HomeMy Public PortalAbout05 May 23, 1988 Citizens Advisory040254
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
AGENDA
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
1:30 P.M., MONDAY, MAY 23, 1988
RIVERSIDE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CENTER
14th Floor Conference Room
4080 Lemon Street, Riverside
1. Call to Order.
2. Approval of Minutes. ACTION
3. Park and Ride Facility Security/Vandalism. DISC/
ACTION
4. UMTA 16(b)2 Capital Assistance Grants for ACTION
Private Non -Profit Agencies.
5. FY 1989-1993 Short Range Transit Plan. ACTION
6. Other Items.
7. Adjournment.
BATE May 23, 1988
Citizens Advisory Committee
NAME
,
n Lgtl
r _
Efi.
,'��� /7/
Ala
EK IA, • ecia
REPRESENTING
12C_.k. Cf `.� 1L G�..FLiit
7
[as- -.Raley ic.,.670
a:17, ecrip, 044'4' sgb.40,44ef
F aczeie
DF-PL -e-k- 4144
.? r'9 1
%G
PHONE
907 7
78/ &72-2
,7 �92S
_62.V77
37eJ` �1J4� �' 51/7
34'G1 -577/
L _fig
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Minutes of Meeting No. 4-88
April 25, 1988
1. Call to Order.
The meeting of the Citizens Advisory Committee was called to
order by Chairman Terry Allen at 1:40 p.m., at the Riverside
County Administrative Center, 14th Floor Conference Room,
4080 Lemon Street, Riverside 92501.
Members present:
Terry Allen
Ace Atkinson
Ray Baca
Cathy Bechtel
Mike Beggins
Rose Eldridge
Jim Judge
Jim Kenna
Others present:
Paul Blackwelder, RCTC
Dick Cromwell, SunLine
Helen Mullaly, SCAG
Barry Samsten, RTA
Hideo Sugita, RCTC
2. Approval of Minutes.
Herb Krauch
Don Kurz
Joanne Moore
Lori Nickel
Charles Schmitt
Don Senger
Bill Udell
It was moved, seconded and carried to approve the
minutes of the Citizens Advisory Committee's March 25,
1988 meeting as submitted.
3. Committee Bylaws Amendment.
Paul Blackwelder, Assistant Director, stated that the bylaws
were amended to incorporate actions taken by the Committee
at their last meeting. The bylaws have been reviewed and
approved by the Commission's legal counsel.
It was moved, seconded and carried to approve the
amended bylaws of the Citizens Advisory Committee.
Page 2
4. Unmet Transit Needs.
Contracted Services in the Western County Area
Ace Atkinson informed the Committee of the Developmental
Disabilities Area Board No. 12 concern that the Inland
Regional Center should not be funding transportation
services for the developmentally disabled. He said that the
Inland Regional Center is a non-profit agency to
specifically provide assessments, case management and to
purchase services for people with developmental
disabilities. IRC currently spends approximately $.5
million/year on transportation services. The issue that has
developed over the past 3-4 years is whether or not transit
service purchased from vendors by IRC for its clients
constitutes an unmet transit service need.
Chairman Allen read the SCAG definition of unmet transit
need. Unmet transit needs are, at a minimum, those public
transportation or specialized transportation services that
are identified in the Regional Short Range Transit Plan and
the Regional Transportation Plan that have not yet been
implemented or funded. Reasonable to meet shall include the
following factors: 1) community acceptance; 2) timing; 3)
equity ; 4) economy; 5) short term and long term; and, 6)
cost effectiveness, including the ability to meet the
required farebox ratio. The farebox ratio is 18%+ for the
Riverside Transit Agency and 15%+ for the SunLine Transit
Agency.
Paul Blackwelder asked Ace Atkinson how Riverside and San
Bernardino Counties compare with other Article 8 counties
with regards to providing transit service to persons with
developmental disabilities and how other Regional Centers
throughout the State handle the problem.
Ace Atkinson said that up until March, the western end of
San Bernardino County was an exemplary community in which
there was no waiting list for people with developmental
disabilities to ride public transportation and there has
been ongoing commitment on the part of the elected
officials, the transit providers and Omnitrans to insure
that as population expanded in the area that the specialized
transit service will also be expanded. Cathy Bechtel has
testified at their unmet transit needs hearing that
expansion of transit services is needed in the western end
of San Bernardino County.
In Orange County, the Orange County Transportation
Commission has allowed the Orange County Transit District to
bankroll $100 million in TDA funds while the Orange County
Regional Center pays about $1 million/year for direct full
private contracted services. Sacramento and Fresno Counties
utilize CTSA's. The Regional Center in Fresno spends $3-4
Page 3
million/year for private contract service over and above the
service provided by the CTSA. What the other Regional
Centers do with contracting bothers him and is contrary to a
policy adopted in 1979-80 by the State Council but was never
implemented.
Cathy Bechtel said that the Sacramento and the San Francisco
Bay area uses public transit. In Angeles County, the
Regional Centers do not use public transit to their full
advantage. All of the Regional Centers are completely
separate and have separate contracts with the State of
California.
Paul Blackwelder said that the Inland Regional Center
receives and spends $.5 million/year on transportation. In
discussing this matter previously with Ace Atkinson, it was
his impression that funds that are not spent go back to
Sacramento and are then dispersed to other Regional Centers
allowing more transportation to be bought in other counties.
He feels that the Commission has worked with Regional Center
staff and would be desirous of providing transportation but
not to simply supplement a budget. If the Regional Center
could provide information as to what services they would be
providing if they did not have to spend the $.5 million on
transit and show that the services are needed in this
county, there would be much better argument for the
Commission to pick up the costs of contracted services. He
noted that in the proposed sales tax measure, 5% of the
revenues is being proposed to be used to expand for transit
with the emphasis on transit for the elderly and
handicapped.
Ace Atkinson explained how the Regional Centers' budget is
developed. The State takes the current expenditures for 12
months as of June and additional funding is allocated for
new clients. Funds not spent are used for individualized
new programming, mobility training, etc., by the State. The
following year, they build the base on the other service
categories.
Paul Blackwelder suggested an amendment to staff
recommendation to expand the proposed CTSA/Alternative Study
to include the Western Riverside County to address the issue
of the contracted services being paid for by the Regional
Center as part of that study. The study would assist in
determining the extent to which the Regional Center should
be providing transportation for their clients.
It was moved, seconded and approved that the Commission
expand its proposed Consolidated Transportation Service
Agencies/Alternatives Study to include the Western
County area, in particular, to look at the services
provided by the Inland Regional Center and bring the
study back to the Committee for review and make
recommendations on how to best proceed and on funding.
Page 4
Expanded Service by the Riverside Special Services Program
Chairman Allen informed the Committee that Commission staff
has discussed expanding service by the Riverside Special
Services with staff of the Regional Center and Area Board 12
and it was agreed that there was not enough additional
demand at present to warrant expansion of the Riverside
Special Services Program.
Paul Blackwelder stated that Ace Atkinson will be working
with the ARC to stagger the workshop program hours. A
report will be provided to the Committee on this matter in
six months.
It was moved, seconded and approved the staff
recommendations that there is not enough additional
demand at present to warrant expansion of the Riverside
Special Services Program.
Intervalley Handicapped Service in the SunLine Service Area
It was moved, seconded and approved that SunLine
Transit Agency should continue to operate the
intervalley service to the Foundation for the Retarded
of the Desert at least until the proposed consultant
study of the Consolidated Transportation Service Agency
and other alternatives for providing social service
transportation in the Coachella Valley is completed,
and that continued operation of this service should be
included in their FY 1989-1993 Short Range Transit
Plan.
It was moved, seconded and approved that the: 1) eight
new clients should be served, if possible, by the
existing intervalley service; 2) 13 clients transported
by the Foundation in the afternoon cannot be served
without expansion of the intervalley service; and, 3)
intervalley service should not be expanded pending the
completion of the study of a CTSA and other
alternatives to providing social service transportation
in the Coachella Valley area.
5. Transportation Studies - Progress Report.
Paul Blackwelder briefed the Committee on the status of the
following studies.
Riverside -Orange County Commuter Rail Study.
The Commission is participating in a Riverside to Orange
County commuter rail feasibility study along the Route 91
corridor. The study will be completed the end of June. It
Page 5
It is anticipated that four trains will be used in the
morning and four trains in the afternoon. Existing railroad
rights -of -way will be used. The railroad is interested in
selling the line from San Bernardino to Los Angeles and they
would like to have the Riverside to Los Angeles line double
tracked. It may be possible for the commissions to help pay
for the double tracking and, in return, get the right to use
the line for commuter rail.
