HomeMy Public PortalAbout12 December 11, 2019 CommissionRIVERSIDE
COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION
MEETING AGENDA
TIME/DATE: 9:30 a.m. / Wednesday, December 11, 2019
LOCATION: BOARD ROOM
County of Riverside Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside
COMMISSIONERS
Chair — Chuck Washington
Vice Chair— Ben J. Benoit
Second Vice Chair — Jan Harnik
Kevin Jeffries, County of Riverside, District 1
Karen Spiegel, County of Riverside, District 2
Chuck Washington, County of Riverside, District 3
V. Manuel Perez, County of Riverside, District 4
Jeff Hewitt, County of Riverside, District 5
Art Welch / Daniela Andrade, City of Banning
Lloyd White / Julio Martinez, City of Beaumont
Joseph DeConinck / Johnny Rodriguez, City of Blythe
Larry Smith / Linda Molina, City of Calimesa
Randall Bonner / Jeremy Smith, City of Canyon Lake
Raymond Gregory / Mark Carnevale, City of Cathedral City
Steven Hernandez / Megan Beaman Jacinto, City of Coachella
Wes Speake / Jim Steiner, City of Corona
Scott Matas / Russell Betts, City of Desert Hot Springs
Clint Lorimore / Todd Rigby, City of Eastvale
Linda Krupa / Russ Brown, City of Hemet
Dana Reed / Kimberly Muzik, City of Indian Wells
Waymond Fermon / Oscar Ortiz, City of Indio
Brian Berkson / Chris Barajas, City of Jurupa Valley
Kathleen Fitzpatrick / Robert Radi, City of La Quinta
Bob Magee / Natasha Johnson, City of Lake Elsinore
Bill Zimmerman / Dean Deines, City of Menifee
Victoria Baca / Carla Thornton, City of Moreno Valley
Scott Vinton / To Be Appointed, City of Murrieta
Berwin Hanna / Ted Hoffman, City of Norco
Jan Harnik / Kathleen Kelly, City of Palm Desert
Lisa Middleton / Jon R. Roberts, City of Palm Springs
Michael M. Vargas / Rita Rogers, City of Perris
Ted Weill / Charles Townsend, City of Rancho Mirage
Rusty Bailey / Andy Melendrez, City of Riverside
Andrew Kotyuk / Russ Utz, City of San Jacinto
Michael S. Naggar / Maryann Edwards, City of Temecula
Ben J. Benoit / Joseph Morabito, City of Wildomar
Mike Beauchamp, Governor's Appointee Caltrans District 8
Comments are welcomed by the Commission. If you wish to provide comments to the Commission,
please complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
www.rctc.org
MEETING AGENDA*
*Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda
9:30 a.m.
Wednesday, December 11, 2019
BOARD ROOM
County of Riverside Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, CA
In compliance with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials distributed 72 hours
prior to the meeting, which are public records relating to open session agenda items, will be available for
inspection by members of the public prior to the meeting at the Commission office, 4080 Lemon Street, Third
Floor, Riverside, CA, and on the Commission's website, www.rctc.org.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, Government Code Section 54954.2, and the Federal
Transit Administration Title VI, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141 if special assistance is
needed to participate in a Commission meeting, including accessibility and translation services. Assistance is
provided free of charge. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to the meeting time will assist staff in assuring
reasonable arrangements can be made to provide assistance at the meeting.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS — Each individual speaker is limited to speak three (3) continuous minutes or less.
The Commission may, either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote of the Commission, waive
this three -minute time limitation. Depending on the number of items on the Agenda and the number of
speakers, the Chair may, at his/her discretion, reduce the time of each speaker to two (2) continuous
minutes. In addition, the maximum time for public comment for any individual item or topic is thirty (30)
minutes. Also, the Commission may terminate public comments if such comments become repetitious.
Speakers may not yield their time to others without the consent of the Chair. Any written documents to
be distributed or presented to the Commission shall be submitted to the Clerk of the Board. This policy
applies to Public Comments and comments on Agenda Items.
Under the Brown Act, the Commission should not take action on or discuss matters raised during public
comment portion of the agenda that are not listed on the agenda. Commission members may refer such
matters to staff for factual information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration.
5. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS — The Commission may add an item to the Agenda after making a
finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and that the item came to the
attention of the Commission subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Agenda
December 11, 2019
Page 2
to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Commission. If there are less than 2/3 of the Commission
members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote. Added items will
be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — NOVEMBER 13, 2019
7. CONSENT CALENDAR —All matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion
unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the
Consent Calendar will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.
7A. PROPOSED 2020 COMMISSION/COMMITTEE MEETING SCHEDULE
Page 1
Overview
This item is for the Commission to adopt its 2020 Commission/Committee Meeting
Schedule.
7B. FISCAL YEAR 2018/19 COMMISSION AUDIT RESULTS
Overview
This item is for the Commission to:
Page 6
1) Receive and file the Fiscal Year 2018/19
a) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR);
b) Local Transportation Fund (LTF) Financial and Compliance Report;
c) State Transit Assistance (STA) Fund Financial and Compliance Report;
d) State of Good Repair (SGR) Fund Financial and Compliance Report;
e) Proposition 1B Rehabilitation and Security Project (Proposition 1B)
Accounts Financial and Compliance Reports;
f) Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) Account Financial and
Compliance Reports;
g) Single Audit Report;
h) RCTC 91 Express Lanes Fund Financial Report;
i) Auditor Required Communications Report;
j) Agreed -Upon Procedures Report related to the Appropriations Limit
Calculation;
k) Agreed -Upon Procedures Report related to the Commuter Assistance
Program (CAP) incentives; and
I) Management certifications.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Agenda
December 11, 2019
Page 3
7C. APPOINTMENT OF UNDERWRITERS FOR COMMISSION FINANCINGS
Overview
This item is for the Commission to:
Page 146
1) Approve the selection of the following firms to provide underwriting services to
the Commission in connection with long-term debt financings for a three-year
period, with an option to extend for an additional two one-year periods:
a) BofA Securities, Inc. (BofA);
b) Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC (Goldman Sachs);
c) J.P. Morgan Chase (J.P. Morgan);
d) Siebert Williams Shank & Co., LLC (Siebert); and
e) Wells Fargo Securities (Wells Fargo).
7D. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT
Page 150
Overview
This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for
the quarter ended September 30, 2019.
7E. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE SALT CREEK TRAIL
Page 236
Overview
This item is for the Commission to approve federal Congestion Mitigation and Air
Quality (CMAQ) funds in the additional amount of $594,203 for a total amount of
$5,684,203 to fully fund construction of the Salt Creek Trail project.
7F. LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION STUDY
Page 239
Overview
This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Riverside County Long Range
Transportation Study (LRTS).
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Agenda
December 11, 2019
Page 4
7G. TRANSIT AND INTERCITY RAIL CAPITAL PROGRAM MASTER AGREEMENT
Overview
This item is for the Commission to:
Page 242
1) Approve Agreement No. 20-25-017-00 with the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) for implementing projects when the Commission is
the lead agency for transit projects funded by the Transit and Intercity Rail
Capital Program (TIRCP);
2) Adopt Resolution No. 19-018, "Resolution of The Riverside County
Transportation Commission Regarding Authorization for The Execution of A
Master Agreement and Program Supplements For The State -Funded Projects";
and
3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute
the agreement on behalf of the Commission.
7H. BYLAWS OF THE CITIZENS AND SPECIALIZED TRANSIT ADVISORY COUNCIL
Overview
This item is for the Commission to:
Page 302
1) Approve the revised bylaws of the Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Service
Transportation Council (CAC/SSTAC); and
2) Rename the CAC/SSTAC to the Citizens and Specialized Transit Advisory Council
(CSTAC).
71. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS WITH THE CITIES OF BANNING AND BEAUMONT,
CALTRANS, AND WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS FOR THE
PREPARATION OF THE INTERSTATE 10/HIGHLAND SPRINGS INTERCHANGE PROJECT
STUDY REPORT
Page 314
Overview
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Approve Cooperative Agreement No. 20-31-008-00 with the cities of Banning
and Beaumont for the preparation of a Project Study Report (PSR) for the
Interstate 10/Highland Springs Interchange project (Project);
2) Approve Cooperative Agreement No. 20-31-025-00 with Caltrans for its review
and oversight of the Project in the amount of $190,000, plus a contingency of
$25,000, for a total amount not to exceed $215,000;
3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work up
to the total amount not to exceed as required for the Project;
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Agenda
December 11, 2019
Page 5
4) Approve Funding Agreement No. 20-72-018-00 with Western Riverside Council
of Governments (WRCOG) for the allocation of Transportation Uniform
Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Zone funding for the Project;
5) Approve an increase of $240,000 in the Fiscal Year 2019/20 budget for TUMF
Zone revenues and Commission and consultant expenditures related to the
Project; and
6) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute
these agreements on behalf of the Commission.
7J. AMENDMENT WITH WKE, INC. FOR THE INTERSTATE 15/RAILROAD CANYON ROAD
INTERCHANGE PROJECT IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
Overview
This item is for the Commission to:
Page 350
1) Approve Agreement Amendment No. 17-31-048-07 with WKE, Inc. (WKE) to
finish final design services, prepare the project for Ready to List (RTL), and
provide construction support related to the Interstate 15/Railroad Canyon Road
interchange improvement project (Project) in the amount of $471,167, plus a
contingency amount of $47,000, for an additional amount of $518,167, and a
total amount not to exceed $4,070,438;
2) Approve Agreement No. 10-72-016-08, Amendment No. 8 to Agreement
No. 10-72-016-00, with the city of Lake Elsinore (City) to reprogram $518,167
of Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF) right of way phase funds to
the plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E) phase for the Project;
3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute
the agreements on behalf of the Commission; and
4) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve the use of the
contingency amount as may be required for the Project.
8. WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN INVESTMENTS
Page 370
Overview
This item is for the Commission to approve a 30-year planning horizon and investments in
projects and services to be included in a draft Western Riverside County component of the
Traffic Relief Plan.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Agenda
December 11, 2019
Page 6
9. COUNTYWIDE TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN DRAFT FRAMEWORK
Page 386
Overview
This item is for the Commission to provide recommendations and direction to staff on the draft
framework of the Countywide Traffic Relief Plan (Plan) in preparation for public circulation of
the Plan in January 2020.
10. PRESENTATION OF DRAFT CONNECT SOCAL
Page 398
Overview
This item is for the Commission to receive and file a presentation from the Southern California
Association of Government (SCAG) regarding the Draft Connect SoCal.
11. ELECTION OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION OFFICERS AND
APPOINTMENT OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Overview
This item is for the Commission to conduct an election of officers for 2020 — Chair, Vice Chair,
and Second Vice Chair.
12. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA
13. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
Overview
This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and the Executive Director to report
on attended meetings/conferences and any other items related to Commission activities.
14. ADJOURNMENT
Page 399
The next meeting of the Commission is scheduled to be held on Wednesday,
January 8, 2020, Board Room, First Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street,
Riverside.
AGENDA ITEM 6
MINUTES
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, November 13, 2019
1. CALL TO ORDER
The Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by
Chair Chuck Washington at 9:34 a.m. in the Board Room at the County of Riverside
Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California, 92501.
2. ROLL CALL
Commissioners/Alternates Present Commissioners Absent
Victoria Baca
Rusty Bailey
Mike Beauchamp
Ben J. Benoit
Brian Berkson
Russell Betts
Randall Bonner
Joseph DeConinck
Waymond Fermon
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Raymond Gregory
Berwin Hanna
Jan Harnik
Steven Hernandez
Jeff Hewitt*
Kevin Jeffries*
Andrew Kotyuk
Linda Krupa
Clint Lorimore*
Bob Magee
Lisa Middleton
Michael Naggar
V. Manuel Perez
Dana Reed
Wes Speake
Karen Spiegel
Larry Smith
Michael M. Vargas
Scott Vinton
Chuck Washington
Ted Weill
Art Welch
Lloyd White
Bill Zimmerman
*Arrived after the meeting was called to order.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Ben J. Benoit led the Commission in a flag salute.
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Arnold San Miguel, representing Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG),
announced the Elected Official Briefings on the draft Connect SoCal, which includes
several meetings throughout the six county area and was distributed to the
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 2
Commissioners. The draft agenda for the 10th Annual Southern California Economic
Summit being held on December 5, 2019, at the L.A. Grand Hotel Downtown, which was
distributed to the Commissioners.
At this time, Commissioner Clint Lorimore joined the meeting.
5. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS
There were no additions or revisions to the agenda.
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — OCTOBER 17, 2019
M/S/C (Benoit/Zimmerman) to approve the October 17, 2019 minutes as
submitted.
Abstain: Betts
At this time, Commissioner Kevin Jeffries joined the meeting.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
M/S/C (Baca/Benoit) to approve the following Consent Calendar items.
Abstain: Jeffries
7A. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT
Receive and file the Single Signature Authority report for the first quarter ended
September 30, 2019.
7B. REVENUE ESTIMATE FOR COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT AND
TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN
Approve a revenue estimate to guide development of the countywide Traffic
Relief Plan (Plan).
7C. QUARTERLY PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT METRICS REPORT, JULY — SEPTEMBER 2019
Receive and file the Quarterly Public Engagement Metrics Report for July —
September 2019.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 3
7D. AGREEMENT FOR EXPRESS LANES CONSULTING SERVICES
1) Award Agreement No. 20-31-001-00 to HNTB Corporation for express
lanes consulting services for a five-year term, plus two one-year options to
extend the agreement, in an amount of $10 million, plus a contingency
amount of $500,000, for a total amount not to exceed of $10.5 million;
2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review,
to execute the agreement, including option years, on behalf of the
Commission; and
3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve the use of the
contingency amount as may be required for these services.
7E. PACHAPPA UNDERPASS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AWARD AND AMENDMENT
FOR CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES
1) Award Agreement No. 19-31-094-00 to SEMA Construction, Inc. (SEMA) to
construct the Pachappa Underpass project (Project), in the amount of
$8,237,419, plus a contingency amount of $862,581 for potential change
orders and supplemental work during construction, for a total not to
exceed contract authorization of $9.1 million;
2) Waive informalities and minor irregularities in the SEMA bid;
3) Approve Agreement No. 16-31-051-04, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement
No. 16-31-051-00, with Jacobs Project Management Company (Jacobs) to
provide construction management (CM), materials testing, and
construction surveying services for the Project, for an additional amount
of $1,245,509, and a total amount not to exceed $3,245,509;
4) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to approve contingency
work as may be required for the Project; and
5) Authorize the Chair or the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel
review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission.
7F. AGREEMENTS WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR
STATE FUNDING AND SENATE BILL 1 FUNDING FOR THE OPERATION OF THE
FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL PROGRAM IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
1) Approve Agreement No. 20-45-013-00 with the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) to provide state funding for Fiscal Year 2019/20
for the operation of the Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol (FSP)
program in an amount not to exceed $1,702,145;
2) Approve Agreement No. 20-45-016-00 with Caltrans to provide SB 1
funding for FY 2019/20 for the operation of the Riverside County FSP
program in an amount not to exceed $1,464,524; and
3) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review,
to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 4
8. FRAMEWORK FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STATE ROUTES 241/91 EXPRESS LANES
CONNECTOR
Anne Mayer, Executive Director, provided a detailed overview for the State Routes
241/91 Express Lanes Connector term sheet, the framework for implementation of the
241/91 Express Lanes Connector project, and the associated agreements for each
respective governing board's consideration. She stated the term sheet when approved
will confirm the priorities for improvements on the corridor. The first priority project is
Interstate 15/SR-91 eastbound to northbound express lane connector; the second priority
is the 91 westbound corridor operations project (COP), and the third priority is the 91/71
eastbound to northbound connector and then the 241/91 connector. Anne Mayer
expressed gratitude to Mike Beauchamp, Caltrans District 8, Ryan Chamberlain, Caltrans
District 12, Darrell Johnson, OCTA, and Mike Kraman, TCA for being an important part of
the negotiations.
Commissioner Wes Speake expressed gratitude to staff in working with all of the partners
as the 91 is vital for the Western Riverside County and for other commuters that uses the
91. He expressed that having this project happen will aid commuters and provide less
frustration in getting these projects sequenced and built in such away is tremendous. He
then expressed appreciation to Anne Mayer for doing such a great job. He explained how
the 241/91 connector will take out about 2,400 cars an hour off the general purpose lanes
and the large component of the mixing bowl of commuters trying to get out of the toll
lanes and get over to SR-241 will help that area work much better.
Commissioner Larry Smith congratulated Anne Mayer for putting these three agencies
together and doing all that can be done to mitigate a very difficult traffic situation. He
inquired about what the state's funding component may be.
Anne Mayer replied it was assumed in the RTP planning process that 25 percent of the
project costs would be a good request of the state from a participation standpoint. She
stated it is known that the congested corridor program is oversubscribed and there will
be billions of dollars of projects coming in seeking funding. She explained from a strategic
standpoint, it makes sense to request a feasible amount and staff will try to bring 25
percent of the project costs in through the congested corridor program.
