Loading...
04 April 27, 2020 Budget & Implementation MEETING AGENDA Budget and Implementation Committee Time: 9:30 a.m. Date: April 27, 2020 Pursuant to Governor Newsom’s Executive Order N-29-20, (March 18, 2020), the Governing Board meeting will only be conducted via video conferencing and by telephone. COMMITTEE MEMBERS Lloyd White, Chair / Julio Martinez, City of Beaumont Randall Bonner, Vice Chair / Jeremy Smith, City of Canyon Lake Larry Smith / Linda Molina, City of Calimesa Raymond Gregory / Mark Carnevale, City of Cathedral City Steven Hernandez / Megan Beaman Jacinto, City of Coachella Linda Krupa, / Russ Brown, City of Hemet Scott Matas / Russell Betts, City of Desert Hot Springs Bob Magee / Natasha Johnson, City of Lake Elsinore Lisa Middleton / Dennis Woods, City of Palm Springs Rusty Bailey, / Andy Melendrez, City of Riverside Ben J. Benoit / Joseph Morabito, City of Wildomar Karen Spiegel, County of Riverside, District II Chuck Washington, County of Riverside, District III STAFF Anne Mayer, Executive Director Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY Annual Budget Development and Oversight Competitive Federal and State Grant Programs Countywide Communications and Outreach Programs Countywide Strategic Plan Legislation Public Communications and Outreach Programs Short Range Transit Plans RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 9:30 a.m. Monday, April 27, 2020 Pursuant to Governor Newsom’s Executive Order N-29-20, (March 18, 2020), the Budget and Implementation Committee meeting will only be conducted via video conferencing and by telephone. Please follow the instructions below to join the meeting remotely. INSTRUCTIONS FOR ELECTRONIC PARTICIPATION Join Zoom Meeting - from PC, Laptop or Phone https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87128733383 Meeting ID: 871 2873 3383 One tap mobile +16699006833,,87128733383# US (San Jose) Dial by your location +1 669 900 6833 US Meeting ID: 871 2873 3383 For members of the public wishing to submit comment in connection with the Budget and Implementation Committee Meeting please email written comments to the Clerk of the Board at lmobley@rctc.org prior to April 26, 2020 at 5:00 p.m. and your comments will be made part of the official record of the proceedings and read into the record. Members of the public may also make public comments through their telephone or Zoom connection when recognized by the Chair. 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 on the Commission’s website, www.rctc.org. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, Government Code Section 54954.2, Executive Order N-29-20, 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 Committee 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. Budget and Implementation Committee April 27, 2020 Page 2 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS – Under the Brown Act, the Board should not take action on or discuss matters raised during public comment portion of the agenda which are not listed on the agenda. Board members may refer such matters to staff for factual information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration. Each individual speaker is limited to speak three (3) continuous minutes or less. 4. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS (The Committee 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 Committee subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Committee. If there are less than 2/3 of the Committee 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.) 5. 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. 5A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – FEBRUARY 24, 2020 Page 1 5B. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS Page 13 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 3, 2019 (3Q 2019); and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 5C. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT Page 22 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the Single Signature Authority report for the third quarter ended March 31, 2020; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. Budget and Implementation Committee April 27, 2020 Page 3 5D. FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION’S SECTION 5310 ENHANCED MOBILITY FOR SENIORS AND INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES PROGRAM FEDERAL FISCAL YEARS 2017/18 AND 2018/19 Page 24 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 20-007, “Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Certifying Project Consistency with the Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Coordinated Plan”; 2) Direct staff to program the projects in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP); and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 5E. LOW CARBON TRANSIT OPERATIONS PROGRAM Page 38 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 20-006 “Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding Authorization for the Execution of the Certifications and Assurances and Authorized Agent Forms for the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program for Expanded Perris Valley Line Operations FY 21 Project in the Amount of $1,081,302”; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 6. REVISED FISCAL YEAR 2020 AND FISCAL YEAR 2021 REVENUE PROJECTIONS FOR MEASURE A, LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND, AND TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE Page 42 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the revised mid-year Fiscal Year 2019/20 revenue projections of $178 million for 2009 Measure A (Measure A) revenues, $91 million for Local Transportation Fund (LTF) revenues and $16 million for Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) revenues; 2) Approve the revised FY 2020/21 revenue projections of $160 million for Measure A revenues, $82 million for LTF revenues, and $11 million for TUMF revenues; Budget and Implementation Committee April 27, 2020 Page 4 3) Approve the budget decrease adjustments to Measure A revenues of $24 million and expenditures of $9.91 million to reflect the revised FY 2019/20 Measure A projection; 4) Approve the budget decrease adjustments to LTF revenues of $12 million, transfers in of $360,000, and expenditures and transfers out of $450,000 to reflect the revised FY 2019/20 LTF projection; 5) Approve the budget decrease adjustments to TUMF revenues of $11 million to reflect the revised FY 2019/20 TUMF projection; and 6) Forward to the Commission for final action. 7. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Page 52 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislation; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 8. CITIZENS AND SPECIALIZED TRANSIT ADVISORY COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP APPOINTMENTS Page 66 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the appointments of 15 members to the Citizens and Specialized Transit Advisory Council (CSTAC) effective May 13, 2020; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 9. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 10. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT Overview This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and staff to report on attended and upcoming meeting/conferences and issues related to Commission activities. 11. ADJOURNMENT The next Budget and Implementation Committee meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Monday, June 22, 2020, Board Chambers, First Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. AGENDA ITEM 5A MINUTES RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE Monday, February 24, 2020 MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the Budget and Implementation Committee was called to order by Chair Linda Krupa at 9:35 a.m., in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. ROLL CALL Members/Alternates Present Members Absent Rusty Bailey Ben J. Benoit Randall Bonner Steven Hernandez Raymond Gregory Linda Krupa Bob Magee Scott Matas* Larry Smith Karen Spiegel* Chuck Washington Lloyd White Dennis Woods* *Arrived after meeting was called to order. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Karen Spiegel led the Budget and Implementation Committee in a flag salute. 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no requests to speak from the public. 5. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS There were no additions or revisions to the agenda. 1 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 24, 2020 Page 2 6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – NOVEMBER 25, 2019 M/S/C (Bailey/Gregory) to approve the minutes of November 25, 2019 meeting as submitted. 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. M/S/C (Gregory/Spiegel) to approve the following Consent Calendar item(s): 7A. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS 1) Receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 2, 2019; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 7B. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT 1) Receive and file the Single Signature Authority report for the second quarter ended December 31, 2019; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 8. REFINANCING OF 91 EXPRESS LANES TOLL DEBT Michele Cisneros, Deputy Director of Finance, presented the refinancing of RCTC 91 Express Lanes Toll debt, highlighting the following areas: • Current 91 Express Lanes Toll Debt • Refinancing process • Financing team At this time, Michele Cisneros welcomed and introduced Anna Sarabian, Principal, Fieldman, Rolapp & Associates, Inc. to present the proposed 2020 refinancing Plan, highlighting the following: At this time, Commissioners Scott Matas and Dennis Woods joined the meeting. • Proposed 2020 refinancing plan: o Toll Revenue Senior Lien Bonds (2013A Bonds) & TIFIA Loan o Issue 2020 Refunding Toll Bonds o Achieve debt service savings o Flexibility to fund or accelerate 91 Corridor Projects • 2020 Refinancing Toll Bonds sources and uses • Required disclosures 2 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 24, 2020 Page 3 At this time, Michele Cisneros presented the required refinancing disclosure documents, and approvals, highlighting the following: • 2020 refinancing documents and approvals • 2020 refinancing timeline • Why refinance now o Benefit to RCTC: Reduce interest costs; Capture additional near-term surplus toll revenues; Eliminate TIFIA loan restrictions; Ensure local control and future flexibility o Current market conditions: Historically low interest rates and large amounts of investor cash available; Current interest rates reflect market’s expectation of future events; 2013 TIFIA Loan outstanding balance increases daily; and 2013 A Bonds slightly cheaper to refund as 2023 call date nears Commissioner Larry Smith expressed appreciation for the presentation as it was as precise and clear as it could possibly be in a complex situation. He stated there was indication of an $18 million potential savings and inquired if those funds are dedicated back to the 91 Corridor and if that would be the case for any future refinancing of debt projects. Anna Sarabian replied yes because they are refinancing 91 debt secured by toll revenues from the 91 Projects so those savings can only be applied to projects in the corridor. In response to Commissioner Karen Spiegel’s inquiry about the bond RCTC is trying to sell for $725 million, Anna Sarabian replied that is the not to exceed amount. Commissioner Spiegel stated if that is what the Commission was going to do and Ms. Sarabian is saying that the debt all said and done is going to be $1.1 billion. Anna Sarabian replied that is total principle and interest. In response to Commissioner Spiegel’s clarification if the Commission were not going to go with this route how much debt does the Commission have looking at total principal and interest, Anna Sarabian replied they had the total principal earlier and currently the TIFIA Loan is at $481 million but it will keep accruing and compounding interest until December 2021 so it will be more than that, plus the $123 million and the interest payments. The total combined is higher than the new refunded debt service because this is being done for savings. In response to Commissioner Spiegel’s inquiry what approximate is the savings, which is more than $18 million, Anna Sarabian replied the $18 million is a net present value savings so the gross savings are actually a lot higher. 3 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 24, 2020 Page 4 Anne Mayer explained the $18 million is a net present value and asked for confirmation from Ms. Sarabian or Ms. Cisneros that with this refinancing the Commission would also be out of debt sooner. Anna Sarabian concurred. She stated under this refinancing plan the team is looking to actually prepay the debt three years sooner than currently contemplated so savings, getting out of debt sooner, and removing the restrictions on TIFIA. M/S/C (Bailey/Smith) to: 1) Receive and file the presentation regarding the refinancing of the Commission’s Toll Revenue Senior Lien Bonds, 2013 Series A (2013A Bonds) and 2013 Transportation Infrastructure Financing and Innovation Act (TIFIA) Loan (2013 TIFIA Loan) related to the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (91 Project) with the issuance of taxable and tax- exempt senior lien and second lien toll revenue refunding bonds (2020 Refunding Toll Bonds); 2) Approve the refinancing plan to refund all or a portion of the 2013A Bonds, currently outstanding in the amount of $123.8 million, and prepay all or a portion of the 2013 TIFIA Loan, currently outstanding in the amount of approximately $481 million; 3) Adopt Resolution No. 20-001, “Resolution Authorizing the Issuance and Sale of Not to Exceed $725,000,000 Aggregate Principal Amount of Riverside County Transportation Commission Toll Revenue Refunding Bonds in One or More Series, the Refunding of Outstanding Bonds, the Execution and Delivery of One or More Supplemental Indentures, One or More Purchase Contracts, One or More Official Statements, One or More Continuing Disclosure Agreements and One or More Escrow Agreements, the Adoption of a Restated Debt Management Policy, and the Taking of All Other Actions Necessary in Connection Therewith”; 4) Approve the proposed form of the Preliminary Official Statement for the issuance of not to exceed $725 million in 2020 Refunding Toll Bonds and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the printing and distribution of the final form of the Official Statement; 5) Approve the proposed form of the Continuing Disclosure Agreement related to the 2020 Refunding Toll Bonds, by and between the Riverside County Transportation Commission and Digital Assurance Certification, L.L.C., as dissemination agent, and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the final form of the Continuing Disclosure Agreement; 6) Approve the proposed forms of the Third Supplemental Indenture and Fourth Supplemental Indenture for the 2020 Refunding Toll Bonds, each by and between the Riverside County Transportation Commission and U.S. Bank National Association (US Bank), as Trustee, and authorize the 4 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 24, 2020 Page 5 Executive Director to approve and execute the final forms of the Third Supplemental Indenture and Fourth Supplemental Indenture; 7) Approve the proposed form of the Bond Purchase Agreement(s), also referred to as Purchase Contract(s), between the Riverside County Transportation Commission and Bank of America Securities, Inc. (BofA), as Underwriter Representative acting on behalf of itself and Goldman, Sachs & Co. (Goldman), Wells Fargo Securities (Wells Fargo), J.P. Morgan (JPM), and Siebert Cisneros Shank & Co., LLC (Siebert), (collectively the Underwriters), for the 2020 Refunding Toll Bonds and authorize the Chief Financial Officer to approve and execute the final form of the Bond Purchase Agreement; 8) Approve the proposed form of the Escrow Agreement, by and between the Commission and US Bank, as Escrow Agent, and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the final Escrow Agreement; 9) Approve the estimated costs of issuance, including estimated underwriter’s discount, of $4,477,065 to be paid from the proceeds of the 2020 Refunding Toll Bonds; 10) Approve Agreement No. 05-19-510-17, Amendment No. 17 to Agreement No. 05-19-510-00, with Orrick, Herrington, & Sutcliffe LLP (Orrick) for bond counsel services related to the issuance of the 2020 Refunding Toll Bonds for an additional amount of $325,000 and a total amount not to exceed $3,330,000; 11) Approve Agreement No. 09-19-072-15, Amendment No. 15 to Agreement No. 09-19-072-00, with Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP (Norton Rose) for disclosure counsel services related to the issuance of the 2020 Refunding Toll Bonds for an additional amount of $155,000 and a total amount not to exceed $1,022,600; 12) Approve adjustments to the Fiscal Year 2019/20 budget in the amounts of $672,951,600 to increase sources related to the issuance of the 2020 Refunding Toll Bonds and $631,984,300 to increase uses related to the use of the proceeds of the 2020 Refunding Toll Bonds; and 13) Forward to the Commission for final action. Abstain: White 9. AGREEMENT WITH EIDE BAILLY FOR AUDIT SERVICES Michele Cisneros presented the agreement for audit services, highlighting the following areas: • Scope of audit services • Proposed costs and score ranking At this time Commissioner Bailey left the meeting. 5 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 24, 2020 Page 6 In response to Commissioner Dennis Woods’ inquiry about the three-year option is almost $100,000 more per year and if that is standard for a one-year audit, Michele Cisneros replied it is and their values do increase over the years; that is common amongst many accounting firms and it is consistent with the proposals that were received. She stated each year they gain additional experience on the Commission’s audit and they include additional work as far as opining to the Commission’s financial statements. M/S/C (Washington/Spiegel) to: 1) Award Agreement No. 20-19-021-00 to Eide Bailly LLP (Eide Bailly) for audit services for a three-year term, with three one-year options to extend the agreement, for $1,461,198, plus a contingency in the amount of $138,802, for a total amount not to exceed $1.6 million; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to finalize and execute the agreement, including options years, on behalf of the Commission; 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work up to the total not to exceed amount as required for these audit services; and 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. 