Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout02 February 22, 1983 Citizens' Advisory040222 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AGENDA CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE February 22,. 1983.; 1:30 P.M. Riverside City Hall, Fourth Floor Conference Room 3900 Main Street, Riverside 92522 1. Call to Order. 2. Approval of Minutes. 3. Short Range Transit Plan for FY 1984-88. 4. Adjournment. ITEM 3 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TO: Citizens Advisory Committee FROM: Paul Blackwelder, Assistant Director -Programming SUBJECT: Riverside County Short Range Transit Plan for FY 1984-1988 Transit operators and Commission staff are preparing the updated Riverside County Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) for FY 1984-1988. The RTA and SunLine elements of the plan are prepared by the operators. Plans for the six small operators are prepared by Commission staff. The SRTP is expected to be adopted by the Com- mission at its meeting in May. Between now and May, staff will review the draft SRTP's and the Commission will hold "unmet transit needs" public hearings in the desert area and the west end of the County. These hearings will be held in conjunction with the Commission's meetings. The public hearing for the desert area will be held on March 10, 1983, 1:30 P.M., at the' Palm Desert City Hall and on March 24, 1983, 2:30 P.M., at the Riverside City Hall for the west end of the County. Staff has contacted the transit operators to identify service changes under con- sideration for inclusion in the SRTP update which are not included in the current plan. With the exception of RTA, the transit operators are intending to submit a status quo level of service with updated ridership and financial estimates. RTA is considering a number of service changes and studies for inclusion in the SRTP update. Items under consideration are as follows: o 30 -minute peak hour service for commuters in the Riverside area fixed -route system. o Sunday service between Sunnymead and Riverside on Line 16. o Fixed -route service to replace the Rubidoux dial -a -ride. o Replacement of dial -a -ride services in Perris and Sun City with subsidized taxi service. o Feasibility study of a fixed -route service alternative to re- place the Moreno Valley dial -a -ride system. o Feasibility study of a fixed -route service alternative to re- place the Norco dial -a -ride. o Increased commuter buspool service to Orange County. o Continued monitoring of fixed -route service on Lines 17 (UCR- Riverside Plaza), Line 21 (Country Village -Tyler Mall), and Line 30(Hemet-San Jacinto) through September 1983. Agenda Item No. 3 February 22, 1983 1984-1988 SRTP RTA staff will be present at the meeting to discuss the proposed service changes and studies with the Committee. Committee members are requested to discuss service changes which they feel should be considered by Riverside Transit Agency, SunLine Transit Agency, or any of the smaller operators. The Committee's suggestions will then be forwarded to the Commission and the transit operators for consideration in the review process. While the Committee will have additional opportunity to provide recommendations to the Commission when draft plans are completed, evaluation of substantive service changes are more easily accomplished early in the development of the plan. PB:nk RCTC Minutes RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Minutes of Meeting No. 11-82 October 14, 1982 1. Call to Order. The meeting of the Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chairman Norton Younglove at 2:39 p.m. on Thursday, October 14, 1982, at the Riverside County Administrative Center, 14th Floor Con- ference Room, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. The Chair noted that a quo- rum was present. Commissioners present: Kay Ceniceros Sue Cornelison Phil Jones Donald Schroeder Roy -Wilson Norton Younglove Alternate present: Jim Adams 2. Approval of Minutes. M/S/C (CORNELISON/WILSON) to approve the minutes of the Spetember 9, 1982 meeting as submitted. 3. Public Comments. Milan Milkovitch, Assistant to the City Manager, City of Indian Wells, requested that he be called to speak when item No. 5 is before the Commission. 4. Executive Director's Report. a. Status of Study of Rail Service to Riverside County. Barry Beck, Executive Director, reported that the Coachella Valley Association of Governments, at its last meeting, determined not to endorse further study of the passenger rail service to the Coachella Valley. While Caltrans has not announced which option they will study, in light of the CVAG action, the action will most likely re- sult in the project being placed in a lower priority at the State level. Barry Beck said that he has discussed this matter with Caltrans headquarters staff and they had indicated that this project will probably be placed on the "back burner". In discussing the Commission's proposal that Caltrans study the feasibility of an inter- city service and commuter service, they were not very enthusiastic about it as the proposal was viewed as a long-term project. Staff feels that the feasibility study should be done in order that the question whether commuter rail and intercity rail is