Commissioner Karen Spiegel expressed gratitude how the three entities worked together
and the partnership that needed to happen. She expressed appreciation to Anne Mayer
for the patience and professionalism it took to get to this point. Commissioner Spiegel
explained at the same time with the Western Riverside County residents having some
challenges with the congestion in that area hopefully this proves to have some significant
pressure relief for the congestion there and it also helps with the transition into SR-71.
She suggested at some point the Commission may need to consider the piece of SR-71
between Riverside and San Bernardino Counties.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 5
M/S/C (Vargas/Berkson) to:
1) Approve the State Routes 241/91 Express Lanes Connector term sheet as
a framework for future agreements, contingent on all parties agreeing
to the term sheet; and
2) Direct staff to work with agencies to prepare associated agreements for
each respective governing board's consideration, consistent with the
terms included in this report.
9. TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN STRUCTURE: GEOGRAPHY AND EXPENDITURE CATEGORIES
Aaron Hake, External Affairs Director, presented the Traffic Relief Plan structure in terms
of geography and expenditure categories, highlighting the following:
• Geography — Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley and the
Policy: return to source by sub -region
• Expenditure Categories — Reducing congestion and connecting communities;
improving safety and keeping infrastructure in good condition; and supporting
seniors, veterans, students, and individuals with disabilities
• Committee Direction: Local Streets/Roads
o Traditional approach: Cities, County receive automatic formula share for
local streets & roads; trade-off: benefits of local returns vs. benefits of
impactful regional projects
o For the Traffic Relief Plan: Call for projects instead of automatic return;
and encourage collaboration between cities, leverage funding
In response to Commissioner Spiegel's inquiry about the SB 1 providing the local streets
and roads funding but with the funding that has been moved from SB 1 by the Governor
is it known what the ultimate result is, Aaron Hake replied as of today the law has not
changed and the Governor's proposals have not moved forward. The Governor did
propose tying in some SB 1 funds to housing issues in the last session of the Legislature
and ultimately that proposal did not advance. He stated SB 1 funds are still flowing as the
Legislature passed it and each jurisdiction is receiving an annual formula allocation.
In response to Commissioner Spiegel's inquiry that those numbers never changed with
the incoming SB 1, as there are two pots of funding, Aaron Hake concurred. He stated
the pre SB 1 Gas Tax funds that go to the cities and the counties that formula did not
change and SB 1 was additive to that so as CPI increases the amount will increase.
Commissioner Spiegel referred to the housing and the recent conversation of Regional
Housing Needs Assessment and the number distribution and expressed gratitude to
Commissioner Bailey for leading the Commission in standing up to other counties. She
asked if those number have been looked at for the three areas where there is going to be
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 6
a significant increase in housing units over the next eight years. She suggested the
Commission really has to focus on that.
Anne Mayer replied this has not been done yet, the numbers have not been seen from
Commissioner Bailey's proposal and looks forward to seeing those and appreciates the
political effort that occurred last week at SCAG. She explained that the housing
conversation is going to cut across every funding conversation that occurs in the coming
year and she discussed the various funds that would be affected. A filter has not been
placed for the housing allocation but in regards to the three categories that have been
developed she expressed confidence that any project in any location in the County that is
important for housing support and for job creation any project fits in at least one of those
three categories if not multiple categories. Anne Mayer stated that is why having a
flexible program that allows the Commission to be nimble as the state changes its focus
on housing and other policy issues.
Commissioner Rusty Bailey referred to the chart on page 130 of the agenda item and
stated for Coachella Valley in terms of basis for distribution among jurisdictions 50/50
split, however it is dwelling units versus population. He noted Western and Palo Verde
go with population and asked if the Commission should adjust.
Anne Mayer replied those are the percentages for the existing sales tax measure, which
is how the existing local streets and roads funding is distributed. The dwelling unit and
revenue generated formula for the Coachella Valley was implemented decades ago at
their request. She suggested if this Commission wants to add a local streets and roads
component to the Measure that the Commission should consider what those metrics
would be and if dwelling units is a part of it. Anne Mayer stated if the Commission does
not carve out a portion for local streets and roads and do a competitive call for projects
that the Commission should have dwelling units and population be part of the metric in
those evaluations. She explained whether or not these could be changed for the existing
Measure she referred to legal counsel to ask if these are in the ordinance.
Steve DeBaun, Legal Counsel, replied yes and explained any change to the ordinance
would require the Commission goes through the process of approving the ordinance
change and having the voters approve it.
Commissioner Kevin Jeffries suggested this is a better approach, however small cities are
going to be hurt the most as coalitions build to do larger projects and tax payers will
continue to pay but will not see any projects in their cities. There will be coalitions that
will move all of the funds to some sub region within the County. He expressed if a mass
coalition is built and things are going to be taken away from certain parts of the County
how is the Commission going to protect those interests.
Aaron Hake replied there could be a number of tools should the Commission choose to
use them. He explained one would be to enact a local guarantee similar to what is in
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 7
Measure A currently according to a formula so that each community would have some
sort of return to source on an annual basis that they could predict and program going
forward. Aaron Hake stated the other approach is should the Commission choose to not
do an automatic return to source formula and choose a call for projects approach the
Commission would have to adopt the criteria with which that call for projects would go
out. The other option is highlighting specific interregional projects that connect certain
communities that are a high priority actually calling them out in the plan could be another
way to ensure they receive funding.
Anne Mayer replied to Commissioner Jeffries that he hit on a key point that has come up
in conversations with city managers of smaller cities. In that, they are at a disadvantage
from multiple perspectives even if smaller cities get a dedicated amount returned to their
city the dollar amount is so small they cannot get some of their most basic projects built,
as there is not enough of their resources. She explained in a competition some of the
smallest cities will be competing against some of the largest cities. She suggested the
Commission focus on criteria that ensures jurisdictions of all sizes has the opportunity to
compete fairly and that there is flexibility in the program so that jurisdictions can focus
on their priorities and the Commission would have to come up with a structure to allow
this.
In response to Chair Washington's inquiry if this is the place to do that, Anne Mayer
replied that would be direction that is important for staff to know now so that in each
layer of the Traffic Relief Plan that could be built in. She stated this is in terms of language
and implementation that it is laid out as the expectation and implementation for approval
later.
Chair Washington clarified in order to give Commissioner Jeffries some certainty is that
the Commission is voting on staff recommendation today. Going forward the
Commissioners also provided direction to staff to follow up with an analysis that gives
every city represented on the Commission the opportunity to compete for funds in order
to allow them to complete some significant projects.
Commissioner Jeffries concurred with Chair Washington's comments and expressed the
Commission has to protect the County interests for those connection funds. He stated
being uncertain if the weighted vote ability will still carry over in trying to change the
formula if the Commission realizes abuses starting to occur due to a particular sub region
become organized and was able to override everybody else. He then inquired if the
Commission could weigh in then with the weighted vote and change that after this policy
is adopted.
Commissioner V. Manuel Perez suggested in the distribution on jurisdictions the
population versus dwelling units there should be an analysis of that. He is uncertain if
this makes sense today or if this was done years ago. He stated for example in
unincorporated areas such as Mecca, Thermal, Oasis, and North Shore there are mobile
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 8
homes and multiple families live in one mobile home and wondered if this type formula
makes sense today as they may be losing out. He reiterated doing further analysis to
consider moving forward.
Commissioner Raymond Gregory stated in speaking with his city manager and city
engineer he understands a lot of their support for this additional tax measure at its core
had to do with funds collected coming back locally. His city manager and city engineer's
understanding was both locally to the region and some money to address not just the
regional issues but also, which is called the last mile segment. Commissioner Gregory
clarified what is being seen today is a suggestion is that those funds would not be included
and when he goes back to his city to explain that they lose some luster on supporting the
sales tax measure in general. Especially if those road segments are not included or
guaranteed and expressed if this type of change at this juncture could actually erode some
of the support for this and some of the things that would be used to sale an increased tax
measure.
Anne Mayer requested the slide with the three categories be put back up and expressed
appreciation to the Commissioners for raising that issue. She stated at the Traffic Relief
Strategy (TRS) Committee meeting CVAG's Executive Director Tom Kirk will be here to
discuss how the Coachella Valley implements projects and determines prioritizes. She
explained what is being heard from Coachella Valley is a keen interest not only in some
of the transformative projects but also state of good repair not only for local road
maintenance also to ensure that local roadways are accessible during flooding and other
items. She referred to the second item on the slide about improving safety and keeping
infrastructure in good condition and she discussed the conversations with CVAG staff
regarding those priorities and the staff recommendation to the CVAG Board to decide
what the local priorities are.
In response to Commissioner Gregory's clarification this is not the final direction, Aaron
Hake replied it is important direction and staff is trying to be iterative in this process and
build one piece upon the other. Therefore, if staff is aware that they are going in a certain
direction it helps and this is not the final there will be an agenda item going forward every
month that builds the plan.
Commissioner Andrew Kotyuk suggested for the Commission and the committees to take
some thought for consideration, as it seems on geography for the Western County the
Commission's focus is to be able to move residents in and out of the County to other
counties for jobs. He stated Coachella Valley is to move internally around Coachella Valley
in through that region but by having these two geographies, he suggested the
Commission is missing to tie those two geographies together. There should be a harder
artery internally in the County to continue to drive jobs here and connect those two
regions and for easy movement between those two regions, which is being missed with
how the geography is set up and suggested that be a part of the discussion.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 9
Anne Mayer replied this afternoon at the TRS Committee meeting and at the December
Commission meeting, there will be discussion about some of the polling work. She stated
what is interesting about the polling in Western County and asking people their opinion
or in the Coachella Valley almost everyone brings up the 1-10 corridor and the connection
within the County. She suggested in response to Commissioner Kotyuk's comment when
items are brought forward related to projects and potential programs that connectivity is
an important priority as oppose to exporting people to other counties. There is many
internal project and program proposals within the County as well.
Chair Washington clarified in Riverside County there are two exit entry points that are
affected the most on the 91 its Corona in the southwest it is Temecula it is either the 91
or the 15 corridors. He explained when leaving Coachella Valley or going through
Coachella Valley in the Pass Area, he suggested the concern for those communities that
are greatly impacted by a large number of residents leaving and then coming back is
primarily driven by the cost of living. He explained just by the nature of who everyone is
as a County and how it has grown creates that issue that Commissioner Kotyuk brought
up. Chair Washington concurred that the Commissioners wants to see more jobs come
to Riverside County.
Commissioner Kotyuk concurred it clearly has been the Commission's position, however
as much as the Commissioners understands the history of California the growth moving
eastward and has seen the Los Angeles Basin along the 1-215 of all the commercial
distribution centers build out and the job growth that is happening. In looking at the real
estate in the L.A. Basin for that sort of space, it is highly occupied, and much like the truck
climbing lanes the Commission is feeling the need to allow trucks to move eastward. He
expressed job growth is coming and pushing eastward as it was mentioned on Beaumont
and Coachella Valley that is the next phase for that. Commissioner Kotyuk stated if the
Commission owns that much such as real estate development and investment internally
that should be part of the discussion.
Commissioner Larry Smith referred to Commissioner Jeffries' comment about small cities
and stated in the TRS Committee meeting was one that advocated for a call for projects.
He explained this should be a competitive call as all the Commissioners have specific
needs and coming from a small city, he assumed that would be considered. He suggested
the city of Calimesa is a small city but with big city impact as people do make that
movement from the east to west into San Bernardino County seeking jobs and affordable
housing into through the Pass. Commissioner Smith stated with the continual impact on
1-10 on a daily basis growing and 40 — 60 year old overpasses there needs to be a focus
over there along with the neighboring cities Banning and Beaumont, which is impacted
by that continual increase of activity on 1-10.
Commissioner Kathleen Fitzpatrick expressed appreciation for Commissioner Gregory's
comments and explained the city of La Quinta relies heavily on Measure A funds as part
of their Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to maintain their streets. She stated a
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 10
considerable sum is dedicated every year to ensure La Quinta's streets stay at a very high
level. Commissioner Fitzpatrick expressed concern for part of that funding going to a
larger pool for competitive projects while her city works very well with CVAG and their
neighboring cities on large projects and appreciates that movement and being able to do
those large projects. She suggested a set aside for local cities that allows them to continue
with their CIPs.
Anne Mayer clarified that the existing Measure A will not change except for the direction
that staff received to look at the potential to reanalyze how the funds is allocated. The
existing Measure money that is coming to each Commissioners jurisdictions will not
change and as the Commissioners are providing direction on this the Coachella Valley and
Western County can make different decisions about local streets and roads and staff
would be interested in that feedback.
In response to Commissioner Clint Lorimore's inquiry if there was a slide about the
discussion of the sub regions and the percentages on page 130, Aaron Hake replied there
is no slide with that.
Commissioner Lorimore clarified what the Commission is discussing is the amount of sub
regional funds for local streets and roads at least in Western County it is listed at 29
percent. He stated his understanding is that 29 percent is up for discussion.
Aaron Hake clarified this is speaking to precedent and existing Measure A, this item is not
proposing any changes to existing Measure A. He explained this item is about the Traffic
Relief Plan the Commission is developing that could go to the voters for additional funding
on top of existing Measure A. Mr. Hake stated the table Commissioner Rush referred to
simply illustrative of the current scenario of what is happening as a reference point for
whether the Commission wants to mimic that in the new plan or go in a different
direction.
Commissioner Lorimore inquired it is illustrative as to possibly how the Commission could
move forward and just adopt what was done in 2009, so currently there is 29 percent that
goes back to cities. He clarified there is a suggestion from the TRS Committee that it all
goes towards regional as oppose to go back to the cities.
Aaron Hake replied the direction that staff has heard from the TRS Committee is that
rather than an automatic return to the cities for local street and roads type projects that
there still be funding for those type of projects. He explained rather than be distributed
by formula that there be a call for projects where cities would propose what types of local
streets and roads projects they prefer to do and the committee emphasized wanting to
have cities collaborate with each other or try to leverage other local funding to do more
impactful local projects.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 11
In response to Commissioner Lorimore's inquiry that rather the cities receiving the funds
it would be sent to a committee as to whether or not that specific project should be
funded, Aaron Hake replied it would be this Commission.
Commissioner Lorimore expressed concern he wants to have the funds return to source
in some way as that is the position for the city of Eastvale. He expressed appreciation the
fact the Commission is trying to address regional issues and regional plans and stated
under the current plan his understanding is that 71 percent of the dollars are already
going towards that. He stated going into the 29 percent if the Commission were to utilize
the 2009 approach it is of concern that will even to dollars that are directly coming into
the city to take care of maintenance of roads.
Commissioner Jan Harnik assured her colleagues from the Coachella Valley the committee
members evaluated the initial polling and it was very strong that there is a return to
source in the Coachella Valley. She expressed certainly the Commissioners need to
advocate for what they heard their community members say. Commissioner Harnik
stated as a guiding principle discussed how Commissioner Bailey walked into the Board
Room and received a hero's reception due to his work at SCAG about the Regional
Housing Needs Assessment. She expressed how Commissioner Bailey came back to the
Commission and discussed Riverside County, all the Commissioners thought regionally,
and what was in the best interest of the entire region, which was successful. She
explained how Anne Mayer discussed the growing and balance of jobs, housing and the
Commission needs to determine what they are doing about it and what infrastructure and
amenities are being put into place in these cities to attract jobs, also what education and
training is being done. She expressed in regards to the smaller cities there is no question
it has to be addressed, and she then discussed in the Coachella Valley how they work
under CVAG for the needs, which is when they function the best.
Commissioner Steven Hernandez concurred with the Commissioners comments that the
Commission should have a small portion that looks at return to source but they can
debate that and figure out the percentage at CVAG. He clarified in looking at the
categories supporting seniors, veterans, students, and individuals with disabilities if
disadvantaged communities could be added. He wanted to ensure some dollars will be
set aside for areas that have historically lacked bus routes and access to transportation
such as Oasis and Mecca.
At this time, Commissioner Jeff Hewitt joined the meeting.
Anne Mayer reviewed the requests from the Commissioners for staff to address, and
stated the following: With respect to the existing Measure A allocations staff has been
asked to look at the basis for distribution amongst jurisdictions in the different geographic
areas. That is an existing Measure question so it would be an action item for staff to do
that and to come back to this Commission for discussion. There was a concern about
small cities being unable to develop their projects they need because they will be
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 12
competing against larger regional projects or coalitions. There needs to be assurances for
small cities and in the unincorporated areas of the County. The Commission needs to look
at connection between the different geographic areas within the County and that just
because the Commission would be approving Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo
Verde Valley it does not mean the Commission should not be looking at the connection
between those areas. Heard concern from multiple jurisdictions about the importance of
local funding sources and the return to source and it will probably be a conversation in
the Coachella Valley and heard some concerns in Western County as well so that will go
back to the Traffic Relief Strategy Committee for discussion. Also heard a request to add
in support for disadvantaged communities as well on the third bullet.
Chair Washington stated along with staffs recommendation the Commission heard Anne
Mayer's elaborate on the additional comments she inquired about and at this time Chair
Washington requested a motion and would entertain additional comments.
In response to Commissioner Perez's clarification if Anne Mayer mentioned the analysis
between population versus dwelling units for today versus back when it was decided,
Anne Mayer replied if this is approved by the Commission staff is taking that as an action
item to analyze that and come back with a report to the Commission for consideration.
