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 submittďż˝
B r-rS' Beck
Executive Director
10