Riverside/San Bernardino Transportation Study
A copy of the Riverside/San Bernardino Transportation Study
was mailed to the cities and the county for their review.
Approval of the long range highway study will be on the
Commission's June agenda. Staff has met with developers
interested in doing a traffic study in the Rancho California
area. The study is being proposed because the number of
developments now being proposed for the area would result in
far more units than considered in the Riverside/San
Bernardino Transportation Study. The developers will pick
up the cost of the study.
Cajalco Parkway Study
Commission staff has requested SCAG to look at alternative
improvements on the Cajalco Parkway starting at I-215 near
Perris and either linking it to the Eastern Corridor by
extending it through the hills and the Cleveland National
Forest to Orange County or connecting only to Route 15 in
order to relieve congestion on Route 91. The other
alternative being looked at is to increase employment in the
Lake Elsinore, Perris and Moreno Valley areas to see how the
Parkway will functions as a north -south route for the
Western County area. If the study indicates a need for the
Cajalco Parkway, an additional study will be done to
determine the alignment to protect the right-of-way.
Don Kurz stated that since the Corp of Engineers will be
spending $1.3 million for improvements along the Santa Ana
River. He asked if it is possible for the Commission to
request that a portion of the funds be used to construct
road/railroad alignment along the Santa Ana River.
Staff has indicated that they will investigate the
possibility of Mr. Kurz' proposal.
6. Motorist Aid Callbox System.
Paul Blackwelder said that the Commission, at their meeting
earlier this month, approved the selection of Techplan
Corporation to assist in a three-phase program for callbox
installation. Phase I is the final design of the technology
and coverage for each county based on the revenues expected
Page 6
to be available. Phase II is development of final system
specifications, issuing Requests for Proposals and
contractor selection. Phase III is oversight of
construction of the system. This item was presented for
information only and no recommendation was requested.
Jim Judge asked how the callbox systems will be installed in
populous areas and in areas that are sparsely populated.
Paul Blackwelder said determining the number and where the
callboxes should be installed is the first issue that the
consultant and the Commission will need to decide.
7. Other Business.
A. Paul Blackwelder reported that a subcommittee of the
Commission has been appointed to meet with the Orange
County Transportation Commission. One item they will
discuss is a vanpool program for commuters to Orange
County. Also, the Orange County Rideshare and Commuter
Computer agreed to select employment sites to be
targeted for this program.
B. The recommendation of the Committee regarding signing
on Route 74 will be on the Commission's agenda next
month.
8. Adjournment.
There being no other items to come before the Committee, the
meeting was adjourned at 3 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
` atl,_ aL J
Paul Blackwelder
Assistant Director
NK
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
May 23, 1988
TO: Citizens Advisory Committee
FROM: Staff
SUBJECT: Park and Ride Facility Security/Vandalism
Mr. Jo Sanford of Caltrans will be present at the meeting to
report on the park and ride lots that are experiencing vandalism
problems and to identify recommendations that Caltrans considers
reasonable and cost effective to address the vandalism problems.
Agenda Item No. 3
May 233 1988
R IVER SIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
May 23, 1988
TO: Citizens Advisory Committee
FROM: Staff
SUBJECT: Park and Ride Facility Security/Vandalism
Mr. Jo Sanford of Caltrans will be present at the meeting to
report on the park and ride lots that are experiencing vandalism
problems and to identify recommendations that Caltrans considers
reasonable and cost /effective /to address the/ vandalism p"roblems.
l Io �CiL� A(�Ct�LSS 01117- r� << ��c� crl/ij 4' co�i7 /b 16xr���}� 4llUC G�J
Agenda Item No. 3
May 23, 1988
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4
May 23, 1988
TO:
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
t Ct"!
Citizens Advisory Committee Social Service Advisory
Council
FROM: Hideo Sugita, Staff Analyst
SUBJECT: UMTA 16(b)2 Capital Assistance Grants for Private Non -
Profit Agencies
Annually, federal capital assistance funds are made available to
the State under Section 16(b)2 of the Urban Mass Transportation
Act. An estimated $2.8 million will be available to the State for
projects in FY 1988-89. This program provides capital assistance
to private non-profit agencies for the purchase of capital
equipment to provide transportation to elderly and _handicapped
persons. The program is administered by Caltrans. Caltrans
notifies eligible agencies, provides technical assistance in
preparing grants and selects the projects to be funded. UMTA
funds 80% of the cost of the equipment and successful local
agencies provide the 20% match. To be eligible for selection,
projects in Riverside County must be endorsed by the Commission.
This year three projects were submitted to Caltrans from private
non-profit agencies in Riverside County. Commission, Caltrans and
Office on Aging staff met onCA ril = 1988 and reviewed the
applications. The Department of Rehabilitation comments on the
applications were available at the meeting, they were
unable to attend. Caltrans also sent copies of the applications
to the Inland Regional Center and the Developmental Disabilities
Area Board #12 for review purposes. The proposed projects are
discussed below.
06
Meditrans
Meditrans Services Inc., a non-profit agency in Western Riverside
County has applied for a 15 passenger lift equipped van with 2
tie downs. Meditrans provides transportation for handicapped and
elderly persons under contract with the Inland Regional Center,
County Office on Aging, and the Riverside Transit Agency. The
primary needs served by Meditrans are transportation to
handicapped workshop programs, medical and social service agency
appointments and shopping trips from the unincorporated areas to
Riverside, Perris and Hemet. L,,
Meditrans has requested an expansions'vehicle to primarily serve
the developmentally disabled in/fhe Sunnymead (Moreno Valley)
area . The Inland Regional Center is in the process of
decentralizing their client residence facilities and will need
Meditrans to provide transportation for its clients this area.
Agenda Item No. 4
May 23,.1988
Atio
ca-wi,t 6, ,� � Lev
. C l«t. r tat✓
Meditrans has coordinated with the Riverside Transit Agency and
the Friends of Moreno Valley (a prior year successful 16(b)2
applicant) and neither agency has any objection to the proposed
service. Staff recommends that this project be highly recommended
for approval.
Cathedral City Senior Center
Cathedral City Senior Center, a private non-profit service
organization, has applied for a 15 passenger lift equipped van
with base and mobile radio units. The Senior Center is proposing
to provide elderly and handicapped service to approximately 69
seniors per week.
Currently, SunLine, through a contract with Desert Blind provides
dial -a -ride service in the Palm Springs/Cathedral City area.
Staff is meeting with Senior Center and SunLine representatives
to determine if Desert Blind can provide the needed service and
if not, should SunLine expand their service or should the Senior
Center begin operating a van. Staff will report on the outcome of
this meeting and present a recommendation for this project at the
Committee meeting.
Jewish Community Center af Palm Desert 2ei00o
The Jewish Community Center application was incomplete. The need
for the service was not clear and the application did not
demonstrate that the Community Center would be able to operate
the service if the grant was approved. The local Caltrans Review
Committee recommended that the Community Center work with
Caltrans staff to produce a complete application for the next
cycle.
In light of the Riverside County Transportation Commission's
proposed CTSA alternatives/feasibility study to be conducted
early next year, staff recommends that Meditrans and the
Cathedral City Senior Center, if the Committee supports their
grant, should be required to cooperate and coordinate their
services 140th the CTSA, if one is formed as an outcome of the
study. (L;c,- -,t.z •-- ES -VP- ate, e d," 0_ w'4sy,t
REC MMENDATION (�,l' JJ �'Y�e UG� 1 r �: ;� Se1a (.L !V c
tom':. f i-7/1, - -.af�_eL1 LL 0 s+f� ogres
That the Committee recommend- o the Commission:
1. That the Meditrans grant application should be highly
recommended for approval by Caltrans.
2. That Meditrans, as a condition of approval, should be
required to cooperate and coordinate its services with the
public transit operators and any new operator that may be
created as a result of the Commission's CTSA
Feasibility/Alternatives Study.
