Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout01 January 13, 1986 Citizens Advisory040239 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION CO \ei::-1 %s SGENDA CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE 12:30 p.m.,* JANUARY 13, 1986 RIVERSIDE CITY HALL 5TH FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM 3900 MAIN STREET, RIVERSIDE 92522 1. Call to Order. 2. Approval of Minutes. (Copies of the minutes will ACTION be distributed at the meeting.) 3. Election of Officers. ACTION 4. Riverside Transit Agency Methanol Fuel INFO Demonstration Project. 5. SB 1199 - Freeway Emergency Call Boxes. INFO 6. Federal Transportation Legislation. INFO 7. Transportation Issues Update. DISC/ POSS ACTION 8. Other Business. 9. Adjournment. ***************************************** LUNCH WILL BE PROVIDED TO COMMITTEE MEMBERS. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE TIME WAS CHANGED. IF YOU ARE NOT BE ABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING, PLEASE CALL NATY BY THURSDAY, JANUARY 9TH. ***************************************** RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of Meeting No. 1-86 January 13, 1986 1. Call to Order. With the Chairman and Vice Chairman not present, the Committee appointed Ben Minnich as Chairman Pro Tempore. The meeting was called to order at 12:52 P.M., on January 13, 1986, at the Riverside City Hall, 5th Floor Conference Room, 3900 Main Street, Riverside. Members Present: Terry Allen Harry Brinton Jordis Cameron Bill Freeman Herb Krauch Members Absent: Marian Carpelan Dick Jandt Don Kurz Jim Kenna Ben Minnich Joanne Moore Rena Parker Shiela Velez Bertram Vinson Ran Wyder Others Present: Steve 011er, RTA Durand Rall, RTA Barry Beck, Executive Director, introduced Jim Kenna and Bill Freeman, who were appointed to the Committee by the Commission. 2. Approval of Minutes. There being no corrections or additions to the minutes of the December 9, 1985 meeting, the minutes were approved as submitted. At this time, Vice Chairman Rena Parker entered the room and as- sumed the chair. 3. Election of Officers. Terry Allen and Jordis Cameron were unanimously elected as Chairman and Vice Chairman. It was the consensus of the Committee that the elected officers begin their term at the next meeting. 1 4. Riverside Transit Agency Methanol Fuel Demonstration Project. Durand Rall, General Manager of the RTA, briefed the Committee on how the Riverside Transit Agency became involved with the methanol fuel demonstration project. The demonstration project to retrofit existing diesel -fueled buses to methanol was initiated by an agree- ment between the State of California and General Motors in lieu of GM paying a fine for sales of automobiles not meeting emission cri- teria. In addition, legislation authored by Senator Robert Presley provided $975,000 for the demonstration project. RTA will provide three 1982 buses to be retrofitted to run on methanol. The cost to retrofit the first bus is estimated to be $630,000 including costs for engine development and testing, electronic control system deve- lopment, and three years of field support. The second and third bus retrofits will cost $110,000 each. Retrofitting all three vehicles will take approximately a year and a half. An additional $125,000 is available to construct a fueling system. Since the RTA's new maintenance facility is being constructed with an alter- native fueling system, only $20,000 will be needed to build a vapor recovery turnoff unit and control to deactivate the methanol system. After three years, RTA will have the option of continuing to operate the retrofitted buses on methanol or converting them back to diesel. One reason that RTA was selected for the demons- tration project was because they will have a fueling system capable of handling methanol. A second reason is that RTA is located in the south coast air quality basin. Steve 011er gave a presentation on the properties of methanol fuel. He explained that the project is one effort being tried to meet the Environmental Protection Agency's regulation on diesel emission standards by 1991. If the diesel engine is not substantially altered to reduce emissions or if the diesel fuel is not replaced with a cleaner burning alternative fuel, California will have difficulty complying with the EPA standards. 5. SB 1199 - Freeway Emergency Call Boxes. Barry Beck said that at the last legislative session, as a result of a number of counties expressing interest in the freeway emer- gency call box system, SB 1199 was enacted. The legislation allows a $1 surcharge on vehicle registrations to be used for the installation and maintenance of a call box system. There are approximately 500,000-600,000 registered vehicles in Riverside County. Terry Allen commented that vandalism alone will be a big part of the maintenance cost. Ben Minnich suggested that staff check with a county that already has a system in place to obtain data on costs for maintenance, usage of the system, and its effectiveness. Barry Beck replied that based on a study done by Orange County, the system could be built at a 1/2 mile spacing or a 1/4 mile spacing using one of the three technologies - hard wire, cellular, or 2 radio. Both Orange and San Diego Counties are considering building the system at a 1/2 mile spacing. The radio technology is consi- dered to be the least costly alternative in both capital and main- tenance. Based on the Orange County study, building a system at 1/2 mile spacing and using the radio technology would cost an esti- mated $400,000 for capital and $300,000 per year for operations. It was the consensus of the Committee that this matter be agendized at the next meeting in order for staff to provide additional infor- mation on cost, freeway miles, and technology. 