feasible for Riverside County is answered. RCTC Minutes October 14, 1982 Page 2 Chairman Younglove stated that there is a need for staff to prepare for the Commission's next meeting a recommendation with a basic thrust requesting that feasible transit service to Riverside County (western and eastern) be studied and, in addition, authorization be given for either a member of the Commission or staff to discuss this subject with CVAG, SanBAG, etc. He added that the Commission is a body repre- senting the entire county and, thus, it has the responsibility to address the needs of the entire county. He agreed that the study should be pursued as in the long term, rail service in the county will be needed. Barry Beck said that the Commission has already addressed this matter. At the last meeting, the Commission reviewed the three Caltrans alter- natives to serve the Coachella Valley and adopted a fourth option that was proposed by staff for commuter rail for the west end and intercity rail for the Coachella Valley. Chairman Younglove stated that he realized that but what is needed now is a report to update the Commission in relationship to reacting to CVAG's action. Discussion followed as to reasons why CVAG elected not to endorse further study of the rail service. b. Local Option Gas Tax. Barry Beck informed the Commission that he has discussed this matter with some local agencies' staff as to what they feel about the chances are or the desire for a local gas tax option as allowed by SB 215. He said that there really is not much enthusiasm at the present time. The general feeling is a "wait and see" attitude. Barry Beck told the Commission that there are local gas tax propositions on the ballot in November in San Diego County and in Northern California Counties. The propositions will require a two-thirds vote for approval. He added that the SCAG Executive Committee took an action at its last meeting authorizing its staff to organize discussions within the region to see if a coordinated regional effort to implement a local gas tax has merit. Staff will report back to the Commission when those dis- cussions get under way. Commissioner Ceniceros asked what the process is to place the local option gas tax on the ballot. Barry Beck said that SB 215 sets up the process for implementation. To place it on the ballot, it has to be approved by the County Board of Supervisors and a majority of the cities representing a majority of the population. In addition, there has to be an agreement as to how the funds will be shared between the cities and the County. RCTC Minutes October 14, 1982 Page 3 Barry Beck reported that the Orange County Transportation Commission had pursued and nearly gained passage of legislation giving authori- zation to place a one cent sales tax to be used for trans- portation on the ballot. As far as he knows, they will continue to pursue that method in the next legislative session. He explained that one of the reasons why Orange County is pursuing this method is due to the fact that only a majority vote is required because the Commission is not subject to the Proposition 13, two-thirds, vote requirement. c. Status of Caltrans' Proposed Roadside Rest Stops. Barry Beck told the Commission that Caltrans' proposal to build the two roadside rests (Rancho California and Lake Elsinore) in Riverside County are still in limbo. Caltrans is also proposing a roadside rest in San Bernardino County which like in Riverside County is being opposed by the San Bernardino Commission. Barry Beck and Wes McDaniel met with Caltrans headquarters and district officials to discuss the projects. One of the proposals being discussed by San Bernardino is .to have a joint venture project with the rest stop combined with an existing truck stop and tourist stop in the general vicinity of the area where Caltrans wants to locate the rest stop. He said that if the SanBAG idea works out, he will then discuss with Caltrans if it would be applicable to Riverside County. Barry Beck added that the State Commission has appropriated $25 million for rest stops subject to further study but identification of the projects to be funded has not been made yet. d. Banquet & Presentation for Senator Robert Presley. The dinner honoring Senator Robert Presley for his efforts on the vehicle inspection and maintenance legislation is in the process of being finalized. It is scheduled for Thursday, November 4th at 6:30 p.m. to be held at the Music Center in Los Angeles. In order to assist SCAG on this effort to insure that there is an appropriately large participation at the dinner, they asked if the Commission would be willing to co -host it. Co -hosting would cost $500 and will buy a table with 10 seats at $35/seat. The rest of the amount will be used to defray the overhead cost and for gratis dinners of invited guests. Barry Beck said that since Riverside County is the main beneficiary of the legislation as far as clean air goes, he thinks that it would be appropriate for the Commission to co -host the affair and requested that the Commission authorize the expenditure of $500 to co -host it and for a table. The action by the Commission will be subject to legal counsel review. 