AGENDA ITEM NO. 5
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TO: Citizens Advisory Committee
FROM: Paul Blackwelder, Assistant Director
SUBJECT: FY 1989 - 1993 Short Range Transit Plan
Enclosed with the agenda is a copy of the FY 1989 - 1993
Riverside County Short Range Transit Plan scheduled for approval
by the Commission at their meeting on June 1, 1988. The
Riverside County Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) covers three
areas of the county, the Western County area, the Coachella
Valley area, and the Palo Verde Valley area, and is comprised of
the plans for seven small public transit operators, the Riverside
Transit Agency, and the Sunline Transit Agency. The Sunline
Transit Agency plan has not been completed and will have to be
processed through the Committee and the Commission next month.
Staff has reviewed the plans of the operators for compliance with
the Commissions' unmet transit needs findings, reasonableness of
estimated cost and ridership increases, compliance with fare
revenue to operating cost ratios requirements, and justification
for capital projects. Since the SRTP is updated annually, the
service assumptions, studies to be accomplished, and
justification for capital projects programmed in the first two
years of the plan are reviewed more closely than, those in years
three to five, which are more subject to change in future plan
updates.
The following operators hayg not programmed _any. majox Qervice
. xpansion thiring lhi Liza year �.� periQ Banning; Beaumont;
Corona; Lake Elsinore Transit System; Rancho Mirage; Riverside
Special Services; and Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency. Capital
improvements for these operators are primarily aimed at replacing
older vehicles and providing vehicles to allow for maintenance.
The City of Riverside' Special Services Program will increase its
fares in FY 1988/89 to meet the 10% fare revenue to operating
cost requirement for services for the elderly and handicapped.
The Riverside Transit Agency plan contains the service expansions
and studies outlined below:
FY 1988/89
* Implement Corona/Norco fixed route service.
* Route 29 (Pedley/Rubidoux/Riverside) - Extend service to the
Belltown area.
* Implement minor route revisions recommended in the COA
Report approved by the RTA Board.
Agenda Item No, 5
May 23. 19RR
* Study the Rubidoux area to determine the feasibility of
starting a second route to expand coverage of the area and
to improve the headway of line 29 to 60 minutes.
* Poll Lake Elsinore area employers to determine if there is
a reasonable demand for bus service to and from the Perris
area for commuters.
FY 1989/90
* Route 14 (Indiana Ave) Extend route to serve a new county
building.
* Route 15 (Arlington Ave) Add evening and Sunday service.
* Route 2 (Riverside/Corona) Improve weekday and Saturday
headways.
FY's 1990/91 and 1991/92
No service expansions are planned
FY 1992/93
* Modify several routes to serve proposed major commercial
and industrial developments and a proposed Riverside
Community College campus in Moreno Valley.
* Route 19 (Moreno Valley/Perris) Add Saturday service.
* Implement 3 new routes to serve expected development, one
route in Riverside and two routes in Moreno Valley
The RTA capital program for the next five years is aimed
primarily at replacing older buses, fareboxes, and radio
equipment and acquiring buses for service expansion programmed
for FY 1991/92.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend that the Commission approve the FY 1989 - 1993 Short
Range Transit Plan for the public transit operators in the
Western County and Palo Verde Valley areas of Riverside County.
PAST COMMISSION MINUTES
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
Minutes of Meeting No. 3-88
March 2, 1988
1. Call to Order.
The meeting of the Riverside County Transportation
Commission was called to order by Vice Chairman Roy Wilson
at 2:02 P.M. on Wednesday, March 2, 1988, at the Riverside
Public Library, 3581 Seventh Street, Riverside.
Members present:
Kay Ceniceros Melba Dunlap
Susan Cornelison Roy Wilson
Alternates present:
Russell Beirich
Jack Clarke
Pat Murphy
2. Approval of Minutes.
Wayne Stuart
Ray Tanner
M/S/C (CLARKE/CENICEROS) to approve the minutes of the
February 3, 1988 meeting.
3 Public Comments.
There were no public comments.
4. Consent Calendar.
M/S/C (TANNER/CLARKE) to approve the consent calendar
items as followed:
A. PVVTA State Transit Assistance Fund Claim.
To adopt Resolution No. 88 -4 -PVT allocating
$32,700 for the purchase of a lift -equipped van to
replace older equipment.
B. Moreno Valley SB 821 Claim Extension.
To approve the City of Moreno Valley's request for
a time extension to June 30, 1988 to complete the
SB 821 funded Phase II sidewalk construction
project.
Page 3
7. Caltrans' Proposed State Transportation Improvement Program
for State Highways.
Jack Reagan, Executive Director, reviewed the State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) process. The
first step is the adoption of the fund estimate by the State
Commission. He said that the fund estimate adopted by the
California Transportation Commission assumed that no funds
would be available for programming new projects in the STIP.
Secondly, Caltrans prepares its preliminary STIP and,
thirdly, regional transportation planning agencies prepare
and submit their proposed regional programs. The PSTIP
submitted by Caltrans reflects some technical adjustments in
timing and costs. The timing adjustments proposed included
acceleration of the interstate rehabilitation project on I-
215 and the expressway construction on Route 86. Funding
adjustments involved cost increases for the I-215 and Route
86 projects and resulted in net increases of $18.2 million
for"District 8 and $2.5 million in District 11. The only
change in Caltrans' PSTIP that staff is recommending is for
the Ethanac Interchange project to be moved from FY 1991-92
to FY 1990-91. Staff recommendation is for the Commission
to support Caltrans' PSTIP, with the understanding that the
Ethanac Interchange project be moved up.
Commissioner Cornelison asked if the Ethanac Interchange
project was delayed because of flood control considerations. -
Commissioner Ceniceros stated that she has been working with
the County Flood Control District and that the target date
for the construction of the flood control project is 1990.
Ed Studor, Riverside County Road Department, said that the
County will be doing the design work.
M/S/C (CENICEROS/DUNLAP) to support Caltrans' PSTIP,
with the understanding that the Ethanac Interchange
project will be moved up.
8. Report on State Transportation Issues.
Jack Reagan reported on the following legislations.
A. SB 516 (Bergeson)
This bill, effective on January 1989, was signed into
law by Governor Deukmejian last month. It provides
statutory authority for Caltrans to contract out work.
Staff recommended that the Commission authorize staff
to contact Caltrans to identify which projects would be
affected.
Page 2
C. Palm Springs SB 821 Claim.
To approve the City of Palm Springs' request to
use $23,683 in previously allocated SB 821 funds
and accrued interest for the Vista Chino sidewalk
and bikeway project and instruct Palm Springs to
return the remaining $34,488 plus any interest
accrued since June 30, 1987 to the Commission.
5. Unmet Transit Needs Public Hearing.
Vice Chairman Wilson gave a brief definition of unmet
transit needs and informed those present on the purpose of
the hearing, and how TDA funds would be expended. The
Commission will review the comments received at the hearings
as well as written and telephone comments received. A
determination on whether there are any unmet transit needs
that can be reasonably met will be made by the Commission at
its April 6, 1988 meeting.
The public hearing was opened at 2:18 p.m. After all the
testimony were received, the public hearing was closed at
2:39 p.m.
(Transcripts of the unmet needs hearings are included in the
April agenda packet.)
6. Intercounty Transit Service Cost/Subsidy Reduction and
Intercounty Pass Feasibility Study.
Paul Blackwelder, Assistant Director, stated that the San
Bernardino and Orange County Transportation Commissions
approved the policies related to cost -sharing, transfer use
and pass use on the intercounty transit services and the
request to have RTA obtain proposals from public and private
transit providers. The Los Angeles County Transportation
Commission will be taking action on the request at their
next meeting and LACTC staff is recommending approval. In
addition, LACTC proposed that a study be done by a
consultant on the feasibility of an intercounty transit
pass. OCTC has a consultant available and that the study
could be completed in 2-3 months at a cost not to exceed
$20,000. The study will be done contingent upon the four
counties sharing the cost of the study, at a cost not to
exceed $5,000 per Commission.
M/S/C (DUNLAP/TANNER) to approve funding for. an
Intercounty Transit Pass Feasibility Study to be
conducted by the Los Angeles County Transportation
Commission at 25% of the cost, but not to exceed
$5,000, subject to similar approval by the county
transportation commissions in Orange and San Bernardino
Counties.
Page 4
B. SB 140 (Deddah )
The Commission previously took positions on SB 140
to: 1) support SB 140 provisions to involve the
Legislature and the Governor in the fund estimate
process; 2) oppose SB 140 provisions which would define
the STIP as a priority list of projects rather than a
delivery schedule; and, 3) support SB 140 provisions
which would create a State matching grant program for
locally funded projects, with the understanding that
rehabilitation projects will be made eligible for
funding and to oppose Caltrans' proposal to make this
an entitlement program.