Commissioner Spiegel referred to page 129, which was highlighted by Commissioner
Harnik and is something she has always advocated for. She stated it is at the very top and
it is about infrastructure supporting permanent local jobs and economic development to
reduce commuting, which was not brought up in any of the discussions and she wanted
to ensure the Commissioners knows it is in there and it needs to be a higher focus then it
has been given. She explained regarding the local streets and roads, which several
Commissioners commented on different sizes of cities and she inquired that maintaining
local roads and transit system is how the Commission is going to look at those local roads
dollars.
Commissioner Michael Naggar explained the TRS Committee has a lot of work to do. He
mentioned at their first committee meeting a couple of things came up and wanted to
encourage the Commission to consider these. He expressed the Commission cannot
continue to do things the old way the Commissioners has to make a sacrifice on their part
as opposed to sitting here and the Commissioners making a grab for individual projects.
That money spread out will not help countywide and it is essential that neighboring cities
need to collaborate and do projects together. Commissioner Naggar stated that the TRS
Committee wanted to encourage the Commissioners to go back to their city council and
brainstorm along with their neighboring cities to come up with out of the box ideas.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 13
M/S/C (Berkson/Vargas) to approve geographic divisions and expenditure
categories for the countywide Traffic Relief Plan (Plan).
Abstain: Hewitt
No: Bonner, Welch, White
10. ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY
John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director, presented the Economic Impact Study,
highlighting the following areas:
• The transportation and the economy connection — Analyze benefits and costs to
implement Plan
o Analysis to be conducted by credible, independent party with knowledge
about Riverside County economy
o UCR Center for Economic Forecasting & Development fits the criteria
• Scope of work:
o Phase 1 — Specific economic impacts; and examples of major capital
projects and program categories
o Phase 2 — Longer -term community impacts
o Phase 3 — Impact on consumers and businesses of raising sales tax
o Phase 4 — Public information
Commissioner Hewitt expressed this still seems to be a one sided deal and is aware the
people at UCR are smart but they want to see these things happen and it seems a little
bit biased. He explained he prefers to put out to the reason validation or the heritage
foundation that would show the actual effects of what a half -cent sales tax has on how
businesses come here, stay here, or go. It has to be a balance thing as the Commission is
walking a fine line and education has to be unbiased. He expressed voting no on this
agenda item as this is very unbiased and going forward he requested equal sides from
both sides of this issue.
Commissioner Hernandez expressed appreciation for this study particularly in looking at
the regressive tax issue when it comes to disadvantaged communities. He stated wanting
to understand it in terms of how those taxes or going to benefit these areas where folks
that are going to pay the tax in a regressive form, where are they located and what is
going to be the impact potentially for them if this is done. He expressed concern that the
folks on the low social economic ladder paying this regressive tax and will not get any
benefit due to the lack of infrastructure. Commissioner Hernandez clarified it seems the
Commission is trying to concentrate where a lot of the congestion is located on a regional
basis and wanted to ensure they get something to be able to advance themselves and
improve their areas.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 14
M/S/C (Perez/Benoit) to:
1) Approve Agreement No. 20-19-012-00 to University of California,
Riverside (UCR) School of Business, Center for Economic Forecasting &
Development (UCR Center) to perform an economic impacts analysis
related to the investment of an additional sales tax for transportation
improvements in Riverside County in an amount not to exceed $199,500;
and
2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel
review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission.
Abstain: Washington
No: DeConinck, Hewitt, Jeffries, Welch, and White
11. AGREEMENT FOR BACK OFFICE SYSTEM AND CUSTOMER SERVICE CENTER OPERATIONS
FOR THE 91 EXPRESS LANES IN ORANGE AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES
Jennifer Crosson, Toll Operations Manager, presented the agreement for back office
system & customer service center operations for the 91 Express Lanes in Orange and
Riverside Counties, highlighting the following:
• 91 Express Lanes map for Orange and Riverside Counties
• Cooperative agreement with OCTA:
o Required by SB 1316
o Jointly operate the 91 Express Lanes — Economic of scale; seamless
customer experience; and share staff responsibilities
• 91 back office system & customer service center:
o Back -office system — telephone and other customer contact systems;
hardware and software maintenance; customer service; violations
processing and collections; customer account management; payment and
mail processing; revenue collection and transaction processing; traffic
operations and incident management; emergency services coordination;
and transponder inventory management
• Current provider:
o Cofiroute USA: Operating 91 Express Lanes for OCTA since 1995; added
RCTC to agreement in 2013; began operating Riverside Express Lanes in
2017; agreement expires June 2021; and Commission approved extension
to December 2021 (if needed for transition to new firm)
• 18-month deployment — System design and development; data migration; system
installation; and staff hiring & training
• Procurement information — OCTA lead agency; RCTC and OCTA jointly develop
RFP; competitively negotiated procurement method; and OCTA and RCTC both to
approve
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 15
• Short-listed firms — Cofiroute USA and Conduent Transportation
• Evaluation criterion
• Evaluation scores — short-listed firms:
o Cofiroute — Price score 15.56 — Technical score 66.83 — Total score 82.39
o Conduent — Price score 20.00 — Technical score 54.50 — Total score 74.50
• Cofiroute qualifications — 24 years experience; operator of the 91 since 1995; and
positive project references
• Cofiroute staffing & project organization — Cofiroute and Toll Plus working
together for 10 years; key staff experienced; retaining current staff; and customer
focused training
• Back off system technical approach — New back office system; hybrid cloud and
existing data center; schedule indicates delivery on -time; understand technical
requirements; detailed quality assurance program; low data migration risk; and
complete schedule with projected on -time delivery
• Customer service center (0 & M) approach — Committed to customer service and
accuracy of revenue processing; committed to quality assurance program; well -
versed in California laws, 91 EL operating policies, and security requirements;
established relationships with emergency responders; and favorable third party
services identified
• Agreement elements — Back office system implementation; initial O & M term (1
to 5 years); first O & M option (6 to 8 years); and second 0 & M option ( to 11
years)
• RCTC cost — BOS implementation: $7,124,546; Initial O & M (1 to 5 years):
$30,437,693; first option 0 & M (6 to 8 years): $23,662,037; second option O & M
(9 to 11 years): $27,367,068 for a total price: $88,591,344
• Contingency — Back office system implementation - $350,000
o 5 year base O & M - $1.5 million
o Increase in estimated transaction volumes
o Changes in policy
o Changes in law
o Changes in technology
• Pass through costs — postage; address location services; welcome kits;
transponder shipping supplies; and website domains
At this time, Jennifer Crosson requested Legal Counsel to provide additional information.
Steve DeBaun, Legal Counsel, stated staff is asking the Commission to add one additional
item to staff recommendations: Public Utilities Code Section 130238 allows the
Commission to award a contract of this nature to the most advantageous firm with price
only being one factor for consideration. Therefore, staff is asking the Commission to add
the following to its motion, as follows:
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 16
Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 130238 the Commission finds that the award to
Cofiroute is based upon the facts that are included in the staff report and the staff
presentation supporting the award to Cofiroute.
In response to Commissioner Spiegel inquiry since the Commission is doing partnerships
with TCA who do they use, Jennifer Crosson replied they use Bric for their back office and
use Faneiul as their operator and neither of them proposed.
Commissioner Spiegel stated with SR-241, there is going to be that relationship, and San
Bernardino and eventually Los Angeles will be coming on board. She expressed with all
the different entities she wanted to ensure the Commission has that discussion when San
Bernardino comes on with the extension of 1-15. She suggested it is much easier to have
the same operator and hopefully making it more seamless but with the SR-241 there
maybe some challenges.
Jennifer Crosson replied that is a good point and of the 2,400 technical requirements
some of those were related to setting the Commission up for the additional service of
other facilities of the Commission or others if needed. Pricing is transaction based so it
sets that up as well for pricing for others.
Commissioner Dana Reed stated that he is in support of staff recommendation and has
dealt with this company and are definitely top notch. He clarified as part of this contract
the Commission continues to be concerned about those motorists that are evading the
tolls by claiming that there are three or more people when just a visual indicates that is
not the case. He understands this is a back end contract and not an enforcement contract
and the Commission should be concerned as the Commission is losing an enormous
amount of revenue from people that are evading the tolls.
In response to Commissioner Lisa Middleton's inquiry as to what the Commission is
actually purchasing, Jennifer Crosson replied the back office system includes the opening
of FasTrak accounts for the 91 Express Lanes and the management of the express
accounts. The Commission holds prepaid funds and they collect the transactions both
from the Commission's in road system and from all the interoperable agencies bring those
over post them to the customer accounts. She stated they also do all the account
management for those accounts, issuing transponders, replenishing the accounts,
intergrading with credit card processors, there is many credit card industry requirements
and personally identifiable identity requirements and security requirements. They
answers the Commission's phones to answer questions, issue violation notices, and
manage the violation process, which is a multistep process of issuing timely notices
according to vehicle code. Also escalating them to a collection agency and managing that
whole process including administrative reviews with an outside third party. There are
capital costs, which is what the $14 million proposed price is to design, develop that
system according the Commission's policies and business rules, provide all the hardware
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 17
and stand that up, including licenses for software. She then discussed the services in
terms of operation.
In response to Commissioner Middleton's inquiry how many staff is there, Jennifer
Crosson replied about 100 staff between the Anaheim and the Corona facility.
In response to Commissioner Middleton's inquiry if they are operating out of the
Commission's facilities and if they are paying rent, Jennifer Crosson replied the Anaheim
facility is a leased building by OCTA for which the Commission and OCTA share the leased
costs. The Commission owns the customer service center in Corona and OCTA pays the
Commission a lease payment for that.
Commissioner Speake clarified with the option years the Commission is talking about an
11-year contract, which concerns him as Commissioner Spiegel commented that there
are other operators coming on board and people are going to get better at it. He wanted
to know what the triggers those option years, as he understands it is a very complicated
system.
Jennifer Crosson replied as Commissioner Speake pointed out the Commission did make
a decision during the based period as to whether the Commission will enter into the first
option or not enter into it as it takes a few years to get these on board. The important
part is even though staff separated them into three-year options they do not have to carry
out the three-year options. She explained if staff decided in year three the Commission
would prefer to have something different the Commission can enter in the first option for
a portion of it and start the process.
Anne Mayer explained Jennifer Crosson mentioned before that as a part of the
procurement they had to prepare a quality plan so as an ongoing part of project
management staff will be monitoring their performance against their quality plan, which
will be done in conjunction with OCTA. The trigger would be that if OCTA and the
Commission believes that there is a need to make a change in the vendor and/or believe
there is a benefit to the Commission and the OCTA Board to do so then staff would
recommend that the Commission would proceed with an additional procurement. This
process is used on all of the Commission contracts with options. She stated all of those
option extensions whatever durations that might be would need to be approved by the
Commission as a part of the budget process in order to allocate the funds for it and subject
to a subsequent agreement amendment.
Commissioner Speake expressed the expectation is that people are going to perform and
they are not going to perform he believes the Commission has a mechanism to either
make them perform or get someone else. He clarified the Commission is entering into an
11 year contract that the Commission is not having any revisit on costs, five years, with
options to year 11 and wanted to ensure he understood that correctly.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 18
Commissioner Brian Berkson clarified as far as the back office system he took a tour of
the entire system including the facilities in Anaheim and it was extremely eye opening
and it is open to all the Commissioners to take a tour. He stated the 100 employees were
seen working day in and day out to keep things going and one of the biggest things is time
consumption of those staff members that run this license plate reading. Each plate
number has to read and input by two separate staff members to provide accuracy.
Commissioner Berkson inquired if Cofiroute as they design this project will they be looking
at away to use technology to their advantage and try to reduce the Commission's costs.
As other Commissioners commented, the Commission is in this for up to 11 years and if
they find new technology in year six or seven how does the Commission embrace those
savings.
Jennifer Crosson replied the image processing will no longer be done by Cofiroute by the
time this contract comes in, as the Commission's new lanes system provider Kapsch is
providing Cofiroute will a fully formed price transaction in six months when the 1-15
project comes on line, which is a more automated process. She discussed the cost savings
in the current contract and reallocating those resources to another matter to the SR-60
transition and the performance requirement for Cofiroute to work with the Commission
on efficiencies.
Steven DeBaun reminded the Chair staff had the additional finding that is being requested
as well. He stated pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 130238 the Commission finds
that the award to Cofiroute is based upon the facts that are included in the staff report
and in staffs presentation supporting the award to Cofiroute.
M/S/C (Berkson/White) to:
1) Award Agreement No. 19-31-059-00 among the Orange County
Transportation Authority (OCTA), Riverside County Transportation
Commission (RCTC), and Cofiroute USA, LLC (Cofiroute) to provide back -
office system (BOS) and customer service center (CSC) operations
services for the 91 Express Lanes (91EL) in Orange and Riverside Counties
in an amount of $88,591,344, plus a contingency amount of $1,850,000,
for a total amount not to exceed $90,441,344;
2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel
review, to execute the agreement, including options years, on behalf of
the Commission;
3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve the use of the
contingency amount as may be required by the project;
4) Authorize the payment of pass -through items in an amount not to exceed
$10.5 million; and
5) Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 130238 the Commission finds
that the award to Cofiroute is based upon the facts that are included in
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 19
the staff report and in staffs presentation supporting the award to
Cofiroute.
No: Jeffries and Speake
At this time, Commissioner Jeffries left the meeting.
12. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION
There were no items pulled from the Consent Calendar.
13. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
13A. Commissioner Berkson announced there will be a video shown for the 2019 Jurupa
Valley State of the City Address that he did and highlighted and show cased the
hard work the men and women from the Commission and other agencies perform
for this region every day. This is video is with Commissioner Berkson working
alongside with Commission staff members on the 1-15 project.
At this time, Commissioner Spiegel left the meeting.
After the video was shown, Commissioner Berkson expressed appreciation to the
Commission to allow the opportunity not only to serve on this Commission but to
participate in such away the brings some highlights to people that deserve to be
recognized for things they do that are not involved in that kind of business. He
then came up to the podium and presented certificates of recognitions to John
Tarascio, Bechtel staff and Cheryl Donahue, Public Affairs Manager.
At this time, Commissioner Magee left the meeting.
13B. Anne Mayer announced:
• December 4 and 5 the California Transportation Commission (CTC) will be
in Riverside having their annual meeting in the Board Room. She
expressed appreciation the Railroad Canyon/1-15 Interchange project will
be receiving its allocation of state funding at the December CTC meeting.
• Expressed appreciation to Caltrans District 8 District Director Mike
Beauchamp for the work that his team has been doing along the 1-15
Corridor. They identified some auxiliary lanes in Temecula on the 1-15 for
inclusion and funding. She expressed gratitude for receiving
correspondence from Mike Beauchamp stating they are also going to
analyze the possibility of auxiliary on 1-15 in the city of Corona from SR-91
to Weirick Road.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes
November 13, 2019
Page 20
14. CLOSED SESSION
14A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Agency Negotiator: Executive Director or Designee
Item
APN(s)
Property Owner
Buyer(s)
1
102-092-030, 102-092-031,
102-101-002, 102-101-033,
102-101-035, 102-101-037
RCTC
JDI Ventures Real Estate LLC
2
118-160-021
RCTC
JDI Ventures Real Estate LLC
3
117-111-005
RCTC
JDI Ventures Real Estate LLC
4
117-112-001 and 117-112-002
RCTC
Cruz Ortega
5
117-112-014 and 117-112-015
RCTC
JDI Ventures Real Estate LLC
6
117-122-001 and 117-122-002
RCTC
JDI Ventures Real Estate LLC
14B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Agency Negotiator: Executive Director or Designee
Item
APN(s)
Property Owner
Buyer(s)
1
465-030-024
Lisa Li Ju Chen
RCTC
There were no announcements from the Closed Session Items.
15. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation
Commission, Chair Washington adjourned the meeting at 11:37 a.m. The next
Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday,
December 11, 2019, Board Chambers, First Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080
Lemon Street, Riverside.
Respectfully submitted,
Lisa Mobley
Clerk of the Board
AGENDA ITEM 7A
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
December 11, 2019
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Lisa Mobley, Clerk of the Board
THROUGH:
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Proposed 2020 Commission/Committee Meeting Schedule
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to adopt its 2020 Commission/Committee Meeting Schedule.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Commission is scheduled to meet on the second Wednesday of each month at 9:30 a.m. The
Executive Committee is scheduled at 9:00 a.m. on the same day. Due to the February
Commission meeting falling on Lincoln's Birthday, a holiday observed by the County of Riverside,
the February Commission meeting will not be held. Due to the November Commission Meeting
falling on Veteran's Day, the meeting will be rescheduled to a date to be determined. For 2020,
the annual Commission Workshop will be held on Thursday, January 30 and Friday, January 31 at
the Hilton Palm Springs. Due to the timing of the annual workshop, the January Budget and
Implementation and Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committees will not be
scheduled.