3 RCTC Minutes October 14, 1982 Page 4 M/S/C (CENICEROS/JONES) to authorize to co -host the dinner and acquisition of a table at a cost of $500 subject to legal counsel approval and to authorize the Executive Director to handle invitations. Chairman•Younglove encouraged members of the Commission to remain after the meeting to discuss the presentation for Senator Presley. 5. Allocation of TDA Funds for Streets and Roads in the Coachella Valley. Barry Beck stated that Indian Wells is opposed to the recommendation. In addition, staff has received a letter from the County Road Commissioner requesting that the La Quinta allocation be split 50-50 between the County and La Quinta because the County is still responsible for maintaining the streets and roads in La Quinta until December 31, 1982. On the surface, the County's request seems equitable, however, La Quinta was not aware of this request. In discussing this matter with La Quintals City Manager, he requested that he be given a chance to review the request and comment on it. Therefore, if the Commission wishes to approve this item, he requested that they delete the approval for the allocation to La Quinta and that it be addressed at the Commission's next meeting. Copies of a resolution adopted by the Indian Wells City Council concerning their position in the allocation of TDA funds were distributed to Commission members. Milan Milkovitch briefed the Commission as to what had transpired when he appeared before the SunLine Board at its meeting of September 22nd. The Board informed him that to have input, Indian Wells must be a member and that it would cost $25,000 to join. He then communicated SunLine's action to the Indian Wells City Council and they decided to adopt a resolution opposing the allocation of TDA funds based on a population formula. In addition, they feel that since Indian Wells has a population under 5,000 that they do not have to obligate TDA funds beyond 50% of their allocation. Milan Milkovitch said that he discussed this matter with Barry Beck and because there is a difference in the interpretation on this matter, he recommended that interpretation of the State Code be made. Barry Beck told the Commission that the 50% referred to relates to the restriction that the Commission cannot allocate TDA funds ex- ceeding 50% of the agency's budget for streets and roads. The staff recom- mendation is in compliance with the law. In response to Chairman Younglove's question regarding unmet transit needs, Barry Beck said that the unmet needs issue is not relevant. The Commission has already made the determination that transit needs are being met primarily because of the services being provided by SunLine, including service to Indian Wells. The Commission could not allocate any TDA funds for streets and roads to local agencies without making the determination on unmet transit needs first. 4 RCTC Minutes October 14, 1982 Page 5 Commissioner Wilson asked if the population data are consistent with the 1980 census data. Barry Beck said that under SCAG procedures for all TDA claims, the popu- lation.is based on the State Controller's estimate. All population esti- mates, except La Quinta, are as of January 1, 1982. Lee Norwine, General Manager of SunLine Transit Agency, reminded the Commission that SunLine did a study a year ago justifying SunLine service utilization in Indian Wells. He said that ridership in the area has increased rather than decreased. He urged the Commission to approve the recommendation as it has been a lengthy process getting a formula that is equitable for every member agency of SunLine. Commissioner Wilson stated that SunLine's letter included in the agenda packet noted that they are in the process of reviewing the JPA agreement. He asked Lee Norwine to explain what is being reviewed. Lee Norwine said that the current language of the JPA states that new member agencies are required to pay $25,000 for capital -acquisition. The Board felt that since the cities of La Quinta and Cathedral City were previously a part of Riverside County and the County had been con- tributing based on population for capital acquisition, they were allowed to join without the mandatory $25,000. There has been no change in the JPA agreement regarding Indian Wells. Previous funding formula would be abolished and other changes were made so that the Board has the ability to make decisions for the agency. Commissioner Wilson asked what was the political composition of the Board vote approving allocation of funds based on population. Lee Norwine said that there was.a unanimous vote for the population for- mula with the exception of Palm Desert. Palm Desert proposed that the allocation be based on a two-thirds population and one-third service hour formula. At that time, La Quinta had not joined yet and the Cathedral City's City Manager sent a letter indicating their desire to be a member of the agency. Milan Milkovitch stated that at least 80% of the ridership is from Palm Desert and not Indian Wells. M (SCHROEDER) to approve a formula that would allow Indian Wells to receive more TDA funds for streets and roads than is being proposed on the staff report. RCTC Minutes October 14, 1982 Page 6 M/S/C (CENICEROS/CORNELISON) to approve the allocation of TDA funds available for streets and roads in the Coachella