10. FISCAL YEAR 2019/20 MID-YEAR BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS Michele Cisneros, presented the FY 2019/20 mid-year budget adjustments, highlighting the following: • FY 2019/20 Mid-Year Budget Adjustments for revenue Adjustments 1 and 2 and expenditures Adjustments 1, 2, and 3 for a total excess revenues over (under) expenditures of $535,000 M/S/C (Smith/Washington) to: 1) Approve Fiscal Year 2019/20 mid-year budget adjustments for a net increase of $22,041,000 and $21,506,000 in revenues and expenditures/expenses, respectively; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 11. PROPOSED POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020/21 BUDGET Michele Cisneros, presented the proposed Policy Goals and Objectives for FY 2020/21 Budget, highlighting the following areas: • Budget development – Commission Goals and Policies; Department Goals and Objectives; and Budget Development and Adoption 6 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 24, 2020 Page 7 • Commission Goals and Objectives – Quality of Life; Operational Excellence; Connecting the Economy; and Responsible Partner • Guiding Fiscal Policies – Financial planning; Revenues; Expenditures/expenses; Debt management; Cash management; and Accounting and reporting • Next steps Commissioner Raymond Gregory explained in reviewing the goals he wanted to know where the rail service initiative for the San Gorgonio-Coachella Valley rail line was, as he thought he missed it. He clarified it is still listed under Regional Programs but it reads the Commission will provide leadership in the planning and development of this line and his understanding was the Commission had stronger language before and inquired if this has changed. He noted hearing from advocacy groups that Commission staff indicated there is a softening in the commitment to this line basically because it is very difficult. Anne Mayer stated staff will go back and look at the wording as she did not recall that this wording has changed. She expressed that it is absolutely not true of staff’s position on this important corridor is softening at all. This is a very complicated project as evidenced by being four years the Commission has been in on a Tier 1 environmental document that had hoped it would be circulated to the public a year ago. Anne Mayer stated staff is working very closely with the Federal Railroad Administration to get their approval to release the document for public review and it should be later this year. She explained this project will require triple tracking the entire Union Pacific Line from Colton out to Indio, which is a very large expense that will likely be borne by state investments in intercity rail and possibly federal investments. She suggested staff could go out and have any conversations with the advocacy groups in the desert to ensure them of the Commission’s commitment to the project. Commissioner Gregory expressed appreciation for Anne Mayer’s comments of commitment, which is very helpful and suggested maybe part of the concern comes from the setbacks with the special train and that platform in Indio there was a lot of press particularly in the Coachella Valley. Although he heard mention of it in some of these meetings and has not had an update as to where that is so he may request that staff could come back with an update on what is the status on the entire rail project. Anne Mayer replied staff can provide an update on the status of the environmental document for the overall project as well as an update on the special event train at a future meeting. She stated in regards to the delay for running the special event train is the challenge is the Commission needs Union Pacific approval, which the Commission does not yet have. M/S/C (Bonner/Gregory) to: 1) Review and approve the proposed Commission Policy Goals and Objectives for the Fiscal Year 2020/21 Budget; 7 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 24, 2020 Page 8 2) Review and approve the Fiscal Accountability Policies for the FY 2020/21 Budget; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 12. QUARTERLY PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT METRICS REPORT, OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2019 Cheryl Donahue, Public Affairs Manager, presented the Quarterly Public Engagement Metrics reports: October – December 2019, highlighting the following areas: • Data driven approach – Adjust strategies, goals; Analyze strengths, weaknesses; Boost transparency; Began tracking January 2018; and Compare data over time • Three sets of data – Overall public engagement activities; I-15 Express Lanes Project; and 60 Truck Lanes Project • Overall public engagement efforts – Social Media: Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram • Social Media Sentiment chart • RCTC Website: Just under 40,000 visits and about 26,000 are unique users; Top pages visited: Home page is number 1, CTC Funds for I-15 Railroad Canyon Interchange number 2, Route 60 Truck Lanes Project number 3, and employment number 4; Desktop vs Mobile users: 46 percent desktop users and 54 percent mobile users • The Point E-Newsletter - 12 percent drop and average open rate at 31 percent • I-15 Express Lanes Project: Social Media slight increases on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram; Received only 10 emails and texts inquiries and 26 people signed up for construction updates; Website visits had 62,023 and went up +6,004 in the last quarter • Route 60 Truck Lanes Project: Social Media increase in Facebook likes, Twitter followers, and Instagram followers; Received only 13 emails and texts inquiries and 22 people signed up for construction updates; and 10,000 people have visited the website 1) Receive and file the Quarterly Public Engagement Metrics Report for October – December 2019; and 2) Forward to Commission for final action. 13. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Aaron Hake, External Affairs Director, provided an update for the state and federal legislative activities, including details for the implementation of SB 743. Aaron Hake welcomed and introduced David Knudsen, Legislative Affairs Manager, and acknowledged he will be giving this report from now on. In response to Commissioner Spiegel’s inquiry about SB 743 and the possibility of litigation delays, Aaron Hake referred to Anne Mayer to respond. 8 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 24, 2020 Page 9 Anne Mayer stated the CEQA process can be very challenging and it is not uncommon for CEQA documents to become the subject of litigation. One of the challenges with implementation of new processes especially implementation of new processes when the process is not fully vetted is that there is confusion. She discussed the situation when guidance comes out in a couple of weeks and they are required to implement this now. Most projects, out of abundance of caution, will have to become a full blown EIR and an EIS on the federal level, which on average takes at least four years or longer. Also, due to a lack of clarity of intent here that there will be litigants on all sides of this issue. She discussed the confusion about implementation regarding the transition period. Staff is working through the issue and Caltrans is required to do this and they are being required to do it in a really big hurry, which is where the problem comes in. Anne Mayer stated after July 1st all of the jurisdictions will be required to use vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the measure for approving or disproving environmental documents for development. She explained receiving the initial list of projects Friday evening that Caltrans believes could be impacted by the VMT and the majority of the projects are in Southern California in the SCAG Region and Riverside and San Bernardino have the highest volume of projects that could potentially be impacted. In regards to Commissioner Spiegel’s inquiry on the INFRA and the BUILD and how the same project could be submitted for both and if it is the same application type, Aaron Hake replied the applications are similar the criteria are a little bit different in each solicitation but staff is being consistent and making sure they are tailoring each application to specifically what that program is designed to fund as it is the same Secretary that will make a decision on both of these. Commissioner Larry Smith explained what was learned at the Commission’s Annual Workshop is the very measures that have been used historically to reduce VMT can backfire on the Commission and be able to now take a road that will increase the traffic and it is not going to work in the Commission’s favor. That is the simplicity of the very projects the Commission thought would decrease some of the congestion are going to have a difficult time getting through because they are going to increase VMTs. He stated this went through SCAG a few months ago and that is not the end of this conversation as VMT moves and its implementations on the Commissioners and what it means for taxes. 1) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislation; and 2) Forward to Commission for final action. 14. RIVERSIDE COUNTY 2020 FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FINANCIAL RESOLUTION Martha Masters, Senior Management Analyst, presented the Riverside County 2020 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP), highlighting the following: 9 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 24, 2020 Page 10 • What is the FTIP: A federally required document that lists transportation projects funded with federal, state, and local funds; and covers Federal Fiscal Years starting October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2026 • SCAG’s role: Through the FTIP process, SCAG performs the following five air quality conformity tests: o Consistency with SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) o Regional emission analysis o Timely implementation of Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) o Financially constraint o Interagency consultation and public involvement and public outreach • RCTC’s role: o Contact agencies for updates o Analyze and review project updates o Ensure projects complement strategies in RTP/SCS o Financially constrained • Importance of TCMs: o TCMs are specific transportation projects and programs committed to help improve air quality o A TCM-type project or program should reduce vehicle use or change traffic flow or congestion conditions o TCMs must be operational or implemented by the completion: Date committed to in the FTIP o 20 TCM projects in the 2021 FTIP: Estimated cost of $875 million o Examples of TCMs in 2021 FTIP: County of Riverside: 3,000 LF of sidewalk in Cabazon; and Riverside: 1.28 miles of sidewalk in La Sierra Neighborhood • FTIP process • 2021 FTIP Resolution: o Certify the Riverside County portion of the FTIP is financially constrained and affirm the commitment to implement the projects o Financial Constraint: Projects are not programmed in excess of anticipated fund levels o Project Commitment to the projects in the 2021 FTIP (especially TCMs) M/S/C (White/Smith) to: 1) Approve Resolution No. 20-002, “Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Certifying Riverside County Has Resources to Fund Projects in the Federal Fiscal Years 2020/21 Through 2025/26 Transportation Improvement Program and Affirming Commitment to Implement All Projects in the Program”; and 2) Forward to Commission for final action. 10 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 24, 2020 Page 11 15. ELECTION OF OFFICERS FOR THE BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE Chair Krupa stated this item is for the Budget and Implementation Committee to conduct an election of the officers for 2020. At this time, Chair Krupa opened nominations for the Chair position. Chair Krupa, seconded by Commissioner Larry Smith, nominated Vice Chair White for the Chair position for 2020. No other nominations were received. The Chair closed the nominations. Vice Chair Lloyd White was elected as the Budget and Implementation Committee’s Chair for 2020. Abstain: White At this time, Chair Krupa opened nominations for the Vice Chair position for 2020. Commissioner Lloyd White, seconded by Commissioner Larry Smith nominated Commissioner Randall Bonner as Vice Chair for 2020. No other nominations were received. The Chair closed the nominations. Commissioner Randall Bonner was elected as the Budget and Implementation Committee’s Vice Chair for 2020. Abstain: Bonner 16. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA There were no items pulled from the consent calendar. 17. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT 17A. Commissioner Gregory expressed gratitude to Chair Krupa for her services as Chair for 2019. Chair Krupa expressed appreciation for chairing the Budget and Implementation Committee for 2019. She also thanked the committee for their services for 2019 and is looking forward to 2020. 18. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Budget and Implementation Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 10:48 a.m. 11 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 24, 2020 Page 12 Respectfully submitted, Lisa Mobley Clerk of the Board 12 AGENDA ITEM 5B Agenda Item 5B RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 27, 2020 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Michele Cisneros, Deputy Director of Finance THROUGH: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Quarterly Sales Tax Analysis STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 3, 2019 (3Q 2019); and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its December 2007 meeting, the Commission awarded an agreement with MuniServices, LLC (MuniServices), an Avenu Company, for quarterly sales tax reporting services plus additional fees contingent on additional sales tax revenues generated from the transactions and use tax (sales tax) audit services. As part of the recurring contracts process in June 2018, the Commission approved a five-year extension through June 30, 2023. The services performed under this agreement pertain to only the Measure A sales tax revenues. Since the commencement of these services, MuniServices submitted audits, which reported findings and submitted to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA), for review and determination of errors in sales tax reporting related to 1,111 businesses. Through 3Q 2019, the CDTFA approved 635 of these accounts for a cumulative sales tax recovery of $10,551,666. If CDTFA concurs with the error(s) for the remaining claims, the Commission will receive additional revenues; however, the magnitude of the value of the remaining findings was not available. It is important to note that while the recoveries of additional revenues will be tangible, it will not be sufficient to alter the overall trend of sales tax revenues. MuniServices provided the Commission with the Quarterly Sales Tax Digest Summary report for 3Q 2019. Most of the 3Q 2019 Measure A sales tax revenues were received in the fourth quarter of calendar year 2019, during October 2019 through December 2019, due to a lag in the sales tax calendar. The summary section of the 3Q 2019 report is attached and includes an overview of California’s economic outlook, local results, historical cash collections analysis by quarter, top 25 sales/use tax contributors, historical sales tax amounts, annual sales tax by business category, and five-year economic trend (general retail). 13 Agenda Item 5B Taxable transactions for the top 25 contributors in Riverside County generated 24.6 percent of taxable sales for the benchmark year ended 3Q 2019, slightly higher than the 23.3 percent for the benchmark year ended 3Q 2018. The top 100 tax contributors generated 39.2 percent for the benchmark year ended 3Q 2019, slightly higher than the 37.9 percent for the benchmark year ended 3Q 2018. In the Economic Category Analysis below, all six categories experienced new highs in the 3Q 2019 benchmark year to the prior eight benchmark years. % of Total / % Change RCTC State Wide Orange County San Bernardino County S.F. Bay Area Sacramento Valley Central Valley South Coast North Coast Central Coast General Retail 28.3 / 6.4 28.2 / 2.4 30.4 / 1.4 25.7 / 0.0 25.6 / 0.9 27.5 / 4.5 28.8 / 1.6 29.5 / -0.1 30.1 / 6.6 28.7 / -1.9 Food Products 17.8 / 1.7 23.3 / 4.0 22.3 / 3.1 19.0 / 10.7 24.9 / 5.3 18.1 / 2.5 17.7 / 5.4 25.2 / 0.8 17.3 / -6.5 37.0 / 8.2 Transportation 24.2 / 1.4 26.5 / 2.4 25.6 / 6.0 26.9 / 2.2 23.9 / 0.4 30.7 / 3.3 28.7 / 4.6 26.0 / 1.2 29.9 / -9.7 23.8 / -0.6 Construction 10.8 / 4.1 8.2 / -9.4 8.3 / -13.7 9.6 / -2.0 8.7 / -8.3 10.8 / -10.8 10.2 / -7.6 6.9 / -13.0 15.9 / -5.7 6.4 / -8.2 Business to Business 16.3 / 2.9 12.8 / -7.6 12.2 / -10.4 13.8 / -15.2 15.8 / -8.0 12.1 / -0.7 13.9 / 10.7 11.6 / -12.0 6.5 / -7.1 3.6 / -16.5 Miscellaneous 2.6 / 7.8 0.9 / -15.3 1.2 / 9.5 5.0 / 37.9 1.0 / -7.5 0.9 / -12.2 0.7 / -30.1 0.9 / -21.2 0.4 / -32.2 0.5 / -19.0 Total 100.0 / 3.5 100.0/ -0.1 100 / -0.1 100.0 / 1.1 100 / -2.0 100.0 / 2.4 100.0 / 1.8 100.0 / -0.5 100.0 / -4.3 100 / -0.2 General Retail: Apparel Stores, Department Stores, Furniture/Appliances, Drug Stores, Recreation Products, Florist/Nursery, and Misc. Retail Food Products: Restaurants, Food Markets, Liquor Stores, and Food Processing Equipment Construction: Building Materials Retail and Building Materials Wholesale Transportation: Auto Parts/Repair, Auto Sales - New, Auto Sales - Used, Service Stations, and Misc. Vehicle Sales Business to Business: Office Equip., Electronic Equip., Business Services, Energy Sales, Chemical Products, Heavy Industry, Light Industry, Leasing, Biotechnology, I.T. Infrastructure, and Green Energy Miscellaneous: Health & Government, Miscellaneous Other, and Closed Account Adjustments ECONOMIC CATEGORY ANALYSIS An analysis of sales tax performance through 3Q 2019 is attached and illustrates fairly consistent cycles for sales tax performance for most of the economic categories since 3Q 2014. For 7 of the top 10 segments (restaurants, department stores, miscellaneous retail, building materials – wholesale, apparel stores, building materials – retail, and heavy industry) during the eight benchmark year quarters, sales tax receipts reached a new high point. The segments represent 49.5 percent of the total sales tax receipts. Service stations representing 7.6 percent was higher than the last five benchmark year quarters since 3Q 2014. Auto sales – new and food markets were down slightly from 3Q 2018 due to an end for new order incentives and a warehouse club chain, included under department stores, taking away food sales from grocery retailers, respectively. The top 10 segments represent 73.1 percent of the total sales tax receipts. For the other 21 segments representing 26.9 percent of the total sales tax receipts, 11 segments representing 18.6 percent of the total sales tax receipts reached new high points in the benchmark year 3Q 2019. In the Economic Segment Analysis below, auto sales – new and department stores have been in the top three economic segments since 2014. Restaurants replaced service stations in the top three economic segments beginning in 4Q 2014. The service stations segments high occurred in 4Q 2012 and declined through 1Q 2017 due to lower fuel prices; the 3Q 2019 benchmark year quarter for service stations reflects an increase over the last five benchmark year quarters since 2Q 2014 due to higher fuel prices. 14 Agenda Item 5B RCTC State Wide Orange County San Bernardino County S.F. Bay Area Sacramento Valley Central Valley South Coast North Coast Central Coast Largest Segment Restaurants Restaurants Restaurants Restaurants Restaurants Restaurants Department Stores Restaurants Department Stores Restaurants % of Total / % Change 11.5 / 4.0 16.8 / 6.2 16.8 / 5.6 11.9 / 9.4 18.1 / 6.3 12.7 / 6.9 13.7 / 6.1 18.7 / 5.8 13.4 / 16.2 25.4 / 10.3 2nd Largest Segment Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Department Stores Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Restaurants Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New % of Total / % Change 10.9/ -1.0 12.0 / 3.3 14.1 / 12.7 11.5 / 8.8 12.5 / -2.2 12.4 / 3.0 12.0 / 8.8 12.2 / 6.4 12.1 / -2.3 11.7 / -0.4 3rd Largest Segment Department Stores Department Stores Department Stores Service Stations Department Stores Department Stores Auto Sales - New Department Stores Restaurants Misc Retail % of Total / % Change 10.1 / 8.2 9.8 / 4.1 9.7 / 4.1 10.5 / 3.5 7.9 / 1.3 11.5 / 8.8 11.1 / 4.6 9.5 / 3.6 10.6 / -5.0 10.5 / 1.5 ECONOMIC SEGMENT ANALYSIS As reported in the 3Q 2018 Sales Tax Analysis Report, staff notified the Commission of a reporting error by one of the top 25 sales/use tax contributors related to a misallocation of the district tax to the Commission during 2Q 2018 through 4Q 2018, resulting in an overpayment to the Commission estimated in the amount of $2.5 million. Staff is not certain in which period the misallocation correction will be completed; however, the Fiscal Year 2019/20 sales tax revenues after the correction are expected to continue to reflect an increase over the FY 2018/19 revenues. Information regarding sales tax comparison by city and change in economic segments (two highest gains and two highest losses) from 3Q 2018 to 3Q 2019 is attached. Staff continues to monitor sales tax receipts and other available economic data to determine the need for any adjustments to the revenue projections. Staff will utilize the forecast scenarios with the complete report and receipt trends in assessing such projections. Attachments: 1) Sales Tax Digest Summary 3Q 2019 2) Sales Tax Performance Analysis by Quarter 3Q 2019 3) Quarterly Sales Tax Comparison by City for 3Q 2018 to 3Q 2019 15 Riverside County Transportation Commission Sales Tax Digest Summary Collections through December 2019 Sales through September 2019 (2019Q3) www.avenuinsights.com (800) 800‐8181 Page 1 CALIFORNIA’S ECONOMIC OUTLOOK  California sales tax receipts decreased by ‐8.5% over the same quarter from the previous year, with  Northern California reporting a ‐9.8% decrease compared to a ‐7.5% for Southern California. Receipts for  the RCTC decreased by ‐12.3% over the same periods. Large decreases were mostly due to the California  Department of Tax and Fee Administration implementation of a new reporting system and the  processing of many sales tax returns filed for the for previous quarters in Q3 of the previous year.  Online Sales Tax Windfall: A new California law, (AB147), aimed at collecting sales tax from third‐ party retailers using online platforms like Amazon, ebay, Walmart, Etsy to sell taxable goods in California  generated nearly $475 million in Sales Tax in the fourth quarter of 2019. That is nearly as much as the  $476 million that state and federal agencies, and many tax experts predicted it would generate for an  entire year! (CalMatters, March 4, 2020)  COVID‐19 (Corona Virus): The impact of the virus on the overall economy so far has been mostly to reduce supply and not demand. Though the effect is likely to be temporary, fear has had an impact on  consumer behaviors that may negatively impact “foot traffic and tourism‐sensitive” segments of the  economy. Sales tax revenues may be negatively impacted for 30 to 60 days. Historically pandemics,  (Swine Flu, SARS, Bird Flu), have not had a significant long‐term impact on sales tax revenues.  