The Commission's policy committees — Budget and Implementation and Western Riverside
County Programs and Projects — meet on the fourth Monday of each month at 9:30 a.m. and
1:30 p.m., respectively. For 2019, these Committees will not meet in May due to a holiday. In
September 2019, the Commission approved the formation of the Traffic Relief Committee, which
meets on the fourth Monday of the month at 11:30 a.m. through June 2020. Additionally, the
Toll Policy and Operations Committee meets on the fourth Thursday of the months of February,
May, August and November at 11:00 a.m., except when the fourth Thursday falls on a holiday.
There are times when a committee meeting may be cancelled due to lack of substantive agenda
items. When this occurs, the Commissioners will be notified and items are forwarded directly to
the Commission for final action.
Attachment: Proposed 2020 Commission/Committee Meetings Schedule
Agenda Item 7A
1
RIVERSIDE
RCTC COUNTY TRANSPORTATION 2020 MEETING
COMMISSION
SCHEDULE
Meeting Date
(Wednesday)
Commission
Location
Executive
Committee
Location
January 8
9:30 a.m.
Board Room
9:00 a.m.
RCTC March Field Conf. Rm.
January 30- January 31
Meeting / Workshop
1:30 p.m. (Thursday)*
8:30 a.m. (Friday)*
Hilton Palm Springs
N/A
N/A
March 11
9:30 a.m.
Board Room
9:00 a.m.
RCTC March Field Conf. Rm.
April 8
9:30 a.m.
Board Room
9:00 a.m.
RCTC March Field Conf. Rm.
May 13
9:30 a.m.
Board Room
9:00 a.m.
RCTC March Field Conf. Rm.
June 10
9:30 a.m.
Board Room
9:00 a.m.
RCTC March Field Conf. Rm.
July 8
9:30 a.m.
Board Room
9:00 a.m.
RCTC March Field Conf. Rm.
August 12
9:30 a.m.
Board Room
9:00 a.m.
RCTC March Field Conf. Rm.
September 9
9:30 a.m.
Board Room
9:00 a.m.
RCTC March Field Conf. Rm.
October 14
9:30 a.m.
Board Room
9:00 a.m.
RCTC March Field Conf. Rm.
November**
9:30 a.m.
Board Room
9:00 a.m.
RCTC March Field Conf. Rm.
December 9
9:30 a.m.
Board Room
9:00 a.m.
RCTC March Field Conf. Rm.
The Commission and the Executive Committee meetings are held on the second Wednesday of each month.
*Times are tentative, subject to change. **Date to be determined due to meeting falling on Veteran's Day Holiday.
2020 RCTC Meeting Schedule — V1
2
Meeting Date (Monday)
Budget and
Implementation
Committee
Western Riverside
County Programs and
Projects Committee
Location
February 24
9:30 a.m.
1:30 p.m.
Board Room
March 23
9:30 a.m.
1:30 p.m.
Board Room
April 27
9:30 a.m.
1:30 p.m.
Board Room
June 22
9:30 a.m.
1:30 p.m.
Board Room
July 27
9:30 a.m.
1:30 p.m.
Board Room
August 24
9:30 a.m.
1:30 p.m.
Board Room
September 28
9:30 a.m.
1:30 p.m.
Board Room
October 26
9:30 a.m.
1:30 p.m.
Board Room
November 23
9:30 a.m.
1:30 p.m.
Board Room
December 28
9:30 a.m.
1:30 p.m.
Board Room
The meetings of the Budget and Implementation Committee and the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee are held
on the fourth Monday of each month, except on holidays.
2020 RCTC Meeting Schedule — V1
3
Meeting Date (Thursday)
Toll Policy and Operations Committee
Location
February 27
11:00 a.m.
Riverside — RCTC March Field Conf. Rm.
May 28
11:00 a.m.
August 27
11:00 a.m.
The meetings of the Toll Policy and Operations Committee are held quarterly on the fourth Friday of the months of February, May, August,
and November, except when the fourth Thursday falls on a holiday.
Meeting Date (Monday)
Technical Advisory Committee
Location
March 16
10:30 a.m.
Palm Desert — CVAG Board Room
May 18
10:00 a.m.
Riverside — RCTC March Field Conf. Rm.
July 20
10:30 a.m.
Palm Desert — CVAG Board Room
September 21
10:00 a.m.
Riverside — RCTC March Field Conf. Rm.
November 16
10:30 a.m.
Palm Desert — CVAG Board Room
The meetings of the Technical Advisory Committee are held on the third Monday of every other month, except for holidays.
If the meeting falls on a holiday, the meeting is moved to the fourth Monday.
Riverside — Commission Office, rC ounty Administrative Center,
4080 Lemon Street, 3 Floor, Riverside, CA
Coachella Valley Association of Governments —
Board Room, 73-710 Fred Waring Drive,
Palm Desert, CA
2020 RCTC Meeting Schedule — V1
4
RIVERSIDE
ROTC COUNTY 5 �RTATIDN TRAFFIC
COMMISSION
RELIEF STRATEGY
MEETING SCHEDULE
COMMITTEE
Meeting Date
Time
Location
September 23, 2019
11:30 a.m.
Board Room
October 28, 2019
11:30 a.m.
Board Room
November 25, 2019
11:30 a.m.
Board Room
January 27, 2020
11:30 a.m.
Board Room
February 24, 2020
11:30 a.m.
Board Room
March 23, 2020
11:30 a.m.
Board Room
April 27, 2020
11:30 a.m.
Board Room
May 21, 2020*
11:30 a.m.
Board Room
June 22, 2020
11:30 a.m.
Board Room
*This meeting is being held on an alternate day due to it falling on a holiday.
2020 RCTC Meeting Schedule — V1
5
AGENDA ITEM 7B
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
December 11, 2019
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Audit Ad Hoc Committee
Michele Cisneros, Deputy Director of Finance
Theresia, Trevino, Chief Financial Officer
THROUGH:
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Fiscal Year 2018/19 Commission Audit Results
AUDIT AD HOC COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Receive and file the Fiscal Year 2018/19
a) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR);
b) Local Transportation Fund (LTF) Financial and Compliance Report;
c) State Transit Assistance (STA) Fund Financial and Compliance Report;
d) State of Good Repair (SGR) Fund Financial and Compliance Report;
e) Proposition 18 Rehabilitation and Security Project (Proposition 18) Accounts
Financial and Compliance Reports;
f) Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) Account Financial and
Compliance Reports;
g) Single Audit Report;
h) RCTC 91 Express Lanes Fund Financial Report;
i) Auditor Required Communications Report;
j) Agreed -Upon Procedures Report related to the Appropriations Limit Calculation;
k) Agreed -Upon Procedures Report related to the Commuter Assistance Program
(CAP) incentives; and
I) Management certifications.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
In April 2015, Macias Gini & O'Connell, LLP (MGO) was selected to perform the annual audit of
the Commission's financial statements included in the CAFR, LTF, STA, RCTC 91 Express Lanes,
and federal awards. As a result of receipt of SGR funds for transit infrastructure repair and service
improvements and Proposition 18 and LCTOP funds for commuter rail rehabilitation and security
projects, separate audits are required for these funds. Additionally, MGO performs agreed -upon
procedures related to the annual Appropriations Limit Calculation and the CAP incentives and
reports on compliance with commercial paper debt covenants. The audits, compliance
Agenda Item 7B
procedures, and agreed -upon procedures for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2019, have been
completed, and MGO issued all reports.
The Commission's CAFR consists of three sections: introductory, financial, and statistical. While
the introductory and statistical sections were not audited by MGO, the basic financial statements
included a financial section were audited by MGO. The Commission received an unmodified
opinion on its basic financial statements from MGO, which is the highest form of assurance.
Limited procedures were performed related to the required supplementary information,
including Management's Discussion and Analysis section; such information was not audited. The
other supplementary information was subject to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of
the basic financial statements, and, in the opinion of the auditors, it is fairly stated in relation to
the basic financial statements.
The basic financial statements include government -wide financial statements, fund financial
statements, and notes to the financial statements. Management's Discussion and Analysis
section provides a narrative overview and analysis of the Commission's financial activities for the
fiscal year. Financial highlights and significant matters of the basic financial statements include:
• Net position of approximately $339.5 million at June 30, 2019, compared to
approximately $195.3 million at June 30, 2018, reflects a net increase of approximately
$144.2 million from governmental and business -type activities.
• The net increase in net position consists of a net increase of approximately $141.0 million
from governmental activities and a net increase of approximately $3.2 million from
business -type activities.
• Governmental fund balances of approximately $790.2 million at June 30, 2019, compared
to approximately $776.0 million at June 30, 2018, represent an increase of approximately
$14.2 million from the prior year.
• During the year ended June 30, 2019, the Commission made its first draw of $14.9 million
on the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan related to
the Interstate 15 Express Lanes project (1-15 ELP). The amounts drawn on the
$152.2 million TIFIA loan is recorded as a liability on the government -wide financial
statements as of June 30, 2019, and as other financing sources on the fund financial
statements for the year ended June 30, 2019.
The audit reports related to the separately issued financial statements of the LTF, STA, SGR,
Proposition 1B, and LCTOP also reflect unmodified opinions from MGO. These financial
statements are required to be issued separately under the Transportation Development Act
(TDA) and the provisions for Proposition 1B and LCTOP; however, the LTF, STA, and SGR financial
position and operations are included in the fund financial statements in the CAFR. The
Proposition 1B and LCTOP financial position are part of the General and Measure A Western
Agenda Item 7B
7
County Commuter Rail funds. These reports noted no matters considered to be a material
weakness in internal control and no instances of noncompliance.
The 2019 Single Audit Report includes the reports on compliance and internal control over
financial reporting and over federal awards. These reports noted no matters considered to be a
material weakness in internal control and no instances of noncompliance.
The RCTC 91 Express Lanes Financial Statements include the Independent Auditors' Report,
Management's Discussion and Analysis, and Financial Statements, including Notes to Financial
Statements. Financial highlights include net deficit of approximately $274.6 million, which
consisted of:
• Net investment in capital assets of approximately ($299.9) million reflecting
toll -supported debt in excess of capital assets; and
• Restricted net position of approximately $25.3 million for toll operations in accordance
with debt indentures and agreements.
The deficit in net investment in capital assets will be reduced by future toll revenues for the
payment of outstanding toll debt obligations.
As a result of the establishment of the commercial paper program in March 2005, the bank
reimbursement agreement requires a report from the auditor regarding compliance with certain
covenants. The report issued by MGO indicated that nothing came to the auditor's attention that
caused the auditors to believe the Commission failed to comply with these covenants.
A management letter usually includes recommendations for improvements and operational
efficiencies related to the internal control and other matters notes during the audit. MGO did
not have any recommendations or comments on other matters; therefore, it did not issue a
management letter.
The Appropriations Limit Calculations and CAP reports are based on specific procedures agreed
to by the Commission. For the Appropriations Limit Calculation and CAP, the auditors noted no
exceptions or findings related to the procedures performed.
As required by American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Auditing Standards Board
Statement No. 114, The Auditor's Communications With Those Charged with Governance, the
Commission's auditor is required to make certain annual communications to the Commission's
Audit Ad Hoc Committee, or its equivalent, regarding the audit of the Commission's financial
statements following the completion of the audit. The annual audit for FY 2018/19 conducted
by MGO was completed in October 2019. The report to the Audit Ad Hoc Committee from the
auditor contains the required communications about the audit.
As part of the development of the Commission's Accountability Program, the directors have
completed certifications relating to financial reporting and operational disclosures.
Agenda Item 7B
8
Attachments:
1) 2019 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (Posted on Commission Website)
2) 2019 Local Transportation Fund Financial and Compliance Report
3) 2019 State Transit Assistance Fund Financial and Compliance Report
4) 2019 State of Good Repair Fund Financial and Compliance Report
5) 2019 Proposition 18 Rehabilitation and Security Project Accounts Financial and
Compliance Reports
6) 2019 Low Carbon Transit Operations Program Account Financial and Compliance Reports
7) 2019 Single Audit Report
8) 2019 RCTC 91 Express Lanes Fund Financial Report
9) 2019 Commercial Paper Compliance Report
10) 2019 Report to the Audit Ad Hoc Committee
11) 2019 Agreed -Upon Procedures Report related to the Appropriations Limit Calculation
12) 2019 Agreed -Upon Procedures Report related to the Commuter Assistance Program
incentives
13) 2019 Executive Director and Chief Financial Officer Certification
14) 2019 Director's Certification
15) Auditor's Presentation to the Audit Ad Hoc Committee
Agenda Item 7B
9
ATTACHMENT 1
RIVERSIDE
COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION
91 Express Lanes
SR-60 /1-215
FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2019
EIWOMMIZEORT
Riverside County Transportation Co • ission
Riverside County, Califo,
VanClub
k City of Indio local streets and roads
RIVERSIDE
COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION
EXPRESS LANES
ENTRANCE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CA
COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL
FINANCIAL REPORT
Fiscal Year Ended
June 30, 2019
Submitted by:
Theresia Trevino,
Chief Financial Officer
Michele Cisneros,
Deputy Director of Finance
91 Express Lanes
CONTENTS
Introductory Section
Letter of Transmittal i
Organization Chart ix
List of Principal Officials and Management Staff x
Financial Section
Independent Auditor's Report 1
Management's Discussion and Analysis 3
Basic Financial Statements
Government -wide Financial Statements
Statement of Net Position 20
Statement of Activities 21
Fund Financial Statements
Governmental Funds
Balance Sheet —Governmental Funds 22
Reconciliation of the Balance Sheet of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Net Position 25
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
—Governmental Funds 26
Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances
of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Activities 29
Proprietary Fund
Statement of Fund Net Position 30
Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Fund Net Position 31
Statement of Cash Flows 32
Notes to Financial Statements 34
Required Supplementary Information
Budgetary Comparison Schedules
General Fund 77
Major Special Revenue Funds 78
Schedule of Proportionate Share of Net Pension Liability 81
Schedule of Pension Contributions 82
Schedule of Changes in the Net OPEB Liability and Related Ratios 83
Schedule of OPEB Contributions 84
Notes to Required Supplementary Information 85
Other Supplementary Information
Nonmajor Governmental Funds 89
Combining Balance Sheet 90
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances 92
Contents, Continued
Financial Section, Continued
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances —Budget and Actual
Nonmajor Special Revenue Funds 94
Capital Projects Funds 97
Debt Service Fund 98
Schedule of Expenditures for Local Streets and Roads by Geographic Area —All Special
Revenue Funds 99
Schedule of Expenditures for Transit and Specialized Transportation by Geographic Area and
Source —All Special Revenue Funds 100
Schedule of Uses of Debt Proceeds and Fund Balances 101
Statistical Section
Statistical Section Overview 103
Primary Government Net Position by Component 104
Changes in Primary Government Net Position 106
Fund Balances of Governmental Funds 110
Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds 112
Sources of County of Riverside Taxable Sales by Business Type 114
Direct and Overlapping Sales Tax Rates 116
Principal Taxable Sales Generation by City 117
Measure A Sales Tax Revenues by Program and Geographic Area 118
Measure A Sales Tax by Economic Category 119
Measure A Revenues and Pledged Revenue Coverage 120
Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type 122
Computation of Legal Debt Margin 124
Demographic and Economic Statistics for the County of Riverside 126
Employment Statistics by Industry for the County of Riverside 127
Full-time Equivalent Employees by Function/Program 128
Operating Indicators 130
Capital Asset Statistics by Program 132
INTRODUCTORY SECTION
RIVERSIDE
COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION
October 31, 2019
4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor • Riverside, CA
Mailing Address: P. O. Box 12008 • Riverside, CA 92502-2208
(951) 787-7141 • Fax (951) 787-7920 • www.rctc.org
To the Riverside County Transportation Commission Commissioners
and Citizens of the County of Riverside:
Letter of Transmittal
State law requires that the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission or RCTC) publish
within six months of the close of each fiscal year a complete set of financial statements presented in
conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (GAAP) and audited in
accordance with generally accepted auditing standards by independent certified public accountants.
Pursuant to that requirement, we hereby issue the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) of the
Commission for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2019.
Management assumes full responsibility for the completeness and reliability of all of the information
presented in this report, based upon the Commission's comprehensive framework of internal controls
established for this purpose. Because the cost of internal control should not exceed anticipated benefits,
the objective is to provide reasonable, rather than absolute, assurance that the financial statements are free
of any material misstatements.
Macias Gini & O'Connell LLP has issued an unmodified opinion on the Commission's financial statements
for the year ended June 30, 2019. The independent auditor's report is located at the front of the financial
section of this report.
Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) immediately follows the independent auditor's report
and provides a narrative introduction, overview, and analysis of the basic financial statements. MD&A
complement this letter of transmittal and should be read in conjunction with it.
Profile of RCTC's Governance and Responsibilities
State law established the Commission in 1976 to oversee the funding and coordination of all public
transportation services within the county of Riverside (County). The Commission's mission is to assume
a leadership role in improving mobility in Riverside County and to maximize the cost effectiveness of
transportation dollars in the County. The governing body is the Board of Commissioners (Board), which
consists of all five members of the County Board of Supervisors, one elected official from each of the
County's 28 cities, and one non -voting member appointed bythe Governor. The Commission is responsible
for setting policies, establishing priorities, and coordinating activities among the County's various
transportation operators and agencies. The Commission also programs and/or reviews the allocation of
federal, state, and local funds for highway, transit, rail, non -motorized travel (bicycle and pedestrian), and
other transportation activities. The Commission has developed two express lanes projects; the RCTC 91
Express Lanes opened in March 2017 and the 15 Express Lanes are expected to open in mid 2020.
