Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout09 September 14, 2011 CommissionQA -2; l'11n- c ott on- cop() DO 3 • • RECORDS Riverside County Transportation Comtmssion MEETING AGENDA TIME/DATE: 9:30 a.m. / Wednesday, September 14, 2011 LOCATION: BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside iv& COMMISSIONERS 00, Chair - Greg Pettis First Vice Chair - John J. Benoit Second Vice Chair - Karen Spiegel Bob Buster, County of Riverside John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside Jeff Stone, County of Riverside John J. Benoit, County of Riverside Marion Ashley, County of Riverside Bob Botts / Don Robinson, City of Banning Roger Berg / Jeff Fox, City of Beaumont Joseph DeConinck / To Be Appointed, City of Blythe Ella Zanowic / Jeff Hewitt, City of Calimesa Mary Craton / Barry Talbot, City of Canyon Lake Greg Pettis / Kathleen DeRosa, City of Cathedral City Steven Hernandez / Eduardo Garcia, City of Coachella Karen Spiegel / Steve Nolan, City of Corona Scott Matas / Russell Betts, City of Desert Hot Springs Adam Rush / Ike Bootsma, City of Eastvale Larry Smith / Robert Youssef, City of Hemet Douglas Hanson / Patrick Mullany, City of Indian Wells Glenn Miller / Michael Wilson, City of Indio Frank Johnston / Micheal Goodland, City of Jurupa Valley Terry Henderson / Don Adolph, City of La Quinta Bob Magee / Melissa Melendez, City of Lake Elsinore Darcy Kuenzi / Wallace Edgerton, City of Menifee Marcelo Co / Richard Stewart, City of Moreno Valley Rick Gibbs / Kelly Bennett, City of Murrieta Berwin Hanna / Kathy Azevedo, City of Norco Jan Harnik / William Kroonen, City of Palm Desert Steve Pougnet / Ginny Foat, City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch / Al Landers, City of Perris Scott Hines / Gordon Moller, City of Rancho Mirage Steve Adams / Andy Melendrez, City of Riverside Scott Miller / Andrew Kotyuk, City of San Jacinto Ron Roberts / Jeff Comerchero, City of Temecula Ben Benoit / Timothy Walker, City of Wildomar Raymond Wolfe, Governor's Appointee Comments are welcomed by the Commission. If you wish to provide comments to the Commission, please complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board. • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 9:30 a.m. Wednesday, September 14, 2011 BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, CA In compliance with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials distributed 72 hours prior to the meeting, which are public records relating to open session agenda items, will be available for inspection by members of the public prior to the meeting at the Commission office, 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor, Riverside, CA, and on the Commission's website, www.rctc.org. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section 54954.2, if special assistance is needed to participate in a Commission meeting, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to meeting time will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility at the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS - Each individual speaker is limited to speak three (3) continuous minutes or less. The Commission may, either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote of the Commission, waive this three minute time limitation. Depending on the number of items on the Agenda and the number of speakers, the Chair may, at his/her discretion, reduce the time of each speaker to two (2) continuous minutes. In addition, the maximum time for public comment for any individual item or topic is thirty (30) minutes. Also, the Commission may terminate public comments if such comments become repetitious. Speakers may not yield their time to others without the consent of the Chair. Any written documents to be distributed or presented to the Commission shall be submitted to the Clerk of the Board. This policy applies to Public Comments and comments on Agenda Items. Under the Brown Act, the Commission should not take action on or discuss matters raised during public comment portion of the agenda that are not listed on the agenda. Commission members may refer such matters to staff for factual information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda September 14, 2011 Page 2 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 13 AND JULY 25, 2011 6. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS - The Commission may add an item to the Agenda after making a finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and that the item came to the attention of the Commission subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Commission. If there are less than 2/3 of the Commission members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote. Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR - All matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 7A. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Page 1 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the period ended June 30, 2011. 7B. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended June 30, 2011. 7C. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Single Signature Authority report for the fourth quarter ended June 30, 2011. 7D. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 1 (Q1) 2011. Page 8 Page 28 Page 30 • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda September 14, 2011 Page 3 7E. CITY OF CATHEDRAL CITY FISCAL YEARS 2012-16 MEASURE A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS Page 38 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the city of Cathedral City's FYs 2012-16 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for Local Streets and Roads as submitted. 7F. 2009 MEASURE A PROGRAM MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT Page 50 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the 2009 Measure A Maintenance of Effort (MOE) base year levels for the following cities: • Calimesa • Cathedral City • Coachella • Palm Desert • Palm Springs • Rancho Mirage • San Jacinto 7G. CONSIDERATION OF TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT FUNDS FOR THE B CANYON WILDLIFE CROSSING Page 53 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve $3.1 million of regional Transportation Enhancement (TE) funds for the B Canyon wildlife crossing project. 7H. EXTENSION OF TASK ORDERS ISSUED TO ON -CALL RIGHT OF WAY CONSULTANTS Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 56 1) Approve Agreement No. 07-72-026-40, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 07-72-026-00, with Overland Pacific and Cutler, Inc. (OPC) and Agreement No. 07-72-027-26, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 07-72-027-00, with Epic Land Solutions, Inc. (Epic) to extend the term of the agreements to enable the consultants to complete the right of way components of certain highway and rail projects assigned to them, as identified in the attachment; Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda September 14, 2011 Page 4 2) Authorize staff to extend the term of current task orders for OPC and Epic and to issue the pending task orders for OPC, as identified in the attachment, for the additional amount of $751,600, plus a 10 percent cost contingency of $75,160, for a total additional cost of $826,760; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director to further extend the term of the agreements and related task orders as the corresponding future project schedule revisions may require. 71. ADVANCE AGREEMENTS WITH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON, AT&T, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS CO., AND QUESTAR FOR ADVANCED ENGINEERING AND MATERIAL PROCUREMENT FOR SCHEDULE CRITICAL UTILITY RELOCATIONS FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Page 59 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Authorize the Executive Director to execute advance agreements with Southern California Edison (SCE), AT&T, Southern California Gas Co. (SoCalGas), and Questar, pursuant to legal counsel review, for advanced engineering and material procurement for utility relocations for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR -91 CIP) for a combined amount of $2,070,000, plus a contingency amount of $330,000, for a total not to exceed amount of $2.4 million; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director to approve contingency work up to the total not to exceed amount as may be required for these future utility relocation agreements for advanced engineering and material procurement. 7J. SURPLUS OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT LA SIERRA AVENUE AND INDIANA AVENUE IN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE Overview This item is for the Commission to Page 63 1) Declare the real property located at La Sierra Avenue and Indiana Avenue as surplus; and 2) Authorize staff to initiate the 60 -day public agency notification period and, if no interest is expressed, authorize the Executive Director to offer the surplus property for sale. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda September 14, 2011 Page 5 7K. AMENDMENT TO COMMISSION'S RAIL PROGRAM SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLANS Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 66 1) Amend the Commission's Commuter Rail Program's FY 2009/10, FY 2010/1 1, and FY 2011/12 Short Range Transit Plans (SRTPs) to reflect the allocation of $5.2 million in Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5309 program funds to the Southern California Regional Rail Authority's (SCRRA) Rehabilitation and Renovation project and deobligation of $3,877,300 in FTA Section 5307 program funds from the SCRRA Rehabilitation and Renovation project; 2) Amend the Commission's Commuter Rail Program's FY 2008/09 and FY 2009/10 SRTPs to reflect deobligation of $216,000 in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds and $279,000 in State Transit Assistance (STA) funds for the Station Rehabilitation and Preventative Maintenance Plan (Station Plan) and reallocation of $100,000 in STA funds from the Station Plan to the Perris Multimodal Facility construction project; 3) Amend the Commission's Commuter Rail Program's FY 2004/2005, FY 2008/09, and FY 2010/11 SRTPs to reflect deobligation of $1,575,000 in LTF funds from the SCRRA rolling stock purchase and reallocation of $1,575,000 in Proposition 18 Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) funds from the Station Plan, Operations Control Center, and La Sierra Parking Lot Expansion projects to the SCRRA rolling stock purchase; 4) Amend the Commission's Commuter Rail Program's FY 2008/09, FY 2009/10, FY 2010/11, and FY 2011/12 SRTPs to reflect the reallocation of PTMISEA funds of $724,268 from the La Sierra Station Parking Lot Expansion project and $635,847 from the Station Plan to the Perris Valley Line CCTV and Operations Control Center projects; and 5) Approve budget adjustments to increase revenues for FY 2010/11 and FY 2011/12 in the amount of $1,490,476 and $100,000, respectively. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda September 14, 2011 Page 6 7L. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH OWEN DESIGN GROUP, INC. TO • PROVIDE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE PERRIS MULTIMODAL FACILITY Page 70 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-33-01 1-04, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 08-33-01 1-00, with Owen Design Group, Inc. (Owen Group) for construction management services for the Perris Multimodal (PMM) Facility in an amount not to exceed $100,000; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Approve a FY 2011/12 expenditure budget increase of $100,000 related to the PMM Facility construction management. 7M. AGREEMENT WITH UNIVERSAL PROTECTION SERVICE TO PROVIDE SECURITY GUARD SERVICES FOR FIVE COMMISSION -OWNED COMMUTER RAIL STATIONS Page 73 ill Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 11-24-057-00 to Universal Protection Service for security guard services at the five Commission -owned commuter rail stations for a three-year term, and two one-year options in the amount of $5,367,382, plus a contingency amount of $536,718, for a total amount not to exceed $5,904,100; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement, including option years, on behalf of the Commission. • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda September 14, 2011 Page 7 • • • 7N. AGREEMENT WITH SUNESYS, LLC TO PROVIDE FIBER OPTIC CONNECTIONS AND/OR INFRASTRUCTURE TO LINK THE PEDLEY STATION TO THE DOWNTOWN RIVERSIDE STATION Page 94 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 11-25-132-00 to Sunesys, LLC for fiber optic connections to link the Pedley Station to the Downtown Riverside Station for a five-year term for an amount not to exceed $72,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 70. 2011 COACHELLA VALLEY SPECIALIZED TRANSIT CALL FOR PROJECTS IMPLEMENTATION UPDATE Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the report on the implementation of 2011 Specialized Transit CaII for Projects. Page 111 7P. TIGER DISCRETIONARY GRANTS: STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Direct staff to prepare a grant and Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation ACT (TIFIA) letter of interest (L01) submittal package to U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) for the SR -91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR -91 CIP); and 2) Authorize the Executive Director to submit the grant application and TIFIA LOI. Page 115 Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda September 14, 2011 Page 8 7Q. IOWA AVENUE GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 119 1) Allocate $6 million in federal Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) and/or Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds to the city of Riverside (Riverside) in support of the Iowa Avenue grade separation project to front Proposition 1 B Trade Corridor Improvement Fund (TCIF) funds; 2) Approve Agreement No. 12-67-009-00 with Riverside for reimbursement of TCIF/CMAQ/STP funds; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 7R. AVENUE 66 GRADE SEPARATION ON THE ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST - FISCAL YEAR 2008/09 APPROPRIATIONS Page 122 Overview This item is for the Commission to allocate $1.3 million to the county of Riverside (County) in support of the Avenue 66 grade separation project - $950,000 from the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009 and $350,000 in federal Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds. 8. FISCAL YEAR 2011/12 ANNUAL LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND PLANNING ALLOCATIONS TO WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS AND COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS Page 124 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve an allocation of Local Transportation Fund (LTF) Planning funds in the amount of $467,800 to the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) and $255,150 to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) to support transportation planning programs and functions as identified in the FY 2011/12 LTF Program Objectives/Work Plan (Work Plan). Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda September 14, 2011 Page 9 • 9. UPDATE ON FEDERAL AND STATE LEGISLATION Overview This item is for the Commission to: • Page 131 1) Receive and file an update on federal and state legislation; 2) Adopt the following bills positions: a) H.R. 2389 (Miller) - Support; b) H.R. 2766 (Miller) - Support; c) H.R. 2538 (Calvert) - Support; and 3) Adopt a bill position of Work with Author for SB 791 (Steinberg). 10. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 11. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Overview This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and the Executive Director to report on attended meetings/conferences and any other items related to Commission activities. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda September 14, 2011 Page 10 12. CLOSED SESSION 12A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: EXISTING LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (a) Case No. RIC 1113896 12B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (b) Potential Number of Case(s): One 12C. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director or Designee Property Owners: See the List Below Item APN(s) Property Owner(s) 1 331-410-061 331-090-025 Tract No. 23311 Community Association 2 331-090-008 AI-Wafaa Family Trust 311-190-035 3 311-190-002 Seal Beach Business Center, Inc. 331-190-044 4 311-180-014 North Valley Schools, Inc. 5 311-180-032 Lilian Stephens Judith A. Blake 6 311-190-048 Templo Del Evangelio 7 311-120-023 Josephine Miller 8 311-120-002 311-110-028 Michael G. Murphy 9 311-110-011 Ismael Penaloza 10 311-110-010 William R. Westendorf Rosa Alba 11 311-120-022 Laurel Palms Apts, Inc. 12 311-110-001 Carmen Sanabria Item APN(s) Property Purchaser(s) 1 211-191-026 City of Riverside 13. ADJOURNMENT The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, October 12, 2011, Board Chambers, First Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. • • • RCTC Commissioners: Sept. 14, 2011 The width of the curved track at Highgrove to connect the Perris Valley Line to the BNSF track will only take up a small portion of the 17.22 acres of land now owned by RCTC. The remaining portion of this same property could be used for a parking lot and station platform to benefit the Inland Empire region between San Bernardino County and Riverside County by using the existing commuter trains on the I. E. O. C. Line. "Regional" benefits of a Highgrove Metrolink station 1. Location: Railroads on both sides of the property at Highgrove. 2. Ownership/Land Use: RCTC owns the 17.22 acres between the Perris Valley Line track and BNSF tracks. 3. Availability of trains: Existing commuter trains go through Highgrove 7 days a week on the BNSF track (I.E.O.C. line) between San Bernardino County and Riverside County. 4. Timetable schedule: 3,224 Metrolink trains have gone through Highgrove on the BNSF main line each year since July 15, 2006 for a total of over 16,120 commuter trains! 5. Colton Flyover: Bids were due Sept. 7, 2011 that will allow even more future commuter trains. 6. Different Train Destinations: Marlborough Ave. station will transport future commuters between Riverside and Perris but the Highgrove station can transport commuters now between San Bernardino County and Riverside County. 7. Community Support: (Dating back 10 Years) City resolutions: From Grand Terrace on Dec. 13, 2001 and Loma Linda on Jan. 24, 2002. Civic organizations: Highgrove CSA 126, Highgrove PAC, Highgrove Municipal Advisory Council, University Neighborhood Association, North Side Improvement Association. 8 years of written comments available on web site: www.highgrovehappenings.net Written comments on web site: under Supporting Docs (click on each document to see original) Verbal public comments at RCTC meetings for last 10 years, and some SANBAG meetings. Petition: on-line and written. 1 fot 8. Growth potential: Vacant land: There are 1,555 acres * of vacant land in Highgrove. Population: There are 30,777 residents* within a 2 mile radius of the Highgrove station before the new Spring Mountain Ranch homes are built. Spring Mountain Ranch has over 2,000 pads ready for homes to be built on with all utilities already installed underground. Flood control channels are completed and power lines installed. Pigeon Pass Corridor is in the planning stages to make a new road between Moreno Valley and Highgrove. *2008 Riverside County Economic Development Agency figures 9. Vehicle accessibility: Entry/exit via Citrus St. and Villa St. Iowa Overpass: (Construction started Aug. 3, 2011 for this nearby $32 million dollar project) Parking: (17.22 acres less the amount for width of curved track to connect the 2 railroads plus possible 1.75 acres north of Villa Street that contains an abandoned house. 10. Grading of land: Old PVL rail can be used to support track for access to both sides of parking lot. Photo below is 2 miles north of Highgrove and has been in use every day for 50 years. Related information: Articles in Press Enterprise Newspaper: 3-29-2005, 2-15- 2006, 2-14-2009, 7-12- 2011; Article in Sun Telegram Newspaper: 1-1-2007; Articles in Highgrove Happenings Newspaper: 2001 to 2009 on web site www.highgrovehappenings.net Videos: 2-11-2009, 12-8-2009, 1-9-2011 (www.highgrovehappenings.net) CD: 1-11-2006, 11-8-2006, 1-10-2007, 1-18-2007, 1-25-2010, 8-8-2011, 9-7-2011 Audio Recordings: SANBAG 1-18-2007, 4-4-2007; SCAG 4-5-2007 Please consider allowing the remaining portion of the 17.22 acre property to be uses as a parking lot and station to benefit the region between the 2 counties. Grading could be done at the same time for the curved track and parking lot. Thank you, R. A. "Barney" Barnett 474 Prospect Ave. Highgrove, Ca. 92507 (951) 683 4994 E-mail: highgrovenews@roadrunner.com Web site: www.highgrovehappenings.net 09/12/2011 13:43 FAX U002 ENDANGERED HABITATS LEAGUE DEDICATED TO ECOSYSTEM PROTECTION AND SUSTAINABLE LAND USE September 12, 2011 VIA FASCIMILE (951-787-7906) Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTN: Jennifer Harmon 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 RE: Agenda Item 7G (Sept. 14, 2011): Consideration of Transportation Enhancement Funds for the B Canyon Wildlife Crossing — SUPPORT Dear Chairperson Pettis and Members of the Board: EHL The Endangered Habitats League (EHL) endorses the allocation of $3.1 million in regional Transportation Enhancement (TE) funds for the B Canyon wildlife crossing. For your reference, EHL is Southern California's only regional conservation group. For over a decade, EHL has been involved in the development and implementation of Western Riverside County's Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). We commend your Commission's participation in and contributions to the MSHCP over the years. Improving the B Canyon undercrossing of SR -91 will greatly aid in securing north -south wildlife movement in the highly constrained Corona area. Such north -south connectivity is crucial for regional ecosystem and MSHCP goals. The regional TE monies would supplement those Caltrans is obtaining through the Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP). We urge you to move forward on this important project. Sincerely, Dan Silver Executive Director 8424 SANTA MONICA BLVD. SUITE A 592, Los ANGELES, CA 90069-4267 • WWW.EHLEAGUE.ORG • PHONE 213.804.2750 S.A.F.E. Smokefree Air For Everyone Encouraging Smoke free Environments Where People Live, Work and Play 10722 White Oak Avenue, #5, Granada Hills, CA 91344 • Phone: 818-363-4220 - FAX: 818-363-2260 Website:www.smokefreeapartments org EMail: smokefreeapartments@pacificnet.net S.A.F.E. is a project of Community Partners* July 18, 2011 Cynthia Rullo 3121 S. Barrington Avenue, #4 West Los Angeles, CA 90066 Dear Cynthia, Thank you for contacting us about the problem you are experiencing at the Riverside Metro Link Station. You have explained that people are smoking everywhere in the outdoor areas, even the security guards. We are funded by the California Department of Public Health to provide information about the dangers of secondhand smoke. We are aware that you understand very well the health hazards of tobacco smoke in any amount, even outdoors. We are sorry that you are having difficulty communicating this information to the people who could improve the situation. Enclosed is the news release from the California Air Resources Board dated 2006 in which they identify tobacco smoke OUTSIDE as a Toxic Air Contaminant with no safe level of exposure, as dangerous as the worst industrial air pollutants, and able to cause illness and even death. In addition, the U.S. Surgeon General's 2010 report on tobacco smoke asserts that there is no safe level of exposure to tobacco smoke. As a result of this information, all the beaches in L.A. County are now required to be non- smoking because of the passage of local ordinances. In addition, many cities have made their parks non-smoking. Also, some cities have passed ordinances requiring no smoking in many outdoor public areas including restaurant patios. The city of Los Angeles in March of this year passed an ordinance which requires all restaurant patios to be non-smoking. At the v_y least, all of the areas where people congregate outdoors at the Metro Link station should be required to be non-smoking. This is especially necessary in order for there to be compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. People with lung disease, heart disease and cancer especially should not be exposed to any amount of tobacco smoke. It is a denial of access. S.A.F.E. Advisory Board: Albert J. Benson, Jodie Feinberg, Steven Gallegos, Gerardo Guzman, Jacque Petterson, Andrea Portenier, M.S.P.H, Margaret (Peggy) Preacely, MPH, Esther Schiller, Barry J. Stone, C.P.A., Annell Swilley, Eipyrl Tello, MPH, Peggy Toy, and Alan Zovar, R.P.T. In our memory: Richard Lubin, Shiro Paskin, Herm Perlmutter, C.H.E.S. With regard to the smoking by security guards, it does seem to us that they are less able to do their jobs with at least one of their hands holding a cigarette. In addition, they are certainly not good role models for children who are traveling. ,I am hoping that you will be successful in convincing policy makers to adopt no smoking policies for the outdoor areas o t e etro on m versi e. er aps there are a tew areas which could be set aside as designated areas for smoking, but those designated areas need to be chosen very carefully m or er to al ow for wind currents and windows and doors. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Also, please feel free to contact the Riverside County Department of Public Health, Tobacco Control Project at 951-358-4977. Sincerel 4 Esther Schiller, Executive Director S.A.F.E. Smokefree Air For Everyone BREATHING IS FUNDAMENTAL S.A.F.E. Smokefree Air For Everyone Encouraging Smoke free Environments Where People Live, Work and Play 10722 White Oak Avenue, #5, Granada Hills, CA 91344 • Phone: 818-363-4220 • FAX: 818-363-2260 Website:www.smokefreeapariments.org EMail: smokefreeapartments@pacificnet.net S.A.F.E. is a project of Community Partners® Secondhand Smoke is Dangerous, Even Outside Secondhand Smoke is Dangerous — New Information from the U.S. Surgeon General A new Surgeon General's report was released in December 2010: "How Tobacco Smoke Causes Disease -The Biology and Behavioral Basis for Smoking -Attributable Disease" (This is the 30th tobacco related Surgeon General's report issued since 1964) All of the following information is from the Surgeon General's December 2010 report. a. According to the Surgeon General, any exposure to tobacco smoke is harmful. b. Low levels of smoke exposure, including exposures to secondhand tobacco smoke, lead to a rapid and sharp increase in dysfunction and inflammation of the lining of the blood vessels, which are implicated in heart attacks and stroke. c. Cigarette smoke contains more than 7,000 chemicals and compounds. Hundreds are toxic and more than 70 cause cancer. d. Chemicals in tobacco smoke interfere with the functioning of fallopian tubes, increasing risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes such as ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage and low birth weight. They also damage the DNA in sperm which might reduce fertility and harm fetal development. e. The chemicals in tobacco smoke reach the lungs quickly. The blood then carries the toxicants to every organ in the body. f. Exposure to tobacco smoke quickly damages blood vessels throughout the body and makes the blood more likely to clot. This damage can cause heart attacks, strokes and even sudden death. g. The chemicals in tobacco smoke inflame the delicate lining of the lungs and can cause permanent damage that reduces the ability of the lungs to exchange air efficiently, and leads to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. (COPD) h. Even short-term exposure can be dangerous 5 minutes: stiffens the arteries; 20 minutes: increases blood clotting; 30 minutes: increases build-up of fat deposits in blood vessels; 2 hours: increases the chance of an irregular heart beat. All of this increases the risk of heart attack or stroke. S.A.F.E. Advisory Board: Albert J. Benson, Jodie Feinberg, Steven Gallegos, Gerardo Guzman, Jacque Petterson, Andrea Portenier, MS.P.H, Margaret (Peggy) Preacely, MPH, Esther Schiller, Barry J. Stone, C.P.A., Annell Swilley, Eipyrl Tello, MPH. Peggy Toy, and Alan Zovar, R.P.T. In our memory: Richard Lubin, Shiro Paskin, Herm Perlmutter, C.H.E.S. California Environmental Protection Agenc.v 'la NEWS RELEASE Air Resources Board FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE January 26, 2006 California Identifies Second -Hand Smoke as a "Toxic Air Contaminant" CONTACT: Jerry Martin Gennet Paauwe (916) 322-2990 www.arb.ca.gov SACRAMENTO: Today the California Air Resources Board (ARB) identified environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), or second-hand smoke, as a Toxic Air Contaminant (TAC). ETS is now formally identified as an airborne toxic substance that may cause and/or contribute to death or serious illness. ARB's action to list ETS as a TAC was based on a comprehensive report on exposure and health effects of ETS. "This new report reaffirms many of the adverse health effects associated with ETS, especially in children who live in homes where smoking occurs," said ARB Chairman, Dr. Robert Sawyer. "It also raises new concerns about its effects on women. All this strongly supported the need for the Air Board to identify ETS as a serious health threat." Second-hand smoke is a complex mixture of compounds produced by burning of tobacco products. ETS is also a source of other toxic air contaminants such as benzene, 1,3 butadiene, and arsenic. In California each year, tobacco smoke is responsible for the release into the environment of 40 tons of nicotine, 365 tons of respirable particulate matter, and 1900 tons of carbon monoxide. As required by State law, the ARB evaluated exposures to ETS, while the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHI-IA) assessed the health effects from these exposures. The OEHHA evaluation dearly established links between exposure to ETS and a number of adverse health effects, induding some specific to children and infants. These include premature births, low birth -weight babies, and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS). Other effects of ETS on children include the induction and exacerbation of asthma, and infections of the middle -ear and respiratory system. The OEHHA evaluation also found links between ETS exposure and increased incidences of breast cancer in non-smoking, pre -menopausal women. ETS had already been linked to adult incidences of lung and nasal sinus cancer, heart disease, eye and nasal irritation, and asthma. "The ARB's action rightfully puts second-hand tobacco smoke in the same category as the most toxic automotive and industrial air pollutants," OEHHA Director Joan Denton said. "Californians, especially parents, would not willingly fill their homes with motor vehicle exhaust, and they should feel the same way about tobacco smoke." Now that ETS is identified as a toxic air contaminant, the ARB must evaluate the need for action to reduce exposures. In this risk management step, ARB conducts an analysis that includes a review of measures already in place, available options and the costs for reducing the health risks from ETS exposure. The analysis is conducted using an open public process. More information is available on ARB's ETS website, click here . The Air Resources Board is a department of the California Environmental Protection Agency. ARB's mission is to promote and protect public health, welfare, and ecological resources through effective reduction of air pollutants while recognizing and considering effects on the economy. The ARB oversees all air pollution control efforts in California to attain and maintain health based air quality standards_ The energy challenge facing California is real. Every Californian needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumption. For a list of simple ways you can reduce demand and cut your energy cost, see our web site at http://www_arb.ca.gov ##### PUBLIC HEALTH iNsrirur Technical Assistance Legal Center There Is No Constitutional Right to Smoke' February 2004 I. INTRODUCTION Laws that limit how and where people may smoke should survive a legal challenge claiming that smoking is protected by the state or federal constitution. Smoking is not mentioned anywhere in either constitution. Nevertheless, some people may claim that there is a fundamental "right to smoke."2 These claims are usually made in one of two ways: (1) that the fundamental right to privacy in the state or federal constitution includes the right to smoke, or (2) that clauses in the state and federal constitutions granting "equal protection" provide special protection for smokers. Neither of these claims has any legal basis. Therefore, a state or local law limiting smoking usually will be judged only on whether the law is rational, or even plausibly justified, rather than the higher legal standard applied to laws that limit special constitutionally protected rights. II. THERE IS NO FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO SMOKE The argument that someone has a fundamental right to smoke fails because only certain rights are protected by the constitution as fundamental, and smoking is not one of them. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that "only personal rights that can be deemed `fundamental' or `implicit in the concept of ordered liberty' are included in the guarantee of personal liberty."3 These rights are related to an individual's bodily privacy and autonomy within the home. Proponents of smokers' rights often claim that smoking falls within the fundamental right to privacy, by arguing that the act of smoking is an individual and private act that government cannot invade. Courts consistently reject this argument. The privacy interest protected by the U.S. Constitution includes only marriage, contraception, family relationships, and the rearing and educating of children.`' Very few private acts by individuals qualify as fundamental privacy interests, and smoking is not one of them.5 1 This material was made possible by funds received from the California Department of Health Services, under contract # 99-85069. This fact sheet was created to provide general information only and is not offered or intended as legal advice. 2 Common usage of the term "rights" conflates two distinct legal meanings: those rights that are specially provided for or protected by law (e.g., free speech); and those rights that exist simply because no law has been passed restricting them (e.g., the right to use a cell phone while driving). The latter type of right is always subject to potential regulation. Therefore, this memo addresses only those rights provided for or protected by law. This memo also does not address whether an employer may refuse to employ someone who smokes. While prohibiting smoking at work is permissible, Cal. Labor Code §96(k) protects employees from discrimination based on off -work conduct, though one court held that this statute does not create new rights for employees but allows the state to assert an employee's independently recognized rights. Barbee v. Household Auto. Finance Corp., 113 Cal. App. 4th 525 (2003). 3 Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 152 (1973). 4 See, for example, Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 484 (1964) (recognizing the right of married couples to use contraceptives); Meyers v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923) (recognizing the right of parents to educate children 505 14th Street, Suite 810, Oakland, CA 94612 • (510) 444-8252 • (510) 444-8253 (fax) • talc@phi.org • http://talc@phi.org Example: A firefighter trainee challenged a city fire department requirement that trainees must refrain from cigarette smoking at all times, by arguing that "although there is no specific constitutional right to smoke, [there is an] implicit . . . right of liberty or privacy in the conduct of [ ] private life, a right to be let alone, which includes the right to smoke."6 The court, however, disagreed and distinguished smoking from the recognized fundamental privacy rights.' The court went on to find that the city regulation met the fairly low standard for regulating non -fundamental rights because there was a perfectly rational reason for the regulation, namely the need for a healthy firefighting force. III. SMOKERS ARE NOT A PROTECTED GROUP OF PERSONS The second common constitutional claim made by proponents of smokers' rights is that laws regulating smoking discriminate against smokers as a particular group and thus violate the equal protection clause of the U.S. or the California constitutions. No court has been persuaded by these claims. The equal protection clauses of the United States and California constitutions, similar in scope and effect,8 guarantee that the government will not treat similar groups of people differently without a good reason.9 Certain groups of people — such as groups based on race, national origin and gender — receive greater protection against discriminatory government acts under the U.S. and California constitutions than do other groups of people.10 Smokers have never been identified as one of these protected groups." Generally, the Supreme Court requires a protected group to have "an immutable characteristic determined solely by the accident of birth."12 Smoking is not an "immutable characteristic" because people are not born as smokers and smoking is a behavior that people can stop. Because smokers are not a protected group, laws limiting smoking must only be rationally related to a legitimate government purpose.13 as they see fit); and Moore v. East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494 (1977) (protecting the sanctity of family relationships). 5 City of North Miami v. Kurtz, 653 So.2d 1025, 1028 (Fla. 1995) (city requirement that job applicants affirm that they had not used tobacco in preceding year upheld because "the `right to smoke' is not included within the penumbra of fundamental rights protected under [the federal constitution's privacy provisions]"). 6 Grusendorf v. City of Oklahoma City, 816 F.2d 539, 541 (10th Cir. 1987). 7Id. The court relied heavily on the U.S. Supreme Court decision Kelley v. Johnson, 425 U.S. 238 (1976). In Kelley, the Court held that a regulation governing hair grooming for male police officers did not violate rights guaranteed under the Due Process Clause even assuming there was a liberty interest in personal appearance. 8 U.S. Const. amend. XIV, Cal. Const. art.1 §7. See Serrano v. Priest, 5 Cal. 3d 584, 597 n.11 (1971) (plaintiffs equal protection claims under Article 1 §11 and §21 of state constitution are "substantially equivalent" to claims under equal protection clause of Fourteenth Amendment of U.S. Constitution, and so the legal analysis of federal claim applies to state claim). 9 Equal protection provisions generally permit legislation that singles out a class for distinctive treatment "if such classification bears a rational relation to the purposes of the legislation." Brown v. Merlo, 8 Cal. 3d 855, 861 (1973). 10 See, for example, Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) (race); Sugarman v. Dougall, 413 U.S. 634 (1973) (exclusion of aliens from a state's competitive civil service violated equal protection clause); Craig v. Boran, 429 U.S. 190 (1976) (classifications by gender must serve important governmental objectives and must be substantially related to the achievement). 11 Even some potentially damaging classifications, such as those based upon age, mental disability and wealth, do not receive any special protections. See, for example, City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc., 473 U.S. 432 (1985) (mentally disabled adults are not protected under Equal Protection Clause); San Antonio Independent School Dist. v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1 (1973) (education and income classifications are not protected). 12 Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677, 686 (1973). 13 Fagan v. Axelrod, 550 N.Y.S. 2d 552, 560 (1990) (rejecting the argument that a state statute regulating tobacco 2 The equal protection clause not only protects certain groups of people, the clause also prohibits discrimination against certain fundamental "interests" that inherently require equal treatment. The fundamental interests protected by the equal protection clause include the right to vote, the right to be a political candidate, the right to have access to the courts for certain kinds of proceedings, and the right to migrate interstate.14 Smoking is not one of these recognized rights. Example: In upholding a high school campus ban on smoking, a North Carolina court stated that "[tlhe right to smoke in public places is not a protected right, even for adults."15 The court upheld a school regulation that permitted smoking by teachers in the teachers' lounge but prohibited students from smoking. The smoking students claimed they were a discrete group suffering from discrimination (since teachers, another group, could smoke under the ban but students could not). The court found that the rule did not violate equal protection principles because of rational, reasonable differences in prohibiting smoking by minors and not by adults. If a government classification affects an individual right that is not constitutionally protected, the classification will be upheld if there is any reasonably conceivable set of facts that could provide a rational basis for it.16 So long as secondhand smoke regulations are enacted to further the government goal of protecting the public's health from the dangers of tobacco smoke, the regulation should withstand judicial scrutiny if challenged.'? IV. CONCLUSION There is no constitutional right to smoke. Claims to the contrary have no legal basis. The U.S. and California constitutions guarantee certain fundamental rights and protect certain classes of persons from all but the most compelling government regulation. However, no court has ever recognized smoking as a protected fundamental right nor has any court ever found smokers to be a protected class. To the contrary, every court that has considered the issue has declared that no fundamental "right to smoke" exists. So long as a smoking regulation is rationally related to a legitimate government objective such as protecting public health or the environment, the regulation will be upheld as constitutional. smoking in public areas discriminated against members of a subordinate class of smokers on the basis of nicotine addiction by holding that "the equal protection clause does not prevent state legislatures from drawing lines that treat one class of individuals or entities differently from others, unless the difference in treatment is `palpably arbitrary' "). Note, too, that nonsmokers also are not recognized as a protected class, so equal protection claims brought by nonsmokers exposed to smoke in a place where smoking is permitted by law are unlikely to succeed. 14 See, for example, Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962) (improper congressional redistricting violates voters' rights under equal protection); Turner v. Fouche, 396 U.S. 346 (1970) (all persons have a constitutional right to be considered for public service); Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969) (residency requirement for receipt of state benefits violates equal protection). 15 Craig v. Buncombe County Bd. of Educ., 80 N.C.App. 683, 685 (1986). 16 People v. Leung, 5 Cal. App. 4th 482, 494 (1992). 17 Dutchess/Putnam Restaurant & Tavern Ass 'n, Inc. v. Putnam County Dep't of Health, 178 F. Supp. 2d 396, 405 (N.Y. 2001) (holding that County code regulating smoking in public places does not violate equal protection rights); City of Tuscon v. Grezaffi, 23 P.3d 675 (2001) (upholding ordinance prohibiting smoking in bars but not in bowling alleys because it is rationally related to legitimate government interest); Operation Badlaw v. Licking County Gen. Health Dist. Bd. of Health, 866 F.Supp. 1059, 1064-5 (Ohio 1992) (upholding ordinance prohibiting smoking except in bars and pool halls); Rossie v. State, 395 N.W.2d 801, 807 (Wis. 1986) (rejecting equal protection challenge to statute that banned smoking in government buildings but allowed it in certain restaurants). 3 'oTI Page 1 of 1 Smokefree Apartments From: "Jeff Gold" <ebbets16@yahoo.com> To: <smokefreeapartments@pacificnet.net> Sent: Monday, August 22, 2011 12:19 PM Subject: New NY Law: No Smoking On MTA Platforms http: //polhudson.lohudblogs. com/2011 /08/ 15fnew-law-no-smoking-on-mta- platforms/ New Law: No Smoking On MTA Platforms Posted by: Joseph Spector - Posted in Uncategorized on Aug 15, 2011 [NY] Gov. Andrew Cuomo today signed a law that will prohibit smoking on platform areas operated by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, including Metro North and the Long Island Railroad. Cuomo is expected to announce the bill's signing later today. The measure, which passed the Legislature earlier this year, will ban smoking on MTA-operated outdoor train ticketing, boarding or platform areas. Smoking is already banned on all New York City subway platforms. The MTA oversees public transit for New York City and its suburbs, including Westchester, Putnam, Rockland and Dutchess counties. "It is important that commuters are not unwillingly subject to the dangers of second-hand smoke while waiting on train platforms," Cuomo said in a statement obtained by Gannett's Albany Bureau. "Exposure to second-hand smoke can lead to serious health problems for non-smokers and this law will make outdoor MTA train platforms, ticketing and boarding areas a cleaner, healthier place for all commuters." The measure was pushed by Sen. Charles Fuschillo, R -Nassau County, and Assemblywoman Ellen Jaffee, D -Suffern, Rockland County. The law takes effect in 90 days. "New York's commuters deserve protection from the health hazards of secondhand smoke and I commend Governor Cuomo for signing into law this vital protection," Jaffee said in a statement. The state Department of Health estimates that second-hand smoke kills 2,500 New Yorkers every year, Cuomo said in the news release. 8/22/2011 A2 • THURSDAY, July 14, 2011 IN THIS SECTION LOCAL NEWS: PAGES A2 -A10 REGION A2 HEMET-SAN JACINTO AND THE PASS A3 SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY A4-6 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY A8-10 RIVERSIDE-MORENO VALLEY-EASTVALE A7, A9 CASSIE M DUFF LOCA FIRM TOPS IN GIS H ow did opera Redla. r come the s a cuttin now use I as Tuesda exhibit tional San Di Esr' Envi sea iz a mom-and-pop P P on started in ds in 1969 be- an dard-setter for edge technology worldwide? d that question of some of the 300 5 at Esri's Interna- ser Conference in go. (formerly ESRI, or onmental Systems Re- ch Institute) popular - geographic information stems (GIS). Exhibitors told mN tho s REGION oki REPORT: An official says 11.9 percent of adults in 2010 smoked, down from 13.1 percent in 2009. BY LORA HINES THE PRESS -ENTERPRISE California's adult smoking rate last year dropped to about 12 percent, a record low for the state, according to public health officials. Dr. Ron Chapman, direc- tor of the California Depart- men t of Public Health, said Wednesday that 11.9 percent of adults statewide in 2010 smoked, down from 13. 1 per- cent in 2009. The state's highest adult smokin g rate was 27. 7 per- cent in 1985, accordin g to department data. "The drop in smoking means that fewer people will see their lives cut short by tobac'tp. " Chapman said in a r I \ written statement. "Since the inception of California's tobacco education efforts in 1990, we have witnessed de- clines in lung cancer, heart disease and other tobacco - related illnesses. " Chapman didn't release 2010 data for the Inland area. The state's most recent in- formation for Riverside and San Bern ardino counties shows 2008 adult smoking rates of 12. 7 percent for each county, according to the state Public Health Depart- ment. Despite the state's rate reduction, Chapman said of- ficials must remain vigilant in their efforts to pre vent adults from smoking, QUIT S CALL THE California Smokers' Helpline at 800-662-8887 to get information on how to stop smoking. "Smoking remains the number one o preventable cause of death and disease, killing more than 400,000 Americans each year," he said. Inland area public health departments have developed awareness campaigns to en- courage people to stop smok- ing, The Riverside County De- partment of Public Health's Tobacco Control Project has a program to urge restau- rant owners to make their outdoor eating areas smoke - a THE PRESS -ENTERPRISE IN SECTION C LOCAL NEWS: PAGES 01, C3 TV LISTINGS 02 C6-7 06 08 COMICS SUDOKU CROSSWORD OBITUARIES e drops free , Director ConsueIa Ed- mond is hopeful that at least 150 restaurants will join the free campaign by 2013 . Michele Jack.nik, manager of San Bernardino County's Tobacco Use Reduction Now program, said she works with health care providers, inclndin doctors, i st gdentists and pharmacists, to encour- age them to talk to patients about smoking, Health care providers often don't have time to talk to patients about tobacco use unless they are suffering from a smoking - related problem, she said . "We really have to work on the simple things," Jack- nik said. Employers also could help reduce smoking rates by offering health i nsurance in- centives and making work- places smoke -free to get peo- ple to quit, she said . It's important to make smoking less prominent so people consider it an abnormal be- ha vior, Jacknik said. One of the biggest hurdles is to reach people ages 18 to 24, a v ulnerable group which typically has the highest smoking rate, Jacknik said. Young people start smoki ng because they want to em- ulate behavior they think is attractive, she said. Tobacco companies target you ng peo- ple by sponsoring eve nts at places where they gather, including bars and music festivals.. "The cool factor is power- ful and hard to counteract," Jacknik said. Reach Lora Hines at 951-368-9444 or Ihines@PE.com L\ S _ Fup1)-TA-V �n1 -1)R 531 M E5 O Ito 625- 00UrriY Ci 2�.� l� e l �� U_NIE-gsrDE---y ci\-- Q, 5- 0 3 kis-o AGENDA ITEM 5 MINUTES • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, July 13, 2011 1. CALL TO ORDER The Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chair Greg Pettis at 9:31 a.m. in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, 92501. • • 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At this time, Commissioner Jan Harnik led the Commission in a flag salute. 3. ROLL CALL Commissioners/Alternates Present Steve Adams Marion Ashley Ben Benoit John Benoit Roger Berg Bob Botts Daryl Busch Bob Buster Marcelo Co Mary Craton Joseph DeConinck Ginny Foat* Rick Gibbs Douglas Hanson Jan Harnik *Arrived after the meeting Terry Henderson Steven Hernandez Andrew Kotyuk* Darcy Kuenzi Bob Magee Scott Matas Greg Pettis Syed Raza Ron Roberts Adam Rush Larry Smith Karen Spiegel Jeff Stone* Ella Zanowic was called to order Commissioners Absent Glenn Miller Berwin Hanna Scott Hines John F. Tavaglione City of Jurupa Valley Chair Pettis announced Agenda Item 7, "Additions/Revisions", will be taken prior to Agenda Item 4, "Public Comments". 7. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS Anne Mayer, Executive Director, stated staff recommends Agenda Item 10, "Adoption of Resolution Certifying Perris Valley Line Final Environmental Impact Report and Approving the Perris Valley Line project" be withdrawn from the agenda. The Commission received several comment letters Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 13, 2011 Page 2 • yesterday just prior to 5 p.m. that are consistent with previously provided information. However, the Riverside Unified School District believes it was not provided with a complete copy of the responses to comments within the timeframe required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Staff believes it has substantially complied with every CEQA requirement. Due to the importance of this project, staff is requesting a special Commission meeting be held on Monday, July 25. Copies of all written comments received yesterday on this matter have been distributed to the Commissioners for review. Chair Pettis announced Agenda Item 10 will be pulled from this agenda and a special Commission meeting will be held on Monday, July 25 at 9:30 a.m. in the Board Room. 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS R.A. Barney Barnett requested the Commissioners and public view www.highgrovehappenings.net for information supporting a Metrolink station in Highgrove. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 8, 2011 M/S/C (Adams/Spiegel) to approve the minutes of June 8, 2011 meeting as submitted. 6. PUBLIC HEARING - RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSIT SERVICES FUNDING ALLOCATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011/12 Fina Clemente, Transit Manager, presented the transit funding allocations for FY 2011/12, highlighting the following areas: • Short Range Transit Plans (SRTPs) for FY 2011/12 - 2013/14 for cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona, Riverside, Riverside Transit Agency, SunLine Transit Agency, Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency, and the Commission's Commuter Rail program; • State, local, and federal revenues; • Riverside County FY 2011/12 transit funding request; • Operating and capital costs comparison for FY 2010/11 - FY 2011/12; and • Operating and capital expenditures for FY 2008/09 - FY 2011/12. Commissioners Ginny Foat, Andrew Kotyuk, and Jeff Stone arrived at the meeting during the presentation of this agenda item. • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 13, 2011 Page 3 At this time, Chair Pettis opened the public hearing and requested comments from the public. No comments were' received from the public. Chair Pettis closed the public hearing. Anne Mayer discussed the fluctuations and lack of predictability and stability in transit funding. She expressed appreciation to the transit providers for doing a tremendous job of reigning in costs and adjusting services to remain within their budget. M/S/C (Spiegel/Henderson) to: • 1) Approve the FY 2011/12 Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) Section 5307 and 5311 POP for Riverside County; 2) Approve the FY 2011/12 Local Transportation Fund (LTF) and State Transit Assistance (STA) fund allocations for transit; 3) Direct staff to add projects into the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan (RTIP); and 4) Adopt Resolution No. 11-011, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Allocate State Transit Assistance Funds". 8. CONSENT CALENDAR M/S/C (Henderson/Craton) to approve the following Consent Calendar items: Abstain on Agenda Item 8L: Ashley, Benoit, and Stone 8A. 2011 STATE ROUTE 91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN UPDATE Approve the 2011 State Route 91 Implementation Plan update. 