ~T~o~ta~I~S~u~b-~~-d~i-es ______________ _,~$~1~.~25=2~.6~~$~1.~27.47~.~1~$~~5~.5~----~0~.4~o/ci.--------------------------------~

Excludes accrued subidies made for reporting purposes for the CAFR.


• Planning, Highway and Other Projects Expenses

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Planning, Highway and Other Projects expenses were $80.7 million, or 17.3%, below the $466.3 million budgeted. The bulk of the variance is due to underrun of Highway Planning Projects and Measure R Planning Projects, and prior year over accrual/unallocated overhead.

Project/Category ($in rrillions) Budget Actual Variance %Variance Variance Explanation

Most of the favorable variance is related to 1-405

Car Pool lanes project. Other projects

experienced lower than expected progress

Highway Planning Projects $201.4 $215.3 $ (13.9) -6.9% becuase of assorted Highway planning delays.

Planning costs included in MeasureR projects

MeasureR Planning 88.9 55.5 33.3 37.5% shown on Measure R report below.

Variances are due to: Lower cost for FSP, late

contract awards, reevaluating several projects for

Call Box program, procurement delays for VTCLI-

VET contracts, and contract delays for Regional

Congestion Management 58.4 44.9 13.6 23.2% Intel Trans System.

Project delays due to letter designation and

Programs and Studies 17.4 6.2 11.2 64.5% station mock UJJ JJrojects.

Administration cost was behind the budget due

Governmental & Oversight Activites 30.1 22.5 7.6 25.2% to delay in Planning Projects.

Mainly due to technical consultant proposals are

I

under evaluation and contract award is expected

in Jan 2015. PPP Bench contract delayed. General Planning and Programming . 22.8 18.0 4.8 20.9%

Working on SOW and process of awarding the

Sustainability Project 10.0 6.1 4.0 39.6% contract.

Property Mgmt. & Development 15.6 8.8 1 6.8 43.7% Savings in Joint Development cost.

Savings in Services, due to delays and schedule

Transit Planning 15.0 9.5 5.5 36.5% changes.

i Mainly due to lower OH cost and delays in the

Others 6.7 (1.2) 7.9 118.0% GaJJ Closure project and Accouting adjustment. Total Planning, Highway & Other $466.3 $385.6 $ 80.7 17.3"/c

• Debt Service Expenses

Debt principal and interest expenses were $14.5 million or 4.4% under budget, primarily due to the financial reporting change required by GASB 62 related to capitalization of debt interest on capital projects.

FY14 Q4 Financial Performance Page 9

Measure R Expenses

MeasureR projects ended the reporting year with $225.9 million, or 11.0%, below the $2,046.7 million budgeted. The following table provides a consolidated view of the Measure R expense activities. The expense data presented below is also integrated in the "Summary of Expenditures" section of this report.

YTD June 30, 2014

Measure R Fund ($in nillions) Budget Actual Variance % Variance Variance Explanation

1 ~~~-~"-~~-'-~-~-'?-~-t~:,:;::~------------------------.. --.............. ------ ----------------- ---------------- ------------------Admln-Measure R 6 5 3, 7 2.8 ----------43:2~i; L~~-~-;-th~-~-~~p~~t~d-p·;~f~~-~i~~~j-~~d-i~-b~;-~~~t:--

3 Administration (1.5%) Total 6.5 $ 3.7 $ 2.8 43.2%

4 Debt Service

Debt Ser\ice- Measure R 52.9 50.1

6 Debt Service Total 52.9 $ 50.1 $

7 ~~~-~-~-~x . .<?.~.P!.~~! __ t~~::~----------------------------------------------

2.8

2.8

Change 1n Accounting treatment related to capitalizaion of interest on capital projects to

5.3% comply with GASB 62 5.3%

Project Delays for Utility stud ies, Soundwall

_1:!.~_? __ ?_~-~~~-§~:~~--~~-~~':'.-~:?l_~:!~---------------------------- ___ , ____ ~!.:~- ---------~~:~- ------------~-~--~- -----------~-~:~::~ R!~!'!~!!!~-~n!!_§~!!:!o:'~.Y-~!!.Y.~.':'-~!, ____________________________ _