Valley with the exception of La Quinta based on the rela- tive population of each eligible local agency and direct the Executive Director to prepare a formal response to the resolution submitted by Indian Wells' City Council and the comments submitted by Milan Milkovitch. Commissioner Wilson voted no. 6. Effectiveness of Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program. M/S/C (SCHROEDER/JONES) to ask that a monitoring program be developed for the Inspection and Maintenance Program and that the monitoring program be made a feature of the region's air quality management plan. 7. Update on the Riverside/San Bernardino Multimodal Transportation Study. M/S/C (SCHROEDER/WILSON) to: 1. Approve SCAG's request to be given full responsibility for technical work on the transportation study. 2. Authorize staff to form an advisory committee consist- ing of representatives from each local agency in the study area, Riverside Transit Agency, and Caltrans for the Riverside/San Bernardino Multimodal Transportation Study. 8. Desert Area Transit Productivity Advisory Committee. M/S/C (SCHROEDER/WILSON) to appoint the nominees to the Desert Area Transit Productivity Advisory Committee. 9. Transit Operator Performance Audits. M/S/C (SCHROEDER/WILSON) to select Arthur Young & Company as the consultant for the Performance Audit of Transit Operators in Riverside County, and authorize the Executive Director to execute the required agreement. 10. Riverside Transit Agency State Transit Assistance Fund Claim. M/S/C (SCHROEDER/WILSON) to adopt Resolution 83-3 RTA allocating $1,545,000 to the Riverside Transit Agency. RCTC Minutes October 14, 1982 Page 7 11. Amendments to the Conflict of Interest Code. Barry Beck told the Commission that compliance with the Political Reform Act could be done in two ways: to adopt its own Conflict of Interest Code or adopt the standard Conflict of Interest Code as published by the Fair Political Practices Commission. Staff is recommending that the Commission approve the proposed amendments to its own Code. He explained that members of the Commission who are elected officials and file state- ments with the County or city would not have to also file with the Com- mission. M/S/C (SCHROEDER/WILSON) to approve the proposed amendments to the Commission's Conflict of Interest Code. 12. Continuing Cooperative Agreement Amendments. M/S/C (WILSON/JONES) to approve the amendments to the SCAG/ RCTC Continuing Cooperative Agreement and authorize the Executive Director to execute the contract. 13. Status Report on Fiscal Audits. M/S/C (WILSON/JONES) to receive and file the status report on the fiscal audits. 14. Renewal of Office Lease. M/S/C (WILSON/JONES) to approve the renewal of Commission's office lease at the Mission Inn for one year. 15. November Commission Meeting. M/S/C (SCHROEDER/WILSON) to schedule the next RCTC meeting on Monday, November 15, 1982 at 2:30 p.m. 15. Adjournment. There being no other items to be discussed by the Commission, Chairman Younglove adjourned the meeting at 3:42 p.m. Respectfully sub tted, Barry B ck Executie Director nk R IVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Minutes of Meeting No. 12-82 December 9, 1982 1. Call to Order. The meeting of the Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Vice Chairman Roy Wilson at 2:34 P.M. on Thursday, December 9, 1982, at the Riverside County Administrative Center, 14th Floor Con- ference Room, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. The Chair noted that a quo- rum was present. Commissioners present: Kay Ceniceros Sue Cornelison Phil Jones Alternates present: Jim Adams Pat Murphy Donald Schroeder Roy Wilson Ed Shepard 2. Approval of Minutes. M/S/C (SCHROEDER/JONES) to approve the minutes of the October 14, 1982 meeting as submitted. 3. Public Comments. Milan Milkovich, Assistant to the City Manager, City of Indian Wells, introduced Eugene Nazarek, Indian Wells` City Attorney, to the Com- mission. He then requested Vice Chairman Wilson to call on them to speak when Agenda Item No. 5 is before the Commission. At this time, Vice Chairman Wilson welcomed Ivan Hinderaker, Chairman of the California Transportation Commission, to the meeting. 4. Passenger Rail Service to Riverside County. Barry Beck, Executive Director, told the Commission that the report was requested by Chairman Norton Younglove at the last meeting. The report is a chronological history of various actions by Caltrans and the Com- mission as it concerns passenger rail service to Riverside County. The last action taken by the Commission was to recommend that Caltrans study a comprehensive proposal that would include both commuter rail service to the west end of Riverside County and a mid -day intercity service to the Coachella Valley. Subsequent to the mailing of the agenda packet, a formal response was received from Caltrans which states that because RCTC Minutes December 9, 1982 Page 2 of the split vote against the intercity service to the Coachella Valley by CVAG, they are not going to pursue that aspect unless there is some indication of renewed interest. With regards to the commuter service, the proposal was referred to Caltrans District 7 Office who is presently studying other commuter projects in Orange and Los Angeles