Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout07 July 28, 2003 CommissionRIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA TIME: 1:00 p.m. DATE: Monday, July 28, 2003 LOCATION: BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside Commissioners Chairman: Ron Roberts 1St Vice Chairman: Roy Wilson 2nd Vice Chairman: Robin Lowe Bob Buster, County of Riverside John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside James A. Venable, County of Riverside Roy Wilson, County of Riverside Marion Ashley, County of Riverside Art Welch / Sue Palmer / Bill Jenkins, City of Banning Placido L. Valdivia / Roger Berg, City of Beaumont Robert Crain / George Thomas, City of Blythe Gregory Schook / John Chlebnik, City of Calimesa Jack Wamsley / Mary Craton, City of Canyon Lake Gregory S. Pettis / Paul Marchand, City of Cathedral City Juan M. DeLara / Richard Macnicki, City of Coachella Jeff Miller / Jeff Bennett, City of Corona Matt Weyuker / Greg Ruppert, City of Desert Hot Springs Robin Lowe / Lori Van Arsdale, City of Hemet Percy L. Byrd / Robert A. Bernheimer, City of Indian Wells Mike Wilson / Gene Gilbert, City of Indio Terry Henderson / Don Adolph, City of La Quinta Robert L. Schiffner / Thomas Buckley, City of Lake Elsinore Frank West / Charles White, City of Moreno Valley Jack F. van Haaster / Warnie Enochs, City of Murrieta Frank Hall / Harvey Sullivan, City of Norco Dick Kelly / Robert Spiegel, City of Palm Desert William G. Kleindienst / Chris Mills, City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch / Mark Yarbrough, City of Perris Alan Seman / Ron Meepos, City of Rancho Mirage Ameal Moore / Joy Defenbaugh, City of Riverside Chris Buydos / Jim Conner, City of San Jacinto Ron Roberts / Jeff Comerchero, City of Temecula Anne Mayer, Director, Caltrans District #8 Eric Haley, Executive Director Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director Records Comments are welcomed by the Commission. If you wish to provide comments to the Commission, pieaae I: tJIIIfJICLC anti JEW IIIfl a I CJLIIII tiny l.0lU LV LIIC 1...ICI I1 V/ LIIC I.VIllllllJJ/VII. t, a4,,nD 5 i RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 1:00 p.m. Monday, July 28, 2003 BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section 54954.2, if you need special assistance to participate in a Commission meeting, please contact the Clerk of the Commission at (909) 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. ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS (Items not listed on the agenda) 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - July 9, 2003 5. 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 Committee. 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.) Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda July 28, 2003 Page 2 6. 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. 6A. TDA AUDITS OF RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY AND SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY Page 1 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the financial audits for SunLine Transit Agency and Riverside Transit Agency for Fiscal Year 2001-2002. 6B. CONTRACTS COST AND SCHEDULE REPORT Page 79 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Contracts Cost and Schedule Report for the month ending June 30, 2003. 6C. DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 AND PROPOSED GOAL FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003- 2004 Page 83 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt 12.05% as its DBE overall annual goal for Federal FY 2003-2004 (from October 1, 2003 to September 30, 2004); 2) Post the proposed DBE overall annual goal for FY 2003-2004 and receive comments for 45 -days; and, 3) Submit the methodology and FY 2003-2004 goal to Caltrans District 8 Local Assistance. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda July 28, 2003 Page 3 6D. ANNUAL LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND PLANNING ALLOCATIONS TO CVAG AND WRCOG Page 91 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve allocation of Local Transportation Funds totaling $223,602 to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) and $409,938 to the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) to support transportation planning programs and functions as identified in the attached work programs. 