-~--?~?.-~9.~~-~~:_:!:I_?! __ ~P~!:'.~-------------------------------------- ---------~_?-~ ____________ ?~~- --------------~-~- ----------~~:-~:':'~ ~!:':')_~-~~!:!~y_, ________________________________________________________ _

1 o -~:?.~~-~?.~~-~~~--<?.~?.'.'::~~ ............................ ----------------------~-~~~- ......... ~-~~~ ............... ~-~--... --... -~!:_?~~ ID~~!E~ .. ~-~!-~Y.: ....................................................... .. Delay In executing funding agreements wi th

11 -~~~!'!t:~!~~ .. ?-~.~-~~:':~~-:.'!.?!~~-~~••••••••••"••••••••"•••••"• """"'?.?.~. """"'~'~'~' "''"'"''"'~'~' •'''"''"'~'?:.~:':'~ ~-~!!::~-~-~-~~~~-~-~-~~~~-~-~-~-~-~-~::~~!!: .. .,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,, Carmen ita Bridge proJect progressed faster than

12 -~--~-~!~~11!':'.§!:~_r~l1_~-~-~-?-~11_!~ __ t_?_!:~?-~:.!:?..~:?.Y..~-~-~~~ ....... ~.?-~~~- -------~?~,~- ........... !.~~-.?) ........ :~_!:.?~~ ~-~!!.~!P.?..~~~: .......................................................... .. Exceeded budget due to higher than planned

13 -~~~-~:_!~-~~-~':'.:'~?-~-~-?-'':'.~~_r_-~_~_r~~~ .. ?-~P~:~!~?':'......... .. ....... ~-~ .. ~- ----.... -~-~'~- ........... E~-~) ......... :~~:-~:':'~ ~_Qy:.{_~-~.9!:!!~-~~!~!!~.!.<:>::.~§_1( .. ~~~!!~-~ ............................ . The budget request was cut In half. However the work is progressing as scheduled. Negative

14 .~~-~p::~!i_~§!-~~p_r~:::':'.:'~-~!.S..~!:~-~-~:~~~-~!~~-~-.. -.... - ---.. ----~_?:~- ......... ~.?~~- ........... .J!..~) ......... :~~:-~~~~ ~~~!~!!~-~-!o:'!!!.~~-~!!D.~-~-~-~~-~~~-~-~-~ .. ':'!..~~-~-.Y!:~~, ...... .. Project progressed faster than planned, after

15 -~!9.~ .. '?-~-=~~-~~:~~~~ ............................................. ........... ?:~- ........ -~-~!~- ........... .J~_?) ........ :~::_?~~~ ~~!!!!.~_1=_~~-~P.P.~~~~~: .............................................. .. 16 1-405, 1-110, 1-105, SR91 Ramp & Interchange 2.5 7,1 (4 6) -164.3% Exceeded budget due to hfgherthan expected 17 oi;;;;;-Hfiih;~-y-c;~;;ii~i-s~t;~i;;i;~---------------------------- ---------i-6:2- ---------i-5:a· --------------1-:z· ------------7·.-?o/. i;;~j~-~i-"d~i;¥;---------------------------------------------------------

18 Highway Capital (20%) Total 250.4 270.0 $ (19.6) -7.8% 19 Local Return (15%) I

20 ----·r:..;·~~~~-;~-R"-15o/;-t:(;~~~-R;;i~-~--------------------------------t-------i-o4:7- -------i-o5~5--------------(ii~(i> ----------:o.·ao/~ Ci"tT~;;-d;~~-d~;;;~-~-~-;~--b~~~d-~-~-;ct"~~i-i-~~------------