Counties. Barry Beck noted that with the new, more conservative Administration, implementation of any new rail services in the near future is very ques- tionable. A more likely scenario would be the cutback of existing services that are not performing well. Given this, it is very doubtful that Caltrans, at least in the short term, will give serious consider- ations to studying the Commission's proposal. Staff, therefore, is re- commending that the Commission request SCAG to undertake a regionwide passenger rail study as part of the Overall Work Program for FY 1983-84. Commissioner Schroeder voiced his concern regarding source of funding for the study and whether such a study will have a high enough priority in the region to be included in the Overall Work Program. Barry Beck stated that SCAG receives funding annually for various studies and the proposed study would be part of their annual program. Eric Haley, SCAG,added that SCAG has on -board staff that has an expertise in the area. If the Commission initiates the proposal, it would be con- sidered along with the other rail studies in the region by SCAG staff. Bob Pote, Caltrans District 8, commented on the commuter rail service using Santa Fe tracks. He said that preliminary contacts were made by Caltrans with Amtrak and Santa Fe officials. Santa Fe officials wouldn't discuss the matter and Amtrak indicated that they are not willing to pursue a commuter rail service usinq Santa Fe tracks right now. With this attitude from both parties, to institute the service would involve a lengthy court case, thus, making it rather low priority with Caltrans. He said that he agrees with RCTC staff that a feasibility study should be made in order to put the issue to rest. Barry Beck said that whether the railroads are against it or not, he does not think the State is in the posture of wanting to expand rail serivce in the short term. Staff is looking at a longer term project. He added that for this fiscal year and next fiscal year, a long range transportation plan for Riverside County will be developed. At some point, there is a need to find out once and for all whether commuter rail is going to be a part of the long term plan. Commissioner Jones stated that as a daily user of the freeway system, he felt that it would be a worthwhile effort to do the feasibility study. RCTC Minutes December 9, 1982 Page 3 Ivan Hinderaker told the Commission that one of the California Trans- portation Commission concerns on the rail program is that much of the program was developed at the State level without consultation with local and regional agencies. He thinks that there is legitimate function for a regional study and it would not necessarily duplicate a Caltrans study. He said that the incoming Administration will be more concerned with these type of projects emanating from the county than the past Administration. M/S/C (JONES/CORNELISON) to request that SCAG include a regionwide passenger rail study in its FY 1983-84 Overall Work Program. 5. Response to Indian Wells' Resolution on the Allocation of TDA Funds. Barry Beck stated that included with the staff report is a draft letter responding to Indian Wells' resolution which objects to the formula for allocating TDA funds for streets and roads. As pointed out in the report, staff believes that the SunLine formula is perhaps not as equi- table as other formulas as it pertains to areas receiving very little transit services. Nevertheless, the Commission previously indicated that it would rely on a recommendation from SunLine and did so at the last meeting, Therefore, in the draft letter to Indian Wells; staff is urging that they join SunLine and try to develop a new formula, if that is their desire. Milan Milkovich spoke and said that the position that Indian Wells has taken regarding population is something that the Commission has acted upon. Indian Wells' position, however, is that the Commission has quoted an opinion from the Attorney General on the allocation of funds and to this date, the Commission has not shown anything that is valid enough for them to challenge. He asked that a written statement to this effect be given and noted that an opinion of the Attorney General is not necessarily a point of law and that it is just advisory in nature. Eugene Nazarek reiterated the need for a written opinion or legal justi- fication for the decision from either the Attorney General or Legal Counsel, as it may well be that they are in error and Indian Wells would like the opportunity to see what the legal basis is for the position taken. They would like to be advised accordingly whether such an opinion exists or not. Vice Chairman Wilson requested Indians Wells staff to clarify which opinion they wish to be verified. Milan Milkovich said that they are requesting a written statement regard- ing the 50% allocation of funds for cities within 5,000 or less. RCTC Minutes December 9, 1982 Page 4 Barry Beck stated that this is regarding the 50% rule. He suggested that Indian Wells have their legal counsel review this ruling as - it is common knowledge that the Commission's interpretation is correct. The Commission has not asked the Attorney General for an opinion but he will be glad to get a letter from SCAG's Legal Counsel. Commissioner Ceniceros asked Mr. Nazarek if there is possibility of satisfaction if the Commission could obtain such an opinion in writing. She noted that even if this is obtained, it is still not law. Eugene Nazarek commented that they will be satisfied and that it would be very helpful to them. M/S/C (SHEPARD/CENICEROS) to direct staff to provide a written opinion from SCAG's legal counsel on the issue and delay submittal of the letter to Indian Wells until such time as the written opinion is available. 