The Commission also serves as the tax authority and implementation agency for the voter -approved
Measure ATransportation Improvement Program, which imposes a half -cent sales tax to fund transportation
improvements. Originally approved in 1988 (1989 Measure A), Riverside County's voters in 2002 approved
a 30-year extension of Measure A commencing July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2039 (2009 Measure A).
The Commission is also legally responsible for allocating Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds,
the major source of funds for transit in the County. The TDA provides two major sources of funding:
Local Transportation Fund (LTF), which is derived from a one -quarter cent state sales tax, and State Transit
Assistance, which is derived from the statewide sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuel.
Eastvale►
®Norco
Corona
t'
ti
Riverside
Lek
Nee
'Lake
Elsinore
Canyon
Lake
Wildomar
Murrieta
74
Menke
San
Jacinto
Hemet
ake
Temecula
Desert Hot Springs
Palm
Springs
Cathedral
City
Rancho
Mirage Palm
Desert
Indian
Wells
La Duinta
Additionally, the Commission provides motorist aid services designed to expedite traffic flow. These
services include the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE), a program that provides call box
service for motorists, and the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP), a roving tow truck service to assist motorists
with disabled vehicles on the main highways of the County during peak rush hour traffic periods. The
motorist aid program also includes the operation of the Inland Empire 511 (IE51 1) system which provides
comprehensive real time traveler information for freeways, bus and rail transit, and rideshare services.
All services are provided at no charge to motorists and are funded through a $1 surcharge on vehicle
registrations; FSP also receives state allocations. The Commission is financially accountable for SAFE, a
legally separate entity that is blended within the Commission's financial statements.
Finally, the Commission has been designated as the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for the
County.As the CMA,the Commission coordinates with local jurisdictions in the establishment of congestion
mitigation procedures for the County's roadway system.
The Commission is required to adopt a budget priorto the beginning of each fiscal year. The annual budget,
which includes all funds, serves as the foundation for the Commission's financial planning and control
regarding staffing, operations, and capital plans. The budget is prepared by fund (financial responsibility
unit), department, and function. Management has the discretion to transfer budgeted amounts within the
financial responsibility unit according to function. During the fiscal year, all budget amendments requiring
Board approval are presented to the Board for consideration and adoption.
Local Economy
Riverside County has specific competitive advantages over nearby coastal counties (Los Angeles, Orange,
and San Diego) including housing that was (and remains) more available and affordable, lower commercial
real estate lease and purchase costs, and land available for development at lesser costs. Riverside County's
economy has thrived, reflecting those specific competitive advantages over its neighboring counties,
largely as a result of the County's continuing ability to draw jobs, residents, and affordable housing away
from the Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego county areas. As a result, the County's employment and
commercial base has become more diversified, and the County's share of the regional economy has
increased.
Riverside County's local economy is experiencing significant improvement since the nationwide recession,
which had a significant impact on the Inland Empire (i.e., San Bernardino and Riverside counties). Notable
areas of growth include employment, population, and a more diverse economic base. Sales tax revenues
have rebounded from the economic downturn's low point in 2010, with Measure A and LTF growing
each year through FY 2018/19. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) revenues increased 26%,
reflecting a continued demand for residential single family and multi -family housing.
While the foundation for continued economic growth is in place, the Commission faces formidable
ongoing challenges in terms of providing needed infrastructure enhancements to support a population
and an economy that has outgrown the capacity of its existing infrastructure. Fortunately, the foundation of
the regional economy continues to retain many of the fundamental positive attributes that fueled its earlier
growth, including lower priced real estate with proximity to coastal communities, a large pool of skilled
workers, and increasing wealth and education levels.
Long-term Financial Planning
Proactive financial planning is a critical element for the success of the Commission as it builds for the future.
Continually reviewing revenues and projecting expenditures and expenses ensures that the Commission's
expectations are realistic and goals are achievable. Scarce resources, especially at the state and federal
level, can be directed to projects of regional significance or, with additional funding, project priorities can
be expanded to address unfunded project requirements or developing needs.
At the state level, transportation funding is a source of continuing debate regarding future priorities.
Sustainability has become a statewide priority and will likely impact the direction of state funding for many
years into the future, and California's Cap and Trade program (which has been reauthorized) could prove
to be a source of funding for transit services.
Voters upheld recent legislation by rejecting Proposition 6, which would have reversed recent raises to
vehicle registration fees and the state gas tax to fund transportation projects. Another bill, Senate Bill (SB)
132, provides $427 million from the state's budget to fund five important new transportation projects in
Northwest Riverside County. This includes two grade separations in Jurupa Valley and Corona, a new bridge
over the Santa Ana River at Hamner Avenue in Norco, improvements to the Interstate 15 (I-15)/Limonite
Avenue interchange, and a new express lanes connector between the RCTC 91 Express Lanes and the
future 15 Express Lanes. Construction on the I-15/Limonite Avenue interchange is nearing completion,
and preliminary engineering work has commenced on the other projects. All of the SB 132 projects are
required to be completed prior to 2023.
The 15/91 express lanes connector will be especially important to the Commission and will provide a
needed direct express lane to express lane connection between State Route 91 (SR-91) and the northern
portion of 1-15. Additional legislation also provided the Commission with added flexibility in delivering the
project by allowing for the use of the design -build or the construction manager general contractor method
of procurement. A number of contract amendments and agreements are now in place to ensure timely
delivery of the project and a design -build contract will be awarded in early 2020.
The news on the federal level is somewhat less predictable. In December 2015, the comprehensive
transportation bill known as Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act - or FAST Act - superseded
Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21 st Century (MAP-21) which originally expired in June 2014.The federal
government will continue to be a source of highway funding through the Surface Transportation Block Grant
Program (formerly, Surface Transportation Program) and the Congestion Mitigation Air Quality program,
since the FAST Act continues these programs at roughly the same funding level. The FAST Act expires in
September 2020. The Commission's transit partners for capital programs also need federal dollars.
Capital Project Delivery and Implementation —Completing Past Promises for a Better Future
The Capital Project Development and Delivery Department is responsible for major highway and rail
capital projects from initial environmental study through preliminary engineering, final design, right of way
acquisition, and construction.
The Commission is currently in the midst of an unprecedented era of transportation investment in Riverside
County. The results can be seen with numerous projects under construction, increasingly popular and
successful transit service, and promises of more on the way in the near future. There are also a number of
iii
notable completed projects - providing tangible examples of the Commission completing promises that
were made to voters who approved Measure A. The Commission has developed a track record of success
which is taking shape throughout the County as evidenced in the following project types.
Highways: In February 2012 the Commission amended its Western Riverside County (Western County)
Highway Delivery Plan to include a truck lanes safety project on SR-60 in the Badlands area in place of
a similar nearby project on I-10. In partnership with Caltrans, the Commission is the project sponsor and
Caltrans is the lead agency for preliminary engineering using federal funds. With a total project cost
estimated at $122 million, construction of the project began in early 2019. The project adds truck climbing
and deceleration lanes, wider shoulders, and additional safety improvements to a 4.5-mile segment of the
highway.
2020 To Be A Big Year: In addition to the construction of the SR-60 truck lanes, a number of other
highway projects will progress during 2020. Many of these projects are part of a new Western Riverside
County Highway Delivery Plan, which was approved by the Commission in July 2019.
1-15 Express Lanes Southern Extension: Environmental work is already under way to extend the 15
Express Lanes an additional 14.5 miles to the city of Lake Elsinore. A series of public scoping meetings
will be held in late 2019 that will be part of the comprehensive environmental review process.
1-15 Railroad Canyon Interchange: The Commission will serve as the lead agency to expand the 1-15
interchange at Railroad Canyon Road in the city of Lake Elsinore. The $45 million project will widen the
street over the freeway and make a number of needed improvements to increase capacity of the on
and off ramps and auxiliary lanes at the location.
Placentia Interchange to link 1-215 and future Mid County Parkway: In early 2020, the Commission
will start the very first component of the Mid County Parkway (MCP), a new 16 mile east -west corridor
between the cities of San Jacinto and Perris.This project will add a new freeway interchange at Placentia
Avenue that will link to the MCP and improve a segment of Placentia Avenue in the city of Perris.
71/91 Interchange: Funding for the construction of a new connector between the eastbound SR-
91 and northbound SR-71 in the city of Corona has been secured. This $121 million project has
environmental clearance and could begin the construction phase in 2020.
91 Freeway Corridor Operations Project: The Commission, in partnership with Caltrans, the Orange
County Transportation Authority, the Transportation Corridor Agencies, and the city of Corona, is
conducting engineering and environmental studies to support the 91 Corridor Operations Project.
The Commission is leading the development of the project. The proposed project would add an
auxiliary lane on westbound SR-91 from the Green River Road on -ramp to the southbound SR-241
connector. The auxiliary lane, located next to the exterior shoulder, would help relieve westbound
traffic congestion through this heavily traveled corridor. Pending project approvals and securing
funding, work could begin in 2020 and would take about 15 months to complete.
Commuter Rail: Since 1993 the Commission has held
title to and managed the 38-mile San Jacinto Branch
Line and several adjacent properties in anticipation
of offering Metrolink commuter rail service to a wider
area of the County, initially including Moreno Valley
and Perris and ultimately to Hemet/San Jacinto. The
completion of the Perris Valley Line project in June
2016 completed yet another promise made to voters
in Measure A. The Perris Valley Line provides Riverside
County with a foundation for better transit service
involving a combination of commuter rail, local buses
and active transportation improvements. It added 24
miles of commuter rail service in Riverside County
Perris -
South
station
iv
with stops in Riverside -Hunter Park/University California Riverside (UCR), Moreno Valley/March Field,
Perris -Downtown and Perris -South. The project used a combination of federal Small Starts Grant funding,
Measure A and State Transportation Improvement Program dollars. Ridership on the new extension has
increased with a targeted marketing campaign and rider discounts.
Active Transportation: Non -motorized transportation options are becoming an increasingly important part
of California's transportation infrastructure, and the Commission has taken a leadership role in assisting
local jurisdictions by funding and advocating for projects vying for state funding. The Commission is
also heading up project development for the Santa Ana River Trail - a multiuse facility that will provide a
bike, pedestrian and equestrian trail to link San Bernardino, Riverside and Orange Counties for cyclists,
pedestrians and equestrians.
Toll Program Exceeding Expectations
91 Express Lanes Offer a New Choice: The SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (91 Project) through
Corona opened in March 2017. Since that opening, use of the 91 Express Lanes has far exceeded a
conservative ramp -up period that was expected for the facility. During its two years of operation, use of the
RCTC 91 Express Lanes exceeded expectations and traffic conditions on the corridor have improved with
the addition of the new capacity.
1-15 Express Lanes Project
1-15 Express Lanes - The Next Project: The 1-15 Express
Lanes Project is now under construction and will add two
tolled express lanes of approximately 15 miles in length,
in each direction in the median of 1-15. The facility is
expected to open in mid 2020 and will operate somewhat
differently from othertoll facilities in the region by offering
multiple access points to enter and exit the express lanes.
The 1-15 Express Lanes will also feature dynamic pricing,
which is designed to adjust tolls throughout the day to
reflect actual traffic conditions rather than being bound
by a set time of day schedule.
79 Realignment Remains an Important Priority: Another large planning effort affecting the Hemet and
San Jacinto communities is the realignment of SR-79. This 2009 Measure A project is undergoing early
project development, which was partially funded through the TUMF program and federal earmarks. An
environmental document was approved in January 2017 to allow the realignment of SR-79 between
Domenigoni Parkway, south of SR-74, and Gilman Springs Road, north of San Jacinto. The project would
realign the highway to provide a more direct route within the San Jacinto Valley. Current work on this
project includes acquisition of right of way needed for mitigation and to protect cultural sites.
TUMF Plays an Important Role
In the Coachella Valley, a TUMF program was established shortly after the passage of the 1989 Measure A.
The program requires developers to pay a fee on new development to fund arterial improvements. Cities
are required to participate in the program or forfeit Measure A local dollars to Coachella Valley Association
of Governments, which oversees the arterial program and has been successful in funding a number of
important arterial and freeway interchange projects.
With the passage of the 2009 Measure A, a TUMF program with participation requirements similar to that
in the Coachella Valley is in place in Western County and administered by the Western Riverside Council of
Governments. TUMF funds received by the Commission are split evenly between new corridors, including
the MCP, and regional arterials, including local projects and the SR-79 realignment project. To date under
the regional arterial program, 18 projects have been completed, one project will be under construction in
2020, and one project remains in pre -construction.
v
Rail Development, Operations and Support
As one of five funding partners in the Southern California Regional Rail Authority, which operates the
Metrolink commuter rail service, the Commission is engaged in a continual exercise of consensus building
with its partners to provide effective regional service. Now consisting of seven lines serving six counties, the
system carries an average of slightly more than 40,000 passengers each weekday. The Commission owns
and operates nine stations served by the three Metrolink lines operating through the County, including
four new stations along the Perris Valley Line that commenced carrying passengers in June 2016.
The Commission's Perris -Downtown station is a multimodal facility also serving Riverside TransitAgency bus
operations and providing park and ride spaces. It continues to serve as an important regional bus terminal.
The Riverside Downtown Operations Control Center provides monitoring of closed circuit televisions at
the stations as well as facilities for train crews.
• Riverside Line: Originates in the Riverside -Downtown station and stops at the Jurupa Valley-Pedley
station before proceeding through Ontario, Pomona, Industry, and Montebello to Los Angeles
Union Station. Daily ridership averages 3,868 riders.
• Inland Empire Orange County (IEOC) Line: Begins in nearby San Bernardino with stops at the
Riverside -Downtown, Riverside -La Sierra, Corona -North Main, and Corona -West stations before
entering Orange County with stops in Anaheim Canyon, Orange, Santa Ana, Tustin, Irvine, Laguna
Niguel/Mission Viejo, San Juan Capistrano, San Clemente and Oceanside. When initiated, this
service was described as the first suburb -to -suburb commuter rail service in the nation. Average
daily ridership on the IEOC line was 4,656. This line also provides weekend service.
• 91/Perris Valley Line: Provides service from Perris to Los Angeles with stops in Perris -South, Perris -
Downtown, Moreno Valley/March Field, Riverside -Hunter Park/UCR, Riverside -La Sierra, Corona -
North Main, Corona -West, Fullerton, Buena Park, Norwalk, and Commerce before terminating at
Union Station. Daily patronage on the line averages 3,293. A part of this line between Riverside and
Los Angeles offers weekend service, and new weekend service from Perris started in October 2019.
Commuter Services
Acting in its capacity as the regional transportation planning agency (RTPA) and the SAFE for Riverside
County, the Commission provides a variety of commuter services to increase mobility, safety, and air quality
throughout the region. As the RTPA, the Commission applies Measure Afundsto administer the Commuter
Assistance Program (CAP) to ease congestion, maximize the efficiency of its transportation investments,
and reduce emissions from single occupant vehicle trips with the following programs and services:
Commuter/Employer Rideshare Services: In partnership with San Bernardino County Transportation
Authority (SBCTA), the Commission helps Riverside and San Bernardino commuters discover their best
commute through IE Commuter, the flagship of the CAP. In just a few clicks, www.iecommuter.org users
can access all of their time and money saving transportation options (carpool partners, bus, and rail) and
incentives available to them. Additionally, through IE Commuter, the Commission partners heavily with
local employers to implement and maintain rideshare activities at work sites throughout Riverside and San
Bernardino counties. IE Commuter continues to leverage technology to increase awareness, consideration,
and use of alternative modes to improve mobility and air quality throughout the region.
Rideshare Incentives: The most prominent commuter incentive continues to be the Rideshare Incentives,
a short-term incentive that offers $2 per day for each day new ride sharers use an alternate mode of
transportation in a three-month period. Long-term ride sharers are recognized and rewarded for their
continuing commitment to use alternate modes of transportation to and from work with access to discounts
at over 360,000 nationwide merchants through Rideshare Plus.
vi
Vanpool Subsidies: In May 2018,the Commission launched VanClub, which provides ongoing subsidies to
eligible vanpools commuting to employer worksites in Western County. In FY 2018/19, VanClub supported
an average of 67 vans per month resulting in the reduction of 128,060 trips, 4.7 million miles and 2,536
tons of emissions throughout the region.
Park and Rides: Working in partnership with Caltrans, the Commission leases excess parking from business
and civic institutional partners to facilitate ridesharing and to expand the system's park and ride capacity.
There are approximately 2,900 park and ride spaces available in Riverside County.
Motorist Assistance: As the SAFE, the Commission also administers the Motorist Assistance Program to
provide the following services designed to promote mobility and safety for motorists traveling through
Riverside County:
Freeway Service Patrol: The FSP program is a special
team of 26 tow trucks roving along 12 beats on portions
of SR-60, SR-91, 1-15, and 1-215 within the County during
peak, weekday commuter hours to assist drivers when
their vehicles break down or experience other mechanical
problems. Thanks in part to the approval of SB 1, which
provided more funding to FSP programs, the Commission
has been able to expand the service to additional areas
along the 1-15 in southwestern Riverside County.