21 Local Return (15%) Total 104.7 $ 105.5 $ (0.9) -0.8%

22 ~E~-'-~-~-'?-~-~-:-~-~~-(~-~-~~L ___________________________________________ _ 23 -~-~~='-~-'-~--~--~~::~-~~:. __ ?_~-~-=~9:::~----------------------------- --------~-~:-~- ---------~-~:-~. --------------~-? ___________ ?:.?:':'· '2!!.~~-~-~-~-~--------------------------------------------------------------24 Metro Bus Share 98.6 98,6 0.0% 25 ·r:..;-~i~~-0~~~9~--cl;;;;·----------------------------------------------, -----------;;,:7· -----------;;,:7· ------------------- . ----------·o:oo/~ on budget

26 Operations- Bus (20%) Total 147.4 147.4 - 0.0 0.0%

27 Operations· Rail (5%) Total 61.7 61.7 S 0.0% On budget

-----------------·+------------------1 Contract delays due to rescheduling of

29 -~?.~-~~:-:'-~.S.!~~~--'!'_~_r_~<?_r_~ll_~-~-~:-:')_______________________________ __ _______ ?.?:~. ---------~-~-~- ------------~~-? ----------~?:.?~~ •. ~pt::r.::o::;cu~r.:;e.:,:m.:,:e;.:.n~t.~-------,------1 Delay in executing agreements and procurement

30 _!_r_~-~~-~~-~:~~-~!::~-~~':::~??.:11.~-~!--~~~-~!.:.'!.?!1:~~----------- ____________ ?:~. -----------~:~- --------------~·:~ _________ ?.~:_?~~~ ~-~!-~y_~'-------------------------------------------------------------------Delay In plan approval pushed procurement to

31 _§~~-~~~~~--~IJ_~-~-.9_~-~~-~-~~~!'.-~-~~-!~-~!~~~~!!?.~------------- -----------~:~. __________ _?_~- --------------~-~- ----------~?:.?:':'~ ~D-~-~! . .9.~~~-~!! . .'~~!!!.~~-~-~E-~D-~-~-~-!-~-~Y-!~,---------------32 _§~~-~~_rll_-~-~!-~!~~-~-~~~-~-~_<:~I:!Y-.~~?.~-~~~~~-~-~-1)_____________ ---------~-?:~. --------~-~-~- -------------~~-~) __________ :~.:~:':'~ f!.':'L~-~!.!~_Z?.~_!:?..~.P..~~-~~'-~-~-!~_QP.~:'.~!!Iil ................. .

Blue line parts purchases were higher than 33 Light Rail Fleet Midl1fe 3.8 6 0 (2,2) _________ :?.~:-~:':'~ ~-~-~Jl!:!: __________________________________________________________________ _ 34 -oit;;;;·T~~~~~~--C~-p;t~l-20"i,-j:;~~j;;~t-~--------------------------- ·----------·8:2· -----------5·9· --------------i-:4 16 5% Small delay1n Heavy Rail mtdllfe projects

35 Transit Capital -Metro Rail CP (2%) Total 113.6 89.0 $ 24.6 21.6o/c

36 -r:~~':'.~!-~-~~-!'.!~~-~-=-~-'=-t_r_?_l_~ll-~ .. t~~~~L ______________________________ _ ---------------- r----------------------------------Project delays for San Bernadino and SCRIP

37 -~-~!_r~~~~-~~!~.<?.~P!!~~~~~-~------------------------------------- _________ :_~~!.- -----------~--~- -------------~~~~- __________ ?_7.~_?:':'~jJp~r,;;:o~.::je;,:;c::;ts~--~~~---------l 38 Metrolink Trans it Cap1tal 6,0 1, 7 4,3 71 ,0% Rancho Vista project delays

39 Transit Capital - Metrolink (3%) Total 19.7 4.8 $ 14.9 75.6%


YTD June 30, 2014

Measure R Fund($ in nillions) Budget Actual Variance %Variance Variance Explanation 40 Transit Capital -New Rail (35%)

----------+---+----l'-----l-----~--~-.,----,..---------41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

177.2 53.3 I 123.8 69.9% Delay in D/B Contract and slower acquisitions.