6E. ORANGE COUNTY - RIVERSIDE COUNTY MAJOR INVESTMENT STUDY COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 92 1) Approve development of a Cooperative Agreement between the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and RCTC for the initiation of a Major Investment Study to develop solutions to address the significant demand for transportation capacity between Riverside and Orange Counties; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 6F. PROPOSED FUNDING FOR THE ORANGE COUNTY - RIVERSIDE COUNTY MAJOR INVESTMENT STUDY Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 94 1) Approve $1.5 million in Surface Transportation Program Funds for the Orange County — Riverside County Major Investment Study; and, 2) Continue to seek alternate funding opportunities for CETAP and staff monitoring costs. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda July 28, 2003 Page 4 6G. SCAG AGREEMENT FOR COST SHARING TO UPGRADE THE REGIONAL TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 96 1) Approve Agreement No. 04-65-010 for Cost Sharing to Upgrade SCAG's Regional Travel Demand Model; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 6H. CALTRANS LOCAL ASSISTANCE CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT FOR STATE ROUTE 71 WIDENING / ANIMAL CROSSING PROJECT Page 104 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 04-66-01 1, Local Assistance Contribution Agreement with Caltrans District 8 allowing Caltrans to claim $10 million of TEA 21 Demonstration Funds as local contribution for the SR 71 Widening/Animal Crossing Project; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement of behalf of the Commission. 61. AUTHORIZATION TO BID REVEGETATION WORK FOR THE STATE ROUTE 74 SEGMENT I REALIGNMENT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 112 1) Authorize staff to advertise to receive revegetation bids for the State Route 74 Segment I Highway Improvement Project, from Dexter Avenue in Lake Elsinore to approximately 1,640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Road, in the County of Riverside; and, 2) Bring back to the Commission the results of the bidding for contract award to the lowest, responsive bidder. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda July 28, 2003 Page 5 6J. AUTHORIZATION TO BID VEGETATION REMOVAL CONSTRUCTION PACKAGE FOR STATE ROUTE 74 SEGMENT 2 REALIGNMENT Page 114 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Authorize staff to advertise to receive vegetation removal bids for the State Route 74 Segment II Highway Improvement Project, from Wasson Canyon Road to Seventh Street, in the County of Riverside; and, 2) Bring back to the Commission the results of the bidding for contract award to the lowest, responsive bidder. 6K. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT NO. 04-33-012 WITH THE CITY OF CORONA FOR JOINT USE OF EXISTING CITY CONDUIT FROM THE NORTH MAIN CORONA METROLINK STATION TO THE STATE ROUTE 91 CALTRANS FIBER OPTICS BACKBONE Page 116 Overview 1) Approve Agreement No. 04-33-012 with the City of Corona for joint use of existing city conduit, which will be used to install a fiber optics line, from the North Main Corona Metrolink Station to the SR 91 Caltrans Fiber Optics Backbone, at Main Street, to connect the North Main Corona CCTV Security System to the Downtown Riverside Station Security Monitoring Facility; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda July 28, 2003 Page 6 6L. FISCAL YEAR 2004 FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION'S SECTION 5307 PROGRAM OF PROJECTS Page 130 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the Federal Transit Administration's Section 5307 Program of Projects for Riverside County for FY 2004; and, 2) Authorize SCAG to add $78,340 in projects to the Los Angeles urbanized area's Program of Projects for the Riverside Transit Agency. 6M. FISCAL YEARS 2001-2003 PERFORMANCE AUDIT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 135 1) Authorize the release of a Request for Proposal to conduct a performance audit of the Riverside County Transportation Commission's activities and the seven public transit operators providing services in Riverside County; and, 2) Direct the Audit Ad Hoc Committee to select the consultant to conduct the audits. 6N. RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY'S REQUEST TO REPROGRAM FUNDS Page 157 Overview This item is for the Commission to reprogram funds to purchase wheelchair securement devices, purchase up -grade amenities for commuter buses, and to cover in -plant bus delivery inspection fees. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda July 28, 2003 Page 7 60. REQUEST FROM EXCEED FOR MEASURE "A" SPECIALIZED TRANSIT FUNDS AS MATCH FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003 SECTION 5310 PROGRAM Page 158 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve allocation of $49,800 in Measure "A" Specialized Transit Funds to Exceed, A Division of Valley Resource Center, to provide the required local match for the purchase of six vehicles. 