The purpose of the FSP is to clear debris and remove disabled vehicles from the freeway as quickly
as possible to help keep freeway traffic moving during rush hour periods. Another effort augments
existing FSP service with additional tow trucks in construction areas as another means of construction -
related congestion mitigation. The Riverside County SAFE and the State fund the FSP. During FY
2018/19, the FSP provided 44,607 assists. This includes incremental FSP weekend service, funded by
the Southern California Air Quality Management District's Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction and
Review Committee, on segments of SR-91 and SR-60.
Call Boxes: In cooperation with the California Highway Patrol and Caltrans, the Commission assists
motorists who experience accidents, mechanical breakdowns, or other unforeseen problems by
providing access to cellular call boxes with enhanced reception along the County's major highways. In
response to the proliferation and continued growth of cell phone usage and declining demand and
use of call boxes, the Commission approved a substantial reduction to the call box system in 2017
and 2019. A cost effective backbone of 156 call box units will remain in place and serve more than
346 centerline miles of highways. The call box program is funded by Riverside County SAFE revenue,
an annual $1 surcharge added to vehicle registrations. In FY 2018/19, call box operators answered
approximately 1,384 calls from motorists.
Traveler Information: To further promote mobility, the Commission in partnership with the SBCTA,
provides motorists with access to real-time freeway travel information and incident information on
Southern California highways through its 1E511 Traveler Information system. 1E511 is designed to
promote mobility by fostering more informed travel decisions to avoid congestion and is available
via the telephone by dialing 511 from any landline or cell phone within Riverside or San Bernardino
County, online at www.ie51 1.org, or the IE51 1 mobile app. To date, the 1E511 mobile app has been
downloaded by more than 67,000 users. IE511 is funded with Riverside County SAFE funds in addition
to SBCTA reimbursements. In FY 2018/19, 1E511 serviced approximately 214,000 web visits and
114,000 phone calls.
Specialized Transit
The Commission has maintained a long-term commitment to assist in the mobility of those with specialized
transit needs. Through its Specialized Transit Program, the Commission has provided millions of dollars to
public and nonprofit transit operators to assist in the provision of special transit services to improve the
vii
mobility of seniors, persons with disabilities and persons with low incomes. Along with traditional dial -a -
ride services, the Commission supports innovative programs providing transit assistance in hard -to -serve
rural areas or for riders having very special transit needs.
The Commission develops a Public Transit -Human Services Coordinated Plan every four years. In the 2016
update, the Commission identified service gaps, additional qualified populations as well as underserved
areas of Riverside County in need of transit services. To address these transit needs, a Universal Call for
Projects for Specialized Transit (Universal Call) is held every three years and provides funding awards in
Western County. The 2018 Universal Call awarded approximating $8.2 million to 18 public and nonprofit
agencies using Measure A funding over a three-year period from FY 2018/19 through FY 2020/21. During
FY 2018/19, public and nonprofit operators provided over 175,000 one-way trips funded by Measure A in
Western County.
Consideration of an Additional Sales Tax Program
Work is underway to develop a comprehensive countywide transportation study for approval in 2019. This
will help inform another effort to complete a countywide traffic relief plan, which could become the basis
of a new expenditure plan for an additional half -cent sales tax. The Commission will consider whether to
seek voter approval for the plan in mid-2020. Additional local revenue will help close a growing number of
transportation gaps as the County continues to grow in population and employment.
Awards and Acknowledgements
The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States
and Canada (GFOA) awarded a Certificate of Achievement for
Excellence in Financial Reporting to the Commission for its CAFR for
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2018. This was the 26th consecutive
year the Commission has achieved this prestigious award. In order
to be awarded a Certificate of Achievement, a government must
publish an easily readable and efficiently organized CAFR. This
report must satisfy both GAAP and applicable legal requirements.
A Certificate of Achievement is valid for a period of one year only.
We believe our current CAFR continues to meet the Certificate of
Achievement Program's requirements, and we are submitting it to
the GFOAto determine its eligibility for another certificate.
The CAFR each year is a collaborative effort by Commission staff
and its independent auditors. The undersigned are grateful to all
staff for their willingness to expend the effort necessary to ensure
the financial information contained herein is informative and
completed within established deadlines. Special thanks must be extended to the Finance staff, program
management and staff, and Commission's auditors for the time, effort, and commitment so vital for the final
completion of the CAFR.
6�9
� {�nl titi,�lti• 111.
:tt ILIL ti i 11:L:111
11.1 1•.N.t1/4•1It uti
!I: 1 111.51:::;II
E�:Iw lrli 115
11. Pri•Ak l veil
CrarnrrrINININ S •mmnomm, L .41.1•1 •1�
0 P
In closing, without the leadership and the support of the Board, preparation of this report would not have
been possible. Its prudent management must be credited for the strength of the Commission's fiscal
condition, and its vision ensures that the Riverside County Transportation Commission will be on the move
planning for and building a better future for Riverside County residents and commuters.
Very truly yours,
ANNE MAYER THERESIATREVINO
Executive Director Chief Financial Officer
viii
Riverside County Transportation Commission Organizational Chart
Board of
Commissioners
Legal Counsel
Deputy
Executive
Director
Human
Resources
Administrator
Chief Financial
Officer
External Affairs
Director
Clerk of the
Board
Procurement
Manager
Deputy Director
of Finance
Public Affairs
Manager
Legislative
Affairs Manager
ommu er
Motorist
Assistance
M.n..-r
Deputy Clerk of
the Board
Information
Technology
Administrator
Records
Technician
Senior
Procurement
Analyst
Senior
Administrative
Assistant
Senior Financial
Analyst
Accountant
Accounting
Technician (2)
Accounting
Assistant (2)
Senior Office
Assistant
Senior
Management
Analyst
Senior
Administrative
Assistant
Management
Analyst
Rail Manager Management
Analyst
Multimodal
Services Director r ��
�
Planning &
Programming
Director
Project Delivery
Director
Toll Program
Director
Transit ManagerManagement
Analyst
Planning &
Programming t
Manager
Capital Projects
Manager(4)
Senior
Management
Analyst
Management
Analyst
Right of Way Senior
Manager Management
Analyst (3)
Facilities
Manager
Toll Project
Manager
Toll Operations
Manager
Capital Projects
Manager
Toll Technology
Manager
Toll Senior
Management
Analyst
IX
Riverside County Transportation Commission
List of Principal Officials
Name
Board of Commissioners
Title Agency
Kevin Jeffries Member County of Riverside, District 1
Karen Spiegel Member County of Riverside, District 2
Chuck Washington Chair (Commission) County of Riverside, District 3
V. Manuel Perez Member County of Riverside, District 4
Jeff Hewitt Member County of Riverside, District 5
Art Welch Member City of Banning
Lloyd White Vice Chair (Budget and Implementation Committee) City of Beaumont
Joseph DeConinck Member City of Blythe
Larry Smith Member City of Calimesa
Randall Bonner Member City of Canyon Lake
Raymond Gregory Member City of Cathedral City
Steven Hernandez Member City of Coachella
Wes Speake Member City of Corona
Scott Matas Member City of Desert Hot Springs
Clint Lorimore Member City of Eastvale
Linda Krupa Chair (Budget and Implementation Committee) City of Hemet
Dana Reed Member City of Indian Wells
Waymond Fermon Member City of Indio
Brian Berkson Chair (Western Riverside County Programs
and Projects Committee) City of Jurupa Valley
Kathleen Fitzpatrick Member City of La Quinta
Bob Magee Member City of Lake Elsinore
Bill Zimmerman Member City of Menifee
Victoria Baca Member City of Moreno Valley
Scott Vinton Member City of Murrieta
Berwin Hanna Member City of Norco
Jan Harnik 2nd Vice Chair (Commission) City of Palm Desert
Lisa Middleton Member City of Palm Springs
Michael M. Vargas Vice Chair (Western Riverside County Programs
Ted Weill
Rusty Bailey
Andrew Kotyuk
Michael S. Naggar
Ben Benoit
Mike Beauchamp
and Projects Committee)
Member
Member
Member
Member
Vice Chair (Commission)
Governor's Appointee
City of Perris
City of Rancho Mirage
City of Riverside
City of San Jacinto
City of Temecula
City of Wildomar
Caltrans, District 8 Director
Management Staff
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director
Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director
Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery Director
Aaron Hake, External Affairs Director
Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Director
Lorelle Moe -Luna, Multimodal Services Director
Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer
x
RIVERSIDE
COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION
Financial
HOMO I Ilk I CLIC ZMZ
certuied
mime:
Accountants
Independent Auditor's Report
Board of Commissioners
Riverside County Transportation Commission
Riverside, California
We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, the business -type
activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the Riverside County
Transportation Commission (the Commission) as of and for the year ended June 30, 2019, and the related
notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the Commission's basic financial statements,
as listed in the table of contents.
Management's Responsibility for the Financial Statements
Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America; this includes the
design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation
of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.
Auditor's Responsibility
Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted
our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the
financial statements are free from material misstatement.
An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the
financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor's judgment, including the assessment
of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making
those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the Commission's preparation and
fair presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the
circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Commission's
internal control. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes evaluating the
appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates
made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements.
We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our
audit opinions.
Opinions
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the
respective financial position of the governmental activities, the business -type activities, each major fund,
and the aggregate remaining fund information of the Commission, as of June 30, 2019, and the respective
changes in financial position, and, where applicable, cash flows thereof for the year then ended in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Macias Gini & O'Connell LLP
4675 MacArthur Court, Suite 600
Newport Beach, CA 92660
www.mgocpa.com
1
Other Matters
Required Supplementary Information
Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the management's
discussion and analysis, budgetary comparison schedules and information related to the pension and other
postemployment benefit plans, as listed in the table of contents, be presented to supplement the basic
financial statements. Such information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by
the Governmental Accounting Standards Board who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting
for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. We
have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with
auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of
management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency
with management's responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we
obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any
assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to
express an opinion or provide any assurance.
Other Information
Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively
comprise the Commission's basic financial statements. The combining and individual nonmajor fund
financial statements, budgetary comparison schedules, schedules of expenditures, and schedule of uses of
debt proceeds and fund balances, as listed in the table of contents as other supplementary information, and
other information, such as the introductory and statistical section, are presented for purposes of additional
analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements.
The combining and individual nonmajor fund financial statements, budgetary comparison schedules,
schedules of expenditures and schedule of uses of debt proceeds and fund balances are the responsibility of
management and were derived from and relate directly to the underlying accounting and other records used
to prepare the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures
applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing
and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare
the basic financial statements or to the basic financial statements themselves, and other additional
procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In
our opinion, the combining and individual nonmajor fund financial statements, budgetary comparison
schedules, schedules of expenditures and schedule of uses of debt proceeds and fund balances are fairly
stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole.
The introductory and statistical sections have not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the
audit of the basic financial statements and, accordingly, we do not express an opinion or provide any
assurance on them.
/10-ct•Ls 6)11+ if CketVid
r
Newport Beach, California
October 31, 2019
2
Riverside County Transportation Commission
Management's Discussion and Analysis
Year Ended June 30, 2019
As management of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission), we offer readers of
the Commission's financial statements this narrative overview and analysis of the Commission's financial
activities for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2019. We encourage readers to consider the information on
financial performance presented here in conjunction with the transmittal letter on pages i-viii and the
Commission's financial statements which begin on page 20.
Financial Highlights
• Total net position of the Commission was $339,545,929 and consisted of net investment in capital
assets of $407,083,162; restricted net position of $820,131,347; and unrestricted net position
(deficit) of ($887,668,580).
• The governmental activities unrestricted net deficit results primarily from the recording of the
debt issued for Measure A highway, local streets and roads, and regional arterial projects. As
title to substantially most of those assets vests with the State of California (State) Department
of Transportation (Caltrans) or local jurisdictions, there is no asset corresponding to the liability.
Accordingly, the Commission does not have sufficient current resources on hand to cover current
and long-term liabilities; however, future Measure A sales taxes are pledged to cover Measure A
debt service payments when made.
• Total net position increased by $144,218,986 during fiscal 2019. An increase in net position from
governmental activities of $141,047,952 was primarily due to an increase in operating grants and
contributions, capital grants and contributions, Measure A sales taxes, Transportation Development
Act sales taxes, as well as unrestricted investment earnings; a decrease in general government
and CETAP program expenses, as well as interest expense; and offset by an increase in commuter
rail, highways, local streets and roads, regional arterials, and transit and specialized transportation
program expenses. An increase in net position from business -type activities of $3,171,034 was
primarily due to an increase in charges for services and investment earnings, offset by a slight
increase in expenses, and internal transfers of surplus funds for the 91 Corridor Operations project
and excess investment earnings.
• Total capital and intangible assets, net of accumulated depreciation and amortization, were
$819,810,293 and $239,801,144 at June 30, 2019, respectively, representing an increase of
$89,986,860, or 9%, from June 30, 2018. The increase in capital assets was primarily related to
construction in progress costs for the I-15 Express Lanes project and rail station improvement costs.
The decrease in intangible assets was related to the current year amortization, offset by a transfer of
costs for the completed construction of tolled express lanes from the governmental activities capital
assets to business -type activities intangible assets.
• The long-term liabilities net decrease of $5,886,137 related to principal payments on sales tax
revenue bonds, amortization of sales tax revenue bonds premium, and payment for the MSHCP
funding liability, offset by a Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan
drawn down on the I-15 Express Lanes project and compounded and accreted interest on the TIFIA
loans and 2013 Toll Revenue Bonds, respectively.
• The Commission's governmental funds reported combined ending fund balances of $790,214,073,
an increase of $14,176,533 compared to fiscal 2018 primarily due to increased sales taxes and
intergovernmental revenues, as well as investment income, offset by increased commuter rail,
highways, local streets and roads, regional arterials, and transit and specialized transportation
expenditures. Approximately 69% of the governmental fund balances represent amounts available
for the Measure A program, including debt service and funding from the issuance of debt, and the
TUMF program.
3
Overview of the Financial Statements
This discussion and analysis are intended to serve as an introduction to the Commission's basic financial
statements, which are comprised of three components consisting of government -wide financial
statements, fund financial statements, and notes to the financial statements. This report also contains
required supplementary information and other supplementary information in addition to the basic financial
statements.
Government -wide Financial Statements
The government -wide financial statements are designed to provide readers with a broad overview of the
Commission's finances, in a manner similar to a private -sector business.
The statement of net position presents information on all of the Commission's assets, liabilities, and
deferred outflows/inflows of resources with the difference reported as net position. Overtime, increases or
decreases in net position may serve as a useful indicator of whether the financial position of the Commission
is improving or deteriorating.
The statement of activities presents information showing how the Commission's net position changed
during the fiscal year. All changes in net position are reported as soon as the underlying event giving rise
to the change occurs, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Thus, revenues and expenses are
reported for some items that will only result in cash flows in future fiscal periods.
The government -wide financial statements report the functions of the Commission that are principally
supported by sales taxes and intergovernmental revenues, or governmental activities, from other functions
that are intended to recover all or a significant portion of its costs through user fees and charges, or
business -type activities. The governmental activities of the Commission include general government,
the Measure A program, Community and Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP),
commuter assistance, regional arterials, commuter rail, transit and specialized transportation services,
planning and programming, bicycle and pedestrian facilities projects, and motorist assistance services.
Measure A program services are divided within the three regions of Riverside County (County), namely
Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley. The business -type activities of the Commission
include toll road operations.
The government -wide financial statements include only the Commission and its blended component unit.
The government -wide financial statements can be found on pages 20-21 of this report.
Fund Financial Statements
A fund is a grouping of related accounts that is used to maintain control over resources that have been
segregated for specific activities or objectives. Fund accounting is used to ensure and demonstrate
compliance with finance -related legal requirements.
Governmental funds are used to account for essentially the same functions reported as governmental
activities in the government -wide financial statements; however, governmental fund financial statements
focus on near -term inflows and outflows of spendable resources and on balances of spendable resources
available at the end of the fiscal year. Such information may be useful in evaluating a government's near -
term financing requirements.
Since the focus of governmental funds is narrower than that of the government -wide financial statements,
it is useful to compare the information presented for governmental funds with similar information
presented for governmental activities in the government -wide financial statements. As a result, readers
may better understand the long-term impact of the government's near -term financing decisions. Both
the governmental fund balance sheet and related statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in
fund balances provide a reconciliation to facilitate this comparison between governmental funds and
governmental activities.
4
The Commission maintains 16 individual governmental funds. Information is presented separately in the
governmental fund balance sheet and in the related statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in
fund balances for the Commission's major governmental funds comprised of the General fund; Measure
A Western County, Measure A Coachella Valley, Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF), Local
Transportation Fund (LTF), State Transit Assistance, and SB 132 Special Revenue funds; Commercial Paper
and Bonds Capital Projects funds; and Debt Service fund. Data from the other six governmental funds
are combined into a single, aggregated presentation. Individual fund data for each of these nonmajor
governmental funds is provided in the form of combining statements in the other supplementary
information section.