6. Federal Transportation Legislation. Barry Beck said that the current Federal Transportation Act expires in September, 1986. Congress is in the process of instituting a new four-year highway act. Enclosed in the agenda packet is a summary of the highway act as proposed by the Administration. The new act proposes some significant changes. The two biggest changes are: 1) combining the interstate and primary funds when the interstate program ends in 1990; and, 2) combining the federal aid urban and secondary programs, and UMTA formula transit funds into a single fund. The proposal will give local agencies flexibi- lity on using the funds, however, it is also being proposed that the amount of funding be reduced. It is generally felt that these changes would not take effect until 1990. Durand Rall commented that many of the States will resist the proposed changes as they do not have the luxury of having State funds like California's TDA funds for their transit systems. A large number of systems are funded by the cities' general funds. California will have to do quite a bit of lobbying to gain support for the proposed changes. 7. Transportation Issues Update. The Committee was requested to review the list of transportation issues approved last year. The list would then be revised as needed to delete items completed or no longer a priority and to add new issues approved by the Committee. Paul Blackwelder led the discussion to review each of the issues. A. Should there be a universal telephone number for transit, vanpool, carpool and buspool information. M/S/C (MINNICH/MOORE) to delete this issue from the list as it is not feasible to establish a county -wide number to provide transit service information. B. Consideration should be given to phasing out dial -a -ride, except for elderly and handicapped service, unless dial -a -ride can be made more cost effective. Paul Blackwelder, Assistant Director, stated that the dial -a - ride service for the Moreno Valley and Rubidoux have been phased out and replaced by fixed -route services. The Palm 3 Desert dial -a -ride service was recently changed from general public to elderly and handicapped only service. Additionally, in their efforts to reduce costs, transit operators are look- ing at contracting the operation of these types of service to senior centers or other non-profit organizations. It was the consensus of the Committee that this issue remain on the list. C. Should funding be made available for expanding service and carrying out an aggressive marketing program in a selected area as a pilot program. Example: fixed -route service in Moreno Valley with more than one route and headways of no more than 30 minutes. Paul Blackwelder stated that a two route service with 60 minute headways was implemented in Moreno Valley. As part of RTA's marketing program to announce the service, flyers were sent to residences along the route and announcement of the service were printed in the newspaper. Terry Allen asked if the marketing effort increased ridership of the fixed -route services. Durand Rall replied that the dial -a -ride service which was terminated had averaged approximately 90 passenger/day. Line 18 which replaced the dial -a -ride is carrying approximately 150-190 passengers/day. Line 19 is a new route providing additional local service and service between Moreno Valley and Perris. Terry Allen commented that there is a need to market Line 30 in Hemet as not many people are aware that the service exists. Paul Blackwelder replied that RTA would be conducting a direct mail marketing effort for Line 30 soon. Jordis Cameron asked how successful the Santa Express bus service been. Paul Blackwelder said that the service was successful as it averaged 30 passenger/vehicle hour. Durand Rall added that service was significant as an example of private enterprise working with the public agency on a project. M/S/C (ALLEN/FREEMAN) to delete this issue from the list. D. Transit operator should provide more information on bus services at bus stops (maps and schedules). Paul Blackwelder said that SunLine has approximately 400 bus stops in their system. At each bus stop, there is a route map and a schedule which is updated twice a year. RTA has ordered 1300 new bus stop signs to replace old signs. The new signs have a slot to place the route number serving the stop. In addition, system maps will be placed in each of the 25 shelters in the Riverside area. Herbert Krauch stated that schedule information is needed at the RTA bus stops, particularly those with only hourly ser- vice. Ben Minnich agreed that it is important to have the informa- tion at the bus stops especially for riders that do not use public transit regularly. Durand Rall said that there are 1400 bus stops in the RTA system and that it would be very costly to keep the informa- tion at the stops. Barry Beck suggested that RTA staff be requested to make a presentation to the Committee at a future meeting on cost to include a route schedule at each bus stop. M/S/C (KRAUCH/ALLEN) that this issue remain on the list. Due to time constraints, it was the consensus of the Committee to continue the review of the transportation issues at the next meet- ing. 8. Adjournment. The meeting was adjourned at 2:24 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Paul Blackwelder Assistant Director nk 5 Date January 13, 1986 Citizens Advisory Committ, SIGN IN SHEET NAME Pou-L‘w-c, ( bD ©O -n n--A:=.11 ---L-11\mkcL, vk i?)1.1. 