8B. FISCAL YEARS 2012-16 MEASURE A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS Approve the FYs 2012-16 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans (CIPs) for Local Streets and Roads as submitted. • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 13, 2011 Page 4 8C. 2009 MEASURE A PROGRAM MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT 1) Approve the 2009 Measure A Maintenance of Effort (MOE) base year levels for the following cities: • Banning • Indian Wells Murrieta • Blythe • Indio Norco Canyon Lake• Lake Elsinore Perris Corona • Moreno Valley Riverside Desert Hot Springs Temecula; and 2) Approve the city of Riverside's (Riverside) request for special consideration regarding its 2009 MOE base year level. 8D. FISCAL YEAR 2009/10 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT AND MEASURE A AUDIT RESULTS 1) Receive and file the Transportation Development Act (TDA) and Measure A audit results report for the FY 2009/10; and 2) Make a finding that the city of Hemet (Hemet) did not meet its maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement and request a response from Hemet regarding such noncompliance prior to taking any action. 8E. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH CALLAN MANAGEMENT COMPANY DBA WESTERN AREA SECURITY SERVICES 1) Approve Agreement No. 06-25-071-05, Amendment No. 5 to Agreement No. 06-25-071-00, with Callan Management Company dba Western Area Security Services (WASS) to provide security guard services at the five Commission -owned commuter rail stations in an amount not to exceed $300,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8F. AGREEMENT WITH VENDSIGHT, INC. TO PROVIDE A STATION ADVERTISING REVENUE PROGRAM 1) Award Agreement No. 11-24-029-00 to Vendsight, Inc. to provide services associated with the development, management, and maintenance of a station advertising revenue program for a five-year term, and one five-year option to extend the agreement; and • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 13, 2011 Page 5 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement, including the option term, on behalf of the Commission. 8G. PROPOSITION 1B PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION MODERNIZATION, IMPROVEMENT, AND SERVICE ENHANCEMENT ACCOUNT SUPPORTING RESOLUTION FOR THE COMMISSION'S COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM Adopt Resolution No. 11-012, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Authorizing the Execution of the Certifications and Assurances for the Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account Bond Program". 8H. FISCAL YEAR 2009/10 PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Receive and file the transit operators' compliance status report for the FY 2009/10 Productivity Improvement Program (PIP). • • 81. FISCAL YEAR 2011/12 MEASURE A COMMUTER ASSISTANCE BUSPOOL SUBSIDY FUNDING CONTINUATION REQUESTS 1) Authorize payment of $1 ,645/month maximum subsidy per buspool for the period July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2012, to the existing Corona, Mira Loma, and Riverside buspools; and 2) Require subsidy recipients to meet monthly buspool reporting requirements as supporting documentation to receive payments. 8J. SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM EXTENSION FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA Grant the city of Temecula (Temecula) an extension to June 30, 2012, for SB 821 program funds approved for the Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge Overcrossing project. 8K. FISCAL YEAR 2011/12 AGREEMENTS FOR REGIONAL RIDESHARE SERVICES 1) Approve Agreement No. 11-41-140-00 with the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) as part of the Commission's continuing bi-county partnership with SANBAG to deliver commuter/employer rideshare services, regional ridematching services, and operation of an Inland Empire 511 (1E511) system for FY 2011/12; Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 13, 2011 Page 6 2) Approve Agreement No. 10-41-029-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 10-41-029-00, with SANBAG to clarify the reimbursement relationship regarding the FY 2010/11 rideshare/IE511 agreement; 3) Approve the following agreements for regional ridematching services: • Agreement No. 09-41-075-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 09-41-075-00, with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro); • Agreement No. 11-41-139-00 with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA); and • Agreement No. 06-41-082-06, Amendment No. 6 to Agreement No. 06-41-082-00, with the Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC); and 4) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 8L. AMENDMENTS TO FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL AGREEMENTS 1) Approve Amendment No. 07-45-134-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 07-45-134-00, with Pepe's Towing to provide freeway service patrol (FSP) services on Beat No. 4 in the amount of $180,000; 2) Approve Amendment No. 06-45-046-04, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 06-45-046-00, with Tri-City Towing to provide FSP services for Beat No. 8 in the amount of $100,000 and to extend the term of the agreement through December 31, 2011; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 8M. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE 1) Receive an update on state and federal legislation; 2) Adopt the following bill positions: a) SB 446 (Dutton) - Support; b) HR 1825 (Blumenauer) - Support; and c) S. 1034 (Schumer) - Support. 9. AMENDMENT TO STANDBY BOND PURCHASE AGREEMENTS RELATED TO THE 2009 BONDS Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer, presented the proposed amendments to the standby bond purchase agreements for the remarketing of the 2009 Bonds. • • • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 13, 2011 Page 7 Commissioner Rick Gibbs stated the offering memorandum attachment notes a sales tax rate of 8.75 percent instead of 7.75 percent and asked if it should be corrected due to the recent change. Theresia Trevino concurred it will be changed to reflect a sales tax rate of 7.75 percent. M/S/C (Busch/Henderson) to: 1) Receive and file a report on the proposed amendments, including the Fee Letter, to each of the three Standby Bond Purchase Agreements (SBPAs) between the Riverside County Transportation Commission and JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association (JPMorgan), as liquidity facility provider for the 2009 Bonds; 2) Adopt Resolution No. 11-010, "Resolution Authorizing the Release of All or a Portion of the Debt Service Reserve Fund Related to the Riverside County Transportation Commission Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds) 2009 Series A, 2009 Series B, and 2009 Series C, the Execution and Delivery of a Fourth Supplemental Indenture, an Offering Memorandum, and the Taking of All Other Actions Necessary in Connection Therewith"; 3) Approve the draft Offering Memorandum related to the remarketing of the 2009 Bonds; 4) Approve the draft Fourth Supplemental Indenture between the Riverside County Transportation Commission and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the final Fourth Supplemental Indenture; and 5) Approve the estimated costs to be incurred in connection with the amendments to be paid from 2009 Measure A Bond Financing Program funds and the execution of related agreements, as required. Abstain: Kotyuk 10. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA There were no agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 13, 2011 Page 8 11. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 11A. Chair Pettis briefed the Commission on the 2011 APTA Rail Conference and referred to the written report included in the agenda. Commissioner Roberts also briefed the Commission on the 2011 APTA Rail Conference. 11B. Commissioner Craton announced: • The Southern California Association of Governments' (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Public Outreach Workshops being held on various dates and cities during July and August, 2011; and • The spring issue of the Claremont McKenna College magazine features an article on Commissioner Adam Rush. 11C. Commissioner Karen Spiegel expressed: • The importance of the 2011 State Route 91 Implementation Plan update that was approved as part of the Consent Calendar; and • Her gratitude to the Commission for allowing her to serve on the Metrolink Board. 11D. Commissioner Terry Henderson discussed the recent National League of Cities Board and subcommittee meetings concerning environmental streamlining issues. She had the opportunity to discuss the Breaking Down the Barriers report. 11 E. Chair Pettis discussed a meeting with the mayors of El Paso and San Antonio, Texas about expanding passenger rail service to a daily basis from New Orleans to Coachella Valley and Los Angeles. 11 F. Commissioner Ginny Foat suggested staff evaluate the Commission's SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program adopted policies related to Agenda Item 8J, "SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program Extension for the City of Temecula", related to grant extensions for projects to ensure there are no policy violations and funds are reprogrammed in a timely manner. 11G. Commissioner Larry Smith expressed gratitude to staff and the city of Hemet for working together related to a fence that was installed on the Commission's rail right of way. • • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 13, 2011 Page 9 11 H. Anne Mayer: • Discussed the Every Day Counts meeting held on July 7, in Sacramento and the speaker was Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Victor Mendez, Administrator; • Announced the SR -91 Corridor Improvement Project did not qualify for the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act loan program for this round. Staff is working closely with Caltrans and FHWA to ensure the environmental document stays on track. She expressed appreciation to Senator Dianne Feinstein, Congressman Ken Calvert, and Congressman Jerry Lewis for their support; and • Announced construction started for the 60/215 East Junction project and discussed the striping changes for the carpool lanes. She expressed gratitude to Syed Raza, Caltrans District 8, for all of his efforts on this project. 111. Chair Pettis referred to Commissioner Craton's comment about SCAG's RTP Workshops and recommended Commissioners send a city staff member if they are unable to attend. 12. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 10:15 a.m. The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Monday, July 25, 2011, in the Board Room, at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California. Respectfully submitted, Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION MINUTES Monday, July 25, 2011 1. CALL TO ORDER The Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chair Greg Pettis at 9:31 a.m. in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At this time, Commissioner Bob Botts led the Commission in a flag salute. 3. ROLL CALL Commissioners/Alternates Present Commissioners Absent • Steve Adams Marion Ashley Ben Benoit John Benoit Bob Botts Daryl Busch Bob Buster Marcelo Co Mary Craton Rick Gibbs Berwin Hanna Douglas Hanson Jan Harnik Terry Henderson 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS Steven Hernandez Scott Hines Andrew Kotyuk Darcy Kuenzi Bob Magee Scott Matas Glenn Miller Greg Pettis Ron Roberts Adam Rush Larry Smith Karen Spiegel Jeff Stone Ella Zanowic Roger Berg Joseph DeConinck Steve Pougnet John F. Tavaglione Raymond Wolfe City of Jurupa Valley Melanie Zimmermann, a Highgrove area resident and member of the Highgrove Municipal Advisory Council, expressed strong support for a commuter rail station in Highgrove. She discussed the benefits of this location. She then expressed opposition to a station located at Marlborough Avenue. • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 25, 2011 Page 2 Denis Kidd, a Highgrove area resident, expressed strong support for a commuter rail station in Highgrove as it can serve the Perris Valley Line (PVL) and the mainline to Orange and San Bernardino Counties. He discussed a number of advantages of a Highgrove station and disadvantages of a Marlborough station. R.A. Barney Barnett expressed strong support for a commuter rail station in Highgrove since the Commission owns property at the Citrus connector and would serve the cities of Perris, Riverside, and San Bernardino. He discussed a number of advantages of a Highgrove station and disadvantages of a Marlborough station. He stated that he has notified the Federal Transit Administration, California Commissioners, Senators, and others about this matter. He then discussed the compromise proposed to staff and the 10 years of documentation that he can use to pursue this goal. He stated his belief that the environmental impact report (EIR) is incomplete, inaccurate, and unfair. Mr. Barnett submitted a petition signed by residents of Riverside and San Bernardino Counties and a letter of support from the Mayor of the city of Grand Terrace to Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board. Chair Pettis announced there is additional information for Agenda Item 6, "Adoption of Resolution Certifying Perris Valley Line Final Environmental Impact Report and Approving the Perris Valley Line Project". Steve DeBaun, legal counsel, announced there is a closed session item pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b) to discuss possible litigation against the agency regarding the approval of the PVL final EIR and project. At this time, Chair Pettis requested the public to leave the Board Room. 5. CLOSED SESSION 5A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b) Potential Number of Case(s): One or more There was no announcement for the Closed Session item. 6. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION CERTIFYING PERRIS VALLEY LINE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND APPROVING THE PERRIS VALLEY LINE PROJECT Edda Rosso, Capital Projects Manager, provided the background for the development of the EIR, an overview for the resolution certifying the PVL final EIR and project and the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Commission and the Riverside Unified School District (RUSD), and the next • • • • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 25, 2011 Page 3 steps in the process. She then introduced Charity Schiller, legal counsel, to provide a response to the comment letters received for the July 13 and July 25 Commission meetings. Charity Schiller explained the extensive range of public review for the PVL EIR, resulting in several comments received by the Commission that were responded to in the final EIR. She noted the Commission's consideration of this project was scheduled for July 13, however, at the request of the Riverside Unified School District and due to additional comment letters submitted July 12, resulting in the continuance of consideration of the project to this meeting. All additional comment letters received for the July 13 meeting were extensively analyzed with a written response, and have been distributed to the Commissioners. Charity Schiller then summarized the additional comment letters submitted for this meeting and provided detailed responses for each of the letters as well as the speakers' comments for the record and the purpose of completeness. She stated the Commission is a public agency and welcomes all forms of comments at any time. Charity Schiller expressed the Commission clearly accepted comment letters just before this meeting. These letters were evaluated and distributed to the Commissioners. Commissioner Bob Buster discussed the history of the PVL, how it was first cast, the Commission's vision for rail transport, and the interrelationship between commuter rail and bus. He discussed his concern for the apparent disregard for bus transit, stating there should be additional cost effective options, and suggested the Commission seek other modes of transit. Commissioner Buster then asked for clarification on the speed of the trains after the project is completed. Charity Schiller replied the train speeds depends on the area in which the trains are traveling through. Therefore, in some areas it is operationally constrained to 30 mph and other areas it is 25 mph. Commissioner Buster expressed concern for the safety of the rail line and asked if safety is mitigated to a level of insignificance. He believes a number of the safety improvements are significant and the Commission should be more explicit about this. He expressed concern for derailments and chemicals traveling on these tracks and asked what controls exist on the growth of industry for shipping volatile chemicals and the rapid response capabilities in case of accidents. He referred to R.A. Barney Barnett's comments and stated he believes the Highgrove community is talking about the Commission's vision, keeping in mind that eventually the Commission will link Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. He stated he looks forward to a successful line and hopes it receives the projected ridership, but recommends the Commission also work with other modes of transit. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 25, 2011 Page 4 Anne Mayer apologized if staff created the impression this project was a competition between rail and bus. She explained one of the alternatives studied was the express bus system. It was a requirement by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and part of the environmental process. She discussed Caltrans' issues with running a bus on shoulders on Interstate 215. Due to the significant structural system needed to carry the buses, it was deemed infeasible. Anne Mayer confirmed the Commission has a Measure A project to add a carpool lane from Nuevo Road north that the buses may utilize. She discussed working with the Riverside Transit Agency on express bus service. She then discussed track safety issues, noting the speeds are determined by the physical layout of the tracks as well as other circumstances that will be coordinated through Metrolink dispatch. Anne Mayer explained staff is working with RUSD and community members on safety and the Commission will fully implement quiet zones. She discussed Metrolink's Operation Life Saver program and the risk of derailment. Additionally, the Commission cannot prohibit legal uses of the PVL for transport due to interstate commerce requirements. Land use decisions or restrictions would need to be considered by the county of Riverside and the cities of Riverside and Perris. Anne Mayer explained the authorized funding from FTA and the committed Measure A funds are strictly for the PVL project. With regard to a Highgrove station, she reviewed the extensive efforts by staff to consider this station location and the reasons why it was determined to reject this site. Commissioner Buster continued to express his concern regarding the potential of derailments. He then stated he will work with the Commissioners of those cities along this line to reach an agreement that the industries containing chemicals are not located along the 1-21 5 and surrounding areas. He expressed the Commissioners can help promote industry locations as long as it will not pose a hazard either along the rail line or at the site itself. Anne Mayer explained the MOU between the Commission and RUSD highlights key areas of safety concern for RUSD and the intentions of the Commission for communication and coordination during construction of the PVL project. She expressed appreciation to RUSD for its close coordination and cooperation. Commissioner Steve Adams explained when the PVL project became a reality, the Commission and the community were at opposite ends about safety and mitigations. With the advent of the PVL and the cooperation of the Commission, several of these issues are mitigated. He expressed appreciation to RUSD for its concerns, cooperation, and partnership resulting in an MOU. Commissioner Adams expressed the city of Riverside fully supports the PVL project and expressed appreciation to the Commission for making this rail line as safe as possible. At this time, Chair Pettis called on the public speakers to comment. • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 25, 2011 Page 5 Nicholas Adcock, representing the Greater Riverside Chambers of Commerce, expressed support for the PVL project. He stated the PVL will be one of the many tools and assets in this community for job creation and improve regiona► connection. He expressed appreciation to staff, Commissioners, and other community partners for their efforts. Michael Fine, RUSD Deputy Superintendent, expressed support for the MOU between the two agencies to address the concerns for the PVL project and expressed appreciation for bringing this aspect of the matter to a successful close. At this time, Commissioner Andrew Kotyuk left the meeting. Lori Stone, March Joint Powers Authority (March JPA), expressed strong support for the PVL project and explained March JPA worked with the Commission to dedicate a Metrolink site at the Meridian Business Park. She stated 38,000 jobs are projected, which will complement the rail and bus service for that area. Jim Junge, Director of Engineering for Fresh and Easy, explained Fresh and Easy is a major employer in Riverside County and is conscious of environment impacts and carbon footprints. In 2006, due to the PVL project, Fresh and Easy located a manufacturing and distribution site along 1-215. He expressed strong support for the PVL project on behalf of Fresh and Easy as it will help to alleviate traffic congestion on the 1-215. Commissioner Jeff Stone stated it is a monumental day for the Commission as the PVL will be an asset for Southwestern Riverside County and will reduce traffic congestion on the 1-21 5. Commissioner Stone explained the PVL will be an attraction for industries in and around March Air Reserve Base and improve air quality. He expressed concern for the freight traffic and the type of freight traveling along this line. He recommended evaluating the local governments' general plans that are adjacent to these tracks to ensure there is appropriate zoning. He suggested the Commission initiate planning efforts as this project moves forward to extend the PVL to the city of San Jacinto, which will allow access for even more jobs and opportunities. Commissioner Stone moved the staff recommendation. • Commissioner Marion Ashley expressed strong support for the PVL project. He stated it is an important transportation project that will alleviate traffic congestion and provide accessible and affordable mobility while improving the region's air quality, creating jobs, and enhancing economic development. He expressed appreciation to staff, the city of Riverside, and RUSD for working together to resolve their issues. He then expressed support for a Highgrove station, though he understands the action to reject it as a station location. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 25, 2011 Page 6 He stated this badly needed project will connect a massive part of the Western Riverside County with Los Angeles and Orange Counties and change the quality of life for generations to come. He concurred with Commissioner Stone's comment to evaluate the extension of the service to Hemet and San Jacinto. Commissioner Mary Craton expressed support for the PVL project. Commissioner Craton stated she attended the PVL public hearing held at the University of California, Riverside (UCR) and believes all of the questions raised have been addressed. She referred to Kevin Dawson's comment letter submitted this morning concerning pedestrians crossing the railroad tracks. She suggested the UCR neighborhood create a foundation to fund a pedestrian overcrossing. She then asked for the cost of preparing the final EIR. Anne Mayer replied the total amount is uncertain, however, it can be provided to the Commission at a later date. She stated this project has been an extensive, important process. She concurred with Commissioner Craton's suggestion about the UCR neighborhood working together to fund a pedestrian overcrossing for that area of the tracks. She stated the Commission's primary safety concern is the right of way in that area of the San Jacinto Branch Line is being used for recreational purposes. She explained staff will continue to work with Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), BNSF, and local community leaders to reinforce the message that the rail right of way is not intended for recreational use. Commissioner Adam Rush concurred with the Commissioners' comments regarding the progress the PVL project will bring, including economic prosperity. He stated based on his extensive experience with CEQA and environmental documents, he expressed appreciation for the dedication and detailed analysis in the PVL EIR, along with the responses to all comments, which he believe is at the top tier of analysis and applicability to the project. He expressed appreciation to staff and consultants for their professionalism and for a well written and detailed document. Commissioner Karen Spiegel expressed there is no one answer to alleviate traffic congestion and the PVL project is just one piece in completing the transportation puzzle. She discussed how her appointments to Metrolink and RTA provide her a different perspective for the need for alternative modes of transportation. Commissioner Spiegel concurred with Commissioner Buster's comment about the need for buses and concurred with Commissioner Rush's comment about the thoroughness of the final EIR. She expressed appreciation for all parties involved for their time and effort. Commissioner Henderson expressed appreciation to Barney Barnett for being an outstanding and caring citizen, for following the PVL project, and bringing his suggestions and community forward as it helped improve the final EIR. • • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 25, 2011 Page 7 Commissioner Darcy Kuenzi expressed support for the PVL project. She expressed appreciation for the process that brought this project to fruition. She hopes this project will be eligible for an award and encouraged the Commissioners and staff to seek opportunities to nominate this project. Commissioner Daryl Busch expressed sincere appreciation and support for the PVL project. M/S/C (Stone/Henderson) to: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 11-013, "A Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Adopting Environmental Findings and a Statement of Project Benefits Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (Sch #2009011046), Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Approving the Perris Valley Line Project'; 2) Approve Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. 11-33-005-00 with the Riverside Unified School District (RUSD) to address its concerns regarding the Perris Valley Line (PVL) project; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the MOU on behalf of the Commission. 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 11:06 a.m. The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, September 14, 2011, in the Board Room, at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California. Respectfully submitted, 0..x‘-iNA-q4.._H0.X.,m — Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board • • • AGENDA ITEM 7A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Financial Statements BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the period ended June 30, 2011. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: During the past fiscal year, staff has closely monitored the revenues and expenditures of the Commission. The attached financial statements present the revenues and expenditures incurred during the fiscal year. Accrual adjustments for revenue and expenditures have been made for June 30, 2011 and are reflected in these financial statements. The Commission will continue to make year-end accrual adjustments depending upon materiality through October 31, 2011. The operating statement shows the sales tax revenues for the fourth quarter at 92 percent of the budget. This is a result of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 33. GASB 33 requires sales tax revenue to be accrued for the period in which it is collected at the point of sale. The State Board of Equalization collects the Measure A and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) sales taxes and remits these funds to the Commission after the reporting period for the businesses. This creates a two -month lag in the receipts of revenues by the Commission. Accordingly, these financial statements reflect the revenues related to collections through May 2011. On a cash basis, the Measure A and LTF sales tax revenues are 6.9 percent and 5.9 percent higher, respectively, than the same period last year. This continued increase is an encouraging sign regarding the economic recovery in the region. Staff will continue to monitor the trends in the sales tax receipts and report to the Commission any necessary adjustments to the FY 2010/11 budget for sales tax revenues. Agenda Item 7A 1 Federal, state, and local revenues are on a reimbursement basis. The Commission will receive these revenues as eligible project costs are incurred and invoiced to the respective agencies. Staff will continue to prepare year-end accrual adjustments through October 31, 2011. Approximately 81 percent of the reimbursements were related to Measure A Western County highway and rail capital projects. During the FY 2010/11 budget process, the Commission took a conservative approach in estimating the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) revenues of $4.3 million passed through from the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) as a result of the housing crisis and the significant impact this has had on the Inland Empire's local economy. Actual revenues passed through WRCOG are approximately 27 percent above the estimate. The budget balance of $5 million relates to TUMF zone reimbursements from WRCOG, of which only 32 percent had been billed as of June 30, 2011. Staff will bill WRCOG for TUMF zone reimbursements as eligible expenditures are accrued. Other revenues exceeded the estimate by 674 percent as a result of unbudgeted property management revenues generated from properties acquired in connection with the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR -91 CIP). The Commission took a conservative approach in estimating interest income for FY 2010/11, due to flat interest yields on invested balances. Interest income is at 253 percent of the budget as a result of this conservative approach. Other than capital project expenditures that are discussed separately, the other expenditures are in line overall with the expectations of the budget with the following exceptions: • Professional services are under budget due to ongoing contract negotiations with Burlington Northern Santa Fe regarding the 4"' main track, downscaled toll feasibility work on the Interstate 15 Corridor Improvement Project (I-15 CIP) due to market conditions, and unused budget authority for level 2 and level 3 toll feasibility work on the SR -91 CIP. • Support costs are under budget due to unused budget authority for station maintenance and repair and utilities. • Program operation expenditures are under budget and reflect estimated accruals through June 30, 2011. • Operating and capital disbursements expenditures are under budget and are based on claims submitted by transit operators. • Special studies are under budget due to unused budget authority for Caltrans project initiation documents (PIDs) related to planning, programming, and monitoring. Due to the state's budget, additional funds were budgeted in FY 2010/11 should the Commission be required to reimburse Caltrans for PIDs. Agenda Item 7A • • • 2 • • • • Local streets and roads expenditures are related to the timing of the Measure A sales tax revenues as previously explained. These financial statements reflect expenditures made to the local jurisdictions for collections through May 2011. • Regional arterial expenditures are administered by the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG). CVAG requests reimbursements from the Commission based on available funds and sufficient budget authority. • Capital outlay expenditures are under budget due to unexpended authority for financial software improvements. Staff expects these improvements to be completed by the second quarter of FY 2011/12. In September 2010, the Commission issued $20 million in commercial paper notes. In December 2010, the Commission issued $150 million in sales tax revenue bonds to provide funding for the 2009 Measure A projects and retire $103,284,000 of commercial paper .notes. Sales tax revenue bonds debt service interest expenditures are made in December and June, while related principal payments are made in June. The debt service expenditures as of the fourth quarter include principal payments made to retire all of the outstanding commercial paper notes in December 2010, with the proceeds from the 2010 sales tax revenue bonds. The cost of issuance expenditures relates to the 2010 sales tax revenue bonds issued in December 2010. Staff will continue to monitor the revenues and expenditures and will notify the Commission of any unusual events. Listed below are the significant capital projects and the status. Capital project expenditures are generally affected by lags in invoices submitted by contractors and consultants, as well as issues encountered during certain phases of the projects. The capital projects budgets tend to be based on optimistic and aggressive project schedules. Highway Engineering/Construction/Design-Build/Right of Way/Land State Route 60/Valley Way Interchange Project - The county of Riverside is the lead agency for this project. The construction contract started in March 2010 and is essentially complete with the contractor clearing punch list items. Remaining invoices of approximately $1 million are expected to be accrued for in FY 2010/11. 74/215 Interchange Project - Construction is progressing as planned; one right of way acquisition is currently in condemnation proceedings. SR -79 Realignment Project - The draft project report and environmental document is being reviewed by Caltrans to receive approval to release for public circulation. Agenda Item 7A Due to the size and complexity of the project, this phase has taken longer than anticipated. SR-91/Van Buren Boulevard Interchange Project - The city of Riverside is the lead agency for this project. Construction started in March 2010 and the project is progressing. The Measure A funded portion of construction is $5 million; only $3 million was submitted with the remaining $2 million to be billed in the first quarter of FY 2011/12. SR -91 HOV Lanes Project - Caltrans has completed design work. Expenditures remain within the budget authority. Utility relocation contractors continue to perform relocation of utilities; however, no invoices for expenditures incurred to date have been submitted for payment, but accruals will be recorded. Staff is performing right of way acquisition, and negotiations continue to progress and are on schedule; several acquisitions are pending settlements. Construction managed by Caltrans is currently forecasted to start in the fourth quarter FY 2011/12, depending on state Proposition 1B bond sales. 71/91 Interchange Project - The preliminary engineering and environmental phase was completed in late FY 2010/11. The availability of federal earmark funds allows the design phase of work to move forward. Procurement for the design consultant is scheduled for award by the end of the second quarter FY 2011/12. SR -91 CIP (design -build) - A fourth limited notice to proceed (NTP) was issued in the third quarter FY 2010/11. A letter of intent for a Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan was submitted in March 2011. The Commission was not selected for the TIFIA loan and is currently preparing for a submittal of Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) III/TIFIA grant application and letter of interest scheduled for October 31, 2011. Early right of way acquisition work was approved by Caltrans in April 2011. Following a public comment period in June 2011, the anticipated forecast date for early acquisition is scheduled for the first quarter FY 2011/12. 1-15 CIP - Work on the environmental phase continues. The toll feasibility model was completed at the end of the second quarter FY 2010/11. Staff analyzed the results of the toll feasibility model and developed a scoping and implementation plan that was presented to an ad hoc committee in the fourth quarter of FY 2010/11. Comments were received and action items were developed to perform further analysis and to make recommendations for submittal to the Commission in the first or second quarter of FY 2011/12. Agenda Item 7A • • 4 • • • 60/215 East Junction Interchange Project - Right of way certification was approved in the first quarter of FY 2010/11. The project was advertised for construction and the bids were opened in the third quarter FY 2010/11. Construction is currently forecasted to start in the first quarter FY 2011/12. 1-215 Bi-County HOV Lanes Project - Environmental work has been completed and costs have been accrued in FY 2010/11. 1-215 South Widening Project from Murrieta Hot Springs Road to Scott Road - Construction began in July 2011 and is on schedule. 1-215 Central Widening Project from Scott Road to Nuevo Road - A full NTP with final design was issued, and the draft environmental document was approved in the second quarter FY 2010/11. Invoices have been submitted by the contractor starting in the third quarter of FY 2010/11 and the project is on schedule. Mid County Parkway Project - Right of way acquisitions have been curtailed as property development has subsided, and the critical need to acquire property for protection has been delayed due to the substantial rescoping of the project. Rail Engineering/Construction/Right of Way/Land Perris Valley Line Project - Advance preliminary engineering is approximately 90 percent complete and right of way acquisition has started. Environmental clearances are scheduled to be obtained in the first quarter of FY 2011/12, which would release activity for final right of way procurement and start of the final design phase. Riverside Downtown Station Layover Facility Project - The consultant selection process was completed and contract award for engineering was approved by the Commission in September 2010, and a NTP was issued in the second quarter FY 2010/11. Delay in right of way access to perform geotechnical and environmental sampling caused preliminary engineering to start later than scheduled. Subsequently, the Commerce Street portion of the design and construction work has been suspended, as well as the construction of the northern facility due to funding issues. La Sierra Station Parking Expansion Project - Final design activities were in progress and completion was expected in the second quarter FY 2010/11, followed by submitting the plan check to the city of Riverside. However, the project has been placed on hold due to availability of funding. Attachment: Quarterly Financial Statements - June 2011 Agenda Item 7A • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANPORTATION COMMISSION QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENT - 4TH QUARTER QUARTERLY BUDGET VS.ACTUAL BY FUND FOR TWELVE MONTHS ENDED 6/30/2011 Revenues Sales tax Federal reimbursements State reimbursements Local reimbursements Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Other revenues Interest Total revenues Expenditures Salaries and benefits Professional and support Professional services Support costs Total Professional and support costs Projects and operations Program operations - general Engineering Construction Design Build Right of way/land Operating and capital disbursements Special studies Local streets and roads Regional arterials Total projects and operations Debt service Principal Interest Cost of issuance Total debt service Capital outlay Total Expenditures Excess revenues over (under) expenditures Other financing sources/(uses) Operating transfer in Operating transfer out Debt proceeds Bond discount Total financing sources/(uses) Net change in fund balances Fund balance July 1, 2010 Fund balance June 30, 2011 FY 2010/11 4TH QUARTER BUDGET ACTUAL $ 190,054,519 $ 175,440,170 28,870,700 11,051, 337 25,210,100 11,932,608 830,700 1,129,594 9,300,000 7,058,812 178,000 1,200,030 1,830,000 4,631,033 256,274,019 212,443,584 6,195,000 5,858,739 21,968,951 11,427,717 4,481,829 3,593,182 26,450, 780 15,020,899 12,887,326 10, 543, 306 61,235,527 28,989,297 56,610,840 26,155,625 22,991,000 14,490,943 145,248,882 44,532,367 111,515,440 70,577,197 1,534,700 459,450 33,668,400 32,428,542 15,195,000 8,249,723 460,887,115 236,426,450 109,584,200 109,584,000 10,437,300 9,794,915 1,520,000 1,440,958 121,541,500 120,819,873 328,924 147,328 615,403,319 378,273,289 (359,129,300) (165,829,705) 251,478,721 167, 572,432 (251,478,721) (167,572,432) 170, 000,000 170,000,000 (967,500) (967,467) 169, 032, 500 169, 032, 533 (190,096,800) 3,202,828 500,458,200 551,567,928 $ 310,361,400 $ 554,770,756 REMAINING BALANCE $ (14,614,349) (17,819,363) (13,277,492) 298,894 (2,241,188) 1,022,030 2,801,033 (43,830,435) 336,261 10,541,234 888,647 11,429,881 2,344,020 32,246,230 30,455,215 8,500,057 100,716,515 40,938,243 1,075,250 1,239,858 6,945,277 224,460,665 200 642,385 79,042 721,627 181,596 237,130,030 269,455,302 (83,906,289) 83,906,289 33 (33) 269,455,269 51,109,728 PERCENT UTILIZATION 92% 38% 47% 136% 76% 674% 253% 83% 95% 52% 80% 57% 82% 47% 46% 63% 31% 63% 30% 96% 54% 51% 100% 94% 95% 99% 45% 61% 46% 67% 67% 100% 100% 100% -2% 110% $ 320,564,997 179% 6 • • • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT - 4TH QUARTER QUARTERLY BUDGET VS . ACTUAL FOR TWELVE MONTHS ENDED 6/30/2011 MEASURE A SALES TAX PALO L OCAL TRANSPORTATION FSP/ WESTERN COACHELLA STATE TRANSIT COMMERCIAL SALES T AX COMBINED GENERAL FUND SAFE COUNTY VERDE VALLEY TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE UNIFORM MITIGATION PAPER BONDS DEBT SERVICE TOTAL VALLEY FUND FEE(TUMF) Revenues Sales tax Fede ral reimbursements State reimbursements Local reimbursements Tran sportation Un iform Mitigation Fee Other revenues Interest To tal reven ues Expenditures Salaries and benefits Professional and support Professional services Support costs Total Professional a nd support costs Projects and operations Program operations -general Enginee ring Construction Design Build Right of way/land Operating and capital disbursements Special studies Lo cal streets and roads Region al arterials Total projects and operations Debt service Principal In tere st Cost of issuan ce Total debt service $ 16.700,235 $ - $ 78,917,418 $ 758,754 5 25,034,010 $ 53,029,753 $ - $ - $ 299,579 189,112 10,562,646 - - - - - 397,862 2,970 ,131 8,564,615 - - 313,914 391,286 424,394 - - - 1.605.596 - - 5.453,216 1 ,045,866 141 154,023 - - - - - - 61,848 39.448 1.520,758 - 41,074 406,443 247,554 523,866 1,451,521 41,929 18,819,304 3,590,118 102.749.450 758,754 25,075.084 53,436 .196 247,554 5,977.082 1,451,521 41 ,929 3,345,397 98,784 2,227,000 2,144,160 649,555 8,156,085 2,759,701 435,599 397,245 4,903,861 1,085,154 8,553.330 1,372 51 51 1,625,639 2,338,314 6,318,915 - 17,272 21,856,251 - 21,097,924 1,631,146 14,490,943 28,419 25,688,540 - 10, 167,485 - 4,345.839 - 3,773,000 402,763 - 56,687 - - 146,688 22.609.598 798,122 8,874,134 - - - 8,249,723 12,370,994 2,338.314 116.464.697 798,122 22.545,275 50,667,830 1,623,043 186,186 452,128 586 452,714 243,166 6,810,758 1,020,871 17,486,763 25,789 25,789 74,172 2,405.684 248.116 1,278,317 50,328 296,592 296.592 $ 175,440,170 11,051,337 11,932,608 1,129,594 7,058.812 1,200,030 4,631,033 212.443 .584 5,858,739 11,427 .717 3,593,182 15 ,020 ,899 10 ,543,306 28 ,989,297 26.155,625 14.490,943 44,532,167 70,577,197 459,450 32.428,542 8,249,723 50,667,830 1 ,623 .043 25,561,558 3,758,171 298.444 103,284,000 236,426,450 6 ,300,000 109,584,000 151,132 4,791,737 4,852 ,046 9,794,815 1,440,958 - 1440,958 Capital outlay 69,074 78,254 103,435.132 6 .232,695 11,152,046 120,819,873 147,328 Total Expenditures 20,689,326 3.522,252 127,3'13,281 798, 122 22.546. 698 Excess revenue s o ver (under) expenditures (1,870,022) 67.866 (24. 573. 831) (39,368) 2.528,386 Other financing so urc es/(uses) Operating transfer in 52,238 906. 600 32.224,176 - 1,678,228 Opera tin g transfer out (906,600) (27, 653,534) - - Debt proceeds - - - Bond discount - - - Total finan cing sources/(uses) 52,238 4,570,642 - 1,678,228 Net change in fund balances Fund balance July 1, 2010 Fund bala nce June 30, 2011 (1,817,784) 67,866 (20,003.189) (39,368) 4,206,614 13,261,438 6, 679,571 260,141,532 39,926 4,029,897 $ 11, 443. 654 $ 6,747.437 $ 240. 138.343 $ 558 $ 8,236,311 $ 50,667,830 1,623,043 26,200,458 107,219,094 6,531,139 11,152,046 378,273,289 2.768,366 (1,375,489) (20,223.376) (105,767,573) (6,489,210) (10 ,855 ,454) (165,829,705) 2,768, 366 74,875,969 77,644,335 $ (1,375,489) 33,611,891 32,236,402 $ 8,699,301 103,284,000 708 20,727,181 167,572,432 (20,245,296) (117,088.774) (1,678,228) (167.572,432) 20,000,000 150,000,000 170,000,000 (987,467) - (967,467) 8,699,301 103,038,704 31 ,944,467 19,048,953 169,032,533 (11,524,075) 83,618,281 72 ,094 ,206 6 (2,728.869) 25,455,257 8,193,499 3 ,202 .828 29,571 ,329 45,738,294 551.567,928 26 ,842,460 $ 25455 .257 $ 53,931,793 5 554,770,756 7 • AGENDA ITEM 7B • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Anne Hallberg, Accounting Supervisor Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Investment Report BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended June 30, 2011. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Attached are the quarterly investment and cash flow reports as required by state law and Commission policy. The county of Riverside's Investment Report for the month ended June 30, 2011, is also attached for review. Attachments: 1) Quarterly Investment Report for the Quarter Ended June 30, 2011 2) County of Riverside Investment Report for the Month Ended June 30, 2011 3) County of Riverside Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund for the Period Ended June 30, 2011 Agenda Item 7B 8 • • • Statement of Compliance All of the above investments and any investment decisions made for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 were in full compliance with the Commission's investment policy as adopted on May 1 1, 2011. The Commission has adequate cash flows for six months of operations. Signed by: Chief Financial Officer • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Investment Portfoli o Report Pe riod Ended: June 30, 2011 RATING COUPON PAR PURCHASE MATURITY YIELD TO PURCHASE MARKET UNREALIZED GAIN FAIR VALUE MOODYS/FITCH S&P RATE VALUE DATE DATE MATURITY COST VALUE (LOSS) OPERATING FUNDS City National Bank Deposits 891,727 A3/BBB+ N/A N/A County Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund 404,192,778 Aaa/MR1/AAAN1 N/A 0.62% Local Agency Investment Fund (LA IF) 3,591,894 Not Rated N/A N/A Agency/Treasury Securities: N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ A N/A Su bto tal Operating Funds 408,676,399 FUNDS HELD IN TRUST County Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund: Local Transportation Fund Subtotal Fun ds Held in Trust COM MISSION BOND PROJECT FUNDS/DEBT RESERVE US Ba nk Money Market Investment Agreements County of Riverside Pool investment First American Government Obliga tion Fund Su bto tal Bond Project Funds/Debt Reserve TOTAL All Cash and Investmen ts 73,247,843 Aaa-MR1/AAAN1 N/A 73,247,843 37,499,929 Aaa/AAAm N/A 14,348.520 Aaa/MR1/AAAN1 N/A 2,646,683 Aaa/AAAm N/A 54,495,132 536,419,374 Investment Tran sa ctions for the Quarter Ended June 30, 2011 Purchases: None Maturities: Non e Par Value at Maturity Maturity Date Coupon Rate 0.62% 0.62 % N/ A SUMMARIZED INVESTMENT TYPE Banks 891.727 County Pool 477,440,621 County Pool Investment 14,348,520 LAIF 3,591,894 Mutual Funds: CNI Charter US Bank Money Market 37,499,929 First American G overnment Obligation Fund 2,646,683 Sub - Total Mutual Funds 40,146,611 Federal Agency securities Certificates of Deposit U.S. Treasury securities Corporate Note/Commercial Paper Investment Agreements TOTAL S 536,419,374 10 Capital Markets Don Kent Treasurer -Tax Collector Jon Christensen Asst. Treasurer -Tax Collector Giovane Pizano Investment Manager Angela Tressler Asst. Investment Manager Investment Objectives Safety of Principal Liquidity Maximum Rate of Return unty of River u ze All Data as of June 30, 2011 "Don't Hold Your Breath" Another fiscal year has come and gone. FY 11 was wrought with economic trials and tribulations at the local government level with further budget reductions and downsizing, as well as pension reform. FY 12 is off to a tougher start than originally projected due to the still struggling real estate market. Our County Assessor reports that the assessed valuation will be reduced by another 1.45% due to decreasing commercial and industrial property values marking the third straight year of declines. Add into this volatile mix funding cuts at the state level and dwindling interest earnings from lower rates in the capital markets and you have a recipe for further reduction in public services to the tax payers, many at a time when they are needed the most. On the economic news front, Consumer Confidence continued its decline to a 7 month low in June with consumers not feeling upbeat about the latest employment numbers. However, there is a bright spot of sorts, Fuel costs have dropped over 10% mainly due to lowered demand and news of a concerted effort of 28 countries releasing 60 million barrels of oil out of strategic reserves; the initial impact did lower prices to around $90 a barrel, but has since climbed back a Portfolio Statistics 5,606,714,432. 23 6, 378,137,129. 84 5,421,230,535.75 5,599,489,279.54 6,375,299,751. 65 5,429,085,085. 58 bit toward the mid $90 level. Standard & Poor's put the federal government on notice that it's risking its coveted AAA credit rating if it continues the gridlock in the debate about its budget deficits and record $14 trillion debt. Moody's may downgrade the U.S. if it does not increase the debt ceiling by Au- gust 2nd or the government may face a shutdown and possible default. Let's hope our federal leaders can agree on a plan and carry it out as a U.S. debt default would have catastrophic consequences globally . Not surprisingly, the FOMC voted to keep rates unchanged at its June 22nd meeting with a risk -to -growth bias. We will now have to wait and see if this fiscal "New Year" shows any signs of improvement; after all, the State of California finally passed its budget on time but we won't be holding our breath though for the Feds! 7,225,152.69 2, 837, 378.19 (7,854,549.83) Don Kent Treasurer -Tax C ollector *Market values do not include accrued interest. Paper Gain or Book Yrs to Modified L oss ( %) Yield (%) Maturity Duration 5,314,436,486. 43 (4,594,075.87) (0.09) asurer's Po oled Investmen t Fund is comprised of the County, Schoo ls, Special Districts , and other Discretionary Depositors . 1.22 1.11 1.24 1.28 1.23 11 MARKET Economic Indicators* p k ", 7/8/2011 Nonfarm Payrolls - Nonfarm payroll employment counts the number of paid employees 105,000 18,000 M/M change working part-time or full-time in the nation's business and government establishments. 7/8/2011 Unemployment Rate The unemployment rate measures the number of unemployed as a 9.0% 9.2 % percentage of the labor force . 6/24/2011 Durable Goods Orders - Durable goods orders reflect the new orders placed with domestic 1.5% 1.9 % M/M change manufacturers for immediate and future deli very of factoryhard goods. Durable goods orders are a leading indicator of industrial production and capital spending. 6/24/2011 Real Gross Domestic Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is the broadest measure of aggregate 2.0% 1 .9 % Product - C1C1 change economic activity and encompasses every sector of the economy . GDP is the country's most comprehensive economic scorecard. 6/28/2011 Consumer Confidence The Conference Board compiles a survey of consumer attitudes on 58.5 62 .0 present economic conditions and expectations of future conditi ons. Consumer spending drives two-thirds of the economy and if the consumer is not confident, the consumer will not be willing to pull out the big bucks. Consumer spending in turn, affects economicgrowth . 7/5/2011 Factory Orders - M/M Factory orders represent the dollar level of new orders for both durable 1.0% 0.8 % change and nondurable goods. All in all, this report tells in vestors what to expect from the manufacturing sector, a major component of the economy and therefore a major influence on their investments. 6/15/2011 Consumer Price Index - The Consumer Price Index is a measure of the average price level of a 0.0% 0.2 % M/M change fixed basket of goods and services purchased by consumers. Monthly changes in the CPI represent the rate of inflation. As the rate of inflation changes and as expectations on inflation change, the markets adjust interest rates. Stock Indices* �> .££ELP> for explanation. Co rp C3. ..5 MISTC) F2I�AL YIELD GIJR 1. N.F 2 f1A1:: R 1iNG L-91 r6r ii6 £ a MTV RA NGE ® ®E iz pow Jones Indus. Avg (DJIA) 12,414.30 (155.50) &P 500 Index 1,320.64 (24.56) ASDAQComposite Index 2,773.52 (61.78) 1---- I: . .. '--1 ... ....... .... . .. . . ... - ----= . .... .. ... .... .. . . ..... .. . .. Commodities* Nymex Crude Gold (USD/OZ) $ 1,500. 35 $ (35. 45) 95.42 $ (7. 28) *Source: Bloomberg • Current Fed Funds Target Rate: 0.00 - 0 .25%* Decrease to 0.00% No Change Increase to 0.50% U.S. Treasuries* Yield 3 -Month 0.01 6 -Month 0.10 (0.01) (0.04) 12 -Month 0.18 0.03 2 -Year 3 -Year 5 -Year 7 -Year 10 -Year 30 -Year 0 .46 0 .80 1 .76 2.50 3.16 4.37 (0 .01) 0.02 0 .06 0 .11 0.10 0 .15 • AAA Rated Prime I nstitutional Money -Market Funds Fidelity Prime Institutional MMF Federated Prime Obligations Fund Wells Fargo Advantage Heritage Morgan Stanley Institutional Prime Liquidity Fund BlackRock Prime Cash Fund FIPXX 0.13% POIXX 0.09% WFJXX 0.10% MPFXX 0.09% BPIXX 0 .14% The Treasurer's Institutional Money Market Index (TIMMI) is compiled and reported by the Riverside County Treasurer's Capital Markets division. It is a composite index de- rived from five AAA rated prime institutional money market funds . Similar to the Treasurer's Office, prime money market funds invest in a diversified portfolio of U.S . dollar deno minated money market instruments including U. S. Treasuries, go vernment agencies, commercial paper, certificates of deposits, repurchase agreements, etc. TIMMI is currently comprised of the five multi billion dollar funds listed above. CAS Month Monthly Receipts Monthly Required Matured Disbursements Difference Investments Balance Maturing >1 Year Actual Investme nts Availabl e to Invest 07/2011 07/2011 08/2011 09/2011 . ._ 10/2011 11/2011 12/2011 01/2012;, 02/2012 03/2012 04/2012 05/2012 06/2012 TOTALS 10,920.37 10,981.98 (61. 