6P. MEASURE "A" SPECIALIZED TRANSIT: TAXI DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 160 1) Approve the implementation of a twelve-month taxi demonstration program; 2) Allocate up to $87,174 in Western Riverside County Measure "A" Specialized Transit Funds to Diversified Paratransit, Inc. (DPI) to cover the administrative costs of the program; 3) Allocate up to $612,826 in Western Riverside County Measure "A" Specialized Transit Funds to the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) to cover the cost of taxi services; and, 4) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 6Q. FISCAL YEARS 2004-2008 MEASURE "A" FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FOR THE CITY OF MORENO VALLEY Page 167 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the FY 2004-08 Measure "A" Five Year Capital Improvement Plan for Local Streets and Roads for the City of Moreno Valley. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda July 28, 2003 Page 8 6R. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE Page 184 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file Commuter Rail Program Update as an information item. 6S. STATE ROUTE 91 ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATE Page 198 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the State Route 91 Advisory Committee Meeting Update as an information item. 6T. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 201 1) Adopt the following bill positions and associated policy positions: Support - S 1140 (Lautenberg , D — New Jersey) as introduced 5/22/03 and HR 2180 (McGovern, D - Massachusetts) as introduced 5/22/03; Oppose - SB 18 (Burton, D — San Francisco) as amended 7/9/03; and, 2) Receive and file the State and Federal Legislative Status Report as an information item. 7. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT NO. 04-41-014 WITH ENTERTAINMENT PUBLICATION OPERATING COMPANY, INC. Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 212 1) Approve entering into Agreement No. 04-41-014 with the Entertainment Publication Operating Company, Inc., as part of the Commission's Commuter Assistance Program for FY 2003-04; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda July 28, 2003 Page 9 8. ORAL PRESENTATION - UPDATE ON THE WINCHESTER TO TEMECULA CETAP CORRIDOR Overview This item is to update the Commission on the Winchester to Temecula CETAP Corridor. 9. ORAL PRESENTATION - STATE BUDGET IMPASSE Overview This item is to update the Commission on the status of the State Budget and its impact on Riverside County Construction Projects. 10. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 11. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT Overview Page 228 This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and the Executive Director to report on attended and upcoming meetings/conferences and issues related to Commission activities. 12. ADJOURNMENT The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 11:00 a.m., Wednesday, September 3, 2003, Board Room, County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. 5 AGENDA ITEM 4 Minutes • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, July 9, 2003 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chairman Ron Roberts at 9:09 a.m., in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners/Alternates Present Marion Ashley Daryl Busch Bob Buster Chris Buydos Percy L. Byrd Mary Craton Juan DeLara Frank Hall Terry Henderson Dick Kelly William G. Kleindienst Robin Lowe Paul Marchand Anne Mayer Jeff Miller Ameal Moore Ron Roberts Gregory V. Schook Alan Seman John F. Tavaglione Placido Valdivia Jack F. van Haaster Jim Venable Art Welch Frank West Matt Weyuker Roy Wilson Commissioners Absent Robert Crain Robert L. Schiffner Michael H. Wilson Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2003 Page 2 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS • Garry Grant, Meadowbrook area resident, commended the Commission for the progress of the SR 74 Project and requested that the property acquisitions be processed more quickly as the vacant properties are attracting unwanted elements and projecting an untidy appearance. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — June 11 and June 18, 2003 M/S/C (Schook/Kleindienst) to approve the minutes as submitted. Abstain: Craton 5. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS Chairman Roberts noted additions/revisions to the following agenda items: • Agenda Item 6H, "Request for Proposal to Provide Right -of -Way Services Related to the San Jacinto Branch Line Commuter Rail Project" • Agenda Item 6J, "Fiscal Year 2004 Local Transportation Fund Allocations for Transit and Measure "A" Allocation for SunLine Transit Agency" • Agenda Item 7, "Consideration of Memorandum of Understanding No. M23-002 Between RCTC and WRCOG Regarding the Western Riverside TUMF Program" 6. CONSENT CALENDAR M/S/C (Lowe/Ashley) to approve the following Consent Calendar items: 6A. CONTRACTS COST AND SCHEDULE REPORT Receive and file the Contracts Cost and Schedule Report for the month ending May 31, 2003. 6B. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 03-025, "RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AMENDING GUIDELINES FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE MEASURE 'A" FUNDED COMMUTER INCENTIVE PROJECTS AS PART OF ITS COMMUTER ASSISTANCE PROGRAM" Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2003 Page 3 Adopt Resolution No. 03-025, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Amending Guidelines for the Administration of the Measure "A" Funded Commuter Incentive Project as Part of Its Commuter Assistance Program ". 6C. SAN BERNARDINO ASSOCIATED GOVERNMENTS FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 COMMUTER ASSISTANCE PROGRAM CONTRACT 1) Approve entering into Agreement No. 04-41-003 with the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) as part of the Commission's continuing bi-county partnership with SANBAG to deliver commuter and employer rideshare services for Fiscal Year 2003-2004; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 6D. APPROVE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING NO. M23-001 WITH RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY FOR THE PASS THROUGH OF FTA FUNDING FOR THE PERRIS MULTIMODAL FACILITY AND APPROVE AGREEMENT NO. 04-33-007 WITH POUNTNEY CONSULTING GROUP, INC. TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATED TO THE FACILITY 1) Approve Memorandum of Understanding No. M23-001 with Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) for the pass through of Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding for the Perris Multimodal Facility; 2) Approve the selection process to have Pountney Consulting Services, Inc. master plan, environmentally clear, and prepare the final design of the Perris Multimodal Facility; 3) Award Agreement No. 04-33-007 to Pountney Consulting Group, Inc. to perform Phase I of the engineering services for the Perris Multimodal Facility for an amount of $513,000 with an extra work amount of $52,625 for a total not to exceed value of $565,625; 4) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the memorandum of understanding and agreement on behalf of the Commission; and, 5) Direct staff to bring back suggested scope and cost changes to the above agreement with Pountney Consulting Group, Inc. for Phase II final design for the plans, specifications, and cost estimate to construct the project. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2003 Page 4 6E. AGREEMENT NO. 04-31-006 WITH DMJM + HARRIS FOR ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE STATE ROUTE 60 HOV PROJECT FINAL PS&E 1) Award Agreement No. 04-31-006 (Amendment No. 10 to Agreement No. RO-2042) for DMJM + Harris to provide construction management and additional engineering design services for the State Route 60 HOV Project Final Plans, Specifications & Estimates (PS&E), for an additional base amount of $204,800; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 6F. STATE ROUTES 86 AND 111 PROJECTS 1) Approve the revised listing of Tier II Projects for State Route 111, 2) Approve the reimbursement schedule of Measure "A" Funds by fiscal year through 2008-2009; and, 3) Authorize staff to work closely with CVAG to address future cash flow concerns should they arise. 6G. AGREEMENT NO. 04-33-004 WITH CALTRANS (COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. 8-1055, AMENDMENT NO. 2) TO EXPAND USE OF THE STATE ROUTE 91 CALTRANS FIBER OPTICS BACKBONE FOR THE CCTV SECURITY SYSTEM AT RCTC METROLINK STATIONS 1) Approve Agreement No. 04-33-004, (Amendment No. 2 to Caltrans Cooperative Agreement No. 8-1055), between RCTC and Caltrans, for the State to allow RCTC use of up to four (4), two (2) additional dark fibers, along State Route 91 for future expansion of the West Corona, North Main Corona, and La Sierra Metrolink Stations CCTV Security Systems; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 6H. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY SERVICES RELATED TO THE SAN JACINTO BRANCH LINE COMMUTER RAIL PROJECT 1) Direct staff to prepare and advertise a Request for Proposal (RFP), for consultant services to provide right-of-way services related to the San Jacinto Branch Line Commuter Rail Project; Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2003 Page 5 2) Form a selection committee, comprised of representatives from RCTC and Bechtel staffs, to review, evaluate, and rank all RFP's received; and, 3) Authorize staff to negotiate a contract with the top ranked consultant and provide a recommendation to the Commission for contract award. 61. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 04-002, " RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION TO ALLOCATE STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUNDS" AND FISCAL YEAR 2004 STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE ALLOCATIONS 1) Adopt Resolution No. 04-002, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Allocate State Transit Assistance Funds"; and, 2) Approve the Fiscal Year 2004 State Transit Assistance Fund Allocations for Riverside County. 6J. FISCAL YEAR 2004 LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND ALLOCATIONS FOR TRANSIT AND MEASURE "A" ALLOCATION FOR SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY 1) Approve the Fiscal Year 2004 Local Transportation Fund Allocations (LTF) for Transit; and, 2) Approve LTF and Measure "A" Allocations for SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine). 6K. REQUEST TO REPROGRAM FUNDS FOR THE CITY OF BEAUMONT'S TRANSIT SERVICES Reprogram funds for the purchase of two Clean Natural Gas Buses. 6L. REQUEST TO REALLOCATE FUNDS FOR THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE'S SPECIAL TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Reallocate $46,843 in funding from capital to operating for the City of Riverside's Special Transportation Services. 6M. FISCAL YEAR 2004-2008 MEASURE "A" FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS Approve the Fiscal Year 2004-2008 Measure "A" Five Year Capital Improvement Plans for Local Streets and Roads. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2003 Page 6 6N. AMENDMENT TO FISCAL YEAR 2003 MEASURE "A" CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FOR THE CITIES OF MORENO VALLEY AND PALM DESERT Approve the amendment to the Fiscal Year 2003 Measure "A" Capital Improvement Plans for Local Streets and Roads for the Cities of Moreno Valley and Palm Desert. 60. FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS Approve the Fiscal Year 2003-2004 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program Funding Recommendations. 6P. SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM EXTENSION FOR THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AND THE CITIES OF BANNING, BLYTHE, RIVERSIDE, AND SAN JACINTO 1) Grant the County of Riverside a twelve-month extension to June 30, 2004 to complete the Clark Street, Mission Boulevard, and Rubidoux Boulevard Sidewalk Projects; 2) Grant the City of Banning a six-month extension to December 31, 2003 to complete the approved FY 2002-03 SB 821 Sidewalk Projects; 3) Grant the City of Blythe a twelve-month extension to June 30, 2004 to complete the Rice and 6th Street Sidewalk Improvement Projects; 4) Grant the City of Riverside a two -month extension to August 31, 2003 to complete the Wheelchair Ramps Project, La Sierra Avenue Sidewalk Project, Norwood Avenue Sidewalk Project, Nicolett Street Sidewalk Project, and Garfield Avenue Sidewalk Project, and a twelve-month extension to June 30, 2004 to complete the Garfield Avenue Sidewalk (Via San Jose to Adams Street) Project; and , 5) Grant the City of San Jacinto a six-month extension to December 31, 2003 to complete the approved FY 2002-03 Sidewalk and Ramp Projects. 6Q. METROLINK 2002 ONBOARD SURVEY RESULTS Receive and file the presentation on the Metrolink 2002 Onboard Survey as an information item. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2003 Page 7 6R. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE Receive and file the Commuter Rail Program Update as an information item. 6S. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE STATUS REPORT Receive and file the State and Federal Legislative Status Report as an information item. 7. CONSIDERATION OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING NO. M23-002 BETWEEN RCTC AND WRCOG REGARDING THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE TUMF PROGRAM Eric Haley, Executive Director, outlined the proposed Memorandum of Understanding between the RCTC and the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) clarifying the relationship between Measure "A" and the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). He proposed to accelerate the designation of the 6 to 8 arterials outlined in the MOU for presentation to the Commission at its November 12, 2003 