7tto_ buu UCI5L/yL) U REPRESENTINfi TEL. NO 01Atd.. c o..C1.9-- ciTA AGENDA ITEM NO. 4 IVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COM MISS ,?i'- TO: Citizens Advisory Committee FROM: Paul Blackwelder, Assistant Director SUBJECT: RTA Methanol Fuel Demonstration Project The Riverside Transit Agency has agreed to participate in a three-year demonstration project with the State of California Air Resources Board and General Motors Corportation to operate three buses retrofitted with engines operating on methanol instead of diesel fuel. The project is intended to demonstrate the substantial reductions in emissions of particulate and nitrogen oxides that can be achieved by use of this alternative fuel. General Motors Corporation will be responsible for costs associated with retrofitting the buses and costs -for repairs, replacement parts and maintenance, except for routine preventa- tive maintenance, to the methanol engines and equipment modified or added for the installation and operation of the methanol engine. The Riverside Transit Agency will be responsible for fuel, operations, preventative maintenance costs and data col- lection. The Air Resources Board shall be responsible for coordinating the project, assisting RTA in obtaining methanol fuel at the lowest possible cost and the costs for emissions testing and evaluation. To insure that RTA will have enough buses to provide service during the retrofit and testing periods, three new diesel - powered buses will be purchased. Funding for these buses will be provided by federal capital assistance funds available to the Riverside area (80%) and local match funds to be provided from the State (20%) . A representative from the Riverside Transit Agency will be at the meeting to describe the demonstration project and to answer questions concerning the project. PB:nk Agenda Item No. 4 CAC Meeting 1/13/86 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION CoMMISS':DN TO: Citizens Advisory Committee FROM: Barry Beck, Executive Director SUBJECT: SB 1199 - Freeway Emergency Call Boxes SB 1199, passed last year, provides a financing method for installing and maintaining freeway emergency call boxes. I'm sure you are familiar with the system that is in place in Los Angeles County. As a result of several other counties expressing interest in such a system in their county, SB 1199 was enacted. SB 1199 provides for the creation of a special authority that, using a $1 surcharge on vehicle registrations, would plan, install and provide for the maintenance of the system. (By the way, with the new cellular phone technology, the cost of installing a system should be considerably less than a wire interconnected system.) To create an authority requires the approval of the County and a majority of the cities representing a majority of the population. I've agendized this item strictly for information, discussion and to provide an opportunity to see if there is any support to pursue an emergency call box system in Riverside County. BB:nk Attachment Agenda Item No. 5 CAC Meeting 1/13/86 AMEN DE D IN ASSEMBLY SEPTEMBER 3, 1985 AMEN DE D IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 20, 1985 AMENDED IN SE NATE JUNE 18, 1985 AMENDED IN SE NATE JUNE 3, 1985 AMENDED IN SENATE MAY 13, 1985 1 SENATE BILL N o. 1199 Intro duced by Senato rs Craven, Bergeson, and Deddeh (Coau tho rs: Assembly Members Bradley, Chac on, Frazee, Killea, Mojon nie r, O'Co nnell, Peace, and Stirling) March 8, 1985 An act to add Section 16105 to the Business and Professi ons Cede; to add Se etien 131. 1 to, and to add Chapter 14 (commencing with Section 2550) to Division 3 of, the Streets and I lghways Code, and to add Sectio ns 2421.5 and 9250.10 to the Vehicle Co de, relating, to stre ets and highways; and ma lting an appropriation therefor. LEGISLATIVE COUNSELS DIGEST SB 1199, as amended, C raven. Se rvice authority for freeway eme rgencies: motor v ehicle registratio n fees: increase. (1) Under existin g law, the Departme nt of Transportation has full possession and control of all state highways in the California Freeway and Expressway System. This bill would autho rize the board of supervisors of • a co un ty an d a majority of the cities within the co unty having a majority of the populatio n to e stablish a se rvice authority for freeway eme rgencies with 7 me mbers. An established authority would be authorized to impo se additio nal fee s, no t to exce ed S1 per year, on v ehicles re gistered within the SB 1199 —2— -3— SB 1199 county, as prescrib ed . (2) Under e xisting law, r egistration fees on motor vehicles may be used f or, among oth er things, street and highway purposes. This bill would r equire the payment of an additional re gistration fee imposed by an authority for mot or vehicles in su bject coun ties, except those ex empt ed under law, and would require tho se fees to be distrib uted to the appropriate