6. Allocation of Transportation Development Act Funds to La Quinta. M/S/C (SCHROEDER/SHEPARD) to approve the allocation of $12,138 in TDA funds to the City of La Quinta and $12,138 to the County of Riverside for street and road purposes. 7. Local Option Fuel Tax Increase. Ivan Hinderaker stated that the State Commission has some concerns on the result of last month's election. He said that if a County is going to place a local option fuel tax measure on the ballot, they should be sure that it is going to pass because the Legislature may become so afraid of voter opposition that they will not deal with the issue. Commissioner Ceniceros told the Commission of a local radio interview that she had done whereby she was asked to comment on the proposed five -cent federal gas tax increase. She said that a lot of people are not aware that local agencies will not receive the funds. M/S/C (SCHROEDER/SHEPARD) to receive and file the inform- ation on local option fuel tax increase. 8. Proposed Federal Gas Tax Increase. Barry Beck informed the Commission that the proposed five -cent federal gas tax increase is proceeding through Congress very rapidly and Senate consideration is scheduled tomorrow. Because the legislation has moved so fast in Congress, there was not time to organize any unified con- RCTC Minutes December 9, 1982 Page 5 gressional effort. There has been a few interests that are supporting certain aspects, such as the 85% return to State, which is not bene- ficial to California. Crucial to California is to secure a high level of primary funding and to obtain a change in the formula because the current formula that apportions the primary funds to each State only gives California about 6.5% of the funds. (California has over 10% of the population.) He then explained that primary funds are used for projects such as Route 86, Route 74 and I-215 and this type of funding is in short supply in California. He said that the House version has changed the formula to increase California's percentage by two percent from 62% to 82% and with the nationwide program approximately $2 billion/ year, the two percent increase yields considerably more funding. He noted that although the formula was changed in the House version, it was not included in the Senate version of the bill. Transit operating assistance will probably end up being phased out. Of a more local nature, the Federal Aid Urban Program will be the same as the current level. There may be an increase to the Federal Aid Secondary allocation but this is already a small program so an increase does not mean a substantial addition of funds. He has tried to check, unsuccessfully, in the House version of the bill if there is some language placing Route 86 in some special category. He told the Commission that all of the information was received from Bill Edmonds, the new Caltrans District 8 Director, who was Caltrans' lobbyist in Washington just prior to becoming the Director. Bill Dotson, Caltrans 11, added that he has heard that the House version would provide a 95/5 matching ratio for Route 86. In response to Commissioner Cornelison's question if the proposal to consolidate categorical programs into a single block grant only applies to transportation programs, Ivan Hinderaker responded that it would only apply to federal transportation programs. M/S/C (CENICEROS/CORNELISON) to support the proposed positions on federal transportation legislation and authorize the Chairman and staff to communicate these positions to Riverside County's congressional repre- sentatives. Commissioner Shepard voted no. 9. Projected Shortfall in Transportation Development Act Revenues. Barry Beck stated that Riverside County will have an approximate $700,000 to $800,000 shortfall in Transportation Development Act revenues by the end of the fiscal year. He said that the shortfall will be made up the next fiscal year but there will then be less funds next year. RCTC Minutes December 9, 1982 Page 6 Commissioners Ceniceros commented that other counties are impacted much greater than Riverside County because we had made a more con- servative estimate at the beginning of the year. ' 10. Update on Issues Before the California Transportation Commission. Fund Estimate for 1983 STIP Barry Beck told the Commission that the first step in preparing the State Transportation Improvement Program is for the State Commission to adopt a fund estimate. The fund estimate is the amount of funds available for the next five years. He said that if the proposed federal five -cent gas tax increase is approved, one problem. that the State will have to face is to come up with matching funds although he was told that the federal legislation includes a provision that would defer the match for a two-year