SB 140 has passed out of the Assembly and major changes
and/or compromises were: 1) a control mechanism to
make sure that Caltrans project delivery schedule is
more accountable; 2) the concept of a formula versus a
grant distribution of the $300 million of the
Governor's bond proposal for State matching funds has
been added; 3) the $1 billion bond program is being
proposed for 20 years rather than short-term bonds;
and, 4) provisions that deficits from the current STIP
"quinquennium" be rolled over into the next five-year
period and for bond proceeds or other increases in
State Highway funding be used to satisfy the county
minimum requirements.
Commissioner Ceniceros stated that CSAC is concerned
about the 30% allocation to cities and counties being
too little. Also, they are concerned with difficulty
for local agencies to come up with the match for the
program. -She understands that the provision on
maintenance of effort is still included in the bill
making it that much more difficult for local agencies.
Jack Reagan responded that with regards to distribution
of funds from the Governor's bond proposal, he thinks
that it is a wrong message to send to the legi.lators
that there ought to be a distribution of these monies
to, local agencies by some formula because it would only
be done on a one-time basis. He said that cities and
counties should focus on the distribution of additional
Gann proceeds in the event the voters approve the Gann
Reform issue.
C. Gann Reform Initiative.
The initiative proposes that all transportation -related
revenues, in particular to the gas tax and the sales
tax, dedicated for transportation purposes, would be
considered a user fee in order that it would not be
subject to the Gann limit. Senator Gann's initiative
Page 5
would provide new funds as the sales tax on gasoline
would now be identified as a transportation revenue
which currently goes into the general fund. However,
it would not exceed the amount of rebate as in the past
years. He recommended that the Commission support the
Gann Initiative.
Jack Reagan informed the Commission of a measure by
Bill Honig which proposes to identify gas tax as user
fees but that sales tax on motor vehicle revenue would
not be deemed as user fee unless it is appropriated for
transportation purposes. The measure would also modify
the inflation factor using a higher factor and allowing
the Gann cap to increase more rapidly. It was also his
understanding that the population formula would be
modified to use daytime population.
Eric Haley said that the Citizens for Quality
Government are pushing for including the factor that
would reflect daytime versus round-the-clock
residential population. The legislature was requested
to prepare a report with some kind -of formula
distributing an advantage to high daytime population
cities. Another factor being developed is population
growth in school age versus the growth in population at
large. He said that if the Honig measure is to receive
more votes than the Gann measure on the sales tax
treatment then the Honig measure would prevail over the
Gann initiative.
M/S/C (CENICEROS/DUNLAP) to:
1) Contact Caltrans to review projects to be
contracted out to determine how SB 516 will
impact project engineering and delivery with
the objective that project development work
is expedited.
2) Support SB 140 as amended and to reaffirm its
previous position to support the grant
approach.
3) Consider support voter approval of the Gann
Reform Initiative and urge early legislation
related to the distribution of increased
transportation funds to the State and the
cities and counties.
Commissioner Ray Tanner voted no because of
the distribution concept of the bond
proposal for State matching funds.
Page 6
9. Executive Director's Report.
A. Southwestern Riverside County Circulation Issues.
By consensus of the Commission, this item was deferred
to the next Commission meeting.
B. Status Report on Technical Analysis of Local Sales Tax
Expenditure Plan.
Jack Reagan informed the Commission on the status of
the studies being performed by Bechtel Civil, Inc. on
the scope and costs of State highway projects and the
Coachella Valley regional arterial projects. He
expects that the studies will be completed by mid -
April.
The Orange County Transporation Commission, at their
February 18th meeting, approved participation in the
commuter rail feasibility study. Staff of the Orange
County Commission had proposed a memorandum of
understanding between the two commissions but due to
time constraints and since the study will be needed to
finalize the Expenditure Plan in June, he had directed
OCTC staff to proceed with the study.
The work to revise revenue forecasts is underway. An
agreement should be reached on a revised population
growth assumption, use of adjusted growth forecasts
consistent with State Department of Finance forecasts,
or the assumption of 53 annual growth rate which is
currently being used. The assumptions with regards to
State/Federal funds still need to be determined by
using different scenarios: 1) using county minimum
that has been allocated for capital projects; 2) using
the Governor's proposal of $1 billion statewide program
for capacity improvements; or, 3) assume that we are
going to receive 1003 return to source. The
Commission's decision should depend on the gap between
adjusted highway and commuter rail costs and the
anticipated revenues.
C. Review of Board of Supervisors' Action on Study of
Growth Limitation Initiative in Relation to RCTC's
Proposed Transportation Sales Tax Ballot Measure.
The Board of Supervisors took action yesterday to defer
the growth limitation initiative to the November 1988
ballot, the same time that the Commission's local sales
tax measure will be on the ballot. He said that it is
to soon to tell on the implications of the two measures
being on the same ballot. It is possible that the
issues would be viewed as separate issues. The
Page 7
Commission's plan addresses existing transportation
problems. The inclusion of a commuter rail project on
the expenditure plan may be appealing to the proponents
of the growth limitation initiative.
Commissioner Ceniceros.said the measures may be
separated. Transportation is a majorindicator for the
growth initiative. Proponents of the growth initiative
may support something that would alleviate
transportation problems and is intended to solve
traffic problems.
10. SCAG Related Items.
Eric Haley said that in the past two years, SCAG and the
commissions have been discussing a variety of issues such as
AB 18 (Katz) to delinate long range planning responsibility
for SCAG, short range planning responsibility for the
county commissions, TDA management and responsibility for
the commissions, and a formula for distribution of federal
planning funds to be developed at a later date, as well as
funding stability for SCAG by lifting the TDA cap. He
stated that legislation creating a Ventura County
Transportation Commission includes a provision that Ventura
contribute equally.
SB 2625 authored by.Senator Marian Bergeson was introduced
two weeks ago. The bill which proposes establishing a
separate metropolitan planning organization in Orange
County. The bill will have a number of constraints on
issues such as the Orange County -Los Angeles urbanized area
having to be redefined by the federal government and on all
of the work that SCAG has been incorporating into its plan
approval process such as the mobility plan, the jobs -housing
balance, issues regional on housing allocation model, air
quality considerations, etc.. These studies would be
heavily impacted by legally recognizing Orange County as a
separate region from Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino,
Ventura. This would also affect Route 91 which is a three -
county project and would establish a regional proiority but
would not be funded entirely by funds generated locally.
Jack Reagan said that SCAG has been responsive to the county
commissions in delegating or giving up its current
authority to administer the Transportation Development Act
Program notwithstanding some specific concerns that he has
with SCAG on the Overall Work Program issues. In his
discussions with Mark Pisano this afternoon, he felt that
SCAG has been or is attempting to be responsive in passing
through monies and responsibilities to the county
commissions even though more could be done in that area. He
said that SCAG is attempting to be more responsive to the
commissions to decentralize at the same time, at a very
Page 8
difficult time, when there has to be a greater SCAG presence
in the light of such things as the SCAQMD Regulation 15. It
is a very difficult time for SCAG in terms of their
functional responsibilities.
Commissioner Ceniceros said that it might makes sense to
have a paper which outlines: 1) the position of the
Commission that the Katz bill represents a two-year effort
compromise to address some of the key problems with the
transportation institution; 2) reflects the ability of SCAG
to compromise on the centralization issue and to separate
out administrative and planning responsibilities to the
individual jurisdictions; 3) given the multi -disciplinary
roots of the transportation problems, it may be a better
course to wait before separating an MPO for Orange County to
give us a little time to study what the implications would
be; 4) highlight the fact that there is a need to coordinate
with SB 151; and, 5) emphasize our positive position on the
Katz bill and and the need to move that along as well as to
study the implications of how an Orange County MPO would
deal with other jurisdictions.
M/S/C (CENICEROS/CORNELISON) that the Executive
Director develop a position paper based on the general
concept as outlined.
13. Adjournment.
M/S/C (CLARKE/CORNELISON) to adjourn the meeting at
3:20 p.m.
Ike pectfully submitted,
i c,
Jack Reagan
Executive Director
NK
R IVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
Minutes of Meeting No. 4-88
April 6, 1988
1. Call to Order.
The meeting of the Riverside County Transportation
Commission was called to order by Chairman Don Baskett at
2:05 p.m. on Wednesday, April 6, 1988, at the Riverside
County Administrative Center, 14th Floor Conference Room,
4080 Lemon Street, Riverside.
Members present:
Don Baskett Roy Wilson
Susan Cornelison
Alternates present:
Dick Deininger
Jack Clarke
Al Lopez
Pat Murphy
Wayne Stuart
Ray Tanner
2. Approval of Minutes.
M/S/C (STUART/WILSON) to approve the minutes of the
March 2, 1988 meeting as submitted.