au thority after deduction of administrative c osts by the Departme nt of Mo tor Vehicles. The bill w ould authorize an authority to use the fees for the implementation of an eme rge ncy motorist aid system, as specified, on porti ons of the Califo rnia Freeway and Expressway System in the county. The bill would author ize an authority to iss ue reven ue bonds for the pur po se s of the bill and to pledge fees as re venues, as specified. The bill would authorize the Departm ent of Transportatio n and require the Department of the California Highway Patrol to ente r into contracts for the construction, o peration, and maintenance of the aid system with any established authority, as specified. T he authority would be requ ire d to reimburse bo th dep artments for all costs incurred u nder the bill. (3)' -U nder existing law ee urttie s are antherized te lieense businessThis bill for regulation �y te license ; � fitlyeoue-ty whieh has esta blished an; &per -ate - Fs ef ta w ears whieh may pre side emerge nc y se rvice en freeways within the ' ef the eeunty: -(4)- The bill would apprepriate X3;990;080 €re m the General Fund to the Gentreller for a learn te the Se rviee A utherity for Freeway Emergencies ift San Diege qty; if , te implementhave te he � � �r ate The that eo unty: lean would � the Surplus Money F und, in- e arned 1� Vote: % majority. Appro priation: ye s no . Fiscal committee: yes. State -mandated local program: no . f The people of the State of California do enact as follows: 1 SEC TIO N 4 See -Heft 46105 is added to the Business 2 and Prefessi efts Cod e, te re ad: 3 -1610 5 The beard ef supervisors ef any eeunty in 4 whieh a Serviee Autho rity fir Freeway Emergeneies has 5 been established te operate an emergeney motorist aid 6 program in the county may lie ense; for _ 1 a Li en 7 eper aters ef tow ears; whieh may pie emergeney 8 ffieehtlfkied servi ee en the p orti ons ef the Galifeffl-i a 9 Freew ay and Expressway System within the eau—tit-4/as 10 This s eetien shall net a€€eet any tew ear 11 er safety requirements ef the Dep artment ef Hi ghw ay the Galifernia ay Patrol. Dep artment SEG: 14 SECTION 1. Section 131.1 is add ed to the Streets and 15 Highways Code, to read: 16 131.1 . Upon the r equest of any S ervic e Authority for 17 Fre eway Em ergencies that has imp osed additional fees 18 on vehicles pursuant to S ection 9250 .10 of th e Vehicl e 19 C od e, the department may contract with th e auth ority 20 for the installation, operation, and maintenanc e of 21 em ergency call b oxes on porti ons of the Calif ornia 22 Freeway and Expr essway System within the county. The 23 s ervi ce authority shall r eimburse the department f or all 24 c osts incur red under this section. 25 SEG: S: 26 SE C. 2. Chapter 14 (commencing with Section 2550) 27 is added to Division 3 of th e Stre ets and Highways Cod e, 28 to read: 29 30 CHAPTER 14. SE RVICE AU THORI TY FO R FREEWAY 31 EM ERG ENCIES 32 33 2550. A Service A uthority for Freeway Emerg encies 34 may be e stablished in any county if the board of 35 supervisors of the county and a majority of th e citi es 36 within the cou nty having a maj ority of the population 37 ado pt resolu tions prov iding for the establishment of the 38 authority. SB 1199 —4— — 5 — SI3 1199 1 2551. An authority est ablished under this s ection shall 2 have 7 members, with 2 members sel ected by th e b oard 3 of supervisors and 5 members s elected jointly by th e 4 affected cities. 5 2552. The auth ority may contract and may undertake 6 any act convenient or necessary to carry out this chapt er 7 and any other law relating to the authority. 8 2553. Any authority established under this •chapter 9. may impose an additional f ee in a fee, not to exce ed on e 10 dollar ($1) inerements per y ear, on vehicles registered in 11 the county pursuant to Section 9250.10 of the V ehicle 12 Code. 13 2554. The mo neys re ceived by each authority 14 pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 9250.10 of the 15 Vehicle Code shall be used for the implem entation, 16 mainte nance and operation of an emergency mot orist aid 17 system, including, but not limited to, emergency call 18 boxes and emergency mechanical service patr ols on th e 19 portio ns of the California Free way and Expressway 20 System located within the co unty in which the auth ority 21 is e stablished. The Department of Transpo rtation and 22 the Department of the California Highway P atrol shall 23 e ach rev iew and appr ove plans fo r implementation of an 24 emerge ncy motorist aid syste m proposed for any state 25 highway route a nd shall be r eimbursed by the ser vice 26 autho rity for all costs incurred. 27 An au thor ity may co nstruc t and maintain the facilities 28 of an emergenc y mo torist aid system or it may contr act 29 with a pr ivate p erson or entity to do so. 30 2555. Any service author ity may, pursu ant to Chap ter 31 6 (comme ncing with Section 54300) of Division 2 of Title 32 5 of the G ove rnment Code, issu e re venu e bo nds for the 33 pur po ses of this c hapte r and pledge rev enues to be 34 receive d fro m the fees. 35 SEC . 