meeting, allowing full consultation of all parties involved. He briefly reviewed Ordinance No. 824 that limits administrative costs of the TUMF Program to 1% of TUMF Revenue. Staff plans to present monthly revenue calculations to the Commission and move forward with an anticipated quarterly allocation to sub -area projects and regional transit beginning this fall. Commissioner Bob Buster expressed his concurrence with using standardized criteria to evaluate projects and would like to see the criteria used in a positive way to help concentrate growth where the road system can be most rapidly improved and have a positive effect on land use decisions. Eric Haley noted that the criteria will include traffic volumes, proposed approvals of housing and commercial developments, and accident rates. Commissioner Buster requested air quality and energy savings criteria also are included. Commissioner Mary Craton requested clarification of the RCTC fiduciary responsibility and the Ordinance, Section 8, Appointment of TUMF Fund Administrator, as the two documents seem to conflict. Eric Haley responded that all revenues are deposited in accounts overseen by RCTC and the Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2003 Page 8 financial controls are in place and active today. Also, an agreement will be developed to memorialize this relationship. With regards to any questions regarding the Ordinance, they should be address by WRCOG staff. In response to Commissioner Chris Buydos question, Eric Haley indicated that the TUMF 10 -Year Strategic Plan has not been adopted by WROCG's Executive Committee and is in draft form. Commissioner Buydos then expressed her uneasiness in moving forward with a draft document and believes that the Commission should be provided a copy of the document prior to proceeding with the MOU. Eric Haley responded that the MOU has been limited to the disposition of the $400 million TUMF requirement, preserving the Commission's prerogatives on the funds, and that the Commission is not approving the WRCOG project list with the adoption of the MOU. M/S/C (Schook/Lowe) to: 1) Approve the implementation of Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. M23-002 between the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) clarifying the relationship between Measure "A" and the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF), including the amendment to Section 4, Paragraph 5, "RCTC shall, within eight four months of the execution of this Agreement, designate six to eight roadways on the Regional Arterial System as High Priority Regional Arterials."; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the MOU with WRCOG for the Western Riverside County TUMF Program. Abstain: Buydos, Marchand 8. STRATEGIC RECOVERY PLAN FOR SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY AND SUNLINE SERVICES GROUP Richard Cromwell III, General Manager and Chief Executive Officer of SunLine, presented the Strategic Recovery Plan for SunLine Transit Agency and SunLine Services Group, addressing the following issues: • Responses to internal and external stakeholders • Specific actions to repair the draft audit findings Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2003 Page 9 • Necessary steps to rebuild • Commitment to restore public confidence Commissioner Paul Marchand requested that SunLine provide regular progress updates to the Commission and assurance that the 60 -day timeline will be adhered to. Richard Cromwell 111 expressed concurrence and ensured that every effort is being made to remedy the situation. Commissioner Buster asked if these issues had been ongoing since the inception of SunLine Services Group (SSG). Richard Cromwell 111 responded that as SSG evolved, there was no operating money and therefore causing cash flow issues that became increasingly apparent as government contract payments became less timely. Commissioner Buster then asked for the basis on which the original auditor stated that there was a falsification of documents, Richard Cromwell III expressed his belief that it was due to hearsay, an inexperienced audit team, and personality issues. Commissioner Robin Lowe expressed appreciation for the presentation and the cooperation the agency has shown the Commission. Tanya Love, Program Manager, reviewed the six strategies developed by RCTC, SunLine, and CVAG to address the issues raised in the fiscal audits. She also explained the scope of the independent internal audit of SunLine and SSG. Commissioner William Kleindienst stated that there has be credible cooperation between RCTC, SunLine, and CVAG and believes that it is the intent of all parties to find out what has occurred and how to remedy the situation. M/S/C (Miller/Ashley) to: 1) Approve the release of a Request for Proposal (RFP) to have an independent internal audit conducted of SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine) and SunLine Services Group (SSG); and, 2) Appoint members of the Commission's Audit Ad Hoc Committee to review the proposals. 9. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2003 Page 10 10. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT A. Eric Haley provided a status update on the SR 60/SR 91/1-215 Interchange Project. Commissioner Anne Mayer noted that August cash flow projections for the highway account are in the red and expressed concern for the impact this will have on projects. Commissioner Buster requested staff to a letter to legislators urging resolution of the State budget. B. Marilyn Williams, Director of Regional Programs and Public Affairs, provided a report on the MSRC change in the configuration of membership, noting the potential for an RCTC Commissioner to fill the vacant regional rideshare seat. Staff will include this item for a full presentation at a future meeting. Commissioner Kleindienst requested Chairman Roberts support at the appropriate time to appoint Commissioner Robin Lowe for the vacancy. 11. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the meeting adjourned at 10:32 a.m. The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 1:00 p.m., on Monday, July 28, 2003, at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Board Room, Riverside, California, 92501. Respectfully submitted, Naty Kopenhaver Clerk of the Commission AGENDA ITEM 6A • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Ivan M. Chand, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: TDA Audits of Riverside Transit Agency Agency and SunLine Transit STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the financial audits for SunLine Transit Agency and Riverside Transit Agency for Fiscal Year 2001-2002. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Upon completion of the financials audits for Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and SunLine Transit Agency (STA), the financial statements are presented to the Commission. The Commission is now in receipt of both financial statements. Copies of the financial statements are attached. Riverside Transit Agency RTA received an unqualified opinion from the auditors and there were no current - year financial statement findings. There were no current -year federal award findings or questioned costs. In addition, RTA qualified as a low -risk auditee. SunLine Transit Agency STA received an unqualified opinion from the auditors on their financial statements. However the auditor had three areas of concern. They were: 1. Noncompliance material to financial statements were noted. The reasons for this finding are: a. STA advanced $751,000 in funds to its affiliate, SunLine Services Group (SSG), which does not have sufficient cash flow to repay STA in the current period. b. STA obtained a loan from a bank for the benefit of its affiliate, SSG (for taxi cab program). Agenda Item 6A 1 2. There were audit findings disclosed that were required to be disclosed in accordance with Circular A-133 (Section .510(a)). The reasons for this finding are: a. STA is not allowed to perform charter services under FTA regulations. b. STA contracted with a construction company without including the Davis -Bacon Act provisions in the contract. 3. STA was considered a high -risk auditee. During the July 9, 2003 Commission meeting, staff presented agenda item 8 that outlined a strategic recovery plan for SunLine Transit Agency and SunLine Service group. Six items were outlined to address issued raised in the financial audits. Those items are: 1) Agreement to suspend adoption of SunLine's FY 2004 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) until agreements are adopted and implemented. (Note: SRTP was placed on hold at the June 11"' Commission meeting); 2) Agreement to conduct an independent internal audit of SunLine and SSG; 1) Review issues and timeline for the Triennial Performance Audits of RCTC and SunLine; 2) Development of a strategic recovery plan to strengthen fiscal controls between SunLine and SSG; 3) Reimbursement of funds used to cover SSG administrative charges and the potential transfer of assets to cover bad debt; and 4) Potential of complete segregation between SunLine and SSG. On July 17, 2003, staff released a Request for Proposal (RFP) to conduct an independent internal audit of SunLine Transit Agency and SunLine Services Group. Staff expects the selection process to be completed by August 15, 2003 with the audit