_§~~-~~~-~~-~--<?.~~-~!~~!!~~-~~~~-~--~!_~-~~!~----- ---------~~:?. ---------~-L ------------~~:-~ Underrun largely due to allocation of LRV cost to

89.2% another project and lm.oicing delays from DWP. ---------------- ProieclcieiaY"s;·iiLie!o-iiiler!h!lii-aiiticiP"aiea-liiw·aiiii

Reg;onal Connector 131.4 63.2 68.2 51.9% scheduling delays. -----------4---'--'-~----!--------l---..:..:.;;;;.;.:'Project is 75% complete, FY16 Opening. Vehicle

Expo Bll.d LRT Construction Pha,"s-'e_l_l _- _E_xp'--o---!r--=29c.:8:.:..34

_ _:2_3 __ 8._7 __ 1'-__ 5_9_.6 20.0% acquistions will be moved to a new project. LRiilieliig i;nargea to another project, offsetmg other

Expo Bll.d ~RT Construction Phase_:_l _-_ ..:..M~e_::;_tro:....__+ __ 44;.;.;.;.3;,.1-_-1.:.:·.::.6_ ~1 __ __:4::c2.:.:.7+---'9:.:6::...4c.:%-=1ol-,n""eg::.a=t-::ive,..,.va:-:ri-.a,..nc,e;::-s:-::. =---=:-,......,.,-,--..,..~--=-,..,.,,----1 Overrun due to charge for LRV, but Accounting to

Expo Bll.d LRT Construction Phase I - Expo 15.6 36.7 (21. 1) -135.7% reclassify '------+-----1----- !,-------- __________ :_:::F.A~ct~u~al~i~s~h~ig~he~r~t~ha~n~a~n~ti~c""ip-at""e-.d~d,..ue-:-to_e_a-:rl:-y---1

Crenshaw/Lax Transit Corridor 215.2 304.7

I

Gold Line Foothill Extension 132.0 178.1 I

Expo/Blue Line Light Rail 32.3 73.1

(89.5)

(46.1)

(40.8)

mobilization and construction costs not anticipated when budget was originated. Project is still within the

--41.6% approved LOP budQet. Project is 75% complete and working toward FY16

revenue sen.ice. Foothill only has 1 of 12 grade crossings remaining. Trackwork is 90% complete. Station construction in progress. Project is still within

-34.9% the approved LOP budget. ILRV purchases moved from Expo Contructlon project,

-126.3% offset positive variances.

50 Regional Clean Fuel Bus Capital 119.0 110.7 8.3 7.0% Underrun due to delays in design enhancements

51 Sepulveda Pass --r;;;-~-~itco-;:;idor- 4, 7 0.3 j-- 4.4 93.0% Underrun due to delays in Bench contract award 52 ·r.xai·r-.;·ora~9-e·"L~~;;-E~ie~~f;;:;·------------------------------- -----------1·.-6 -----------6_-i;· -------------(4:9) -----·-::so5:9o/~ ciO's-e·;;-ui-iiiiY'iii-eiiis ___________________________________________ -53 ·o!ti-e~:r;~~i~i-ca;;ii~-p-;~-.;;~i~-------------------------------- ----------19~3- ---------1o~ii- ---------------iDi -----------4'3:9% oeiay·s-1ii-ilii;;c-.-·p-rCiieC'i5 _________________________________________ _ 54 Transit Capital- New Rail (35%) Total 1,289.8 1,088.4 $ 201.3 15.6°!.

55 Total Mearure R 2,046.7 1,820.8 $ 225.9 11.0°!.

Next steps

Staff will continue to monitor the financial performance of the agency in FY15 and provide quarterly updates to the Board.


Documents

® Metropolitan Transportation Authorityboardarchives.metro.net/BoardBox/BB2015/2015_03_Mar/...Los Angeles County ® Metropolitan Transportation Authority Metro TO: THROUGH: BOARD