3. Public Comments.
There were no public comments.
4 . Consent Calendar.
M/S/C (DEININGER/CLARKE) to approve the consent
calendar items as followed:
A. Rl3LeLald..€ Tame Exl&nalof - BB 821
Funding.
To approve Riverside County's request for
engineering and design costs for the Santa Ana
River Bikeway project and accept return of SB 821
funds.
B. Budget Revisions - Financial Report.
To authorize the transfer of $3000 from the
Contingency Reserve Account to Communications
($2300), Household Expense ($200), and Office
Furniture and Equipment ($500) .
Page 2
C. Payroll System _tar_ Commission Employees.
To authorize staff to contact Automatic Data
Processing to provide payroll service as July 1,
1988.
5. FY 1987/88 Fiscal Audits.
Paul Blackwelder, Assistant Director, stated that staff is
requesting direction from the Commission whether Thomas,
Byrne and Smith should be hired again this year 'to perform
the audits or whether staff should request for proposals
from other qualified firms. Commissioner Beirich has
requested that request for proposals be sent out and that
the requirement that the firm proposing must have had a
"peer review".
M/S/C (WILSON/CLARKE) that: 1) Request for Proposals be
sent out for the FY 1987/88 fiscal audits on the Local
Transportation Fund, State Transportation Fund, Service
Authority for Freeway Emergencies Fund, and the
Commission accounts; and, 2) firms submitting proposals
must have had a "peer review".
6 PubljQ Reaming and Adoption of Commission Budget- _r FY
1988-89.
Jack Reagan, Executive Director, stated that State law
requires that the Commission hold a public hearing in
conjunction with adoption of its annual budget. He
suggested that the public hearing and the adoption of the
budget be held at the Commission's meeting on May 4th.
Also, he requested that the Chairman appoint three members
of the Commission to the Finance Committee to review the
proposed budget and present its recommendations at the May
meeting.
Appointed to the Finance Committee were Commissioners
Baskett, Tanner and Lopez.
M/S/C (WILSON/TANNER) to schedule a public hearing and
adoption of its annual budget for May 4, 1988.
7. AnmId lgL1.1 o hg FY 1988-92 Rgc ' one1 Tians�oLIAIion
Improvement Program.
Paul Blackwelder informed the Commission that the Technical
Advisory Committee had reviewed and approved a proposal by the
County of Riverside to add the following projects to the
RTIP: 1) Widening the Ramona Expressway (Cedar to Florida) ;
and, 2) Resurfacing projects on Riverview (from Limonite to
Mission), Limonite (from Van Buren to Riverview), and
Rubidoux (from Route 60 to San Bernardino County line).
Page 3
M/S/C (STUART/DEININGER) to approve the amendments to
the FY 1988-92 Regional Transportation Improvement
Program.
8. Federal Aid Urban and Federal Aid, Secondary Projects.
Paul Blackwelder stated that the FAU Subcommittees met and
developed the proposed FAU Program. The FAU and FAS
Programs were then approved by the Technical Advisory
Committee. Most of the projects in the program were
previously approved by the Commission.
M/S/C (DEININGER/WILSON) to approve the FAU and FAS
projects as shown in the attachments for inclusion in
the FY 1989-93 Transportation improvement Program.
9. Q1 Lll2a_Q III ..#.ea Maat 5d.U$ aci=
r�11��QIDIl1 �€ RaaALdlna ElAnnlna And PL48 Ai 1ln9.
Coordination.
Chairman Baskett said that staff is requesting that the
Commission meet with the Orange County Transportation
Commission on the morning of the May 4th meeting. The
subject of the meeting will include work on the Route 91
Corridor and the feasibility of commuter rail. The meeting
will be held in Brea. Appointed to the subcommittee were
Chairman Baskett and Commissioners Dunlap and Clarke..
10. Legislation.
AB 1696 (Katz) - Eric Haley, SCAG, informed the Commission
that this bill will transfer TDA responsibilities from SCAG
to the county transportation commissions as of January 1,
1989. It also includes the development of the County
Transportation Improvement Program which would be developed
in Riverside County through the Commission and presented to
the California Transportation Commission. Additionally,
short range transit planning responsibilities will be
tranfered to the county transportation commissions. The
bill will heard after AB 2625 (Bergeson).
SB 2625 (B rgeson) - This bill would create a separate
Metropolitan Planning Organization in Orange County. The
bill has not been set for hearing. LACTC and SanBAG have
taken an oppose position on the bill. In addition, SCAG met
with the legislative leadership of the Assembly and, at this
point, they are inclined to oppose the bill. The South
Coast Air Quality District has indicated opposition of the
bill because it would disrupt air quality planning.
Although the Administration has not taken an official
position on the bill, Caltrans' official position is
opposition.
Page 4
Commissioner Cornelison asked if the Katz bill be stalled
with opposition to the Bergeson billgrowing.
Eric Haley said that the Katz bill will not become law until
the Bergeson bill is defeated. There is no point for
Orange County to pursue the Katz bill if the Bergeson bill
passes.
Commissioner Cornelison asked if the delay will cause a
problem with the tranferring of TDA responsibility from SCAG
to the county transportation commissions.
Eric Haley responded that SCAG is delegating the TDA
responsibilities out assuming the January 1st transition.
If in fact that doesn't happen, SCAG will have to work out a
number of agreements.
Commissioner Tanner informed the Commission that at the
Transportation Public Works Committee Meeting held in
Oakland, they took an oppose position on AB 3744 (Eastin)
and supported SB 2071 (Bergeson) .
M/S/C (WILSON/CORNELISON) to oppose SB 2625 (Bergeson)
and support AB 1696 (Katz).
AR 2808 (DuP2issDa) - Paul Blackwelder said that AB 2808
would establish State requirements regarding the contracting
out of transit services for publicly funded transit
operators in urbanized areas of 50,000 or more population
and receiving federal transit assistance funds. The county
transportation commissions would be responsible for
certifying compliance by the operators and developing cost
comparison model for the operators. Staff recommended
opposition of the bill because it duplicates current federal
regulations for funding eligibility certain UMTA Programs.
The Commission should offer an alternative approach whereby
a requirement could be added to the triennial performance
audits for TDA funded transit operators requiring the
identification of operations and maintenance functions and
that costs could be significantly reduced if contracted to a
private enterprise.
M/S/C (CORNELISON/DEININGER) to oppose AB 2808
(Duplissea) as written and seek amendment whereby a
requirement be added to triennial performance audits
for TDA funded transit operators requiring the
identification of operations and maintenance functions
that that costs could be significantly reduced if
contracted to a private enterprise.
AB 3042 (Friedman).. - Paul Blackwelder said that AB 3042
would change the annual UMTA 16(b)2 Program so that 85% of
the annual State apportionment funds would be allocated to
Page 5
the local Caltrans Districts based on the percentage of
elderly and handicapped population. Staff recommended
Commission support of the legislation.
M/S/C (TANNER/WILSON) to support AB 3042 (Friedman) .
AB 2222 - Jack Reagan said that the proposed
legislation would set criteria for consideration of capital
and service improvements for intercity rail in the State's
rail passenger development plan. It would allow rail
service operators or county transportation commissions to
claim funds for rail passenger service. Staff recommended
that the Commission support of the legislation assuming this
area's plan for commuter rail into Orange County.
M/S/C (WILSON/TANNER) to support AB 3332 (Costa) .
AB 3589 (Leonard) - Staff recommended Commission support AB
3589 which would provide continuing appropriations to the
Highway Account.
M/S/C (DEININGER/CLARKE) to support AB 3589 (Leonard) .
AB 3744 (Eastin) - Jack Reagan stated that AB 3744 provides
for definition of state/local responsibilities for project
development and construction which now only applies for
sales tax supported projects. The author recommended that
it be applicable to any state highway projects supported by
any type of locally imposed fees or revenues.
M/S/C (STUART/CORNELISON) to support AB 3744 (Eastin).
AB 3749 (Chandler) - Jack Reagan said that this legislation
would limit the formula provisions of SB 140 to only the
proceeds of bonds and would require that 1/2 of the proceeds
of addition Gann II proceeds be provided to cities and
counties. He recommended that the Commission support the
bill.