61) 249.03 5.04% 1,008,18 547.80 738.85 730.00 840.22 1,811.69 842,93 425.00 941.20 1,404.16 746,6 884.08 995.64 725.41 863.69 820.00 689.85 843. 57 1,339.48 921.25 792.95 733.64 1,035.89 1,220,61 12.54 (177.61) (124. 84) (90. 00) 150.37 968.12 (496.55) (496.25) 148.25 670.52 (289.63) (336.53) 34.19 124.84 90.00 130.88 143.42 (0.00) 0.00 0.00 150.37 1,118.49 621.94 125.69 273. 94 944.46 654.83 318.30 381.14 283.00 299 ,94' 260.00 15.00 60.00 500.00 189.96 66.00 50. 00 468.66 226.50 2,800.20 4,688 .00 56.72% 94.96% Page 3 13 The Pooled Investment Fund cash flow requirements are based upon a 12 month histori- cal cash flow model . Based upon projected cash receipts and maturing investments, there are sufficient funds to meet future cash flow disburse- ments over the next 12 months. COUNTY OF RIVER DE Op June 2011 ASS Assets (090`.9 MMKT CALTRUST FND DDA/PASSBK LOCAL AGCY OBLIG US TREAS BILLS US TREAS BONDS FHLM C DISC NOTES FHLMC BONDS FNMA DISC NOTES FNM A BONDS FHLB DISC NOTES FHLB BONDS FFCB DISC NOTES FFCB BONDS FM AC DISC NOTES FARMER MAC MUNI BONDS COMM PAPER NCDS Totals (000's): Scheduled pear _Scheduled, 50,000 .00 50,000 .00 50,000.00 54,000.00 54,000.00 54,000.00 70,000 .00 70,000 .00 70,000 .00 585.00 585 .00 585.00 25,000.00 24,952 .79 24,987 .50 620,000 .00 622,849 .22 622,707.50 350,000.00 349,319.67 349,921.88 436,951.00 437,194.88 438,201 .49 410,000.00 408,974.25 409,606 .25 820,300.00 821,127.01 823,175 .25 100,000.00 99,794.50 99,995.69 1,152,010.00 1,153,671.31 1,154,310.36 82,000.00 81,826.13 81,965.63 298,705.00 299,384.56 299,737.35 45,000.00 44,904.19 44,923 .44 27,102.00 27,469.82 27,131 .72 91,165.00 91,205.56 91,205 .56 150,000. 00 149,767.10 149,877.63 150, 000. 0 0 150,000.00 150, 000.00 4,932,818.00 4,937,025.99 4,942,332.24 ar et ch. , e Yield , w j,.. I+�lat' Yr 100.00% 0.01% .003 .003 100.00% 0.52% .003 .003 100.00% 100.00% 100.14% 99.98°/o 100.17 % 100.23% 100.15% 100 .25% 100 .20% 100 .06% 100 .17% 100.12% 100.04% 98 .77°/o 100.00% 100.07% 100.00% 100 .11% 0.04% 1.14% 0.22% 0.36% 0.24% 1.01% 0.24% 1.07% 0 .27°/o 0.77% 0.26°/o 0.76% 0.21% 1.00% 0.99% 0.27% 0.25% 0.63% .003 8 .967 .614 .800 .228 1.185 .441 1.273 .215 .969 .424 1.276 .904 1.554 .921 .333 .272 .841 .003 8.967 .614 .800 .228 2.319 .441 2.315 .215 1.728 .424 1 .515 .904 1.554 .921 .333 .272 1:307: 1, 50 0, 000. 00 1,000 ,000. 00 500,000.00 0.00 z f CALTRUST FND ODA/PASSBK LOCAL US TREAS BILLS US TREAS BONDS FHLMC DISC NOTES FHLMC BONDS FNMA DISC NOTES FNMA BONDS Aik, Schedule d B ook Ma rket FHLB DISC NOTES FHLB BONDS FFCB DISC NOTES FFCB BONDS FMAC DISC NOTES FAR MER MAC MUNI BONDS COM M PAPER ru 07 0 U SCHEDULED P AR % ® MMKT - 1% C ALTRUST FND - 1% DDA PASSBK - 1% o LOCAL AGCY OBLIG - 0 0/0 ® US TREAS BILLS - 1% ® US TREAS BONDS - 13% = FHLMC DISC N OTES - 7% m FHLMC BONDS - 9% = FNMA DISC N OTES - 8% im FNMA BONDS - 17% FHLB DISC NOTES - 2% ® FHLB B ONDS - 23% ® FFCB DISC NOTES - 2% FFCB B ONDS - 6% cx FMAC DISC NOTES - 1% = FA RMER M AC - 1% MUNI BO NDS - 2% Imo CO MM PAPER - 3% mow NCDS-3% • • COUNTY OF RI• MATLJR ITY Assets(000 s) MMKT CALTRUST FND DDA/PASSBK LOCAL AGCY OBLIG US TREAS BILLS US TREAS BONDS FHLMC DISC NOTES FHLM C BONDS FNMA DISC NOTES FNMA BONDS FHLB DISC NOTES FHLB BONDS FFCB DISC NOTES FFCB BONDS FMAC DISC NOTES FARMER MAC M UNI BONDS COMM PAPER NCDS Totals (000's): • eduled Par Duration (Yr) Effective Duration UI/ALYr) „H 50,000.00 .003 003 .003 54,000.00 70,000.00 585.00 25,000.00 620,000.00 350,000.00 436,951.00 410,000.00 820,300.00 100,000.00 1,152,010.00 82,000.00 298,705.00 45,000.00 27,102.00 91,165.00 150,000.00 150,000.00 4,932,818.00 ,003 .003 .003 .003 .003 .003 4.750 4.750 8.967 .613 .613 .614 .794 .794 .800 228 .228 .228 2.276 .693 1.185 .441 .441 .441 2.275 .770 1.273 .215 .215 .215 1.695 .723 .969 .424 .424 .424 1 .500 1.007 1.276 .903 .903 .904 1.543 1.543 1.554 .909 .909 .921 .333 .333 .333 .272 ,272 .272 1.286 639 .841 t,(Yr)„ .00 .00 .00 8.97 .61 .80 .23 2.32 .44 2.32 .22 1.73 .42 1.52 .90 1.55 .92 .33 .27 1 .31 10.000 5.000 m .000 fi CA DDA/PASSBK Du ra tion US T vi w 1.4 0 0 Z J FNMA DISC NOTE FNMA BOND Effective D ura tio n Avg Life FHLB 0 0 0 s LL FFCB M aturity FMAC 0 1 0 ro z CO MM PAPE 0 u z ill June 20 Page 5 15 COUNTYOF RIVERSIDE 02011; AVERAGE:!_I,FE /. 012 Scheduled Par (000's) ". M MKT CALTRUST FND DDA/PASSBK LOCAL AGCY OBLIG US TREAS BILLS US TREAS BONDS FHLMC DISC NOTES FHLMC BONDS FNMA DISC NOTES FNM A BONDS FHLB DISC NOTES FHLB BONDS FFCB DISC NOTES FFCB BONDS FM AC DISC NOTES FARM ER M AC MUNI BONDS COM M PAPER NCDS 50,000.00 54,000.00 70,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100,000.00 15,000.00 25,000.00 15,000.00 0.00 189,190.00 0.00 5,000.00 0.00 4,602,00 8,645.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 150,000.00 65,030.00 150,000.00 90,000.00 100,000.00 138,300.00 25,000.00 28,000.00 0.00 0.00 24,940.00 35,000.00 50,000.00 0 .001 0.00 0.00 0.00 25,000.00 455,000.00 100,000.00 126,800.00 230,000.00 345,800.00 0.00 595,820.00 57,000.00 96,500.00 45,000.00 0.00 10,810.00 115,000.00 100,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 165,000.00 0.00 139,121.00 0.00 125,000.00 0.00 50,000.00 0 .00 119,205.00 0.00 22,500.00 39,640.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 71,000.00 0.00 180,000.00 0.00 93,700 .00 0.00 40,000.00 0 .00 0 .00 7,130.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 585.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 20,000.00 5,000.00 64,500.00 0.00 85,000.00 0.00 10,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 lj (DA's 50,000.00 54,000.00 70,000.00 585.00 25,000.00 620,000.00 350,000.00 436,951.00 410,000.00 820,300.00 100,000.00 1,152, 010.00 82,000.00 298,705.00 45,000.00 27,102.00 91,165.00 150,000.00 150,000.00 To tals (000's)t % Cumulative °Po ,437.00' 41. 856,270 00 2,302,730.00 ,466:00 , 4 l 11°J0. "•,"' ; 17% 47% - 13% o 28% 75% $$°Jo '185,)8$ 00 4,932,818 00 1000 0. 50 0. 45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25 0.20 0. 15 0.10 0. 05 0.00 0-1 Mos > 1-3 Mos > 3-12 Mos > 1.2 Yr > 2-3 Yr > 3 Yr • 06 • COUNTY CF. RIVilk -./'I:, rk«w CREDI Moody's (000's) Aaa Aa1 Aa2 NR Totals (000's): S&P (000's) AAA AA+ AA AA - NR Totals (000's): Book Market MKT/B ook Yield 4,473,944.32 4,479,458 .89 4,479,458.89 100.12% 0.65% 192,375.56 192,375 .56 192,375.56 100 .00% 0 .54% 197,747.10 197,857 .63 197,857.63 100 .06% 0.32% 72,959.01 72,640.16 72,640.16 99 .56% 0.51% 4,937,025.99 4,942,332.24 4,942,332.24 100 .11% 0.630/0 Wog 4,469,816.00 190,895.00 49,420.00 150,000.00 72,687.00 4,932,818.00 Book 4,473,944.32 190,702. 39 49,420. 27 150,000.00 Markj 4,479,458.89 190,812.91 49,420.27 150,000.00 72,959. 01 72,640.16 99 .56% T/Book 100.12% 100 .06% 100.00% 100 .00% 4,937,025.99 4,942,332,24. ; 100.11%" ., 500 K 0/0 ® A AA - 91%o C: AA - - Jnv ME AA+ -4% I= NR -1% ® AA - 1? d'. 0.65% 0 .55% 0 .49% 0 .25% 0.51% O43% B OOK 0/0 ®Aaa-41 % ® An? -4% NM Aal-4% CMNR-1% Page 7 17 Treas urer's P ooled Investment Fund Month End Po nt'io Holdin MMKT GOIXX FEDERATED GOV 07/01/2011 .010 ltalmitittision CALTRUST FND CLTR CALTRUST SHT TERM FUND .010 07/01/2011 010 .518 .518 50,000,000.00 50,000,000.00 100.000000 50, 000, 000.00 0.00 .003 .003 0,0,000.00 50,000,000.00 100,0000 , .: 50,000,000 .00 0.00 003 003 00 54,000,000.00 DDA/PASSBK CASH UBOC MANAGED RATE LOCAL AGCY O BLIG LAO US DIST COURTHOUS 54,000,000.00 100.000000 54,000,000.00 54,000,000,00, 100.000000 0.00 .003 .003 07/01/2011 .041 .041 70,000,000 .00 70,000,000.00 100.000000 06/15/2020 1.137 54,000,000,00 0.00 .003 .003 70,000,000 .00 0.00 .003 .003 .041 .70,000,000,00.' ,, . 70,000/000.00 100 .000000 70,000,000.00 0,00 003 .003 1.137 US TREAS BILLS 9127953C3 U.S, TREASURY BILL :I11111111116 02/09/2012 .220 .220 585,000.00 585,000.00 100.000000 585,000.00 585,000.00 585 000.0.0, Q0:000000 585,000.00 25,000,000.00 24,952,791.67 99 .950000 US TREAS BONDS 912828M35 U.$. TREASURY BOND 912828MQ0 U. S. TREASURY BOND 912828M36 U.S. TREASURY BOND 912828M36 U.S. TREASURY BOND 912828NE6 U. S. TREASURY BOND 912828NE6 U. S. TREASURY BOND 912828NE6 U.S. TREASURY BOND 912828NS5 U.S. TREASURY BOND 912828NQ9 U,S, TREASURY BOND 912828NQ9 U.S. TREASURY BOND 912828M36 U.S. TREASURY BOND 912828M36 U.S. TREASURY BOND 912828NE6 U.S. TREASURY BOND 9128281436 U.S. TREASURY BOND 9128281436 U.S. TREASURY BOND 912828M35 U.S. TREASURY BOND 9128281436 U. S. TREASURY BOND 912828NE6 U. S. TREASURY BOND 912828M36 U. S. TREASURY BOND 912828NE6 U.S, TREASURY BOND 912828MQ0 U.S. TREASURY BOND 912828NE6 U.S. TREASURY BOND 912828NS5 U. S. TREASURY BOND 91282814Q0 U.S. TREASURY BOND 912828NQ9 U.S, TREASURY BOND 912828MQ0 U.S. TREASURY BOND 912828MU1 U.S. TREASURY BOND 912828ML1 U.S. TREASURY BOND 912828M36 U,S. TREASURY BOND 912828N55 U.S. TREASURY BOND 912828NE6 U.S. TREASURY BOND 9128281436 U.S. TREASURY BOND 912828M36 U.S. TREASURY BOND 91282814Q0 U.S. TREASURY BOND 91282814Q0 U. S. TREASURY BOND 9128281455 U. S. TREASURY BOND 91282814E6 U. S. TREASURY BOND 9128281455 U.S. TREASURY BOND 912828NQ'jr U.S. TREASURY BOND 0,00 4.723 8.967 0 .00 4 .723 8.967 24,987,500.00 34,708 .33 .612 .614 15,000,000:00 24,952,791.67 99,950000 24,987,500.00 34,708.33- .612 .614 , 01/31/2012 .875 .910 15,000,000.00 14,990,625.00 100 .440000 15,066,000.00 75,375.00 .579 .589 02/29/2012 .875 .410 10,000,000.00 10,069,140.63 100.480000 10,048,000.00 -21,140.63 .666 .668 01/31/2012 .875 .401 10,000,000 .00 10,066,601.56 100.440000 10,044,000.00 -22,601.56 .580 .589 01/31/2012 .875 .412 10,000,000 .00 10,063,671 .88 100.440000 10,044,000.00 -19,671.88 .580 .589 05/31/2012 .750 .399 10,000,000,00 10,058,593 .75 100.480000 10,048,000.00 -10,593.75 .913 .921 05/31/2012 .750 .383 10,000,000.00 10,060,937 .50 100.480000 10,048,000.00 -12,937.50 .913 .921 05/31/2012 .750 .470 10,000,000.00 10,042,968,75 100.480000 10,048,000.00 5,031.25 .913 .921 06/30/2012 .625 .487 10,000,000.00 10,022,265.63 100.390000 10,039,000.00 16,734.37 .996 1 .003 07/31/2012 .625 .512 10,000,000.00 10,019,140.63 100.410000 10,041,000 .00 21,859.37 1 .076 1.088 07/31/2012 .625 .455 15,000,000.00 15,043,359.38 100.410000 15,061,500 .00 18,140.62 1.076 1.088 01/31/2012 .875 .332 15,000,000.00 15,096,679.69 100.440000 15,066,000.00 -30,679.69 .580 .589 01/31/2012 .875 .340 20,000,000.00 20,125,000.00 100.440000 20,088,000.00 -37,000.00 .580 .589 05/31/2012 . 750 .418 20,000,000 .00 20,099,218.75 100.480000 20,096,000.00 -3,218 .75 .913 .921 01/31/2012 .875 . 366 15,000,000.00 15,088,476.57 100.440000 15,066,000.00 -22,476 .57 .580 .589 01/31/2012 .875 . 304 10,000,000.00 10,056,640.63 100,440000 10,044,000.00 -12,640 .63 .580 .589 01/31/2012 .875 .321 10,000,000.00 10,054,687.50 100.440000 10,044,000.00 -10,687 .50 .580 .589 01/31/2012 .875 .339 20,000,000 .00 20,103,906.25 100.440000 20,088,000.00 -15,906.25 .580 .589 05/31/2012 .750 .485 20,000,000.00 20,068,750.00 100.480000 20,096,000.00 27,250.00 .913 .921 01/31/2012 .875 .335 10,000,000.00 10,052,343 .75 100.440000 10,044,000.00 -8,343.75 .580 .589 05/31/2012 .750 .316 15,000,000.00 15,078,515.63 100.480000 15,072,000.00 -6,515.63 .913 .921 02/29/2012 .875 .259 15,000,000.00 15,086,718.75 100.480000 15,072,000,00 -14,718.75 .666 .668 05/31/2012 .750 .349 20,000,000.00 20,095,312.50 100.480000 20,096,000.00 687.50 .913 .921 06/30/2012 .625 .385 15,000,000.00 15,045,703.13 100.390000 15,058,500 .00 12,796.87 .997 1.003 02/29/2012 .875 .257 15,000,000.00 15,086,718.75 100.480000 15,072,000.00 -14,718.75 .666 .668 07/31/2012 . 625 .400 15,000,000.00 15,045,703.13 100.410000 15,061,500.00 15,796 .87 1.077 1.088 02/29/2012 . 875 .255 20,000,000.00 20,115,625.00 100.480000 20,096,000.00 -19,625 .00 .666 .668 03/31/2012 1.000 .282 15,000,000.00 15,109,570.31 100 .610000 15,091,500,00 -18,070.31 .746 .753 12/31/2011 1. 000 . 250 15,000,000,00 15,084,960.94 100.430000 15,064,500.00 -20,460.94 .503 .504 01/31/2012 .875 . 262 20,000,000. 00 20,103,125.00 100.440000 20,088,000.00 -15,125.00 .580 .589 06/30/2012 .625 .413 15,000,000. 00 15,039,843. 75 100,390000 15,058,500.00 18,656.25 .996 1.003 05/31/2012 .750 .379 15,000,000.00 15,065,039.06 100.480000 15,072,000.00 6,960.94 .913 .921 01/31/2012 . 875 .260 15,000,000.00 15,077,343.75 100.440000 15,066,000.00 -11,343.75 .580 .589 01/31/2012 .875 .262 20,000,000.00 20,102,343. 75 100.440000 20,088,000.00 -14,343,75 .580 .589 02/29/2012 .875 .281 20,000,000.00 20,108,593.75 100.480000 20,096,000.00 -12,593.75 .666 .668 02/29/2012 .875 .287 25,000,000.00 25,131,835.94 100,480000 25,120,000 .00 -11,835 .94 .666 .668 06/30/2012 .625 .324 25,000,000.00 25,089,843.75 100.390000 25,097,500.00 7,656.25 .997 1.003 05/31/2012 .750 .292 10,000,000.00 10,050,000.00 100.480000 10,048,000.00 -2,000.00 .913 .921 06/30/2012 .625 .294 20,000,000.00 20,076,562.50 100. 390000 20,078,000 .00 1,437.50 .997 1 .003 07/31/2012 .625 .304 15,000,000, 15,059,765.63 100.410000 15,061,500.00 1,734.37 1.077 - 1.088 ,oled Investment Fund Month End Portflio Holdin 912828PH7 U.S. TREASURY BOND 08/31/2012 .375 342 15,000,000.00 15,006,445 .31 100.130000 15,019,500 .00 13,054 .69 1.162 1.173 912828NX4 U.S. TREASURY BOND 09/30/2012 .375 .327 10,000,000.00 10,006,640 .63 100.110000 10,011,000.00 4,359.37 1.245 1.255 xy'' . Af 5 T $c .355• 620,000,000 .00 622,849,21885 100,436694 622,707,500,00 •141,71881 , 792- .800 FHLMC DISC NOTES 313396KF9 FHLMC DISC NOTE 08/10/2011 .290 .291 50,000,000 .00 49,867,486.11 100.000000 50,000,000.00 132,513.89 .112 .112 313396KE2 FHLMC DISC NOTE 08/09/2011 .290 .291 50,000,000.00 49,870,305.56 100.000000 50,000,000.00 129,694.44 .109 .110 3133963B0 FHLMC DISC NOTE 07/13/2011 .240 .240 50,000,000 .00 49,904,000.00 100.000000 50,000,000 .00 96,000.00 .036 .036 3133963Y0 FHLMC DISC NOTE 08/03/2011 .250 .251 50,000,000 .00 49,892,708.33 100.000000 50,000,000 .00 107,291.67 .093 .093 3133963H7 FHLMC DISC NOTE 07/19/2011 .240 .240 50,000,000 .00 49,923,666.67 100 .000000 50,000,000 .00 76,333.33 .052 .052 313396NE9 FHLMC DISC NOTE 10/20/2011 .140 .140 50,000,000.00 49,961,500.00 100.000000 50,000,000.00 38,500.00 .306 .307 313396WZ2 FHLMC DISC NOTE 05/18/2012 .200 .200 50,000,000 .00 49,900,000 .00 99.843750 49,921,875.00 21,875 .00 .883 .885 FHLMC BONDS 3137EACG2 FHLMC 3134G1KL7 FHLMC 3YrNc1Yr 3134010Q1 FHLMC 3134G1GQ1 FHLMC 3134G1GQ1 FHLMC 3134010Q1 FHLMC 3134G1PP3 FHLMC 3.25YrNc1Y 3133F4XP1 FHLMC 5YrNc1Yr 3137EACL1 FHLMC 3134015G0 FHLMC 3.5YrNc6Mo 3134015Y1 FHLMC 5YrNc6Mo 3134G1WT7 FHLMC 3134G1WE0 FHLMC 5YrNc6Mo 3134G1W H3 FHLMC 3.5YrNc6Mo 313401WE0 FHLMC 5YrNc6Mo 3134G1XG4 FHLMC 2YrNc6Mo 3134G1XH2 FHLMC 2YrNc6Mo 3134G1XH2 FHLMC 2YrNc6Mo 3134G1XH2 FHLMC 2YrNc6Mo 3134G1XH2 FHLMC 2YrNc6Mo 3134G1XH2 FHLMC 2YrNc6Mo 3134G1XH2 FHLMC 2YrNc6Mo 3134G1WA8 FHLMC 2YrNc3Mo 3134G1WA8 FHLMC 3YrNc3Mo 3137EACK3 FHLMC 2.2Yr • 313401ZC1 FHLMC 2.5YrNc6Mo 313401035 FHLMC 3YrNc1Mo 313401E34 FHLMC 2. 75YrNc1Mo 3137EACR8 FHLMC 3Yr 313401W75 FHLMC 3YrNc6Mo 313401Z80 FHLMC 3YrNc6Mo 3137EACR8 FHLMC 3Yr 3134G1Z80 FHLMC 3YrNc6Mo 3134G1331 FHLMC 3. 5YrNc6Mo 313401502 FHLMC 5YrNc6Mo 3134013K8 FHLMC 1. 25YrNc6Mo 3134G1VH4 FHLMC 3Yr 313401W S9 FHLMC 2YrNc6Mo 3134G2AL6 FHLMC 1.5YrNc6Mo 3134G1VG6 FHLMC 2Yr 3134G2058 FHLMC 5YrNc6MoB 3134013K8 FHLM C 2.25YrNc6MoE 38 236'- - 350,000,000.00 349,319,666.67 99.977679 349,921 ,875.00 602,208 .33 .227 .228 01/09/2013 1.375 1 .407 10,000,000 .00 9,990,300.00 101.468750 10,146,875 .00 156,575.00 1 .494 1.532 07/12/2013 1 .500 1 .500 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 .00 100.031250 5,001,562.50 1,562 .50 1.982 2.036 08/28/2012 1 .000 .709 5,000,000.00 5,029,450 .00 100.750000 5,037,500 .00 8,050 .00 1.150 1.164 08/28/2012 1.000 .694 10,000,000 .00 10,061,850 .00 100.750000 10,075,000.00 13,150.00 1.150 1.164 08/28/2012 1.000 .732 10,000,000 .00 10,054,100.00 100.750000 10,075,000.00 20,900 .00 1.149 1.164 08/28/2012 1.000 .699 5,000,000 .00 5,030,400.00 100.750000 5,037,500.00 7,100.00 1.150 1.164 11/18/2013 1.400 1.400 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.125000 5,006,250.00 6,250.00 2.332 2.389 08/15/2015 1.000 1.061 5,000,000.00 4,985,250.00 100.156250 5,007,812.50 22,562.50 4.015 4.129 10/28/2013 .875 .937 5,000,000 .00 4,990,300.00 100.468750 5,023,437.50 33,137.50 2.295 2.332 03/03/2014 1.250 1.250 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000 .00 100.656250 5,032,812.50 32,812.50 2.612 2.677 09/16/2015 1.000 1.000 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 100.125000 5,006,250.00 6,250.00 4.102 4.216 11/26/2012 . 515 .470 5,000,000.00 5,004,700.00 100.187500 5,009,375.00 4,675.00 1.398 1 .411 10/28/2015 1.375 1,375 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.437500 5,021,875.00 21,875.00 4 .178 4.332 04/28/2014 1.200 1.200 10,000,000 .00 10,000,000.00 100 .062500 10,006,250.00 6,250.00 2 .767 2.830 10/28/2015 1.375 1.375 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.437500 5,021,875.00 21,875.00 4.178 4.332 10/29/2012 .500 . 500 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 100.031250 5,001,562.50 1,562.50 1.324 1 .334 11/02/2012 .600 .605 10,000,000.00 9,999,000.00 100 .031250 10,003,125.00 4,125,00 1.330 1.345 11/02/2012 .600 .600 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.031250 5,001,562.50 1,562.50 1.330 1,345 11/02/2012 .600 .600 5,000,000.00 5,000,000,00 100.031250 5,001,562.50 1,562.50 1.330 1.345 11/02/2012 .600 .615 10,000,000.00 9,997,000.00 100.031250 10,003,125.00 6,125.00 1 .330 1 .345 11/02/2012 . 600 .600 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.031250 5,001,562.50 1,562.50 1.330 1.345 11/02/2012 . 600 .600 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.031250 5,001,562.50 1,562.50 1.330 1.345 10/25/2013 1. 125 1.142 5,000,000.00 4,997,500.00 100 .062500 5,003,125.00 5,625.00 2.279 2.323 10/25/2013 1.125 1. 142 5,000,000.00 4,997,500.00 100 .062500 5,003,125.00 5,625.00 2.279 2.323 07/27/2012 1. 125 . 514 10,000,000.00 10,102,700.00 100 .812500 10,081,250.00 -21,450.00 1 .064 1.077 05/23/2013 . 625 .645 5,000,000. 00 4,997,500.00 100 .062500 5,003,125.00 5,625.00 1.882 1.899 12/20/2013 1.050 1.050 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 100 .250000 15,037,500.00 37,500.00 2.433 2.477 09/23/2013 1.000 1.000 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.281250 5,014,062.50 14,062.50 2.200 2.236 02/25/2014 1.374 1.374 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 101.468750 5,073,437.50 73,437.50 2.584 2.660 01/28/2014 1.500 1.500 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100 .093750 5,004,687.50 4,687.50 2 .504 2.584 02/11/2014 1.500 1. 500 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100,125000 5,006,250.00 6,250.00 2.540 2 .622 02/25/2014 1.375 1.465 10,000,000.00 9,973,100.00 101.468750 10,146,875.00 173,775.00 2.570 2.660 02/11/2014 1.500 1.500 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.125000 5,006,250.00 6,250,00 2.540 2.622 08/22/2014 1.700 1.700 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100. 187500 10,018,750.00 18,750.00 3.031 3.148 03/09/2016 2.500 2. 500 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100. 406250 5,020,312.50 20,312.50 4.368 4 .696 05/24/2013 1.000 1.027 5,000,000.00 4,997,000.00 100. 125000 5,006,250.00 9,250.00 1.875 1 .901 10/07/2013 1.150 1.213 13,000,000.00 12,979,200.00 100. 250000 13,032,500.00 53,300 .00 2.227 2.274 10/12/2012 .600 .600 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.000000 10,000,000 .00 0 .00 1 .275 1 .288 09/21/2012 .625 .625 5,000,000. 00 5,000,000.00 100. 093750 5,004,687.50 4,687.50 1,217 1.230 10/30/2012 .625 .650 5,000,000.00 4,998,000.00 100. 343750 5,017,187.50 19,187.50 1.324 1.337 04/21/2016 2.250 2.250 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100. 687500 5,034,375.00 34,375.00 4.515 4,814 05/24/2013 1.000 1.000 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100. 125000 10,012,500.00 12,500 .00 1.876 1 .901 S reasurer s Poo e • I nvestment F und 3134G2AL6 3134G2CJ9 3134G1ZC1 3134G2FW7 3134G2CL4 3134G2GU0 3137EACP2 3134G2HQ8 3134G2HE5 3134G2HQ8 3137EACL1 3134G2HU9 3134G2HU9 3134G2HL9 3134G2JT0 3134G2JF0 3I34G2HL9 3134G2KG6 3134G2KG6 3134G2FT4 3134G2KY7 3134G2KY7 3134G2KW1 3134G21A8 3134G2KY7 3134G2LV2 3134G2LA8 FHLMC 1.5YrNc3MoB FHLMC 3.5YrNc3MoB FHLMC 2 .5YrNc6MB FHLMC 2.5YrNc3MoB FHLMC 3Yr FHLMC 4YrNc3MoB FHLMC 2Yr FHLMC 5YrNc6Mo6 FHLMC 3YrNc6MoE FHLMC 5YrNc6MoB FHLMC 3Yr FHLMC 2.5YrNc6MoE FHLMC 2.5YrNc6MoE FHLMC 3YrNc3MoB FHLMC 4YrNc3MoB FHLMC 2YrNc6MoB FHLMC 3YrNc3MoB FHLMC 2YrNc3MoB FHLMC 2YrNc3MoB FHLMC 2.25Yr FHLMC 2.25YrNc6MoB FHLMC 2.25YrNc6Mo8 FHLMC 3YrNc6MoE FHLMC 2YrNc3MoB FHLMC 2.2YrNc6MoB FHLMC 3YrNc6MoE FHLMC 2YrNc3MoB 09/21/2012 10/15/2014 05/23/2013 11/19/2013 04/29/2014 05/26/2015 11/30/2012 05/25/2016 05/23/2014 05/25/2016 10/28/2013 12/09/2013 12/09/2013 06/02/2014 06/15/2015 12/09/2013 06/02/2014 06/21/2013 06/21/2013 08/13/2013 09/23/2013 09/23/2013 06/23/2014 06/28/2013 09/23/2013 06/27/2014 06/28/2013 .625 1.000 .625 1.200 1.350 1.000 .375 2.000 1 .250 2 .000 .875 1.000 1.000 1.375 .750 1.050 1.375 .800 .800 .875 .750 .750 1.150 . 700 .750 1.050 .700 FNMA DISC NOTES 313588KF1 313588KN4 3135883R7 313588LC7 313588L52 313588M31 313588TA3 313588RX5 313588W30 313588WH4 3I3586QR3 FNMA DISC NOTE FNMA DISC NOTE FNMA DISC NOTE FNMA DISC NOTE FNMA DISC NOTE FNMA DISC NOTE FNMA DISC NOTE FNMA DISC NOTE FNMA DISC NOTE FNM A DISC NOT E FNMA DISC NOTE 08/10/2011 08/17/2011 07/27/2011 08/31/2011 09/14/2011 09/30/2011 02/13/2012 01/17/2012 05/03/2012 05/02/2012 07/05/2014 4 .632 1.000 .737 1.202 1 .160 1.000 .385 2.011 1.250 2.005 .790 1 .000 1 .000 1.375 .750 1.050 1.375 .800 .800 .611 .750 .750 1.150 .700 .761 1.050 .700 5,030,000.00 10,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 14,121,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 11,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5, 000, 000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 7,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 1,800,000.00 5,029,497.00 10,000,000 .00 4,988,500.00 4,999,750.00 5,027,800 .00 5,000,000 .00 14,118,881.85 4,997,500.00 5,000,000 .00 4,998,750.00 11,022,330.00 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 5,028,775.00 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 6,998,250.00 5,000,000.00 1,800,000.00 100.093750 100.031250 100.062500 100.125000 101.156250 100 .031250 99.968750 100 .156250 100 .281250 100.156250 100 .468750 100.218750 100.218750 100.125000 100.000000 100 .156250 100.125000 100.093750 100.093750 100.468750 100.031250 100.031250 99.875000 99.906250 100.031250 99 .593750 99.906250 5,034,715 .63 10,003,125.00 5,003,125.00 5,006,250.00 5,057,812 .50 5,001,562.50 14,116,587.19 5,007,812.50 5,014,062.50 5,007,812.50 11,051,562.50 5,010,937.50 5,010,937.50 5,006,250.00 5,000,000 .00 5,007,812 .50 5,006,250.00 5,004,687 .50 5,004,687.50 5,023,437.50 5,001,562.50 5,001,562.50 4,993,750.00 4,995,312.50 7,002,187.50 4,979,687 .50 1,798,312.50 5,218.63 3,125 .00 14,625.00 6,500 .00 30,012 .50 1,562.50 -2,294.66 10,312.50 14,062.50 9,062 .50 29,232.50 10,937.50 10,937.50 6,250.00 0 .00 7,812.50 6,250.00 4,687.50 4,687 .50 -5,337.50 1,562 .50 1,562.50 -6,250.00 -4,687.50 3,937.50 -20,312.50 -1,687.50 1.216 3.224 1.881 2,342 2.765 3.818 1.411 4.639 2.833 4.639 2.297 2.405 2 .405 2.852 3.892 2.403 2.852 1.955 1.955 2.062 2.210 2.204 2.921 1.977 2.222 2.937 1 .977 1 .230 3.296 1.899 2.392 2 .833 3.907 1.422 4.907 2.899 4,907 2.332 2.447 2 .447 2.926 3.962 2 .447 2.926 1.978 1.978 2.123 2.236 2.236 2.984 1.997 2.236 2.995 1.997 .290 .290 .270 .290 .250 .250 .210 .190 ,200 .200 1.052 . 291 .291 ,271 .291 .251 ,251 .210 .190 .200 .200 1.051 25,000,000.00 25,000,000 .00 25,000,000 .00 50,000,000.00 50,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 50,000,000.00 100,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 30,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 x`00%86,.1 -83c 438,201,490.32 1,006,606.47 2.263 2 .319 24,930,722.22 100.000000 24,929,312.50 100.000000 24,939,437.50 100.000000 49,859,027.78 100.000000 49,882,986 .11 100.000000 24,938,888 .89 100.000000 49,910,458,33 99.906250 99,852,750.00 99.937500 24,950,000,00 99.843750 29,940,166.67 99.843750 4,840,500.00 96.031250 25,000,000.00 69,277.78 .112 .112 25,000,000.00 70,687.50 .131 .132 25,000,000.00 60,562 .50 .074 .074 50,000,000.00 140,972.22 .169 .170 50,000,000 .00 117,013.89 .208 .208 25,000,000.00 61,111.11 .251 .252 49,953,125.00 42,666.67 .623 .625 99,937,500.00 84,750.00 .549 .551 24,960,937.50 10,937 .50 .842 .844 29,953,125.00 12,958.33 .839 .841 4,801,562.50 -38,937.50 2 .983 3.016 FNMA BO NDS 3136F94P5 FNMA 3Yr 31398AZN5 FNMA 31398AF23 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo1x 31398AXX5 FNMA 31398AV90 FNMA 3YrNc2Yr 3I398AW32 FNMA 3YrNc1Yr 31398AW32 FNMA 3YrNc1Yr 31398AW32 FNMA 3YrNc1Yr 31398AW32 FNMA 3YrNc1Yr 3136FMV35 FNMA 5YrNc6Mo 3136FM2P8 FNMA 5YrNc6Mo 3136FM3D4 FNMA 5YrNc1Mo 3136FM40 FNMA 5YrNc6Mo . 245 .245; 410,000,000.00 408,974,250.00 = •9 63 ;;• 409,606,250 .00 "` 632,000 0a , .440 01/30/2012 2.000 1.573 10,000,000.00 10,107,000.00 100 .937500 10,093,750.00 -13,250.00 .574 .586 11/23/2011 1. 000 1.117 5,000,000.00 4,987,900.00 100 .375000 5,018,750.00 30,850.00 .398 .400 02/08/2013 1. 800 1.809 10,000,000.00 9,997,500.00 100.156250 10,015,625.00 18,125.00 1.565 1,614 11/03/2011 1.215 .750 10,000,000.00 10,065,500.00 100.375000 10,037,500.00 -28,000.00 .344 .345 07/16/2013 1.300 1. 317 5,000,000. 00 4,997,500.00 100.875000 5,043,750.00 46,250.00 1.999 2.047 07/19/2013 1.375 1.378 10,000,000.00 9,999,000. 00 100.062500 10,006,250.00 7,250.00 2.005 2 .055 07/19/2013 1.375 1.378 10,000,000. 00 9,999,000. 00 100.062500 10,006,250.00 7,250.00 2.005 2 .055 07/19/2013 1.375 1.375 5,000,000,00 5,000,000. 00 100.062500 5,003,125 .00 3,125.00 2.005 2 .055 07/19/2013 1.375 1.375 5,000,000.00 5,000,000. 00 100.062500 5,003,125.00 3,125.00 2.005 2.055 07/21/2015 1.500 1.500 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 100. 093750 2,001,875.00 1,875 .00 3.897 4.060 07/28/2015 1.500 1.500 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.125000 5,006,250 .00 6,250 .00 3.917 4 .079 07/28/2015 1.500 1.521 5,000,000.00 4,995,000.00 100.125000 5,006,250 .00 11,250 .00 3.916 4 .079 08/11/2015 1.500 1.500 5,000,000 5,000,000.00 100.156250 5,007,812.50 7,812.50 3.953 4.118 D oled Investment F und Month End Portflio Holding 5' 3136FM3Z5 FNMA 5YrNc6Mo 3136FM7D0 FNMA 5YrNc1.5Yr 3136FPAF4 FNMA 3136FPAF4 FNMA 3136FPAF4 FNMA 31398A3N0 FNMA 31398A3A8 FNMA 31398A3D2 FNMA 3YrNc1Mo 31398A302 FNMA 3YrNc1Mo 31398A3D2 FNMA 3YrNc1Mo 31398A302 FNMA 3YrNc1Mo 3136FPEL7 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A3D2 FNMA 3YrNc1Yr 3136FPEL7 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPEL7 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPEL7 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPEL7 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A3N0 FNMA 31398A3L4 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A3L4 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPGV3 FNMA 5YrNc6Mo 31398A3L4 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A3L4 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A3L4 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPGA9 FNMA 3YrNc2Mo 3136FPEX1 FNMA 3.25YrNc6Mo 31398A3R1 FNMA 3,5YrNc6Mo 31398A4A7 FNMA 3Yr 31398A4A7 FNMA 3YrNc1Mo 31398A4A7 FNMA 3YrNc1Mo 31398A4A7 FNMA 3YrNc1Mo 31398AH54 FNMA 31398A4H2 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A4H2 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A4H2 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPNM5 FNMA 5YrNc6Mo 31398A5H1 FNMA 3YrNc1Mo 3136FPST5 FNMA 3YrNc1Mo 3136FPST5 FNMA 3YrNc1Mo 31398AP71 FNMA 2,2Yr 31398AT77 FNMA 2.2Yr 31398A554 FNMA 2Yr 31398A5V0 FNMA 2Yr 31398A5V0 FNMA 2Yr 31398AT77 FNMA 2.2Yr 3136FPSH1 FNMA 3.5YrNc1Mo 31398A557 FNMA 2YrNc1Yr 31398A557 FNMA 3YrNc1Yr 31398A5S7 FNMA 3YrNc1Yr 3136FPQL4 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPV80 FNMA 5YrNc6Mo 3136FPV80 FNMA 5YrNc6Mo 31398A5V0 FNMA 2YrNc1Yr 3136FPVC8 FNMA 5YrNc6Mo 31398A5Z1 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 08/11/2015 1.500 1 .500 08/17/2015 1.000 1.000 11/23/2012 .800 .800 11/23/2012 .800 .800 11/23/2012 .800 .800 09/24/2012 .625 .700 09/03/2013 1 .050 1.058 09/09/2013 1.125 1.125 09/09/2013 1.125 1.125 09/09/2013 1 .125 1.125 09/09/2013 1 .125 1.125 09/09/2013 1 .050 1.050 09/09/2013 1.125 1.125 09/09/2013 1.050 1.050 09/09/2013 1.050 1.050 09/09/2013 1.050 1.084 09/09/2013 1.050 1.050 09/24/2012 .625 .704 09/17/2013 1.125 1.132 09/17/2013 1.125 1.125 09/17/2015 1.250 1.250 09/17/2013 1.125 1.125 09/17/2013 1.125 1.125 09/17/2013 1.125 1.125 09/20/2013 1.000 1.017 12/17/2013 1.125 1.141 03/21/2014 1.350 1.350 09/27/2013 1. 200 1.200 09/27/2013 1.200 1.200 09/27/2013 1.200 1.200 09/27/2013 1.200 1.200 04/04/2012 1.000 .410 10/08/2013 1.125 1.125 10/08/2013 1.125 1.125 10/08/2013 1.125 1. 125 10/15/2015 1.250 1. 250 11/04/2013 .875 .885 10/25/2013 .750 . 750 10/25/2013 .750 .750 06/22/2012 1.250 .348 07/30/2012 1. 125 .403 11/01/2012 . 550 .550 11/09/2012 . 625 . 625 11/09/2012 .625 .625 07/30/2012 1.125 . 458 04/25/2014 1.000 1.025 11/15/2013 .900 .900 11/15/2013 .900 . 900 11/15/2013 .900 . 900 04/15/2013 .875 .875 11/16/2015 1.000 1.000 11/16/2015 1.000 1.005 11/09/2012 .625 . 625 11/19/2015 1.250 1.250 11/19/2013 .800 .800 I 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 .00 10,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000 .00 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000,00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 3,050,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 2,500,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 4,992,300.00 4,998,750.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 4,995,000.00 5,000,000.00 4,992,000.00 4,999,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 4,997,500 .00 4,997,500 .00 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000 .00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 .00 10,088,900.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 3,049,085.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,145,800.00 10,124,000.00 15,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,114,300.00 4,995,700.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000. 00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 2,499,375.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.156250 100.500000 100.093750 100.093750 100,093750 100 .375000 100 .718750 100 .156250 100 .156250 100 .156250 100 .156250 100 .625000 100.156250 100.625000 100.625000 100.625000 100.625000 100.375000 101.125000 101.125000 100.250000 101.125000 101.125000 101.125000 100.562500 100 .750000 100 .812500 100.218750 100.218750 100.218750 100 .218750 100.531250 101.093750 101.093750 101.093750 100.031250 99.875000 100.125000 100 .125000 100 .906250 100 .843750 100.093750 100 .125000 100.125000 100.843750 99.968750 100.281250 100.281250 100.281250 100.031250 100.125000 100.125000 100.125000 99.750000 99.968750 e 5,007,812 .50 5,025,000.00 10,009,375.00 5,004,687.50 5,004,687.50 5,018,750.00 5,035,937.50 5,007,812.50 5,007,812.50 10,015,625.00 5,007,812.50 5,031,250.00 5,007,812.50 5,031,250,00 5,031,250.00 5,031,250 .00 5,031,250,00 5,018,750.00 5,056,250.00 10,112,500.00 5,012,500.00 5,056,250 .00 5,056,250.00 5,056,250 .00 5,028,125 .00 5,037,500.00 5,040,625 .00 5,010,937.50 10,021,875.00 5,010,937.50 5,010,937.50 10,053,125.00 5,054,687.50 5,054,687.50 5,054,687 .50 5,001,562.50 3,046,187.50 10,012,500.00 10,012,500.00 10,090,625.00 10,084,375.00 15,014,062.50 10,012,500.00 10,012,500.00 10,084,375 .00 4,998,437.50 5,014,062.50 5,014,062.50 5,014,062.50 5,001,562.50 5,006,250 .00 2,503,125.00 10,012,500.00 4,987,500.00 9,996,875.00 7,812.50 25,000.00 9,375.00 4,687.50 4,687.50 26,450.00 37,187.50 7,812.50 7,812.50 15,625.00 7,812.50 31,250.00 7,812.50 31,250.00 31,250.00 36,250 .00 31,250 .00 26,750.00 57,250 .00 112,500.00 12,500 .00 56,250.00 56,250 .00 56,250.00 30,625.00 40,000.00 40,625.00 10,937.50 21,875.00 10,937.50 10,937.50 -35,775 .00 54,687.50 54,687.50 54,687.50 1,562 .50 -2,897.50 12,500.00 12,500.00 -55,175.00 -39,625.00 14,062.50 12,500,00 12,500.00 -29,925.00 2,737.50 14,062.50 14,062.50 14,062.50 1,562.50 6,250.00 3,750.00 12,500.00 -12,500.00 -3,125.00 odifi; 3.953 4.118 4.022 4.134 1.386 1.403 1.386 1 .403 1 .386 1 .403 1 .224 1.238 2 .138 2 .181 2.152 2,197 2.152 2 .197 2.152 2.197 2.152 2.197 2.154 2.197 2.152 2.197 2.154 2.197 2.154 2.197 2.154 2.197 2.154 2.197 1.224 1.238 2.174 2.219 2.174 2.219 4.078 4.219 2.174 2.219 2.174 2 .219 2,174 2.219 2.186 2.227 2.422 2.468 2.657 2.726 2.199 2 .247 2.199 2 .247 2 .199 2.247 2 .199 2.247 .757 .764 2.232 2.277 2 .232 2.277 2.232 2.277 4.155 4 .296 2 .313 2.351 2 .292 2 .323 2.292 2.323 .973 .981 1,073 1.085 1.328 1.342 1.349 1.364 1.349 1.364 1.073 1.085 2.768 2.822 2.342 2.381 2.342 2.381 2.342 2.381 1.771 1.795 4.268 4.384 4.268 4.384 1.349 1.364 4.249 4.392 2.357 2.392 Pa2.e111 Treas urer's Pooled In vestment Fund h End P ortffo Holdin:s 31398A5Z1 31398A6G2 31398A5Y4 3136FPXXO 31398A6L1 31398A6L1 31398A6L1 31398A6L1 31398A6K3 3136FPSH1 3136FPZD2 3136FPE94 3136FPL88 3136FPL88 3136FPE78 3136FPG68 3136FPL88 3136FPN78 3136FPN78 31398A7A4 3136FPW 60 3136FPV95 3136FPV95 31398A7H9 3136FPV38 '3136FPV46 31398A7M8 3136FP3X3 3136FP6X0 3135G0AM 5 3136FRCU5 3136FRDY6 3136FRED1 3136FPUC9 3136FPUC9 31398A3K6 3136FRGK3 31398A5W8 3136FPUC9 31398AVZ2 3136FRKM4 31398A5Z1 31398A6F4 3135G08N2 3135G0BR3 3136FRYK3 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo FNMA 3YrNc1Yr FNMA 3YrNc6Mo FNMA 4Yr FNMA 3YrNc1Mo FNMA 3YrNc1Mo FNMA 3YrNc1Mo FNMA 3YrNc1Mo FNMA 3YrNc1Mo FNMA 3.5YrNc1Mo FNMA 4YrNc2Mo FNMA 3YrNc1Yr FNMA 3YrNc1Yr FNMA 3YrNc1Yr FNMA 5YrNc6Mo FNMA 2.5YrNc1Yr FNMA 3YrNc1Yr FNMA 3YrNc1Yr FNMA 3YrNc1Yr FNMA 3YrNc1Yr FNM A 3YrNc1Yr FNMA 3.5YrNc1Yr FNMA 3.5YrNc1Yr FNMA 2YrNc6Mo FNMA 3. 5YrNc6Mo FNMA 3YrNc1Yr FNMA 2YrNc6Mo FNMA 2,25YrNc6Mo FNMA 5Yr FNMA 3YrNc1Yr FNMA 3YrNc6Mo FNMA 3YrNc6MoE FNMA 3.5YrNc6MoE FNMA 2Yr FNMA 2Yr FNMA 4Yr FNMA 3.25YrNc1YrE FNMA 3Yr FNMA 2YrNc FNMA SYr FNMA 4.25YrNc1YrE FNMA 3Yr FNMA 1.75 Yr FNMA 3YrNc1YrE FNMA 2.25Yr FNMA 3YrNc9Mo8 FHLB DISC NOTES 313384L56 FHLB DISC NOTE 313384LX5 FHLB DISC NOTE FHLB BONDS 3133XTXH4 FHLB 3133XTXH4 FHLB 3133XU73• FHLB 2Yr 11/19/2013 .800 .800 11/22/2013 .750 .750 11/26/2013 1 .000 1.000 11/26/2014 1,050 1,050 11/29/2013 1 .000 1 .000 11/29/2013 1 .000 1.053 11/29/2013 1.000 1.085 11/29/2013 1.000 1.085 11/29/2013 .800 .800 04/25/2014 1.000 1.212 12/03/2014 1.125 1.125 12/13/2013 1.050 1.074 12/16/2013 1 .200 1.200 12/16/2013 1.200 1.200 12/16/2015 1.500 1.510 05/16/2013 .800 .800 12/16/2013 1.200 1.200 12/27/2013 1.250 1.250 12/27/2013 1.250 1.250 12/30/2013 1.300 1.300 12/30/2013 1.500 1.500 07/03/2014 1.700 1.700 07/03/2014 1.700 1 .700 01/07/2013 1.000 1.000 07/07/2014 1. 750 1.750 01/13/2014 1. 420 1.420 01/18/2013 .930 .930 05/03/2013 1.000 1.000 02/04/2016 .303 .324 01/27/2014 1.000 1.000 03/21/2014 1.625 1.625 03/28/2014 1.600 1.600 09/29/2014 1.875 1.875 10/30/2012 .500 .550 10/30/2012 . 500 .557 03/14/2014 1.250 1.278 07/25/2014 1.700 1.700 12/18/2013 . 750 1,194 10/30/2012 .500 .473 03/13/2014 2.750 1.128 08/24/2015 2.000 2.000 11/19/2013 .800 .870 12/28/2012 . 375 .349 06/27/2014 1.000 1,000 08/09/2013 .500 .580 06/30/2014 . 800 .800 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000 .00 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 25,000,000,00 7,750,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000,00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 5,000,000 .00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000,00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000. 00 5,000,000. 00 10,000,000. 00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 4,992,250 .00 9,975,000.00 4,987,500.00 5,000,000,00 4,964,950.00 10,000,000.00 24,982,500.00 7,750,000.00 10,000,000.00 4,997,500.00 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000 .00 9,990,000 .00 5,000,000 .00 10,000,000 .00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 14,988,000.00 9,991,000.00 4,996,000.00 5,000,000 .00 4,941,950.00 5,002,000.00 10,454,500 .00 5,000,000.00 4,991,250.00 5,002,000.00 5,000,000. 00 9,983,000.00 10,000,000.00 99 .968750 100,125000 100.093750 99.531250 100.250000 100.250000 100 .250000 100.250000 100.187500 99.968750 99300000 100 .406250 100 .250000 100.250000 100.281250 100.250000 100.250000 100.281250 100.281250 100.468750 100.468750 100.625000 100 .625000 100 .000000 100.000000 100.531250 100.031250 100.062500 99.062500 100.343750 100.250000 100.281250 100.343750 100 .031250 100 .031250 101,093750 100.937500 100.000000 100.031250 105.187500 100.375000 99.968750 100.031250 99.625000 99.875000 99.875000 4,998,437,50 5,006,250.00 5,004,687.50 9,953,125.00 5,012,500.00 5,012,500.00 10,025,000.00 5,012,500 .00 5,009,375.00 4,998,437.50 9,950,000.00 25,101,562.50 7,769,375,00 10,025,000.00 5,014,062.50 5,012,500.00 5,012,500.00 25,070,312.50 10,028,125.00 5,023,437.50 5,023,437.50 10,062,500.00 15,093,750.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 20,106,250.00 5,001,562.50 10,006,250.00 9,906,250,00 5,017,187 .50 10,025,000 .00 10,028,125.00 10,034,375 .00 15,004,687.50 10,003,125.00 5,054,687.50 5,046,875 .00 5,000,000.00 5,001,562.50 10,518,750.00 5,018,750.00 4,998,437 .50 5,001,562.50 4,981,250.00 9,987,500.00 9,987,500.00 -1,562.50 6,250.00 4,687.50 -46,875.00 12,500.00 20,250.00 50,000,00 25,000.00 9,375.00 33,487 .50 -50,000.00 119,062.50 19,375.00 25,000.00 16,562.50 12,500.00 12,500.00 70,312.50 28,125.00 23,437.50 23,437 .50 62,500 .00 93,750.00 0.00 0.00 106,250.00 1,562.50 6,250.00 -83,750.00 17,187.50 25,000.00 28,125 .00 34,375.00 16,687.50 12,125.00 58,687.50 46,875.00 58,050.00 -437.50 64,250,00 18,750.00 7,187.50 -437 .50 -18,750 .00 4,500.00 -12,500.00 2.357 2.367 2 .369 3.334 2 .377 2,377 2.376 2.376 2.385 2.765 3 .348 2.414 2.417 2 .417 4.297 1 .858 2.417 2.446 2.446 2 .452 2.451 2.896 2.896 1 .497 2.904 2 .466 1 .529 1.818 4.554 2.525 2.644 2.664 3.122 1.326 1.326 2.642 2.957 2 .433 1.326 2.591 3.936 2.356 1 .489 2.940 2.090 2 .958 2.392 2.400 2.411 3.411 2.419 2.419 2.419 2.419 2.419 2.822 3,430 2.458 2.466 2.466 4.466 1.879 2 .466 2,496 2 .496 2.504 2.504 3.011 3.011 1.526 3.022 2.542 1.556 1,844 4.603 2.581 2 .726 2.745 3.252 1.337 1.337 2.707 3.071 2.471 1 .337 2.704 4.153 2.392 1.499 2.995 2.112 3.003 1.119 1.066 820,300,000.00 821,127,010.00 ' 100. 350512 823,175,250,00 2,048,240,00 2.262 2 .314 09/14/2011 . 270 .271 50,000,000. 00 49,898,000.00 99.995833 49,997,916.67 99,916.67 .208 .205 09/19/2011 .270 .271 50,000,000.00 49,896,500. 00 99.995556 49,997,777 .78 101,277.78 .221 .222 . 270 .271 100,000,000.00 99,794,500. 00 99. 995695 99,995,694.45 201,194,45 .214 .215 07/27/2011 1.625 1.671 5,000,000.00 4,995,250.00 100.125000 5,006,250.00 11,000 .00 .073 C74 07/27/2011 1.625 1.671 10,000,000.00 9,990,500.00 100.125000 10,012,500.00 22,000.00 .073 074 07/18/2011 1.125 1.251 5,000,000 4,987,800.00 100.031250 5,001,562.50 13,762.50 .049 r. .049 3133XUD91 3133XVNT4 3133XWKU2 313313FT5 3133XXTU1 3133XYHD0 3133702E7 3133XWW47 3133XYVH5 3133XYUK9 3133XWEZ8 3133703Y2 3133XYZC2 3133XYZC2 3133XYZC2 3133XYZC2 3133702W7 313370B02 313370B02 313370862 3133708)6 313370836 313370836 3133XYW35 313370TA6 313370TB4 313370608 313370TH1 3133XYZC2 3133XWKU2 313370608 313370872 3133XYZC2 3133706G8 313370ZT8 3133XXPV3 3133XXPV3 3133712G0 3133XYY58 3133XWKU2 313371EE2 3133XXPV3 313371PM2 3133XXPV3 313371PE0 31337110(3 313371UC8 3133XXPV3 313371N31 313371P67 313371VA1 313371U53 313371N77 313372KE3 3133XYVC6 FHLB 3YrNc2Yr1x FHLB 3Yr FHLB 2.5Yr FHLB 1,5Yr FHLB 2,25Yr FHLB FHLB FHLB FHLB SYrNc1. 5Yr FHLB FHLB FHLB FHLB FHLB FHLB FHLB FHLB 3YrNn1.5Mo FHLB 1Yr FHLB 1Yr FHLB 1Yr FHLB FHLB FHLB FHLB 1.5Yr FHLB 3Yr FHLB 3Yr FHLB FHLB 3YrNc1Mo FHLB FHLB 2Yr FHLB FHLB 1.5Yr FHLB FHLB FHLB 1. 5Yr FHLB 2. 2Yr FHLB 2. 2Yr FHLB 5YrNc3Mo FHLB 1. 75Yr. FHLB 2Yr FHLB 3. 25YrNc3Mo FHLB 2. 2Yr FHLB 2.6Yr FHLB 2. 2Yr FHLB 3YrNc3Mo FHLB 3YrNc3Mo FHLB 3.2Yr FHLB 2.2Yr FHLB 5YrNc3Mo FHLB 5YrNc3Mo FHLB 3YrNc3Mo FHLB 5YrNc3Mo FHLB 5YrNc6Mo FHLB 4Yr FHLB 5Yr 08/10/2012 12/14/2012 06/08/2012 09/01/2011 07/12/2012 06/14/2013 04/02/2012 03/09/2012 07/06/2015 01/17/2012 07/08/2011 01/09/2012 01/13/2012 01/13/2012 01/13/2012 01/13/2012 07/12/2013 07/28/2011 07/28/2011 07/28/2011 01/30/2012 01/30/2012 01/30/2012 12/21/2011 08/28/2013 07/29/2013 01/13/2012 09/09/2013 01/13/2012 06/08/2012 01/13/2012 01/25/2012 01/13/2012 01/13/2012 03/27/2012 05/18/2012 05/18/2012 09/29/2015 03/30/2012 06/08/2012 01/27/2014 05/18/2012 06/26/2013 05/18/2012 11/18/2013 11/18/2013 12/27/2013 05/18/2012 11/23/2015 11/25/2015 12/09/2013 12/10/2015 11/19/2015 02/04/2015 06/18/2015 2.050 1.750 1.375 .680 1.260 1.625 .750 1.125 1 .500 .800 .750 .625 .670 .670 .670 .670 1.400 .450 .450 .450 .650 .650 .650 .750 . 875 .850 .625 1.000 .670 1.375 .625 .600 .670 .625 .500 1.125 1.125 1.250 .750 1.375 .850 1.125 . 500 1.125 .800 1.000 .875 1. 125 1.250 1. 300 1.100 1300 1.000 .213 .809 2.101 1.612 1.212 .809 1.260 1.198 .750 .886 1.500 .800 .466 .625 .650 .670 .679 .670 1.400 .450 .420 .415 .570 .550 .506 .446 .851 .840 . 420 1.051 . 425 . 642 . 455 .385 . 375 .375 .500 . 459 . 453 1. 276 .411 . 370 . 910 .342 .590 .445 . 800 1.000 .934 .485 1.250 1.300 1.100 1.500 1.343 .213 .376 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 35,000,000.00 8,890,000.00 10,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000 .00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 10,000,000 .00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 11,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000. 00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 5,000,000. 00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 6,200,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 9,985,500 .00 5,020,050.00 5,017,100 .00 4,991,000 .00 5,000,000.00 15,185,100.00 5,000,000.00 10,040,000.00 10,000,000.00 35,000,000 .00 8,915,158.70 10,000,000.00 25,007,500.00 15,000,000.00 9,998,700.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 20,006,000.00 10,003,460.00 10,011,930.00 10,014,900.00 5,010,650.00 10,040,757 .70 5,003,500.00 5,001,442.61 10,027,900.80 4,992,500.00 10,032,800.00 10,126,900.00 20,045,000.00 10,028,700.00 10,038,500.00 15,048,794.70 5,000,000.00 10,108,600.00 10,109,600 .00 9,987,500.00 11,055,770.00 5,081,600.00 4,990,500.00 10,119,200.00 9,976,500.00 20,206,000. 00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 9,982,000.00 10,095,500.00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 6,200,000.00 10,000,000.00 4,918,900. 00 15,000,000.00 5,091,325.00 100 .187500 101.875000 100 .968750 100.093750 100.937500 102.156250 100.343750 100.562500 100.718750 100.281250 100 .000000 100.218750 100.156250 100.156250 100 .156250 100.156250 100.562500 100.031250 100.031250 100.031250 100.218750 100.218750 100.218750 100.281250 100.625000 100.625000 100.156250 100.125000 100 .156250 100.968750 100.156250 100.187500 100.156250 100.156250 100 .156250 100.718750 100 .718750 100.031250 100 .343750 100.968750 100.000000 100 .718750 99 .968750 100.718750 100.093750 100.125000 100.375000 100.718750 100.218750 100.250000 100.000000 100.218750 99. 781250 99. 250000 101. 125000 10,018,750.00 5,093,750.00 5,048,437.50 5,004,687.50 5,046,875.00 15,323,437.50 5,017,187.50 10,056,250.00 10,071,875.00 35,098,437.50 8,890,000.00 10,021,875.00 25,039,062.50 15,023,437,50 10,015,625.00 5,007,812.50 5,028,125.00 10,003,125.00 20,006,250.00 10,003,125.00 10,021,875.00 10,021,875 .00 5,010,937.50 10,028,125.00 5,031,250.00 5,031,250.00 10,015,625.00 5,006,250.00 10,015,625.00 10,096,875.00 20,031,250.00 10,018,750.00 10,015,625.00 15,023,437.50 5,007,812.50 10,071,875.00 10,071,875.00 10,003,125.00 11,037,812.50 5,048,437.50 5,000,000,00 10,071,875.00 9,996,875 .00 20,143,750.00 5,004,687.50 5,006,250.00 10,037,500.00 10,071,875.00 10,021,875.00 15,037,500 .00 6,200,000 .00 10,021,875.00 4,989,062 .50 14,887,500.00 5,056,250.00 Years To 1urt 33,250.00 1.085 1.115 73,700.00 1.431 1 .460 31,337.50 .930 .942 13,687.50 .172 .173 46,875.00 1.018 1.036 138, 337.50 1 .920 1.959 17,187 .50 .751 .759 16,250 .00 .686 .693 71,875,00 3.856 4.019 98,437.50 .543 .551 -25,158.70 .022 .022 21,875.00 .522 .529 31,562.50 .533 .540 23,437.50 .533 .540 16,925.00 .533 .540 7,812.50 .533 .540 28,125.00 1.985 2.036 3,125.00 .076 .077 250.00 .076 .077 -335.00 .077 .077 9,945.00 .580 .586 6,975.00 .580 .586 287.50 .580 .586 -12,632.70 .475 .477 27,750.00 2.130 2.164 29,807.39 2.052 2.082 -12,275.80 .533 .540 13,750.00 2.156 2.197 -17,175.00 .533 .540 -30,025.00 .932 .942 -13,750.00 .533 .540 -9,950.00 .567 .573 -22,875.00 .533 .540 -25,357.20 .534 .540 7,812.50 .739 .742 -36,725 .00 .879 .885 -37,725.00 .879 .885 15,625.00 4.111 4.252 -17,957.50 .747 .751 -33,162.50 .934 .942 9,500 .00 2.532 2.581 -47,325 .00 .879 .885 20,375.00 1.976 1.992 -62,250.00 .879 .885 4,687.50 2.354 2.389 6,250.00 2 .347 2.389 55,500.00 2.458 2.496 -23,625.00 .878 .885 21,875.00 4.260 4,403 37,500.00 4 .261 4 .408 0.00 2 .401 2.447 21,875.00 4 .281 4.449 70,162.50 4.268 4.392 -112,500.00 3.576 3.603 -35,075.00 3.904 3.970 P3 3133XWKV0 FHLB 3Yr 03/14/2014 2 .375 1 .404 3133736H0 FHLB 2.5Yr 09/26/2013 1.000 1,000 313373AS1 FHLB 3Yr 04/29/2014 1.350 1.350 313373C42 FHLB 1YrNc3MoB 04/27/2012 .410 .410 313373C34 FHLB 1YrNc3MoB 04/27/2012 .400 .400 313373708 FHLB 1,25YrNc3MoB 07/20/2012 .450 .450 313373422 FHLB 5YrNc3MoB 04/20/2016 2.000 2.000 3133XWBW 8 FHLB 2. 5Yr 05/15/2012 1.210 .422 313373CZ3 FHLB 3Yr 05/27/2014 1.500 1.500 313373FB3 FHLB 2YrNc3MoB 04/29/2013 1.000 1.000 313373FX5 FHLB 2YrNc3Mo8 04/29/2013 1 .070 1,070 313373H54 FHLB 5yrNclYrB 04/25/2016 1 .250 1.250 313373EW8 FHLB 5YrNc3MoB 04/27/2016 2 .000 2.000 313373F98 FHLB 2,25Yr 08/15/2013 1.000 1.000 3133733R4 FHLB 3Yr 05/28/2014 1.375 1 .419 313373HW5 FHLB 3YrNc3MoE 05/05/2014 1.600 1.600 313373CK6 FHLB SYrNc3MoB 04/27/2016 2.000 2 .000 313373)60 FHLB 1YrNc3MoB 05/11/2012 .340 .311 313373NV0 FHLB 5YrNc3MoB 05/19/2016 2.000 2,000 313373ND0 FHLB 1Yr 04/26/2012 .250 .250 313373RC8 FHLB 3. 25Yr 07/30/2014 1.250 1.250 313373586 FHLB 2YrNc3MoB 05/09/2013 .750 .750 313373R61 FHLB 2YrNc6MoE 05/17/2013 1.000 .862 313373RB0 FHLB 5YrNc3MoB 05/26/2016 2.000 2.000 313373578 FHLB 2.5YrNc3MoB 11/26/2013 1.000 1.000 3133731159 FHLB 4YrNc3MoB 05/26/2015 1. 250 1.250 3133731167 FHLB 4YrNc3MoB 05/26/2015 1.000 1.000 313373VN9 FHLB 3.5YrNc3MoB 12/08/2014 . 750 .750 3133731134 FHLB 5YrNc3MoB 05/25/2016 1. 000 1.000 313373545 FHLB 5YrNc3MoB 05/26/2016 2. 000 2.000 313373Y22 FHLB 1Yr 05/23/2012 .250 .250 313373Q34 FHLB 2.5YrNc6MoB 11/25/2013 1. 125 1.125 313373Y22 FHLB 1Yr 05/23/2012 .250 .230 313374285 FHLB 1Yr 05/29/2012 .230 . 230 313373WN8 FHLB 5YrNc3MoB 06/09/2016 1.750 1.771 313373XR8 FHLB 5YrNc3MoB 06/16/2016 2.125 2.125 313373537 FHLB 2.25Yr 08/28/2013 .750 .671 313373ZF2 FHLB 1.75YrNc1MoB 03/20/2013 .550 . 550 313373ZF2 FHLB 1.75YrNc1MoB 03/20/2013 .550 .550 3133743F5 FHLB 5YrNc3MoB 06/23/2016 2.010 2.010 313373YW 6 FHLB 5YrNc3MoB 06/15/2016 1. 500 1,500 313373Y22 FHLB 1Yr 05/23/2012 .250 .234 3133742K5 FHLB 1. 5YrNc1MoB 12/20/2012 .500 . 500 3133742K5 FHLB 1.5YrNc1Mo8 12/20/2012 .500 .500 313374357 FHLB 2.5YrNc3MoA 12/20/2013 .875 .875 3133744C1 FHLB 2YrNc1MoB 06/27/2013 .750 .750 3133744C1 FHLB 2YrNc1MoB 06/27/2013 .750 .750 3133744C1 FHLB 2YrNc1MoB 06/27/2013 .750 .750 3133745K2 FHLB 3YrNc6MoE 06/27/2014 1.125 1.125 3133745K2 FHLB 3YrNc6MoE 06/27/2014 1. 125 1,125 313373Z47 FHLB 2. 2YrNc1MoB 08/21/2013 . 750 . 750 3133745K2 FHLB 3YrNc6MoE 06/27/2014 1. 125 1. 125 313374AF7 FHLB 5YrNc3MoB 06/30/2016 1.750 1. 750 313374483 FHLB 5YrNc3MoB 06/23/2016 1.250 1.250 313373Y2• FHLB 1Yr 05/23/2012 .250 .203 5,000,000 .00 5,140,200 .00 104 .156250 5,207,812.50 67,512.50 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.843750 5,042,187.50 42,187.50 2 .203 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 101.312500 10,131,250 .00 131,250.00 2 .762 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.000000 10,000,000.00 0.00 .822 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.000000 10,000,000 .00 0 .00 .822 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.031250 5,001,562,50 1,562.50 1 .050 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.125000 5,006,250.00 6,250.00 4.543 5,000,000.00 5,044,075.00 100 .781250 5,039,062 .50 -5,012.50 .870 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 101 .687500 5,084,375.00 84,375.00 2,832 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100 .062500 10,006,250.00 6,250 .00 1.807 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.062500 5,003,125.00 3,125 .00 1.805 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 100 .812500 15,121,875.00 121,875.00 4.653 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.125000 5,006,250.00 6,250.00 4.562 7,500,000 .00 7,500,000.00 100.906250 7,567,968.75 67,968.75 2 .090 10,000,000 .00 9,986,700,00 101.343750 10,134,375.00 147,675.00 2.840 9,400,000 .00 9,400,000 .00 100.125000 9,411,750.00 11,750.00 2.766 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.156250 5,007,812.50 7,812.50 4.562 20,000,000.00 20,006,000.00 100.000000 20,000,000 .00 -6,000.00 .862 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.187500 5,009,375 .00 9,375.00 4.623 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 99.937500 9,993,750 .00 -6,250.00 .821 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100 .781250 5,039,062 .50 39,062.50 3 .000 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.062500 10,006,250.00 6,250.00 1.840 5,000,000.00 5,013,700.00 100 .250000 5,012,500.00 -1,200.00 1.858 5,000,000,00 5,000,000 .00 100.281250 5,014,062.50 14,062.50 4,642 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.125000 5,006,250 .00 6,250.00 2.369 3,900,000.00 3,900,000.00 99.875000 3,895,125 .00 -4,875 .00 3.796 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000.00 100 .125000 5,006,250.00 6,250 .00 3.818 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99 .937500 4,996,875.00 -3,125 .00 3.387 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99 .968750 4,998,437.50 -1,562.50 4.768 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.062500 5,003,125.00 3,125.00 4.642 35,000,000,00 35,000,000.00 99.937500 34,978,125.00 -21,875.00 .895 4,200,000 .00 4,200,000.00 100.312500 4,213,125.00 13,125.00 2.362 10,000,000 .00 10,001,985.40 99.937500 9,993,750.00 -8,235.40 .896 20,000,000.00 20,000,000 .00 99.906250 19,981,250.00 -18,750.00 .912 5,000,000.00 4,995,000 .00 100.062500 5,003,125 ,00 8,125.00 4 .709 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 98.781250 4,939,062 .50 -60,937.50 4,681 5,000,000.00 5,008,850.00 100.343750 5,017,187 .50 8,337.50 2.135 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 .00 99 .968750 4,998,437 .50 -1,562.50 1.711 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 .00 99.968750 4,998,437 .50 -1,562.50 1.711 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 98.781250 9,878,125,00 -121,875.00 4.715 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99 .968750 4,998,437,50 -1,562.50 4.758 5,000,000.00 5,000,800.00 99.937500 4,996,875.00 -3,925.00 .896 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.000000 5,000,000.00 0 .00 1.465 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.000000 5,000,000.00 0,00 1.465 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.062500 5,003,125 .00 3,125.00 2.440 5,000,000.00 5,000,000,00 99.937500 4,996,875.00 -3,125.00 1.973 2,300,000.00 2,300,000.00 99.937500 2,298,562.50 -1,437.50 1 .973 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99. 937500 4,996,875.00 -3,125.00 1 .973 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.843750 4,992,187 .50 -7,812.50 2.934 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.843750 4,992,187.50 -7,812.50 2.934 3,000,000.00 3,000,000.00 100.031250 3,000,937.50 937.50 2.115 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.843750 4,992,187,50 -7,812.50 2.934 3,820,000.00 3,820,000. 00 99.343750 3,794,931.25 -25,068.75 4.768 5,000,000. 00 5,000,000.00 99.468750 4,973,437.50 -26,562.50 4.813 13,810,000, 13,816,076.40 99.937500 13,801,368,75 -14,707.65 .896 2 .602 2.707 2 .244 2.833 .827 .827 1 .058 4 .811 .877 2,910 1.833 1.833 4.825 4.830 2.129 2.912 2.849 4.830 .866 4.890 .825 3 .085 1 .860 1 .882 4 .910 2.411 3 .907 3 .907 3.444 4.907 4.910 .899 2.408 .899 .915 4.948 4 .967 2 .164 1.723 1.723 4.986 4.964 .899 1.477 1 .477 2.477 1.995 1.995 1.995 2 .995 2.995 2.145 2 .995 5.005 4.986 .899 Month En. P ortfli o Holdin 3133XXPV3 313374EY2 31337451(2 313374EY2 313374EY2 3133745K2 313374EY2 313374EY2 3133747C8 313374A83 3 13374AG5 313374F70 313374F70 313374F70 313374F70 313374F70 313374D49 313374EV8 313374801 313374FE5 FHLB 1Yr FHLB 1Yr FHLB 3YrNc6MoE FHLB 1Yr FHLB 1Yr FHLB 3YrNc6MoE FHLB 1Yr FHLB 1Yr FHLB 3YrNc1YrE FHLB 2YrNc6MoA FHLB 2YrNc3MoA FHLB 1YrNc3MoA FHLB 1YrNc3MoA FHLB 1YrNc3MoA FHLB 1YrNc3MoA FHLB 1YrNc3MoB FHLB 5YrNc3MoB FHLB 2YrNc1YrB FHLB 3YrNc1MoB FHLB 1.5YrNc1Mo8 FFCB DISC NOTES 313312KH2 FFCB DISC NOTE 313312NE6 313312UR9 313312WG1 FFCB DISC NOTE FFCB DISC NOTE FFCB DISC NOTE 05/18/2012 06/20/2012 06/27/2014 06/20/2012 06/20/2012 06/27/2014 06/20/2012 06/20/2012 06/20/2014 06/28/2013 06/28/2013 07/16/2012 07/16/2012 07/16/2012 07/16/2012 07/16/2012 06/30/2016 06/28/2013 06/27/2014 12/28/2012 08/12/2011 10/20/2011 03/23/2012 05/01/2012 .125 .250 1.125 .250 .250 1.125 .250 .250 1 .000 .650 .650 .330 .330 .330 .330 .330 1.500 .600 1.100 .500 .213 .250 1.133 .250 .250 1.125 .250 .250 1.000 .650 .650 .330 .330 .330 .330 ,330 1.500 .600 1 .100 .500 a .767.....; 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,990,000,00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 7,058,783.69 10,000,000.00 4,998,750.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,990,000 .00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000 .00 100 .718750 99 .937500 99.843750 99.937500 99.937500 99.843750 99.937500 99.937500 99.750000 99.812500 99.781250 99 .875000 99.875000 99.875000 99.875000 99.875000 99.062500 99.750000 99.656250 99.875000 .152,010,000 .00 1,15 ,6 >,310 OU, ,,100.199682,, .000 .263 25,000,000.00 .000 .264 25,000,000.00 .270 .271 25,000,000.00 . 240 .241 7,000,000.00 .103 .264 82,000,00000 81 24,960,937.50 24,948,180 .56 24,934,000 .00 6,983,013.33 100.000000 100 .000000 99.906250 99.843750 7,050,312.50 -8,471.19 .880 .885 9,993,750.00 -6,250,00 .970 .975 4,992,187.50 -6,562.50 2 .933 2.995 9,993,750.00 -6,250 .00 .970 .975 9,993,750 .00 -6,250.00 .970 .975 4,992,187.50 -7,812.50 2.934 2.995 9,993,750,00 -6,250.00 .970 .975 9,993,750.00 -6,250.00 .970 .975 5,975,025.00 -14,975.00 2.921 2.975 4, 990, 625.00 -9,375.00 1 .978 1.997 4,989,062.50 -10,937.50 1.978 1.997 9,987,500.00 -12,500 .00 1.040 1.047 14,981,250.00 -18,750.00 1.040 1.047 9,987,500.00 -12,500 .00 1,040 1.047 19,975,000.00 -25,000 .00 1.040 1.047 9,987,500.00 -12,500 .00 1.040 1.047 9,906,250.00 -93,750 .00 4.800 5.005 4,987,500.00 -12,500 .00 1.980 1.997 9,965,625.00 -34,375.00 2.935 2.995 9,987,500 .00 -12,500 .00 1.487 1.499 1$4,310,3,514# ,V.,, ,,04..a$, i; 1.685 1.727, 25,000,000 .00 25,000,000.00 24,976,562 .50 6,989,062.50 39,062.50 51,819.44 42,562.50 6,049.17 .117 .118 .306 .307 .729 .732 .836 .838 .4221-:424,: FFCB BONDS 31331GNQ8 31331GYP8 31331GYP8 313160AA1 31331GN96 31331GV22 31331GYP8 3133137X1 313313W74 31331JW74 313313T78 313313587 313313288 313313000 313313Y56 31331.)4C4 3133134C4 3133136A6 3133136A6 3133137A5 3133137A5 3133136A6 31331KET3 31331KGN4 31331KEW6 31331KHV5 31331KKZ2 FFCB FFCB 3Yr FFCB 3Yr FFCB FFCB 2Yr FFCB 2Yr FFCB 3Yr FFCB 3YrNc1Yr FFCB 1.75YrNc3Mo FFCB 1.75YrNc3Mo FFCB 2YrNc6Mo FFCB 2.25YrNc3Mo FFCB 2.25YrNc3Mo FFCB 3Yr FFCB 2Yr FFCB 3YrNc1Mo FFCB 3YrNc1Mo FFCB 3Yr FFCB 3Yr FFCB 1.5Yr FFCB 1.5Yr FFCB 3Yr FFCB 2.5Yr FFCB 3Yr FFCB 1.5YrNc3MoA FFCB 5Yr FFCB 1.5YrNc3MoA 04/24/2012 2.250 1.762 5,000,000.00 06/18/2012 2,125 2.210 5,000,000.00 06/18/2012 2.125 2.210 3,000,000.00 08/19/2011 3.875 1.525 8,000,000.00 09/01/2011 1.300 1.300 10,000,000.00 10/03/2011 1.125 1.125 5,000,000.00 06/18/2012 2.125 1.374 8,500,000.00 07/08/2013 1.440 1.440 5,000,000. 