Loading...
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