M/S/C (STUART/WILSON) to support AB 3749 (Chandler).
AB -3751 _(Chandler). - This legislation would authorize the
County Boards of Supervisor to review and revise the RTPA
allocations for transit in Article 8 counties. Staff
recommended that the Commission oppose the bill as it is not
consistent with the initial SB 325 intent that transit must
have priority in funding.
M/S/C (TANNER/CORNELISON) to oppose AB 3751 (Chandler).
AB 3849 Lanngx. - Paul Blackwelder stated that this bill
proposes to require transit operators who are publicly
funded to accept the identification cards issued by the
Page 6
Department of Motor Vehicle for determining eligibility for
reduced fares for disabled persons. It would also set
priorities for public transit operators of non -fixed route
services to respond to requests for available service by
eligible elderly and disabled persons. Staff recommended
that the Commission oppose the bill as it sets priorities
that should be set by local agencies.
M/S/C (TANNER/CORNELISON) to oppose AB 3849 (Tanner) .
AB 4222 L astin) - Jack Reagan said that AB 4223 would
require that the lead •agency and/or RTPA environmental
analysis of cumulative impacts of projects with respect to
traffic. Staff recommended opposition of the bill.
M/S/C (DEININGER/CORNELISON) to oppose AB 4223
(Eastin).
AB 4658 ILA Follette/McClintock)
M/S/C (WILSON/STUART) to oppose AB 4658 (La
Follette/McClintock).
$B 2214 LM_QmsAnL2r-eaiay) • 2B 1122 LQ12ki.nth $B 2221
(S vmQur), - Jack Reagan said that these bills would
reinstate some form of State tax incentives for rideshare
and vanpool programs. The bills appear to be consistent
with the intent of Regulation XV and actions of the Air
Quality Management District. Staff recommended that, at
this time, the Commission should support, in concept,
legislation which would reinstate tax incentives for
rideshare and vanpool programs.
M/S/C (CORNELISON/WILSON) to support, in concept,
legislation which would reinstate tax incentives for
ridershare and vanpool programs.
B 2600, (Gara�nend i) - Jack Reagan said that this bill could
provide for a tax rate rather than a fixed amount on the
price of fuel and would result in increase in gas tax
revenues in the event the price of fuel goes up.
Eric Haley said that the author advocates a change in
January 1989 when all future sales of fuel will have the
current fixed amount of total revenue from state and federal
governments. If the federal revenues stopped, state
revenues will automatically increase.
M/S/C (TANNER/WILSON) to support SB 2600 (Garamendi).
O 4262 (Kopp)
M/S/C (TANNER/DEININGER) to oppose SB 4262, unless it
is changed to any form of local support.
Page 7
..CA 42 iGax_amen i) - Jack Reagan said that this is a
constitutional amendment to revise the Article XIX
expenditure limitations. He recommended that the Commission
watch the bill.
It was the consensus of the Commission to watch SCA 42
(Garamendi) .
11. SCAG Related Items.
A. SCAG AB 1246 Meeting - Need for RCTC Position Qn
Mobility Plan.
Judy Hammerslough, SCAG, briefed the Commission on the
preliminary Regional Mobility Plan strategies. The
preliminary plan included four strategies designed to
preserve urban mobility to the year 2010. Strategy One
would add 5,363 lane miles of freeway including 13 new
freeways, 2,297 lane miles of carpool lanes, 10 heavy
rail corridors, 8 light rail corridors, and 2 commuter
rail corridors. It also assumes implementation of the
SCAQMD Regulation XV. The capital costs to implement
Strategy One are estimated at $110.7 billion and the
annual operating costs are estimated at $1.6 billion.
Strategy Two emphasizes a growth management/job housing
balance approach with system construction to solve the
remaining congestion. It proposes to add 4,226 lane
miles of freeways including 14 new freeways, 1,817 lane
miles of carpool lanes, 10 heavy rail corridors, 4
light rail corridors and 2 commuter rail corridors.
The jobs/housing balance component would result in the
shift of 12% of the job growth to job -poor areas and
the shift of 5% of the population and housing growth to
the job -rich areas. It assumes implementation of the
SCAQMD Regulation XV as a demand management component.
The capital costs are estimated at $87 billion and
annual operating costs are estimate at $1.4 billion.
Strategy Three is a productivity and efficiency
approach to growth which would combine job, -housing
balance and demand management components. It proposes
875 additional lane miles of freeways including 8 new
freeways, 983 lane miles of carpool lanes, 11 heavy
rail corridors, 5 light rail corridors and 2 commuter
rail corridors. The jobs/housing balance would result
in the shift of 12% of the job growth to job -poor areas
and the shift of 6% of the population and housing
growth to the job -rich areas. The demand management
component includes the implementation of SCAQMD
Regulation XV, the mandatory implementation of modified
work schedules and telecommunication programs to
achieve a 3.1 million daily person trip reduction and
expanded peak periods, the implementation for
ridesharing programs to achieve ridesharing rates
Page 8
established in activity centers goals, and programs to
increase daily transit use on work trips by 940,000.
The capital costs are estimated at $42 billion and the
annual operating costs are estimated at $3.7 billion.
Strategy Four is a combination of improved productivity
and efficiency with facility development to achieve
mobility.
Jack Reagan stated that an AB 1246 (SCAG/cpunty
commissions)_meeting was held last month at SCAG in
which the the growth management plan, regional housing
needs assessment, air quality management plan and the
mobility plan were discussed. With regards to the
growth management plan and regional housing needs
assessment, it was noted that the Attorney General has
issued an opinion that SCAG cannot consider voter
approved growth limitations in making their statutory
required regional housing needsdetermination. In
relation with the air quality management plan, in order
for the SCAQMD to meet its obligation to the State and
the EPA, SCAG must adopt land use and transportation
control measures for air quality planning. He said
that in reviewing the Regional Mobility Plan
strategies, Strategy Three appears to provide the
greatest number of measures which would lead to air
quality improvement and maintenance. Staff is
recommending that the Commission: 1) Indicate its
conceptual support for a mix of job/housing balance,
demand management, .systems management and facility
development elements consistent with that suggested in
Strategy Three of the Mobility Plan. This support
recognizes that resources will not be sufficient to
provide funding for additional facilities at or beyond
the $42 billion figure associated with that strategy.
The Commission must look more to other approaches to
reduce the need for trips and seek the most efficient
use of the existing system; and, 2) SCAG should work
with individual county transportation commissions to
obtain their recommendations on facilities
improvements; and, 3) Ask SCAG to analytically look at
a slow growth approach.
Commissioner Cornelison asked if the facilities
identified determines the costs for each strategy
approach.
Judy Hammerslough said that is correct but there is
no cost associated with the jobs/housing balance
component and only a minor cost for demand management
component.
Page 9
M/S/C (WILSON/DEININGER) to:
1) Conceptually support a mix of job/housing
balance, demand management, systems
management, and facility development elements
consist with that suggested for Strategy
Three of the Mobility Plan. This is in
recognition that resources will not be
sufficient to provide funding for additional
facilities at or byond the $42 billion figure
associated with that strategy. To look more
to other approaches to reduce the need for
trips and seek the most efficient use of the
existing system.
2) To suggest that SCAG work with individual
county transportation commissions to obtain
recommendations on facilities improvements.
Chairman Baskett noted the importance of this agenda
item to this area and he requested staff to inform
members of the Commission who are not present of the
action that was adopted.
Eric Haley informed the Commission that a public forum
to review the Mobility Plan is scheduled in Riverside
on May 4th.
B. Other Items at Interest tQ the Commission.
Jack Reagan said that the California Transportation
Commission, in response to a legislative approval on SB
140, has deferred approval of the State Transportation
Improvement Program until August. The principal
provision of SB 140 directs the CTC to program capacity
improvement at $1 billion/year. Over a five-year
period, SB 140 would allow for programming an
additional $1.8 billion, but unless the Gann Intiative
passes, funds will not be available. At a meeting
between the council of governments, regional planning
agencies and the commissions, it was determined th-at
notwithstanding the availability of STIP policies, each
agency will generate its own estimate of funds which
should be available. New monies will be divided 60%
south/40% north and would deal out the 70% county
minimum to all non-SCAG counties within Southern
California. Each county transportation commission will
prepare its own Regional Transportation Improvement
Programs. The Riverside County RTIP will be submitted
to the Commission on May 4th.