4: 36 SEC. 3. Se ctio n 2421.5 is added to the Ve hicle Co de , 37 to re ad: 38 2421.5. Upon the reque st of Whe n any Service 39 Authority fo r Freeway Emerge ncies tha t has impo sed 40 additio nal fees on vehicles pursuant to Section 2553 of the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 4 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 ) 40 Stre ets and Highways C ode, the department shall cooperate and co et with that eeuniy to answ er calls and provide c entral dispatching services for th e system on the portions of the Californi a Fre eway and Expressway System within the c ounty. The department shall d et ermine and authoriz e th e s er vice providers eligible to participate in the system . The s ervic e a uthority shall reimburse the d epartment f or all costs incurred under this s ection. SEC. 5: SE C. 4. Section 9250.10 is add ed to the Vehicle C od e, to read: 9250 .10. (a) In addition to any oth er fe es sp ecified in this code and the Re venue and Taxation C ode, any additional fe es imposed by a Service Authority for Freeway Emergenci es pursuant to Section 2553 of the Streets and Highways Code shall be paid to the department at the time of registration or renewal of registration of e very vehicl e subject to registration under this c ode in the subject c ounties, except those vehicles that are expressly exempted under this cod e from the paym ent of registration fees. (b) After d educting its administrative costs, th e department shall distribute the additional f ees collected pursuant to subdivision (a) to the auth ority in the county in which they w er e collected. SEE: 6: The sum of th ree million d oll ars 4 -$3;0003000) - is hereby appropri ated from the G eneral Fund to the Controll er for all•eeatien to the Se rvi ee A uthority f or Freeway Emerg enei es n Sari Diego C ounty as a lean fer the e ests of irnplement4ng an motorist aid program en the C alifor nia Freew ay and System in that countyr The lean shill be made only if a Ser viee Authority for • Freeway Ernergeneies established in Safi Diego County pfl-Fsuarnt to Gimp -ter 4-4 with Seetion $550-)- of Division 3 of the Streets a-nd Highs Code: The le an shall be repaid fro m hose revenues; with merest earl to the rate earned by lieTS deposited in the Surplus Money Investment Ai -Rd; in 4-0 e qual annual ins tallmerits. All SB 1199 —6- 1 payments shall be dle-pesi- e€l ift the General 0 0 0 e Agenda Item No. 6 IVERS1DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISS% o, TO: Citizens Advisory Committee FROM: Barry Beck, Executive Director SUBJECT: Federal Transportation Legislation The current Federal Transportation Act expires after this year. Congress is working on a new bill but passage is not likely until late summer. It is anticipated that the new Act will be pretty much the same as the current one. Indeed, the primary bill, HR 3129, keeps just about all programs at their present authorization levels. The Administration has just released its proposal which proposes some rather radical changes. The feeling is that the Adminis- tration proposal really won't go too far though. Nevertheless, it proposes some interesting concepts,` concepts that may receive support four years from now when another Act is considered. Enclosed is a summary of the Administration's proposal. The two biggest changes proposed are: 1) Combining the Interstate 4R Program and Primary Program, and increasing the amount available to the combined program when the Interstate Program ends in 1990; and, 2) Combining Federal Aid Urban and Secondary Programs, and UMTA formula transit funds into a single fund. This might be very beneficial to this area since we have been having trouble utilizing our formula transit capital money, and could certainly use more money for streets. BB:nk Enclosure Agenda Item No. 6 CEC Meeting 1/13/86 L.i,,:ii,JArKy OF U.S. DE=. &iM.:.NT JtTEA.N5rU <l:.1 UL`I 5 PROPOSAL FOR NEW HITrIW Y/TRANSIT LEGISLATION TITLE I FEDERAL -AID EIGE AY PROGRAMS ;) , 1Z; C; This legislation restructures the highway program to continue the Federal emphasis on highway systems that warrant Federal attention and allow state and local governments greater flexibility to meet local interest highway needs. Completion of the Interstate System and its rehabilitation and preservation continue to be a high priority of the Administration. Interstate Construction Procram This bill provides sufficient funds to complete the Interstate System based on the redefinition in the Federal - aid Eighway Act of 1981. To expedite completion of the System, the availability period for Interstate funds is reduced to one year and Interstate funds will no longer be apportioned one year in advance of the year for which they axe authorized. To effect this change, a second authorization of $3.5 billion for FY 1987 is provided. The discretionary portion of the program will be continued at $300 million. The criteria currently contained in 23 U.S.C. 118(b) (2) will be used to allocate these funds. Additionally, the minimum one-half of 1 percent provision is repealed, but a hold harmless provision is added to the Interstate-4Rlprimary program to give states an equivalent increase in their Interstate-4R/primary funds. Inters tale -4 PJ?rimary Procram In order to give the state increased flexibility, the Interstate -4R and primary programs are merged into a single program. Pending completion of the Interstate System, the annual authorization of approximately $6 billion will approximate the combined FY 1286 authorizations for the Interstate -4R and primary programs. In the post -Interstate completion program, the annual authorization will increase to over $3 billion in 1991 and will reach almost $10 billion by 7994. The hichest priority for the Interstate-4R/primary program will be 4R improvements. The current provisions in 23 U.S.C. 119(b) requiring relative to maintenance of the Interstate System will be used to assure that the states maintain the_ Interstate System properly. Er? dce P'rocr'an With the initiation of the combined highway and transit formula program in Title I4, the Federal -interest bridge program will be revised to include only non -Interstate primary system bridges. The latest report on the bridge program shows that there continues to be a large. backlog of primary system bridge needs. The program will be authorized at $1.25 billion per year for FY 1987-1990 and $1.5 billion per year through FY 1994 to address these needs. Since there is also a large backlog of high cost bridges, the discretionary portion of the program is being increased from $200 million to $250 million per year through FY 1990 and to $200 million after FY 1990. Interstate Substitution Program Current law funds Interstate substitute transit projects from the General Fund and Interstate highway projects from the Highway Trust Fund. The bill proposes to eliminate the separate authorization for substitute transit projects and provide funding for both substitute highway and transit projects from the Highway Account of the Highway Trust Fund. To accomplish this and to include recent Interstate withdrawals, we have authorized the -combined substitute program at $815 million per year through FY 1993. This provides adequate funding for the program. Hiahwav Beautification The bill proposes to greatly simplify the complexand unworkable Highway Beautification Program. :The changs o states in proposed would give greater flexibility administering the program and focus Federal efforts on billboards in rural areas, where state land use controls are the weakest and esthetic protection is most important. Other changes we propose would sharply reduce the opportunity the use e program while still providing sustecora�esisation required by Federal funds �f or payments 'of 3 state law. Hiehwav Safety Imvrovernent Program • The rail -highway crossing and hazard elimination programs are important to highway safety, and they should bbe a intndedntatned=as separate categories. The programs are re present levels of $190 million per year and $200 million per year, respectively. Motor Carrier Safety Assistance ?rocram The bill proposes to continue this grant program to states at an annual level of $50 million. This program provides planning and implementati fn funds t sc fttsu��sizndease buses.1e ir efforts to improve the safe operation 3 Other Flexibility Provisions The latest report on the conditions 'and performance of our Nation's highways continues to show that needs are much larger than can be addressed by the Federal -aid highway program alone. In view of this, changes are proposed to increase the flexibility and purchasing power of state funds by reducing Federal requirements. As one example, we are recommending revisions to present toll road statutes. The toll road provisions would permit a state to use toll financing in conjunction with Federal -aid highway funds in the construction of new toll roads or the • reconstruction of existing toll roads. States would have the option of continuing tolls on these roads after the construction costs had been recovered so long as the excess revenues are used for highway construction on public roads. states would not be permitted to place tolls on existing free roads that were constructed using Federal -aid highway funds. Program Consolidation As part of the program restructuring. a number of existing categorical programs are eliminated. unobligated balances for certain of these pthe�sxnwill thebcasetransferred urbanthe andnew programs that replace m secondary programs, the unobligated balances• may be used for highway construction on any public road using primary procedures. Alternatively, the state may elect to use procedures of the combined highway and transit formula program for off system projects to the extent deemed appropriate by the Secretary. In most other cases, any unobligated funds will lapse' one year after enactment of the bill. . TITLE II HIGHWAY SAFETY PRCGRAMS The bill would provide authorizations from the�Eighway Trust Fund. f or the Department's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NETSA) for fiscal years_ 1937nt andhrougea1 94 to carry out the agency's highway safe rch programs. State and Community Eic +way Safety C -rant Program The bill would authorize $120 million -per year for NETSA's section 402 State and Community Highway Safety Grant program, reflecting the Department's continued high.priority on effective traffic safety programs administered at the state and local level. 