00 08/03/2012 .430 .480 15,000,000. 00 08/03/2012 .430 .447 10,000,000. 00 10/26/2012 .490 . 515 15,000,000.00 01/25/2013 .600 .600 5,000,000. 00 02/15/2013 .530 .550 10,000,000.00 06/03/2013 1. 600 .752 10,000,000. 00 11/02/2012 . 400 .540 10,000,000. 00 12/06/2013 1.125 1.125 10,000,000.00 12/06/2013 1.125 1.125 5,000,000.00 12/23/2013 1. 300 1. 300 5,000,000.00 12/23/2013 1.300 1.300 5,000,000. 00 07/10/2012 .500 . 500 10,000,000.00 07/10/2012 . 500 . 500 9,205,000.00 12/23/2013 1. 300 1. 184 5,000,000.00 09/23/2013 .980 1. 029 10,000,000.00 04/07/2014 1.400 1.400 10,000,000.00 09/24/2012 . 440 . 604 5,000,000.00 04/20/2016 . 266 . 276 10,000,000.00 11/16/2012 .420 . 470 5,000,000.00 *1.104 aitt 5,066,900 .00 4,988,000 .00 2,992,800.00 8,364,880.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 8,637,785.00 5,000,000.00 14,986,950.00 9,997,000.00 14,992,500.00 5,000,000.00 9,995,500.00 10,211,890.00 9,972,900.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000,00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 9,205,000.00 5,015,550.00 9,988,000.00 10,000,000.00 4,988,000.00 9,995,000.00 4,996,250.00 81,965,625.00 139,493 .61 101.562500 5,078,125.00 11,225.00 .804 .819 101.718750 5,085,937.50 97,937.50 .951 .970 101.718750 3,051,562.50 58,762.50 .951 .970 100.468750 8,037,500.00 -327,380.00 .136 .137 100.187500 10,018,750,00 18,750.00 .171 .173 100.250000 5,012,500 .00 12,500 .00 .259 .260 101.718750 8,646,093.75 8,308.75 .955 .970 100.031250 5,001,562.50 1,562.50 1 .973 2 .025 100 .000000 15,000,000.00 13,050.00 1.087 1 .096 100.000000 10,000,000.00 3,000.00 1.087 1 .096 100.000000 15,000,000.00 7,500.00 1,315 1 .326 100.000000 5,000,000.00 0.00 1.556 1 .575 100 .000000 10,000,000.00 4,500.00 1.613 1.633 102 .093750 10,209,375.00 -2,515.00 1 .894 1.929 100 .031250 10,003,125.00 30,225.00 1.332 1 .345 100 .250000 10,025,000.00 25,000 .00 2.392 2.438 100.250000 5,012,500.00 12,500 .00 2 .392 2.438 101.375000 5,068,750.00 68,750.00 2 .433 2.485 101. 375000 5,068,750.00 68,750 .00 2.433 2.485 100. 156250 10,015,625.00 15,625.00 1.021 1.030 100.156250 9,219,382.81 14,382.81 1.021 1 .030 101. 375000 5,068,750 .00 53,200.00 2.434 2.485 100. 781250 10,078,125 .00 90,125.00 2 .195 2,236 101.468750 10,146,875.00 146,875.00 2.699 2 .773 100.000000 5,000,000.00 12,000.00 1 .226 1.238 99.875000 9,987,500.00 -7,500.00 4.771 4.811 100.000000 5,000,000.00 3,750,00 1 .371 1 .384 PQA65 Tr eas urer's Po oled Investment Fund Month End Portflio Ho[di n' Ju ne 2011 31331KKT6 31331KEV8 31331KNH9 31331KMV9 31331KNT3 31331KPC8 31331KPD6 5 FFCB 1Yr FFCB 1Yr FFCB 1Yr FFCB 2.75YrNc3MoA FFCB 3YrNc6MoA FFCB 2.2Yr FFCB 2.5Yr tit 05/16/2012 06/22/2012 06/13/2012 03/07/2014 06/13/2014 08/20/2012 11/20/2013 .210 .290 .240 1 .000 1.080 .250 .625 .224 .244 .240 1.004 1.080 .250 .700 FMAC DISC NOTES 31315KW W6 FMAC DISC NOTE 31315KXU9 FMAC DISC NOTE 05/15/2012 06/06/2012 .210 .210 25,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 5,000,000 .00 24,996,600.00 99 .906250 5,002,450.00 99.968750 20,000,000.00 99.906250 4,999,500.00 99,843750 5,000,000.00 99 .718750 20,000,000.00 99.875000 4,991,100.00 99.843750 24,976,562.50 4,998,437.50 19,981,250.00 4,992,187.50 4,985,937,50 19,975,000 .00 4,992,187,50 757 298,705,000.00 2997384,$55,0Q 1©0.345509 299,737,351.56 .210 .210 25,000,000 .00 20,000,000.00 24,946,770.83 19,957,416.67 99 .843750 99.812500 -20,037.50 -4,012.50 -18,750 .00 -7,312 .50 -14,062.50 -25,000 .00 1,087.50 .876 .879 .976 .981 .951 .956 2.657 2.688 2 .897 2.956 1.136 1.142 2.365 2.395 24,960,937.50 19,962,500.00 352,796.56 1.495 14,166.67 5,083.33 i.5t8 .874 .877 .934 .937 . FARMER MAC 30769PAA0 31315PVU0 31315PVU0 31315PVU0 Fy FARMER MAC GTD FARMER MAC GT D FARMER MAC GTD FARMER MAC GTD 07/15/2011 05/10/2013 05/10/2013 05/10/2013 5.500 .760 .760 760 2.134 .760 .760 .750 45,000,000 .00 • 44,904,1 99.829861 4,602,000.00 5,000,000 .00 5,000,000 .00 12,500,000.00 4,967,444.82 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 12,502,375 .00 100.187500 100.093750 100.093750 100.093750 44, 923,437.50 19, 250 .00 4,610,628.75 5,004,687 .50 5,004,687 .50 12,511,718,75 -356,816.07 4,687,50 4,687 .50 9,343.75 .901 .904 .041 .041 1.843 1 .863 1.843 1 .863 1.843 1 .863 MUNI BONDS 93974C8Y5 93974CBY5 20775BND4 041042RK0 93974CWX4 93974CW W 6 93974CWY2 649791EA4 649791EB2 677521LG9 677521LH7 WASHINGTON ST W ASHINGTON ST CT HFA ARKANSAS ST WASHINGTON ST WASHINGTON ST WASHINGTON ST STATE OF NEW YORK STATE OF NEW YORK OHIO STATE GO OHIO STATE GO 07/01/2011 07/01/2011 05/15/2012 07/01/2012 02/01/2013 02/01/2012 02/01/2014 09/01/2011 09/01/2012 05/01/2013 05/01/2014 1.565 4.000 4.000 2.180 1.250 1.100 .630 1. 480 .300 .650 .740 1.190 .989 3.832 3 .832 2.180 1.240 1 .100 .630 1.480 .300 .650 .740 1.190 27,102,000.00 5,000,000.00 3,645,000.00 850,000.00 1,440,000 .00 10,020,000.00 9,960,000.00 5,130,000.00 24,940,000 .00 23,040,000 .00 5,140,000.00 2,000,000.00 1,16•', .5,!000,00 0 0mit4k 100.O;Ly 27,469,819.82 100 .109669 5,023,300.00 3,661,985.70 850,000.00 1,440,273.60 10,020,000.00 9,960,000.00 5,130,000.00 24,940,000 .00 23,040,000.00 5,140,000.00 2,000,000 .00 100 .466000 100 .466000 100 .000000 100 .019000 100.000000 100.000000 100,000000 100.000000 100.000000 100.000000 100.000000 27,131,722.50 -338,097.32 5,023,300.00 3,661,985.70 850,000.00 1,440,273.60 10,020,000.00 9,960,000.00 5,130,000.00 24,940,000.00 23,040,000.00 5,140,000.00 2,000,000.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 .537 1.553 .003 .003 .003 .003 .860 .877 .987 1.005 1.561 1.595 .583 .592 2.513 2.595 .172 .173 1.161 1.175 1.820 1.838 2.779 2.838 COM M PAPER 36959JXU2 369593W S8 369593X32 36959JZT3 GE CAPITAL CORP GE CAPITAL CORP GE CAPITAL CORP GE CAPITAL CORP 10/28/2011 09/26/2011 10/03/2011 12/27/2011 1.007. ,.., . .340 .270 .270 .170 nifitalt .341 .270 .270 .170 50,000,000.00 35,000,000.00 30,000,000.00 35,000,000.00 49,886,666.67 34,952,487 .50 29,957,700.00 34,970,250.00 99.920667 99.951667 99.937333 99.865750 9m IGm59.30 , 49,960,333.33 34,983,083.33 29,981,200 .00 34,953,012 .50 OMAN 73,666.66 30,595.83 23,500.00 -17,237.50 .327 .329 .240 .241 .259 .260 .492 .493 NCDS 7800933Z6 7800934A0 78009J4Q5 ROYAL BANK OF CANADA ROYAL BANK OF CANADA ROYAL BANK OF CANADA 09/28/2011 10/19/2011 10/05/2011 .270 . 270 150,000,000. 00 £''1149,767,104.17 99.918420 149,877,629.1 6 .250 .260 .250 .250 .260 . 250 50,000,000.00 50,000,000.00 50,000,000.00 50,000,000.00 50,000,000.00 50,000,000.00 100.000000 100.000000 100.000000 50,000,000.00 50,000,000.00 50,000,000.00 110,524.99 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 .332 .333 .246 .303 .265 .247 .304 .266 Total Fund .253 .253 150 000,000. 00 150,00, 1 . 726 .633 4,932,818,000. 00 4,937,025, 1. The market value and yield of short-term money market securities are based on purchase price. 2. Average life is the number of years until principal is returne d at maturity, we ighted by market value. 3. Local Agency Obligations have variable rate coupons, spread to Pool. 4. M odified Duration. The percentage price chan ge of a securiy for a given change in yield. The higher the modified duration of a security, the higher the risk, • • P6 _0 76' 50,0,00,000.00 4,942,332, 241.04 5,306, 252.86 0.00 .271 8.288. • .272 1.307 FULLThe Treasurer's Pooled Invest- ment Fund was in FULL COMPLIANCE with the Treasurer's Statement of Investment Policy. The County's Investment Policy is more restrictive than the California Government Code. This policy is reviewed annually by the County's Investment Oversight Committee and approved by the County Board of Supervisors. Investment Category MUNICIPAL BONDS (M UNI) U. S. TREASURIES LOCAL AGENCY OBLIGATIONS (LAO) FEDERAL AGENCIES COMM ERCIAL PAPER (CP) CERTIFICATE & TIME DEPOSITS (NCD & TCD) REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS (REPO) REVERSE REPOS M EDIUM TERM NOTES (MTNO) CALTRUST SHORT TERM FUND M ONEY MARKET M UTUAL FUNDS (MMF) CASH/DEPOSIT ACCOUNT 5 YEARS NO LIMIT NA 5 YEARS 5 YEARS 5 YEARS 270 DAYS 5 YEARS NO LIMIT NO LIMIT NO LIMIT 40% 30% 1YEARS NO LIMIT 92 DAYS 20% NA NA AAA Al/P1 NA NA NA 5 YEARS 30% A NA NA 90 DAYS (1) 20% NA NA NA AAA/Aaa (2) NA INVESTMENT PQU: Maximum Maturity Authorized % Quality S&P/ Limit Moody's 3 YEARS 15% AA-/Aa3/AA- 5 YEARS 100% NA 3 YEARS INVESTMENT GRADE 5 YEARS 100% 270 DAYS 40% NA Al/P1/F1 1YEAR 25% Combined Al/P1/F1 45 DAYS 40% max, 25% in A1/P1/F1 term repo over 7 days 60 DAYS 10% 3 YEARS 20% DAILY LIQUIDITY DAILY LIQUIDITY 20% NA NA 1.0% NA AA/Aa2/AA NA AAA by 2 Of 3 RATINGS AGC. NA 1 Mutual Funds maturity may be interpreted as we ighted average maturity not exceeding 90 days. 2 Or must have an investmen t advisor with not less than 5 years experience and with assets under management of $500,000,000. Page 17 27 Actual Riverside Portfolio % 1.85% 13.08% 0.01% 75.46% 3 .04% 3 .04% 0.00% 0 .00% 1 .09% 1 .42% • AGENDA ITEM 7C • • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Matt Wallace, Procurement and Assets Administrator THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Single Signature Authority Report BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Single Signature Authority report for the fourth quarter ended June 30, 2011. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The attached report details all professional services and administrative contracts that have been executed for the fourth quarter ended June 30, 2011, under the Single Signature Authority granted to the Executive Director by the Commission. The unused capacity at June 30, 2011 is $4,540. Attachment: Single Signature Authority Report as of June 30, 2011 Agenda Item 7C 28 • • • CONSULTANT AMOUNT AVAILABLE July 1, 2010 SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY AS OF JUNE 30, 2011 DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES ORIGINAL CONTRACT PAID AMOUNT REMAININ G AMOUNT CONTRACT AMOUNT AT&T 511 Traffic & Tr ansp ort ation Related Services TransTrack Systems, Inc. End -User Software License, Training and A -M -M -A Transit Pla nning Services SC Engineering SR -74 Design and Survey Service s Caltrans SR -91 Prado Overhead - Fault Mapping/ Califo rnia Departme nt of Toxic Substances Liston Brick Property - Environmental Servi ces Elrod Fence Co mpany Fencing Services Global Pest Solutio ns Pest Control Services Revel Environmental Manufacturing Waste Disposal Services Beacon Economics Economic Benefit Analysis Services SC Engineering 1.15 at Railro ad Canyon Road - PANED Services US Army Of Engineers Alternatives Analysis fo r the Mid County Parkway Project BLX Group Arbitrage Rebate Services Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians Cultural Resources Treatment an d Tribal Monitoring Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians : Cultural Resources Treatment and Tribal Monitoring Craig Melicher, PE Errors and Omissio ns Review Services Western Area SecurityServices Security Gu ard Se rv ices. AMOUNT USED AMO UNT USED AMOUNT REMAINING thro ugh Ju ne 30, 2011 Matt Wallace Pre pared by Theresa Trevino Reviewed by Note: Shaded area represents new contracts listed in the fourth qua rter, $500,000 .00 49,000.00 26,488 .55 22,511.45 50,000 .00 32,000.00 18,000 .00 25,000.00 18,646 .67 6,353 .33 46,793.00 41,000.00 5,793.00 12,000.00 12,000.00 0.00 28,630.00 0.00 28,630.00 1,037.00 1,037 .00 0.00 15, 000.00 1,566.00 13, 434.00 25,000.00 1,091.00 23,909.00 25,000.00 0.00 25,000.00 18,000.00 18,000 .00 2:0.00 15,000.00 0.00 ..15,000.00 40,000.00 0.00 40,000.00 25,000.00 . 0.00 '.25,000.00 50,000.00 .0,00 ` 50,000.00 50,000.00 50,000,00 ;.3,485.00 46,515.00 20,000.00 0 .00 20,000,00 495,460 .00 495,460.00 $4,540 .00 29 • AGENDA ITEM 7D • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Sales Tax Analysis BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 1 (Q1) 2011. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its December 2007 meeting, the Commission awarded an agreement to MuniServices, LLC (MuniServices) for quarterly sales tax reporting services plus additional fees contingent on additional sales tax revenue generated from the transactions and use tax (sales tax) audit services. The services performed under this agreement pertain to only the Measure A sales tax revenues. Since the commencement of these services, MuniServices submitted an audit update, which reported findings that have been generated and submitted to the State Board of Equalization (SBOE) for review and determination of errors in sales tax reporting related to 175 businesses. Through Q4 2010 for October through December 2010, the SBOE has approved corrections for 108 of these accounts for a total sales tax revenue recovery of $1,707,203. An update to the sales tax revenue recovery through Q1 2011 may be made subsequent to the Committee meeting and prior to the September Commission meeting. If the SBOE concurs with the error(s) for the remaining claims, the Commission would receive additional revenues; however, the magnitude of the value of the remaining findings was not available. It is important to note that while the recoveries of additional revenues will be tangible, it will not be sufficient to alter the overall trend of sales tax revenues. Additionally, MuniServices provided the Commission with the quarterly sales tax summary report for the first quarter of calendar 2011 for January through March 2011 (Q1 2011). Most of the Q1 2011 Measure A sales tax revenues was received by the Commission in the second quarter of calendar 2011, during April through June 2011, due to a lag in the sales tax calendar. The summary section of Agenda Item 7D 30 the Q1 2011 report is attached and includes an overview of California sales tax receipts, local results, historical cash collections analysis, summary of the top 25 sales tax contributors, historical sales tax amounts, sales tax by business category, economic trends for a significant business category, and results. The following observations were noted in the Q1 2011 report: • Sales tax receipts for Riverside County were 9.6 percent higher compared to the Q1 2010, and slightly higher than the state. This supports the previous quarterly reports' analyses that an economic recovery statewide and locally is underway. • Taxable transactions for the top 25 tax contributors in Riverside County, which generated 23 percent of the taxable sales for the year ended Q1 2011, increased 5.1 percent compared to the year ended Q1 2010. For the top 100 tax contributors, which generated 37 percent of the taxable sales, the growth was 7.7 percent. • Over the last two-year period, the Q1 2011 sales tax levels were at the low point for one of the top 10 economic segments (building materials -retail). A few segments (service stations and apparel stores) sales reached a new high point during Q1 2011. • Department stores, service stations, and restaurants continue to represent the three largest economic segments for Riverside County. ECONOMIC SEGMENTS ANALYSIS Largest Segment Department Stores 12.4/ 2.1 % of Total/% Change 2nd Largest Segment California; Statewide Restaurants 13.1/0.7 S.F. BayArea Restaurants 13.7/2.1 Sacramento Valley Department Stores 12.9/2.3 Department Stores 15.7/ 1.9 South .. Coast Restaurants 14.0/0.7 Inland Empire Department Stores 11.7/-8.0 Restaurants 20.0/2.3 Department Stores 13.0/-0.1 % of Total /% Change 3rd Largest Segment Service Stations 12.0/ 16.9 Department Stores 11.2/ -0.3 Department Stores 10.1 /0.7 Restaurants 10.8/1.0 Service Stations 11.2/16.1 Department Stores 10.81.0.3 Service Stations 11.8/6.7 Services Stations 13.4 / 19.2 Misc. Retail 10.5/-4 7 % of Total/% Change Restaurants 10S/1.9 Service Stations 9.8/ 10.6 Service Stations 8.4 /11.6 Service Stations 10.1/12.5 Restaurants 10.0/0.2 Service Stations 9.8/9.6 Restaurants 10.8/-6.5 Restaurants 10.0/0.4 Department Stores 9.0/-2.4 • For the first time in several quarterly reports, all economic categories experienced increases in the Q1 2011 benchmark year comparison to Q1 2010. Transportation had the largest increase at 15.4 percent, which was primarily related to the service station segment increase. General retail had the next highest increase at 4.6 percent. These two categories represent 56.4 percent of total taxable sales. The remaining four economic categories had increases ranging from 0.5 percent to 2.0 percent. Agenda Item 7D • 31 • • • ECONOMIC CATEGORY ANALYSIS' General Retail % of Total/ % Change Food Products % of Total /% Change Construction % of Total/ % Change Transportation % of Total/ % Change Business to Business % of Total/ % Change Miscellaneous % of Total / % Change Total 30.6/4.6 California Statewide 3a4/0.3 S.F. Bay Area; 300/18 Sacramento Vary 31.0/1.5 Central Valley 33.0/25 South' Coast Inland Empire 30.3/-0.1 28.9/-4.0 North Coast 30.2/-0.2 oa 33.0/-1.6 16.8/0.5 192/00 19.8/1.7 17.4/1.6 17.1/0.2 19.7/-01 17.1/-6.6 193/0.1 304/21 10.4/1.8 85/-1.0 8.1/0.4 102/-0.9 10.4/0.4 80/-0.5 99/-79 119/-91 9.1/1.8 258/154 229/76 19.9/9.0 25.4/7.5 243/117 23.2/6.8 26.5/4.6 28.5/11.6 20.0/14.3 143/20 176/5.4 21.0/7.6 14.3/2.6 140/136 17.7/4.5 156/-16 93/103 5.9/-32 2.1/1.8 1.3/-3.7 1.2/-1.6 1.6/-31 12/65 12/-3.2 2.0/-9.4 1.0/-61.2 15/7.6 100.0/5.7 100.0/2.5 100.0/4.1 100.0/2.8 100.0/ 5.4 100.0/2.1 100.0/-2.5 100.0/1.1 100.0/2.7 During the review of the Q1 2011 detailed report with MuniServices, information regarding sales tax comparisons by city and change by economic category from Q1 2010 to Q1 2011 was provided, and is attached. Staff continues to monitor monthly sales tax receipts and other available economic data to determine the need for any adjustment to the revenue projections. Staff will utilize the forecast scenarios included with the complete report and recent trends in assessing such projections. Attachments: 1) Sales Tax Analysis for Q1 2011 2) Sales Tax Comparison by City for Q1 2010 to Q1 2011 Agenda Item 7D 32 • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Sales Tax Digest Summary Collections through June 2011 Sales through March 2011 (2011Q1) CALIFORNIA'S START TO A NEW YEAR California's local governments have generally seen increases in sales tax during the first half of 2011. On a cash basis, statewide sales tax receipts during April -June 2011 grew by 7.6% from the same three months in 2010. Northern California grew by 8.6% and Southern California grew by 6.9%. As for RCTC, its sales tax receipts changed by 9.6% from April -June 2010 to April -June 2011. CALIFORNIA'S FUTURE General Retail, Restaurants and Service Station continue to lead economic growth. High fuel prices have boosted local revenues through the first half of 2011, compensating for slower growth in other economic sectors. Housing and employment continues to dampen recovery across the state. In order to fully establish an economic rebound, California needs job growth both locally and regionally to increase spending as well as business travel. Housing prices must stabilize and begin growing in order to restore some levels of equity and wealth effect, which should bolster consumer confidence and spending once again. LOCAL RESULTS Net Cash Receipts Analysis Local Collections Share of County Pool 0.0% Share of State Pool 0.0% SBE Net Collections Less: Amount Due County 0.0% Less: Cost of Administration Net 102011 Receipts Net 102010 Receipts Actual Percentage Change $31,000,097 0 0 31,000,097 .00 (281, 780) 30,718,317 28,027,761 9.6% Business Activity Performance Analysis Local Collections Less: Payments for Prior Periods Preliminary 102011 Collections Projected 102011 Late Payments Projected 1Q2011 Final Results Actual 102010 Results Projected Percentage Change $31,000,097 (1,337,356) 29,662,741 1,179,165 30,841,906 28, 286,498 9.0% www.Mun iServices. corn (800) 800-8181 33 Page 1 Riverside County Transportation Commission HISTORICAL CASH COLLECTIONS ANALYSIS BY QUARTER (in thousands of 5) 533,000 532,000 531,000 530,000 529,000 c4 528,000 527,000 S26,000 525,000 524,000 4Q2008 IQ2009 2Q2009 3Q2009 4Q2009 IQ2010 2Q2010 3Q2010 4Q2010 IQ201I 1 1 1 IMENet Receipts �+•••SHOE Adesin Fees Doe 5450 5400 -- 5350 5300 5250 5200 5150 S100 S50 50 TOP 25 SALES/USE TAX CONTRIBUTORS The following list identifies RCTC's Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors. The list is in alphabetical order and represents sales from April 2010 through March 2011. The Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors generate 23.5% of RCTC's total sales and use tax revenue. BEST BUY STORES CARMAX THE AUTO SUPERSTORE CHEVRON SERVICE STATIONS CIRCLE K FOOD STORES COSTCO WHOLESALE DEPT OF MOTOR VEHICLES HOME DEPOT 1 C PENNEY COMPANY K MART STORES KOHL'S DEPARTMENT STORES LOWE'S HOME IMPROVEMENT MACY'S DEPARTMENT STORE MOBIL SERVICE STATIONS RALPH'S GROCERY COMPANY RITE AID DRUG STORES ROSS STORES SAM'S CLUB SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY SHELL SERVICE STATIONS STATER BROS MARKETS TARGET STORES VERIZON WIRELESS W.W. GRAINGER WAL MART STORES WALGREEN'S DRUG STORES www. MuniServi ces. cum (800) 800-8181 Page 2 34 Riverside Co nt r Tra :' po a io Comm on HISTORICAL SALES TAX AMOUN rs The following chart shows the sales tax level from sales through March 2011, the highs, and the lows for each segment over the last two years. (in thousands of S) 314 igh el Lau • S16.000 514,000 S12.000 S10.000 58,000 56.000 54,000 52,000 AN WU SAL TAX BY BUSINESS CAIE ORV I Q 2 0 1 1 1Q2010 302010 21)2010 102010 1Q2009 3Q2009 2 Q 2 0 0 9 1 Q 2000 4Q2000 2,000 580,000 5100.000 SO 520,000 510,090 ten Ihnuxands .4Y4 ,rral Rr;ait pEood Produces :J7ran spa rtrr;inn MCons1rnc;'ruu 0`4nsi0 SI20.000 51 00.000 51 60,000 r"00usio04, :>1 iscrIlanrool 35 Riverside County Transportation Commission FIVE-YEAR ECONOMIC TREND: Construction (in tbou,nndn ofS) sa,000 57,000 55,000 35.000 54,000 33,000 32,000 51,000 S0 FINAL RESULTS: October -December 2010 Sales Local Net Cash Collections Less: Pool Amounts Less: Prior Quarter Payments Add: Late Payments Local Net Economic Collections after Adjustments Percent Change from October -December 2009 Sales MUNISERVICES' ON -GOING AUDIT RESULTS This Quarter $134,077 Total to Date $1,228,130 $32,194,968 ($-347,300) ($1,717,664) $978,991 $31,803,595 UP BY 6.6% www.MuniServices.com (800) 800-8181 Page 4 • r 36 Southern California: Sales Tax Com.arison Jan -Mar 2010 Sales to Jan - Mar 2011 Sales • RCTC , ., Retail 6.0% Products 2 .9% 23:4% •ns . 3 .7% :us ness to Busi ness'; 4 .1% isc 2.4% an- r ar r Total - 30,840,841 Jan-rviar 2010 Tot al 28,286,481 % C g Largest Gain ' ' .:9.0% Service Stations 2nd Largest Gain Auto Sales - New Largest Decline 2nd Largest Declin e 81dg Matls-Retail Electronic Eq uipment 'IVERSIDE COUNTY Banning -6 .0% -0.9% 5.9 % -10.3% 40.2 % -63.2 % 356,897 354,999 0 .5% Service Stations Auto Sales - New Miscellaneous Oth er Auto Sales - Used Beaumont -5 .2% 0.3 % 40 .8 % -21.2% 39.0 % -7.6 % 756,519 698,561 8 .3% Service Stations Leasing Department Stores BIdg.Matls-Whsle Blythe -7 .2 % -4.9 % 12 .0% -18.6% 47.8% 20.5% 347,715 339,257 2 .5% Aut o Sales - New Service Stati ons BIdg. Matls-Whsle Bldg. Matls•Retail Calimesa 13.2% 8.5 % 47.0% 15.0% -26.2% -24 .6% 129,147 108,714 18 .8% Service Stations Restaurants Light Industry Miscellaneo us Other Canyon Lake -57.7% -5.1 % -83.3% -38.6% -53.3 % -55.9% 22,009 47,257 -53 .4% Recreation Products Restaura nts Auto Parts/Repair Department Stores Cathedral City -7.6 % 2.9 % 22 .5% -15.8 % -6.8 % 5.4 % 1,538,366 1,396,818 10.1% Auto Sales - New Ser vice Stations Office Equipment Recreation Prod ucts Coachella 31.3 % -0.7% 18 .0 % 0.8% 31 .7% 35.2 % 756,058 668,829 13.0 % Service Statio ns Energy Sales Food Markets Recreation Products Corona 2.6% 6.8 % 24.9 % 15.9% 11.6% -13.3 % 6,196,053 5,502,632 12 .6 % Bldg.Matls-Whsle Service Stations Bldg .Matls-Retail Misc . Vehicl e Sales Desert Hot Springs -2.8% 3.0 % 84.5% 53 .6% -0.8% 23,9% 277,758 220,067 26.2% Service Stati ons Auto Parts/Repair Department Stores Electro nic Equipment Eastvale 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100 .0% 100.0 % 100.0% 534,908 534,908 100.0% Miscellaneous Retail Dep artment Stores Health & Governme nt Misc ellaneous Other Hemet -3.4% -0.5 % 11.3 % -2.2% 15.0 % -25.1% 1,950,412 1,875,303 4,0% Servic e Statio ns Aut o Sales - New Apparel Stores Department St or es Indian Wells 66.2% 8.2% -0.2% 217 .0% -13.2% 78.9% 339,317 283,695 19.6% Florist/Nursery Restaura nts Miscellan eo us Retail Lightlndustry Indio 5. 3% 0,2% 16 .3% -2.5% 10.5% 21.9% 1,631,415 1,515,936 7.6%A ut o Sales -New Dep artme nt St ores Bldg. Matls-Retail Apparel Stores La Quinta 2.9% 4.2% 35.3% -2.6 % -1.4% -7.7% 1,882,799 1,786,169 5.4 %Auto Sales -New Service Stati ons El ectr onic Equipm ent BIdg.Matls-Retail Lake Elsinore 4. 7% -1.6% 8.3% -9.9% -10.0% -0.6% 1,438,943 1,404,221 2 .5%Auto Sales -New Department Stores eldg.Matls-Whsle Heavy Industry M enifee 17.1% 12.7% 21,8% -2.2 % -4,8% -31 .1% 977,744 866,281 12.9% Service Stations Furniture/Appliance E nergy Sales Misc. Vehicle Sales Moreno Valley 10.3% 3.1% 22.4% -9.5 % 4.4% -11.0 % 2,762,713 2,525,543 9,4% Auto Sales - New Service Stations BIdg .Matis-Retail Office Equipment M urrieta 2.9% 6.5% 17. 0% -5.9 % -7.4% 5.8% 2,226,711 2,135,312 4.3% Service Stations Misc . Vehicle Sales BIdg.Matls-Retail Office Equipment Norco 1.7% 0.0% 12.8% 5.3% 8 .6% -1.7 % 889,571 832,531 6 .9% Service Stati ons Auto Sales - New Aut o Parts/R epair Liquor Stores Palm Desert 9.7% 10.6% 35.4% 9. 8% 2 .3% -17.9 % 3,890,117 3,498,930 11.2% Department Stores Restaurants Office Equipment Fl orist/Nursery Palm Springs 4.6% 6. 3% 0.8% 4.1% 13.0 % -23.7% 2,410,010 2,281,209 5.6 % Restaurants Service Stations Misc. Vehicle Sales Furniture/Applianc e Perris -2.5% 3. 0% 29. 7% 1. 8% -11.2% 36.5% 1,352,465 1,207,662 12.0 % Service Stati ons Miscellaneous Other Heavy Ind ustry Bldg.Matls-Retail Rancho M irage 2.2% 8. 3% 14.1% -6. 2% 10.8% -26 .4% 1,057,407 1,001,743 5.6%Auto Sales -New Restaurants Miscellaneous Retail Misc . V ehicle Sales Riv erside 3. 0% 2. 5% 19.9% 10. 1% 12.1% -5.6% 9,535,651 8,658,384 10.1% Aut o Sales - New Electronic Equipment Light Ind ustry Cl osed Acct-Adjustmt Riverside Coun ty -6. 8% -2.0% 18.1% 3.9% 13.4% -24.8% 5,940,730 5,774,362 2.9 % Service Stations Ch emical Products Department Stores Furniture/Applia nce San Jacinto Temecula 1. 1% 5.3% 6.2% 5.3% 24. 4% 25.1% 10.8% 3.8% 2.8% 4.1% 5.2% 7.2% 464,499 5,515,219 426,567 5,072,977 8.9% Service Stations Auto Parts/R epair Service Stations Departme nt Stores Office Eq uipment Miscellan eous Retail Electct r onic Equipme nt 8 .7 % Auto Sales - New Wildomar -14,6% 9.4% 1.8% -16.5% 14.3% 5. 4% 256,327 248,592 3.1% Food Markets Restaurants Furniture/Appliance Miscellaneous Retail 37 MuniServices, LLC AGENDA ITEM 7E • • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Andrea Zureick, Senior Staff Analyst Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Years 2012-16 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan for Local Streets and Roads for the City of Cathedral City BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the city of Cathedral City's FYs 2012-16 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for Local Streets and Roads as submitted. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Measure A imposes several requirements on local agencies in order to receive local streets and roads funds. First, the Coachella Valley and Western County cities and the county must be participating in either the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) or Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program. Western County agencies must also participate in the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan managed by the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA). The cities of Beaumont and La Quinta are not TUMF participants, and Commission staff is in the process of obtaining confirmation from CVAG, WRCOG, and RCA regarding the current participation in their programs. Additionally, agencies are required to annually provide to the Commission a CIP detailing how those funds are to be expended and an annual certification of maintenance of effort (MOE) along with documentation supporting the calculation. On February 28, 2011, Commission staff provided the local agencies with Measure A revenue projections for local streets and roads to assist in preparation of the required CIP. The Commission approved the CIPs for all of the local agencies except the county of Riverside and the city of Cathedral City at its July meeting. Agenda Item 7E 38 The required CIP and supporting documentation has now been received from the city of Cathedral City and is attached. The FY 2011/12 Measure A Local Streets and Roads disbursements to local agencies with Commission approved CIPs are expected to begin in September 2011. Attachment: City of Cathedral City's FYs 2012-16 Measure A Five -Year CIP Agenda Item 7E • • • 39 • • Agency: Page: Prepared by: Telephone No.: Date Prepared: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2011-2012 City of Cathedral City 68-700 Avenida Lalo Guerrero, Cathedral City, CA 92234 1 of 1 Sheila McGrath-Hibdon, Engineering Financial Analyst (760) 770-0319 July 11, 2011 Item No. Project Name / Limits Capital Projects Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A ($000's) 1 2 Public Works Department Capital Improvement Projects (on -going and proposed projects) City wide maintenance operations including parking, median maintenance and street light energy; Transportation and traffic related planning and development activities as well as highway design and related engineering activities; Maintenance of traffic signal system. Various Traffic / Transportation related projects. $ 2,150.1 $ 24,778.4 $ 1,075,1 $ 1,541.4 $ 26,928.5 $ 2,616.5 • 40 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION • MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2012-2013 Agency: Page: Prepared by: Telephone No.; Date Prepared: City of Cathedral City 68-700 Avenida Lalo Guerrero, Cathedral City, CA 92234 1 of 1 Sheila McGrath -Higdon, Engineering Financial Analyst (760) 770-0319 July 11, 2011 Item No. Project Name / Limits Capital Projects Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A ($000's) 1 5 Public Works Department & Parks Maintenance Capital Improvement Projects (on -going and proposed projects) City wide maintenance operations including parking, median maintenance and street light energy; Transportation and traffic related planning and development activities as well as highway design and related engineering activities; Maintenance of traffic signal system, Various Traffic / transportation related projects. $ 2,214.7 $ 18,302.7 $ 1,107.4 $ 531.1 $ 20,517.4 $ 1,638.5 • 41 • Agency: Page: Prepared by: Telephone No.: Date Prepared: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2013-2014 City of Cathedral City 68-700 Avenida Lalo Guerrero, Cathedral City, CA 92234 1 of 1 Sheila McGrath-Hibdon, Engineering Financial Analyst (760) 770-0319 July 11,2011 Item Project Name / Limits Total Cost Measure A No. Capital Projects Project Type ($000's) ($000's) 1 Public Works Department & Parks Maintenance City wide maintenance operations including parking, median maintenance and street light energy; $ 2,281.1 $ 1,140,6 Transportation and traffic related planning and development activities as well as highway design and related engineering activities; Maintenance of traffic signal system. 5 Capital Improvement Projects (on -going and proposed projects) Various Traffic / transportation related projects. $ 140,441.9 $ 717.7 $ 142,723.0 $ 1,858.3 42 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2014-2015 Agency: Page: Prepared by: Telephone No.: Date Prepared: City of Cathedral City 68-700 Avenida Lalo Guerrero, Cathedral City, CA 92234 1 of 1 Sheila McGrath-Hibdon, Engineering Financial Analyst (760) 770-0319 July 11. 2011 Item No. Project Name J Limits Capital Projects Project Type Total Cost ($000`s) Measure A ($000's) 1 Public Works Department & Parks Maintenance aty wide maintenance operations including parking, median maintenance and street light energy; $ 2,349.5 $ 1,174.8 Transportation and traffic related planning and development activities as well as highway design and related engineering activities; Maintenance of traffic signal system. 5 Capital Improvement Projects (on -going and proposed projects) Various Traffic / transportation related projects. $ 27,090.3 $ 467.14 $ 29,439.8 $ 1,641.9 • 43 • Agency: Page: Prepared by: Telephone No.: Date Prepared: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015-2016 City of Cathedral City 68-700 Avenida Lao Guerrero, Cathedral City, CA 92234 1 of 1 Sheila McGrath-Hibdon, Engineering Financial Analyst (760) 770-0319 July 11, 2011 Item No. Project Name / Limits Capital Projects Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A ($000's) I 5 Public Works Department & Parks Maintenance Capital Improvement Projects (on -going and proposed projects) City wide maintenance operations including parking, median maintenance and street light energy; Transportation and traffic related planning and development activities as well as highway design and related engineering activities; Maintenance of traffic signal system. Various Traffic / transportation related projects. $ 2,420,0 $ 9,915.9 $ 1,210.0 $ 435.0 $ 12,335.9 - $ 1,6450 • 44 CITY OF CATHEDRAL CITY MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY2010-2011 PROJECT STATUS REPORT JULY 11,2011 The following projects, programs and operations were listed in prior Five -Year Plans and Project Status Reports, have been added as new projects, have been cancelled or amended. All Operations and Capital Projects utilize a combination of Measure A and other funding sources. The following figures are un-audited and reflect expenditures through May 31, 2011. OPERATIONS: 156-8301 Traffic Signal Maintenance Annual Contract: The City has a contract with Honeywell to perform signal maintenance of its 46 traffic signals. Measure A Expended to Date: $ 141,457 161-xxxx City Public Works Department operations, including parkway and median maintenance and street lighting charges. Measure A Expended to Date: $ 629,288 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS: ONGOING PROJECTS NOTE: Measure A FY 2011 funding overages, by project, are returned to fund for re -allocation as needed during FY 2012 - forward. COP No. 1000 City-wide Restriping: Established as a Public Works activity for the Re -Striping of City streets and is now complete. Total Project Budget: $ (150,000) Measure A Allocation: S (141,000) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 83,602 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ 1003 Ramon Road Widening East of Date Palm: To widen and rehabilitate Ramon Road, east of Date Palm to the east City limits. The project has experienced environmental and right-of-way delays and is now anticipated to be complete June 2012. Total Project Budget: $ Measure A Allocation: $ Measure A Expended To Date: $ Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ (2,996,019) (1,140,000) 277,909 (862,091) 1005 Date Palm /1-10 Interchange: This project is necessary to reconstruct the existing Date Palm Drive/1-10 interchange to improve traffic capacity. Construction is expected to be complete during FY 2012/2013. Total Project Budget: $ (31,721,000) Measure A Allocation: $ (630,850) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 25,025 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ (363,495) 1010 DaVall / 1-10 Interchange: Construct new regional arterial improvement including: the widening of Da Vall Rd. from 2 to 6 lanes between Dinah Shore and Ramon Rd., widening from 2 to 6 lanes from Ramon Rd to McCallum Way, widening from 2 to 6 lanes from McCallum Way to Ave_ 30, construct new 6 -lane road Ave. 30 to 1-10, and construct new 6 -lane road 1-10 to Varner Rd. This project is part of CVAG's Transportation Project Prioritization Study and is expected to begin construction during FY 2020. The PID/PSR stage of this project is currently on hold until further notice from CVAG and/or Caltrans District 8. Total Project Budget: $ (134,220,942) Measure A Allocation: $ (440,000) Pg. 1 of 5 Updated 07111/2011 Cathedral City PSR FY2010-2011 45 CITY OF CATHEDRAL CITY MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY2010-2011 PROJECT STATUS REPORT JULY 11, 2011 Measure A Expended To Date: $ 58.674 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012: $ 1011 Dream Homes Area ADA: To construct barrier free access to Agua Caliente School and approximately 30-35 ADA compliant handicap ramps to provide safer pedestrian circulation in a low -mod residential area of Cathedral City known as the 'Dream Homes,' Construction slated to be complete FY 2011/2012. Additional and/or alternative funding mechanism(s) have been secured; balance of Measure allocation to return to fund. Total Proposed Project Budget: $ (344,290) Total Allocated Measure A: $ (50,000) Measure A Expended To Date: $ Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ 1012 Date Palm Lighted Crosswalks: To install in -pavement lighted crosswalks at seven (7) locations along Date Palm Dr. between Converse and 30th Ave. at cross streets; Date Palm Dr. at David Kelly, 30th Ave., Victoria Dr. and Converse; Converse at Felicity PI., and San Eljay at McCallum and 30th Ave. by FY 2011/2012. Additional and/or alternative funding mechanism(s) have been secured; balance of Measure allocation to return to fund. Total Proposed Project Budget: $ (484,233) Total Allocated Measure A: $ (45,960) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 3,668 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ • 1013 Landau Blvd. /1-10 Interchange: Phase 1 is to prepare the Project Initiation Document and other preliminary studies and documents necessary to construct a new 6 -lane mixed flow, partial cloverleaf interchange with auxiliary lanes and 4 -two lane ramps, plus a 6 -lane grade separation bridge over the UPRR tracks, including the widening of Landau Blvd. between Vista Chino and Varner Road. Work on this project has been placed on hold and suspended until FY. 2014/2015. Total Proposed Project Budget: $ (184,808,400) Total Allocated Measure A: $ (40,000) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 17,266 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ - 1014 Varner Road and Date Palm Drive Shoulder Stabilization: This project was to provide PM10 soil stabilization to reduce blow sand track -out onto City streets. The City has now opted not to proceed with project due to environmental finding that proposed material is toxic to environment. Balance of Measure A allocation to return to fund. Total Proposed Project Budget: $ (158,328) Total Allocated Measure A: $ (37,680) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 37,318 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ - 1016 Edorn Hill Truck Climbing Lane: To construct a climbing lane from Varner Rd. northerly for 4,700 linear feet as required by an agreement with Riverside Integrated Waste Management Bureau (IWMB). The design phase is anticipated to be completed during FY 2011/2012, with construction complete FY 2012/2013. Total Proposed Protect Budget: $ (1,000,000) Total Allocated Measure A: $ (114,700) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 2,142 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ (45,023) 2012 Cove Assessment District: This project was for sanitary sewer, street and other improvements in the Cove Area of Cathedral City, Final acceptance of the project by City Council occurred May 25. 2011 via Minute Order 4866. Balance of Measure A allocation to retum to fund. Total Project Budget: $ (42, 912,064) • Pg. 2 of 5 Updated 07,11/2011 Cathedral City PSR FY2010-2011 46 CITY OF CATHEDRAL CITY MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY2010-2011 PROJECT STATUS REPORT JULY 11,2011 Measure A Allocation: S (5,000) Measure A Expended To Date: S 4,467 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 S - 2500 Ramon Road at Whitewater River Bndge Widening: The project is necessary to eliminate lane restriction for capacity and safety, as well as a land deficiency, and to improve the structure efficiency rating of the Ramon Road Bridge at the Whitewater River; located on Ramon Road between San Luis Rey and Landau Blvd. Palm Springs is the lead agency of this $33.2M project; Cathedral City will share approximately 2©h of the total costs. Construction is scheduled to begin in FY 2014/2015. Total Proposed Project Budget: $ (476,320) Total Allocated Measure A: S (238,160) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 20,219 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ (10.897) 2512 Cathedral Canyon / Terrace Road: The constructed improvements consist of a sidewalk on the east side of Cathedral Canyon Dr. from E. Palm Canyon Dr. to Terrace Rd., a sidewalk on the north side of Terrace Rd. from Chuperosa Ln. to Paradise Way, and a Class II bikeway on Cathedral Canyon Dr. (both east and west sides) from E. Palm Canyon Dr. to Terrace Rd and will be complete July 2011_ Any remaining Measure A allocation will return to fund. Total Project Budget $ (526,000) Measure A Allocation: $ (75,840) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 55.113 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ (20,727) 2513 Whitewater Neighborhood Sidewalk Improvements: For infill sidewalks necessary to turn existing dirt, grass and native pathways within the Whitewater neighborhood between Dinah Shore Drive and Ramon Road into ADA compliant concrete sidewalks, driveway approaches and curb ramps. Project to be complete FY 2012. Total' Project Budget $ (198,850) Measure A Allocation: $ (45,425) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 9;317 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ (36,108) 3522 Clean Streets Management: To provide for the on -going reduction of entrained road dust emissions as part of the City's arterial and auxiliary street maintenance and as part of the City's systematic approach in maintaining compliance with PM -10 standards. Continuance of this project will be funded by non -Measure A monies. Total Project Budget: $ (419,087) Measure A Allocation: $ (95,605) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 95,605 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ - 6506 Date Palm Signal Synchronization: For the installation of signal synchronization equipment at 10 intersections on Date Palm Dr. from Ramon Rd. to E. Palm Cyn. Dr., utilizing the already installed hard -wire interconnect along the Date Palm Dr. corridor, and the installation of signal synchronization equipment on Date Palm Dr, from Ramon Rd, to Varner Rd. Project to be completed FY 2011/2012. Remaining project activities will be funded by non -Measure a monies. Total Project Budget: $ (509,550) Measure A Allocation: S (10,262) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 10,262 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ 8645 Drainage Basins: On -going activities to acquire and construct retention/detention basins to prevent street flooding, Project activities postponed until FY 2014/2015. Pg. 3 of 5 updated 07/11/2011 Cathedral City PSR FY2010-2011 47 CITY OF CATHEDRAL CITY MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY2010-2011 PROJECT STATUS REPORT JULY 11,2011 Total Project Budget: $ (81,350) Measure A Allocation: $ (25,000) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 1,038 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ - 8670 Date Palm Dr. Bridge: For the replacement/widening of a two lane low water crossing bridge (Bridge No. 00L0043) on Date Palm Dr. over Long Canyon Creek with a six lane bridge and pavement for approximately 350' (from Varner Rd. to 350' south of Varner Rd.). Environmental clearances are anticipated by Dec. 2013, bid advertising Mar. 2016 and construction completed Dec: 2017. Tota! Project Budget: $ (10,914,300) Measure A Allocation: $ (751,800) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 26,862 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ (108,741) 8691 E. Palm Canyon Bridge Widening at the West Cathedral Canyon Channel: Designed and constructed a widened bridge structure and approach lane to accommodate six lanes and sidewalks on the bridge. This project is now complete and was accepted by City Council on May 11, 2011 via Minute Order 4861. Balance of Measure A allocation to return to fund. Total Project Budget: $ (4,276,000) Measure A Allocation: $ (250,000) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 184,970 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ - • 8695 Landscaping Date Palm: For the on -going maintenance of Date Palm Dr. median landscaping • Total Project Budget: $ (50,000) Measure A Allocation: $ (25,000) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 8,827 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ (16,173) 8835 Ramon Road Median Islands: On -going project to construct and landscape median islands at various locations in Ramon Road. Total Project Budget: $ (17,000) Measure A Allocation: $ (17,000) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 933 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ (16,067) 8907 Varner / Date Palm Chip Seal: This maintenance project was necessary to improve safety and rideability of Varner Road and Date Palm Drive. The project is not cost effective and the chip seal product raised environmental concerns. Subsequently, the City has rescinded the CIWMB grant and will pursue alternative roadway options. Balance of Measure A allocation to return to fund. Tota! Proposed Project Budget: $ (500,000) Total Allocated Measure A: $ (100,000) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 35,700 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ - 8915 Date Palm / Varner Road Blow Sand Abatement Wind fences: Installed wind fences on Date Palm Dr. from 1-10 to Varner Rd. and along Varner Rd. from Date Palm Dr. northerly to the west City limits. This project is now complete and was accepted by City Council on May 11, 2011 via Minute Order 4861. Balance of Measure A allocation to return to fund. Total Project Budget: $ Measure A Allocation: $ Measure A Expended To Date: $ Pg. 4 of 5 Updated 07/11/2011 Cathedral City PSR FY2010-2011 (152, 680) (37,680) 23,580 • 48 • • • CITY OF CATHEDRAL CITY MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY2010-2011 PROJECT STATUS REPORT JULY 11,2011 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ 8919 Cathedral Canyon Bridge Whitewater Low Flow Crossing: To construct a new 4 -lane bridge on Cathedral Canyon Dr. at the Whitewater River Channel to eliminate a low flow crossing. Construction is estimated to be complete during FY 2015/2016. Total Project Budget: $ Measure A Allocation: $ Measure A Expended To Date: $ Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ (22, 038, 000) (631,940) 99,953 (53.199) 8921 Cove Drainage: Construct storm drains in the upper and tower portions of the Cathedral City Cove area necessary to protect the Downtown core from a 100 -year flood hazard. The project has 12 systems and was accomplished in two phases. The project is complete and pending final acceptance by the City Council. Balance of Measure A allocation to return to fund. Total Project Budget: $ (8,250,525) Measure A Allocation: $ (80,000) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 46,896 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ - 8946 ADA Compliance: For the on -going construction of access ramps and other disabled access improvements on public streets and sidewalks. This project is currently on hold and has been postponed until FY 2013/2014. Total Project Budget: $ (115, 600) Measure A Allocation: $ (115,600) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 4,702 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ 8947 Eagle Canyon Dam and Clean Up: For the site of a proposed flood control dam to be built by Riverside County Flood Control District, intended to prevent flash flooding along E. Palm Canyon Dr. from the large upstream watershed. Completion of this project is anticipated during FY 2014. Remaining project activities will be funded by non -Measure A monies. Total Project Budget: $ (3,375,000) Measure A Allocation: S (45,000) Measure A Expended To Date: 5 43,845 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ 8988 Ramon Road West Corridor: Project is for the planning, design & construction to rehabilitate and beautify the Ramon Rd. corridor, improving traffic circulation and urban aesthetics between Landau and Date Palm, promoting the retention and expansion of businesses, increase traffic flow and reduce congestion. Construction is expected to complete FY 201112012. Total Project Budget: $ (3,551,135) Measure A Allocation: $ (109,850) Measure A Expended To Date: $ 101,011 Measure A to Carry Forward to FY 2012 $ (8,839) Pg. 5 of 5 Updated 07/11/2011 Cathedral City PSR FY2010-2011 49 • AGENDA ITEM 7F • • • • • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: 2009 Measure A Program Maintenance of Effort BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the 2009 Measure A Maintenance of Effort (MOE) base year levels for the following cities: • Calimesa • Cathedral City Coachella • Palm Desert • Palm Springs Rancho Mirage • San Jacinto BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Measure A imposes several requirements on local agencies in order to receive local streets and roads funds. The 2009 Measure A ordinance continued the requirement for local agencies to maintain the current commitment of local discretionary expenditures toward transportation construction and maintenance activities. This requirement is to ensure that Measure A funds supplement current expenditures, not supplant. In accordance with the 2009 Measure A ordinance, if local agencies do not meet their respective MOE base year level in a given year, Measure A Local Streets and Roads disbursements will be withheld the following year. At its July 2010 meeting, the Commission approved the MOE guidelines developed by staff and the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). The guidelines also indicated that the implementation of the 2009 MOE base year levels would be applicable to FY 2011/12. For the first two years of the 2009 Measure A program (i.e., FY 2009/10 and FY 2010/11), the Commission approved the use of the 1989 Measure A MOE base year amounts, or the Proposition 42 MOE amount for cities incorporated in or after 1989. Agenda Item 7F 50 The 2009 Measure A MOE annual certification process is as follows: • Local agencies complete the MOE report template to include discretionary general fund expenditures for construction and maintenance activities for the reporting year; • General ledger documentation/forms must be submitted as an attachment to the MOE report template; • MOE reports will be submitted to the Commission's auditor; • Commission staff will report to the TAC and Commission regarding the outcome of the auditor's findings regarding agencies meeting the MOE base year levels; and • Local agencies that do not meet the MOE base year may submit a request for special consideration, which will be presented to the Commission. The newly incorporated cities of Eastvale, Jurupa Valley, Menifee, and Wildomar are eligible to receive Measure A Local Streets and Roads funding upon notice of participation in the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and participation in the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee program. These cities will be required to determine their respective MOE base year levels to meet the MOE certification requirement after the third year of incorporation. At its July 2011 meeting, the Commission approved 2009 MOE base years for 14 of the 22 eligible cities. After further review and clarification staff recommends approving MOE base years for the following cities: Calimesa Cathedral City Coachella Palm Desert Palm Springs Rancho Mirage San Jacinto The attached listing identifies the local agencies that are being recommended for approval at the September 2011 Commission meeting in addition to those that were previously approved. Staff anticipates concluding the review of the city of Hemet 2009 MOE base year calculation so that a recommendation may be made at the October 2011 Commission meeting. Attachment: 2009 Measure A MOE Base Year Recommendations Agenda Item 7F • • • 51 ATTACHMENT 1 • • • 2009 MEASURE A MOE BASE YEAR LEVELS 2009 MOE Base Years - Recommended for Approval at the September 2 Agency 1989 MOE Proposed 2009 MOE RCTC Adjustments Recommended 2009 MOE Calimesa 7,294 2,401 2,401 Cathedral City 625,230 391,688 391,688 Coachella 69,663 92,205 92,205 Palm Desert 904,798 2,398,146 2,398,146 Palm Springs 1,892,584 1,498,732 1,498,732 Rancho Mirage 1,191,036 674,811 674,811 San Jacinto 143,347 156,391 156,391 2009 MOE Base Years - Approved at the July 2011 Commission M Agency 1989 MOE Approved 2009 MOE Banning 164,325 316,181 Blythe 475,677 520,192 Canyon Lake 6,063 28,873 Corona 1,784,399 2,201,200 Desert Hot Springs 57,586 75,147 Indian Wells 55,962 963,640 Indio 465,763 2,048,564 Lake Elsinore 503,339 960,771 Moreno Valley 943,143 1,459,153 Murrieta 52,625 595,702 Norco 1,259 22,536 Perris 399,945 1,218,470 Riverside 12,449,203 12,449,203 Temecula 2,785,034 1,431,799 New Cities - Base Year Level Required After Third Year of Incor Agency 1989 MOE Approved 2009 MOE Eastvale N/A N/A Jurupa Valley N/A N/A Menifee N/A N/A Wildomar N/A N/A MOE Base Year Levels Not Required Agency 1989 MOE Approved 2009 MOE Comments Beaumont 70,702 N/A City does not qualify for Measure A LSR funds La Quinta N/A N/A City does not qualify for Measure A LSR funds Riverside County - - No Discretionary GF expenditures 2009 MOE Base Year Levels - Pending Agency Hemet 1989 MOE Approved 2009 MOE 1,183,605 Pending Comments Follow up with city 52 • • • • AGENDA ITEM 7G • • • • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Consideration of Transportation Enhancement Funds for B Canyon Wildlife Crossing the WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve $3.1 million of regional Transportation Enhancement (TE) funds for the B Canyon wildlife crossing project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission has been working closely with Caltrans, the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority, local agencies and wildlife agencies to develop a project to address the need for an improved wildlife crossing in the Corona area. Past and present transportation improvements on State Route 91 have incrementally degraded opportunities for north -south wildlife movement in the area and piecemeal mitigation on a project -by -project basis has not adequately addressed the cumulative impacts that have resulted. Additionally, it is not reasonable for any one project to carry the burden for these cumulative impacts. The proposed B Canyon wildlife crossing project is a holistic approach toward mitigating the cumulative impacts of these projects within this environmentally sensitive area. Improvements to an existing culvert under SR -91 east of the Green River Road interchange will allow connection between the Cleveland National Forest with the Santa Ana River, Chino Hills State Park, and Prado Basin and allow for a critical wildlife crossing in the area. The TE program provides Federal Highway Administration funds to projects that strengthen the cultural, aesthetic, or environmental value of our transportation system. The intent of the program is to fund special or additional activities not normally required on a transportation project. TE delivery has been problematic statewide and locally due to many factors such as: Agenda Item 7G 53 • Difficulty completing the environmental process in a timely manner; • Request for Authorization (RFA) or obligation process; • Requirement for California Conservation Corps involvement, if feasible; and • Allocation and award deadlines. The anticipated cost of the total project is approximately $8.1 million. Caltrans District 8 has submitted an application for $5 million of Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP) TE funds for this project, which is the maximum amount that Caltrans can apply for through the ITIP TE program. The $5 million will cover all of the support costs associated with the project and a portion of the construction capital. Construction of this project is proposed to be programmed in FY 2016/17 and will be closely coordinated with the Commission's SR -91 Corridor Improvement Project. California Transportation Commission staff has indicated that TE programming in the 2012 STIP will be more restrictive in an effort to ensure projects are programmed and delivered so that amendments and extensions are minimized. Since many TE projects tend to be in environmental sensitive areas or impact historical areas/buildings, project sponsors need to spend more resources developing the environmental document and technical studies. Caltrans is willing to be the lead agency and will have a better advantage at delivering this wildlife crossing project. Staff recommends that the remaining balance of $3.1 million for the project be funded with regional TE funds. There is no fiscal impact as these funds will not pass through the Commission but to Caltrans as the lead agency. Attachment: B Canyon Wildlife Crossing Location Agenda Item 7G • • • 54 • re. �1?