LOCAL RESULTS  Net Cash Receipts Analysis  Local Collections 48,861,948  Share of County Pool 0.0% 0  Share of State Pool 0.0% 0  SBE Net Collections 48,861,948  Less: Amount Due County 0.0% .00  Less: Cost of Administration (548,970)  Net 3Q2019 Receipts 48,312,978  Net 3Q2018 Receipts 55,057,944  Actual Percentage Change ‐12.3%  Business Activity Performance Analysis  Local Collections – Economic Basis 3Q2019 $48,217,358  Local Collections – Economic Basis 3Q2018 $45,979,925  Quarter over Quarter Change 2,237,433  Quarter over Quarter Percentage Change 4.9%  Avenu Insights & Analytics’ On‐Going Audit Results  Total Recovered Year to Date $10,258,416  ATTACHMENT 1 16 RCTC www.avenuinsights.com (800) 800‐8181 Page 2 HISTORICAL CASH COLLECTIONS ANALYSIS BY QUARTER      TOP 25 SALES/USE TAX CONTRIBUTORS  The following list identifies RCTC’s Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors. The list is in alphabetical order  and represents sales from August 2018 to September 2019. The Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors  generate 24.6% of RCTC’s total sales and use tax revenue.      AMAZON.COM LOWE’S HOME CENTERS  ARCO AM/PM MINI MARTS MACY’S DEPARTMENT STORE  BEST BUY STORES MCDONALD'S RESTAURANTS  CARMAX THE AUTO SUPERSTORE RALPH'S GROCERY COMPANY  CHEVRON SERVICE STATIONS ROBERTSON’S READY MIX  CIRCLE K FOOD STORES ROSS STORES  CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS SAM'S CLUB  COSTCO WHOLESALE SHELL SERVICE STATIONS  DEMATIC STATER BROS MARKETS  DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES TARGET STORES  FOOD 4 LESS VERIZON WIRELESS  HOME DEPOT WAL MART STORES  KOHL'S DEPARTMENT STORES   17 RCTC www.avenuinsights.com (800) 800‐8181 Page 3 HISTORICAL SALES TAX AMOUNTS                              ANNUAL SALES TAX BY BUSINESS CATEGORY  The following chart shows the sales tax level from annual sales through September 2019, the  highs, and the lows for each segment over the last two years in thousands of $.  18 RCTC www.avenuinsights.com (800) 800‐8181 Page 4   FIVE‐YEAR ECONOMIC TREND: General Retail        19 RCTC:  Sales Tax Performance Analysis by QuarterTOTALEconomicTOTAL2019Q3 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆$48,217,358 4.9% $2,237,433 4.1% $7,688,593GENERAL RETAIL2019Q3 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆$12,494,625 6.8% $800,648 6.4% $3,279,45525.9%FOOD PRODUCTS2019Q3 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆$8,067,660 1.5% $116,398 1.7% $574,909% of Total: 16.7%TRANSPORTATION2019Q3 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆$12,093,089‐0.3%‐$35,7891.4% $635,366% of Total: 25.1%CONSTRUCTION2019Q3 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆$5,455,693 3.9% $203,702 4.1% $830,559% of Total: 11.3%BUSINESS TO BUSINESS2019Q3 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆$8,029,224 8.0% $597,755 2.9% $885,325% of Total: 16.7%Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3TOTALCATEGORY% of 2019Q3 Total:QoQ = 19Q3 / 18Q3 YoY = YE 19Q3 / YE 18Q3$0$2,000,000$4,000,000$6,000,000$8,000,000$10,000,000$12,000,000$14,000,000$16,000,000$18,000,000$0$10,000,000$20,000,000$30,000,000$40,000,000$50,000,000$60,000,000Avenu Insights & AnalyticsATTACHMENT 220 RCTC: Quarterly Comparison of 2018Q3 and 2019Q3 (July through August Sales)General RetailFood ProductsTransportationConstructionBusiness To BusMiscellaneousJul ‐ Aug 2019 (2019Q3)Jul ‐ Aug 2018 (2018Q3)% ChgGainGainDeclineDeclineBANNING6.0%‐2.0%‐14.1%‐17.7% 47.0% 15.9%590,398722,627‐18.3%HEAVY INDUSTRY MISC. VEHICLE SALES AUTO SALES ‐ NEW SERVICE STATIONSBEAUMONT‐0.3%‐0.8% 4.1%‐68.1% 24.4%‐9.3%1,036,4111,106,525‐6.3%LIGHT INDUSTRY SERVICE STATIONS BLDG.MATLS‐RETAIL FOOD MARKETSBLYTHE79.3% 1.7%‐19.0% 13.0%‐2.7%‐62.4%335,033343,843‐2.6%FURNITURE/APPLIANCE MISCELLANEOUS RETAIL SERVICE STATIONS AUTO SALES‐NEWCALIMESA‐1.1% 1.7% 4.7% 56.9%‐56.9%‐53.7%213,837206,8073.4%AUTO PARTS/REPAIR FOOD MARKETS CHEMICAL PRODUCTS MISCELLANEOUS RETAILCANYON LAKE38.5% 9.8% 4.6% 4121.5% 5.1%‐0.6%100,861122,316‐17.5%FOOD MARKETS RESTAURANTSLIGHT INDUSTRY SERVICE STATIONSCATHEDRAL CITY‐7.8%‐9.1%‐1.1% 1.5% 2.9%‐14.5%2,007,4482,098,600‐4.3%HEAVY INDUSTRY MISC. VEHICLE SALES AUTO SALES ‐ NEW FOOD MARKETSCOACHELLA‐6.1%‐17.8%‐3.9%24.7%‐61.7% 85.8%694,511788,706‐11.9%BLDG.MATLS‐WHSLE AUTO PARTS/REPAIR FOOD MARKETSENERGY SALESCORONA‐3.0%‐1.9%‐8.2%‐7.7%‐5.9% 40.1%9,371,6729,863,811‐5.0%ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT DEPARTMENT STORES BLDG.MATLS‐RETAIL AUTO SALES ‐ NEWCOUNTY OF RIVERSIDE‐0.1%‐0.1%‐7.5%‐4.7%‐17.2%‐1.2%6,571,5796,731,085‐2.4%MISCELLANEOUS RETAIL FOOD PROCESSING EQP SERVICE STATIONS BLDG.MATLS‐WHSLEDESERT HOT SPRINGS18.7% 2.8% 27.0% 1.1% 62.0% 76.8%417,676352,92018.3%SERVICE STATIONS MISCELLANEOUS RETAIL FLORIST/NURSERY FOOD MARKETSEASTVALE22.4%‐19.1%‐3.3%‐38.6%‐0.9%‐79.6%1,875,0051,987,987‐5.7%DEPARTMENT STORES APPAREL STORES BLDG.MATLS‐RETAIL FOOD MARKETSHEMET‐1.4%‐3.4% 18.8%‐61.5%‐7.3%10.3%2,650,4842,630,2660.8%AUTO SALES ‐ NEW MISCELLANEOUS RETAIL BLDG.MATLS‐RETAIL BLDG.MATLS‐WHSLEINDIAN WELLS‐7.5%‐17.5% 0.0%‐99.2%‐24.5% 437.2%116,179132,127‐12.1%MISCELLANEOUS RETAIL DRUG STORESRESTAURANTSBLDG.MATLS‐WHSLEINDIO7.1%‐9.0%‐3.6%‐38.0% 37.3% 4.4%2,289,3482,411,180‐5.1%APPAREL STORES ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT BLDG.MATLS‐RETAIL BLDG.MATLS‐WHSLEJURUPA VALLEY‐16.6% 2.0% 0.6% 35.2%‐1.3%‐46.0%3,307,7872,810,99617.7%BLDG.MATLS‐WHSLE DEPARTMENT STORES MISCELLANEOUS RETAIL SERVICE STATIONSLA QUINTA‐1.9% 7.2% 4.6%‐60.0%‐10.1% 8.2%1,509,1831,604,983‐6.0%AUTO SALES ‐ NEW RESTAURANTSBLDG.MATLS‐RETAIL MISCELLANEOUS RETAILLAKE ELSINORE5.2%‐2.1% 4.4%‐45.9%‐34.6% 26.4%2,103,2462,159,458‐2.6%AUTO SALES ‐ NEW DEPARTMENT STORES BLDG.MATLS‐RETAIL FOOD MARKETSMENIFEE3.5% 11.3%‐5.0%‐3.2%‐10.8%‐4.4%1,898,9471,852,6092.5%RESTAURANTSFOOD MARKETS ENERGY SALESSERVICE STATIONSMORENO VALLEY‐2.2%‐10.7%‐5.4%‐39.5% 2.9%‐47.4%4,086,0654,477,084‐8.7%DEPARTMENT STORES HEAVY INDUSTRY BLDG.MATLS‐RETAIL FOOD MARKETSMURRIETA4.1%‐8.4% 0.1%‐39.6%‐7.0% 30.5%3,792,9684,018,457‐5.6%MISCELLANEOUS RETAIL MISC. VEHICLE SALES BLDG.MATLS‐RETAIL FOOD MARKETSNORCO3.3%‐1.4%‐3.2% 57.0%‐3.3% 1.5%1,625,4771,636,887‐0.7%AUTO SALES ‐ USEDBLDG.MATLS‐WHSLE AUTO SALES ‐ NEW SERVICE STATIONSPALM DESERT1.1% 0.0%‐38.2% 5.6%‐9.9% 253.6%3,375,7843,466,867‐2.6%BUSINESS SERVICES MISCELLANEOUS OTHER AUTO SALES ‐ NEW CHEMICAL PRODUCTSPALM SPRINGS2.1%‐0.2% 9.1%‐39.4% 5.5% 6.0%2,411,2392,482,424‐2.9%AUTO SALES ‐ NEW RESTAURANTSBLDG.MATLS‐RETAIL FOOD MARKETSPERRIS31.1%‐13.5%‐16.3%‐66.1% 108.9% 7.0%4,647,0784,612,1520.8%FURNITURE/APPLIANCE LIGHT INDUSTRY BLDG.MATLS‐RETAIL SERVICE STATIONSRANCHO MIRAGE‐4.8%‐3.1% 23.9%‐62.5% 10.6% 58.2%1,050,9511,076,880‐2.4%AUTO SALES ‐ NEW BLDG.MATLS‐WHSLE BLDG.MATLS‐RETAIL RESTAURANTSRIVERSIDE‐6.6%‐0.9%‐1.9%‐20.4%‐1.4%‐24.5%13,834,10814,499,916‐4.6%RESTAURANTSBUSINESS SERVICES BLDG.MATLS‐WHSLE MISCELLANEOUS RETAILSAN JACINTO1.3%‐5.9%‐5.6% 0.0%‐1.0% 59.4%697,792727,380‐4.1%FLORIST/NURSERY DEPARTMENT STORES RESTAURANTSAUTO SALES ‐USEDTEMECULA2.1% 4.3%‐2.1%‐39.7%‐1.3% 9.1%7,905,6868,181,062‐3.4%DEPARTMENT STORES AUTO SALES ‐ NEW BLDG.MATLS‐RETAIL BLDG.MATLS‐WHSLEWILDOMAR‐4.0% 12.9%‐42.0% 36.5%‐45.2%‐35.4%400,341470,578‐14.9%FOOD MARKETS RESTAURANTSSERVICE STATIONS LEASINGRIVERSIDE COUNTYAvenu Insights & AnalyticsATTACHMENT 321 AGENDA ITEM 5C Agenda Item 5C RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 27, 2020 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Jose Mendoza, Senior Procurement Analyst Matt Wallace, Procurement Manager THROUGH: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Single Signature Authority Report STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the Single Signature Authority report for the third quarter ended March 31, 2020; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Certain contracts are executed under single signature authority as permitted in the Commission’s Procurement Policy Manual adopted in September 2019. The Executive Director is authorized to sign services contracts that are less than $250,000 individually and in an aggregate amount not to exceed $1.5 million in any given fiscal year. Additionally, in accordance with Public Utilities Code Section 130323(c), the Executive Director is authorized to sign contracts for supplies, equipment, materials, and construction of all facilities and works under $50,000 individually. The attached report details all contracts that have been executed for the third quarter ended March 31, 2020, under the single signature authority granted to the Executive Director. The unused capacity of single signature authority for services at March 31, 2020 is $1,104,286. Attachment: Single Signature Authority Report as of March 31, 2020 22 CONTRACT # CONSULTANT DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT PAID AMOUNT REMAINING CONTRACT AMOUNT AMOUNT AVAILABLE July 1, 2019 $1,500,000.00 20-31-020-00 WSP USA, Inc.Managed Freeways - Pre-design report and conceptual design plans 249,983.00 0.00 249,983.00 20-31-024-00 California Highway Patrol Construction Zone Enhancement Program (COZEEP) for SR-91 Pachappa Project 49,981.00 0.00 49,981.00 20-33-045-00 Sapphos Environmental Railroad right-of-way maintenance permit support services 5,750.00 0.00 5,750.00 20-18-053-00 Koff & Associates Compensation, classification, and benefits studies 20,000.00 0.00 20,000.00 20-19-062-00 Eadie & Payne GASB 87 implementation professional services 70,000.00 0.00 70,000.00 AMOUNT USED 395,714.00 395,714.00 $1,104,286.00 None N/A $- $- $- Jose Mendoza Theresia Trevino Prepared by Reviewed by AMOUNT USED SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY AS OF March 31, 2020 Note: Shaded area represents new contracts listed in the third quarter. AMOUNT REMAINING through March 31, 2020 Agreements that fall under Public Utilities Code 130323 (C) 23 AGENDA ITEM 5D Agenda Item 5D RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 27, 2020 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Monica Morales, Management Analyst THROUGH: Lorelle Moe-Luna, Multi Modal Services Director SUBJECT: Federal Transit Administration’s Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility for Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities Program Federal Fiscal Years 2017/18 and 2018/19 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 20-007, “Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Certifying Project Consistency with the Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Coordinated Plan”; 2) Direct staff to program the projects in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP); and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5310 grant program was established in 1975 and has been administered by Caltrans since its inception. The goal of the 5310 program is to improve mobility for seniors and individuals with disabilities by removing barriers to transportation services and expanding the transportation mobility options available. On July 1, 2019, Caltrans issued a call for projects for the FFYs 2017/18 and 2018/19 FTA Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities program. Eligible applicants include private non-profit organizations and public agencies. Projects must be in line with the identified strategies of a local Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Coordinated Plan (Coordinated Plan). The Commission’s current Coordinated Plan was updated in December 2016. Eligible projects are classified as traditional or expanded projects. Traditional projects include vehicles and related equipment and must comprise at least 55 percent of the available funding. Expanded projects are those that exceed the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and mobility management and comprise up to 45 percent of available funding. For large urbanized areas (UZA) in Riverside County, as shown in Table 1.1 below, approximately $3 million was available for programming for the FFYs 2017/18 and 2018/19 grant cycle. Table 24 Agenda Item 5D 1.2 below shows that for the statewide competitive funding for small urban areas such as the Hemet-San Jacinto UZA, a total of $10,170,044 was available and for rural areas a total of $4,078,151. Table 1.1 LARGE URBANIZED AREA Available Funding by UZA and Project Category Western Riverside – San Bernardino UZA Coachella Valley – Indio – Cathedral City UZA Murrieta – Temecula – Menifee UZA TOTAL FUNDS Available for Riverside County FFY 2018 $750,354 $403,589 $321,731 $1,475,674 FFY 2019 $769,915 $412,979 $335,170 $1,518,064 Two-Year Funding Available $1,520,269 $816,568 $656,901 $2,993,738 Table 1.2 SMALL URBAN AND RURAL (STATEWIDE) Available Funding by UZA and Project Category Statewide Small Urban (Hemet-San Jacinto Eligible) Statewide Rural Areas (All Non-Urban Areas Eligible) FFY 2018 & FFY 2019 Two-Year Funding Available $10,170,044 4,078,151 FTA guidelines allow 5310 program funds to be used to provide up to 80 percent federal share of capital costs and require at least 20 percent in local match. For operating costs, federal funds can be awarded up to 50 percent. However, for this FFYs 2017/18 and 2018/19 funding cycle, as in the past three funding cycles, agencies will receive 100 percent project funding in 5310 funds with the usage of California state toll credits as local matching funds. Toll credits are a funding tool that can be utilized by states as a means of meeting local and state matching requirements for federal funding. State credits are accrued when capital investments are made in federally approved tolled facilities including toll roads and bridges. Caltrans was responsible for administering and selecting projects for both the small urban and rural and large urbanized areas in Riverside County; however, Commission staff also reviewed and evaluated traditional project applications in the county. A total of 14 agencies within Riverside County submitted grant applications requesting $5,359,392 for 46 projects that include 21 replacement vehicles, 13 expansion vehicles, 2 computer hardware/software, 8 operating projects, and 2 mobility management projects. Caltrans’ recommendations were approved and awarded by the California Transportation Commission on March 26, 2020. As required by the program, staff recommends that the Commission adopt Resolution No. 20-007 to certify that the projects were derived from a locally developed Coordinated Plan. Additionally, staff will submit the projects to the Southern California Association of Government for inclusion into the FTIP for programming and obligation of funds. There is no financial impact to the Commission, as Caltrans disburses the Section 5310 funds directly to the recipients. 25 Agenda Item 5D Attachments: 1) Caltrans’ FFYs 2017/18 and 2018/19 Section 5310 funding recommendations – Large Urbanized 2) Caltrans’ FFYs 2017/18 and 2018/19 Section 5310 funding recommendations – Small Urban/Rural 3) Resolution No. 20-007 26 FTA Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities 2019 Program of Projects - Large Urbanized Areas (LUZAs) - February 21, 2020 #Agency Caltrans District Large UZA Region PA/NP (1) Project Description Vehicles/Equipment (2) FTA Match (Toll Credits) FTA 5310 Share Total Project $Score 1 Eastern Contra Costa 4 Antioch NP Operating Assistance 95,391$ 95,391$ 190,782$ 60 2 Mobility Matters 4 Antioch NP Mobility Management 52,465$ 209,861$ 262,326$ 50 3 Delano Association for the Developmentally Disabled, Inc 6 Bakersfield NP Three (R) Large Buses 48,720$ 194,880$ 243,600$ 84 4 New Advances for People with Disabilities 6 Bakersfield NP One (R) Small Bus 14,240$ 56,960$ 71,200$ 78 5 New Advances for People with Disabilities 6 Bakersfield NP Three (R) Minivans 33,600$ 134,400$ 168,000$ 78 6 Valley Achievement Center 6 Bakersfield NP Three (SE) Medium Buses 46,020$ 184,080$ 230,100$ 80 7 Choice in Aging 4 Concord NP Operating Assistance 55,235$ 55,235$ 110,469$ 82 8 City of Lafayette: Lamorinda Spirit Van 4 Concord PA Operating Assistance 82,500$ 82,500$ 165,000$ 90 9 Contra Costa Transportation Authority 4 Concord NP Mobility Management 37,102$ 148,408$ 185,510$ 64 10 Golden Rain Foundation Walnut Creek 4 Concord NP Three R Large Buses 48,720$ 194,880$ 243,600$ 84 11 Golden Rain Foundation Walnut Creek 4 Concord NP One SE Medium Bus 15,340$ 61,360$ 76,700$ 80 12 Mobility Matters 4 Concord NP Mobility Management 35,601$ 142,404$ 178,005$ 60 13 The Respite Inn 4 Concord NP One R Minivan 11,200$ 44,800$ 56,000$ 72 14 Angel View, Inc.8 Indio Cathedral NP One R Large Bus 16,240$ 64,960$ 81,200$ 88 15 Angel View, Inc.8 Indio Cathedral NP Operating Assistance 69,398$ 69,398$ 138,795$ 95 16 Desert ARC 8 Indio Cathedral NP Two R Large Buses 32,480$ 129,920$ 162,400$ 87 17 Desert Blind Handicapped Association 8 Indio Cathedral NP Operating Assistance 40,000$ 40,000$ 80,000$ 82 18 Independent Living Partnership 8 Indio Cathedral NP Operating Assistance 84,000$ 84,000$ 168,000$ 96 19 Sunline Transit Agency 8 Indio Cathedral PA Four SE Minivans 44,800$ 179,200$ 224,000$ 89 20 Sunline Transit Agency 8 Indio Cathedral PA Computer Hardware (4)1,030$ 4,120$ 5,150$ 88 21 Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Stockton 10 Modesto NP Operating Assistance 79,040$ 79,040$ 158,079$ 81 22 Howard Training Center 10 Modesto NP Two SE Large Buses 32,480$ 129,920$ 162,400$ 81 23 UCP of Stanislaus 10 Modesto NP Four SE Small Buses 56,960$ 227,840$ 284,800$ 82 24 Independent Living Partnership 8 Murrieta-Temecula NP Operating Assistance 138,295$ 138,295$ 276,590$ 96 25 Riverside Transit Agency 8 Murrieta-Temecula NP Mobility Management 76,062$ 304,249$ 380,311$ 94 26 Independent Living Partnership 8 Riverside-San Bernardino NP Operating Assistance 121,852$ 121,852$ 243,703$ 96 27 Loma Linda University Health 8 Riverside-San Bernardino NP Two SE Medium Buses 30,680$ 122,720$ 153,400$ 73 28 Loma Linda University Health 8 Riverside-San Bernardino NP One SE Small Bus 14,240$ 56,960$ 71,200$ 66 29 Lutheran Social Services 8 Riverside-San Bernardino NP Operating Assistance 145,641$ 145,641$ 291,282$ 95 30 Mountain Shadows Group 8 Riverside-San Bernardino NP Three R Minivans 33,600$ 134,400$ 168,000$ 94 31 Mountain Shadows Group 8 Riverside-San Bernardino NP Three SE Minivans 33,600$ 134,400$ 168,000$ 89 32 Omnitrans 8 Riverside-San Bernardino PA Three R Large Buses (CNG)62,520$ 250,080$ 312,600$ 47 33 OPARC 8 Riverside-San Bernardino NP Operating Assistance 75,000$ 75,000$ 150,000$ 69 34 Peppermint Ridge 8 Riverside-San Bernardino NP Three SE Small Buses 42,720$ 170,880$ 213,600$ 53 35 Peppermint Ridge 8 Riverside-San Bernardino NP Operating Assistance 78,000$ 78,000$ 156,000$ 84 36 Riverside Transit Agency 8 Riverside-San Bernardino PA Mobility Management 56,653$ 226,614$ 283,267$ 94 37 Valley Resources for the Retarded Inc 8 Riverside-San Bernardino NP One R Minivan 11,200$ 44,800$ 56,000$ 79 38 Valley Resources for the Retarded Inc 8 Riverside-San Bernardino NP Two R Medium Buses 30,680$ 122,720$ 153,400$ 79 39 Valley Resources for the Retarded Inc 8 Riverside-San Bernardino NP Operating Assistance 67,877$ 67,877$ 135,754$ 85 (1) PA = Public Agency NP = Non-Profit (2) R = Replacement SE = Service Expansion Page 1 of 4 ATTACHMENT 1 27 FTA Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities 2019 Program of Projects - Large Urbanized Areas (LUZAs) - February 21, 2020 #Agency Caltrans District Large UZA Region PA/NP (1) Project Description Vehicles/Equipment (2) FTA Match (Toll Credits) FTA 5310 Share Total Project $Score 40 Asian Community Center (ACC)3 Sacramento NP Operating Assistance 131,041$ 131,041$ 262,081$ 90 41 City of Roseville 3 Sacramento PA Mobility Management 19,200$ 76,800$ 96,000$ 88 42 County of Sacramento Dept of Child Family and Adult Services 3 Sacramento PA Operating Assistance 123,981$ 123,981$ 247,962$ 76 43 Pride Industries Transit 3 Sacramento NP Two R Medium Buses 30,680$ 122,720$ 153,400$ 90/85 44 Pride Industries Transit 3 Sacramento NP Thirteen R Large Buses 211,120$ 844,480$ 1,055,600$ 90/85 45 Shores of Hope 3 Sacramento NP Operating Assistance 75,000$ 75,000$ 150,000$ 71 46 United Cerebral Palsy Association of Greater Sacramento, Inc.3 Sacramento NP Four R Large Buses 64,960$ 259,840$ 324,800$ 95 47 United Cerebral Palsy Association of Greater Sacramento, Inc.3 Sacramento NP One SE Small Bus 14,240$ 56,960$ 71,200$ 93 48 United Cerebral Palsy Association of Greater Sacramento, Inc.3 Sacramento NP One SE Minivan 11,200$ 44,800$ 56,000$ 93 49 United Cerebral Palsy Association of Greater Sacramento, Inc.3 Sacramento NP Cameras (6)4,308$ 17,234$ 21,542$ 95 50 United Cerebral Palsy Association of Greater Sacramento, Inc.3 Sacramento NP Operating Assistance 233,813$ 233,813$ 467,625$ 97 (1) PA = Public Agency NP = Non-Profit (2) R = Replacement SE = Service Expansion Page 2 of 428 FTA Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities 2019 Program of Projects - Large Urbanized Areas (LUZAs) - February 21, 2020 #Agency Caltrans District Large UZA Region PA/NP (1) Project Description Vehicles/Equipment (2) FTA Match (Toll Credits) FTA 5310 Share Total Project $Score 51 Alegria Community Living 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Five R Minivans 56,000$ 224,000$ 280,000$ 90 52 Bay Area Outreach Program 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP One R Large Bus 16,240$ 64,960$ 81,200$ 88 53 Casa Allegra Community Services 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP One R Minivan 11,200$ 44,800$ 