4 MEI Research and Deve1 omment Procrarns For NETSA's section 403 research .and development programs, the bill would authorize $38 million per year for FY 1987 through FY 1994. plcohQL Safety Tncentive Grant Program The bill also provides an extension for NHTSA's section 408 alcohol safety incentive grant program. Sixteen states have qualified to date for basic grants under that program, but other states are expected to adopt stricter drunk driving laws that will meet the criteria of section 408 in the next few years. The extension will provide additional time for the remaining states to qualify, thus preserving the "incentive" nature of the program. Since funds previously authorized for section 408 may lapse under current law, the extension will simply allow total funding for the program to meet the cumulative $125 million level authorized by the 1982 legislation. Other Provisio'n's The bill also provides several technical amendments to these NETSA programs, including periodic reviews of the effectiveness ❑f section 402 programs and organizational improvements for the National Highway Safety Advisory Committee. Further discussion of these provisions is included in the section —by -section analysis. TITLE III MASS TRANSIT PROGRAMS The purpose of the changes t❑ the mass transit program are to reduce Federal involvement in programs that do not serve nationwide needs. to reduce Federal requirements. and to enhance the role of private industry in the provision of transit services. Revised Delivery Mechanism Instead of the complicated and sometimes overlapping assistance that is currently provided under the various Urban Mass Transportation Administration {IIMTA) programs. this bill would result in just two basic programs: The bulk of transit assistance would be provided to states under the combined 5 highway/transit formula provisions of Title Iv. However, an operating assistance program' funded with appropuatinurbanized from the General Fund would also be available for and rural areas. Omeratinc Assistance At the request of the Administration, Congress has frozen or decreased the amount of assistance available to transit authorities to fund routine omerating costs. This bill proposes to recognize the differences between the need for Federal operating assistance in small urbanized areas (less than 200,000 population) and the need in large areas. Many small areas receive such a high percentage of their operating budget from the Federal government that the cessation of Federal operating assistance might result in closing some systems. Operating assistance for small urbanized and rural areas would be continued at the current level (or a reduced level if Congress later so provides) and would be ended for large urbanized areas. This would result in an annual savings of more than $700 million from the General Fund. To assist large urbanized areas in maintaining their transit equipment, the definition of capital assistance would be expanded to cover capital maintenance* items. Enhance Private Enterprise Participation Title III contains a number of changes to enhance the participation of private enterprise in the provision of mass transit service. First, . section 302 would preclude UMTA- funded y r grantees from running charter service. It is not _air for taxpayer -subsidized authorities to take business away from private companies. Next, the planning recuir ements would be revised by section 305 so that private companies would partic4.pate in decisions to provide transit service. Finally, section 307 would require recipients of transit funds to explore opportunities for contracting out service with private companies. TITLE IV COMBINED HIGEWAy/TR.ANSIT FORMULA PROGRAM An important objective of the bill is to give the states and localities increased flexibility in the use of their non - Federal interest highway and transit funds. This -tithe :tie would replace the current FEWA urban system program, system portion EWA secondary system program, the FEWA non -primary s_ of the bridge program, the CMTA discretionary grant program, and the UMTA formula program with a combined formula program. r this formula program, Federal requirements will be CTndee t• s � than eliminated or satisfied by state assurances rather by Structure This program would have three components: an urban mobility component, under which funds could be used for either highway or transit projects; a transit component, under which funds could only be used for transit projects; anda highway ,component, under which funds could only be used for highway projects. Fundinv The program would be authorized at a level approximately equal t❑ the sum of the FY 86 program levels for the FEWA programs that are incorporated ($2.2 billion) plus $1.6 billion from the Mass Transit account (less certain take- downs) . All of the funding would be derived from fees paid into the Highway Trust Fund. Formula The funds will be distributed to the Governor of each state by a formula that will approximate the total amount of funds each state received under the current FEWA programs plus an amount of M ITA funds that are based on the current section 9A and section 18 formulas. To continue the consideration presently given t❑ urbanized areas of more than 200,000 population, provisions are included to require that the portion of the FEWA and UMTA funds attributable to these urbanized areas be made available to these areas. The amounts of attributable funds are based on the current provisions of FEWA Urban 'System program and the MITA section 9A formula. The funds attributable to large urbanized areas would be fungible, that is, could be spent on either transit or highway projects within those areas. This would provide a pool of money of approximately $1,000,000,000 that would be available t❑ the large urbanized areas to address urban mobility needs. The .balance of the Mass Transit Account funds passed through to the large urbanized areas