%orly FRp' Yu,,flI Pk • B Cany on Wildlife Crossing Location Route 91 County Postrile: RIV R.1 Statewide Postrnile: 37.332 • 55 • • • • AGENDA ITEM 7H • • • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Min Saysay, Right of Way Manager Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Extension of Task Orders Issued to On -Call Right of Way Consultants WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 07-72-026-40, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 07-72-026-00, with Overland Pacific and Cutler, Inc. (OPC) and Agreement No. 07-72-027-26, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 07-72-027-00, with Epic Land Solutions, Inc. (Epic) to extend the term of the agreements to enable the consultants to complete the right of way components of certain highway and rail projects assigned to them, as identified in the attachment; 2) Authorize staff to extend the term of current task orders for OPC and Epic and to issue the pending task orders for OPC, as identified in the attachment, for the additional amount of $751,600, plus a 10 percent cost contingency of $75,160, for a total additional cost of $826,760; 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 4) Authorize the Executive Director to further extend the term of the agreements and related task orders as the corresponding future project schedule revisions may require. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On September 14, 2006, the Commission authorized the award of Agreement No. 07-72-026-00 to OPC and Agreement No. 07-72-027-00 to Epic to perform right of way acquisition, relocation, and related services on an on -call basis. Previously selected on the basis of responses to a competitive request for proposals issued on June 13, 2006, OPC and Epic were awarded these agreements for an initial period of three years with two one-year extension options. Both Agenda Item 7H 56 agreements will expire on September 15, 2011. Task orders have been issued to OPC and Epic under the terms of both agreements for the performance of critical right of way components of various highway and rail projects. The work covered by the majority of these task orders has been completed satisfactorily prior to agreement expiration. A request for proposals is expected to be issued on or before September 6, 2011, to secure new right of way services agreements competitively under an independent procurement process. However, as summarized on the attachment, several existing as well as pending task orders aggregating $1,254,420 and $826,760, respectively, for certain projects are anticipated to be completed after the term of the existing agreements. These projects are far enough along that a change in consultants at this point would result in substantial extra costs. Amounts for these task orders have been included in the FY 2011/12 budget. Both consultants have agreed to (1) reduce the profit component of their hourly billings by 30 percent and (2) waive their contractual right under the existing agreements to increase their hourly rates on an annual basis for work billed under these task orders. Staff recommends the approval of the term extensions of the agreements in order to complete existing and to issue pending task orders as listed in the attachment. Additionally, staff recommends that the Executive Director be authorized to approve further term extensions to the agreements as future project schedule revisions may require. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2011/12 FY 201 2/1 3 + Amount: $592,680 234,080 1989 Measure A Highway and Rail Source of Funds: 2009 Measure A Highway Budget Adjustment: No TUMF, TCRP, STIP-RIP 003005 81403 00013 222 31 81401 003009 81403 00013 222 31 81401 GL/Project Accounting No.: 003015 81403 00013 222 31 81401 003023 81403 00013 262 31 81401 003824 81403 00073 221 33 81401 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \yam Date: 08/16/1 1 Attachment: List Summarizing Existing and Pending Task Orders Agenda Item 7H • • • 57 • Project Name Scope of Work Unexpended Amount on Existing Task Orders Additional Amount For Pending Task Orders Needed to Close Out Projects Expected Completion Date Overland, Pacific and Cutler, Inc. SR -91 HOV Construction Coordination, Closeout $270,183 $112,500 4/31/2014 SR -74/1-215 Interchange Reconstruct Lake Perris Village sign, remediate soundwall, utility coordination, ROW Services 876 62,600 6/30/2012 SR -74 Curve Realignment ROW Acquisition Services 8,980 49,100 4/31/2013 1-215 Central ROW and Utility Coordination Services 69,390 227,400 4/31/2016 BNSF 4th Main Acquisition and Relocation Services 109,579 300,000 12/31/2012 Total OPC $459,008 $751,600 Epic Land Solutions, Inc. (term extensions only) Rail Property Management MWD Negotiations $1,716 12/31/2011 Perris Valley Line Utility and Outdoor Sign Relocation 320,044 12/31/2012 Perris Valley Line Acquisition and Relocation 340,108 12/31/2012 Perris MMF Acquisition and Relocation 13,591 12/31/2011 Perris Valley Line Potholing 47,313 12/31/2011 3/31/2012 Perris Valley Line Easement to Fee Conversion in Perris 11,024 Perris Valley Line 5th/ 6th Street Vacation in Perris 36,400 12/31/2012 Rail Property Management 9th Street Vacation in Downtown Riverside 23,500 12/31/2011 Total Epic $795,412 Grand Total $1,254,420 $751,600 10% Contingency 75,160 Grand Total with Contingency $826,760 58 • • • • AGENDA ITEM 71 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Advance Agreements with Southern California Edison, AT&T, Southern California Gas Co., and Questar for Advanced Engineering and Material Procurement for Schedule Critical Utility Relocations for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Authorize the Executive Director to execute advance agreements with Southern California Edison (SCE), AT&T, Southern California Gas Co. (SoCalGas), and Questar, pursuant to legal counsel review, for advanced engineering and material procurement for utility relocations for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR -91 CIP) for a combined amount of $2,070,000, plus a contingency amount of $330,000, for a total not to exceed amount of $2.4 million; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director to approve contingency work up to the total not to exceed amount as may be required for these future utility relocation agreements for advanced engineering and material procurement. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Staff continues to work toward timely completion of the SR -91 CIP to widen the SR -91 freeway through Corona and extend the 91 Express Lanes by advancing several work phases concurrently. These concurrent work phases include preliminary engineering, environmental permitting, right-of-way acquisition, and design -build (final design, construction, and utility relocation). To maintain the project's construction schedule, staff and its design build project and construction manager (PCM) have identified certain schedule -critical activities related to right-of-way acquisition, railroad coordination, procurement of a design - build contractor, and the relocation of utilities impacted by the SR -91 CIP. Staff continues to actively advance each of these schedule -critical activities. Agenda Item 71 59 Environmental permitting is planned to be completed by the summer of 2012. Construction, including utility relocations, can begin only after the environmental permitting and state and federal project approvals are in place. However, utility relocation work that is not actual construction, such as advanced engineering and material procurement, can proceed in advance of obtaining environmental permits. Staff, through its PCM, has identified 74 utility locations potentially impacted by the SR -91 CIP owned by five utility companies: SCE, AT&T, SoCalGas, Time Warner, and Questar. Staff has developed an action plan to minimize the risk of cost and schedule delay due to these utility relocations. Staff has coordinated with each of the utility companies to verify utility locations within the project area. Further, staff and its PCM located each potential utility conflict in the field (pothole) and developed a utility conflict matrix including an estimated cost to relocate each utility. Additionally, staff and its PCM continue to work with each utility company to develop a project utility agreement to detail the roles and responsibilities of each party, and the cost and schedule to relocate each utility impacted by the SR -91 CIP, and other items. Through discussions with the utility companies it was determined that if certain schedule -critical activities, such as advanced engineering and material procurement, could start prior to obtaining environmental permits, it would reduce the risk of a future construction schedule delay. By executing advance agreements with each utility company, other than Time Warner, for advanced engineering and material procurement, each utility company could start advanced engineering and material procurement of long lead time items (e.g. large, steel electrical poles). The estimated costs for utility relocations, and advanced engineering and procurement are shown in Table 1. TABLE 1 - Advanced Engineering and Material Procurement Costs Utility Estimated Relocation Advanced Engineering (10%) Advanced Material Procurement Total Advanced Agreement SCE $3,000,000 $300,000 $750,000 $1,050,000 AT&T 2,500,000 250,000 400,000 650,000 SoCalGas 1,100,000 110,000 150,000 260,000 Questar 1,100,000 110,000 0 110,000 TOTAL $7,700,000 $770,000 $1,300,000 $2,070,000 Benefits and/or justifications of advancing the detailed engineering and the procurement of long -lead time materials through advanced agreements include: Agenda Item 71 • • • 60 • • • • The technical documents developed with the utility companies will provide design build contractors bidding with additional information for all the utility conflicts which reduces cost risk to the Commission and the design build contractor. Early communication with utility companies to accomplish advanced design and material procurement will foster mutual cooperation and conflict coordination which will reduce schedule risk to the project. Some examples include: 1. SCE structures at Sherman and Lincoln may require FAA approval due to the FAA height limitation requirements to span the widened SR -91. Engaging SCE earlier will provide time for FAA approvals, if required; 2. Relocation of the SCE distribution line at the SR -91/I-15 interchange is complex, requires agreements with BNSF Railroad and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, and would benefit from advance agreement; and 3. SCE steel structures, SoCalGas regulator vault, and AT&T communications cabinets have a procurement lead time of 12 to 18 months which could be started earlier with advanced engineering and material procurement. • Reaching earlier agreement with utility companies on relocation plans, technical information, and advanced procurement can reduce bid costs by reducing the perceived overall utility risk by a design build contractor. Staff is seeking to execute advance agreements with the four utility companies in Table 1 which would be limited in scope to payment of funds to the utility company for advanced engineering and material procurement. Separately, a more comprehensive project utility agreement is being negotiated with each utility company to address all issues related to utility relocations between the utility company and the Commission. Staff will return to the Commission requesting approval of each of these project utility agreements. The cost of these advance utility agreements is included in the current FY 2011/12 budget. Staff recommends the Commission authorize the Executive Director to: • Execute advance agreements with SCE, AT&T, SoCalGas, and Questar, pursuant to legal counsel review, for utility relocation advanced engineering and material procurement for the SR -91 CIP for a combined amount of $2,070,000, plus a contingency amount of $330,000 for a total not to exceed amount of $2.4 million. • Approve contingency work up to the total not to exceed amount as may be required for these advance utility relocation agreements for advanced engineering and material procurement. Agenda Item 71 61 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2011/12 Amount: $2,400,000 Source of Funds: 2009 Measure A Western County Highway, 2010 Bond Proceeds Budget Adjustment: No GLA No.: 003028 81603 00000 0000 262 31 81603 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \1414,,davitimin Date: 08/16/11 Agenda Item 71 • 62 • AGENDA ITEM 7J • • • 1 • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Min Saysay, Right of Way Manager Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Surplus of Real Property Located at La Sierra Avenue and Indiana Avenue in the City of Riverside WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Declare the real property located at La Sierra Avenue and Indiana Avenue as surplus; and 2) Authorize staff to initiate the 60 -day public agency notification period and, if no interest is expressed, authorize the Executive Director to offer the surplus property for sale. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Staff is in the process of identifying Commission -owned real estate that is not needed for future projects and is not income generating. Such real estate assets may be declared surplus and sold in accordance with state regulations and the Commission's policies and procedures. One such asset is a portion of the real property located at the intersection of La Sierra Avenue and Indiana Avenue in the city of Riverside and depicted in the attachment. This property was acquired in its entirety from Riverside Community College in February 2003. Previously, the Commission leased a portion of the property to construct and operate the La Sierra Station. The property consists of four assessor parcel numbers (APNs) with a total area of approximately 21 acres. The station improvements are located on 11 of those acres. The Commission has a proposed project to add 500 parking spaces, comprising an additional 5 acres. The remaining areas total approximately 5 acres and are the portions of the property that staff recommends to be declared surplus. Agenda Item 7J 63 These remaining two areas are five to ten feet below street grade. One of the areas is currently used as a detention basin. In order to bring these sites to a developable condition, a large quantity of dirt would need to be imported and subsurface drainage would need to be installed. In compliance with state regulations and the Commission's policies and procedures, staff has secured an appraisal of the proposed surplus property, based on its highest and best use. Staff will initiate the 60 -day public agency notification period required by state regulations, which require that public agencies notify the city and county of jurisdiction, and other named public entities, when a property has been declared surplus and may be purchased. If no interest is expressed, the Commission may offer the surplus property for sale in the open market. The fiscal impact will be determined upon disposition of the surplus property. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: No Year: FY 2011/12 Amount: $0 Source of Funds: Sale Proceeds Budget Ad ustment: No GLA No.: 334003-416-41608-0000 221-33-42003 Fiscal Procedures Approved: 34,2, Date: 08/15/11 Attachment: Map Depicting Proposed Surplus Property Agenda Item 7J • 64 AGENDA ITEM 7K • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Henry Nickel, Staff Analyst Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Amendment to Commission's Rail Program Short Range Transit Plans WESTERN RIVERS/DE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Amend the Commission's Commuter Rail Program's FY 2009/10, FY 2010/11, and FY 2011/12 Short Range Transit Plans (SRTPs) to reflect the allocation of $5.2 million in Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5309 program funds to the Southern California Regional Rail Authority's (SCRRA) Rehabilitation and Renovation project and deobligation of $3,877,300 in FTA Section 5307 program funds from the SCRRA Rehabilitation and Renovation project; 2) Amend the Commission's Commuter Rail Program's FY 2008/09 and FY 2009/10 SRTPs to reflect deobligation of $216,000 in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds and $279,000 in State Transit Assistance (STA) funds for the Station Rehabilitation and Preventative Maintenance Plan (Station Plan) and reallocation of $100,000 in STA funds from the Station Plan to the Perris Multimodal Facility construction project; 3) Amend the Commission's Commuter Rail Program's FY 2004/2005, FY 2008/09 and FY 2010/11 SRTPs to reflect deobligation of $1,575,000 in LTF funds from the SCRRA rolling stock purchase and reallocation of $1,575,000 in Proposition 1B Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) funds from the Station Plan, Operations Control Center, and La Sierra Parking Lot Expansion projects to the SCRRA rolling stock purchase; 4) Amend the Commission's Commuter Rail Program's FY 2008/09, FY 2009/10, FY 2010/11, and FY 2011/12 SRTPs to reflect the reallocation of PTMISEA funds of $724,268 from the La Sierra Station Parking Lot Expansion project and $635,847 from the Station Plan to the Perris Valley Line CCTV and Operations Control Center projects; and Agenda Item 7K 66 5) Approve budget adjustments to increase revenues for FY 2010/11 and FY 2011/12 in the amount of $1,490,476 and $100,000, respectively. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The SRTPs include plans for the Commission's Regional Commuter Rail Program and provide detailed information about existing services and facilities, financial forecasts and plans, as well as planned and proposed improvements to be implemented. The Commission oversees transit service in Riverside County primarily through the approval of SRTPs that detail the operating and capital costs planned for transit services. Each operator adopts such a plan and then provides data to the Commission on performance. As SRTPs are based upon estimates of future projects, it is necessary to subsequently amend these documents upon completion or changes to specified projects and circumstances. The Rail Program is thus requesting amendments to its FY 2004/05, FY 2008/09, FY 2009/10, FY 2010/11, and FY 2011/12 Commuter Rail SRTPs in order to: • Cleanup unused funds through reallocation and deobligation; • Use federal and state grant funds to preserve local funds; and • Protect lapsing grant funds. FY 2009/10, FY 2010/11, and FY 2011/12 SRTP Proposed Amendment At its September 8, 2010 meeting, the Commission amended the FY 2009/10 SRTP to reflect the substitution of $9.975 million in Measure A funds for FTA 5309 funds applied to the balance of the SCRRA Metrolink rail car option #3 purchase of seven cars. The approved FY 2009/10, FY 2010/11, and FY 2011/12 SRTPs included allocation of a total of $3,877,300 in FTA Section 5307 program funds to the SCRRA Rehabilitation and Renovation project. Due in part to the September 8, 2010 amendment, SCRRA maintains unexpended federal Section 5309 funds of the Commission totaling $5.2 million. The Rail Program is now requesting approval to substitute the Section 5307 portion of the funding on SCRRA project with the unexpended Section 5309 funds scheduled to lapse unless programmed within a grant by September 30, 2011. The balance of Section 5309 funds will be applied to future capital obligations under the corresponding grant application. As these FTA funds are claimed and managed directly by SCRRA there is no fiscal impact to the Commission budget. Agenda Item 7K • 67 • • • Funding Year From To Amount SCRRA Rehabilitation: FTA 5309 Multiple Unobligated Current $3,877,300 Future $1,322,700 FY2009/10 $1,396,600 FTA 5307 FY2010/11 SCRRA Rehabilitation Deobligation for future use $1,224,700 FY201 1 /12 $1,256,000 FY 2008/09 and FY 2009/10 SRTP Proposed Amendment The approved FY2008/09 and FY 2009/10 SRTPs included allocation of a total of $216,000 in LTF funds and $379,000 in STA funds for the Station Plan that have not been expended. This project has now concluded. The Rail Program is now requesting approval to reallocate $100,000 in STA funds to the Perris Multimodal Facility construction project. The LTF balance and the $279,000 STA balance will be deobligated from the Station Plan so they may be used elsewhere in the Rail Program at a future date. A FY 2011/12 budget adjustment to increase revenues $100,000 is required. Funding Year From To Amount LTF FY2009/10 Station Rehabilitation Plan Deobligation for future use $216,000 STA FY2008/09 $279 000 STA Perris Multimodal Facility $100,000 FY 2004/05, FY 2008/09, and FY 2010/11 SRTP Proposed Amendment At its April 13, 2005 meeting, the Commission approved an expanded base order of four train cars or one locomotive and two train cars for an additional amount of $7,875,000 for the 91 Line/IE0C Line/Perris Valley Line for delivery within three years. Staff requested $6.3 million in Commuter Rail FTA Section 5309 funding and $1,575,000 in LTF funds. The procurement is now complete. The Rail Program is requesting approval to substitute the LTF portion of the funding with existing PTMISEA funds of $84,524 from the La Sierra Station Parking Lot Expansion project, anticipated PTMISEA funds of $200,000 from the Operations Control Center project, and anticipated PTMISEA funds of $1,290,476 from the Station Plan that will not be used as those project phases are complete. The anticipated PTMISEA funds relate to Proposition 1B allocations that have been approved but are pending funding through the state's bond sale anticipated for this fall. A corresponding FY 2010/11 budget adjustment to increase revenues $1,490,476 is required. Payment for the rail cars will occur upon receipt of the PTMISEA funds. Funding Year From To Amount Prop 1B FY2010/11 Station Rehabilitation Plan Rail Car Procurement $1,290,476 Prop 1B FY2010/11 Operations Control Center $200,000 Prop 1B FY2008/09 La Sierra Parking $84,524 Agenda Item 7K 68 Expansion Rail Car Procurement LTF FY2004/05 Deobligation for future use $1,575,000 FY 2008/09, FY 2009/10, FY 2010/11, and FY 2011/12 SRTP Proposed Amendment The approved FY 2008/09 and 2009/10 SRTPs included allocations of $870,637 in PTMISEA funds to the La Sierra Station Parking Lot Expansion project and $684,000 in PTMISEA funds to the Station Plan. The current phases of these projects are now complete. The Rail Program is requesting approval to reallocate the remaining balances of these funds for use on the FY 2011/12 Perris Valley Line CCTV and FY 2010/11 Operations Control Center projects. No budget adjustments are necessary, as the project expenditures will be incurred subsequent to FY 2011/12. Funding Year From To Amount Prop 1B FY2008/09 La Sierra Parking Expansion Perris Valley Line CCTV & Operations Control Center $724,268 Prop 1B FY2009/10 Station Rehabilitation Plan $635,847 Financial Information No FY 2010/11 $1,490,476 Yes FY 2010/11 $ 84,524 In Fiscal Year Budget: No Years: FY 2011/12 Amount: $ 100,000 N/A FY 2012/13+ $1,360,115 Yes (*) Source of Funds: Prop 1B, LTF, STA, and FTA Budget Adjustment: No Yes (**) N/A FY 2010/11 254199 415 41507 103 25 41502 $1,490,476* (Rail Prop 1B revenues) GLA No.: FY 2011/12 002204 97001 241 62 97001 $100,000** (STA transfer out) 003816 59001 221 33 59001 $100,000** (Rail capital transfer in) Fiscal Procedures Approved: \44,444,14. Date: 08/17/11 Agenda Item 7K • 69 • AGENDA ITEM 7L • • • • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMM/SS/ON DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Edda Rosso, Capital Projects Manager Richard Bryan, Bechtel Rail Projects Manager Stephen Bennett, Bechtel Construction Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Amendment to Agreement with Owen Design Group, Inc. to Provide Construction Management Services for the Perris Multimodal Facility WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-33-011-04, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 08-33-011-00, with Owen Design Group, Inc. (Owen Group) for construction management services for the Perris Multimodal (PMM) Facility in an amount not to exceed $100,000; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Approve a FY 2011/12 expenditure budget increase of $100,000 related to the PMM Facility construction management. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its September 2007 meeting, the Commission awarded Owen Group an agreement to perform construction management services to support pre -bid and bid phases and to manage construction of the North Main Corona Station (NMC) parking structure and PMM facility projects. The agreement was executed and work started on October 1 5, 2007. The contract for the construction of the NMC Station parking structure was awarded to McCarthy Building Companies on November 14, 2007, with an authorized amount of $21.1 million. Work started on January 7, 2008, and was substantially completed on June 29, 2009. The facility opened to the public on July 20, 2009. The project has been completed below the authorized amount with $132,256 remaining. The design engineer for the NMC Station parking structure Agenda Item 7L 70 was Stantec Architects, and at this time staff is assessing opportunities under the errors and omissions (E&0) clauses of the design agreement and is working with legal counsel to evaluate a basis for recovery. The contract for construction of the PMM Facility was awarded to LA Engineering on November 12, 2008, with an authorized amount of $5.4 million. Work started on January 5, 2009, and was substantially completed by January 10, 2010. Close out activities, including change order and claims negotiations, are underway. Psomas was the design engineer for the PMM Facility. Numerous changes and the delayed start of construction work on the PMM Facility increased the effort required by the construction manager (CM) and Amendment Nos. 1, 2 and 3 have addressed those issues. Additional Services For Amendment No. 4 Additional construction management support efforts and additional scope beyond what was originally anticipated in Amendment Nos. 1, 2 and 3 have occurred thereby requiring Amendment No. 4 in the not to exceed amount of $100,000. The reasons for this increase are itemized below: Perris Multimodal Facility 1) Prepare as -built drawings for the project; 2) Complete negotiations with the contractor for remaining contract change orders and claims to the extent possible; and 3) Prepare documents for discussion of E&O review with the designer for the PMM Facility project. Time Adjustment The time set forth in the original agreement was insufficient due to the later than anticipated start of the PMM Facility project. The original completion date of CM services of August 31, 2009, was revised to March 31, 2010, by Amendment No. 1. As CCTV configuration and traffic signal interface issues remained at PMM Facility, Amendment No. 2 extended time to June 30, 2010 to complete this work. Protracted discussion of change orders and claims has occurred on PMM Facility, and Amendment No. 4 extends the period to December 31, 2011 to complete this work. Recovery of Costs As discussed at the April 14, 2010 Commission meeting, much of the CM's work at NMC Station and PMM Facility has been involved in completing missing design Agenda Item 7L • 71 • • • details or correcting design errors. The Commission has now entered into tolling agreements with the designers, Stantec and Psomas respectively, to discuss these matters. Staff has reviewed the changes at NMC Station with legal counsel that it believes warrant rebated cost from the designer and discussion with Stantec will be underway shortly. A similar discussion with Psomas awaits the resolution of change orders/claims at PMM Facility. SUMMARY: The additional work and additional scope items required by the CM team have resulted in the depletion of the original agreement and amendment's funding earlier than expected. The original agreement and the cost estimate provided by Owen Group anticipated a project completion date of August 31, 2009. Due to the late start of the PMM Facility, the extended change order negotiations, the additional work, the negotiations on claims, the preparation of as-builts, and the preparation of documents for the E&O, this proposed amendment will extend the agreement term to December 31, 2011. The item previously presented under Agenda Item No. 11 provided for the reallocation of $ 100,000 in State Transit Assistance funds to the PMM Facility project. A budget adjustment to increase FY 2011/12 expenditures $ 100,000 is required. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: No Year: FY 2011/12 Amount: $100,000 Source of Funds: State Transit Assistance Budget Adjustment: Yes GLA No.: 003816 81302 221 33 81302 $100,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \P/f4,4a, Date: 08/17/11 Agenda Item 7L 72 • AGENDA ITEM 7M • • • • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement with Universal Protection Service to Provide Security Guard Services for Five Commission -Owned Commuter Rail Stations WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 11-24-057-00 to Universal Protection Service for security guard services at the five Commission -owned commuter rail stations for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreement, in the amount of $5,367,382, plus a contingency amount of $536,718, for a total amount not to exceed $5,904,100; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement, including option years, on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Since the Commission first opened the commuter rail stations, it has provided 24 -hour security guard services to protect life and property. The security guards are required to serve a number of roles in the field and the quality, dependability, and effectiveness of the security guards are a direct reflection on the Commission. The guard force is often the only representative of both the Commission and Metrolink at the stations on a regular basis. In that role they are expected to be alert and aware of all safety and security concerns, and also by default, to be good ambassadors at the stations. On a daily basis, the guards assist riders with ticketing, determining schedules, directing riders to the appropriate trains, platforms, and buses as necessary. In addition, they protect the Commission's property as well as keep an eye on the hundreds of parked cars at the stations. Transportation security is a national top priority and the security guard force is the most direct means for the Commission to secure the stations. Several significant improvements have been made to the security process at the stations based on a Agenda Item 7M 73 detailed security assessment that was completed in 2010. Some of the improvements include expanded staffing for observing the security cameras, additional afternoon/late night supervision, increased reporting, an electronic tour of duty monitoring system, security carts, and expanded tracking and database system. The contract with Western Area Security Services (WASS) has been in place for 10 years. Recently the contract was amended for a six-month period in order for staff to undertake a competitive procurement of a new contract for security services. Procurement Process The Commission generally utilizes the low -bid methodology for scopes of services that are complete and clearly delineated, where price is the only relevant factor that could distinguish qualified firms. The low -bid procurement precludes Commission staff from discussing a vendor's approach to performing the required services with any potential bidder. When the Commission must rely on a vendor to provide safety related services, factors other than price must be considered. For these types of services, a firm's capacity, performance history, qualifications, experience, and approach are relevant considerations in the procurement process. A negotiated procurement, or request for proposals (RFP), affords staff the opportunity to evaluate and discuss price and other technical factors with proposers. Accordingly, staff issued RFP No. 11-24-057-00 to secure services from a qualified firm to provide security guard services for the five Commission - owned commuter rail stations — Downtown Riverside, La Sierra, North Main Corona, Pedley, and West Corona. The RFP was released by staff and advertised on March 1, 2011. The weighted factor method of source selection was determined by staff to be the most appropriate for this procurement, as it allows the Commission to identify the most advantageous proposal with price and other technical factors considered. Non - price factors used to evaluate the proposers under this RFP included elements such as experience, qualifications of the firms and personnel, and the firms' relative ability to respond to the requirements set forth under the terms of the RFP. Price comprised 40% of the maximum possible points under the evaluation criteria. A pre -proposal conference was held at the Commission's office on March 10 and twelve firms attended. Commission staff responded to all questions submitted by potential proposers prior to the March 17 deadline. Twenty-three firms submitted responsible and responsive proposals prior to the April 4 submittal deadline. Utilizing the evaluation criteria set forth in the RFP, the twenty-three firms were evaluated and scored by an evaluation committee comprised of Commission staff, Bechtel staff, and a representative from the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department who serves as Metrolink's police force. Scoring was based entirely upon the evaluation criteria set forth in the RFP. Agenda Item 7M • • 74 • Based on the evaluation committee's assessment of the written proposals, and pursuant to the terms of the RFP, the evaluation committee shortlisted and invited five firms to the interview phase of the evaluation and selection process. The shortlisted firms included: • All Nation Security Services, Inc. (All Nation) • American Guard Services, Inc. • Contact Security, Inc. • Universal Protection Service (Universal) • Western Area Security Services (WASS) Interviews with the above referenced firms were conducted on May 17, and, as a result, the evaluation committee proceeded to invite All Nation, Universal, and WASS to a best and final offer phase to achieve the most competitive pricing from each firm. A subsequent teleconference was held with each of the three firms to clarify remaining concerns. Based on the foregoing procurement process, the respective evaluation ranking, inclusive of pricing, is as follows: • • Firm Overall Rank Price Price Rank Universal Protection Service 1 $5,367,381 2 Western Area Security Services 2 $5,642,366 3 AII Nation Security Services, Inc. 3 $4,306,677 1 Universal offered the most advantageous combination of relevant qualifications, experience, approach, understanding, and pricing. The technical, non -price factors that earned Universal the highest score were related to its past performance based on reference checks, experience, and qualifications, including its experience in providing security to Metrolink at Union Station. Pricing was evaluated based upon the firms' fixed labor rates for security guard services. Universal ranked second of the three firms as to price. Based on the stated criteria, Universal earned the highest evaluation score. Accordingly, the evaluation committee recommends the award of Agreement No. 11-24-057-00 to Universal for security guard services at the Commission - owned commuter rail stations for a three-year term and two one-year options. The contract amount is $5,367,382, plus a contingency amount of $536,718 for a total contract value of $5,904,100. The contingency amount shall be used for additional service locations assigned to Universal, if necessary, and for the Commission's special events held at the commuter rail stations. Agenda Item 7M 75 Universal's rates are considered fair and reasonable based upon adequate price competition and the historical cost paid for comparable services by the Commission. It should be noted that All Nation has submitted a protest of the recommended action using price as its justification. Commission policy is that price is not a valid category in which to protest an award and as such, the protest was denied. The Commission's standard form professional services agreement will be entered into with Universal subject to any changes approved by the Executive Director, and pursuant to legal counsel review. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2011/12 FY 2012/13+ Amount: $766,134 $5,137,966 Source of Funds: Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds Budget Adjustment: No N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 244001-81006-00000-0000 103-24-81006 244002-81006-00000-0000 103-24-81006 244003-81006-00000-0000 103-24-81006 244004-81006-00000-0000 103-24-81006 244006-81006-00000-0000 103-24-81006 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \JUe4,.da,� Date: 08/15/11 Attachment: Agreement with Universal Protection Service for Guard Services at the Commission -Owned Stations. Agenda Item 7M • • • 76 • Agreement No. 11-24-057-00 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AGREEMENT FOR SECURITY GUARD SERVICES WITH UNIVERSAL PROTECTION SERVICE 1. PARTIES AND DATE. This Agreement is made and entered into this _ day of , 2011, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("the Commission") and UNIVERSAL PROTECTION SERVICE ("Contractor"), a r LEGAL STATUS OF CONTRACTOR e.g., CORPORATION ]. 2. RECITALS. 2.1 Contractor desires to perform and assume responsibility for the provision of certain professional consulting services required by Commission on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Contractor represents that it is a professional Contractor, experienced in providing security guard services to public clients and is familiar with the scope of services of Commission. • 2.2 Commission desires to engage Contractor to render certain consulting services for the conduct of Security Guard Services ("Project") as set forth herein. 3. TERMS. 3.1 General Scope of Services. Contractor promises and agrees to furnish to Commission all labor materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidental and customary work necessary to fully and adequately provide professional consulting services and advice on various issues affecting the decisions of Commission regarding the Project and on other programs and matters affecting Commission, hereinafter referred to as "Services". The Services are more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. All Services shall be subject to, and performed in accordance with, this Agreement, the exhibits attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and all applicable local, state, and federal laws, rules and regulations. 3.2 Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the date first specified above and shall continue in effect for three (3) years, unless earlier terminated as provided herein. Commission shall have the option, in its sole discretion, to extend the term of this Agreement for up to two (2) consecutive one (1) year periods. Consultant shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and shall meet any other established schedules and deadlines. • 3.3 Schedule of Services. Contractor shall perform the Services expeditiously, within the term of this Agreement, and in accordance with the Schedule of Services. Contractor represents that it has the professional and technical personnel required to perform the Services 77 • in conformance with such conditions. In order to facilitate Contractor's conformance with the Schedule, the Commission shall respond to Contractor's submittals in a timely manner. Upon request of the Commission, Contractor shall provide a more detailed schedule of anticipated performance to meet the Schedule of Services. 3.4 Independent Contractor; Control and Payment of Subordinates. The Services shall be performed by Contractor under its supervision. Contractor will determine the means, method and details of performing the Services subject to the requirements of this Agreement. Commission retains Contractor on an independent contractor basis and Contractor is not an employee of Commission. Contractor retains the right to perform similar or different services for others during the term of this Agreement. Any additional personnel performing the Services under this Agreement on behalf of Contractor shall not be employees of Commission and shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Contractor shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance of Services under this Agreement and as required by law. Contractor shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such additional personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance, and workers' compensation insurance. 3.5 Conformance to Applicable Requirements. All work prepared by Contractor shall be subject to the approval of Commission. 3.6 Substitution of Key Personnel or Sub -Contractors. Contractor has represented to Commission that certain key personnel and sub -Contractors will perform and coordinate the Services under this Agreement. Should one or more of such personnel or sub - Contractors become unavailable, Contractor may substitute other personnel or sub -Contractors of at least equal competence and experience upon written approval of Commission. In the event that Commission and Contractor cannot agree as to the substitution of key personnel or sub -Contractors, Commission shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement for cause, pursuant to provisions of Section 3.16 of this Agreement. The key personnel and sub -Contractors for performance of this Agreement are as follows: Roger Langer, Paul Strankowski, Steven Merkler, Mark Sullivan, Robert Ryan. 3.7 Commission's Representative. Commission hereby designates Executive Director, or his or her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement ("Commission's Representative"). Commission's representative shall have the power to act on behalf of Commission for all purposes under this Agreement. Contractor shall not accept direction from any person other than Commission's Representative or his or her designee. 3.8 Contractor's Representative. Contractor hereby designates Robert Ryan, or his or her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement ("Contractor's Representative"). Contractor's Representative shall have full authority to represent and act on behalf of the Contractor for all purposes under this Agreement. The Contractor's Representative shall supervise and direct the Services, using his or her best skill and attention, and shall be responsible for all means, methods, techniques, sequences and procedures and for the satisfactory coordination of all portions of the Services under this Agreement. 3.9 Coordination of Services. Contractor agrees to work closely with Commission staff in the performance of Services and shall be available to Commission's staff, • • 78 • Contractors and other staff at all reasonable times. 3.10 Standard of Care; Licenses. Contractor shall perform the Services under this Agreement in a skillful and competent manner, consistent with the standard generally recognized as being employed by professionals in the same discipline in the State of California. Contractor represents and maintains that it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the Services. Contractor warrants that all employees and subcontractors shall have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. Finally, Contractor represents that it, its employees and subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services and that such licenses and approvals shall be maintained throughout the term of this Agreement. Contractor shall perform, at its own cost and expense and without reimbursement from Commission, any Services necessary to correct errors or omissions which are caused by the Contractor's failure to comply with the standard of care provided for herein, and shall be fully responsible to the Commission for all damages and other liabilities provided for in the indemnification provisions of this Agreement arising from the Contractor's errors and omissions. • • 3.11 Laws and Regulations. Contractor shall keep itself fully informed of and in compliance with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in any manner affecting the performance of the Project or the Services, including all Cal/OSHA requirements, and shall give all notices required by law. Contractor shall be liable for all violations of such laws and regulations in connection with Services. If the Contractor performs any work knowing it to be contrary to such laws, rules and regulations and without giving written notice to Commission, Contractor shall be solely responsible for all costs arising therefrom. Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold Commission, its officials, directors, officers, employees and agents free and harmless, pursuant to the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with such laws, rules or regulations. 3.12 Insurance. 3.12.1 Time for Compliance. Contractor shall not commence work under this Agreement until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the Commission that it has secured all insurance required under this section. In addition, Contractor shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any subcontract until it has secured all insurance required under this section. 3.12.2 Minimum Requirements. Contractor shall, at its expense, procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Agreement by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Contractor shall also require all of its subcontractors to procure and maintain the same insurance for the duration of the Agreement. Such insurance shall meet at least the following minimum levels of coverage: (A) Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as the latest version of the following: (1) General Liability: Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001); (2) Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form number CA 0001, code 1 (any auto); and (3) Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. 79 • (B) Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $2,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this Agreement/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit; (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage; and (3) if Contractor has an employees, Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Workers' Compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California. Employer's Practices Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. 3.12.3 Professional Liability. Contractor shall procure and maintain, and require its sub -Contractors to procure and maintain, for a period of five (5) years following completion of the Project, errors and omissions liability insurance appropriate to their profession. Such insurance shall be in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per claim. 3.12.4 Insurance Endorsements. The insurance policies shall contain the following provisions, or Contractor shall provide endorsements on forms approved by the Commission to add the following provisions to the insurance policies: (A) General Liability. The general liability policy shall be endorsed to state that: (1) the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the Services or operations performed by or on behalf of the Contractor, including materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection with such work; and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Contractor's scheduled underlying coverage. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any way. (B) Automobile Liability. The automobile liability policy shall be endorsed to state that: (1) the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the ownership, operation, maintenance, use, loading or unloading of any auto owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor or for which the Contractor is responsible; and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Contractor's scheduled underlying coverage. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any way. (C) Workers' Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents for losses paid under the terms of the insurance policy which arise from work performed by the Contractor. (D) All Coverages. Each insurance policy required by this Agreement shall be endorsed to state that: (A) coverage shall not be suspended, voided or canceled except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the Commission; and, (B) any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies, including breaches of warranties, shall not affect coverage • • 80 • provided to the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents. 3.12.5 Deductibles and Self -Insurance Retentions. Any deductibles or self -insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the Commission. If the Commission does not approve the deductibles or self -insured retentions as presented, Contractor shall guarantee that, at the option of the Commission, either: (1) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self -insured retentions as respects the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents; or, (2) the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigation costs, claims and administrative and defense expenses. 3.12.6 Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating no less than A:VIII, licensed to do business in California, and satisfactory to the Commission. • • 3.12.7 Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall furnish Commission with original certificates of insurance and endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement on forms satisfactory to the Commission. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All certificates and endorsements must be received and approved by the Commission before work commences. The Commission reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. 3.13 Safety. Contractor shall execute and maintain its work so as to avoid injury or damage to any person or property. In carrying out its Services, the Contractor shall at all times be in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations, and shall exercise all necessary precautions for the safety of employees appropriate to the nature of the work and the conditions under which the work is to be performed. Safety precautions as applicable shall include, but shall not be limited to: (A) adequate life protection and life saving equipment and procedures; (B) instructions in accident prevention for all employees and subcontractors, such as safe walkways, scaffolds, fall protection ladders, bridges, gang planks, confined space procedures, trenching and shoring, equipment and other safety devices, equipment and wearing apparel as are necessary or lawfully required to prevent accidents or injuries; and (C) adequate facilities for the proper inspection and maintenance of all safety measures. 3.14 Fees and Payment. 3.14.1 Compensation. Contractor shall receive compensation, including authorized reimbursements, for all Services rendered under this Agreement at the rates set forth in Exhibit "C" attached hereto. The total compensation shall not exceed Three Million One Hundred Forty One Thousand One Hundred Thirty Three Dollars ($3,141,133)) without written approval of Commission's Executive Director ("Total Compensation"). Extra Work may be authorized, as described below, and if authorized, will be compensated at the rates and manner set forth in this Agreement. 3.14.2 Payment of Compensation. Contractor shall submit to Commission a monthly statement which indicates work completed and hours of Services rendered by Contractor. The statement shall describe the amount of Services and supplies provided since the initial commencement date, or since the start of the subsequent billing periods, as appropriate, through the date of the statement. Commission shall, within 45 days of 81 • receiving such statement, review the statement and pay all approved charges thereon. 3.14.3 Reimbursement for Expenses. Contractor shall not be reimbursed for any expenses unless authorized in writing by Commission. 3.14.4 Extra Work. At any time during the term of this Agreement, Commission may request that Contractor perform Extra Work. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work which is determined by Commission to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which the parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the execution of this Agreement. Contractor shall not perform, nor be compensated for, Extra Work without written authorization from Commission's Executive Director. 3.15 Accounting Records. Contractor shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to all costs and expenses incurred and fees charged under this Agreement. All such records shall be clearly identifiable. Contractor shall allow a representative of Commission during normal business hours to examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of such records and any other documents created pursuant to this Agreement. Contractor shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment under this Agreement. 3.16 Termination of Agreement. 3.16.1 Grounds for Termination. Commission may, by written notice to Contractor, terminate the whole or any part of this Agreement at any time and without cause by giving written notice to Contractor of such termination, and specifying the effective date thereof. Upon termination, Contractor shall be compensated only for those services which have been fully and adequately rendered to Commission through the effective date of the termination, and Contractor shall be entitled to no further compensation. Contractor may not terminate this Agreement except for cause. 3.16.2 Effect of Termination. If this Agreement is terminated as provided herein, Commission may require Contractor to provide all finished or unfinished Documents and Data, as defined below, and other information of any kind prepared by Contractor in connection with the performance of Services under this Agreement. Contractor shall be required to provide such document and other information within fifteen (15) days of the request. 3.16.3 Additional Services. In the event this Agreement is terminated in whole or in part as provided herein, Commission may procure, upon such terms and in such manner as it may determine appropriate, services similar to those terminated. 3.17 Delivery of Notices. All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be given to the respective parties at the following address, or at such other address as the respective parties may provide in writing for this purpose: CONTRACTOR: COMMISSION: Universal Protection Service Riverside County 1551 North Tustin Avenue, 6th Floor Transportation Commission rd Santa Ana, CA 92705 4080 Lemon Street, 3 Floor • 82 • Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: Robert Ryan Attn: Executive Director Such notice shall be deemed made when personally delivered or when mailed, forty-eight (48) hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid and addressed to the party at its applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service. • • 3.18 Ownership of Materials/Confidentiality. 3.18.1 Documents & Data. This Agreement creates an exclusive and perpetual license for Commission to copy, use, modify, reuse, or sub -license any and all copyrights and designs embodied in plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, materials, data and other documents or works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, including but not limited to, physical drawings or data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer diskettes, which are prepared or caused to be prepared by Contractor under this Agreement ("Documents & Data"). Contractor shall require all subcontractors to agree in writing that Commission is granted an exclusive and perpetual license for any Documents & Data the subcontractor prepares under this Agreement. Contractor represents and warrants that Contractor has the legal right to grant the exclusive and perpetual license for all such Documents & Data. Contractor makes no such representation and warranty in regard to Documents & Data which were prepared by design professionals other than Contractor or provided to Contractor by the Commission. Commission shall not be limited in any way in its use of the Documents & Data at any time, provided that any such use not within the purposes intended by this Agreement shall be at Commission's sole risk. 3.18.2 Intellectual Property. In addition, Commission shall have and retain all right, title and interest (including copyright, patent, trade secret and other proprietary rights) in all plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, materials, data, computer programs or software and source code, enhancements, documents, and any and all works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium or expression, including but not limited to, physical drawings or other data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer media ("Intellectual Property") prepared or developed by or on behalf of Contractor under this Agreement as well as any other such Intellectual Property prepared or developed by or on behalf of Contractor under this Agreement. The Commission shall have and retain all right, title and interest in Intellectual Property developed or modified under this Agreement whether or not paid for wholly or in part by Commission, whether or not developed in conjunction with Contractor, and whether or not developed by Contractor. Contractor will execute separate written assignments of any and all rights to the above referenced Intellectual Property upon request of Commission. Contractor shall also be responsible to obtain in writing separate written assignments from any subcontractors or agents of Contractor of any and all right to the above 83 • referenced Intellectual Property. Should Contractor, either during or following termination of this Agreement, desire to use any of the above -referenced Intellectual Property, it shall first obtain the written approval of the Commission. All materials and documents which were developed or prepared by the Contractor for general use prior to the execution of this Agreement and which are not the copyright of any other party or publicly available and any other computer applications, shall continue to be the property of the Contractor. However, unless otherwise identified and stated prior to execution of this Agreement, Contractor represents and warrants that it has the right to grant the exclusive and perpetual license for all such Intellectual Property as provided herein. Commission further is granted by Contractor a non-exclusive and perpetual license to copy, use, modify or sub -license any and all Intellectual Property otherwise owned by Contractor which is the basis or foundation for any derivative, collective, insurrectional, or supplemental work created under this Agreement. 3.18.3 Confidentiality. All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings, descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other Documents and Data either created by or provided to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by Contractor. Such materials shall not, without the prior written consent of Commission, be used by Contractor for any purposes other than the performance of the Services. Nor shall such materials be disclosed to any person or entity not connected with the performance of the Services or the Project. Nothing furnished to Contractor which is otherwise known to Contractor or is generally known, or has become known, to the related industry shall be deemed confidential. Contractor shall not use Commission's name or insignia, photographs of the Project, or any publicity pertaining to the Services or the Project in any magazine, trade paper, newspaper, television or radio production or other similar medium without the prior written consent of Commission. 3.19 Cooperation; Further Acts. The Parties shall fully cooperate with one another, and shall take any additional acts or sign any additional documents as may be necessary, appropriate or convenient to attain the purposes of this Agreement. 3.20 Attorney's Fees. If either party commences an action against the other party, either legal, administrative or otherwise, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing party reasonable attorney's fees and costs of such actions. 3.21 Indemnification. Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees, Contractors, agents and volunteers free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any alleged negligent acts, omissions or willful misconduct of Contractor, its officials, officers, employees, agents, Contractors and contractors arising out of or in connection with the performance of the Services, the Project or this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all consequential damages and attorney's fees and other related costs and expenses. Contractor shall defend, at Contractor's own cost, expense and risk, any and all such aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees, Contractors, agents and volunteers. Contractor shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or 84 • • decree that may be rendered against Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees, Contractors, agents and volunteers, in any such suit, action or other legal proceeding. Contractor shall reimburse Commission and its directors, officials, officers, employees, Contractors, agents and/or volunteers, for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. Contractor's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees, Contractors, agents and volunteers. The indemnification language above shall apply except as to design professional services, as defined in Civil Code section 2782.8, including any architect, landscape architect, engineer or land surveyor services, provided pursuant to this Agreement. As to such Services, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees, Contractors, volunteers, and agents free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any alleged negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Contractor, its officials, officers, employees, agents, Contractors, and contractors arising out of or in connection with the performance of the Services, including without limitation the payment of all consequential damages, expert witness fees, and attorneys fees and other related costs and expenses. Contractor shall defend, at Contractor's own cost, expense and risk, any and all such aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, agents, Contractors, employees and volunteers. Contractor shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against the Commission or its directors, officials, officers, agents, Contractors, employees and volunteers, in any such suit, action or other legal proceeding. Contractor shall reimburse the Commission and its directors, officials, officers, agents, Contractors, employees and volunteers, for any and all legal expenses and costs, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. Contractor's obligation to indemnity shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by the Commission or its directors, officials, officers, agents, Contractors, employees and volunteers. 3.22 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings or agreements. This Agreement may only be modified by a writing signed by both parties. 3.23 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County. 3.24 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement. 3.25 Commission's Right to Employ Other Contractors. The Commission reserves the right to employ other Contractors in connection with this Project. 3.26 Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties, and shall not be assigned by Contractor without the prior written consent of Commission. 3.27 Prohibited Interests. 85 • 3.27.1 Solicitation. Contractor maintains and warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Contractor, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, Contractor warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Contractor, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, Commission shall have the right to rescind this Agreement without liability. 3.27.2 Conflict of Interest. For the term of this Agreement, no member, officer or employee of Commission, during the term of his or her service with Commission, shall have any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising therefrom. 3.28 Equal Opportunity Employment. Contractor represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex or age. Such non- discrimination shall include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination. Contractor shall also comply with all relevant provisions of Commission's Disadvantaged Business Enterprise program, Affirmative Action Plan or other related Commission programs or guidelines currently in effect or hereinafter enacted. 3.29 Subcontracting. Contractor shall not subcontract any portion of the work or Services required by this Agreement, except as expressly stated herein, without prior written approval of the Commission. Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision making them subject to all provisions stipulated in this Agreement. 3.30 Prevailing Wages. By its execution of this Agreement, Contractor certified that it is aware of the requirements of California Labor Code Sections 1720 et seq. and 1770 et seq., as well as California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 16000 et seq. ("Prevailing Wage Laws"), which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements on certain "public works" and "maintenance" projects. If the Services are being performed as part of an applicable "public works" or "maintenance" project, as defined by the Prevailing Wage Laws, and if the total compensation is $1,000 or more, Contractor agrees to fully comply with such Prevailing Wage Laws. The Commission shall provide Contractor with a copy of the prevailing rate of per diem wages in effect at the commencement of this Agreement. Contractor shall make copies of the prevailing rates of per diem wages for each craft, classification or type of worker needed to execute the Services available to interested parties upon request, and shall post copies at the Contractor's principal place of business and at the project site. Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the Commission, its elected officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any claims, liabilities, costs, penalties or interest arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws. 3.31 Employment of Apprentices. This Agreement shall not prevent the employment of properly indentured apprentices in accordance with the California Labor Code, and no employer or labor union shall refuse to accept otherwise qualified employees as indentured apprentices on the work performed hereunder solely on the ground of race, creed, national origin, ancestry, color or sex. Every qualified apprentice shall be paid the standard wage paid to apprentices under the regulations of the craft or trade in which he or she is • 86 • employed and shall be employed only in the craft or trade to which he or she is registered. If California Labor Code Section 1777.5 applies to the Services, Contractor and any subcontractor hereunder who employs workers in any apprenticeable craft or trade shall apply to the joint apprenticeship council administering applicable standards for a certificate approving Contractor or any sub -Contractor for the employment and training of apprentices. Upon issuance of this certificate, Contractor and any sub -Contractor shall employ the number of apprentices provided for therein, as well as contribute to the fund to administer the apprenticeship program in each craft or trade in the area of the work hereunder. The parties expressly understand that the responsibility for compliance with provisions of this Section and with Sections 1777.5, 1777.6 and 1777.7 of the California Labor Code in regard to all apprenticeable occupations lies with Contractor. 3.32 No Waiver. Failure of Commission to insist on any one occasion upon strict compliance with any of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof shall not be deemed a waiver of such term, covenant or condition, nor shall any waiver or relinquishment of any rights or powers hereunder at any one time or more times be deemed a waiver or relinquishment of such other right or power at any other time or times. • • 3.33 Eight -Hour Law. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Labor Code, eight hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work, and the time of service of any worker employed on the work shall be limited and restricted to eight hours during any one calendar day, and forty hours in any one calendar week, except when payment for overtime is made at not less than one and one-half the basic rate for all hours worked in excess of eight hours per day ("Eight -Hour Law"), unless Contractor or the Services are not subject to the Eight -Hour Law. Contractor shall forfeit to Commission as a penalty, $50.00 for each worker employed in the execution of this Agreement by him, or by any sub -Contractor under him, for each calendar day during which such workman is required or permitted to work more than eight hours in any calendar day and forty hours in any one calendar week without such compensation for overtime violation of the provisions of the California Labor Code, unless Contractor or the Services are not subject to the Eight -Hour Law. [signatures on following page] 87 • SIGNATURE PAGE TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AGREEMENT FOR SECURITY GUARD WITH UNIVERSAL PROTECTION SERVICE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement was executed on the date first written above. RIVERSIDE COUNTY UNIVERSAL PROTECTION SERVICE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: Gregory S. Pettis, Chairman Signature Name Title APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Best, Best & Krieger LLP General Counsel 88 • EXHIBIT A STATEMENT OF WORK I. STATION LOCATIONS A. Contractor shall provide security services for the Riverside County Transportation Commission (hereinafter "RCTC" or "Commission") at each of the following Metrolink commuter rail stations in the County of Riverside. 1. Riverside Downtown Station — 4066 Vine Street, Riverside, CA 92507 2. Pedley Station — 6001 Pedley Road, Riverside, CA 92509 3. La Sierra Station — 10901 Indiana Avenue, Riverside, CA 92503 4. West Corona Station — 155 S. Auto Center Drive, Corona, CA 92880 5. North Main Corona Station (including Parking Structure) — 250 East Blaine, Corona, CA 92879 II. SCOPE OF SERVICES The successful Contractor will provide the following: A. General Requirements 1. Monitor commuter rail stations by walking each facility, riding a golf cart and/or whatever other means the Commission considers best for each facility and/or station location. 2. Provide security for patrons, buildings, vehicles and personnel at the commuter rail stations identified herein. This will include, but not be limited to, making rounds and clock rounds of assigned areas and key locations, responding to alarms, and assuring locks of gates and doors. 3. Respond to alarms, suspicious activities, fires, injuries, security incidences, or any emergency situation. 4. Write reports to document incidents, as required. 5. Follow guidelines and requirements set forth in the Post Orders (see paragraph III below) developed by the Successful Contractor. 6. Communicate with a broad diversity of persons, including the communication of information to station patrons in a courteous and professional manner. 7. Take photographs and document violations and incidents, as required. 89 • 8. Perform any other duties or functions not specifically outlined or set forth above but which are reasonably identified as falling within the scope and realm of a security officer's duties and responsibilities. B. Work Force and Assignments 1. Contractor shall station a minimum of one Security Officer at each commuter rail station at all times. a. The Riverside Downtown Station is an exception due to the equipment layover at night - requiring a second guard equipped with pepper spray for the night shift and weekends. b. The night and weekend shift guards at the Riverside Downtown Station are required to work a total of eighty-eight hours per week. 2. A guard is required to operate the Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) System located at the Riverside Downtown Station at all times. 3. All Security Officers, except for the Downtown guards working nights and weekends, shall be unarmed. 4. Security Guards will be required to wear appropriate security uniforms. Officers shall conduct high visibility security of platforms and parking areas and shall patrol these areas hourly throughout the shift. 5. The Contractor will provide an adequate supply of flashlights and batteries, raingear, uniforms, clipboards and any other personnel equipment reasonably necessary for each guard to perform their duties. All equipment utilized by the Contractor in the execution of the agreement shall be maintained by the contractor. 6. The schedule of the guard shifts will be based on the commuter rail train schedule. Security Officers will be required assist train riders with ticket purchases and schedules. C. Communications and Records 1. Officers shall be in communication with Contractor headquarters and shall have mobile communication capability to contact police, if necessary. 2. Contractor shall be required to utilize the existing Deggy electronic guard tour system at each commuter rail station location. 3. Contractor shall provide accurate, legible, detailed reports of daily activity (DARs) and submit to the Commission using the Commission's Rail Station Security Application Database. a. The DARs should include but not be limited to all unsafe equipment or conditions of site, any accidents or injuries occurring on property, all equipment failure, schedule of services providers and a count of vehicles remaining in parking lots after hours. 90 • 4. In the event of emergency, incidents shall be reported to the designated Commission representative immediately. D. Minimum Qualifications for Prospective Security Officers 1. Must be a graduate of a state certified security officer/guard training program and possess current, valid Consumer Affairs guard cards, certification to carry mace (a chemical agent), and handcuffs. All Contractors and Security Guards shall possess all necessary certificates and permits required by state and any local jurisdiction. 2. Must possess current First Aid and CPR (Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation) certification cards. Certification as an Emergency Medical Technician level (EMT -1) may substitute for the first aid requirement. 3. May not be employed under this contract if he or she currently or in the past has been involved in: • • a. Any felony conviction; b. Military conduct resulting in dishonorable or undesirable discharge; c. Any pattern of irresponsible behavior, including but not limited to unreasonable driving, theft, or a problem employee record. 4. Must be fully literate in the English language (i.e., able to read, write, speak) and understand clearly. All personnel shall be capable of properly writing reports and maintaining a daily activity log. 5. Must meet the following requirements regarding personal behavior and ability: a. Ability to meet and deal tactfully with government personnel, facility employees and the general public; b. Ability to understand, explain, interpret and apply rules, regulations, directives and procedures; c. Possess poise, self-confidence and an ability to make sound decisions and react quickly under stressful conditions; d. Ability to prepare clear and concise reports; e. Ability to learn and adapt to changing situations; f. Ability to accept and respond to instructions and direction. 6. Must meet the physical demands. The work requires frequent and prolonged walking, standing, sitting and some running. It is possible the guards may encounter smoke and/or chemicals. Occasionally, security personnel may be required to subdue violent 91 • or potentially violent people. Accordingly, physical stamina in all its forms (mental, climate -related, etc.) is a basic physical requirement of this position. E. Supervision and Training Contractor's supervisory duties shall include, but not be limited to: 1. Provide an adequate, appropriate level of field supervision for security officers working the fixed posts. 2. Provide security guard training, at no cost to the Commission, at least twice a year for each guard. 3. Ensure that relevant contractor personnel obtains applicable Verint certification within the first six months of the contract. 4. Coordinate all security operations and services for regular and event assignments with the Commission to ensure that all are properly staffed. III. POST ORDERS The SUCCESSFUL security Contractor shall provide "post orders" to guide the performance of its security personnel on Commuter Rail facilities. Contractor shall submit a complete, final copy of the post orders for RCTC review and approval by no more than six months from the issuance of the Notice to Proceed. These post orders shall be prepared in consultation with the RCTC and shall be subject to regular update and inspection by RCTC. RCTC shall provide interested parties, upon request and adequate notice, access to the existing post orders. The existing post orders will be made available for review at the RCTC offices, located at 4080 Lemon St., 3`d Floor, Riverside, CA 92501. Please contact Matt Wallace at (951) 787-7141 to schedule a review of the documents. Post orders shall be written and contain complete duty instructions for staffing each individual post, including provisions for handling critical incidents (emergency procedures). All contact security personnel shall have access to these post orders at all times while on duty. All contract security personnel are responsible for knowing the locations of these written post orders and shall be familiar with their contents. RCTC shall have a comprehensive set of all post orders in their possession. Post orders define the basic work to be performed by contract security personnel at a specific site. Post orders shall include, but are not limited to: 1. Facility information (e.g. schedule of train operations, passenger information, bus schedules and service provider information) 2. Facility rules and regulations 3. Operation of equipment (e.g. ticket vending and validator machines) • • 92 • 4. Vehicular traffic control 5. Access control procedures 6. Emergency and critical incident response procedures 7. Security and communication control systems 8. Rail safety procedures 9. Response to injury and illness 10. Safeguarding property 11. Interaction with vendors End of Statement of Work • • • AGENDA ITEM 7N • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement with Sunesys, LLC to Provide Fiber Optic Connections and/or Infrastructure to Link the Pedley Station to the Downtown Riverside Station WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: • • 1) Award Agreement No. 11-25-132-00 to Sunesys, LLC for fiber optic connections to link the Pedley Station to the Downtown Riverside Station for a five-year term in an amount not to exceed $72,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission has invested in a network of security cameras at all of the Riverside County commuter rail stations. These cameras supplement the security guards at the site and are useful as both a deterrent to prevent crimes and as a forensics tool to investigate events and activities. All 95 cameras in the network are connected to a central operations center at the Downtown Riverside Station and observed 24 hours a day. The cameras are connected to Downtown Riverside Station via fiber optic lines (primarily through Caltrans), except the Pedley Station cameras. This agreement would establish a new fiber optic connection with Sunesys to improve reliability and capacity for the Pedley station. The current connection is a T1 line that has limited capacity and cannot be expanded beyond the current four cameras at the station. Based on efforts to improve security at the stations, it is important that an expanded communications network be developed. The proposed dark fiber installation and license agreement, Agreement No. 11-25-132-00, with Sunesys is for a license to the Commission for use of Sunesys' fiber optic connections and/or infrastructure (dark fiber) to link the Pedley Station to the Downtown Riverside Station. The agreement will allow the Agenda Item 7N 94 Commission to transfer information between the stations including, but not limited to, security camera and video feed, voice lines and data. A number of alternatives were evaluated and it was determined that the Sunesys option provide the best service at the best price. While there is some installation work to be completed by Sunesys under the agreement, per section 3.1 of the agreement, this work will be completed at Sunesys' sole cost and expense. The current Commission Procurement Manual, adopted in 2007, provides that a competitive procurement should be used for contracts over $50,000 as a matter of policy, unless non-competitive procurement is in the best interests of the Commission. In this case, staff believes that it is in the Commission's best interest to enter into the agreement with Sunesys without competitive procurement. The Commission has an existing dark fiber license agreement with Sunesys for the Perris Station. That agreement is at no cost to the Commission, as the license was provided in exchange for granting Sunesys a license over certain other Commission property. It would be in the Commission's best interest to utilize the same dark fiber provider for its commuter rail stations in order to achieve optimal connectivity, interoperability, and ease of use and maintenance. Further, Sunesys is a well - qualified provider of dark fiber, and the Commission has had success in working with Sunesys at its Perris Station. Finally, Commission staff has determined that Sunesys' license fee is at a commercially reasonable rate. Government Code section 4525 et seq. establishes procurement procedures for architectural, landscape architectural, engineering, environmental, land surveying, and construction project management selection. These provisions are sometimes referred to as the Mini -Brooks Act. Procurement under the Mini -Brooks Act is to be made based on demonstrated competence and professional qualifications. The Mini -Brooks Act is generally regarded as requiring a two-step request for proposal (RFP) process for services that fall under this Act. Federal funding rules also require a similar competitive procurement for these types of services. The proposed agreement with Sunesys does not fall under the Mini -Brooks Act and is not federally funded. Therefore an RFP process is not required, and the Commission may enter into the proposed agreement with Sunesys based on the findings above. The competitive bid requirements applicable to the Commission are set forth in Public Utilities Code section 130232. This section requires contracts to be awarded on a low -bid basis for "purchase of all supplies, equipment, and materials, and the construction of all facilities and works" when the cost exceeds $25,000. Since the proposed agreement with Sunesys does not involve the purchase of supplies, equipment, materials, or construction in excess of $25,000, it is not a low -bid contract under the Public Utilities Code, and the Commission may award the agreement based on the findings required under the procurement manual as stated above. Agenda Item 7N • 95 • • Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2011/12 FY 2012/13+ Amount: $10,800 $61,200 Source of Funds: Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds Budget Adjustment: No N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 244002-73201-00000-0000 103-24-73003 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \14/z,e,,A jtu Date: 08/16/11 Attachment: Dark Fiber Installation and License Agreement Agenda Item 7N 96 • Agreement No. 11-25-132-00 DARK FIBER INSTALLATION AND LICENSE AGREEMENT THIS DARK FIBER INSTALLATION AND LICENSE AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made as of , 2011 between Sunesys, LLC, having a place of business at 185 Titus Avenue, Warrington, PA 18976 ("SUNESYS") and RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, having a place of business at 4080 Lemon Road, 3`d Floor P.O. Box 12008, Riverside, CA 92502-2208 ("Licensee"), who are sometimes hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Parties" or individually as a "Party." RECITALS A. WHEREAS, Licensee has existing underground conduit (the "RCTC Conduit") located on, under and through certain real property owned by Licensee in the unincorporated area of Pedley, County of Riverside, State of California, also known as the "Pedley Metrolink Station", and in the City of Riverside downtown area, County of Riverside, State of California, also known as the "Downtown Riverside Metrolink Station", both Stations are referenced in Exhibit "A" as the "hub site" and further described therein (the "Property"). B. WHEREAS, the Pedley Metrolink Station and the Downtown Riverside Metrolink Station are sometimes referred to herein collectively, as the "Metrolink Stations" or "Stations" and individually, as the "Metrolink Station" or "Station". • • C. WHEREAS, SUNESYS is a telecommunications services and dark fiber provider and proposes to use its fiber optic connections and/or infrastructure to link the Metrolink Stations in order to allow transfer by Licensee of information including, but not limited to, camera and video feed, voice lines and data. D. WHEREAS, SUNESYS shall install or run two (2) fiber optic strands from the adjacent telephone pole through the RCTC Conduit to Licensee's communications room at each Station, and shall run the two (2) fiber optic strands from the RCTC Conduit at each Station through SUNESYS' fiber optic connections and/or infrastructure in order to connect the Pedley Metrolink Station to the Downtown Riverside Metrolink Station, as further described and depicted in Exhibit "B". The two (2) fiber optic strands as described in this paragraph are referred to in this Agreement as the "Licensed Fiber Optic Strands" and shall be provided and maintained by SUNESYS for Licensee's exclusive use. E. WHEREAS, SUNESYS agrees to install and grant Licensee an exclusive license to use the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows: TERMS 1. DEFINITIONS As used in this Agreement: 1.1 "Authorized Use" means the intended business use of Licensed Fiber Optic Strands by Licensee or its employees, officers or agents for telecommunication traffic purposes. 1.2 "Dark Fiber" means one or more fiber optic strands subject to this Agreement through which an associated light, signal or light communication transmission must be provided to furnish service. 17336.00603\6034229.1 97 1.3 "Licensed Fiber Optic Strands" means the two (2) Strands of Dark Fiber to be installed and used to connect the Pedley Metrolink Station to the Downtown Riverside Metrolink Station, as further described in Recitals C and D above, and as described and depicted in Exhibit "B", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 1.4 "Services" means the provision, installation and maintenance of the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands by SUNESYS including, but not limited to, the "Work" as described in Section 3 of this Agreement and the "Maintenance and Operation" as described in Sections 7.1-7.3 and 7.8 of this Agreement. 1.5 "Strands" means individual fiber optic strands. 1.6 "Taxes" means all sales, use, gross receipts, excise, access, bypass and other local, state and federal taxes, charges, fees and surcharges (including, without limitation, telecommunications taxes, universal service fees and other similar charges), however designated, imposed on or based upon the provision, lease, license, sale or use of the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands, but excluding any taxes assessed upon the net income or imposed upon the capital of SUNESYS. 2. GRANT OF LICENSE SUNESYS grants to Licensee and Licensee accepts from SUNESYS an exclusive and indefeasible license solely for Authorized Use of the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands (the "License"), as provided in this Agreement. Licensee shall have no further right, title or other interest in the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands or any other property of SUNESYS. During the term of this Agreement, SUNESYS shall have no right to grant or renew any rights to use the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands other than to Licensee. 3. WORK 3.1 SUNESYS shall, at its sole cost and expense, install the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands as described herein on or before One Hundred Twenty (120) days following the execution of this Agreement (the "Completion Date"). SUNESYS covenants that the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands shall be installed in a good and workmanlike manner, and substantially and in all material respects in accordance with standard fiber optic specifications. SUNESYS shall conduct all activities on the Property so as not to damage or harm the RCTC Conduit, or any other person or property located on the Property. SUNESYS shall be responsible for any repair, maintenance or cleanup required as a result of SUNESYS' entry onto or use of the Property under this Agreement. 3.2 SUNESYS shall, at its sole cost and expense, test the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands to verify that the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands are installed and operational in accordance with standard fiber optic specifications. When SUNESYS has determined that the results of the testing with respect to the entire span show that the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands so tested are installed and operating in accordance with such specifications, SUNESYS shall promptly notify Licensee in writing. 3.3 if and when SUNESYS gives written notice to Licensee that the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands are installed and operational, Licensee shall provide SUNESYS with written notice accepting (or rejecting by specifying the defect or failure in the testing that is the basis for such rejection) the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands. If Licensee fails to notify SUNESYS of its acceptance or rejection of the final test results with respect to the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands within thirty (30) days after Licensee's receipt of notice from SUNESYS of such test results, Licensee shall be deemed to have accepted the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands. lf, during the course of such installation and testing, any material deviation from standard specifications is discovered, the installation of the affected portion of the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands shall be repaired to such specification by SUNESYS. The date of such notice of acceptance (or deemed acceptance) of all the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands on the Property shall be the "Acceptance Date." 2 • • • 98 • • • 4. CONSIDERATION 4.1 Licensee shall pay to SUNESYS a monthly license fee of One Thousand Two Hundred Dollars ($1,200.00) per month beginning on the Acceptance Date and continuing on the monthly anniversary of the Acceptance Date. 4.2 Except as otherwise specifically provided, Licensee shall pay all applicable fees and charges associated with the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands provided for in this Agreement within thirty (30) days after receipt of invoice. 5. TAXES AND FEES Licensee shall pay all Taxes, if any, associated with the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands. Such Taxes may be separately stated on an applicable invoice. 6. LICENSE TERM The term of this Agreement shall commence on the date first specified above and shall continue in effect for an initial term of five (5) years ("Term"), unless earlier terminated as set forth herein. 7. MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION 7.1 SUNESYS shall, at its sole cost and expense, maintain the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands at all times in good working condition and repair, consistent with Licensee's performance needs and with the standards for similar systems located in the State of California. Licensee shall cooperate with, as may be reasonably required, SUNESYS in performing said maintenance. In the event of service outages or other maintenance request, SUNESYS agrees to use best efforts to respond within two (2) hours of time of notice. 7.2 SUNESYS shall, at its sole cost and expense, be responsible for all necessary splicing, including any splicing required to connect the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands to the RCTC Conduit and/or to any other fiber serving Licensee. SUNESYS shall, at its sole cost and expense, install, maintain and repair any laterals required to connect the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands provided under this Agreement to any termination point outside the portion of the Property shown on Exhibit "B", attached hereto. 7.3 SUNESYS shall, at its sole cost and expense, be responsible for obtaining and maintaining from the appropriate public or private authority any pole attachment agreements, franchises, licenses, state, local or right-of-way permits or other authorizations required to enter upon the Property to install the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands, and to operate and maintain the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands as required under this Agreement. 7.4 Licensee's use of the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands shall be at Licensee's sole cost and expense. Any work conducted by Licensee in or around the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands shall be conducted in a safe manner so as not to physically, electronically or inductively conflict or interfere or otherwise adversely affect the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands. 7.5 In the event Licensee receives information that the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands are damaged, it shall notify SUNESYS of said damage by phone at (800) 286-6664. In the event SUNESYS receives information that the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands are damaged, SUNESYS will notify Licensee of said damage by phone at: (951) 453-5037. In each case, the caller shall provide the following information: (a) Name of entity making report. (b) Location reporting problem. (c) Name of contact person reporting problem. 3 99 (d) Description of the problem in as much detail as possible. (e) Time and date the problem occurred or began. (fl State whether or not the problem presents a jeopardy situation to the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands. 7.6 Should Licensee require any additional services of SUNESYS not covered under this Agreement related to the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands, such work shall be pursuant to an amendment to this Agreement, or to a separate written agreement between the Parties, and shall be conducted at SUNESYS' then current rates for such work. 7.7 Except to respond to a service outage or a maintenance request as set forth in Section 7.1, or in the case of an emergency, SUNESYS shall provide no less than twenty-four (24) hours advance written notice to the following Licensee contact person: prior to entering onto the Property, and shall only enter the Property during normal business hours. In all cases, SUNESYS shall provide written notice of any entry onto the Property to the foregoing referenced contact person, which notice shall include, if known to SUNESYS, the identity of the entity and/or individuals who will enter the Property. Licensee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to accompany, at all times, any person entering onto the Property on behalf of SUNESYS, and to reasonably delay the entry of any such person(s) in order to protect Licensee's confidential information. Further, SUNESYS shall exercise its entry rights under this License in a manner that will not unreasonably interfere with or unreasonably interrupt Licensee's ordinary business activities on the Property. 8. OWNERSHIP The Licensed Fiber Optic Strands shall at all times remain the sole and exclusive property of SUNESYS and legal title shall be held by SUNESYS. Neither the grant of this License nor Licensee's use of the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands as contemplated herein, shall create or vest in Licensee any easement, interest, or any other ownership or property right of any nature in the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands or Strands, except that SUNESYS agrees to Licensee's right to use the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands for Authorized Use during the term of this Agreement. Licensee shall not grant any security interest in the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands or any part or component thereof. 9. INDEMNIFICATION 9.1 To the fullest extent permitted by law, SUNESYS shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Licensee, its officials, officers, directors, agents, volunteers and employees from and against any claims, damages, costs, expenses, or liabilities (collectively, "Claims") arising out of or in any way connected with any negligent act, omission or willful misconduct of SUNESYS, its officials, officers, directors, agents, contractors and employees in any way related to or arising out of this Agreement and/or the installation and maintenance of the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands. Such obligation shall include, without limitation, Claims for loss or damage to any property or for death or injury to any person or persons, mechanics' or other liens of any character, taxes or assessments of any kind, or interference with the use of the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands except that SUNESYS shall not be obligated to indemnify, defend or hold harmless Licensee, its officials, officers, directors, agents, volunteers and employees for Claims caused by the sole negligence of Licensee. 9.2 To the fullest extent permitted by law, Licensee shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless SUNESYS, its officials, officers, directors and employees from and against any claims, damages, costs, expenses, or liabilities (collectively, "Claims") arising out of or in any way connected with any negligent act, omission or willful misconduct of Licensee, its officials, officers, directors, agents and employees in any way arising out of Licensee's use of the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands under this Agreement. Such obligation shall include, without limitation, Claims for loss or damage to any property or for death or injury to any person or persons, mechanics' or other liens of any character, taxes or assessments of any kind, except that Licensee shall not be obligated to indemnify, defend or hold harmless SUNESYS, its officials, officers, directors, agents and employees for Claims caused by the sole negligence of SUNESYS. 4 • • • 100 • • • 9.3 Except as otherwise set forth in this Agreement, nothing contained herein will operate as a limitation on the right of either Party to bring action for damages against any third party based on any act or omission of such third party as such act or omission may affect the installation, operation, or use of the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands. Each Party agrees to execute such documents and provide such commercially reasonable assistance, at the claiming Party's sole expense, as may be reasonably necessary to enable the claiming Party to pursue any such action against such third party. 10. STANDARD OF CARE; PERFORMANCE OF EMPLOYEES SUNESYS shall perform all Services under this Agreement in a skillful and competent manner, consistent with the standards generally recognized as being employed by professionals in the same discipline in the State of California. SUNESYS represents and maintains that it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the Services. SUNESYS warrants that all employees and subcontractors shall have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. Finally, SUNESYS represents that it, its employees and subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services, and that such licenses and approvals shall be maintained throughout the term of this Agreement. As provided for in the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, SUNESYS shall perform, at its own cost and expense and without reimbursement from Licensee, any Services necessary to correct errors or omissions which are caused by SUNESYS' failure to comply with the standard of care provided for herein. Any employee of SUNESYS or its subcontractors who is determined by Licensee to be uncooperative, incompetent, a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the project, a threat to the safety of persons or property, or any employee who fails or refuses to perform the Services in a manner consistent with the standard of care set forth herein, shall be promptly removed from the project by SUNESYS and shall not be re-employed to perform any of the Services or to work on the project. 11. LAWS AND REGULATIONS SUNESYS shall keep itself fully informed of and in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in force at the time the Services are performed by SUNESYS and in any manner affecting the performance of the work or the Services, including all applicable Cal/OSHA requirements, and shall give all notices required by law. SUNESYS shall be liable for all violations of such laws and regulations in connection with the Services. If SUNESYS performs any work knowing it to be contrary to such laws, rules and regulations and without giving written notice to Licensee, SUNESYS shall be solely responsible for all costs arising therefrom. SUNESYS shall defend, indemnify and hold Licensee, its officials, directors, officers, employees and agents free and harmless, pursuant to the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with such laws, rules or regulations. SUNESYS' violation of such laws, rules and regulations shall also constitute a material breach of this Agreement. 12. INSURANCE 12.1 Time for Compliance. SUNESYS shall not commence the Services under this Agreement until it has provided evidence satisfactory to Licensee that it has secured all insurance required under this section. In addition, SUNESYS shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any subcontract until it has provided evidence satisfactory to Licensee that the subcontractor has secured all insurance required under this section. 12.2 Minimum Requirements. SUNESYS shall, at its expense, procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Agreement by SUNESYS, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. SUNESYS shall also require all of its subcontractors to procure and maintain the same insurance for the duration of the Agreement. Such insurance shall meet at least the following minimum levels of coverage: 12.2.1 Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as the latest version of the following: (1) General Liability: Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability 5 101 coverage (occurrence form CG 0001); (2) Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form number CA 0001, code 1 (any auto); and (3) Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. 12.2.2 Minimum Limits of Insurance. SUNESYS shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this Agreement/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit; (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage; and (3) Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Workers' Compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California. Employer's Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. 12.2.3 Insurance Endorsements. The insurance policies shall contain the following provisions, or SUNESYS shall provide endorsements on forms supplied or approved by Licensee to add the following provisions to the insurance policies: (a) General Liability. The general liability policy shall be endorsed to state that: (1) Licensee, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the Services or operations performed by or on behalf of SUNESYS, including materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection with such work; and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects Licensee, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of SUNESYS' scheduled underlying coverage. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by Licensee, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be excess of SUNESYS' insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any way. (b) Automobile Liability. The automobile liability policy shall be endorsed to state that: (1) Licensee, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the ownership, operation, maintenance, use, loading or unloading of any auto owned, leased, hired or borrowed by SUNESYS or for which SUNESYS is responsible; and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects Licensee, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of SUNESYS' scheduled underlying coverage. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by Licensee, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be excess of SUNESYS' insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any way. (c) Workers' Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against Licensee, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers for losses paid under the terms of the insurance policy which arise from work performed by SUNESYS. (d) All Coverages. Each insurance policy required by this Agreement shall be endorsed to state that: (A) coverage shall not be suspended, voided, reduced or canceled except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to Licensee; and (B) any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies, including breaches of warranties, shall not affect coverage provided to Licensee, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers. 12.2.4 Separation of Insureds; No Special Limitations. All insurance required by this Section shall contain standard separation of insureds provisions. In addition, such insurance shall not contain any special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to Licensee, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers. 12.2.5 Deductibles and Self -Insurance Retentions. Any deductibles or self -insured retentions must be declared to and approved by Licensee. SUNESYS shall guarantee that, at the option of Licensee, either: (1) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self -insured retentions as respects 6 • • 102 • • • Licensee, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers; or (2) SUNESYS shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigation costs, claims and administrative and defense expenses. 