56,000$ 71 54 Center for Elders' Independence 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Five R Medium Buses 76,700$ 306,800$ 383,500$ 87 55 Center for Elders' Independence 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Mobile Radios (7)1,400$ 5,600$ 7,000$ 82 56 Center for Elders' Independence 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Two SE Medium Buses 30,680$ 122,720$ 153,400$ 77 57 Eden I&R 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Mobility Management 35,125$ 140,499$ 175,624$ 91 58 Friends of Children with Special Needs 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Two SE Minivans 22,400$ 89,600$ 112,000$ 75 59 Institute on Aging 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Two R Medium Buses 30,680$ 122,720$ 153,400$ 87 60 Institute on Aging 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Two R Medium Buses 30,680$ 122,720$ 153,400$ 82 61 Kimochi, Inc.4 San Francisco-Oakland NP One R Large Bus 16,240$ 64,960$ 81,200$ 75 62 Lighthouse for the Blind and Visually Impaired 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Mapping Software 12,759$ 51,038$ 63,797$ 100 63 Lighthouse for the Blind and Visually Impaired 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Mobility Management 80,000$ 320,000$ 400,000$ 83 64 Marin County Transit District 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Mobility Management 32,560$ 130,240$ 162,800$ 80 65 Marin Senior Coordinating Council, Inc 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Two R Large Buses 32,480$ 129,920$ 162,400$ 85 66 Marin Senior Coordinating Council, Inc 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Four R Large Buses 64,960$ 259,840$ 324,800$ 80 67 Mobility Matters 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Operating Assistance 43,502$ 43,502$ 87,004$ 62 68 Mobility Matters 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Mobility Management 13,394$ 53,576$ 66,970$ 60 69 On Lok Senior Health Services 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Six R Small Buses 85,440$ 341,760$ 427,200$ 75 70 On Lok Senior Health Services 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP One R Minivan 11,200$ 44,800$ 56,000$ 85 71 Peninsula Family Service 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Operating Assistance 136,936$ 136,936$ 273,871$ 68 72 Peninsula Jewish Community Center 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Operating Assistance 156,000$ 156,000$ 312,000$ 68 73 Pomeroy Recreation & Rehabilitation Center 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP One R Small Bus 14,240$ 56,960$ 71,200$ 76 74 SAHA 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP One SE Small Bus 14,240$ 56,960$ 71,200$ 80 75 SAHA 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Operating Assistance 52,100$ 52,100$ 104,200$ 76 76 San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority 4 San Francisco-Oakland PA Mobility Management 84,220$ 336,879$ 421,099$ 79 77 Self-Help for the Elderly 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP One R Medium Bus 15,340$ 61,360$ 76,700$ 80 78 Self-Help for the Elderly 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Two R Large Buses 32,480$ 129,920$ 162,400$ 80 79 Self-Help for the Elderly 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Computer Hardware 600$ 2,398$ 2,998$ 76 80 The Center of Independent Living 4 San Francisco-Oakland NP Mobility Management 60,000$ 240,000$ 300,000$ 90 81 Friends of Children with Special Needs 4 San Jose NP Two SE Minivans 22,400$ 89,600$ 112,000$ 75 82 Metropolitan Transportation Commission 4 San Jose PA Mobility Management 41,737$ 166,950$ 208,687$ 81 83 On Lok 4 San Jose NP Six SE Small Buses 85,440$ 341,760$ 427,200$ 75 84 On Lok 4 San Jose NP Eight R Small Buses 113,920$ 455,680$ 569,600$ 85 85 Outreach and Escort 4 San Jose NP Mobility Management 35,116$ 140,465$ 175,581$ 97 86 Outreach and Escort 4 San Jose NP Operating Assistance 200,000$ 200,000$ 400,000$ 95 87 West Valley Community Services 4 San Jose NP Operating Assistance 162,705$ 162,705$ 325,409$ 72 (1) PA = Public Agency NP = Non-Profit (2) R = Replacement SE = Service Expansion Page 3 of 429 FTA Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities 2019 Program of Projects - Large Urbanized Areas (LUZAs) - February 21, 2020 #Agency Caltrans District Large UZA Region PA/NP (1) Project Description Vehicles/Equipment (2) FTA Match (Toll Credits) FTA 5310 Share Total Project $Score 88 Becoming Independent 4 Santa Rosa NP Two R Small Buses 28,480$ 113,920$ 142,400$ 83 89 Becoming Independent 4 Santa Rosa NP One R Medium Bus 15,340$ 61,360$ 76,700$ 83 90 City of Santa Rosa 4 Santa Rosa PA One R Large Bus 16,240$ 64,960$ 81,200$ 75 91 County of Sonoma, Human Services Department, Adult and Aging Division 4 Santa Rosa PA Operating Assistance 57,455$ 57,455$ 114,910$ 90 92 County of Sonoma, Human Services Department, Adult and Aging Division 4 Santa Rosa PA Mobility Management 2,161$ 8,643$ 10,804$ 90 93 County of Sonoma, Human Services Department, Adult and Aging Division 4 Santa Rosa PA Mobility Management 22,269$ 89,078$ 111,347$ 90 94 Catholic Charities of the Dioecies of Stockton 10 Stockton NP One SE Minivan 11,200$ 44,800$ 56,000$ 81 95 Catholic Charities of the Dioecies of Stockton 10 Stockton NP Two I-Pad Ranger Tablets 1,700$ 6,800$ 8,500$ 81 96 Catholic Charities of the Dioecies of Stockton 10 Stockton NP Scheduling Software 4,000$ 16,000$ 20,000$ 81 97 Catholic Charities of the Dioecies of Stockton 10 Stockton NP Mobility Management 51,721$ 206,882$ 258,603$ 81 98 San Joaquin RTD 10 Stockton PA Operating Assistance 49,906$ 199,623$ 249,529$ 81 99 Foothill AIDS Project 8 Victorville-Hesperia NP Operating Assistance 91,940$ 91,940$ 183,879$ 86 100 Victor Valley Community Services Council 8 Victorville-Hesperia NP Mobility Management 20,000$ 80,000$ 100,000$ 95 101 Victor Valley Transit Authority 8 Victorville-Hesperia PA Two R Large Buses (CNG) 41,680$ 166,720$ 208,400$ 83 102 City of Visalia 6 Visalia PA Mobility Management 28,538$ 114,154$ 142,692$ 100 103 Porterville Shelter Workshop 6 Visalia NP One R Larger Bus 18,400$ 73,600$ 92,000$ 87 104 Porterville Shelter Workshop 6 Visalia NP One R Large Bus 16,240$ 64,960$ 81,200$ 87 105 Porterville Shelter Workshop 6 Visalia NP Cameras (4)1,997$ 7,988$ 9,985$ 87 106 Porterville Shelter Workshop 6 Visalia NP Mobile Radios (4)317$ 1,266$ 1,583$ 87 107 Porterville Shelter Workshop 6 Visalia NP Q- Strains Hardware 738$ 2,954$ 3,692$ 87 108 Porterville Shelter Workshop 6 Visalia NP Computer Hardware (5)1,548$ 6,194$ 7,742$ 87 (1) PA = Public Agency NP = Non-Profit (2) R = Replacement SE = Service Expansion Page 4 of 430 Attachment B - FTA Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities Draft 2019 Program of Projects February 5, 2020 Small Urban and Rural Prioritized List (score priority order) #AGENCY County Caltrans District Small Urban or Rural Project Type (1)Vin Year Miles FTA 5310 Share Local (Toll Credits) Project Total Cumulative (Federal $) Score TRADITIONAL PROJECTS 1 Monterey-Salinas Transit MON 5 Small Urban Small Bus R 85544 2013 227183 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 71,200$ 100 2 Colusa County Transit Agency COL 3 Rural Large Bus R 18536 2008 207725 -$ -$ -$ 71,200$ 100 3 Colusa County Transit Agency COL 3 Rural Large Bus R 43831 2007 221979 -$ -$ -$ 71,200$ 100 4 Colusa County Transit Agency COL 3 Rural Large Bus R 18543 2008 251998 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 152,400$ 100 5 Colusa County Transit Agency COL 3 Rural Large Bus R 43837 2007 233259 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 233,600$ 100 6 Help Central Inc BUT 3 Small Urban Mobility Management MM 284,593$ 71,148$ 355,741$ 589,341$ 98 7 Easy Lift Transportation, Inc.SB 5 Small Urban Minivan R 64178 2012 275640 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 645,341$ 97 8 Easy Lift Transportation, Inc.SB 5 Small Urban Minivan R 69067 2012 250290 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 701,341$ 97 9 Kings Rehabilitation Center KIN 6 Rural Minivan R 80800 2007 151231 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 757,341$ 97 10 Kings Rehabilitation Center KIN 6 Rural Minivan R 80134 2007 161601 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 813,341$ 97 11 Kings Rehabilitation Center KIN 6 Rural Minivan R 79938 2007 189443 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 869,341$ 97 12 Nevada-Sierra Connecting Point Public Authority NEV 3 Small Urban Mobility Management MM 276,246$ 69,061$ 345,307$ 1,214,648$ 97 13 United Cerebral Palsy San Luis Obispo - Ride On SLO 5 Small Urban Medium Bus R 86883 2011 286107 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 1,291,348$ 96 14 United Cerebral Palsy San Luis Obispo - Ride On SLO 5 Small Urban Medium Bus R 63468 2011 264096 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 1,368,048$ 96 15 United Cerebral Palsy San Luis Obispo - Ride On SLO 5 Small Urban Large Bus R 22799 2011 287432 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 1,449,248$ 96 16 United Cerebral Palsy San Luis Obispo - Ride On SLO 5 Small Urban Large Bus R 22798 2011 297274 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 1,530,448$ 96 17 United Cerebral Palsy San Luis Obispo - Ride On SLO 5 Small Urban Large Bus R 22791 2011 291478 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 1,611,648$ 96 18 Full Access & Coordinated Transportation, Inc.SD 11 Rural Mobility Management MM 284,590$ 71,147$ 355,737$ 1,967,385$ 93 19 County of Nevada Public Works, Transit Services Division NEV 3 Rural Minivan SE 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 2,023,385$ 92 20 County of Nevada Public Works, Transit Services Division NEV 3 Rural Minivan SE 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 2,079,385$ 92 21 County of Nevada Public Works, Transit Services Division NEV 3 Rural Minivan SE 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 2,135,385$ 92 22 County of Nevada Public Works, Transit Services Division NEV 3 Rural Minivan SE 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 2,191,385$ 92 23 Easy Lift Transportation, Inc.SB 5 Small Urban Small Bus R 30963 2013 201162 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 2,262,585$ 92 24 Eastern Sierra Transit Authority INY 9 Rural Cameras (2)OE 14,428$ 3,607$ 18,035$ 2,280,620$ 92 25 Eastern Sierra Transit Authority INY 9 Rural Computer Hardware OE 6,986$ 1,746$ 8,732$ 2,289,352$ 92 26 Milestones of Development INC SOL 4 Small Urban Minivan R 94944 2011 62880 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 2,345,352$ 92 27 Milestones of Development INC SOL 4 Small Urban Equipment/Hardware OE 14,080$ 3,520$ 17,600$ 2,362,952$ 92 28 Monterey-Salinas Transit MON 5 Small Urban Small Bus R 10763 2015 179400 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 2,434,152$ 91 29 Smooth SB 5 Small Urban Large Bus R 14962 2011 213863 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 2,515,352$ 91 30 Smooth SB 5 Small Urban Large Bus R 14963 2011 231742 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 2,596,552$ 91 31 Tuolumne County Transit Agency TUL 10 Rural Mobility Management MM 96,837$ 24,209$ 121,046$ 2,717,598$ 91 32 El Dorado County Transit Authority ELD 3 Small Urban Minivan R 51062 2013 185094 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 2,773,598$ 90 33 Kings Rehabilitation Center KIN 6 Rural Small Bus SE 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 2,844,798$ 90 34 Kings Rehabilitation Center KIN 6 Rural Medium Bus SE 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 2,921,498$ 90 R = Replacement Vehicle MM = Mobility Management Red Text = Project Added SE = Service Expansion Vehicle OE = Operating Equipment Blue Text = Funding Reduction O = Operating Assistance Page 1 of 5 ATTACHMENT 2 31 Attachment B - FTA Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities Draft 2019 Program of Projects February 5, 2020 Small Urban and Rural Prioritized List (score priority order) #AGENCY County Caltrans District Small Urban or Rural Project Type (1)Vin Year Miles FTA 5310 Share Local (Toll Credits) Project Total Cumulative (Federal $) Score 35 County of Sonoma, Human Services Department, Adult and Aging Division SON 4 Rural Mobility Management MM 113,760$ 28,440$ 142,200$ 3,063,698$ 90 36 Redwood Coast Transit Authority DEL 1 Rural Medium Bus R 43107 2011 253393 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 3,140,398$ 89 37 County of Nevada Public Works, Transit Services Division NEV 3 Rural Medium Bus SE 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 3,217,098$ 89 38 Community Bridges/Liftline SC 5 Small Urban Minivan R 47565 2006 145351 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 3,273,098$ 89 39 Kings Rehabilitation Center KIN 6 Rural Medium Bus SE 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 3,349,798$ 89 40 Pace Solano SOL 4 Small Urban Small Bus R 66408 2003 158057 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 3,420,998$ 89 41 Community Bridges/Liftline SC 5 Small Urban Minivan R 48985 2006 147069 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 3,476,998$ 89 42 Community Bridges/Liftline SC 5 Small Urban Minivan R 40513 2008 135200 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 3,532,998$ 89 43 The Arc of Amador and Calaveras AMA 10 Rural Minivan R 99195 2008 75384 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 3,588,998$ 88 44 Care-A-Van RIV 8 Small Urban Minivan R 45398 2011 150443 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 3,644,998$ 88 45 Amador Transit AMA 10 Rural Mobility Management MM 215,082$ 53,771$ 268,853$ 3,913,851$ 88 46 Imperial County Transportation Commission IMP 11 Rural Mobility Management MM 284,581$ 71,145$ 355,726$ 4,269,577$ 88 47 Milestones of Development INC SOL 4 Small Urban Small Bus R 11710 2011 139678 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 4,340,777$ 87 48 Monterey-Salinas Transit MON 5 Small Urban Small Bus R 12374 2015 171238 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 4,411,977$ 86 49 Monterey-Salinas Transit MON 5 Small Urban Small Bus R 12375 2015 161411 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 4,483,177$ 86 50 Monterey-Salinas Transit MON 5 Small Urban Small Bus R 12376 2015 146874 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 4,554,377$ 86 51 Monterey-Salinas Transit MON 5 Small Urban Small Bus R 12377 2015 169381 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 4,625,577$ 86 52 San Benito County Local Transportation Authority SBN 5 Rural Large Bus R 84647 2010 127986 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 4,706,777$ 86 53 San Benito County Local Transportation Authority SBN 5 Rural Minivan R 96624 2010 133644 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 4,762,777$ 86 54 Smooth SB 5 Small Urban Medium Bus R 12713 2013 200234 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 4,839,477$ 86 55 Smooth SB 5 Small Urban Large Bus R 46326 2010 189417 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 4,920,677$ 86 56 ARC Imperial Valley IMP 11 Rural Minivan SE 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 4,976,677$ 85 57 Redwood Coast Transit Authority DEL 1 Rural Minivan R 85634 2012 165165 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 5,032,677$ 84 58 Community Bridges/Liftline SC 5 Small Urban Cameras (3) OE 4,171$ 1,043$ 5,214$ 5,037,891$ 84 59 North Valley Services TEH 2 Rural Large Bus R 85224 2003 271739 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 5,119,091$ 84 60 North Valley Services TEH 2 Rural Large Bus R 23527 2008 358733 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 5,200,291$ 84 61 ARC Imperial Valley IMP 11 Rural Minivan SE 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 5,256,291$ 84 62 Community Bridges/Liftline SC 5 Small Urban Mobile Radio OE 13,109$ 3,277$ 16,386$ 5,272,677$ 84 63 Community Bridges/Liftline SC 5 Small Urban Computer Hardware OE 6,363$ 1,591$ 7,954$ 5,280,631$ 84 64 Solano Transportation Authority SOL 4 Small Urban Mobility Management MM 284,590$ 71,147$ 355,737$ 5,636,368$ 84 65 Easy Lift Transportation, Inc.SB 5 Small Urban Small Bus R 39996 2013 166947 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 5,707,568$ 82 66 Regents of the University of California, Santa Cruz SC 5 Small Urban Minivan R 50778 2004 65301 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 5,763,568$ 82 67 Ukiah Senior Center, Inc.MEN 1 Rural Minivan R 44149 2008 121862 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 5,819,568$ 82 68 Regents of the University of California, Santa Cruz SC 5 Small Urban Minivan R 50855 2004 72081 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 5,875,568$ 82 69 Regents of the University of California, Santa Cruz SC 5 Small Urban Minivan R 51862 2004 85856 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 5,931,568$ 82 70 Milestones of Development INC SOL 4 Small Urban Small Bus R 73534 2012 165297 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 6,002,768$ 82 71 Milestones of Development INC SOL 4 Small Urban Small Bus R 17017 2012 153920 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 6,073,968$ 82 72 Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency RIV 8 Small Urban Minivan SE 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 6,129,968$ 80 73 Desert Area Resources and Training KER 6 Small Urban Minivan R 12650 2010 179289 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 6,185,968$ 79 R = Replacement Vehicle MM = Mobility Management Red Text = Project Added SE = Service Expansion Vehicle OE = Operating Equipment Blue Text = Funding Reduction O = Operating Assistance Page 2 of 5 32 Attachment B - FTA Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities Draft 2019 Program of Projects February 5, 2020 Small Urban and Rural Prioritized List (score priority order) #AGENCY County Caltrans District Small Urban or Rural Project Type (1)Vin Year Miles FTA 5310 Share Local (Toll Credits) Project Total Cumulative (Federal $) Score 74 Desert Area Resources and Training KER 6 Small Urban Minivan R 70020 2011 154185 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 6,241,968$ 79 75 Desert Area Resources and Training KER 6 Small Urban Minivan R 70022 2011 116277 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 6,297,968$ 79 76 Desert Area Resources and Training KER 6 Small Urban Minivan R 69994 2011 186493 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 6,353,968$ 79 77 North of the River Rec and Park District KER 6 Small Urban Small Bus R 08597 2014 128651 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 6,425,168$ 79 78 North of the River Rec and Park District KER 6 Small Urban Small Bus R 22494 2014 124332 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 6,481,168$ 79 79 North of the River Rec and Park District KER 6 Small Urban Small Bus R 22503 2014 132156 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 6,537,168$ 79 80 North of the River Rec and Park District KER 6 Small Urban Small Bus R 22493 2014 123714 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 6,593,168$ 79 81 North of the River Rec and Park District KER 6 Small Urban Minivan R 84304 2014 98255 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 6,649,168$ 79 82 North of the River Rec and Park District KER 6 Small Urban Minivan R 84305 2014 86110 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 6,705,168$ 79 83 North of the River Rec and Park District KER 6 Small Urban Mobile Radios OE 1,163$ 291$ 1,454$ 6,706,622$ 79 84 Milestones of Development INC SOL 4 Small Urban Minivan SE 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 6,762,622$ 78 85 Care-A-Van RIV 8 Small Urban Minivan R 51038 2013 90733 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 6,818,622$ 78 86 Eastern Sierra Transit Authority INY 9 Rural Large Bus R 59860 2013 109812 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 6,899,822$ 77 87 Eastern Sierra Transit Authority INY 9 Rural Large Bus R 59858 2013 105054 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 6,981,022$ 77 88 Milestones of Development INC SOL 4 Small Urban Minivan SE 64,960$ 16,240$ 56,000$ 7,037,022$ 76 89 Humboldt Senior Resource Center HUM 1 Small Urban Minivan R 43588 2013 191804 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 7,093,022$ 76 90 Humboldt Senior Resource Center HUM 1 Small Urban Medium Bus R 93075 2000 281205 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 7,169,722$ 76 91 Humboldt Senior Resource Center HUM 1 Small Urban Medium Bus R 74136 2002 190101 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 7,246,422$ 76 92 Humboldt Senior Resource Center HUM 1 Small Urban Medium Bus R 54578 2003 134301 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 7,323,122$ 76 93 Humboldt Senior Resource Center HUM 1 Small Urban Mobile Radios OE 16,898$ 4,224$ 21,122$ 7,344,244$ 76 94 Valley Resource Center for the Retarded Inc.RIV 8 Small Urban Minivan R 01113 2007 75173 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 7,400,244$ 76 95 Valley Resource Center for the Retarded Inc.RIV 8 Small Urban Small Bus R 58934 2006 110987 $ 56,960 $ 14,240 $ 71,200 