Page 10
12. Publj. Information Program - Consultant Services.
Jack Reagan stated that Commissioners and staff will be
requested to speak before various groups and there is a need
to develop and package information related to the 1/2%
transportation sales tax proposal. Included in the agenda
packet is a proposal from Consultants Collaborative to
provide this service. The cost would be $5,850 for
Consultants Collaborative and $1,150 for graphics..
Commissioner Tanner requested that staff, in the future,
prepare a summary of previously approved services in
relation to the 1/2% transportation sales tax.
M/S/C (WILSON/TANNER) to authorize the Executive
Director to negotiate a contract with Consultants
Collaborative, not to exceed $7,000 for direct costs
and graphic, and to authorize a budget transfer of
$7,000 from the Contingency Account to the Professional
and Specialized Services Account.
13. jlbox System Consultant Services.
Paul Blackwelder stated that a request for proposals for
consultant services to assist in a three-phase program for
callbox installation were sent out. The proposals were
reviewed and rated by the Selection Committee comprised of
the Bi-County Technical Advisory Committee and
representatives from each SAFE (Commissioners Russ Beirich
and Kay Ceniceros represented the Riverside County SAFE).
The Selection Committee recommended Techplan be selected.
SanBAG has agreed to act as the lead agency for the project
to oversee the consultantl's work and progress. The cost of
Phase I is estimated to cost $74,974 and the estimated cost
to complete the three phases for both counties is $278,385.
Staff from the two SAFE's recommended that the cost for the
consultant and SanBAG's staff cost for administering the
contract be split between the two SAFE's in proportion to
the annual revenues expected to be generated from the $1
surcharge on vehicle registrations for each county with the
cost for Phase I as $32,489 (43%) for Riverside County and
$42,485 (57%) .
M/S/C (CORNELISON/CLARKE) to:
1) Approve the proposed consultant cost and SanBAG
administrative cost share of 43% Riverside County
and 57% San Bernardino County, subject to approval
by SanBAG.
2) Select Techplan Corporation as the consultant for
Phase I of the project, at a cost not to exceed
$74,974, subject to approval by SanBAG.
Page 11
14. Adjournment.
M/S/C (CLARKE/TANNER) to adjourn the meeting at 4:05
p.m.
ectfully submitted,
Jack Reagan
Executive Director
NK
R IVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
Minutes of Meeting No. 2-88
February 3, 1988
1. Call to Order.
The meeting of the Riverside County Transportation
Commission was called to order by Chairman Melba Dunlap at
2:01 p.m. on Wednesday, February 3, 1988, at the Council
Chambers of the City of Palm Desert, 73-510 Fred Waring
Drive, Palm Desert.
Members present:
Don Baskett
Kay Ceniceros
Susan Cornelison
Alternate members present:
Russell Beirich
Jack Clarke
Pat Murphy
2. Approval of Minutes.
Melba Dunlap
Roy Wilson
Wayne Stuart
Ray Tanner
M/S/C (BASKETT/WILSON) to approve the minutes of the
January 6, 1988 meeting as submitted.
3. Public Comments.
There were no public comments.
4. Consent Calendar.
M/S/C (TANNER/CLARKE) to approve the consent calendar
items as followed:
A. Additional TDA Funds for the Riverside Transit
Agency.
To allocate an additional $145,138 in TDA funds to
the Riverside Transit Agency to fund the reduction
in UMTA Section 9 federal operating assitance for
FY 1987/88.
B. Commission Bylaws Amendment.
To adopt Ordinance No. 88-01 amending the
Commission bylaws regarding the membership of the
Commission's Citizens Advisory Committee.
RCTC Minutes
February 3, 1988
C. UMTA Section 16(b)2 Grants Approved.
To receive and file the report relating to the
agencies awarded capital assistance grants for FY
1987/88 through the UMTA Section 16(b)2 Program in
Riverside County.
D. SCAQMD Regulation XV.
To receive and file the staff report on SCAQMD
Regulation XV.
E. Quarterly Financial Report.
To receive and file the quarterly financial
reports ending September 30, 1987 and December 31,
1987 prepared by the Riverside County Auditor -
Controller's Office.
5. Hearing on Unmet Transit Needs.
Chairman Dunlap briefed those present of the purpose of the
unmet transit needs hearing and how Transportation
Development Act funds are allocated.
Lee Norwine, General Manager of the SunLine Transit Agency,
gave a summary of transit services provided in the Coachella
Valley area.
At 2:10 p.m., Chairman Dunlap opened the public hearing.
After all the testimony was received, the public hearing was
closed at 3:00 p.m.
(Transcripts of the unmet needs hearing will be included in
the April agenda packet.)
6. Proposed Responses to SunLine's Proposed Service Changes.
Jack Reagan, Executive Director, said that staff of the
Commission and SunLine have been discussing the service
changes relating to SunLine's Elderly/Handicapped Report.
Points of conceptual agreement between staff are: 1) It
will be necessary to provide service to the Foundation for
the Retarded (intervalley service) through the summer. Air-
conditioned vehicles will be necessary for the service. The
Commission should provide supplemental funding to SunLine,
if needed, to cover the additional costs of providing air-
conditioned vehicles; 2) The intervalley service has come to
RCTC Minutes
February 3, 1988
be a specialized service for Foundation clients, since they
require all available capacity of the service. At some
time, SunLine should be relieved of this responsibility and
the Commission should look towards establishment of a
separate specialized social service oriented transportation
system within the Coachella Valley; 3) The concept of having
a Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA), or
some other mechanish to provide service for the social
service agencies should be looked into and hopefully have it
in place by October 1988 or sooner; and, 4) The concept of
implementing an elderly and handicapped dial -a -ride services
in the Indio, Coachella, and La Quinta areas should be
supported. The idea is to provide service by provide
subsidy to existing providers on a per passenger basis.
Jack Reagan continued and said that the items that are still
under consideration are: 1) The amount of TDA funding
support, if any, to be provided for specialized social
service transportation; 2) The organizational issues related
to the CTSA concept or an alternative approach to providing
specialized social service transportation; and, 3) The
duration of funding commitment for Indio, Coachella and La
Quinta area elderly and handicapped service and the
appropriate criteria for .evaluating performance and when
they should be determined.
Commissioner Cornelison said that when the Commission
reviewed the service for the Foundation for the Retarded
over the last few years at various hearings, one of the
concerns continually stated was that there are a number of
clients that are not being served. Also, she understood
that the vehicles would be available for clients of other
agencies when the vehicles are not being utilized by the
Foundation clients. She asked if there is demand from
other agency clients.
Lee Norwine said that when SunLine implemented the
intervalley service, it was available to everyone but failed
miserably due to lack of patronage. What surfaced was the
need for a dial -a -ride service for the Foundation clients to
get to and from their workshops. The service cost then
escalated to the point that it received pressure from the
Commission to evaluate the service. The subsidy cost was
approximately $25-30 per person. Part of what stimulated
the need for the study was SunLine's overall need for new
capital equipment which will cost millions of dollars. He
said that from the best of his knowledge, that size of
vehicle needed for the intervalley service is only
appropriate for that service. The other type of service
3
RCTC Minutes
February 3, 1988
provided is the curb to curb type basis like the one in
Desert Hot Springs use 14 -passenger vehicles. He noted that
SunLine is using all of the area's TDA funds for transit
services.
Commissioner Cornelison said that Mr. Nathan Rosenberg, who
presented testimony at the unmet transit needs hearing, made
referenced to the fact that data is not available to show
what the subsidy per passenger was. She asked if Commission
or SunLine staff know what the subsidy per passenger was for
the Foundation service.
Paul Blackwelder, Assistant Director, said that the subsidy
per passenger trip is approximately $5-6. The Foundation
service when compared to Desert Hot Springs, Palm Springs,
Cathedral City, or the Palm Desert dial -a -ride services has
the lowest subsidy per passenger trip. The point that
SunLine staff has keyed on is not the subsidy per passenger
trip basis but that same 50 people use the service everyday.
The other services serve less passenger trips and larger
number of persons. In comparing performance criteria such
as passengers per hour and subsidy per passenger, the
intervalley service rates better than any of the tel-a-ride
services.
Commissioner Cornelison asked that, with the projected
capital expenditures necessary, if there was any projection
for the subsidy needs for new elderly and handicapped
services.