period. The State Commission will have to determine how the increase in revenues will fit in with the county minimum provision. Los Angeles County is concerned be- cause they are receiving large amount of funding for their projects such as the Century Freeway and obviously they would like to move the rest of their projects but the county minimum is going to inhibit them from doing so. Riverside County is in a different situation because I-15 will be finished in three to four years, and, at that time, we will be one of the underfunded counties. Barry Beck said that from a broader aspect, he does not think that it is going to work with every county getting their county minimum even with the new influx of federal funds as there will not be sufficient funds to accomplish a major highway project in a county. Ivan Hinderaker informed the Commission that the adoption of the fund estimate was postponed from December to the January meeting in order to give them a chance to review the federal legislation when it passes. He said that estimates were made when SB 215 was passed and they are not holding up because the gallonage and prices have fallen off. They may have to readopt the 1982 STIP. The State Commission has made policy decisions to accept all federal interstate funds regardless of the county minimum provision, to approve the use of highway funds for mass transit (Article 19), and to view rehabilitation on a statewide basis. The decisions have resulted in some counties being way over their county minimum. Los Angeles County is proposing that the State should adopt legislation to exempt interstate from the minimum calcu- lation. The State Commission is hoping that the Legislature will start dealing with the county minimum problem soon. Barry Beck noted that since I-215 was included in the 1980 STIP, in accordance with SB 215 and CTC policy, there is a commitment to include the project in the STIP regardless of county minimums. RCTC Minutes December 9, 1982 Page 7 Commissioner Ceniceros commented that this is debated at SCAG everytime the issue comes up. She said that the problem is that the county minimum formula failed to recognize the criteria for building roads and, politic- ally, it does not look like it will be changed. There is a need to re- evaluate the commitment to the county minimum formula. Roadside Rest Projects Barry Beck said that a number of months ago, the Commission rejected a roadside rest project in Rancho California because of the proximity to another roadside rest project and due to the extremely high cost. The Commission questioned whether it might not be feasible to have some kind of joint venture with a private enterprise to reduce cost and still serve the public need. Caltrans has now agreed to only pursue the Rancho California roadside rest project which would serve both I-215 and I-15. In San Bernardino County, Caltrans has agreed to look at a joint venture with an existing truck stop facility. Barry Beck told the Commission that two weeks ago, Bob Watkins, Caltrans, and he visited Rancho California. Caltrans has agreed to study a joint venture type project. Ivan Hinderaker said that the State Commission has told Caltrans that it won't even look at a roadside rest project until they have explored the possibility of joint development with private enterprise thoroughly. Bicycle Lane Program Barry Beck informed the Commission that there was a great deal of oppo- sition from local and regional agencies to set aside a specific amount of funds for bicycle projects. The State Commission has agreed not to establish the special fund but instead has adopted a general target which is considerably lower than Caltrans had wanted. The actual amount spent will depend on year to year considerations on the merits of the projects submitted. Regional agencies were pleased with the CTC action. Highway/Transit Guideway Project Listing Barry Beck stated that two consultants were hired by the CTC to prepare a list of needed highway and transit guideway projects that could be constructed over the next ten years. The CTC promised that regional agencies and county commissions will have some involvement in the project. He said that this could be extremely crucial to a lot of projects but he is relatively confident that Riverside County's highest priority projects will be included in the list because they are gap closures and commitments the State has already made. He said that this action has emanated from SCR 46 passed last year which was sponsored by the Automobile Club. Ivan Hinderaker noted that the reason the Automobile Club brought up the idea is that if projects are identified, there is a better chance the Legislature will provide the revenue to build the project. RCTC Minutes December 9, 1982 Page 8 In response to Commissioner Cornelison on whether the list could be used as an argument for the county minimum issue as well, Ivan Hinderaker said that it could very well be. Eric Haley added that the list would also be very helpful in the appro- priations bill for next year. Issues Before the State Commission Ivan Hinderaker stated that several meetings were held with the incoming Administration and one of the things that was discussed was the State Commission will not take a position on