7,471,444$ 76 96 Valley Resource Center for the Retarded Inc.RIV 8 Small Urban Large Bus R 70015 2004 181210 $ 64,960 $ 16,240 $ 81,200 7,552,644$ 76 97 Humboldt Transit Authority HUM 1 Rural Small Bus R 21687 2012 203568 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 7,623,844$ 75 98 Dignity Health Connected Living SHA 2 Rural Medium Bus R 21323 2011 172724 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 7,700,544$ 75 99 Dignity Health Connected Living SHA 2 Rural Medium Bus R 21325 2011 170608 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 7,777,244$ 75 100 Butte County Association of Governments BUT 3 Rural Large Bus R 95250 2013 156341 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 7,858,444$ 74 101 Butte County Association of Governments BUT 3 Rural Large Bus R 12720 2013 152344 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 7,939,644$ 74 R = Replacement Vehicle MM = Mobility Management Red Text = Project Added SE = Service Expansion Vehicle OE = Operating Equipment Blue Text = Funding Reduction O = Operating Assistance Page 3 of 5 33 Attachment B - FTA Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities Draft 2019 Program of Projects February 5, 2020 Small Urban and Rural Prioritized List (score priority order) #AGENCY County Caltrans District Small Urban or Rural Project Type (1)Vin Year Miles FTA 5310 Share Local (Toll Credits) Project Total Cumulative (Federal $) Score 102 Butte County Association of Governments BUT 3 Rural Large Bus R 95252 2013 157673 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 8,020,844$ 74 103 Butte County Association of Governments BUT 3 Rural Large Bus R 16127 2013 159369 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 8,102,044$ 74 104 Butte County Association of Governments BUT 3 Rural Large Bus R 95249 2013 150723 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 8,183,244$ 74 105 North Valley Services TEH 2 Rural Large Bus R 07595 2015 182777 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 8,264,444$ 74 100% LINE 1 ARC Imperial Valley IMP 11 Rural Large Bus R 19438 2013 216280 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 81,200$ 73 2 Forest Folk Incorporated RIV 8 Rural Minivan R 91413 2002 91413 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 137,200$ 71 3 Humboldt Senior Resource Center HUM 1 Small Urban Medium Bus SE 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 213,900$ 66 4 Humboldt Transit Authority HUM 1 Rural Small Bus R 19276 2012 178984 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 285,100$ 65 5 Humboldt Transit Authority HUM 1 Rural Small Bus R 21688 2012 173163 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 356,300$ 65 6 Roderick Hayfork Senior Nutrition Center TRI 2 Rural Small Bus R 12999 2007 82769 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 427,500$ 65 7 The Latino Equity Advocacy Policy Institute KIN 6 Rural Minivan SE 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 483,500$ 65 8 The Latino Equity Advocacy Policy Institute KIN 6 Rural Minivan SE 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 539,500$ 65 9 The Latino Equity Advocacy Policy Institute KIN 6 Rural Minivan SE 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 595,500$ 65 10 Amador Transit AMA 10 Small Urban Minivan SE 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 651,500$ 63 11 Cambria Community Council SLO 5 Small Urban Medium Bus R 50991 2013 102403 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 728,200$ 62 12 Dignity Health Connected Living SHA 2 Rural Small Bus R 31017 2013 98351 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 799,400$ 60 13 United Cerebral Palsy of Central California FRE 6 Rural Minivan SE 44,800$ 11,200$ 56,000$ 855,400$ 58 14 United Cerebral Palsy of Central California FRE 6 Rural Small Bus SE 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 926,600$ 58 15 United Cerebral Palsy of Central California FRE 6 Rural Small Bus SE 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 997,800$ 57 16 United Cerebral Palsy of Central California FRE 6 Rural Small Bus SE 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 1,069,000$ 55 17 Colusa County Transit Agency COL 3 Rural Large Bus R 30482 2015 141435 64,960$ 16,240$ 81,200$ 1,150,200$ 50 18 Kings County Commission on Aging KIN 6 Rural Small Bus SE 56,960$ 14,240$ 71,200$ 1,221,400$ 48 19 Napa Valley Transportation Authority NAP 4 Small Urban Medium Bus R 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 1,298,100$ 20 20 Napa Valley Transportation Authority NAP 4 Small Urban Medium Bus R 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 1,374,800$ 20 21 Napa Valley Transportation Authority NAP 4 Small Urban Medium Bus R 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 1,451,500$ 20 22 Napa Valley Transportation Authority NAP 4 Small Urban Medium Bus R 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 1,528,200$ 20 23 Napa Valley Transportation Authority NAP 4 Small Urban Medium Bus R 61,360$ 15,340$ 76,700$ 1,604,900$ 20 Contingency List if Funding Becomes Available R = Replacement Vehicle MM = Mobility Management Red Text = Project Added SE = Service Expansion Vehicle OE = Operating Equipment Blue Text = Funding Reduction O = Operating Assistance Page 4 of 5 34 Attachment B - FTA Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities Draft 2019 Program of Projects February 5, 2020 Small Urban and Rural Prioritized List (score priority order) #AGENCY County Caltrans District Small Urban or Rural Project Type (1)Vin Year Miles FTA 5310 Share Local (Toll Credits) Project Total Cumulative (Federal $) Score EXPANDED PROJECTS 1 Seniors Council SC 5 Small Urban Operating Assistance O 130,893$ 130,893$ 261,786$ 261,786$ 100 2 Common Ground Senior Services CAL 10 Rural Operating Assistance O 150,000$ 150,000$ 300,000$ 561,786$ 100 3 Outreach & Escort INC (Outreach)SC 4 Small Urban Mobility Management MM 136,246$ 34,062$ 170,308$ 732,094$ 97 4 Reach Out Morongo Basin SBN 8 Rural Operating Assistance O 80,000$ 80,000$ 160,000$ 892,094$ 97 5 Town of Truckee NEV 3 Small Urban Operating Assistance O 150,000$ 150,000$ 300,000$ 1,192,094$ 96 6 Outreach & Escort INC (Outreach)SC 4 Small Urban Operating Assistance O 64,846$ 64,846$ 129,692$ 1,321,786$ 95 7 City of Rio Vista SOL 4 Rural Operating Assistance O 150,000$ 150,000$ 300,000$ 1,621,786$ 95 8 Eastern Sierra Transit Authority INY 9 Rural Operating Assistance O 35,000$ 35,000$ 70,000$ 1,691,786$ 94 9 The Arc of Amador and Calaveras AMA 10 Rural Operating Assistance O 150,000$ 150,000$ 300,000$ 1,991,786$ 94 10 Tuolumne County Transit Agency TUL 10 Rural Operating Assistance O 128,331$ 128,331$ 256,662$ 2,248,448$ 93 11 Faith in Action SOL 4 Small Urban Operating Assistance O 150,000$ 150,000$ 300,000$ 2,548,448$ 92 12 Easy Lift Transportation, Inc.SB 5 Small Urban Operating Assistance O 71,000$ 71,000$ 142,000$ 2,690,448$ 91 13 NCI Affiliates SLO 5 Small Urban Operating Assistance O 150,000$ 150,000$ 300,000$ 2,990,448$ 91 14 Tehama County Transit Agency TEH 2 Rural Operating Assistance O 150,000$ 150,000$ 300,000$ 3,290,448$ 91 15 Consolidated Tribal Health Project, Inc.MEN 1 Rural Operating Assistance O 150,000$ 150,000$ 300,000$ 3,590,448$ 91 16 Wilshire Community Services SLO 5 Small Urban Operating Assistance O 150,000$ 150,000$ 300,000$ 3,890,448$ 90 17 Community Partners In Caring SB 5 Small Urban Operating Assistance O 150,000$ 150,000$ 300,000$ 4,190,448$ 90 18 Lake Transit Authority LAK 1 Small Urban Operating Assistance O 150,000$ 150,000$ 300,000$ 4,490,448$ 90 19 County of Sonoma, Human Services Department, Adult and Aging Division SON 4 Rural Operating Assistance O 80,000$ 80,000$ 160,000$ 4,650,448$ 90 20 Morongo Basin Transit Authority SBN 8 Rural Operating Assistance O 117,668$ 117,668$ 235,336$ 4,885,784$ 89 21 Lake Links Inc.LAK 1 Rural Operating Assistance O 46,400$ 46,400$ 92,800$ 4,978,584$ 87 22 ARC Imperial Valley IMP 11 Rural Operating Assistance O 101,984$ 101,984$ 203,967$ 5,182,551$ 85 23 Coastal Seniors, Inc.MEN 1 Rural Operating Assistance O 150,000$ 150,000$ 300,000$ 5,482,551$ 84 24 Lake Links Inc.LAK 1 Rural Mobility Management MM 160,960$ 40,240$ 201,200$ 5,683,751$ 82 25 San Luis Obispo Council of Governments/SLO Regional Rideshare SLO 5 Small Urban Mobility Management MM 240,000$ 60,000$ 300,000$ 5,983,751$ 81 100% LINE 1 Mental Health Client Action Network (MHCAN)SC 5 Small Urban Operating Assistance O 108,345$ 108,345$ 216,689$ 216,689$ 80 2 City of Petaluma SON 4 Small Urban Mobility Management MM 77,472$ 19,368$ 96,840$ 313,529$ 80 3 Amador Transit AMA 10 Rural Operating Assistance O 28,242$ 28,242$ 56,484$ 370,013$ 79 4 Community Bridges/Liftline SC 5 Small Urban Operating Assistance O 99,500$ 99,500$ 199,000$ 569,013$ 78 5 Dignity Health Connected Living SHA 2 Rural Operating Assistance O 87,700$ 87,700$ 175,400$ 744,413$ 75 6 Area 1 Agency on Aging HUM 1 Rural Operating Assistance O 68,815$ 68,815$ 137,629$ 882,042$ 74 7 Humboldt Medi-Trans HUM 1 Rural Operating Assistance O 150,000$ 150,000$ 300,000$ 1,182,042$ 71 8 North Valley Services TEH 2 Rural Operating Assistance O 150,000$ 150,000$ 300,000$ 1,482,042$ 62 9 Camping Unlimited for Developmentally Disabled SC 5 Small Urban Operating Assistance O 150,000$ 150,000$ 300,000$ 1,782,042$ 37 Contingency List if Additional Funding Becomes Available R = Replacement Vehicle MM = Mobility Management Red Text = Project Added SE = Service Expansion Vehicle OE = Operating Equipment Blue Text = Funding Reduction O = Operating Assistance Page 5 of 5 35 RESOLUTION NO. 20-007 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CERTIFYING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH THE PUBLIC TRANSIT – HUMAN SERVICES TRANSPORTATION COORDINATED PLAN WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (“Commission”) is charged with reviewing, evaluating, and programming for Federal Transit Administration’s Section 5310 funding for transportation services to meet the needs of seniors and persons with disabilities for whom public transportation services are otherwise unavailable, insufficient or inappropriate; and WHEREAS, the Commission confirms 46 projects from fourteen agencies were submitted in Riverside County; and WHEREAS, the Commission has scored and ranked the traditional project applications; and WHEREAS, the Commission, as the Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA); and WHEREAS, the Section 5310 process, as interpreted in Federal Transit Administration Circular 9070.1F, Section 4, requires the RTPA to include in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program each request awarded Section 5310 funding by Caltrans and to certify by resolution that the evaluated projects are derived from a locally developed, coordinated public transit-human services transportation plan. NOW, THEREFORE, the Commission does hereby certify and resolve as follows: Section 1. The Commission has determined that the locally evaluated projects approved by Caltrans for Section 5310 funding are derived from the Riverside County Public Transit – Human Services Transportation Coordinated Plan (adopted by the Commission on April 9, 2008) and the 2016 Update (approved December 2016). ATTACHMENT 3 36 Section 2. Each of the projects awarded Section 5310 funding by Caltrans will be included in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program adopted for Riverside County. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of May, 2020. ____________________________________ Ben. J. Benoit, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: ______________________________________ Lisa Mobley, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 37 AGENDA ITEM 5E Agenda Item 5E RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 27, 2020 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Ariel Alcon Tapia, Management Analyst Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager THROUGH: Lorelle Moe-Luna, Multimodal Services Director SUBJECT: Low Carbon Transit Operations Program STAFF RECOMMENDATION This item is for the Committee to: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 20-006 “Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding Authorization for the Execution of the Certifications and Assurances and Authorized Agent Forms for the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program for Expanded Perris Valley Line Operations FY 21 Project in the Amount of $1,081,302”; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission’s Commuter Rail Program applies for various federal and state funds that are necessary to fund rail projects within Riverside County. There is also the need for grants to meet the Commission’s annual funding responsibility related to rail operations and capital projects. The Commuter Rail Program is currently seeking approval to obtain Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) grant funding which is available through the California Department of Transportation. Projects eligible for this program need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and support transit agencies in their effort to increase mode share. The Rail Program is seeking operation funding for the newly extended Perris Valley Line (PVL) commuter rail service. Funding for this grant is formula based. The application is for funding allocated to the Commission in the amount of $1,081,302. As required by the LCTOP grant guidelines, Resolution No. 20-006 is needed to authorize use of the funds on PVL operations and authorize the Executive Director to execute the Certifications, Assurances, and Authorized Agent forms. The resolution is required to submit and file the grant; therefore, staff recommends approval of the resolution related to the FY 2019/20 LCTOP grant. Funding received from this grant will be included in the FY 2020/21 budget and will be reflected in the Commission’s FY 2020/21 Short Range Transit Plan. 38 Agenda Item 5E Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A Year: FY 2020/21 Amount: $1,081,302 Source of Funds: LCTOP Budget Adjustment: N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 034198 415 41511 0000 103 25 41501 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 04/10/2020 Attachment: Resolution No. 20-006 39 RESOLUTION NO. 20-006 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION REGARDING AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTION OF THE CERTIFICATIONS AND ASSURANCES AND AUTHORIZED AGENT FORMS FOR THE LOW CARBON TRANSIT OPERATIONS PROGRAM FOR THE EXPANDED PERRIS VALLEY LINE OPERATIONS FY 21 PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,081,302 WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission is an eligible project sponsor and may receive state funding from the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) for transit projects; and WHEREAS, the statutes related to state-funded transit projects require a local or regional implementing agency to abide by various regulations; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 862 (2014) named the California Department of Transportation (Department) as the administrative agency for the LCTOP; and WHEREAS, the Department has developed guidelines for the purpose of administering and distributing LCTOP funds to eligible project sponsors (local agencies); and WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission wishes to delegate authorization to execute these documents and any amendments thereto to Anne Mayer, Executive Director; and WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission wishes to implement the following LCTOP project listed above, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Riverside County Transportation Commission that the fund recipient agrees to comply with all conditions and requirements set forth in the Certification and Assurances and the Authorized Agent documents and applicable statutes, regulations and guidelines for all LCTOP funded transit projects. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Anne Mayer, Executive Director be authorized to execute all required documents of the LCTOP program and any Amendments thereto with the Department. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Riverside County Transportation Commission that it hereby authorizes the submittal of the following project nomination and allocation request to the Department: 40 FY 2019-20 LCTOP funds: List project(s), including the following information: Project Name: Expanded Perris Valley Line Operations FY21 Amount of LCTOP funds requested: $1,081,302 Short description of project: Funding will be used for operating costs associated to expand the commuter rail Perris Valley Line. Contributing Sponsor: Not applicable APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of May 2020. Ben J Benoit, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Lisa Mobley, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 41 AGENDA ITEM 6 Agenda Item 6 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 27, 2020 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Revised Fiscal Year 2020 and Fiscal Year 2021 Revenue Projections for Measure A, Local Transportation Fund, and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the revised mid-year Fiscal Year 2019/20 revenue projections of $178 million for 2009 Measure A (Measure A) revenues, $91 million for Local Transportation Fund (LTF) revenues and $16 million for Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) revenues; 2) Approve the revised FY 2020/21 revenue projections of $160 million for Measure A revenues, $82 million for LTF revenues, and $11 million for TUMF revenues; 3) Approve the budget decrease adjustments to Measure A revenues of $24 million and expenditures of $9.91 million to reflect the revised FY 2019/20 Measure A projection; 4) Approve the budget decrease adjustments to LTF revenues of $12 million, transfers in of $360,000, and expenditures and transfers out of $450,000 to reflect the revised FY 2019/20 LTF projection; 5) Approve the budget decrease adjustments to TUMF revenues of $11 million to reflect the revised FY 2019/20 TUMF projection; and 6) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its January meeting, the Commission approved the mid-year FY 2019/20 and the FY 2020/21 revenue projections for Measure A, LTF, and TUMF revenues. Subsequently in March, the federal government as well as California’s Governor Newsom issued emergency declarations related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Further, on March 19, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-33-20, a stay at home order to protect the health and well-being of all Californians and to establish consistency across the state in order to slow the spread of COVID-19. The County of Riverside also issued a directive to county residents supporting the Governor’s executive order. 