Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Votran officials outline budget risks, urge options to protect paratransit as grants face uncertainty
Summary
Votran finance and transit officials told the Volusia County Council the transit general‑fund subsidy remains about $11.0 million but warned federal and state grant uncertainties and contractor cost pressures could force painful service changes (Sunday service, fleet reductions) unless offsets or new revenues are found.
Votran officials told the Volusia County Council on March 17 that the public transit system’s general‑fund subsidy is roughly $11,000,361 and that the agency is managing service models to hold the subsidy flat amid uncertain federal and state grant allocations.
"This is the third of five mini budget workshop presentations," said Ryan Osofsky, Votran chief financial officer, introducing a session intended to solicit council direction on service-level changes to be costed for a May budget presentation. Transit Services Director Bobby King said contractor and paratransit costs are Votran’s biggest pressures and that the agency has used microtransit and fleet reductions to control expenses. "Our biggest expense is our operations and maintenance contractor," King said, and he described a $22–35 million range for contracted services and other operating costs, with a substantial portion covered by federal grants.
King said the agency had avoided asking for a general-fund increase this year by trimming fleet and shifting low‑ridership routes to microtransit. He warned that further revenue losses — particularly to federal transit programs — could require "painful" changes such as cutting Sunday service, further fleet reductions or larger conversions to microtransit. Council members pressed for data on ridership by route and asked for alternatives that would protect paratransit services for eligible riders.
Council members also asked about fare options and whether income‑tiered fares or targeted partnerships could help cover costs. Officials noted federal grant allocations and matching requirements limit some options and said that taking service away without replacement could reduce future grant apportionments, a counterproductive outcome.
The council asked staff to return with a package of options and ridership data for potential service-model adjustments and to identify candidates for microtransit conversion and other cost-saving measures ahead of budget deliberations.