could be spent only an transit projects in those areas. The FEWA funds that are not attributable to large urbanized areas could be spent anywhere in the state on eligible highway projects. The Transit Account funds not passed through to the large urbanized areas would be apportioned to the states using the same percentages applicable t❑ small urbanized areas and rural areas under existing law - 8.64 percent and 2.93, respectively. These funds could be spent anywhere in the state for eligible transit projects. Procram Match A11 highway and transit projects under the highway and transit formula program would have a Federal share of 75 percent. Procran Assurances A number of assurances apply to the use of transit or highway funds under the combined highway and transit formula program. These assurances require only a written statement from the Governor that the requirements are being net. Because the transit assurances are based on provisions of the UMT Act, and because the Administration proposes to make certain changes or additions to that Act, a number of the provisions of Title III apply to the use of transit funds under the highway and transit formula program as well as to the use of remaining carryover funds under the existing transit programs. TITLE V CHANGES TO TAX PROVISIONS Sichwav Revenue Provision, Extension of the User Fees and the Eichwav Trust Fund In order to provide continued funding of the program, provisions are included to extend both the user fees and the Highway Trust Fund for eight years. Elimination of Certain E emmtions from Cser Fees The current' exemptions of gasohol, methanol, and ethanol significantly reduce the revenues going into the Highway Trust Fund. In FY 86, the loss amounts to approximately $415 million, and by FY 90 the loss will increase to approximately $485 million. Since vehicles using these exempt fuels do the same amount of damage to our highways as vehicles using nonexempt fuels,.we continue to believe these exemptions are inappropriate and contrary to the user fee principle. We have included provisions to repeal these exemptions effective December 31, 1985. This proposal is also contained in the President's tax simplification initiative. Provisions to eliminate the current exemptions from the gasoline, diesel, and tire taxes for public and private revenue bus operations are also included. These exemptions are estimated to reduce Highway Trust Fund revenues by approximately 5105 million in FY 86 with the :eduction increasing to approximately $120 million by FY 90. The coal of these changes is to charge the actual users of the highway systems for the damage that they- cause and also to provide a w, sae? eat —0 avinc field" between public and private bus Agenda Item No. 7 RIVERSIDE CouNT'( TRANSPORTATION voM IISS1_:a_, TO: Citizens Advisory Committee FROM: Paul Blackwelder, Assistant Director SUBJECT: Transportation Issues Attached is a list of transportation issues and priorities established by the Citizens Advisory Committee in February. Staff will provide an update on efforts made to address these issues during the past year at the meeting. Committee members are requested to review the list and to identify any issues they wish to be added. PB:nk Attachment Agenda Item No. 7 CAC Meeting 1/13/86 CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE TRANSPORTATION ISSUES KIGH PRIORITY AI\j Should there be a universal telephone number for transit, vanpool, carpool and buspool information. B. Consideration should be given phasing out dial -a -ride, except for elderly and handicapped service, unless dial -a -ride can be made more cost effective. C. Should funding be made available for expanding service and carrying out an aggressive marketing program in a selected area as a pilot program. Example: fixed -route service in Moreno Valley with more than one route and headways of no more than 30 minutes. D. Transit operators should provide more information on bus services at bus stops (maps and schedules) . E. Highway 79 (Lambs Canyon) - safety problems and update on possible widening or guard rail project. F. Highway 111 - safety and congestion problems. G. Highway 86 - safety problem. H. Highway 71 - safety problem, better markings on the asphalt. I. Highway 91 - safety and congestion problems. Should a diamond lane be constructed from Corona to Orange County. J. How are Citizens Advisory Committees used by other Commissions, what are the areas of activity, and should the Committee begin to act more as an advocacy group through the Commission? MQpERATE PRIORITY A. Transit operators should increase efforts to' promote transit subsidy programs such as merchant discounts, employer pass programs, etc. B. Should transit service be operated between Lake Elsinore and Corona. C. Should transit service be operated between Norco and Riverside to accommodate persons needing to be in Riverside for work by 8 a.m. D. Public/private partnerships - should private developers participate more in transportation projects. t LOW PRIORITY A. Is there adequate information exchange within the transit community to identify innovative transit programs designed in 'other areas for possi- ble implementation in Riverside County. B. Coordination should be improved between transit operators and Commuter Computer. C. Provide an update report on efforts to establish local airline and rail services in Riverside County.