42 Agenda Item 6 COVID-19 and the related “stay at home” orders have negatively impacted the local, regional, state, and federal economies; the magnitude and duration of these impacts is uncertain. Nonetheless, Commission staff determined that it was critical to reassess the FY 2019/20 and FY 2020/21 revenue projections for Measure A, LTF, and TUMF to establish more realistic projections and expectations for the Commission’s FY 2020/21 budget and impacts on local jurisdictions. DISCUSSION: Measure A Sales Tax Revenues Measure A is the local half-cent transactions and use tax approved by Riverside County voters in November 2002. Measure A funds fund highway, regional arterial, local streets and roads, new corridors, economic development, bond financing, bus transit, commuter rail, commuter assistance, and specialized transportation projects in the three geographic areas of Riverside County, as defined in the Measure A Expenditure Plan. For the Measure A sales tax revenues, management analyzed each economic category (general retail, food products, transportation, construction, business to business, and miscellaneous) and underlying economic segments that generate Measure A sales tax. Management then estimated a percent change in each segment. For example, management estimated a 100 percent decrease in new and used auto sales (transportation); however, management estimated no change in food markets (food products category). The anticipated benefit of the Wayfair decision and implementation of internet sales taxes slightly offset the projected changes in Measure A sales tax revenues due to COVID-19. Management used the most recent benchmark year information from Q3 2019 (separate staff report at this meeting) to estimate a one-month net reduction in Measure A sales tax revenues. Management then applied the estimated monthly reduction to the last four months of FY 2019/20 and the first eight months of FY 2020/21. This reflects a conservative assumption that the COVID-19 impacts extend for a 12-month or one-year period. As a result of this analysis, management projects a significant decrease in the revised FY 2019/20 and FY 2020/21 Measure A revenues, as follows: Measure A Projection FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21 Original $ 193,000,000 $ 207,000,000 Mid-year 202,000,000 N/A Revised 178,000,000 160,000,000 Decrease ($) 24,000,000 47,000,000 Decrease (%) 12% 22% 43 Agenda Item 6 LTF Sales Tax Revenues LTF sales tax revenues represent a quarter cent of the statewide sales tax and primarily fund transit requirements within the county in addition to planning and administration activities and bicycle and pedestrian projects. These revenues approximate 51 percent of Measure A sales tax revenues; management applied this percentage to the Measure A net reductions for the same period. Accordingly, management projects a significant decrease in the revised FY 2019/20 and FY 2020/21 LTF revenues, as follows: LTF Projection FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21 Original $ 97,000,000 $ 106,000,000 Mid-year 103,000,000 N/A Revised 91,000,000 82,000,000 Decrease ($) 12,000,000 24,000,000 Decrease (%) 12% 23% TUMF Revenues TUMF revenues represent the Commission’s share of revenues generated from a development fee program administered by the Western Riverside Council of Governments. Local Western County jurisdictions collect fees charged to ensure new development pays for the new transportation facilities needed to accommodate growth. For TUMF revenues, management analyzed TUMF revenues for the first six months of FY 2019/20 and determined an average monthly TUMF revenue amount. The analysis showed a 14 percent decrease in TUMF revenues for the first half of FY 2019/20 compared to the same period for FY 2018/19. Additionally, actual revenues were tracking below the FY 2019/20 projections. Management assumed that TUMF revenues for the last four months of FY 2019/20 and the first eight months of FY 2020/21 would decrease to approximately 10 percent and 20 percent, respectively, of the average monthly TUMF revenue amount. This analysis resulted in the following revised FY 2019/20 and FY 2020/21 TUMF revenues: TUMF Projection FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21 Original $ 25,000,000 $ 28,000,000 Mid-year 27,000,000 N/A Revised 16,000,000 11,000,000 Decrease ($) 11,000,000 17,000,000 Decrease (%) 41% 61% 44 Agenda Item 6 NEXT STEPS: In recent weeks, the Governor issued additional executive orders that impact the collection of sales tax revenues. Management has not determined the impact, if any, of these orders on the revised Measure A and LTF sales tax revenues. However, staff will continue to monitor FY 2019/20 and FY 2020/21 sales tax revenues to determine if any required adjustments to the revenue projections. Management recommends the Commission approve the revised revenue projections for FY 2019/20 and FY 2020/21. Additionally, management recommends the following FY 2019/20 budget adjustments related to the revised FY 2019/20 revenue projections: • Measure A: $24 million decrease in revenues and related direct effect decreases of $7,331,000 and $2,579,000 on local streets and roads program and Coachella Valley highways and regional arterial expenditures, respectively; • LTF: $12 million decrease in revenues and related direct effect decreases of $360,000 and $90,000 on Commission and Southern California Association of Governments planning allocations, respectively; and • TUMF: $11 million decrease in revenues. While the revised FY 2019/20 revenue projections reflect significant decreases in revenues as a result of the COVID-19 impact, sufficient Measure A, LTF, and TUMF reserves are available to fund budgeted expenditures. However, even greater decreases anticipated in FY 2020/21 revenues may impact Commission programs and projects. Accordingly, staff requires additional time for the development of the FY 2020/21 budget. Staff anticipates that the FY 2020/21 budget will be presented at the June Commission meeting for a public hearing and adoption rather than a preliminary budget in May and final budget in June as in past years. While the FY 2020/21 budget will reflect the best available information at the time of adoption, management anticipates the need for subsequent budget adjustments throughout the year as the economic impacts of COVID-19 become clearer. Upon Commission approval of these revised revenue projections and related FY 2019/20 budget adjustments, staff will continue the development of the FY 2020/21 budget. Additionally, staff will provide this information to the local jurisdictions and transit operators for planning purposes. 45 Agenda Item 6 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: No Year: FY 2019/20 Amount: Decreases of: $47,360,000 sources $10,360,000 uses Source of Funds: 2009 Measure A, LTF, TUMF Budget Adjustment: Yes GL/Project Accounting No.: Measure A $ (5,683,000) 623999 401 40101 262 31 40101 revenues (2,062,000) 613999 401 40101 261 31 40101 revenues (1,137,000) 654199 401 40101 265 33 40101 revenues (284,000) 269 62 40101 revenues (355,000) 260 26 40101 revenues (118,000) 270 26 40101 revenues (279,000) 632199 401 40101 263 41 40101 revenues (1,671,000) 266 72 40101 revenues (5,404,000) 267 71 40101 revenues (1,505,000) 264 19 40101 revenues (223,000) 683999 401 40101 268 31 40101 revenues (2,579,000) 563999 401 40101 256 31 40101 revenues (1,804,000) 257 71 40101 revenues (773,000) 258 26 40101 revenues (123,000) 234 71 40101 revenues (5,404,000) 267 71 86104 expenditures (2,579,000) 256 31 86405 expenditures (1,804,000) 257 71 86104 expenditures (123,000) 234 71 86104 expenditures LTF $ (12,000,000) 601 62 40102 revenues (360,000) 601 62 97001 transfers out (360,000) 106 65 59001 transfers in (90,000) 601 62 86205 expenditures TUMF $ (5,500,000) 725000 416 41607 210 72 42110 revenues (5,500,000) 735000 416 41607 210 73 42110 revenues Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 04/16/2020 46 Agenda Item 6 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A Year: FY 2020/21 Amount: Decreases in revenues of $47,000,000 Measure A; $24 million LTF; and $17,000,000 TUMF Source of Funds: 2009 Measure A, LTF, TUMF Budget Adjustment: N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: Measure A $ (11,146,000) 623999 401 40101 262 31 40101 revenues (4,043,000) 613999 401 40101 261 31 40101 revenues (2,230,000) 654199 401 40101 265 33 40101 revenues (557,000) 269 62 40101 revenues (697,000) 260 26 40101 revenues (233,000) 270 26 40101 revenues (546,000) 632199 401 40101 263 41 40101 revenues (3,278,000) 266 72 40101 revenues (10,599,000) 267 71 40101 revenues (2,950,000) 264 19 40101 revenues (437,000) 683999 401 40101 268 31 40101 revenues (5,040,000) 563999 401 40101 256 31 40101 revenues (3,528,000) 257 71 40101 revenues (1,512,000) 258 26 40101 revenues (204,000) 234 71 40101 revenues LTF $ (24,000,000) 601 62 40102 revenues TUMF $ (8,500,000) 725000 416 41607 210 72 42110 revenues (8,500,000) 735000 416 41607 210 73 42110 revenues Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 04/16/2020 Attachments: 1) Measure A Program Allocation FY 2019/20 Revised for COVID-19 Impacts 2) Measure A Program Allocation FY 2020/21 Revised for COVID-19 Impacts 3) Riverside County LTF FY 2019/20 Apportionment Revised for COVID-19 Impacts 4) Riverside County LTF FY 2020/21 Apportionment Revised for COVID-19 Impacts 47 Revised Projection (3/30/2020) Revised Projection (1/8/2020) Original Projection (1/9/2019) Increase (Decrease) Projected Measure A Revenues 178,000,000$ 202,000,000$ 193,000,000$ (24,000,000)$ Less: Administration 2 - - - Projected Apportionment to Programs: Western County Highway Improvements (262)42,146,000$ 47,829,000$ 45,698,000$ (5,683,000)$ New Corridors (261)15,288,000 17,350,000 16,577,000 (2,062,000) Public Transit Commuter Rail (265)8,429,000 9,566,000 9,140,000 (1,137,000) Intercity Bus (269)2,107,000 2,391,000 2,285,000 (284,000) Specialized Transit-Operations (260)2,634,000 2,989,000 2,856,000 (355,000) Specialized Transit-CTSA (270)878,000 996,000 952,000 (118,000) Commuter Services (263)2,066,000 2,345,000 2,240,000 (279,000) Regional Arterial (266)12,396,000 14,067,000 13,441,000 (1,671,000) Local Streets & Roads (267)40,081,000 45,485,000 43,458,000 (5,404,000) BANNING 578,000 656,000 627,000 (78,000) BEAUMONT 922,000 1,046,000 1,000,000 (124,000) CALIMESA 168,000 190,000 182,000 (22,000) CANYON LAKE 182,000 207,000 197,000 (25,000) CORONA 4,137,000 4,695,000 4,486,000 (558,000) EASTVALE 1,325,000 1,503,000 1,436,000 (178,000) HEMET 1,712,000 1,942,000 1,856,000 (230,000) JURUPA VALLEY 2,049,000 2,325,000 2,221,000 (276,000) LAKE ELSINORE 1,329,000 1,508,000 1,441,000 (179,000) MENIFEE 1,704,000 1,934,000 1,847,000 (230,000) MORENO VALLEY 3,918,000 4,446,000 4,248,000 (528,000) MURRIETA 2,376,000 2,697,000 2,577,000 (321,000) NORCO 658,000 746,000 713,000 (88,000) PERRIS 1,847,000 2,096,000 2,003,000 (249,000) RIVERSIDE 7,274,000 8,254,000 7,886,000 (980,000) SAN JACINTO 855,000 970,000 927,000 (115,000) TEMECULA 2,961,000 3,361,000 3,211,000 (400,000) WILDOMAR 627,000 711,000 680,000 (84,000) RIVERSIDE COUNTY 5,459,000 6,198,000 5,920,000 (739,000) Bond Financing (264)11,156,000 12,661,000 12,096,000 (1,505,000) Economic Development Projects (268)1,653,000 1,876,000 1,792,000 (223,000) SUBTOTAL-Western County 138,834,000 157,555,000 150,535,000 (18,721,000) Coachella Valley Highways & Regional Arterials (256)19,126,000 21,705,000 20,738,000 (2,579,000) Local Street & Roads (257)13,389,000 15,193,000 14,516,000 (1,804,000) CATHEDRAL CITY 1,418,000 1,609,000 1,537,000 (191,000) COACHELLA 579,000 657,000 628,000 (78,000) DESERT HOT SPRINGS 468,000 531,000 507,000 (63,000) INDIAN WELLS 246,000 279,000 267,000 (33,000) INDIO 1,894,000 2,149,000 2,054,000 (255,000) LA QUINTA 1,466,000 1,664,000 1,590,000 (198,000) PALM DESERT 2,622,000 2,975,000 2,842,000 (353,000) PALM SPRINGS 2,066,000 2,345,000 2,240,000 (279,000) RANCHO MIRAGE 890,000 1,010,000 965,000 (120,000) RIVERSIDE COUNTY 1,740,000 1,974,000 1,886,000 (234,000) Specialized & Public Transit (258)5,738,000 6,511,000 6,221,000 (773,000) SUBTOTAL-Coachella Valley 38,253,000 43,409,000 41,475,000 (5,156,000) Palo Verde Valley Local Street & Roads (234)913,000 1,036,000 990,000 (123,000) BLYTHE 721,000 819,000 782,000 (98,000) RIVERSIDE COUNTY 192,000 217,000 208,000 (25,000) SUBTOTAL-Palo Verde Valley 913,000 1,036,000 990,000 (123,000) TOTAL 178,000,000$ 202,000,000$ 193,000,000$ (24,000,000)$ Notes: 1 Estimate for planning purposes, subject to change and rounding differences. 2 Administrative costs are allocated in accordance with a cost allocation plan on a quarterly basis. Accordingly, the Measure A allocations to each geographic area by program will be reduced for such quarterly cost allocations. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A PROGRAM ALLOCATION (PROJECTION)1 FY 2019/20 (Revised 3/30/2020) N:\MEASURES\Meas A FY20\REVISED_2020 Measure A Revenue Projections_3.30.2020_COVID-19 4/13/20208:00 AM ATTACHMENT 1 48 Revised Projection (3/30/2020) Original Projection (1/8/2020) Increase (Decrease) Projected Measure A Revenues 160,000,000$ 207,000,000$ (47,000,000)$ Less: Administration 2 - - - Projected Apportionment to Programs: Western County Highway Improvements (262)37,942,000$ 49,088,000$ (11,146,000)$ New Corridors (261)13,763,000 17,806,000 (4,043,000) Public Transit Commuter Rail (265)7,588,000 9,818,000 (2,230,000) Intercity Bus (269)1,897,000 2,454,000 (557,000) Specialized Transit-Operations (260)2,371,000 3,068,000 (697,000) Specialized Transit-CTSA (270)790,000 1,023,000 (233,000) Commuter Services (263)1,860,000 2,406,000 (546,000) Regional Arterial (266)11,160,000 14,438,000 (3,278,000) Local Streets & Roads (267)36,083,000 46,682,000 (10,599,000) BANNING 516,000 668,000 (152,000) BEAUMONT 825,000 1,067,000 (242,000) CALIMESA 154,000 200,000 (46,000) CANYON LAKE 168,000 218,000 (50,000) CORONA 3,655,000 4,729,000 (1,074,000) EASTVALE 1,187,000 1,536,000 (349,000) HEMET 1,537,000 1,989,000 (452,000) JURUPA VALLEY 1,851,000 2,395,000 (544,000) LAKE ELSINORE 1,172,000 1,517,000 (345,000) MENIFEE 1,553,000 2,010,000 (457,000) MORENO VALLEY 3,501,000 4,530,000 (1,029,000) MURRIETA 2,180,000 2,821,000 (641,000) NORCO 578,000 748,000 (170,000) PERRIS 1,667,000 2,157,000 (490,000) RIVERSIDE 6,499,000 8,408,000 (1,909,000) SAN JACINTO 775,000 1,003,000 (228,000) TEMECULA 2,783,000 3,601,000 (818,000) WILDOMAR 565,000 730,000 (165,000) RIVERSIDE COUNTY 4,917,000 6,355,000 (1,438,000) - Bond Financing (264)10,044,000 12,994,000 (2,950,000) Economic Development Projects (268)1,488,000 1,925,000 (437,000) SUBTOTAL-Western County 124,986,000 161,702,000 (36,716,000) Coachella Valley Highways & Regional Arterials (256)17,159,000 22,199,000 (5,040,000) Local Street & Roads (257)12,011,000 15,539,000 (3,528,000) CATHEDRAL CITY 1,233,000 1,596,000 (363,000) COACHELLA 531,000 687,000 (156,000) DESERT HOT SPRINGS 421,000 544,000 (123,000) INDIAN WELLS 230,000 297,000 (67,000) INDIO 1,681,000 2,175,000 (494,000) LA QUINTA 1,299,000 1,681,000 (382,000) PALM DESERT 2,391,000 3,094,000 (703,000) PALM SPRINGS 1,918,000 2,482,000 (564,000) RANCHO MIRAGE 789,000 1,020,000 (231,000) RIVERSIDE COUNTY 1,518,000 1,963,000 (445,000) Specialized & Public Transit (258)5,148,000 6,660,000 (1,512,000) SUBTOTAL-Coachella Valley 34,318,000 44,398,000 (10,080,000) Palo Verde Valley Local Street & Roads (234)696,000 900,000 (204,000) BLYTHE 548,000 709,000 (161,000) RIVERSIDE COUNTY 148,000 191,000 (43,000) SUBTOTAL-Palo Verde Valley 696,000 900,000 (204,000) TOTAL 160,000,000$ 207,000,000$ (47,000,000)$ Notes: 1 Estimate for planning purposes, subject to change and rounding differences. 2 Administrative costs are allocated in accordance with a cost allocation plan on a quarterly basis. Accordingly, the Measure A allocations to each geographic area by program will be reduced for such quarterly cost allocations. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FY 2020/21 (Revised (3/30/2020) MEASURE A PROGRAM ALLOCATION (PROJECTION)1 ATTACHMENT 2 49 Revised Revised Original Projection Projection Projection (Decrease) (3/30/2020)(1/8/2020)(1/9/2019)Increase Estimated Carryover (Unapportioned)17,983,000$ 17,983,000$ -$ -$ Estimated Receipts1 91,000,000 103,000,000 97,000,000 (12,000,000) TOTAL 108,983,000 120,983,000 97,000,000 (12,000,000) Less: County Auditor-Controller Administration 12,000 12,000 12,000 - Less: Estimated RCTC Administration2 1,100,000 1,100,000 1,100,000 - Less: RCTC Planning (3% of revenues)3,269,000 3,629,000 2,910,000 (360,000) Less: SCAG Planning (3/4 of 1% of revenues)817,000 907,000 728,000 (90,000) BALANCE 103,785,000 115,335,000 92,250,000 (11,550,000) Less: SB 821 (2% of balance)2,076,000 2,307,000 1,845,000 (231,000) BALANCE AVAILABLE BEFORE RESERVES 101,709,000 113,028,000 90,405,000 (11,319,000) Less: 10% Transit Reserves 10,171,000 11,303,000 9,041,000 (1,132,000) BALANCE AVAILABLE FOR APPORTIONMENT 91,538,000$ 101,725,000$ 81,364,000$ (10,187,000)$ FY 2019/20 Revised FY 2019/20 Revised FY 2019/20 Original Population Apportionment Apportionment Apportionment (Decrease) APPORTIONMENT Population % of Total (3/30/2020)(1/8/2020)(1/9/2019)Increase Western:1,923,562 79.62%72,882,000$ 80,992,000$ 64,781,000$ (8,110,000)$ Rail 22%16,034,000 17,818,000 14,252,000 (1,784,000) Transit 78%56,848,000 63,174,000 50,529,000 (6,326,000) Coachella Valley 466,366 19.30%17,670,000 19,637,000 15,706,000 (1,967,000) Palo Verde Valley 26,027 1.08%986,000 1,096,000 877,000 (110,000) 2,415,955 100.00%91,538,000$ 101,725,000$ 81,364,000$ (10,187,000)$ ALLOCATION OF TRANSIT RESERVES (in accordance with Reserve Policy adopted January 12, 2005): Western: Rail 1,782,000$ Transit: RTA 5,285,000$ Banning 159,000 Beaumont 270,000 Corona 189,000 Riverside 413,000 Subtotal Transit 6,316,000$ 6,316,000 Subtotal Western 8,098,000 Coachella Valley 1,963,000 Palo Verde Valley 110,000 Total Reserves 10,171,000$ NOTES: 1 Estimate for planning purposes, subject to change and rounding differences. Rounded to the nearest thousand. 2 Amount is an estimate; administrative costs are allocated in accordance with a cost allocation plan on a quarterly basis. Population Source: California Department of Finance, Demographic Research Unit as of January 1, 2018. Allocation of reserves: FY 2018/19 SRTP funding allocations approved 7/11/18. RIVERSIDE COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND FY 2019/20 APPORTIONMENT (REVISED 03/30/2020) N:\LTF\LTF Projections\2019-2020 Apportionments_REVISED MidYr_03.30.2020_COVID-19 4/13/20207:56 AM ATTACHMENT 3 50 Revised Original Projection Projection (Decrease) (3/30/2020)(1/8/2020)Increase Estimated Carryover (Unapportioned)-$ -$ -$ Estimated Receipts1 82,000,000 106,000,000 (24,000,000) TOTAL 82,000,000 106,000,000 (24,000,000) Less: County Auditor-Controller Administration 12,000 12,000 - Less: Estimated RCTC Administration2 1,000,000 1,000,000 - Less: RCTC Planning (3% of revenues)2,460,000 3,180,000 (720,000) Less: SCAG Planning (3/4 of 1% of revenues)615,000 795,000 (180,000) BALANCE 77,913,000 101,013,000 (23,100,000) Less: SB 821 (2% of balance)1,558,000 2,020,000 (462,000) BALANCE AVAILABLE BEFORE RESERVES 76,355,000 98,993,000 (22,638,000) Less: 10% Transit Reserves 7,636,000 9,899,000 (2,263,000) BALANCE AVAILABLE FOR APPORTIONMENT 68,719,000$ 89,094,000$ (20,375,000)$ FY 2020/21 Revised FY 2020/21 Original Population Apportionment Apportionment (Decrease) APPORTIONMENT Population % of Total (3/30/2020)(1/8/2020)Increase Western: 1,941,646 79.57% 54,680,000$ 70,894,000$ (16,214,000)$ Rail 22%12,030,000 15,597,000 (3,567,000) Transit 78%42,650,000 55,297,000 (12,647,000) Coachella Valley 472,427 19.36%13,305,000 17,249,000 (3,944,000) Palo Verde Valley 26,051 1.07%734,000 951,000 (217,000) 2,440,124 100.00%68,719,000$ 89,094,000$ (20,375,000)$ ALLOCATION OF TRANSIT RESERVES (in accordance with Reserve Policy adopted January 12, 2005): Western: Rail 1,337,000$ Transit: RTA 3,949,000$ Banning 120,000 Beaumont 220,000 Corona 134,000 Riverside 315,000 Subtotal Transit 4,738,000$ 4,738,000 Subtotal Western 6,075,000 Coachella Valley 1,478,000 Palo Verde Valley 82,000 Total Reserves 7,635,000$ NOTES: 1 Estimate for planning purposes, subject to change and rounding differences. Rounded to the nearest thousand. 2 Amount is an estimate; administrative costs are allocated in accordance with a cost allocation plan on a quarterly basis. Population Source: California Department of Finance, Demographic Research Unit as of January 1, 2019. Allocation of reserves: FY 2019/20 SRTP funding allocations approved 7/10/19. RIVERSIDE COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND FY 2020/21 APPORTIONMENT N:\LTF\LTF Projections\2020-2021 Apportionments_Original_Revised03.30.20_COVID-19.xlsx 3/31/20208:13 AM ATTACHMENT 4 51 REVISED REVENUE PROJECTIONS FY 2020 and FY 2021 Measure A, Local Transportation Fund and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Theresia Trevino 1 Good morning Commissioners. At the January meeting, the Commission approved revenue projections for the  revised revenue projections for FY 2020 and the revenue projections for FY 2021 to  be used for budget development. The revenue projections related to the RCTC’s two sales tax sources—Measure A and  Local Transportation Fund, or LTF—and  RCTC’s share of Transportation Uniform  Mitigation Fee revenues. Since that approval, the COVID‐19 pandemic has resulted in local, state, and national  emergency declarations.   1 FY 2020 and FY 2021 Revised Revenue Projections COVID-19 Impact APRIL 27, 2020 BUDGET & IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE MEETING 2 FY 2021 Budget Development Duration Magnitude Economic COVID‐19 and the related “stay  at home orders” have negatively impacted the  economy. This is truly an unprecedented event, and it’s difficult to predict the magnitude and  duration of the economic impacts. However, it’s our responsibility to revise the January estimates in order to complete  preparation of a more realistic FY 2021 budget. In the next slides, I will provide an overview of revised projections for the 3 revenue  sources. 2 FY 2020 and FY 2021 Revised Revenue Projections Measure A Sales Tax APRIL 27, 2020 BUDGET & IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE MEETING 3 Projected adjustment for 12‐month period Last 4 months FY 2020 = $24 million First 8 months FY 2021 = $47 million Determined one‐month impact = $6.4 million decrease Based on year ended Q3 2019 Offset by internet sales tax = $0.4 million Estimated COVID‐19 impact on economic segments in each category General retail Food products Transportation Construction Business to  business Miscellaneous Through our sales tax consultant, we obtained data on Measure A sales tax revenues through the most recent year  available (through the third quarter of 2019) by economic category.  [Q3 2019 is a consent item on this agenda.] There are six economic categories. Within each category are economic segments for a total of 32 segments. Based on the information at the time, we analyzed each segment and estimated the percentage impact of COVID‐ 19.  The estimates ranged from no change to a 100% reduction.   Let me give you a few examples. Food Markets represents about 29% of the sales tax revenues in the Food Products category. We estimated no change in this segment. Apparel Stores is about 17% in the General Retail category.   