individuals considered for the Caltrans Director position. However, they indicated that they have some high hopes about the specifications that might be applied in the appoint- ment of the Director. One of the Commission's hopes is that the Director will be very concerned about maintaining a high level of cooperation with the CTC, the department, local, county and regional groups. In addition, the CTC hopes that they will be included in the representation in Washington as at the present time, Caltrans has a lobbyist in Washington but the CTC does not. The CTC has also requested that the Caltrans press office be available to them as when an action is taken that is signifi- cant to a county, a release could be printed and everyone concerned could be informed. Also discussed at the meeting was that the new Administration not lock themselves into a no -tax increase position so hard that it will get themselves into a box similar to the previous Administration. Vice Chairman Wilson thanked Ivan Hinderaker for attending the meeting and for keeping the Commission informed of issues before the State Commission. 11. Western Riverside County Transit Productivity Committee Recommendation. Barry Beck informed the Commission that for the first time, the Western Riverside County Transit Productivity Committee has come up with a number of very good proposals that could lead to lowering cost and increasing ridership. There was an agreement that RTA needs to review driver work rules, part-time employee restrictions, contracts and policies. He noted that there was representation from the union on the committee and no strong objections were raised to the the recom- mendations. M/S/C (SHEPARD/SCHROEDER) to transmit the recommended productivity improvements developed by the Western Riverside County Transit Productivity Committee to appropriate operators for review. RCTC Minutes December 9, 1982 Page 9 12. Employee Salary Adjustments for FY 82-83. Copies of the Personnel Committee's report were distributed to Commission members. Commissioner Schroeder told the Commission members that County of Riverside employees only received an increase in health insurance benefits and no increase in salary. He said that it would not be sensible to grant Commission employees an increase in salary with the high rate of unemployment and current economic condition. Discussion followed as to salary agreements reached by various cities in Riverside County this year. M/S/C (SHEPARD/JONES) to approve the recommendations made by the Personnel Committee as follows: 1) To grant the Executive Director an 8% salary increase. 2) That the Executive Director have the discretion to grant RCTC staff, based on employee performance, a maximum increase of 8% and minimum increase of 5%. 3) All salary adjustments will be effective on the first full pay period of July, 1982. Commissioner Schroeder voted no. 13. Performance Audit of Commission Activities. Barry Beck informed the Commission that only one firm had submitted a proposal to perform the Commission performance audit. Staff feels that the firm is qualified and recommends that the Commission approve the selection of Arthur Young & Company. M/S/C (SHEPARD/SCHROEDER) to select Arthur Young & Company as the consultant for the Performance Audit of the Commission, and authorize the Executive Director to execute the required agreement. 14. Federal -Aid Urban (FAU) Program Change. Barry Beck stated that legislation was passed at the last session pro- viding a new source of funds for ridesharing. Staff is recommending that the Commission withdraw the FAU funding for ridesharing, return the funds to the FAU pot for street and road projects, and replace the FAU funds for ridesharing with SB 320 funds. Commissioner Shepard asked if there is a time limit in the legislation. RCTC Minutes December 9, 1982 Page 10 Eric Haley responded that this is a five-year program. He noted that this is being reviewed by the Legislature in the next week and that this year's budget crunch may result in the suspension of funds for ridesharing. Barry Beck told the Commission that he will bring any change or problems that may arise before the Commission. M/S/C (SCHROEDER/CORNELISON) to cancel the $64,000 in Federal -Aid Urban funds for Commuter Computer in fiscal years 1983-1987 of the 1982 County Transportation Improve- ment Program and replace these funds with monies from the SB 320 Program. 15. City of Riverside State Transit Assistance Claim. M/S/C (SCHROEDER/SHEPARD) to adopt Resolution No. 83-4-RIV allocating $46,000 to the City of Riverside. 16. Quarterly Report on RCTC Funds. M/S/C (SCHROEDER/SHEPARD) to receive and file the quarterly report. 17. Plaque Presentation. Vice Chairman Wilson, on behalf of members of the Commission, presented a plaque to Commissioner Donald Schroeder and expressed appreciation for his dedication and participation on the Commission since January, 1977. 18. Adjournment. The next Commission meeting is scheduled for January 13, 1982 at 2:30 P.M., Riverside County Administrative Building, 14th Floor Conference Room, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. M/S/C (SCHROEDER/CORNELISON) to adjourn the meeting at 3:55 p.m. nk Respectfully submitt� B r-rS' Beck Executive Director 10