12.2.6 Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating no less than A:VII, licensed to do business in California, and satisfactory to Licensee. 12.2.7 Verification of Coverage. SUNESYS shall furnish Licensee with original certificates of insurance and endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement on forms satisfactory to Licensee. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf, and shall be on forms provided by Licensee if requested. All certificates and endorsements must be received and approved by Licensee before work commences. Licensee reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. 12.2.8 SUNESYS shall execute and maintain its work so as to avoid injury or damage to any person or property. In carrying out its Services, SUNESYS shall at all times be in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations, and shall exercise all necessary precautions for the safety of employees appropriate to the nature of the work and the conditions under which the work is to be performed. Safety precautions as applicable shall include, but shall not be limited to: (A) adequate life protection and life saving equipment and procedures; (B) instructions in accident prevention for all employees and subcontractors, such as safe walkways, scaffolds, fall protection ladders, bridges, gang planks, confined space procedures, trenching and shoring, equipment and other safety devices, equipment and wearing apparel as are necessary or lawfully required to prevent accidents or injuries; and (C) adequate facilities for the proper inspection and maintenance of all safety measures. 13. SUNESYS' SALES OR DISPOSITIONS In the event of a sale or other disposition, SUNESYS shall condition such sale or other disposition subject to the rights of Licensee under this Agreement. SUNESYS shall promptly notify Licensee of the proposed disposition of the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands. 14. LIENS Licensee shall keep the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands free from all mechanic's, artisans, materialman's, architect's, or similar services' liens which arise in any way from or as a result of Licensee's activities and cause any such liens which may arise to be discharged or released immediately upon notification that any such lien has attached to the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands. 15. TERMINATION 15.1 Upon the termination, revocation or cessation of this Agreement in any manner provided in this Agreement, SUNESYS shall restore the Property including, but not limited to the RCTC Conduit, to the same condition prior to the installation of the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands, reasonable wear and tear excepted. 16. DEFAULT PROVISIONS AND REMEDIES 16.1 Each of the following shall be deemed a material breach by Licensee under this Agreement: (a) Failure by Licensee to perform or observe any term, covenant, agreement or condition of this Agreement on the part of Licensee to be performed and such default continues for a period of thirty (30) days after written notice thereof from SUNESYS (provided that if such default cannot be cured within such thirty (30) day period, this period will be extended if Licensee commences to cure such default within such thirty (30) day period and proceeds diligently thereafter to effect such cure); 7 103 (b) The filing of a tax or mechanic's lien against the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands which is not bonded or discharged within thirty (30) days of the date Licensee receives notice that such lien is filed; (c) An event of Licensee's bankruptcy (whether voluntary or involuntary) or the finding that Licensee is insolvent or unable to pay its debts as they come due or the appointment of a receiver for Licensee's properties, if such bankruptcy, finding or appointment is not dismissed or resolved within sixty (60) days of any official filing of bankruptcy, insolvency or appointment in a court of competent jurisdiction; (d) if Licensee knowingly uses the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands in violation of any law or in aid of any unlawful act or undertaking;. 16.2 The following events or occurrences shall constitute a material breach by SUNESYS under this Agreement: (a) Any material noncompliance by SUNESYS with the terms of this Agreement; (b) Any material breach by SUNESYS of a representation or warranty under this Agreement. (c) In the event of a material breach of this Agreement, the aggrieved Party must give written notice to the breaching Party which shall specify the nature of such breach, and shall further state that the breaching Party shall have ten (10) days from the effective date of such notice to cure such breach, or if such cure cannot be completed within such period, such additional time as is reasonably determined by the aggrieved Party to be necessary for the breaching Party to complete such cure, at which time, if the breach is not cured, this Agreement shall be terminated immediately. The aggrieved party may also exercise any other legal or equitable right to remedy that it may have. All rights and remedies of the aggrieved party shall be cumulative and none shall exclude any other right or remedy, now or hereafter allowed by or available under any statute, ordinance, rule of court, or the common law, either at law or in equity, or both. 16.3 The prevailing Party in any lawsuit or action based upon this Agreement shall, in addition to any other relief granted therein, be entitled to its reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. 17. FORCE MAJEURE Neither Party shall have any liability for its delays or its failure to perform due to: fire, explosion, pest damage, power failures, strikes or labor disputes, acts of God, the elements, war, civil disturbances, acts of civil or military authorities or the public enemy, inability to secure raw materials, transportation facilities, fuel or energy shortages, or other causes beyond its control, whether or not similar to the foregoing. 18. SUCCESSION, ASSIGNABILITY 18.1 This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto and their respective permitted successors or assigns. 18.2 Neither SUNESYS nor Licensee shall assign, transfer, or dispose of this Agreement or any of its rights or obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the other Party which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld; provided, however, that either Party may assign or transfer this Agreement to a controlling or controlled affiliate or to a successor in the event of reorganization, including a merger or sale of substantially all its assets (an "Affiliate"), without the consent of the other Party. An assignment, transfer or disposition of this Agreement by either Party shall not relieve that Party of any of its obligations under this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Licensee shall not have the right to sub -license to any third party the right to use or the use of the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands. 18.3 Neither this Agreement, nor any term or provision hereof, nor any inclusion by reference shall be construed as being for the benefit of any person or entity not a signatory hereto. 8 • • 104 • • 19. NOTICES Any demand, notice or other communication to be given to a Party in connection with this Agreement shall be given in writing and shall be given by personal delivery by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, by telecopy or commercial overnight delivery service addressed to the recipient as set forth as follows or to such other address, individual or telecopy number as may be designated by notice given by the Party to the other: SUNESYS: Sunesys, LLC 185 Titus Avenue Warrington, PA 18976 Attention: Senior Counsel Telecopier Number: (267) 927-2099 LICENSEE: Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Road, 3rd Floor P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Attn: Executive Director Telecopier Number: (951) 787-7920 Any demand, notice or other communication given by personal delivery shall be conclusively deemed to have been given on the day of actual delivery thereof and, if given by registered or certified mail return receipt requested on the date of receipt thereof and, if given by telecopy, the day of transmittal thereof if given during the normal business hours of the recipient and on the next business day if not given during normal business hours. 20. NON -WAIVER No course of dealing, course of performance or failure of either Party strictly to enforce any term, right or condition of this Agreement shall be construed as a waiver of any term, right or condition. 21. CHOICE OF LAW The construction, interpretation and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by the law of the State of California without regard to its conflicts of laws provisions. Venue shall be in Riverside County. SUNESYS stipulates to continually maintain an agent for service of process whose information will be made known to the California Secretary of State throughout the term of this Agreement. 22. HEADINGS All headings contained in this Agreement are inserted for convenience only and are not intended to affect the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement or any clause. 23. CONFIDENTIALITY AND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION 23.1 In connection with this Agreement, either Party may furnish to the other certain information that is marked or otherwise specifically identified as proprietary or confidential ("Confidential Information"). This Confidential Information may include, among other things, private easements, licenses, utility agreements, permits, other right-of-way granting documents, specifications, designs, plans, drawings, data, prototypes, and other technical and/or business information. For purposes of this Section 23, the Party that discloses confidential Information is referred to as the "Disclosing Party," and the Party that receives Information is referred to as the "Receiving Party". 9 105 23.2 When Confidential Information is furnished in tangible form, the Disclosing Party shall mark it as proprietary or confidential. When Confidential Information is provided orally, the disclosing Party shall, at the time of disclosure or promptly thereafter, identify the Confidential Information as being proprietary or confidential. 23.3 With respect to Confidential Information disclosed under this Agreement, the Receiving Party and its employees shall: (a) to the extent that disclosure is not required by state or federal law or compelled by a court of competent jurisdiction, hold the Confidential Information in confidence, exercising a degree of care not less than the care used by the Receiving Party to protect its own proprietary or confidential information that it does not wish to disclose; (b) restrict disclosure of the Confidential Information solely to those of its employees and such Receiving Party's counsel and outside auditors who (i) have a need to know in connection with the performance of this Agreement, and (ii) agree to be bound by the confidentiality obligations set forth herein; and not disclose the Confidential Information to any other person or entity without the prior written consent of the Disclosing Party; (c) advise those employees of their obligations with respect to the Confidential Information; (d) use the Confidential Information only in connection with the performance of this Agreement, except as the Disclosing Party may otherwise agree in writing. 23.4 Confidential Information shall be deemed the property of the Disclosing Party. Upon written request of the Disclosing Party, the Receiving Party shall return all Confidential Information received in tangible form, except that each Party's legal counsel may retain one copy in its files solely to provide a record of such Confidential Information for archival purposes. If the Receiving Party loses or makes an unauthorized disclosure of Confidential Information it shall notify the Disclosing Party and use reasonable efforts to retrieve the Confidential Information. 23.5 The Receiving Party shall have no obligation to preserve the proprietary nature of Confidential Information which: confidential; or (a) was previously known to the Receiving Party free of any obligation to keep it (b) is or becomes publicly available by means other than unauthorized disclosure; or (c) is developed by or on behalf of the Receiving Party independently of any Confidential Information furnished under this Agreement; or (d) is received from a third party whose disclosure does not violate any confidentiality obligation to the knowledge of the Receiving Party. 23.6 If the Receiving Party is required to disclose the Disclosing Party's Confidential Information by an order or a lawful process of a court or governmental body, the Receiving Party shall promptly notify the disclosing Party, and shall cooperate with the Disclosing Party in seeking reasonable protective arrangements before the Confidential Information is produced. 23.7 Each Party agrees that the Disclosing Party would be irreparably injured by a breach of this Section 23 by the Receiving Party or its representatives and that the Disclosing Party may be entitled to equitable relief, including injunctive relief and specified performance, in the event of any breach of the provisions of this 10 • 106 • • • Section 23. Such remedies shall not be deemed to be the exclusive remedies for a breach of this Section 23, but shall be in addition to all other remedies available at law or in equity. 24. REQUIRED RIGHTS SUNESYS covenants that it will, to the best of its knowledge, have obtained by the time the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands are made available to Licensee (and will use commercially reasonable efforts to cause to remain in effect during the term of this Agreement) easement, leases, licenses, fee interests, rights of -way, permits, authorizations and other rights necessary and requisite to enable SUNESYS to grant the License to Licensee ("Required Rights"). Subject to the foregoing obligations of SUNESYS, Licensee is receiving its interests in Licensed Fiber Optic Strands only to the extent such interests are held by SUNESYS. 25. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES Each Party represents and warrants that: (i) it has full right and authority to enter into, execute, deliver and perform its obligations under this Agreement; (ii) this Agreement constitutes a legal, valid and binding obligation enforceable against such Party in accordance with its terms, subject to bankruptcy, insolvency, creditors' rights and general equitable principles; and (iii) its execution of and performance under this Agreement shall not violate any applicable existing regulations, rules, statutes or court orders of any local, state or federal government agency, court, or body. 26. ENTIRE AGREEMENT The terms and conditions contained in this Agreement supersede all prior oral or written understandings between the Parties and constitute the entire agreement between them concerning the subject matter of this Agreement. There are no understandings or representations, express or implied, not expressly set forth in this Agreement. This Agreement shall not be modified or amended except by a writing signed by both Parties. 27. CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION REVIEW This Agreement shall not become finally effective until it has been submitted to the California Public Utility Commission for review and the time for such review has expired. Should the California Public Utility Commission fail to timely grant any approval that may be required for this Agreement, either SUNESYS or Licensee shall have the right to terminate this Agreement. 28. INCORPORATION OF RECITALS The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Agreement by reference as though fully set forth herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be signed by their duly authorized representatives. !Signatures on following page] 11 107 SIGNATURE PAGE TO DARK FIBER INSTALLATION AND LICENSE AGREEMENT (Agreement No. 11-25-132-00) SUNESYS, LLC By: Name: Title: Date: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: Name: Title: Date: 12 • 108 • EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION OF THE SERVICE Description of Service PTP Dark Fiber between the following locations: Hub Site Site Name: Street: City: State: Zip: Site 2 Riverside Metrolink Station 4066 Vine Street Riverside CA 92507 Site Name: Street: City: State: Zip: • • Pedley Metrolink Station 6001 Pedley Road Riverside CA 92509 **Sunesys shall utilize Licensee provided conduit (from riser pole at the street) to enter the facility. 13 109 • EXHIBIT B DEPICTION OF LOCATION OF LICENSED FIBER OPTIC STRANDS TO BE PROVIDED BY SUNESYS TO CONNECT THE METROLINK STATIONS * Red line shows the location of SUNESYS' fiber optic connections/infrastructure through which SUNESYS shall provide the Licensed Fiber Optic Strands to connect the Pedley Metrolink Station to the Downtown Riverside Metrolink Station. RCTC - Pedley Station - Preliminary Fiber Optic Map • • Estimated Distance- 11.28 mi 118.15 km Estimated Loss Q 1550 - 4.54 db 14 110 • AGENDA ITEM 70 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Eastern Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: 2011 Coachella Valley Specialized Transit Call for Projects Implementation Update EASTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the report on the implementation of 2011 Specialized Transit CaII for Projects. • • BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Providing funding for transit services for persons with disabilities and senior citizens has long been a priority of the Commission. A portion of both Measure A Expenditure Plans has included funding for specialized transit services with the majority of the funding allocated and used for services provided by local transit providers and non-profit agencies. In recent years, additional funding through the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has been made available in both the Coachella Valley and Western Riverside County (Western County) areas for this purpose. These programs are known as the Jobs Access Reverse Commute (JARC) and New Freedom (NF) programs. The administrative costs associated with these programs are significant, and each agency involved generally exceeds the maximum 3% administrative allocation. These administrative requirements have resulted in concerns by recipients and subrecipients of these programs. At its April 2008 meeting, the Commission approved the Coordinated Public Transit -Human Services Transportation Plan (Coordinated Plan) and adopted a strategy for developing and conducting a specialized transit call for projects program for both the Coachella Valley and Western County. This process was required to make the Commission eligible to receive the JARC and NF funds and would be used to competitively disburse these funds as required as well to ensure that all available funding be used as efficiently and effectively as possible. Agenda Item 70 111 At its September and October 2008 meetings, the Commission approved the first suite of specialized transit projects for implementation with a funding allocation totaling $7.8 million for both Coachella Valley and Western County. All projects awarded under the 2009 Specialized Transit Call for Projects (2009 Call for Projects) concluded their two-year terms on June 30, 2011. At its October 2010 meeting, the Commission approved a new fund allocation to support the 2011 Specialized Transit Call for Projects (2011 Call for Projects) for the next two years of funding and directed staff to develop the application and scoring criteria and to conduct a new call for projects. The applications were released on November 4, 2010, with a due date of January 5, 2011. Twenty-three proposals were received covering both Coachella Valley and Western County areas. These projects were scored and ranked by an evaluation committee consisting of Citizen Advisory Council (CAC) members (two votes), the two county Coordinated Transportation Service Agency public transit providers - SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine) with one vote and Riverside Transit Agency with one vote - and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) with one vote. Commission staff also participated on the project evaluation and scoring committee with one vote, and two additional votes were provided by outside consultants advising Commission staff. The scoring criterion was derived from the goals and objectives analysis that was generated during the development of the Coordinated Plan, along with the recommendations derived from a lessons learned report, which documented the performance of the 2009 Call for Projects and resulting contracts. These documents were received and approved by the Commission. On April 13, 2011, the Commission took action on the staff recommendation, which resulted in four projects in the Coachella Valley receiving funding. The four projects include: 1) Agreement No. 11-26-069-00 with the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) for the provision of directly operated transportation services (specialized transit program) in the amount of $101,809 in JARC grant funds; 2) Agreement No. 11-26-070-00 with SunLine for the provision of directly operated transportation services (SunLine commuter service) in the amount of $219,030 in JARC grant funds and $40,000 in NF grant funds; 3) Agreement No. 11-26-071-00 with SunLine for the provision of transportation pass or voucher services (SunLine Taxi Voucher program) in the amount of $161,067 in NF grant funds; and 4) Agreement No. 11-26-072-00 with SunLine for the provision of transportation pass or voucher services (RCTC-Coachella Valley Rideshare program) in the amount of $80,000 in JARC grant funds. Agenda Item 70 • • • 112 • • • In order to meet a service start date of July 1, 2011, staff recommended approval of the suite of projects as well as the authority needed to construct the project agreements and have them signed by the chair. DISCUSSION: The purpose of this item is to provide the Eastern County Projects and Programs Committee, as well as the Commission, with an update on the progress of implementing the JARC and NF programs in the Coachella Valley since the approval of the projects in April. It is important to note that SunLine is an important partner in the entire process. SunLine served on the evaluation committee for the projects, is designated as a grantee for oversight of the funding of the Coachella Valley projects, and receives an administrative fee for its role. In the Coachella Valley, this role is somewhat minimal in that the oversight role extends beyond SunLine itself to on►y two agencies - the Commission and CVAG. SunLine has expressed concern regarding the administrative responsibilities and costs associated with this oversight. On June 9, 2011, staff sent agreement packages for three of the four awarded projects from the 2011 Call for Projects to SunLine for signature. This was done in order to ensure that the projects were able to begin service on July 1, 2011, in order to avoid an interruption in service. The fourth project, SunLine's proposed commuter service to the Pass Area, was withheld because a revised scope of work is needed to reflect a lower funding level than the original application. On August 1, 2011, SunLine, acting as grantee, entered the projects into the Transportation Electronic Award Management (TEAM) System, the FTA application and project monitoring system. While this action assisted in the preservation of the funds for Riverside County, the issue surrounding the administration of the projects within the context of the regional memorandum of understanding (MOU) had not yet been resolved. . SunLine has expressed concern regarding the administrative responsibilities and costs associated with this oversight. In a subsequent series of telephone conversations concluding on August 19, staff, SCAG, and SunLine identified the following three points which were mutually agreed upon. This would allow for the agreement packages to be signed and the projects to become eligible for implementation. 1) SunLine agrees to complete the execution of the projects into the federal TEAM database; 2) SCAG agrees to reimburse SunLine in the amount of $5,000 for additional administrative costs; and 3) SCAG, the Commission, and SunLine agree to commence talks within 45 days to discuss the potential revision to the regional MOU. Agenda Item 70 113 NEXT STEPS: By completing the TEAM process, all Coachella Valley projects become eligible for funding. It also should be noted that SunLine as well as the Commission and CVAG are not eligible to receive reimbursements on the projects until SunLine executes the agreements with the Commission and receives approval from the FTA for the TEAM grant submissions. It is uncertain at this point if services provided prior to August 1, 2011, will be eligible for reimbursement. With respect to the Pass Area transit project, the Commission requires a revised scope of work to be submitted by SunLine for approval along with the appropriate short range transit plan amendment. The Commission has retained the services of AMMA Transit Planning in order to assist SunLine and the subrecipients with the project reporting and invoicing requirements. This process is similar to that used in Western County and is intended to streamline the process by lessening the administrative load on SunLine and therefore allowing for more efficient payment to the subrecipients. It is the intention of staff, working collaboratively with other agency partners, to seek revisions to the regional MOU to establish a streamlined administrative process for future allocations of these federal funds. Agenda Item 70 • • • 114 • AGENDA ITEM 7P • • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: TIGER Discretionary Grants: State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: • • 1) Direct staff to prepare a grant and Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation ACT (TIFIA) letter of interest (LOI) submittal package to U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) for the SR -91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR -91 CIP); and 2) Authorize the Executive Director to submit the grant application and TIFIA LOI. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The FY 2010/11 Appropriations Act appropriated $526,940,000 for national infrastructure investments. This appropriation is similar, but not identical to the appropriation for the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) program authorized and implemented pursuant to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and the national infrastructure investments or TIGER II program under the FY 2009/10 Appropriations Act. Given that funds have now been appropriated for these similar programs in three separate statutes, U.S. DOT is referring to the grants for national infrastructure investments under the FY 2010/11 Continuing Appropriations Act simply as TIGER Discretionary Grants. Funding for the TIGER Discretionary Grants program will be allocated on a competitive basis by U.S. DOT. The process will be highly competitive with no more than 25% of funds (approximately $131 million) awarded to projects in a single state. Grants for urbanized areas must be a minimum of $10 million but no more than $200 million. This year's grant process allows for up to $150 million of Agenda Item 7P 115 the $526,940,000 to be used to pay the subsidy and administrative costs of TIFIA, a federal credit assistance program. U.S. DOT has estimated that the $150 million of TIGER TIFIA payments can support approximately $1.5 billion in TIFIA credit assistance. The notice of funding availability (NOFA) was released by U.S. DOT on August 12, 2011. While the guidelines allow almost any kind of eligible applicants (state and local governments, tribal governments, transit and port authorities, etc.,) and the project eligibility list covers a broad range of project types and modes, it is clear in the guidelines that U.S. DOT officials are looking to award funds for projects that will have a significant impact on the nation, a metropolitan area, or a region. Additionally, U.S. DOT will consider the extent that projects are ready to proceed with obligation of grant funds when evaluating applications. U.S. DOT Application Process As highlighted in the attached TIGER fact sheet, final applications are due no later than October 31, 2011. Projects that are eligible for TIGER discretionary grants include capital investments in: 1. Highway or bridge projects; 2. Public transportation projects; 3. Passenger and freight rail projects; and 4. Port infrastructure investments. U.S. DOT will establish a pre -application screening process based on the following threshold requirements: 1. Project is an eligible project; 2. NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) is completed or has been initiated; 3. Project is included in the relevant state, metropolitan, and local planning documents, if applicable; 4. Project is able to obligate funds by September 30, 2013 (Note: U.S. DOT prefers June 30, 2013); and 5. For urbanized areas, a 20% local match must be identified and committed; there is no match requirement for rural areas. Projects can increase their competitiveness by demonstrating significant non-federal contributions in excess of the required local match. Additionally, U.S. DOT will give priority to projects for which federal funding is required to complete an overall financing package. SR -91 CIP The SR -91 CIP, the extension of the 91 Express Lanes and freeway widening of the general purpose lanes, requires significant funding that is anticipated to come Agenda Item 7P • • • 116 • • • from the sale of toll revenue bonds and Measure A funds. To supplement this planned funding, staff is seeking a loan through the federal TIFIA program. Staff is seeking Commission approval to submit the SR -91 CIP for FY 2010/11 TIGER Discretionary Grant and TIFIA LOI consideration. Attachment: TIGER Fact Sheet Agenda Item 7P 117 FACT SHEET The TIGER Grant program gives state and local governments a rare opportunity to nominate road, rail, transit and port projects in a multi -modal, multi -jurisdictional competition. The TIGER program uses a rigorous process to select projects with exceptional benefits, explore ways to deliver projects faster and save on construction costs, and make investments in our Nation's infrastructure to build more livable and sustainable communities. PROGRAM DETAILS $526.94 million total funds available'+ $140 million minimurn in rural areas $150 millionmaximum forTIF1A subsidy No funds for planning oa NEPA • • STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS: • Grants for Urbanized Areas can be no less than $10M, no more than $200M, require a 20 % match minimum • Rural project minimum is $1M, and march requirement can be waived • No more than 25 °/! of funds (approximately $131M) may be awarded to projects in a single state • Awards must be balanced both geographic and modally IMPORTANT DATES July 18, 2011 August 22, 2011 October 3, 2011 October 4, 2011 October 31, 2011 "How to Compete Seminar" at USDOT Headquarters Pre -Application Registration Open Pre -Applications Due Final Applications Open Final Applications Due SPECIAL TOPICS WEBINARS July 27, 2011 August 17, 2011 August 22, 2011 August 24, 2011 August 24, 2011 August 30, 2011 "Talking Freight" Benefit Cost Analysis Project Readiness/NEPA Public Private Partnerships & TIFIA Challenge Rural and Tribal Applications MARAD Port Outreach TIGER Information and assistance can be found at v w.cioL.gov/tiger For questions contact ` 1%,_ '_Lt;;•aL_tsr 118 • AGENDA ITEM 7Q • • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Iowa Avenue Grade Separation Project WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Allocate $6 million in federal Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) and/or Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds to the city of Riverside (Riverside) in support of the Iowa Avenue grade separation project to front Proposition 1B Trade Corridor Improvement Fund (TCIF) funds; 2) Approve Agreement No. 12-67-009-00 with Riverside for reimbursement of TCIF/CMAQ/STP funds; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In April 2008, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) allocated $13 million in Proposition 1B TCIF funds to the Iowa Avenue grade separation project. The Iowa Avenue project will grade separate the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway at an estimated cost of $32 million. The right of way phase is complete and, depending on available funding, construction is scheduled to begin in winter 2012. Agenda Item 7Q 119 Proposed Iowa Avenue Grade Separation Unfortunately, the Proposition 1B bond sale that was scheduled for earlier in the year did not commence as planned. Availability of TCIF funding is dependent on such bond sales, and as a result, Riverside is unable to proceed with the construction phase of the project unless alternative funding is available. Pursuant to AB 672, effective January 1, 2010, and the CTC Proposition 1B letter of no prejudice (LONP) guidelines, Riverside can request CTC authorization to proceed with the project by using local and federal funds in place of the TCIF funding. At this time, Riverside has $7 million in local funding available and has requested Commission assistance in fronting $6 million of the TCIF funding. There is adequate CMAQ and/or STP funding available to allocate to the project. It should be noted that there is no guarantee that the $6 million will be reimbursed. CTC has indicated that all LONP requests to date have been approved and payments are being made, and there is a high likelihood that LONP repayments will continue to be made. The CTC recommends that local agencies request an allocation when their project is ready to begin construction as that reinforces the need for a bond sale. The next bond sale is scheduled for fall 2011. The LONP guidelines allow for the conversion of LONP's once bonds are sold. For example, if bonds are sold in fall 2011, CTC can allocate approved LONP's thereby replacing the LONP funds with the allocated TCIF funds. This would result in the LONP funds (CMAQ and/or STP) reverting back to the local agency (the Commission). If approved to advance the $6 million in CMAQ and/or STP funding, staff will assist Riverside in deobligating the funds through Caltrans Local Assistance if the TCIF funds become available. Once federal funds are deobligated by Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration, the funds automatically revert back to the County in which they originated. However, in the event TCIF bond funds are not available to convert and CMAQ or STP funds are not deobligated, staff is seeking approval to enter into a loan agreement - Agreement No. 12-67-009-00 - with Riverside for reimbursement of the funding. Agenda Item 7Q • • e 120 • • • There is no financial impact to the Commission, as CMAQ and STP funds do not flow directly through the Commission. Riverside will be the direct recipient of such funds. Agenda Item 7Q 121 • AGENDA ITEM 7R • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Eastern Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Avenue 66 Grade Separation on the Alameda Corridor East - Fiscal Year 2008/09 Appropriations STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to allocate $1.3 million to the county of Riverside (County) in support of the Avenue 66 grade separation project - $950,000 from the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009 and $350,000 in federal Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: • • The County is requesting $1.3 million in funding to complete the final design and engineering phase for the Avenue 66 grade separation project. Currently, an at -grade crossing exists on the Union Pacific Railroad on Avenue 66 just south of the city of Coachella. Agenda Item 7R Project Location Avenue 66 At -Grade Crossing 122 The existing at -grade crossing requires that traffic, including a substantial number of agricultural freight trucks, stop for passing trains. Once completed, the project will improve traffic flow, reduce air pollution, and increase safety by eliminating vehicle delays. The FY 2008/09 consolidated appropriations bill identified funding in the amount of $950,000 for grade separation projects located in Riverside County on the Alameda Corridor East (ACE). In addition to the earmark, the Commission approved an off the top allocation of 25 percent of CMAQ and Surface Transportation Program federal funds for ACE grade separation projects. Staff is in support of the County's request and recommends that in addition to the $950,000 earmark, $350,000 of CMAQ funding also be allocated. If approved, the project will become shovel ready making it more competitive should future grant opportunities arise. There is no financial impact to the Commission, as the funds do not flow directly through the Commission. The County will be the direct recipient of such funds. Agenda Item 7R • • • 123 • AGENDA ITEM 8 • • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2011/12 Annual Local Transportation Fund Planning Allocations to Western Riverside Council of Governments and Coachella Valley Association of Governments BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve an allocation of Local Transportation Fund (LTF) Planning funds in the amount of $467,800 to the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) and $255,150 to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) to support transportation planning programs and functions as identified in the FY 2011/12 LTF Program Objectives/Work Plan (Work Plan). BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 99233.2 of the Transportation Development Act (TDA), code of regulations, up to three percent of the annual LTF revenues shall be allocated for transportation planning and programming purposes. The TDA also requires one half of these LTF funds to be allocated for planning activities within the Western Riverside County and the Coachella Valley areas as determined by the Commission. WRCOG submitted its Work Plan that identifies two key program areas - air quality and planning programs and regional transportation programs. CVAG submitted its Work Plan that identifies eight program areas including: 1) Transportation Department Operations; 2) Project Management and Contract Administration; 3) Riverside County Transportation Commission Programs; 4) Planning, Programming and Monitoring Program; 5) Miscellaneous Programs; 6) Congestion Management/Air Quality Programs; 7) Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program; and 8) Governmental and Special Projects. Agenda Item 8 124 Staff reviewed the Work Plans and found them consistent with the Commission's overall transportation programming and planning objectives. The amounts of LTF funding available to WRCOG ($467,800) and CVAG ($255,150) are included in the Commission's FY 2011/12 budget. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2011/12 Amount: $ 722,950 Source of Funds: LTF funds Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 002210 86205 00000 0000 106 65 86205 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \)//,z,1,4,A,3ttbumi Date: 08/16/11 Attachments: 1) WRCOG FY 2011/12 LTF Program Objectives/Work Plan 2) CVAG FY 2011/12 LTF Program Objectives/Work Plan Agenda Item 8 • • 125 • WRCOG Fiscal Year 2011/2012 Local Transportation Funds Program Objectives The Work Plan for FY 2011 is divided into two program areas: 1. Planning Programs and Energy/Environment Programs Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and California Air Resources Board Department of Energy (DOE) and California Energy Commission South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Southern California Edison Southern California Associations of Governments Department of Housing and Urban Development Strategic Growth Council CALCOG Planning: This program includes the following activities: staff time to develop a Sub Regional Sustainability Framework in conjunction with a grant from the California Air Resources Board; staff time to develop a Sub Regional Climate Action Plan in conjunction with a three year grant from the Strategic Growth Council, continued participation with SCAG and other regional planning agencies; and continued support for the WRCOG Planning Directors TAC to review, analyze and make recommendations to the WRCOG Executive Committee on the sub regional growth forecast, the Regional Transportation Plan and legislation that will impact/assist the implementation of AB 32 and SB 375. Air Quality, Energy Efficiency and Sustainability: These programs include staff time to: support WRCOG Clean Cities and programs that WRCOG has developed to reduce emissions through energy efficiency and water conservation; continued participation in the National Clean Cities Program; assist in the purchase of alternative fuel vehicles and the development of the supporting infrastructure; review and analyze state and federal legislation. Continue tracking and participation in energy efficiency legislation; continued participation in regional air quality meetings and in EPA and Air Resources Board hearings; and to provide outreach to our jurisdictions regarding SCAQMD rule making; • 2. Regional Transportation Programs Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) Caltrans Southern California Association of Governments CALCOG TUMF: This program includes staff time to administer the TUMF Program which includes but is not limited to: program contract/agreement administration; public outreach/information; the Annual Report; signage program TUMF Zone TIP development and amendments; prepare the annual audit; preparation of annual adjustment for construction costs; maintain TUMF data base of fee collections and disbursements; work with developers on credit and reimbursement agreements; develop and maintain a GIS database to support the Program. Caltrans: Staff time to manage the Jefferson Avenue Multi -Jurisdiction Corridor Study Caltrans grant on behalf of the cities of Temecula (lead agency), Murrieta, Wildomar, and Lake Elsinore. Riverside Transportation Commission Programs: These programs include staff time and project management to assist in transportation planning and air quality programs to include: participation in TUMF Program tasks as needed to assist RCTC in the implementation of the Regional TUMF Program; participate in evaluation committees as requested; and other planning related tasks as determined in consultation with the RCTC Executive Director. Miscellaneous and GIS: This Program includes staff time and project management to: cooperate with the County of Riverside and the RCA, participate with the local jurisdictions and regional partners GIS coverage analysis; develop databases and provide analysis and mapping to support RCTC's rail, STIP, TUMF and transit programs and projects; provide land use, population and employment and other GIS information to local and regional agencies, Caltrans, and other state agencies; legislative review and analysis. 127 • • • TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FISCAL YEAR 2011/12 The Work Plan for 2011/12 is separated into eight main program areas: 1) Transportation Department Operations • Transportation Program Administration • Monitor Implementation of Transportation Project Prioritization Study (TPPS) • Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Update • Other Transportation Planning • Operations Management and Administration This program area performs primarily administrative functions which consist of general transportation program administrative activities and various transportation planning duties in support of the Transportation Department. (Funded from Measure A and TUMF) 2) Project Management and Contract Administration • Financial Cash Flow • Project Status Tracking • Preparation and Monitoring Agreements Includes staff time to conduct project oversight (design, environmental, construction and close-out), preparation of reimbursement agreements for regional arterial projects, review and approval of project billings in accordance 'with project scope of work and participation in project development team meetings and associated staff reports. (Funded from Measure A, TUMF and Special Program Funds) 3) Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Programs • State Highway Routes in the Coachella Valley • Congestion Management Program/System (CMP/CMS) • RCTC Technical Advisory Committee Includes staff time to support the Riverside County Congestion Management Program through building permit analysis of the one non-TUMF jurisdiction and analysis of traffic patterns through the traffic count program, to provide RCTC staff regional transportation project information for the State Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), and to support the RCTC Technical Advisory Committee. (Funded from CMAQ and TUMF) 128 4) Planning, Programming and Monitoring Program • Regional Transportation Improvement Program/State Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP/STIP) This area includes staff time in support of the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), support in implementation and updating of the CVAG Transportation Project Prioritization Study (TPPS), coordination of updates to the Capital Improvement Plan (CEP), and monitoring and examining impacts of implementing SB 45. TPPS activities support the regional project construction program which includes staff time to develop an annual prioritized list of construction projects and required financial resources. (Funded from PP&M, LTF and Measure A) 5) Miscellaneous Programs • GIS Information Services • Maintain Transportation Model- • Regional Arterial Traffic Count Program This area involves support to multiple programs with a focus on key project areas. These areas include staff time and project management to maintain and provide input for GIS Information Services, the countywide transportation demand model, the regional arterial traffic count program, and transportation legislation review and analysis. GIS Information Services includes staff time to provide regional land use information to CVAG jurisdictions, developers, SCAG and Caltrans. The countywide transportation model involves support for the current transportation model for forecasting projected transportation system needs to the year 2039_ (Funded from Measure A, TUMF, CMAQ and Special Program Funds) 6) Congestion Management /Air Quality Programs • SB 821 Program • Conformance with SIP requirements Involves Transportation Department staff support to CMAQ program areas, with focus on the SB 821 program. Also includes implementation of State Implementation Plan (SIP) conformance to CVAG regional projects. (Funded from Measure A and SB 821) 7) Transportation Unifbrm Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program • TUMF Program Administration • TUMF/GIS Interface Includes staff time in support of the TUMF program and TUMF/GIS Interface program. TUMF program activities include staff time to monitor the implementation of the TUMF program in member jurisdictions, to perform annual fiscal reviews of building permits and TUMF collections, to research, analyze and prepare reports for • • • 129 • • • TUMF appeals, to enter TUMF collections in the TUMF data base, to meet with developers on request to review potential TUMF assessments, and to perform special TUMF analysis on request. The TUMF/GIS Interface program requires support for continuing the development of integrating the TUMF collection process with electronic transmission of new development information for land use coverages. (Funded from TUMF) 8) Governmental and Special Projects • Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Overall Work Program The SCAG OWP program includes staff time to coordinate the CVAG sub -region SCAG Overall Work Program needs, develop annual growth projections, collect annual Highway Performance Monitoring System data, provide input to the Federal Regional Transportation Plan, and assist SCAG with transportation modeling refinements. Additionally, staff performs specific transportation project work for SCAG through their Overall Work Program. (Funded from Special Program Funds) • Special Projects Some proposed projects may involve general fund money or special grants. Any project not already a part of the regular work programs, will be brought through the committee process for approval of the proposed work. (Funded from Special Grant funds) 130 • • • 9/14/2011 LTF Planning Allocations September 14, Background RIVERSIDE COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND FY 2011112 APPORTIONMENT Estmated Carryover (Unapportioned) Est Receipts TOTAL Less: Auditor Less: RCTC Admiristaton Less: RCTC Planing (3% of revenues) Less: SCAG Planning (3/4 of 1% of revenues) BALANCE Less: SB 821 (2% of balance) BALANCE AVAILABLE BEFORE RESERVES Less: 10% Tar t Reserves BALANCE AVAILABLE FOR APPORTIONMENT Projection 56,700,000 58,700,000 12,000 700,000 1,701,000 F 425,250 53,881,750 1,077,235 52,784,515 5,278,452 47,506.063 PUC Section 99233.2 (Transportation Development Act) 3% of LTF revenues allocated for planning and programming 50% allocated to RCTC Vitttitiing &tftdles within Western Riverside County and Coachella Valley areas, as determined by RCTC: • 15% for RCTC •55% for WRCOG •3056 for CVAG 1 9/14/2011 Regional Planning Role of COGs Provide long range transportation planning in coordination with comprehensive planning programs COGs may use LTF funding as local match to leverage other planning grant opportunities Planning efforts include participation of jurisdictions within County Support RCTC in regional planning efforts to meet state/federal regulations: Air quality conformity Transportation demand ordinances TUMF programs CVAG and WRCOG include the following elements in its Work Plans: • TUMF • RTP (incl. growth forecasts, SB 375) • Air Quality • Transportation Modeling/CMP (CVAG) • Energy Programs (WRCOG) 2 9/14/2011 �• - Staff Recommendations Approve LTF planning allocation of $467,800 to WRCOG Approve LTF planning allocation of $255,150 to CVAG Confirm LTF planning allocations are related to regional activities that benefit the respective geographic regions through WRCOG and CVAG 3 • AGENDA ITEM 9 • • • • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISS/ON DATE: September 14, 2011 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Update on Federal and State Legislation BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive and file an update on federal and state legislation; 2) Adopt the following bills positions: a) H.R. 2389 (Miller) - Support; b) H.R. 2766 (Miller) - Support; c) H.R. 2538 (Calvert) - Support; and 3) Adopt a bill position of Work with Author for SB 791 (Steinberg). BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Federal Update Debt Ceiling and Deficit Reduction Deal Impacts Transportation Spending The compromise package ultimately signed into law by President Obama to raise the national debt ceiling and reduce the deficit largely consists of domestic spending cuts. The immediate impact to transportation funding from this deal is a freeze of funding levels in 2012 and 2013 that is equal to 2010 levels. Limits are placed on overall domestic spending through 2021. The flat funding levels for transportation will have the greatest impact on non -Highway Trust Fund (HTF) programs that rely on General Fund budget authority. New Starts and Small Starts, the Administration's primary tool for funding transit capital projects, is an example of a General Fund program that will be subject to downward pressure as more projects come into the pipeline without an increase in budgetary authority. The Commission's Perris Valley Line project is reliant on $75 million of Small Starts funds that have yet to be fully committed through a project construction grant agreement (PCGA) with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Although progress is being made towards securing these Agenda Item 9 131 funds that have been set aside by Congress and the Administration, these reduced funding levels place additional pressure to lock -up Small Starts funds for this project. Other non-HTF programs include high-speed rail and the popular Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) discretionary grant program, which could be subject to reductions in future years. Federal Surface Transportation Reauthorization Update Over the summer, both the House and Senate made progress on reauthorizing the nation's surface transportation law, which expired in 2009, and has been living on short- and medium -term extensions for two years. Senator Barbara Boxer (D -CA), Chairman of the Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee and Representative John Mica (R -FL), Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I) Committee, have each held initial hearings on draft outlines of their proposed authorization bills. No bill text has been released from either committee. The process in the Senate has focused on a bipartisan effort between Senator Boxer, Ranking Member Senator James Inhoffe (R -OK), Finance Committee Chairman Senator Max Baucus (D -MT), and Senator David Vitter (R -LA). Their legislative framework calls for flat funding levels in a two-year authorization bill, shorter than the normal six years for these types of bills. On the policy front, the Senate bill, dubbed MAP -21 or Moving Ahead for Progress in the 215` Century, includes a new program for goods movement projects on the interstate highway system. Funding for freight -related projects has been a key priority for the Commission for several years. MAP -21 also seeks to consolidate and realign a number of federal programs and introduces the concept of a performance -based funding system. Senator Boxer's outline describes a performance -based system as, "focus[ing] the highway program on key outcomes, such as reducing fatalities, improving bridges, fixing roads, and reducing congestion, in order to ensure that taxpayers are receiving the most for their money. States will set their own targets for improving safety, road and bridge condition, congestion, and freight movement." In the House, Chairman Mica has outlined a bill that will reduce transportation funding from current levels by living within the means of gas tax receipts, which continue to decline. Most experts estimate a 30 percent plus cut in transportation funding under Chairman Mica's proposal. New rules passed in the House of Representatives earlier this year prevent the T&I Committee from finding revenue beyond what is in the HTF, ending a recent practice of using General Fund money to keep current funding levels and make up for the steady decline of gas tax receipts. In Tight of this constrained funding situation, Chairman Mica has focused heavily on red tape reduction and eliminating duplicative programs or programs that Agenda Item 9 • • 132 • • • stray from a truly federal interest. This policy focus could have a result of reducing the overall cost of transportation