We assigned a 75% reduction to this segment. In the Transportation category, we assigned a 100% reduction to Auto Sales‐New, which represents 44% of this  category. This process then produced a one‐month impact estimate, which was a $6.4 million decrease using the Q3 2019  data. This decrease was then offset by the anticipated benefits from implementation of the Wayfair internet sales tax as  estimated by the sales tax consultant. The monthly benefit of $400,000 resulted in a one‐month net decrease of approximately $6 million. We then used this one‐month decrease to project an adjustment to Measure A revenues over a 12‐month period:   the last 4 months of FY 2020 and the first 8 months of FY 2021. This resulted in a $24 million decrease in the FY 2020 projection and $47 million decrease in the FY 2021 projection. On the next slide, I’ll show you a graphic to illustrate the results of this process. 3 FY 2020 and FY 2021 Revised Revenue Projections Economic Category Impacts APRIL 27, 2020 BUDGET & IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE MEETING 4  $‐  $500,000  $1,000,000  $1,500,000  $2,000,000  $2,500,000  $3,000,000  $3,500,000  $4,000,000  $4,500,000  $5,000,000 General Retail Food Products Transportation Construction Business to Business Miscellaneous Comparison of Monthly Revenue ‐Before & After COVID‐19 Monthly Revenue YE 9/30/19 Mo. Revenue After COVID‐19 Reduction In this chart, we show the monthly revenue before and after COVID‐19 by the six  economic categories noted in the previous slide. The blue bars represent the one‐month average of sales tax revenues per the Q3  2019 benchmark year data. The yellow bars represent our projection of the one‐month average after the analysis  of COVID‐19 impacts for each segment in each category. The process resulted in a reduction of revenues in all categories. The most significant reductions were in Transportation (69%), Construction (50%),  Business to Business (42%), and General Retail (30%). [Food Products reduction=13% and Miscellaneous=4%] On the next slide is a summary of the change in our revenue projections. 4 FY 2020 and FY 2021 Revised Revenue Projections Revised Measure A Revenues APRIL 27, 2020 BUDGET & IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE MEETING 5 Measure A Projection FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21  Original   $ 193,000,000  $ 207,000,000  Mid‐year    202,000,000   N/A  Revised    178,000,000   160,000,000      Decrease ($)   24,000,000   47,000,000  Decrease (%) 12% 22%  This chart summarizes the results of the revised Measure A projections. For FY 2020, the revised revenue projection of $178 million reflects the $24 million or  12% decrease. For FY 2021, the revised revenue projection of $160 million reflects the $47 million or  22% decrease. 5 FY 2020 and FY 2021 Revised Revenue Projections Revised LTF Revenues APRIL 27, 2020 BUDGET & IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE MEETING 6 LTF  about 51%  of Measure A •One month net impact = $3.1 million decrease •Gross impact = $3.3 million decrease • Offset by $0.2 million internet sales tax  •FY 2020 adjustment = $12 million FY 2021 adjustment = $24 million LTF Projection FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21  Original   $ 97,000,000  $ 106,000,000  Mid‐year    103,000,000   N/A  Revised    91,000,000   82,000,000      Decrease ($)   12,000,000   24,000,000  Decrease (%) 12% 23%  Since LTF  revenues are a quarter cent of the state sales tax, we used the Measure A  results in our projection. LTF  represents about 51% of Measure A revenues, so the one‐month net impact is  projected to be a $3.1 million decrease for the last 4 months of FY 2020 and the first  8 months of FY 2021. This results in a $12 million decrease for FY 2020 and $24 million decrease in FY 2021  to revised revenue projections of $91 million in FY 2020 and $82 million in FY 2021. 6 FY 2020 and FY 2021 Revised Revenue Projections Revised TUMF Revenues APRIL 27, 2020 BUDGET & IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE MEETING 7 Reviewed FY 2020 TUMF revenues through December •14% lower than FY 2019 comparable period •Average of $2 million/month  FY 2020 projection = $16 million •Assumed first 8 months at 100% of average monthly revenue •Assumed last 4 months at 10% of average monthly revenue FY 2021 projection = $11 million •Assumed first 8 months at 20% of average monthly revenue •Assumed last 4 months at 100% of average monthly revenue TUMF Projection FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21  Original   $ 25,000,000  $ 28,000,000  Mid‐year    27,000,000   N/A  Revised    16,000,000   11,000,000      Decrease ($)   11,000,000   17,000,000  Decrease (%) 41% 61%  TUMF revenues are RCTC’s share of the developer fee  program administered by  WRCOG. We  reviewed revenues through December and determined that they were about 14%  lower than the same period in FY 2019. Those revenues averaged about $2 million per month. Our assumptions for TUMF were similar to sales tax with the impacts beginning in  March for  a 12‐month period. We  projected that the impacts in the last 4 months of FY 2020 would be 10% of the  average monthly revenue and 20% for the first 8 months of FY 2021. Based on this process, we conservatively project that the TUMF revenues for FY 2020  will be $16 million and for FY 2021 will be $11 million.   These are significant decreases compared to the January projections as shown in the  chart. 7 FY 2020 and FY 2021 Revised Revenue Projections Future Considerations APRIL 27, 2020 BUDGET & IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE MEETING 8 Impacts of Executive  Orders related to  deferral of sales tax  payments by sellers Changes in revised  projection assumptions  compared to actual  trends Completion of FY 2021  Budget  •Public hearing at June  meeting •Adoption at June meeting When we developed our revised projections, it was as of a specific point in time based on the  information at that time. Since then, the Governor has issued two Executive Orders related to the deferral of sales tax payments  by sellers. These orders will have an impact on RCTC’s receipt of sales tax revenues. Additionally, soon we’ll begin to receive actual data on the impacts of COVID‐19 related to spending in  the economic categories discussed earlier. As the stay at home orders are lifted, hopefully we’ll gradually get a better sense of how long it will take  for the economy to return to normal or whatever the new normal will be. The point here is that there are many uncertainties and there will likely be differences between these  projections and actual results.   But we need to present a budget for the new fiscal year that anticipates some reductions in revenues. We are still working on the budget and will present it at the June meeting for the public hearing and  adoption. We will continue to monitor the revenues as we end this fiscal year and begin the new fiscal year.   It is possible that the we will need to come to the Board throughout FY 2021 for subsequent budget  adjustments as the economic impacts of the virus are better known. 8 FY 2020 and FY 2021 Revised Revenue Projections Staff Recommendations APRIL 27, 2020 BUDGET & IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE MEETING 9 •Approve revised FY 2020 projections •$178 million for Measure A •$91 million for LTF •$16 million for TUMF #1 •Approve revised FY 2021 projections •$160 million for Measure A •$82 million for LTF •$11 million for TUMF #2 •Approve related budget adjustments#3‐5 •Forward to Commission for final action#6 Let me summarize the staff recommendations for you: •The first recommendation is to approve the revised FY 2020 projections for  Measure A, LTF, and TUMF. •The second recommendation is to approve the revised FY 2021 projections. •Recommendations 3, 4 and 5 relate to approval of FY 2020 budget adjustments  related to the decreased revenues and the impacts on certain Measure A and LTF   expenditures. •The final recommendation is to forward this item to the Commission for final  action at its May meeting. 9 QUESTIONS & COMMENTS 10 That concludes my presentation. 10 AGENDA ITEM 7 Agenda Item 7 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 27, 2020 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: David Knudsen, Legislative Affairs Manager THROUGH: Aaron Hake, External Affairs Director SUBJECT: State and Federal Legislative Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislation; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State Update The COVID-19 State Response The California State Legislature went into suspension on March 16, 2020 after approving $1 billion in new funding in response to the COVID-19 public health crisis. The bill, which was signed by Governor Newsom on March 17, 2020, allocated up to $1 billion for a ramp-up of hospital capacity and any purpose related to the Governor’s March 4, 2020 state of emergency declaration. As of April 8, 2020, Governor Newsom has issued thirteen executive orders aimed at enhancing local government’s COVID-19 response, moratorium on evictions, relief for small businesses, ensuring safety net services continue for vulnerable Californians, and some tax relief. On March 25, 2020, RCTC Executive Director Anne Mayer, sent a letter to the Riverside County’s Legislative Delegation in support of public transit operators seeking emergency funding to offset the direct costs and revenue losses associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Transit agencies in Riverside County are expected to lose approximately $15.4 million of operating funds due to the unprecedented drop in ridership and escalating operational costs. Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-40-20 Providing Relief to California Small Businesses on March 30, 2020. The order will allow small business taxpayers with annual taxable sales below $5 million to enter into a 12-month payment plan for up to $50,000 of their sales and use tax liability at zero interest. Following the signing of the Executive Order, the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA), which administers California's sales tax, announced sales tax returns for the 1st Quarter 2020 will now be due on July 31, 2020, an addition of three months 52 Agenda Item 7 to file returns and pay taxes. Unclear in the Executive Order and guidance from CDTFA, is if this order also includes local sales tax collection. RCTC staff is working to determine how this might impact Measure A sales tax collection and distribution. The Assembly Budget Committee released a memo on April 6, 2020 recognizing that there will be less money and time to adopt a balanced budget by the constitutionally required deadline of June 15, 2020. The memo further outlined changes to the 2020 budget process including: • The Governor’s May Revision will become a “workload” budget that reflects 2019-2020, or current, service levels. This means that new budget proposals, based on the Governor’s January 2020 budget proposal, will not be heard in Committee. Additionally, when the Assembly Budget Committee reconvenes, no new priorities will be considered from stakeholders, advocates, and Members with the exception of COVID-19 related costs, wildfire prevention, and homelessness funding. • By delaying personal income tax receipts until July 15, 2020 the Legislature will revisit the budget after it is passed in June, likely in August. This second round of budget deliberations will allow for a better picture of revenues, the state of the economy, and determine if additional COVID-19 related responses will be necessary. As of this staff report, the Legislature is expected to stay in recess until May 4, 2020, but legislative leaders in either chamber can decide to reconvene or extend the recess if necessary. It is unclear at this time what additional legislative action the Legislature will take once they return or what will happen to existing bills unrelated to COVID-19 response and recovery. RCTC staff will continue to monitor and provide an update to the Commission on legislation that will impact RCTC. Federal Update The COVID-19 Federal Response Throughout March, Congress and the Trump Administration have been working to enact emergency relief legislation in response to the COVID-19 public health crisis. Three COVID-19 relief packages have been enacted to date: Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act (March 4, 2020), Families First Coronavirus Response Act (March 18, 2020), and the $2 trillion CARES Act (March 27, 2020). On March 24, 2020, RCTC Executive Director Anne Mayer, sent a letter to the Riverside County’s Congressional Delegation in support of public transit operators seeking emergency funding to offset the direct costs and revenue losses associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. The emergency relief bill, the CARES Act, included $25 billion in emergency funding for public transportation. Public transportation funding from this bill is expected to total more than $3.75 billion for California. Congress is currently considering additional coronavirus response 53 Agenda Item 7 legislation (commonly referred to as "Phase 4") that aims to build on the first three emergency relief packages. There has been interest in including funding for some form of infrastructure investment in the Phase 4 or future legislation. However, while House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, along with President Trump, have expressed interest that the next bill could include substantial investment in infrastructure projects, because of the growing substantial economic impacts of the pandemic, it appears that Phase 4 may continue to focus on emergency relief for individuals, small businesses and health care response. As discussions are taking place about what might be included in Phase 4, RCTC Chair Ben J. Benoit sent letters to the Riverside Congressional Delegation on April 7, 2020, urging bipartisan action to invest in infrastructure as a way to stimulate the economy. Three areas were identified as having immediate impact: • Direct Aid Assistance: To keep current and upcoming projects moving and jumpstart economic recovery, RCTC requests direct aid assistance that backfills lost revenue and ensure that projects and jobs are not impacted in a serious manner. • Economic Recovery Funding: Any federal economic recovery funding for surface transportation should be sub-allocated to implementing agencies such as RCTC who are responsible for getting projects delivered. • Surface Transportation Reauthorization: Complete the reauthorization of federal transportation policy prior to the expiration of the current law – the FAST Act – and ask that as part of this reauthorization, ensure that regional transportation agencies receive an increase in federal resources. RCTC staff and finance team are working to develop additional policy ideas, in alignment with the Commission adopted 2020 State and Federal Legislative Platform, that could be proposed to help address the current financial impact of the COVID-19 emergency on RCTC's finance and project plans. Congress is currently in recess until at least April 20, 2020. Congressional staff continue to work developing the Phase 4 legislation and RCTC staff will continue to monitor and provide an update to the Commission on our efforts to impact this legislation to assist RCTC. Attachments: 1) Support letter: State Emergency Transit Funding 2) Support letter: Federal Emergency Transit Funding 3) Support letter: COVID-19 Economic Recovery and Response 4) State COVID-19 Response Timeline 5) Federal COVID-19 Response Timeline 6) Legislative Matrix – April 2020 54 March 25, 2020 The Honorable Richard Roth The Honorable Mike Morrell California State Senate California State Senate State Capitol State Capitol Sacramento, California 95814 Sacramento, California 95814 The Honorable Marie Waldron The Honorable Sabrina Cervantes California State Assembly California State Assembly State Capitol State Capitol Sacramento, California 95814 Sacramento, California 95814 The Honorable Jose Medina The Honorable Eduardo Garcia California State Assembly California State Assembly State Capitol State Capitol Sacramento, California 95814 Sacramento, California 95814 The Honorable Chad Mayes The Honorable Melissa Melendez California State Assembly California State Assembly State Capitol State Capitol Sacramento, California 95814 Sacramento, California 95814 The Honorable Randy Voepel California State Assembly State Capitol Sacramento, California 95814 Dear Members of the Riverside County Legislative Delegation: On behalf of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and in support of all public transit operators in Riverside County, I write to strongly urge the Legislature to provide emergency funding to public transit agencies to offset the direct costs and revenue losses associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. We are grateful that Congress is working on legislation to provide initial emergency funding for transit operators and we are assessing how much of those funds will come to Riverside County. As communities wisely adhere to “safer at home” policies, transit agencies in Riverside County are expected to lose approximately $15.4 million of operating funds due to the unprecedented drop in ridership and escalating operational costs to ensure healthy and safe rides during the pandemic. Their shortfalls will depend on the duration of this crisis. ATTACHMENT 1 55 Public transportation is an essential element of our regional economy and local communities. Especially during this time of crisis, public transit is a lifeline for many of our residents who have no other option to access healthcare or employment. Public transit operators are on the front lines. Without emergency funding, public transit agencies, particularly those that rely on fare revenue for a significant portion of their operating budgets, will be required to suspend or drastically curtail such important services. While our immediate focus is on maintaining front-line public transit operations, we will also soon need to address the likely significant shortfalls in revenue for capital construction projects that provide thousands of jobs in Riverside County. As we have seen in previous economic downturns, infrastructure is a cornerstone of recovery. Thank you for your consideration of this request. If you have any questions about this request, please contact Aaron Hake at (AHake@rctc.org) and David Knudsen (DKnudsen@rctc.org). Thank you Anne Mayer Executive Director CC: The Honorable Jim Beall, Chair, Senate Transportation Committee The Honorable Bob Wieckowski, Chair, Senate Budget Subcommittee on Resources, Environmental Protection, Energy and Transportation The Honorable Jim Frazier, Chair, Assembly Transportation Committee The Honorable Richard Bloom, Chair, Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Resources and Transportation Al Zelinka, City Manager, City of Riverside Doug Schulze, City Manager City of Banning George Colangeli, General Manager, Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency Jacob Ellis, City Manager, City of Corona Larry Rubio, Chief Executive Officer, Riverside Transit Agency Lauren Skiver, Chief Executive Officer, SunLine Transit Agency Mark Watts, Riverside County Transportation Commission Advocate Stephanie Wiggins, Chief Executive Officer, Metrolink Todd Parton, City Manager, City of Beaumont Riverside County Legislative Delegation Page 2 March 25, 2020 56 ATTACHMENT 2 57 58 April 3, 2020 The Honorable Ken Calvert United States House of Representatives U.S. Capitol Washington, DC 20510 Subject: COVID-19 Economic Relief and Recovery Response Dear Congressman Calvert: On behalf of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), thank you for supporting recent legislation to provide relief to our communities in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. By quickly providing emergency funding to public transportation agencies through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act, Congress provided immediate relief and investment in public transportation that will allow transit operators to continue serving the residents of Riverside County. While the assistance to public transportation agencies was very helpful, it will be necessary to further address the negative financial impacts of the pandemic to funding sources that sustain infrastructure development and related employment in Riverside County. RCTC will experience a dramatic reduction in revenue because the very necessary “safer at home” policies have reduced economic activity in Riverside County. As a “self-help” county, our projects are heavily-reliant on voter- approved sales tax revenue, toll revenue, and development fees. The majority of RCTC’s revenues come from these local self-help sources. We also anticipate our revenues from state sources based on sales taxes and fuel consumption to decline dramatically. The anticipated magnitude of revenue loss will impact the delivery of projects that reduce traffic congestion, improve the flow of commerce, increase passenger rail connectivity, and support the jobs of countless residents of Riverside County. Many of these projects have strong support from your constituents. As Congress