Paul Blackwelder said that he is not able to determine this
as yet as he has not seen what the capital needs will be or
the actual plan for the new elderly and handicapped
services would entail.
Lee Norwine noted that the intervalley service is the only
service that SunLine provides that receives payment for
fares for the passengers whether or not they actually use
the service. Staff time is not included at the rate it
should be in the computation of the cost for this service.
In the case of the Cathedral City and Palm Desert services,
the subsidy is $5 per passenger.
Commissioner Ceniceros stated that she is unclear as to how
much funding the IRC or the Foundation for the Retarded
contributes toward the current service as we are thinking in
terms of trying to determine what the cost shares for a CTSA
in this area would be. It seems to her that it would be
useful to know if they are going to be a significant
contribution towards the cost. If the IRC and the
Foundation are willing to work on scheduling, that would
also be a big help to the service provider.
RCTC Minutes
February 3, 1988
Lee Norwine said that IRC is subsidizing 25% of the cost.
The annual cost of the service is approximately $100,000.
Commissioner Ceniceros said that within Coachella Valley and
from the concerns expressed by the clients from way down
valley who are not being served currently as well as those
that are more centrally located and are being served, the
cost per individual passenger probably varies a great deal.
There may be more than one scenario that will work.
Lee Norwine said that SunLine's concern is that there are
other social service agencies out there that need service.
A CTSA would help SunLine out of this dilemma of making
those service priority decisions.
Commissioner Ceniceros commented that disabled and other
handicapped persons also need transit. She is not sure
whether or not their needs should be given priority over the
elderly and handicapped further down valley. She felt that
they should be included in the priorities and that the
Commission should recognize that their alternatives are
fewer than most other people. She would greatly support
having SunLine provide the service through the summer to
give time to resolve the issues and also have staff spell
out what priorities are vested in law. She would also like
to see the total SunLine cost per passenger for a client of
the Foundation for the Retarded. If they are riding not
only curb to curb but being walked into their home and into
the Foundation and it is still not costing the system more
than an elderly rider who is taken into the grocery store,
then she does not see the hardship placed upon SunLine to
provide the service. She does think that there should be
participation in cost by all agencies.
Cathy Bechtel said that she had contacted Laidlaw as well as
the Riverside County Schools to see whether they have
additional space on their vehicles. The Riverside County
Schools indicated that they do have some spaces available
presently but there is the danger of the clients being
bumped off so there is no guarantee. Laidlaw has indicated
that that they would charge the same rate as they are
charging the school district which is $236.31 per bus.
Since three buses will be needed, the cost would be $709.53
per day or $14,191 per month for comparable service. It
would cost the taxpayers $227,000 to contract with Laidlaw
versus $25,000 plus $75,000 ($100,000) if it is provided by
SunLine.
Ace Atkinson informed the Commission that 7 years ago, when
the Employment Development Department was contracted to
study the transportation cost, the Inland County Regional
RCTC Minutes
February 3, 1988
Center served as a model of how to provide service. Area
Board 12 is committed to draw the IRC out from the
transportation business. It seems to him that it is good
business for. public operators if the IRC do not provide the
service. He suggested that as is being done by Meditrans as
well as the City of Riverside Special Services, SunLine keep
a record of customers that are turned down. The record
would be helpful in determining if there is a need for
another bus.
Commissioner Ceniceros said that if the Commission was to
look at a CTSA for the Coachella Valley area and some dollar
participation is needed beyond the FY 86-87 STA funds, would
it be financially possible for SunLine to continue 'to
participate at some level if the Commission had made a
commitment of STA funds for elderly and handicapped
demonstration program. If this recommendation is tied to
another recommendation, the Commission should know whether
some options will be eliminated.
7. Bechtel Civil, Inc., Proposal to Provide Scope and Cost
Review of the Coachella Valley Area Section of the Riverside
County Transportation- Expenditure Plan.
Jack Reagan said that at the January meeting, the Commission
authorized Bechtel to proceed with work on the Coachella
Valley arterial projects and authorized staff to work with
Bechtel and CVAG to prepare a proposal for a contract
revision to review the scope and cost of the regional
arterial system within the Coachella Valley. At that time,
a $10,000 limit was set for the work which might be
performed. Included in the agenda packet is a copy of
Bechtel's proposal. Since that time, Bechtel has had a
chance to determine the scope of the work and because the
required work is more complex, the proposed cost :is
relatively higher. For the Coachella Valley area, less
information is available for the proposed regional arterial
system than for the highway projects in the Western County
area and substantial local agency contacts and field work
will be required. Also, Bechtel will have to work with more
agencies to determine the project scope, develop uniform
standards and cross sections, review recent project
construction costs, and review and report work progress.
Staff is proposing that the Commission approve Bechtel's
proposal and approve a budget amendment for an additional
$30,000 for consultant services. In addition, the existing
contract with D.J. Smith Associates will be amended to
reflect the additional work to be performed by Bechtel but
no increase in compensation is required for D.J. Smith.
RCTC Minutes
February 3, 1988
Councilman Eli Birer said that the Coachella Valley area is
working hard to establish a mitigation fee to be tied to the
losal sales tax measure on the ballot in November. It is an
extremely complex operation and it involves approximately
40% of the total cost. He urged Commission support of the
proposal.
Councilman Dick Kelly said that as Chairman of the CVAG
Transportation Mitigation Fee SubCommittee, a lot of time
and effort have been put into the mitigation fee issue. He
urged Commission approval of the recommendation. this.
M/S/C (CLARKE/CENICEROS) to approve Bechtel's proposal
and approve a budget amendment for an additional
$30,000 for consultant services. The existing contract
with D.J. Smith Associates will be amended to include
the additional work to be performed by Bechtel as a
subcontractor; no increase in compensation for Smith
shall be required.
8. Proposed Orange/Riverside County Transportation Commissions'
Commuter Rail Feasibility Study.
Jack Reagan said that the Orange County Transportation
Commission has requested the Commission to participate in a
commuter rail feasibility study along the Route 91 corridor.
Based upon a survey done by Fairbank, Bregman & Maullin for
RCTC, there is strong support for providing commuter rail
service along existing rail lines from Riverside County to
Los Angeles and Orange Counties. Staff is recommending that
the Commission approve the proposed OCTC/RCTC Commuter Rail
Feasibility Study and budget $15,000 for financial
participation, and to execute the necessary agreements with
the contract management responsibility vested with OCTC.
M/S/C (CLARKE/CENICEROS) •to:
A. Approve the proposed OCTC/RCTC Commuter Rail
Feasibility Study;
B. Budget $15,000 for financial participation;
C. Execute necessary agreements with contract
management responsibility vested with OCTC.
9. Election of Officers.
Commissioners Don Baskett and Roy Wilson were nominated and
unanimously elected as Chairman and Vice Chairman,
respectively.
RCTC Minutes
February 3, 1988
It was the consensus of the Commission that the newly
elected officers assume the Chair at the next Commission
meeting.
10. SCAG Related Items.
A. Report by Eric Haley.
Eric Haley reported the following: 1) There has been
some delay in approving a contract for the Truck Task
Force consultant and the second task force meeting
will also be delayed until March; 2) The cost estimates
for an office space at the RCTC offices to house SCAG
staff in the Inland Empire has received positive
response; 3) The SCAG General Assembly will commence on
Thursday, February 4th at 9:00 a.m.
B. OWP Discussion - Transit Funding Allocations.
Jack Reagan said that at the December meeting, the
Commission discussed the overall work program and the
possibility of requesting SCAG to set aside transit
planning funds. .Staff has been successful in getting
SCAG to set aside $100,000 ($80,000 federal) in transit
planning funds and the Commission will now have to
determine how the funds will be divided between RCTC,
RTA and SunLine. He suggested that the Commission set
up a committee to be composed of two members of the
Commission who are also members of the RTA and SunLine
Boards, and the Chairmen of the RTA and SunLine Boards.
In addition to the Committee addressing the SCAG
allocation, other items that could be discussed are
other resources that could be used for planning
purposes and the potential for inter -area transfer of
UMTA funds for capital needs.
At this time, Chairman Dunlap appointed Commissioners
Don Baskett and Pat Murphy, Councilman Dick Kelly from
the SunLine Board, and Councilman Jack Clarke from the
RTA Board to the Committee.
11. Adjournment.
There being no other items to be discussed before the
Commission, Chairman Dunlap adjourned the meeting at 4:06
p.m.
Respectful submitted,
submitted,
nk
Jack Reagan
Executive D rector