The Commission adopts an annual appropriated budget for the General fund, all Special Revenue funds, all
Capital Projects funds, and the Debt Service fund. Budgetary comparison schedules have been provided
for the General fund and major Special Revenue funds as required supplementary information and for the
nonmajor Special Revenue funds and the Capital Projects and Debt Service funds as other supplementary
information to demonstrate compliance with these budgets.
The governmental fund financial statements, including the reconciliation between the fund financial
statements and the government -wide financial statements, can be found on pages 22-29 of this report.
The proprietaryfund consists of an enterprise fund, which is used to report the same functions presented as
business -type activities in the government -wide financial statements. The Commission uses an enterprise
fund to account for its toll road operations.
Proprietary fund financial statements provide the same type of information as the government -wide
financial statements, only in more detail. The proprietary fund financial statements provide separate
financial information of the RCTC 91 Express Lanes, which is a major enterprise fund of the Commission.
The proprietary fund financial statements can be found on pages 30-33 of this report.
Notes to the Financial Statements
The notes provide additional information that is essential to a full understanding of the data provided in
the government -wide and fund financial statements. The notes to the financial statements can be found on
pages 34-74 of this report.
Other Information
Other information is in addition to the basic financial statements and accompanying notes to the
financial statements. This report also presents certain required supplementary information concerning
the Commission's budgetary results for the General fund and major Special Revenue funds as well as
the schedules of proportionate share of net pension liability, pension contributions, changes in the net
other post -employment benefits (OPEB) asset and related ratios, and OPEB contributions. Required
supplementary information can be found on pages 77-85 of this report.
Other supplementary information is presented immediately following the required supplementary
information. Other supplementary information includes the combining statements referred to earlier
relating to nonmajor governmental funds; budgetary results for the nonmajor Special Revenue funds, all
Capital Projects funds, and the Debt Service fund; schedules of expenditures for local streets and roads
and expenditures for transit and specialized transportation; and schedule of uses of debt proceeds and
fund balances. This other supplementary information can be found on pages 89-101 of this report.
Government -wide Financial Analysis
As noted previously, net position may serve over time as a useful indicator of a government's financial
position. At June 30, 2019, the Commission's assets exceeded liabilities by $339,545,929, a $144,218,986
increase from June 30, 2018. Our analysis below focuses on the net position and changes in net position
of the Commission's governmental and business -type activities.
5
Net Position
Approximately 120%, compared to 124% in 2018, of the Commission's net position reflects its net investment
in capital assets (i.e., intangibles, construction in progress; land and improvements; toll infrastructure;
buildings; construction and rail operating easements; rail stations; rail tracks; office improvements;
development in progress; transponders; and office furniture, equipment, and vehicles), less any related
outstanding debt used to acquire those assets, primarily related to land and tolled express lane projects.
The Commission uses these capital assets to provide transportation services to the residents and business
community of the County. Although the Commission's investments in capital assets is reported net of
related debt, the resources used to repay this debt must be provided from other sources, since the capital
assets themselves cannot be used to liquidate these liabilities. For business -type activities, the related debt
for the RCTC 91 Express Lanes exceeded the capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation.
The most significant portion of the Commission's net position represents resources subject to external
restrictions on how they may be used. Restricted net position from governmental activities represented
approximately 129% and 169% of the total governmental activities net position at June 30, 2019 and 2018,
respectively. Restricted net position from governmental activities decreased by $6,526,530, as a result of
the increased commuter rail, highways, local streets and roads, regional arterials, and transit and specialized
transportation program expenses, offset by increased operating and capital grants and contributions, sales
taxes, and unrestricted investment earnings.
Unrestricted net position represents the portion of net position that can be used to finance day-to-
day operations without constraints established by debt covenants, enabling legislation, or other legal
requirements. Unrestricted net position from governmental activities changed from a $857,485,575 deficit
at June 30, 2018 to a $887,668,580 deficit at June 30, 2019. The governmental activities deficit results
primarily from the impact of recording of the Commission's long-term debt, consisting of bonds issued for
Measure A highway, local street and road, and regional arterial projects. While a significant portion of the
debt has been incurred to build these projects which are capital assets, upon completion most projects are
transferred to Caltrans or the local jurisdiction. Accordingly, such projects are not assets of the Commission
that offset the long-term debt in the statement of net position.
Certain reclassifications have been made to 2018 amounts to conform to the 2019 presentation. Such
reclassifications had no effect on the previous reported change in net position.
6
The following is condensed financial data related to net position at June 30, 2019 and June 30, 2018:
Net Position
Governmental -Activities
2019 2018
Business-T . e Activities Total
2019 2018
2019 2018
Current and other assets
Capital assets not being depreciated
Capital assets, net of depreciation
Intangible assets, net of amortization
Total assets
Deferred outflows of resources
Total assets and deferred outflows
of resources
Long-term obligations
Other liabilities
Total liabilities
Deferred inflows of resources
Total liabilities and deferred inflows
of resources
Net position:
Net investment in capital assets
Restrided
Unrestricted (deficit)
Net position at end of year
$ 863,920,518 $ 844,630,845 $155,219,789 $ 89,085,530 $1,019,140,307 $ 933,716,375
484,129,864 379,768,175 38,736,133 43,207,039 522,865,997 422,975,214
279,626,359 280,571,027 17,317,937 22,032,516 296,944,296 302,603,543
- 239,801,144 244,045,820 239,801,144 244,045,820
1,627,676,741 1,504,970,047 451,075,003 398,370,905 2,078,751,744 1,903,340,952
40,172,143 42,863,182 277,686 310,156 40,449,829 43,173,338
1,667,848,884 1,547,833,229 451,352,689 398,681,061 2,119,201,573 1,946,514,290
926,889,816 953,564,990 669,327,649 648,538,612 1,596,217,465 1,602,103,602
126,193,666 120,668,602 56,578,412 27,877,895 182,772,078 148,546,497
1,053,083,482 1,074,233,592 725,906,061 676,416,507 1,778,989,543 1,750,650,099
623,173 505,360 42,928 31,888 666,101 537,248
1,053,706,655 1,074,738,952 725,948,989 676,448,395 1,779,655,644 1,751,187,347
706,935,587 529,178,100 (299,852,425) (286,349,191) 407,083,162 242,828,909
794,875,222 801,401,752 25,256,125 8,581,857 820,131,347 809,983,609
(887,668,580) (857,485,575) - - (887,668,580) (857,485,575)
$ 614,142,229 $ 473,094,277 $ (274,596,300) $ (277,767,334) $ 339,545,929 $195,326,943
Changes in Net Position
The Commission's total program and general revenues were $582,510,599, while the total cost of
all programs was $438,291,613. Total revenues increased by 33%, and the total cost of all programs
increased by 7%. Those who directly benefited from the programs or other governments that subsidized
certain programs with grants and contributions paid approximately 51 % of the costs of the Commission's
programs in 2019, compared to 40% of the costs in 2018. Sales taxes ultimately financed a significant
portion of the programs' net costs.
Governmental and business -type activities increased the Commission's net position by $144,218,986,
and condensed financial data related to the change in net position is presented in the table below. Key
elements of this increase are as follows:
• Charges for services increased by $7,990,327 or 16%, due to toll operations on the RCTC 91 Express
Lanes;
• Operating grants and contributions increased by $47,721,181 or 105%, primarily due to state
reimbursements related to the I-15/Limonite interchange and Jurupa and McKinley Avenue grade
separation projects;
• Capital grants and contributions increased by $7,648,154, or 11 %, primarily due to federal and state
reimbursements related to the I-15 Express Lanes and the 15/91 Express Lanes Connector projects;
• Measure A sales tax revenues increased by $24,903,339, or 14%. This increase is primarily a result
of the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) resolving the backlog of sales
tax returns due to the implementation of a new system in May 2018;
• Transportation Development Act (TDA) sales taxes increased by $20,142,673, or 18%, as a result of
an increase in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) revenues related to the CDTFA backlog resolution
and State Transit Assistance (STA) revenues;
• Unrestricted investment earnings increased $15,011,435, or 169%, due to higher interest rates and
unrealized gains on investments;
7
" O t h e r m i s c e l l a n e o u s r e v e n u e s i n c r e a s e d $ 7 6 3 , 9 3 1 , o r 3 1 % , d u e p r i m a r i l y t o t h e s a l e o f r a i l a n d
h i g h w a y p r o p e r t i e s n o t i n c l u d e d i n c a p i t a l a s s e t s ; a n d
" T h e n e t l o s s o n s a l e o f c a p i t a l a s s e t s o f $ 3 , 2 6 3 , 8 7 2 , r e l a t e d t o t h e s a l e o f e x c e s s p r o p e r t i e s r e c o r d e d
a s c a p i t a l a s s e t s .
C h a n g e s i n N e t P o s i t i o n
G o v e r n m e n t a l - A c t i v i t i e s B u s i n e s s - T . e A c t i v i t i e s
2 0 1 9 2 0 1 8
2 0 1 9 2 0 1 8
2 0 1 9
T o t a l
2 0 1 8
R e v e n u e s
P r o g r a m r e v e n u e s :
C h a r g e s f o r s e r v i c e s
O p e r a t i n g g r a n t s a n d c o n t r i b u t i o n s
C a p i t a l g r a n t s a n d c o n t r i b u t i o n s
G e n e r a l r e v e n u e s :
M e a s u r e A s a l e s t a x e s
T D A s a l e s t a x e s
U n r e s t r i c t e d i n v e s t m e n t e a r n i n g s
( l o s s )
O t h e r m i s c e l l a n e o u s r e v e n u e
G a i n ( l o s s ) o n s a l e o f c a p i t a l a s s e t s ,
n e t
$ 3 2 4 , 5 7 4
9 3 , 0 8 4 , 8 0 5
7 4 , 5 5 8 , 4 3 9
$ 3 1 0 , 8 8 4 $ 5 8 , 4 2 3 , 4 6 1 $ 5 0 , 4 4 6 , 8 2 4 $ 5 8 , 7 4 8 , 0 3 5 $ 5 0 , 7 5 7 , 7 0 8
4 5 , 3 6 3 , 6 2 4 - - 9 3 , 0 8 4 , 8 0 5 4 5 , 3 6 3 , 6 2 4
6 6 , 9 1 0 , 2 8 5 - - 7 4 , 5 5 8 , 4 3 9 6 6 , 9 1 0 , 2 8 5
2 0 1 , 2 0 4 , 9 9 5 1 7 6 , 3 0 1 , 6 5 6
1 3 1 , 0 2 1 , 2 3 0 1 1 0 , 8 7 8 , 5 5 7
2 1 , 1 3 0 , 9 5 7 8 , 9 1 6 , 3 2 1
3 , 2 6 1 , 8 7 3 2 , 4 9 7 , 9 4 2
4 4 3 , 4 6 1 -
2 , 7 6 4 , 1 3 7
( 3 , 7 0 7 , 3 3 3 )
- 2 0 1 , 2 0 4 , 9 9 5 1 7 6 , 3 0 1 , 6 5 6
- 1 3 1 , 0 2 1 , 2 3 0 1 1 0 , 8 7 8 , 5 5 7
( 3 2 , 6 6 2 ) 2 3 , 8 9 5 , 0 9 4 8 , 8 8 3 , 6 5 9
- 3 , 2 6 1 , 8 7 3 2 , 4 9 7 , 9 4 2
( 3 , 2 6 3 , 8 7 2 )
T o t a l r e v e n u e s 5 2 5 , 0 3 0 , 3 3 4 4 1 1 , 1 7 9 , 2 6 9 5 7 , 4 8 0 , 2 6 5
E x p e n s e s
G e n e r a l g o v e r n m e n t
B i c y c l e a n d p e d e s t r i a n f a c i l i t i e s
C E T A P
C o m m u t e r a s s i s t a n c e
C o m m u t e r r a i l
H i g h w a y s
L o c a l s t r e e t s a n d r o a d s
M o t o r i s t a s s i s t a n c e
P l a n n i n g a n d p r o g r a m m i n g
R e g i o n a l a r t e r i a l s
T o l l o p e r a t i o n s
T r a n s i t a n d s p e c i a l i z e d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
I n t e r e s t e x p e n s e
T o t a l e x p e n s e s
E x c e s s ( d e f i c i e n c y ) o f r e v e n u e s o v e r
( u n d e r ) e x p e n s e s
T r a n s f e r s
I n c r e a s e ( d e c r e a s e ) i n n e t p o s i t i o n
N e t p o s i t i o n a t b e g i n n i n g o f y e a r
N e t p o s i t i o n a t e n d o f y e a r
5 0 , 4 1 4 , 1 6 2 5 8 2 , 5 1 0 , 5 9 9 4 6 1 , 5 9 3 , 4 3 1
1 , 2 9 5 , 3 8 4 3 , 6 5 4 , 6 2 8 - -
2 , 3 1 9 , 8 9 5 1 , 1 4 2 , 3 0 6 - -
1 , 3 9 8 , 2 3 8 2 2 , 2 8 5 , 9 1 3 - -
3 , 6 1 2 , 8 5 5 3 , 6 6 8 , 3 0 7 - -
4 8 , 5 5 3 , 4 5 9 3 6 , 5 7 8 , 9 2 0 - -
9 1 , 0 8 6 , 6 2 3 7 9 , 2 3 4 , 8 0 2
6 1 , 4 7 0 , 3 5 9 5 3 , 6 3 9 , 6 9 8
4 , 4 0 3 , 6 7 1 3 , 8 3 5 , 6 1 2 -
4 , 3 4 0 , 6 6 0 4 , 7 5 8 , 5 0 3 -
1 7 , 0 4 8 , 4 1 3 1 2 , 8 9 7 , 5 5 7 - -
- 5 1 , 3 3 1 , 8 3 5 4 9 , 4 5 2 , 2 9 7
1 1 7 , 7 6 6 , 5 4 8 9 0 , 1 8 5 , 2 2 7 - -
3 3 , 6 6 3 , 6 7 3 4 6 , 4 2 1 , 2 1 1 -
3 8 6 , 9 5 9 , 7 7 8 3 5 8 , 3 0 2 , 6 8 4 5 1 , 3 3 1 , 8 3 5
1 3 8 , 0 7 0 , 5 5 6 5 2 , 8 7 6 , 5 8 5 6 , 1 4 8 , 4 3 0
2 , 9 7 7 , 3 9 6 ( 1 4 , 9 4 9 , 6 4 1 ) ( 2 , 9 7 7 , 3 9 6 )
4 9 , 4 5 2 , 2 9 7
9 6 1 , 8 6 5 1 4 4 , 2 1 8 , 9 8 6 5 3 , 8 3 8 , 4 5 0
1 4 , 9 4 9 , 6 4 1
1 , 2 9 5 , 3 8 4 3 , 6 5 4 , 6 2 8
2 , 3 1 9 , 8 9 5 1 , 1 4 2 , 3 0 6
1 , 3 9 8 , 2 3 8 2 2 , 2 8 5 , 9 1 3
3 , 6 1 2 , 8 5 5 3 , 6 6 8 , 3 0 7
4 8 , 5 5 3 , 4 5 9 3 6 , 5 7 8 , 9 2 0
9 0 , 4 7 4 , 6 3 9 7 9 , 2 3 4 , 8 0 2
6 1 , 4 7 0 , 3 5 9 5 3 , 6 3 9 , 6 9 8
4 , 4 0 3 , 6 7 1 3 , 8 3 5 , 6 1 2
4 , 3 4 0 , 6 6 0 4 , 7 5 8 , 5 0 3
1 7 , 0 4 8 , 4 1 3 1 2 , 8 9 7 , 5 5 7
5 1 , 9 4 3 , 8 1 9 4 9 , 4 5 2 , 2 9 7
1 1 7 , 7 6 6 , 5 4 8 9 0 , 1 8 5 , 2 2 7
3 3 , 6 6 3 , 6 7 3 4 6 , 4 2 1 , 2 1 1
4 3 8 , 2 9 1 , 6 1 3 4 0 7 , 7 5 4 , 9 8 1
1 4 1 , 0 4 7 , 9 5 2 3 7 , 9 2 6 , 9 4 4 3 , 1 7 1 , 0 3 4 1 5 , 9 1 1 , 5 0 6 1 4 4 , 2 1 8 , 9 8 6 5 3 , 8 3 8 , 4 5 0
4 7 3 , 0 9 4 , 2 7 7 4 3 5 , 1 6 7 , 3 3 3 ( 2 7 7 , 7 6 7 , 3 3 4 ) ( 2 9 3 , 6 7 8 , 8 4 0 ) 1 9 5 , 3 2 6 , 9 4 3 1 4 1 , 4 8 8 , 4 9 3
$ 6 1 4 , 1 4 2 , 2 2 9 $ 4 7 3 , 0 9 4 , 2 7 7 $ ( 2 7 4 , 5 9 6 , 3 0 0 ) $ ( 2 7 7 , 7 6 7 , 3 3 4 ) $ 3 3 9 , 5 4 5 , 9 2 9 $ 1 9 5 , 3 2 6 , 9 4 3
" G e n e r a l g o v e r n m e n t e x p e n s e s d e c r e a s e d b y $ 2 , 3 5 9 , 2 4 4 , o r 6 5 % , p r i m a r i l y d u e t o a d m i n i s t r a t i v e
c o s t a l l o c a t i o n s ;
" B i c y c l e a n d p e d e s t r i a n f a c i l i t i e s e x p e n s e s i n c r e a s e d b y $ 1 , 1 7 7 , 5 8 9 , o r 1 0 3 % , d u e t o a n i n c r e a s e i n
c l a i m s s u b m i t t e d f o r a p p r o v e d p r o j e c t s ;
" C E T A P e x p e n s e s d e c r e a s e d b y $ 2 0 , 8 8 7 , 6 7 5 , o r 9 4 % , p r i m a r i l y d u e t o a s e t t l e m e n t a g r e e m e n t o n
t h e M i d C o u n t y P a r k w a y p r o j e c t i n t h e p r e v i o u s y e a r ;
" C o m m u t e r r a i l e x p e n s e s i n c r e a s e d b y $ 1 1 , 9 7 4 , 5 3 9 , o r 3 3 % , a s a r e s u l t o f c o m m u t e r r a i l s t a t i o n
o p e r a t i n g a n d r e h a b i l i t a t i o n c o s t s ;
8
" H i g h w a y e x p e n s e s i n c r e a s e d b y $ 1 1 , 8 5 1 , 8 2 1 , o r 1 5 % , d u e t o S R - 6 0 T r u c k L a n e s , I - 1 5 E x p r e s s L a n e s ,
1 5 / 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s C o n n e c t o r , I - 1 5 / L i m o n i t e i n t e r c h a n g e , a n d J u r u p a a n d M c K i n l e y A v e n u e
g r a d e s e p a r a t i o n p r o j e c t s ;
" L o c a l s t r e e t s a n d r o a d s e x p e n s e s i n c r e a s e d b y $ 7 , 8 3 0 , 6 6 1 o r 1 5 % , b e c a u s e o f a n i n c r e a s e i n t h e
o v e r a l l M e a s u r e A s a l e s t a x r e v e n u e w h i c h a f f e c t s t h e l o c a l s t r e e t s a n d r o a d d i s t r i b u t i o n s t o l o c a l
j u r i s d i c t i o n s ;
" M o t o r i s t a s s i s t a n c e e x p e n s e s i n c r e a s e d b y $ 5 6 8 , 0 5 9 , o r 1 5 % , d u e p r i m a r i l y t o n e w f r e e w a y s e r v i c e
p a t r o l b e a t s i n s o u t h W e s t e r n C o u n t y ;
" P l a n n i n g a n d p r o g r a m m i n g e x p e n s e s d e c r e a s e d b y $ 4 1 7 , 8 4 3 , o r 9 % , d u e t o f e a s i b i l i t y s t u d i e s i n
t h e p r e v i o u s y e a r ;
" R e g i o n a l a r t e r i a l e x p e n s e s i n c r e a s e d b y $ 4 , 1 5 0 , 8 5 6 , o r 3 2 % , a s a r e s u l t o f a n e t i n c r e a s e i n
r e i m b u r s e m e n t s t o l o c a l j u r i s d i c t i o n s f o r a p p r o v e d r e g i o n a l a r t e r i a l p r o j e c t s ;
" T o l l o p e r a t i o n s e x p e n s e s i n c r e a s e d b y $ 1 , 8 7 9 , 5 3 8 , o r 4 % , a s a r e s u l t o f a n e t i n c r e a s e i n o p e r a t i n g
c o s t s a n d i n c r e a s e d d e p r e c i a t i o n a n d i n t e r e s t e x p e n s e f o r t h e R C T C 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s ;
" T r a n s i t a n d s p e c i a l i z e d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n e x p e n s e s i n c r e a s e d b y $ 2 7 , 5 8 1 , 3 2 1 , o r 3 1 % , d u e t o a n
i n c r e a s e i n b u s t r a n s i t o p e r a t i n g a n d c a p i t a l c l a i m s i n a l l t h r e e g e o g r a p h i c a r e a s ; a n d
" I n t e r e s t e x p e n s e s r e l a t e d t o g o v e r n m e n t a l a c t i v i t i e s d e c r e a s e d b y $ 1 2 , 7 5 7 , 5 3 8 o r 2 7 % , p r i m a r i l y a s
a r e s u l t o f t h e i m p a c t s o f t h e i s s u a n c e o f s a l e s t a x r e v e n u e r e f u n d i n g b o n d s i n t h e p r e v i o u s y e a r ; a n d
" I n t e r n a l t r a n s f e r s d e c r e a s e d $ 1 7 , 9 2 7 , 0 3 7 , o r 1 2 0 % , d u e t o t h e t r a n s f e r o f c a p i t a l a n d i n t a n g i b l e
a s s e t s f r o m g o v e r n m e n t a l a c t i v i t i e s t o b u s i n e s s - t y p e a c t i v i t i e s i n t h e p r i o r y e a r a s a r e s u l t o f t h e
c o n t i n u e d c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e 9 1 P r o j e c t .