prepares to consider emergency relief and recovery proposals that will restore our national, state, and local economies, RCTC urges bipartisan action to invest in our nation’s infrastructure as a way to stimulate the economy. I want to share with you a few high-level concepts for future legislation that are important to maintaining and strengthening our regional infrastructure in this time of crisis. In the coming weeks, RCTC will share more specific policy proposals. Direct Aid Assistance To keep current and upcoming projects moving and jumpstart economic recovery, RCTC requests direct aid assistance that backfills lost revenue and ensure that projects and jobs are not impacted in a serious manner. RCTC remains hard at work serving our communities, our region, and our state while adhering to highest level of employee and public safety protocols. Even during this uncertain time, RCTC currently has 11 projects, in or 59 ATTACHMENT 3 beginning construction, worth $738 million. These important projects generate thousands of jobs, expand economic development, increase safety for the traveling public and move people and goods throughout our region’s transportation network. Yet, we are concerned that the drastic reduction in revenue will cause cancellation or indefinite delay of future projects, despite years of work, planning, environmental studies, public engagement, and investment of taxpayer dollars. Economic Recovery Funding Any federal economic recovery funding for surface transportation should be sub-allocated to implementing agencies such as RCTC who are responsible for getting projects delivered. The fewer layers of government through which funds must flow before getting to the construction site, the sooner the economic recovery can get underway and the public can see their tax dollars at work. In addition, we are exploring changes to federal policies and programs that would provide flexibility to RCTC and other transportation agencies to expedite current projects or planned projects without unnecessary bureaucratic delays. Please consider further emergency relief and recovery proposals that both directly funds infrastructure and improves policy to get that funding to work faster. Surface Transportation Reauthorization Finally, we ask that you do everything possible to complete the reauthorization of federal transportation policy prior to the expiration of the current law – the FAST Act – and ask that as part of this reauthorization, you ensure that regional transportation agencies receive an increase in federal resources. Ensuring a robustly funded Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG) and including specific funding for local bridge projects, such as the Hamner Bridge Widening project, are priorities for RCTC. Thank you for considering our recommendations and your historical support for infrastructure investment in Riverside County. We look forward to your leadership in this moment as we work together to get Riverside County moving again. Please contact me or RCTC staff directly to discuss any questions or ideas you have. Sincerely, Ben J. Benoit Chair The Honorable Ken Calvert April 3, 2020 Page 2 60 Timeline of State COVID-19 Emergency Response: April 4, 2020 Governor Newsom Signs Executive Order to Provide Expanded Access to Child Care for Essential Workers During COVID-19 Response April 2, 2020 Governor Newsom Issues Executive Order Protecting Homes, Small Businesses from Water Shutoffs April 2, 2020 Governor Newsom Announces New Help for Small Businesses & Workers Displaced by COVID-19 April 1, 2020 Governor Newsom Issues Executive Order Providing for Expedited Resources for COVID- 19 Response April 1, 2020 Governor Newsom Announces Agreement Between Teachers, Classified Employees and School System Management to Support Student Instruction During COVID-19 Outbreak March 31, 2020 Governor Newsom Launches Campaign to Protect Health and Well-Being of Older Californians During COVID-19 Pandemic March 30, 2020 Governor Newsom Signs Executive Order Providing Relief to California Small Businesses March 30, 2020 Governor Newsom Announces California Health Corps, a Major Initiative to Expand Health Care Workforce to Fight COVID-19 March 29, 2020 California’s Leading Digital and Media Platforms, Businesses and Celebrities Partner with the State to Amplify COVID-19 “Stay Home. Save Lives.” Public Awareness Campaign March 27, 2020 Governor Newsom Takes Executive Action to Establish a Statewide Moratorium on Evictions March 26, 2020 FPPC to extend Form 700 deadline due to COVID-19 March 25, 2020 Governor Gavin Newsom Announces Major Financial Relief Package: 90-Day Mortgage Payment Relief During COVID-19 Crisis March 24, 2020 Governor Newsom Issues Executive Order on State Prisons and Juvenile Facilities in Response to the COVID-19 Outbreak March 23, 2020 California Awards $100 Million to Cities, Counties and Continuums of Care to Help People Experiencing Homelessness During COVID-19 Pandemic March 23, 2020 Governor Gavin Newsom announce the closure of state parks and beaches to combat COVID-19 March 22, 2020 California Secures Presidential Major Disaster Declaration to Support State’s COVID-19 Emergency Response March 21, 2020 Governor Newsom Issues Executive Order to Fight the COVID-19 Surge March 20, 2020 Governor Newsom Signs Order to Protect Public Health by Expanding Vote-by-Mail Options and Extending Deadlines for Presidential Primary Canvass March 19, 2020 Governor Issues State-wide "Stay-at-Home" Directive March 18, 2020 Governor Newsom Issues Executive Order to Protect Ongoing Safety Net Services for Most Vulnerable Californians During COVID-19 Outbreak March 18, 2020 California Launches New Comprehensive, Consumer-Friendly Website and Public Service Announcements to Boost COVID-19 Awareness March 18, 2020 Governor Newsom Issues Executive Order to Suspend Standardized Testing for Students in Response to COVID-19 Outbreak March 17, 2020 Governor Newsom Signs Executive Order to Allow Timely Delivery of Vital Goods During COVID-19 Outbreak March 17, 2020 Governor Newsom Signs Emergency Legislation to Fight COVID-19 March 16, 2020 Governor Newsom Issues New Executive Order authorizing Local Governments to Halt Evictions, Slow Foreclosures, and Protect Against Utility Shut Offs March 16, 2020 California Issues Directive to Fight COVID-19 March 13, 2020 Governor Newsom Signs Executive Order Ensuring State Funding for Schools Even in Event of Physical Closure ATTACHMENT 4 61 Timeline of State COVID-19 Emergency Response: March 12, 2020 Governor Newsom Issues New Executive Order Further Enhancing State and Local Government’s Ability to Respond to COVID-19 Pandemic 62 Timeline of Federal COVID-19 Emergency Response: April 1, 2020 Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic Whole-of-America Response March 31, 2020 Coronavirus Guidelines for America March 30, 2020 Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic Whole-of-Government Response March 28, 2020 CISA releases Version 2.0 of the Essential Critical Infrastructure Worker Guidance originally published on March 19, 2020 March 27, 2020 President signs Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) – $2 trillion Economic Relief Bill to Aimed at Helping American Workers, Families, and Businesses Impacted by the Coronavirus March 27, 2020 Memorandum on Order Under the Defense Production Act Regarding General Motors Company March 26, 2020 Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic Whole-of-Government Response March 25, 2020 USDA Implements Immediate Measures to Help Rural Residents, Businesses and Communities Affected by COVID-19 March 22, 2020 President Donald J. Trump Approves Major Disaster Declaration for California March 18, 2020 President signs Families First Coronavirus Response Act — Guaranteed free coronavirus testing, established paid leave, enhanced unemployment insurance, expanded food security initiatives, and increased federal Medicaid funding March 16, 2020 White House and CDC New Guidance on Preventing the Spread of Coronavirus - "15 Days to Slow the Spread" March 4, 2020 President signs Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2020 — Provided $8.3 billion in emergency funding for federal agencies to respond to the coronavirus outbreak related to developing a vaccine, medical supplies, grants for public health agencies, small business loans, and assistance for health systems in other countries. Allowed for temporarily waiving Medicare restrictions and requirements regarding telehealth services. ATTACHMENT 5 63 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - POSITIONS ON STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION – APRIL 2019 Legislature reconvened on January 6, 2020 Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption AB 252 (Daly, Frazier) Removes the sunset date from the NEPA Reciprocity program. Signed by Governor Newsom. (July 31, 2019) SUPPORT 3/13/19 AB 1402 (Petrie-Norris) Makes substantive changes to the Active Transportation Program administered by the State, allocating 75% of funds to be distributed by large MPOs. Assembly-Died- Transportation. (February 3, 2020) SUPPORT 4/1/19 SB 152 (Beall) Makes substantive changes to the Active Transportation Program administered by the State, allocating 75% of funds to be distributed by large MPOs. Senate-Died- Appropriations. (February 3, 2020) SUPPORT 4/1/19 AB 626 (Quirk-Silva) Seeks to dictate that professionals who provide professional services on one phase of a project be deemed not to have a conflict of interest in subsequent project phases, disregarding the Commission’s adopted Procurement Policy. Died on inactive file (February 3, 2020) OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED 4/10/19 AB 456 (Chiu, Bonta, Low) Removes the January 1, 2020 sunset provision on claims resolution processes. Approved by the Governor. (October 3, 2019) OPPOSE 5/8/19 SB 498 (Hurtado) Takes funds dedicated in the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund and repurposes them for a new short-line railroad project grant program. Referred to Assembly Transportation Committee. (June 6, 2019) OPPOSE Staff action based on platform 5/30/19 SB 742 (Allen) Authorizes existing state funds for Amtrak to be used on intercity passenger bus transportation, regardless of whether the passenger is connecting to or from intercity rail service. Approved by the Governor. (October 8, 2019) SUPPORT 6/12/19 AB 1149 (Fong) Eliminates the ability of petitioners to opt to prepare the record of proceedings and would place that responsibility solely on the lead agency. Assembly-Died-Natural Resources. (February 3, 2020) SUPPORT 6/12/19 ATTACHMENT 6 64 Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption SB 664 (Allen) Revises existing statute in the Streets and Highways Code and the Vehicle Code to allow for improved operations of toll facilities in California. Re-referred to Committees on Privacy & Consumer Protection and Judiciary. (September 10, 2019) SUPPORT Staff action based on platform 6/17/19 SB 277 (Beall) Changes the SB 1-created Local Partnership Program to be administered at 85% formula, rather than 50% formula as is currently in adopted guidelines. Vetoed by the Governor. In Senate. Consideration of Governor’s veto pending. (August 14, 2019) SUPPORT Staff action based on platform 7/1/19 AB 2011 (Holden) Creates West San Bernardino County Rail Construction Authority for purposes of awarding and overseeing all design and construction contracts for completion of an extension of the Metro Gold Line light rail project from the City of Montclair to the Ontario International Airport. The bill would prescribe the powers and duties of the construction authority. Referred to Assembly Transportation Committee. (February 14, 2020) OPPOSE Staff action based on platform 3/10/20 SB 1390 (Portantino) Creates the Montclair to Ontario Airport Construction Authority for purposes of awarding and overseeing all design and construction contracts for completion of an extension of the Metro Gold Line light rail project from the City of Montclair to the Ontario International Airport. The bill would prescribe the powers and duties of the construction authority. Referred to Senate Transportation Committee. (March 12, 2020) OPPOSE Staff action based on platform 3/10/20 HR 2939 (Napolitano) Protects state and local general sales tax revenues from being directed to airports. Introduced. (May 23, 2019) SUPPORT 7/10/19 65 AGENDA ITEM 8 Agenda Item 8 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 27, 2020 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Ariel Alcon Tapia, Management Analyst Eric DeHate, Transit Manager THROUGH: Lorelle Moe-Luna, Multimodal Services Director SUBJECT: Citizens and Specialized Transit Advisory Council Membership Appointments STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the appointments of 15 members to the Citizens and Specialized Transit Advisory Council (CSTAC) effective May 13, 2020; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Transportation Development Act (TDA) provides direction for administering both Local Transportation Fund and State Transit Assistance funds, which are used to support operational and capital expenditures for public transit. Section 99238 and 130105 (d) of the TDA regulations requires the Commission to have a CSTAC as part of the oversight process in administering the TDA funds. The CSTAC serves the Commission by participating in the transit needs hearing and reviewing the Short-Range Transit Plans (SRTP) developed by public transit operators as part of the Commission’s annual budget development process. The TDA regulations require that the membership consist of the following categorical areas: 1) One representative of a potential transit user 60 years of age and older; 2) One representative of a potential transit user who is disabled; 3) Two representatives of the social service providers for seniors; 4) Two representatives of the social service providers for the disabled, including one representative of a social service transportation provider, if one exists; 5) One representative of a social service provider for persons of limited means; and 6) Two representatives of a Consolidated Transportation Service Agency(s) designated as such pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 15975 of the Government Code, including one representative from an operator, if one exists. Membership terms are to be staggered to reduce the likeliness of membership relapse causing a lack of quorum. The adopted bylaws for the CSTAC state that membership can consist of up to 15 members appointed by the Commission and serve at the will and pleasure of the Commission and without compensation. 66 Agenda Item 8 DISCUSSION: In December 2019, the revised CSTAC bylaws were approved to garner more active participation and staff was directed to recruit new members. Membership is required to reflect a broad spectrum of interest among geographic areas of the county and minority representation. An application period took place between January 23, 2020 through March 13, 2020. Various outreach methods were used to solicit membership: • Commissioner recommendations; • Solicitation to existing and previous CAC members and their networks; • Advertisement on the website, social media, and The Point blog article; • Email distributions to the Riverside Transportation Network and Specialized Transit providers, and Transportation NOW chapters; • Personalized emails and calls to universities and colleges transportation and student disabilities services departments; and • Press release A total of 17 applications were received and reviewed. Staff recommends the appointment of 15 individuals and their associated organizations, as identified in the attachment, for membership on the CSTAC. RTA and SunLine are standing members due to their Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA) designation and are included as part of the 15. Each appointment would represent at least one of the categories identified in state law and several communities throughout the county in order to provide a perspective from a wide geographic area. Citizen appointments are critical to the success of the Commission and its charge to oversee transit services in the county. The new membership opens dialogue between citizen appointee representatives and public transit and specialized transit providers in the county. Upon Commission direction and approval, additional members representing relevant TDA constituencies can be added to the CSTAC membership in the future. There is no financial impact for this item. Attachment: 2020 CSTAC Appointments and Categorical Membership List 67 Riverside County Transportation Commission 2020 Citizens and Specialized Transit Advisory Council (CSTAC) Appointments Name/Area Represented Categorical Membership Per TDA Qualifications 1. Ivet Woolridge / Western Riverside and Coachella Valley Social Services Transportation Provider for Seniors Chief Operating Officer, Independent Living Partnership, Specialized Transit Provider 2. Kenneth Woytek / Southwest Riverside Potential Transit User Over 60 Years of Age Retired Vice Chair, Menifee Senior Advisory Committee 3. Mary Jo Ramirez / Southwest Social Service Provider for Senior, Disabled and Persons of Limited Means Social Services Transportation Provide for Seniors or the Disabled Appointed Member, Riverside County Workforce Development 4. Gloria Sanchez / Southwest Potential Transit User Over 60 Years of Age Chair, Menifee Senior Advisory Committee, Past Chair, Riverside County Advisory Council on Aging 5. Jack Marty / The Pass Potential Transit User Over 60 Years of Age Social Service Provider for Senior, Disabled and Persons of Limited Means Past Member, Citizens Advisory Council (RCTC) HICAP Medicare Counselor 6. George Colangeli / Palo Verde Valley Social Service Transportation Provider for Seniors and Disabled General Manager for Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency 7. Alejandra Gonzalez / Western Riverside Social Services Transportation Provider for Seniors and Disabled Social Service Provider for Seniors, Disabled and Persons of Limited Means Norco Seniors on the Move Transportation Specialized Transit Provider 8. Priscilla Ochoa / Western Riverside Social Services Provider for Disabled Past Member, Citizens Advisory Council (RCTC) Blindness Support and Transit Trainer 9. Catherine Rips / Coachella Valley Social Service Provider for the Disabled Grants Director, Angel View, Residential and Day Program for Disabled 10. Betty Day / Hemet-San Jacinto Potential Transit User Over 60 Years of Age Past, Hemet Public Library Board Trustee 11. John Krick / Western Riverside Potential Transit User Over 60 Years of Age Social Service Provider for the Disabled Member, T-Now Riverside Member, Riverside City Commission on Disabilities 12. John Chavez / The Pass Potential Transit User Over 60 Years of Age. Retired, BNSF 13. Lisa Castilone / Western and Southwest Riverside County Social Services Provider for Seniors, Disabled and Person of Limited Means Social Services Transportation Provide for Seniors or The Disabled Founder, GRID Alternatives Inland Empire 14. Riverside Transit Agency Staff/Western Riverside County Consolidated Transportation Service Agency Consolidated Transportation Service Agency for Western Riverside County 15. SunLine Transit Agency Staff / Coachella Valley Consolidated Transportation Service Agency Consolidated Transportation Service Agency for Coachella Valley 68 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE ROLL CALL APRIL 27, 2020 Present Absent County of Riverside, District II X  County of Riverside, District III X  City of Beaumont X  City of Calimesa X  City of Canyon Lake X  City of Cathedral City X  City of Coachella  X City of Desert Hot Springs  X City of Hemet X  City of Lake Elsinore X  City of Palm Springs X  City of Riverside X  City of Wildomar  X 1 Tara Byerly From:Tara Byerly Sent:Wednesday, April 22, 2020 2:06 PM To:Tara Byerly Cc:Anne Mayer; Lisa Mobley; John Standiford Subject:RCTC: Budget and Implementation Committee Meeting - April 27, 2020 Good afternoon Committee Members,    The April Agenda for the Budget and Implementation Committee meeting scheduled for Monday, April 27 @ 9:30 a.m. is now available.    https://www.rctc.org/wp‐content/uploads/2020/04/April‐Budget‐and‐Implementation‐Committee‐ Agenda.pdf    Pursuant to Governor Newsom’s Executive Order N‐29‐20, (March 18, 2020), the Governing Board meeting will only be conducted via video conferencing and by telephone. Please follow the instructions below to join the meeting remotely. For any questions regarding the Zoom meeting or to schedule a test run, please contact  Lisa Mobley at lmobley@rctc.org or 951‐288‐2680.    INSTRUCTIONS FOR ELECTRONIC PARTICIPATION  Join Zoom Meeting ‐ from PC, Laptop or Phone  https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87128733383  Meeting ID: 871 2873 3383  Teleconference Dial In  +1 669 900 6833    Respectfully,    Tara Byerly Deputy Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 951.787.7141 W |951.787.7906 F 4080 Lemon St. 3rd Fl.| P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502 rctc.org