projects and thereby increase the value of current gas tax dollars, enabling more projects to proceed. One area of bicameral and bipartisan agreement continues to be a vast expansion of the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) program. TIFIA is the low-cost borrowing tool that the Commission requires for the SR -91 Corridor Improvement Project and may utilize in the future for other Measure A or tolling projects. TIFIA continues to be seen as a cost effective way for the federal government to leverage non-federal funds to accelerate large transportation projects that are backed by revenue streams such as sales tax measures or tolls. Having adjourned until September, Congress will not be in a position to move a surface transportation reauthorization bill until after Labor Day. Congress will then have only three weeks to negotiate the legislation through both chambers and get it to the President's desk. The current extension of Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) expires on September 30. If agreement cannot be reached on a full authorization bill, another extension will have to be passed or the federal transportation program will shut down. Failing to extend the federal transportation program in some form for the September 30 deadline might seem like a political loser for Congress, there are two recent experiences that suggest it is not impossible for such a chaotic result. The recent showdown over the debt ceiling is the most glaring example of Congress' ability to run big decisions down to the 1 1 `h hour and make formerly routine matters subject of great consternation. Second, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) experienced a three-week shutdown after a last minute partisan battle erupted between the House and Senate, causing the FAA authorization to lapse. The lapse forced massive furloughs and stop orders on airport construction projects, including at Palm Springs International Airport. September 30 becomes more interesting when considering that the federal gasoline excise tax is set to expire at the same time. Many in Washington, D.C. have yet to awaken to the fact that this tax will need to be reauthorized, regardless if a reauthorization bill is passed. The current federal excise tax is 18.4 cents per gallon. It is likely that some Members of Congress will view a gas tax reauthorization as a tax increase and oppose its extension. An elevated fight over the very existence of transportation's most essential and basic funding source will bring transportation policy into a partisan environment that it historically has been safe from. It is not yet clear how this issue will play out. Agenda Item 9 133 Local Congress Members Introduce Legislation to Improve Project Delivery Representatives Gary Miller and Ken Calvert have recently introduced bills to speed and streamline project delivery decisions at the federal level. H.R. 2389 by Representative Miller would make permanent the pilot program that allows states to accept the responsibi►ities of the federal government in reviewing National Environmental Po►icy Act (NEPA) documents. Colloquially referred to as NEPA delegation, this program has only been utilized in California and has had positive results around the state. However, another major provision of H.R. 2389 goes a step further and allows states to substitute its own environmental laws for federal law in cases where the state law is equally or more stringent than federal law. The ostensible goal here is to allow the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to replace NEPA, thereby eliminating duplicative reviews of projects under both laws. The Secretary of Transportation would have to approve a state's application to use this demonstration program. Under the program, local governments could also be permitted to accept the responsibilities of the federal government in ensuring compliance with federal environmental requirements. This could allow an agency such as the Commission to directly manage the environmental process, eliminating a great deal of time-consuming review by Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration. This bill is entitled the Environmental Review Cooperation Act. Just prior to the Congressional recess following the debt ceiling compromise, Representative Miller also introduced H.R. 2766, the Breaking Down Barriers Act of 2011. This bill legislates some of the recommendations of the Orange County Transportation Authority's (OCTA) Breaking Down Barriers report that the Commission supported enthusiastically. H.R. 2766 also makes the NEPA delegation program permanent and waives California from having to reapply for delegation authority under the new law. The bill allows for projects to accelerate construction prior to official approvals under a letter of no prejudice. This allows projects to proceed at -risk while federal agencies are finishing final paperwork to approve projects. Other key provisions of the bill include: • Requiring the Secretary of Transportation to issue recommendations to expand project eligibility for categorical exclusions under NEPA; • Requiring the Comptroller General of the United States to study methods to streamline the process for environmental impact statements; • Requiring the Secretary of Transportation to issue regulations that create deadlines for project approvals; if approvals are not issued within timeframes set in regulations, projects are automatically deemed approved; and • Delegating federal responsibilities to the state for projects that have high ratios of non-federal funds (i.e., reducing federal bureaucratic involvement when there is very little federal funding on a project). Agenda Item 9 • 134 • • • Representative Calvert has introduced H.R. 2538, the Reducing Environmental Barriers to Unified Infrastructure and Land Development Act of 2011 Act (REBUILD Act). This bill expands the NEPA delegation pilot program to non -transportation agencies including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Department of the Interior, and Army Corps of Engineers. SAFETEA-LU originally limited NEPA delegation to the Department of Transportation. As with the original program, the bill does not weaken environmental laws and requires a memorandum of understanding between the state and federal agency with NEPA responsibilities. Audits are required to ensure states are complying with federal rules. Representative Calvert's goal is to take the successes of NEPA delegation in the transportation arena and apply them to other areas where NEPA reviews may be duplicative. Representative Calvert views this bill as complimentary to Representative Miller's bill. Both Members are co-sponsors of each others' legislation. While the Commission's platform and previous actions by the Federal Authorization Legislative Ad Hoc Committee allow staff to act in support of these bills, given the Commission's strong enthusiasm for advocating for legislation that reduces red tape and improves project delivery, staff felt it appropriate to present these bills for a specific Commission action. Both of these bills are in the spirit of Orange County Transportation Authority's Breaking Down Barriers initiative, which the Commission is supporting. Both bills are intended to become policy elements of a larger authorization bill. State Update State Legislature Heads into Final Month of Regular Session for 2011 With the state budget approved in June, the Legislature took a rare summer recess in July and August. The final weeks of August will be consumed with committee hearings and floor sessions to move bills towards the Governor's desk ahead of the August 31 deadline. The Governor will then have the month of September to decide the fate of legislation presented to him. However, many in Sacramento expect the budget to be reopened by the end of the year when and if it is found to be out of balance. Maintaining a balanced budget is essential to the State Treasurer's ability to raise bond proceeds on Wall Street to meet state commitments on Proposition 1B projects under construction and preparing to break ground, such as the SR -91 high occupancy vehicle project through downtown Riverside. Fortunately the June budget agreement includes authorization of appropriations to fund debt service for Proposition 1B bonds. Agenda Item 9 135 With the passage of AJR 4 (Miller) in June, there are no Commission -sponsored pieces of legislation moving through the Capitol at this time. There are other bills still moving through the process that the Commission has been tracking; an updated bill matrix is attached to this report. Following the conclusion of the legislative session, staff will present a recap of this year's business in Sacramento. Outside of the legislative process, staff is working with the Self -Help Counties Coalition and Caltrans on policy issues related to project initiation documents (PIDs) that were not resolved as part of the state budget. Staff is also working to achieve fairness and equity in the process of sorting out obligation authority for federal funds among counties; this has implications for how much federal funding can be committed to projects that are preparing for construction. In early July, the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee held an informational field hearing in Los Angeles on SB 867 (Padilla), a bill to create Build California Bonds to accelerate transportation projects funded by local sales tax measures. Staff was invited to testify by Chairman Senator Mark DeSaulnier (D -Concord) on behalf of the Self -Help Counties Coalition. SB 791 — What the Bill Does Senate President Pro-Tem Darrell Steinberg (D -Sacramento) has "gut -and -amended" SB 791 late in the legislative session into a bill that would authorize metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to submit to the voters a regional congestion charge on motor vehicle fuel purchases. SB 791 would allow MPOs to develop programs and projects to be funded by a regional congestion charge that would "directly and specifically benefit motorists within the region by reducing vehicle congestion and by providing capital improvements for maintenance, safety and rehabilitation so as to increase overall mobility for motorists within the region who are paying the charge." Eligible projects to be funded from this new revenue source include: • Transit capital, operations, and maintenance costs; • Bicycle and pedestrian programs and projects; • Programs and projects that would demonstrably reduce the region's rate of growth from 2005 levels in vehicle miles traveled by single occupant vehicles; • Conversion of high occupancy vehicle lanes to high occupancy toll lanes or variably tolled express lanes; • Capital improvements relative to maintenance safety, and rehabilitation of state highways and bridges in the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP); and • Related administrative costs. Agenda Item 9 • • • 136 • • • The MPO board is responsible for crafting the expenditure plan and placing the charge before voters. In selecting projects to be funded by the charge, the bill requires the MPO to look at increased transit ridership and changes in land use patterns. The bill requires that individuals who are not charged shall not receive benefits from the projects funded by the charge. Electric vehicles, which obviously do not require motor vehicle fuel, instead receive an unspecified fee on their vehicle registration as a method to ensure that all road users pay the regional congestion charge. Regional congestion charges can be no more than 30 years in length. The bill contains numerous recitals that attempt to justify the bill's status as a majority vote only measure. This is an attempt to satisfy the requirements of recently passed Proposition 26, which provides for strict delineation between taxes and fees, and therefore delineating what requires a two-thirds vote rather than a simple majority vote under the California Constitution. In the region served by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), a county transportation commission such as the Commission may instead choose to implement its own regional congestion charge specific to its county and assume the responsibilities of SCAG prescribed by the bill. The bill also opens the door to sub -regional implementation of a congestion charge; MPO's are offered the opportunity to implement congestion charges "in all or part of [its] jurisdiction." Staff Analysis Riverside County voters have voted by more than a two-thirds margin to approve and then renew Measure A, a sales tax that was initiated locally for the benefit transportation for the entire county. More recently, Riverside County voters have also overwhelmingly voted in favor of increasing the Commission's debt ceiling in order to implement the robust improvements contained in the Measure A expenditure plan. However, original Measure A, its renewal, and Measure K were motivated by local needs, not a mandate from the state Legislature. Also, the Measure A expenditure plan heavily focuses on capacity expansion on the state highway system and local streets, roads, and arterials. SB 375 was approved by the Legislature and Governor in 2008, requiring a new planning regime oriented heavily towards public transit, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, land use, and other measures to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT). However, this new mandate came without commensurate funding for the infrastructure needed to achieve the goals set in SB 375 while the Legislature and Governor simultaneously zeroed -out funding for the State Transit Account. While proponents of SB 791 will argue that the bill offers local control and empowerment to fund local transportation improvements, this new authority would come from a Agenda Item 9 137 vastly different motivation and context than the traditional self-help measures that have been so successful in Riverside County and 18 other counties across California, which represent over 80% of the state's population. In spite of the great lengths taken to rationalize the bill's compliance with Proposition 26, it is difficult to envision SB 791 going without a legal challenge from the likes of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer's Association and other taxpayer groups that championed Proposition 26. While staff has no legal opinion on the merits of a Proposition 26 challenge against SB 79, the Commission should be aware that if this bill is approved by the Governor, it is likely to be litigated. Commission staff is concerned that the bill too narrowly prescribes the types of projects that can be funded from a regional congestion charge. Since the charge is linked to achieving goals established in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) required by SB 375, which itself provides the plan for reducing congestion and VMT, it seems inconsistent to say that only certain types of projects in the RTP can be funded to meet the plan's overall goals. These regional plans must be treated as a whole, recognizing that the projects contained therein operate as a system. Thus, staff believes that a regional congestion charge should be eligible to be expended on any project in the RTP. The bill acknowledges the strong role for county transportation commissions such as the Commission by allowing each commission to opt out of a SCAG-wide fee. However, in the event that a commission chooses to be part of a Southern California approach, the bill does not contain a mechanism that guarantees a return -to -source on revenues generated from each county. Staff is concerned that absent a minimum return guarantee in the law, a scenario could arise where the SCAG Regional Council could author a ballot measure that expends less revenue in Riverside County than would be collected here. Staff strongly believes that this policy issue should be addressed in SB 791. Finally, SB 791 allows revenues from a congestion charge to be expended on (SHOPP) projects. Rehabilitation and maintenance on state highways are extremely important to the safety and health of our regional transportation network. However, it is curious that the Legislature would expect voters to approve a local fee to pay for what is unquestionably a state responsibility. Caltrans is the owner and operator of the state highway system. Staff firmly believes that the SHOPP should be more adequately funded; however, expectations should not be placed on local governments to absorb this responsibility. Agenda Item 9 • • • 138 • Recommendations Although SB 791 is flawed, staff does not recommend that the Commission oppose the bill at this time. Rather, staff recommends a position of Work with Author and that staff be directed to address the following issues with Senator Steinberg: • Addressing the need for a return to source funding mechanism for MPO-wide ballot measures; • Expand project eligibility; and • Seek alternative avenues for the state to provide funding for its own mandates on regional and local governments and for the state to address SHOPP needs on a statewide basis. Failure to achieve agreement with the author on these issues should result in the Commission issuing an oppose position on the bill. SB 791 will be brought before the SCAG Regional Council for discussion as well. Staff will continue collaborating and consulting with staff from SCAG and other county transportation commissions and MPOs in California. Attachments: 1) Legislative Matrix 2) SB 791 (Steinberg) Agenda Item 9 139 RIVERSIDE COUN TY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - POSITIONS STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION • • L,ruta 1 Cv A Ug. Ili, Z 1 I Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of B oard Adopti on AB 105 (Committee on Budget) Clarifies and re-establishes Gas Tax Swap provisions of 2010 and provides a frameword for predictable tax re venue for the STIP and State Transit Assistance . Mar. 24 Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 6, Statutes of 2011. Staff recommended position "Support" 4/13/11 AB 296 (Skinner) The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 requires the State Air Resources Board to ad opt regulations to address global warming caused by the emission of greenhouse gases by reducing the emission of those gases to certain specified levels . This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that would regulate the reflectivity (albedo) of pa vement to reduce the urban heat island effect. July 1 1 . Held in Senate Appropriations Committee "suspense" file . Staff recommended position "Oppose" 5/1 1 /1 1 AB 427 (Perez) Existing law, the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006, authorizes the issuance of $19. 925 billion of general obligation bonds for specified purposes. Existing law requires the deposit of $1 billion of the bond proceeds in the Transit System Safety, Security, and Disaster Response Account to be used, upon appropriation, for capital projects that provide increased protection against a security and safety threat, and for capital expenditures to increase the capacity of transit operators to dev elop disaster response transportation systems that can move people, goods, and emergency personnel and equipment in the aftermath of a disaster impairing that movement. Existing law requires the allocation of 25% of these funds for capital expenditures to regional public waterborne transit agencies authorized to operate a regional public water transit system, as specified, and requires the California Emergency M anagement Agency to administer a grant application and award program. July 13 Amended and re -referred to Senate Appropriations Committee Staff recommended position " Monitor" 5/1 1 /1 1 'z{I:ive Update.docx 140 Legislation/; Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption Existing law, implementing the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006, requires specified entities receiving an allocation of the proceeds of bonds issued under the act to expend those funds within 3 fiscal years of the fiscal year in which the funds were allocated. This bill would specify that for an allocation of the funds made prior to June 30, 2011, the entity receiving the allocation would be required to expend them within 4 fiscal years of the fiscal year in which the funds were allocated. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute. May 27 In committee: Set, second hearing. Held under submission. Staff recommended position "Support" 5/1 1 /1 1 AB 1134 (Bonilla) AB 1308 (Miller) This bill, in any year in which the Budget Act has not been enacted by July 1, would provide that all moneys in the Highway Users Tax Account in the Transportation Tax Fund, e xcept as specified, are continuously appropriated and may be encumbered for certain purposes until the Budget Act is enacted. The bill would thereby make an appropriation. The bill would authorize the Controller to make estimates in order to implement these provisions. May 27 In committee: Set, second hearing. Held under submission. Staff recommended position "Support" 4/13/11 AJR 4 (Miller) This measure would memorialize the President of the United States and the Secretary of the United States Department of Transportation to award a federal Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act loan guarantee to enable the timely construction of the State Route 91 Co rridor Improvement Project in the interest of economic competitiv eness of California and the United States. Passed by Legislature, Chaptered and transmitted to Washington, DC . Staff recommended position "Support" 3/9/1 1 SB 468 (Kehoe) This bill imposes requirements related to the delivery of Interstate 5 improvements in San Diego County which are in the coastal zone. July 12 In Assembly. Passed Transportation and Natural Resources Committees. Referred to Appropriations Committee Staff recommended position Oppose" 5/1 1 /1 1 • Leian/' Author ., Descripti on I W � Bill Status Position ,.Dateoard °, ':Adoption SB 693 (Dutton) Existing law sets forth requirements for the solicitation and evaluation of bids and the awarding of contracts by public entities for the erection, construction, alteration, repair, or improvement of any public structure, building, road, or other public improvement. Existing law also authorizes specified state agencies, cities, and counties to implement alternative procedures for the awarding of contracts on a design -build basis. Existing law authorizes the Department of Transportati on and regional transportation agencies to enter into public -private partnerships for transportation projects under certain conditions. Existing law authorizes the department to delegate to any city or county any part of its powers and jurisdiction, except the power of approval, with respect to any portion of any state highway within the city or county, and to withdraw the delegation. This bill would specify that the delegation authority includes the authority to utilize private -public partnership agreements for transportation projects. The bill would also make findings and declarations related to local agency contracting . May 2 Set, second hearing . Hearing canceled at the request of author . Staff rec ommended position "Support in Concept" 5/1 1 /1 1 H.R. 304 (Gallegly) To amend the limitation on liability for certain passenger rail accidents or incidents under section 28103 of title 49, United States Code, and for o ther purposes. Feb. 28 Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution. Staff recommended position "Oppose and Work with Author" 3/19/11 H.R. 526 (Calv ert) To direct the Secretary of Transportation to establish and collect a fee based on the fair market v alue of articles imported into the United States and articles exported from the United States in commerce and to use amounts collected from the fee to make grants to carry out certain transportation projects in the transportation trade corridors for which the fee is collected, and for other purposes. March 1 Referred to the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade. Staff recommended position "Support" 3/19/1 1 J:1201 Y','09 Septernber\9.A1. edSt. ate Lei isiativ e Update.docx 142 • • • AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 25, 2011 SENATE BILL No. 791 Introduced by Senator Steinberg February 18, 2011 An act to amend Scction 14536 of the Government Codc, relating to transportation: An act to add Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 55830) to Part 3 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code, relating to transportation. SB 791, as LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST amended, Steinberg. California Transportation al -report -Regional congestion reduction charge. Existing law provides various funding sources for transportation programs and capital improvement projects. Existing law provides for designation of transportation planning agencies throughout the state with various transportation planning and programming responsibilities, including preparation of a regional transportation plan. Certain of these agencies are also designated as metropolitan planning organizations under federal law This bill would authorize a metropolitan planning organization, subject to majority voter approval, to impose, for up to 30 years, a regional transportation congestion reduction charge on purchasers of motor vehicle fuel in all or part of its jurisdiction, which would be collected by the fuel retailer or wholesaler and transmitted to the State Board of Equalization. The bill would define motor vehicle fuel for these purposes to include gasoline and diesel. A corresponding vehicle registration charge would be imposed on electric vehicles licensed to be driven on public roads, which would be collected by the Department of Motor Vehicles. Prior to adopting a regional congestion reduction 98 SB 791 —2— charge, the metropolitan planning organization would be required to make certain determinations, including that the transportation demand reduction projects funded by the charge would directly and specifically benefit motorists within the region by reducing vehicle congestion so as to increase overall mobility for motorists who are paying the charge. The bill would impose various other requirements. The bill would provide for revenues from the regional transportation congestion reduction charge to be transferred by the State Board of Equalization or the Department of Motor Vehicles, as applicable, to the appropriate metropolitan planning organization. The bill would authorize use of the revenues for certain transportation projects and programs that have been identified in the regional transportation plan, as specified. The bill would require the board ofsupervisors in a county in the jurisdiction of the metropolitan planning organization where the charge is to be imposed, upon request of the organization, to submit the proposed charge to the voters, and would require the organization to reimburse the associated election costs. In certain counties, the charge would be imposed by a county transportation commission rather than the metropolitan planning organization. adopt an annual report for submission to the Legislature containing, in allocating transportation capital outlay funds and an identification law, for the reports to be submitted bctwccn 2001 and 2008, requires a and transfcrs. This bill would delete the previsions -relating to -the loan and t-ransfcr summary and discussion that was to be included in the reports submitted between 2001 and 2008. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: eyes. State -mandated local program: no. The people of the State of California do enact as follows: 1 SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of the 2 following: 3 (a) Section 65080 of the Government Code requires each 4 transportation planning agency designated under Section 29532 98 • • • 144 • • • —3— SB791 1 or 29532.1 of that code to prepare and adopt a regional 2 transportation plan directed at achieving a coordinated and 3 balanced regional transportation system, including, but not limited 4 to, mass transportation, highway, railroad, maritime, bicycle, 5 pedestrian, goods movement, and aviation facilities and services. 6 (b) Federal law also requires metropolitan planning 7 organizations to prepare regional transportation plans that 8 consider the need to relieve congestion and to prevent congestion 9 from occurring and to consider congestion management strategies 10 or actions that improve the mobility of people and goods (23 C.F.R. 11 450.316). 12 (c) Achieving increased mobility within California's 13 metropolitan regions is essential for their economic growth and 14 environmental quality. Free movement of vehicles, goods, and 15 services within a region is a key goal of the regional transportation 16 plan. 17 (d) In attempting to achieve a coordinated and balanced 18 regional transportation system that will achieve the greatest 19 mobility for individuals and businesses within the region, the 20 transportation planning agency must consider projects, taking 21 into account land use and other effects, including induced demand 22 and induced growth, that reduce vehicle congestion by increasing 23 roadway and freeway capacity, as well as projects that reduce 24 vehicle congestion by decreasing demand for roadway and freeway 25 use. 26 (e) In many of California's urbanized areas, it is not practical 27 to increase roadway or freeway capacity because of land or 28 environmental constraints. In other parts of the state, the benefits 29 of increased roadway and freeway capacity can be short lived 30 because often land use changes occur that result in additional 31 driving that absorbs the new capacity. In those areas, projects to 32 reduce demand for roadway and freeway use, by providing 33 alternate means of transportation, may be the most practical way 34 to achieve reduced vehicle congestion. 35 (n At the November 2, 2010, statewide general election, the 36 voters of California approved Proposition 26, which amended 37 Section 3 of Article XIII A and Section 1 of Article XIII C of the 38 California Constitution. Section 3 of ArticleXJIJA of the California 39 Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the Legislature for any 40 change in a state statute that results in any taxpayer paying a 98 145 SB 791 —4 — 1 higher tax. Exceptions to the definition of "tax" were also adopted. 2 Section 1 of Article XIII C of the California Constitution adopts 3 new definitions, including a new definition of "special tax." 4 Exceptions to the definition of "special tax" were also adopted. 5 (g) An exception both to the definition of "tax" in Section 3 of 6 Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and to the definition 7 of "special tax" in Section 1 of Article X111 C of the California 8 Constitution, is a charge imposed for a specific benefit conferred 9 or privilege granted directly to the payor that is not provided to 10 those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs 11 to the state or local government of conferring the benefit or 12 granting the privilege. 13 (h) Proposition 26 also imposes a requirement on any charge 14 enacted without a two-thirds vote that the government "bears the 15 burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that a levy, 16 charge, or other exaction is not a tax, that the amount is no more 17 than necessary to cover the reasonable costs of the governmental 18 activity, and that the manner in which those costs are allocated to 19 a payor bear a fair or reasonable relationship to the payor's 20 burdens on, or benefits received from, the governmental activity" 21 (subdivision (d) of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California 22 Constitution; Section 1 of Article XIII C of the California 23 Constitution). 24 (i) The requirements that the amount is not more than necessary 25 to cover the reasonable costs of the governmental activity and that 26 the manner in which those costs are allocated to a payor bear a 27 fair or reasonable relationship to the payor's burden on or benefits 28 received from the governmental activity restate language from the 29 Sinclair Paint Co. v. State Bd. of Equalization (1997) 15 Ca1.4th 30 866, line of cases (see also California Farm Bureau v. State Water 31 Resources Control Board (2011) 51 Ca1.4th 421, 437-439). 32 (j) Under this standard, a regulatory fee does not become a tax 33 simply because the fee may be disproportionate to the service 34 rendered to individual payors. The question of proportionality is 35 not measured on an individual basis. Rather, it is measured 36 collectively, considering all rate payors (California Assn. of 37 Professional Scientists v. Department of Fish & Game (2000) 79 38 Cal.App.4th 935, 948). Thus, permissible fees must be related to 39 the overall cost of the government regulation. They need not be 40 finely calibrated to the precise benefit each individual fee payor 98 • • • 146 • • • 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 —5— SB 791 1 might derive (California Farm Bureau v. State Water Resources Control Board, supra, at p. 438). (k) Freeway and roadway users receive a speck benefit from programs and projects that reduce vehicle congestion within a region and, therefore, it is appropriate for transportation planning agencies that are federally designated metropolitan planning organizations to impose regional charges on such freeway and roadway users that do not exceed the reasonable cost of reducing vehicle congestion. Congestion reduction is a specific benefit provided to the users of freeways and roadways that is particular and distinct to those users over and above general benefits provided to the public at large. The Legislature also finds that regional vehicle charges are an appropriate method to charge freeway and roadway users for receiving the speck benefit of reduced congestion, and that individuals and businesses that do not pay regional vehicle charges will not receive the speck benefit of reduced vehicle congestion. (1) Freeway and roadway users also receive a specific benefit from funding for maintenance and repair of those facilities, a specific benefit to those users that is not enjoyed by the general public. SEC. 2. Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 55830) is added to Part 3 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code, to read: 25 CHAPTER 2. REGIONAL CONGESTION REDUCTION CHARGE 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 55830. (a) Subject to the approval of the voters pursuant to subdivision (fl, a metropolitan planning organization designated pursuant to Section 134 of Title 23 of the United States Code may impose a regional congestion reduction charge in all or part of its jurisdiction pursuant to this section. The charge shall become operative on the first day of the first calendar quarter commencing more than 90 days after voter approval. (b) A regional congestion reduction charge imposed pursuant to this chapter must satisfy all of the following: (1) (A) The transportation projects and programs funded by the charge would directly and specifically benefit motorists within the region by reducing vehicle congestion and by providing capital improvements for maintenance, safety, and rehabilitation so as to 98 147 SB791 —6- 1 increase overall mobility for motorists within the region who are 2 paying the charge. 3 (B) The metropolitan planning organization shall consider both 4 increased ridership on transit services as well as changes in land 5 use patterns during the planning horizon of the regional 6 transportation plan in determining the congestion relief that would 7 result from the transportation demand reduction projects. 8 (C) The metropolitan planning organization shall use travel 9 demand models consistent with Section 14522.1 and guidelines 10 adopted by the California Transportation Commission for 11 transportation demand models in making this determination. 12 (D) For purposes of this subdivision, "vehicle congestion" 13 means peak period travel speeds on regional freeways, 14 thoroughfares, major and minor arterials, and major connectors 15 that are less than 60 percent of the free flow speeds. 16 (2) The specific benefits of reduced vehicle congestion are not 17 provided to those not charged. 18 (3) The amount of the charge does not exceed the reasonable 19 costs of providing the congestion reduction benefits identified in 20 the regional transportation plan. 21 (4) The manner in which the charge is allocated to a payor 22 bears a fair or reasonable relationship to the payor's congestion 23 relief benefit on regional freeways, thoroughfares, major and 24 minor arterials, and major connectors. 25 (5) The metropolitan planning organization shall adopt any 26 additional findings necessary to establish that the charge satisfies 27 the requirements of paragraph (I) of subdivision (e) of Section 1 28 of Article X111 C of the California Constitution. 29 (c) The charge shall be in addition to any other levies that the 30 metropolitan planning organization is authorized to impose. 31 (1) The charge may be implemented for a period not to exceed 32 30 years on all purchasers of motor vehicle fuels sold in all or 33 part of the jurisdiction of the metropolitan planning organization. 34 The rate of the charge shall be established by the metropolitan 35 planning organization on a per gallon basis. 36 (2) With respect to electric vehicles that are licensed to be driven 37 on public roads and that do not utilize motor vehicle fuel, the 38 charge may be imposed on the vehicle registration for vehicles 39 with a registration address in that part of the region where the 40 charge on motor vehicle fuel is imposed. The charge shall be for 98 • • 148 • • • —7— SB791 1 the same period of time as the charge on motor vehicle fuel. The 2 surcharge shall be collected by the Department of Motor Vehicles 3 and, after deducting the department's administrative costs, the net 4 revenues shall be transferred quarterly to the metropolitan 5 planning organization. 6 (3) As used in this section, motor vehicle fuel includes, but is 7 not limited to, gasoline and diesel fuel, which shall have the same 8 meanings set forth in Sections 7316 and 60022, respectively, of 9 the Revenue and Taxation Code. 10 (d) (1) Revenues from the charge may be expended for (A) 11 transit capital, operations, and maintenance costs, (B) bicycle and 12 pedestrian programs and projects, (C) programs and projects that 13 would demonstrably reduce the region's rate of growth from 2005 14 levels in vehicle miles traveled by single -occupant vehicles, (D) 15 conversion of high -occupancy vehicle lanes to high occupancy toll 16 lanes or other variably tolled express lanes, (E) capital 17 improvements relative to maintenance, safety, and rehabilitation 18 of state highways and bridges as described in subdivision (a) of 19 Section 14526.5 and equivalent projects on local streets and roads, 20 and (F) related administrative costs. A metropolitan planning 21 organization that includes a regional congestion reduction charge 22 in its regional transportation plan shall ident ifi; the programs and 23 projects that would be funded by the charge in the financial element 24 of the regional transportation plan. The financial element shall 25 also identifii the eligible transit operators and other recipients and 26 the amount of funds that would be needed from all sources, 27 including the regional congestion reduction charge, for each year 28 of the programs through the planning horizon of the regional 29 transportation plan. 30 (2) A charge authorized by this section shall provide sufficient 31 funding, together with other funding sources realistically projected 32 to be available, to complete each project or program, or to operate 33 and maintain each program for the duration of the project or 34 program as identjed in the regional transportation plan. 35 (e) (1) Following the adoption by the metropolitan planning 36 organization of a regional transportation plan, or an amendment 37 to a regional transportation plan, that provides for a charge 38 pursuant to this section, the board of supervisors of each county 39 and city and county in the jurisdiction of the metropolitan planning 40 organization where the charge is to be imposed shall, upon the 98 149 SB 791 —8- 1 request of the metropolitan planning organization, submit to the 2 voters at a local election consolidated with a statewide primary 3 or general election specified by the metropolitan planning 4 organization, a measure, adopted by the organization, authorizing 5 the organization to impose the charge within all or part of the 6 region consistent with subdivision (c). 7 (2) The metropolitan planning organization shall reimburse 8 each county or city and county in the affected part of the region 9 for the cost of submitting the measure to the voters. These costs 10 shall be reimbursed from revenues derived from the charge if the 11 measure is approved by the voters or, if the measure is not 12 approved, from any funds of the metropolitan planning 13 organization that may be lawfully used for that purpose. 14 (/) (1) Upon approval of the measure by a majority of the voters 15 voting at an election within the region or the affected part of the 16 region where the charge is to be imposed, the metropolitan 17 planning organization may impose the charge. The charge shall 18 be imposed on the purchaser of motor vehicle fuel at the point of 19 retail or wholesale sale in each county or city and county within 20 the region where the charge is imposed, and shall be collected 21 from the purchaser by the retailer or wholesaler and transmitted 22 to the State Board of Equalization. The measure shall provide for 23 refund, by the board, of charges paid for motor vehicle fuel that 24 is not used in a vehicle on public roads. 25 (2) The motor vehicle fuel charge required to be collected by 26 the retailer or wholesaler, and any amount unreturned to the 27 customer which is not the charge but was collected from the 28 customer under the representation that it was the charge, constitute 29 debts owed by the retailer or the wholesaler to the state. 30 (3) The motor vehicle fuel charges imposed by this section are 31 due and payable quarterly on or before the last day of the month 32 next succeeding each calendar quarter. The payment shall be 33 accompanied by a return in the form prescribed by the State Board 34 of Equalization. 35 (g) (1) The metropolitan planning organization shall contract 36 with the State Board of Equalization for the administration of the 37 motor vehicle fuel charge imposed under this section, and the 38 board shall be reimbursed for its actual cost in the administration 39 of the charge, including administration of refunds, and for its 98 • • • 150 • • • —9— SB 791 1 actual cost of preparation to administer the charge based upon 2 an independent audit. 3 (2) The Stale Board of Equalization shall collect the motor 4 vehicle fuel charges pursuant to the Fee Collection Procedures 5 Law (Part 30 (commencing with Section 55001) of Division 2 of 6 the Revenue and Taxation Code). 7 (3) After deducting its cost of administering the motor vehicle 8 fuel charge, the State Board of Equalization shall periodically 9 transmit the net revenues, less refunds, to the metropolitan 10 planning organization as promptly as possible. Transmittal of 11 those revenues shall be made at least twice in each calendar 12 quarter. 13 (h) The net revenues of the motor vehicle fuel and electric 14 vehicle registration charge shall be deposited into a Regional 15 Congestion Reduction Fund, to be created and administered by 16 the metropolitan planning organization, and shall be expended in 17 accordance with this section. 18 (i) (1) In an area where a charge has been approved by the 19 voters, the metropolitan planning organization shall appoint an 20 independent taxpayers' oversight committee to audit and oversee 21 the programs and projects funded by the charge to ensure that 22 expenditures are consistent with this chapter and with the measure 23 submitted to the voters. 24 (2) The committee shall be comprised of three persons, each of 25 whom shall be a retired federal or state judge. Committee members 26 shall be selected in a public meeting by the board of the 27 metropolitan planning organization. No person currently serving 28 as an elected or appointed city, county, special district, state, or 29 federal public officeholder shall be eligible to serve as a member 30 of the committee. The committee shall select no fewer than six 31 taxpayers representing a fair cross section of the public to serve 32 on an advisory committee. 33 0) (1) The metropolitan planning organization may issue bonds 34 backed solely by revenues from the charge authorized by this 35 section. Revenues from the charge may be pledged for payment of 36 debt service on those bonds. 37 (2) For purposes of this section, "bonds" means indebtedness 38 and securities of any kind or class, including bonds, notes, bond 39 anticipation notes, and commercial paper. 98 151 SB 791 —10 — 1 (3) The metropolitan planning organization may issue bonds 2 payable from the revenues from the charge authorized by this 3 section at any time or from time to time. The bonds may be secured 4 by a pledge of those revenues. The metropolitan planning 5 organization may issue bonds to refund, purchase, or otherwise 6 acquire bonds on terms and conditions as it shall approve. 7 (4) The bonds may be sold at public or private sale in the forms 8 and on such terms and conditions as the metropolitan planning 9 organization shall approve. The metropolitan planning 10 organization may pledge all or any part of the revenues from the 11 charge to secure any repayment or reimbursement obligations of 12 the metropolitan planning organization to any provider of 13 insurance or a guarantee of liquidity or credit facility entered into 14 to provide for the payment of the bonds. The metropolitan planning 15 organization may employ and compensate bond counsel, financial 16 consultants, and other advisers determined necessary by it in 17 connection with the issuance and sale of the bonds. 18 (5) Bonds issued under this chapter shall not be a debt or 19 liability of any political subdivision of this state, or a pledge of 20 the full faith and credit of the state or of any political subdivision, 21 but shall be payable solely from the funds provided in this chapter. 22 (6) Bonds issued by the metropolitan planning organization are 23 legal investments for all trust funds, the funds of all insurance 24 companies, banks, trust companies, executors, administrators, 25 trustees, and other fiduciaries. The bonds are securities that may 26 legally be deposited with, and received by, any state or municipal 27 officer or agency or political subdivision of the state for any 28 purpose for which the deposit of bonds or obligations of the state 29 is now, or may hereafter be, authorized by law, including deposits 30 to secure public funds. 31 (7) Interest earned on any bonds issued under this chapter shall 32 at all times be free from state personal income tax and corporate 33 income tax. 34 (8) The state hereby pledges to and agrees with the holders of 35 bonds issued by the metropolitan planning organization that the 36 state will not limit, alter, or restrict the rights hereby vested in the 37 metropolitan planning organization to fulfill each pledge of 38 revenues and any other terms of any agreement made with or for 39 the benefit of the holders of bonds or in any way impair the rights 40 or remedies of the holders of bonds. 98 • • • 152 -11— SB791 • • • 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 resporrsibilities over the 25 past year. 26 (b) Thc annual report may also include a discussion of any 27 28 1 (k) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, in the 2 region served by the multicounty transportation planning agency 3 described in Section 130004 of the Public Utilities Code, a county 4 transportation commission may impose the charge within the 5 county of its jurisdiction if approved by a majority of the voters 6 in that county. The requirements of subdivision (b) shall apply to 7 the county within the region specified in this subdivision. In this 8 case, the county transportation commission, rather than the metropolitan planning organization, shall exercise all of the powers under this section relative to imposition of the charge. (1) (1) The requirement for voter approval pursuant to subdivision (t is a requirement for a charge imposed specifically pursuant to this section and is not a requirement of the California Constitution. (2) The provisions of this chapter shall not limit the rights of local governments to impose any fee or charge otherwise permitted under the California Constitution. SECTION 1. Scction 14536 of the Government Codc is amended to read: 14536. (a) Thc annual report shall include an explanation and policies and -decisions adopted by the 0 98 153 Federal & State Legislative Update September 14, 2O1i MIN mem Riverside 'County from{m rtation Commission • Apparent deal between House and Senate for a six-month extension at current funding levels . 8th extension since SAFETEA-LU expired 2009 • $5 billion for TIGER and TIFIA grants/loans • $2 billion for airport improvement grants • $1 billion for FAA NextGen air traffic control Project Delivery Legislation • H.R. 2389 (Miller) — Makes NEPA delegation a permanent program, allows replacement of NEPA with CEQA • H. R. 2538 (Calvert) —REBUILD Act — Expands NEPA delegation to other areas of infrastructure Project Delivery Legislation • H.R. 2766 (Miller) — Breaking Down Barriers Act of 2011 Creates deadlines for project approvals Makes federal involvement more proportional to federal funding Requires studies and recommendations for: • Expanding categorical exclusions under NEPA • Methods to streamline EIR process SB 791 (Steinberg) • Details: — Allows MPO's to place on the ballot a "congestion charge" on the sale of gasoline (majority vote): • In SCAG region, CTC's can opt for county -specific measures — Possible that sub -regional COG's could implement the charge • Electric vehicles pay a surcharge on vehicle registration, instead • 30 year maximum — Eligible projects (partial): transit (capital, ops, maintenance), conversion of HOV to HOT, SHOPP, anything that reduces VMT, admin costs — Goal: increase transit ridership and change land -use patterns SB 791 (Steinberg) • RCTC Staff Concerns: More limited than a traditional self-help measure • Project eligibility is restricted, does not allow all projects in the RTP Return to Source Abdication of state responsibilities • SHOPP (state highway maintenance) Tara Byerly From: Tara Byerly Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:07 PM To: Tara Byerly Subject: RCTC September Commission Agenda Importance: High Good Afternoon Commission Alternates: Attached below is the link to the September 14, 2011 Commission Meeting Agenda. Please copy the link and paste it into a web page http://www.rctc.org/downloads/current/agenda 201 1 O9.pdf. Thank you. Respectfully, Tara S. Byerly Senior Administrative Assistant 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 787-7141 1 Tara Byerly From: Tara Byerly Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:11 PM To: Tara Byerly Subject: RCTC September Commission Agenda - [pad Users Attachments: Conflict of Interest Memo.pdf; Conflict of Interest Form.pdf Importance: High Good Afternoon Commissioners, The September Commission Agenda for the [Pad Users is available. Please copy this link: http://www.rctc.org/downloads/current/agenda ipad.pdf In addition, attached is the conflict of interest memo and the form for your review. Please let me know if you have any questions. Respectfully, Tara S. Byerly Senior Administrative Assistant 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 787-7141 1 Riverside County Transportation Commission TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jennifer Harmon, Office and Board Services Manager DATE: September 7, 2011 SUBJECT: Possible Conflicts of Interest Issues -Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda of September 14, 2011 The September 14, 2011 agenda of the Riverside County Transportation Commission includes items which may raise possible conflicts of interest. A RCTC member may not participate in any discussion or action concerning a contract or amendment if a campaign contribution of more than $250 is received in the past 12 months or 3 months following the conclusion from any entity or individual listed. Agenda Item No. 7H - Extension of Task Orders Issued to On -Ca// Right of Way Consultants Consultant(s): Epic Land Solutions 2601 Airport Drive #115 Torrance, CA 90505 Holy Rockwell, President Overland Pacific Cutler, Inc. (OPC) 3750 Schaufele Avenue, #150 Long Beach, CA 90808 Amber Costello, Corporate Counsel Agenda Item No. 7M - Agreement with Universal Protection Service to Provide Security Guard Services for Five Commission -Owned Commuter Rail Stations Consultant(s): Universal Protection Service 1551 North Tustin Ave, Sixth Floor Santa Ana, CA 92705 Robert Ryan, Vice President of Sales Agenda Item No. 7N - Agreement with Sunesys, LLC to Provide Fiber Optic Connections and/or Infrastructure to Link the Pedley Station to the Downtown Riverside Station Consultant(s): Sunesys 1325 Pico Street, Suite 106 Corona, CA 92881 Stephen A. DeFranco, Director of Sales RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ROLL CALL SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 Present Absent County of Riverside, District I 0 County of Riverside, District II 0 County of Riverside, District III 0 County of Riverside, District IV /171' 0 County of Riverside, District V 0 City of Banning /71' 0 City of Beaumont 0` 0 City of Blythe ,er 0 City of Calimesa ,,0'^ 0 City of Canyon Lake J71- 0 City of Cathedral City 0 City of Coachella 0 City of Corona ,0✓ 0 City of Desert Hot Springs ,0-- 0 City of Eastvale ,0'" 0 City of Hemet J2 0 City of Indian Wells ,g-, 0 City of Indio ,I7' 0 City of Jurupa Valley ,O' 0 City of La Quinta ,2r. 0 City of Lake Elsinore ,17r- 0 City of Menifee 0 City of Moreno Valley 521' 0 City of Murrieta 0 %' City of Norco ,,®''' 0 City of Palm Desert ,i7Y 0 City of Palm Springs ,0` 0 City of Perris ,Fr 0 City of Rancho Mirage ,e'' 0 City of Riverside 0 City of San Jacinto 0 City of Temecula 0 City of Wildomar ,17'' 0 Governor's Appointee, Caltrans District 8 0 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 NAME AGENCY E MAIL ADDRESS *1.1`1‘ > Z% /i 1 .- �c.4:l_ ,'' � f ' fv- /24244 e� 5.71 6 .444\-1',/”,. - /I4I -- '. -'— t cd. 14 c - t.e-itvi-i N /474 it/ 0� / Nco '` 1Z-- -NIA4 4s �u rY.c.�A.. Ved e r 4'f r / r)EcUZ4 v C , g/ 5 OAAte___ - ,5 -71 -1.6 -e --- f y woG c -c/ c o,-/,.1 �. de- C% i2'// v.. Ca /6ve--,il- •S'07' at__ (fir/ A..,. _f, OA, //-az- . tA..V N.Q Cj c2 C..o& 6 52 ILA, ?jab& te,t_th --7. z -A 2 ,c. /r-17 �� Gam, -s-4- ' PX...-1.--) ":----- 1<-'e7/-VcA .r .si,_„,) ,,,_.c..zoc.,,rz3 ,i, , ,.if. 4,,, ,. /1„.._ /2...e..,._i_t L,,.e N0 +J T \'\\,e - T�10 -, 11 L•rn \r„5 Rol \ �n ,,A, \14 \\S ic) c3)19/00/k&s RI - ..5. --r ` .. ii'7H'% 's pis n.z.z J % .5�,L-- s 'r AL4 i. L «r\zl L. k/u . e1�-