9
The graphs below present the program and general revenues by source and program expenses for the
Commission's governmental activities for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2019 and June 30, 2018:
$200,000,000
$175,000,000
$150,000,000
$125,000,000
$100,000,000
$75,000,000
$50,000,000
$25,000,000
$0
■ 2019
■ 2018
$140,000,000
$120,000,000
$100,000,000
$80,000,000
$60,000,000
$40,000,000
$20,000,000
$-
Revenues - Governmental Activities
1.
Charges for
services
Operating Capital grants
grants and and
contributions contributions
Measure A TDA sales
sales taxes taxes
$324,574 $93,084,805 $74,558,439 $201,204,995 $131,021,230
$310,884 $45,363,624 $66,910,285 $176,301,656 $110,878,557
Expenses - Governmental Activities
Unrestricted
investment
earnings
$21,130,957
$8,916,321
Other
miscellaneous
revenue
$3,261,873
$2,497,942
Gain on sale of
capital assets,
net
$443,461
$0
iliI l_r
Bicycle and Transit and
General Commuter Local streets Motorist Planning and Regional Interest
government pedestrian CETAP assistance Commuter rail Highways and roads assistance programming arterials specialized expense
facilities transportation
■ 2019 $1,295,384 $2,319,895 $1,398,238 $3,612,855 $48,553,459 $91,086,623 $61,470,359 $4,403,671 $4,340,660 $17,048,413 $117,766,548 $33,663,673
$3,654,628 $1,142,306 $22,285,913 $3,668,307 $36,578,920 $79,234,802 $53,639,698 $3,835,612 $4,758,503 $12,897,557 $90,185,227 $46,421,211
■ 2018
10
The graphs below present the program and general revenues by source and program expenses for the
Commission's business -type activities for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2019 and June 30, 2018:
Expenses- Business -Type Activities
$51,500,000
$51,000,000
$50,5 00,000
$50,000,000
$49,5 00,000
$49,000,000
$48,5 00,000
12019
2018
RCTC91 Express Lanes
$51,331,835
$49,452,2 97
$61,000,000
$57,000,0 00
$53,000,0 00
$49 ,000,0 00
$45 ,000,0 00
$41,000,0 00
$37,000,0 00
$33,000,0 00
$29,000,0 00
$25 ,000,0 00
$21,000,0 00
$17,000,000
$13,000,000
$9,000,000
$5,000,000
$1,000,000
-$3,000,000
Revenue - Business -Type Activities
1
Chargesfor
services
Unrestricted
investment
earnings(loss)
Loss on sale of
capital assets
■ 2019 $58,423,461 $2,764,137-$3,707,333
■ 2018 $50,446,824-$32,662 $0
Financial Analysis of the Commission's Funds
Governmental Funds
The focus of the Commission's governmental funds is to provide information on a near -term inflows,
outflows, and balances of spendable resources. Such information is useful in assessing the Commission's
financing requirements.
As of June 30, 2019, the Commission's governmental funds reported combined ending fund balances of
$790,214,073, an increase of$14,176,533 compared to 2018. Less than 1 %, or$4,020,972, is nonspendable
fund balance related to prepaid amounts; $3,226,466 is assigned fund balance for general government
administration activities; an unassigned deficit of $1,272,356 is related to a deficit fund balance in a major
governmental fund. The remainder of the fund balance is restricted to indicate the following externally
enforceable legal restrictions:
• $7,474,877 in TDA funds that have been allocated to jurisdictions within the County for bicycle and
pedestrian projects;
• $52,262,879 of TUMF funds for new CETAP corridors in Western County;
• $16,004,237 for Western County commuter assistance activities such as expansion of park -and -ride
facilities and other projects and programs that encourage commuters to use alternative modes of
transportation under the 2009 Measure A program;
• $62,650,271 in TDA, Measure A, and Proposition 1 B funds for commuter rail operations and capital
projects and $3,071,729 in TDA and Proposition 1 B funds for the Coachella Valley/San Gorgonio
Pass rail corridor;
11
" $ 1 1 , 4 3 7 , 1 4 9 i n 2 0 0 9 M e a s u r e A f u n d s a v a i l a b l e t o p a y s a l e s t a x r e v e n u e b o n d s d e b t s e r v i c e o v e r
t h e n e x t y e a r ;
" $ 3 0 3 , 5 8 1 , 3 3 0 f o r h i g h w a y , e c o n o m i c d e v e l o p m e n t , a n d n e w c o r r i d o r p r o j e c t s r e l a t e d t o t h e 1 9 8 9
M e a s u r e A a n d 2 0 0 9 M e a s u r e A p r o g r a m s ;
" $ 3 , 1 8 5 f o r l o c a l s t r e e t s a n d r o a d s p r o g r a m s t h a t a r e r e t u r n e d t o t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n s w i t h i n t h e C o u n t y
f o r m a i n t e n a n c e a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e i r r o a d s a n d l o c a l a r t e r i a l s u n d e r t h e 2 0 0 9 M e a s u r e A
p r o g r a m ;
" $ 1 0 , 5 0 1 , 5 1 1 i n s t a t e f u n d s f o r m o t o r i s t a s s i s t a n c e s e r v i c e s ;
" $ 5 , 2 5 0 , 4 0 5 o f T D A f u n d s f o r p l a n n i n g a n d p r o g r a m m i n g a c t i v i t i e s a n d $ 1 7 , 0 1 7 o f i n t e r g o v e r n m e n t a l
r e v e n u e s f o r o t h e r a g e n c y p r o j e c t s ;
" $ 4 4 , 4 8 2 , 6 8 5 a n d $ 5 7 , 3 9 0 , 4 5 3 f o r r e g i o n a l a r t e r i a l p r o j e c t s i n W e s t e r n C o u n t y r e l a t e d t o t h e 2 0 0 9
M e a s u r e A a n d T U M F p r o g r a m s , r e s p e c t i v e l y ;
" $ 9 , 9 9 1 , 5 7 4 o f M e a s u r e A f u n d s f o r t r a n s i t a n d s p e c i a l i z e d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i n t h e W e s t e r n C o u n t y a n d
$ 1 , 9 0 3 , 2 4 6 f o r s p e c i a l i z e d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i n t h e C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y ; a n d
" $ 1 9 8 , 2 1 6 , 4 4 3 i n T D A f u n d s a v a i l a b l e t o t h e c o m m u t e r r a i l a n d b u s t r a n s i t o p e r a t i o n s a n d c a p i t a l i n
t h e C o u n t y .
T h e f o l l o w i n g t a b l e p r e s e n t s t h e c h a n g e s i n f u n d b a l a n c e s f o r t h e g o v e r n m e n t a l f u n d s f o r t h e f i s c a l y e a r s
e n d e d J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 1 9 a n d 2 0 1 8 :
F u n d B a l a n c e s
Y e a r E n d e d J u n e 3 0
2 0 1 9 2 0 1 8 % C h a n g e
G e n e r a l f u n d
S p e c i a l R e v e n u e m a j o r f u n d s :
M e a s u r e A W e s t e r n C o u n t y
M e a s u r e A C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n U n i f o r m M i t i g a t i o n F e e
L o c a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d
S t a t e T r a n s i t A s s i s t a n c e
S B 1 3 2
C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s m a j o r f u n d s :
C o m m e r c i a l P a p e r
B o n d s
D e b t S e r v i c e f u n d
N o n m a j o r g o v e r n m e n t a l f u n d s
$ 2 9 , 1 2 4 , 2 6 9
$ 2 6 , 0 4 0 , 4 9 4
2 5 3 , 9 2 5 , 6 0 2 2 7 6 , 9 9 7 , 3 0 2
5 6 , 4 1 0 , 4 7 4 5 2 , 0 6 8 , 0 7 6
1 0 9 , 6 5 3 , 3 3 2 7 8 , 4 0 9 , 9 8 7
9 1 , 5 4 1 , 3 5 3 1 1 0 , 4 3 5 , 8 5 4
1 0 7 , 4 6 9 , 4 1 1 8 8 , 1 4 3 , 3 4 1
( 1 , 2 7 2 , 3 5 6 ) ( 2 6 8 , 7 5 4 )
1 2 %
( 8 ) %
8 %
4 0 %
( 1 7 ) %
2 2 %
3 7 3 %
2 3 , 0 9 1 , 6 5 9 2 1 , 5 7 6 , 3 1 6 7 %
8 8 , 5 6 1 , 8 0 5 9 5 , 3 4 3 , 6 4 4 ( 7 ) %
1 1 , 4 3 7 , 1 4 9 1 1 , 0 8 2 , 9 0 9 3 %
2 0 , 2 7 1 , 3 7 5 1 6 , 2 0 8 , 3 7 1 2 5 %
K e y e l e m e n t s f o r t h e c h a n g e s i n f u n d b a l a n c e s a r e a s f o l l o w s :
" T h e 1 2 % i n c r e a s e i n t h e G e n e r a l f u n d r e s u l t e d f r o m i n c r e a s e d t r a n s f e r s f r o m t h e L o c a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n
F u n d a n d 2 0 0 9 M e a s u r e A W e s t e r n C o u n t y S p e c i a l R e v e n u e F u n d f o r c o m m u t e r r a i l a n d r e l a t e d
s t a t i o n o p e r a t i o n s ;
" T h e 8 % d e c r e a s e i n t h e M e a s u r e A W e s t e r n C o u n t y S p e c i a l R e v e n u e f u n d w a s a t t r i b u t e d t o
i n c r e a s e d h i g h w a y p r o j e c t s ;
" T h e 8 % i n c r e a s e i n t h e M e a s u r e A C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y S p e c i a l R e v e n u e f u n d w a s a t t r i b u t e d t o e x c e s s
2 0 0 9 M e a s u r e A r e v e n u e s o v e r e x p e n d i t u r e s f o r C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y h i g h w a y a n d r e g i o n a l a r t e r i a l
p r o j e c t s ;
" T h e 4 0 % i n c r e a s e i n t h e T U M F S p e c i a l R e v e n u e f u n d w a s p r i m a r i l y a t t r i b u t a b l e t o a s e t t l e m e n t
a g r e e m e n t o n t h e M i d C o u n t y P a r k w a y p r o j e c t i n t h e p r i o r y e a r ;
1 2
" T h e 1 7 % d e c r e a s e i n t h e L o c a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d r e s u l t e d f r o m t h e e x c e s s o f c l a i m s o f a l l o c a t i o n s
f o r t r a n s i t o p e r a t i o n s a n d c a p i t a l p r o j e c t s a n d f o r b i c y c l e a n d p e d e s t r i a n f a c i l i t y p r o j e c t s o v e r s a l e s
t a x r e v e n u e s ;
" T h e 2 2 % i n c r e a s e i n t h e S t a t e T r a n s i t A s s i s t a n c e f u n d r e s u l t e d f r o m l e s s c l a i m s f o r a l l o c a t i o n s f o r
t r a n s i t o p e r a t i o n s o v e r s a l e s t a x r e v e n u e s ;
" T h e 3 7 3 % i n c r e a s e i n t h e S B 1 3 2 f u n d d e f i c i t r e s u l t e d f r o m t h e r e i m b u r s e m e n t s d u e f r o m t h e
D e p a r t m e n t o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n f o r e l i g i b l e p r o j e c t r e i m b u r s e m e n t s ;
" T h e 7 % i n c r e a s e i n t h e C o m m e r c i a l P a p e r C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s f u n d w a s a t t r i b u t e d t o i n c r e a s e d
i n v e s t m e n t i n c o m e ;
" T h e 7 % d e c r e a s e i n t h e B o n d s C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s f u n d w a s a t t r i b u t e d t o t r a n s f e r s o u t f o r p r o j e c t c o s t s ;
" T h e 3 % i n c r e a s e i n t h e D e b t S e r v i c e f u n d w a s a t t r i b u t a b l e t o i n c r e a s e d i n v e s t m e n t i n c o m e ; a n d
" T h e 2 5 % i n c r e a s e i n n o n m a j o r g o v e r n m e n t a l f u n d s r e s u l t e d p r i m a r i l y f r o m t h e e x c e s s o f s a l e s t a x
r e v e n u e s o v e r c l a i m s o f a l l o c a t i o n s f o r t r a n s i t c a p i t a l p r o j e c t s a n d a n i n c r e a s e i n m o t o r i s t a s s i s t a n c e
r e v e n u e s f o r f r e e w a y s e r v i c e p a t r o l s e r v i c e s .
P r o p r i e t a r y F u n d
T h e C o m m i s s i o n '