starting immediately after the selection. Staff will keep the Commission informed as these items are completed. Attachments Agenda Item 6A 2 64845 AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AND REPORTS Riverside Transit Agency Years ended June 30, 2002 and 2001 with Report of Independent Auditors R.23.7 3 , Riverside Transit Agency Audited Financial Statements and Supplemental Information and Reports Years ended June 30, 2002 and 2001 Contents Report of Independent Auditors 1 Audited Financial Statements Balance Sheets 2 Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings 4 Statements of Cash Flows 6 Notes to Financial Statements 7 Supplemental Information and Reports Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards .............................................. 27 Notes to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards 28 Report of Independent Auditors on Compliance and on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards 29 Report of Independent Auditors on Compliance with Requirements Applicable to the Major Program and Internal Control Over Compliance in Accordance with OMB Circular A-133 31 Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs 33 4 , Eil ERNST & Ito m Ernst & Young uP Suite 1000 18111 Von Karman Avenue Irvine, California 92612-1007 Report of Independent Auditors s Phone: (949) 794-2300 Fax: (949) 437-0590 www.ey.com Board of Directors Riverside Transit Agency We have audited the accompanying financial statements of Riverside Transit Agency as of and for the years ended June 30, 2002 and 2001, as listed in the table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of Riverside Transit Agency's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Riverside Transit Agency as of June 30, 2002 and 2001, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the years then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report as of and for the year ended June 30, 2002 dated September 23, 2002 on our consideration of Riverside Transit Agency's internal control over financial reporting and our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grants. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be read in conjunction with this report in considering the results of our audit. Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the financial statements of Riverside Transit Agency, taken as a whole. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards is presented for purposes of additional analysis as required by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non -Profit Organizations, and is not a required part of the financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole. September 23, 2002 f71 -1-P A Member Practice of Ernst & Young Global 5 1 , Riverside Transit Agency Balance Sheets June 30 2002 2001 Assets Current assets: Cash Accounts receivable Due from other governmental agencies Interest receivable Parts inventory Prepaid expenses Total current assets Restricted assets: Cash Cash and investments held by trustee Total restricted assets Operating property Less accumulated depreciation Financing costs, net of accumulated amortization of approximately $60,000 and $27,000 in 2002 and 2001, respectively Total assets $ 4,289,111 641,568 2,553,260 7,500 1,703,851 545,956 $ 1,830,501 509,770 2,601,083 79,067 1,662,797 574,597 9,741,246 1,421,860 16,906,221 7,257,815 2,345,991 20,766,257 18,328,081 65,297,599 (29,587,242) 35,710,357 23,112,248 46,600,440 (25,729,512) 20, 870,928 214,712 242,093 $ 63,994,396 $ 51,483,084 6 2 June 30 2002 2001 Liabilities and equity Current liabilities: Accounts payable Accrued payroll and related taxes Compensated absences payable Claims payable Current portion of capital lease obligations Total current liabilities Long-term portion of capital lease obligations Liabilities payable from restricted assets: Deferred revenues Total liabilities payable from restricted assets Equity: Capital grants Retained earnings Total equity Total liabilities and equity See accompanying notes. $ 2,233,425 293,309 484,208 3,984,889 1,440,000 $ 1,265,510 260,775 278,011 3,849,624 8,435,831 19,270,000 2,590,031 5,653,920 20,710,000 2,849,086 2,590,031 13,666,344 20,032,190 33,698,534 2,849,086 15,545,546 6,724,532 22,270,078 $ 63,994,396 $ 51,483,084 7 3 Riverside Transit Agency Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings Year ended June 30 2002 2001 Operating revenues: Passenger fares Total operating revenues Operating expenses: Salaries Employee benefits Purchased transportation Other materials and supplies Services Fuel and lubricants Casualty and liability costs Miscellaneous expense Utilities Tires and tubes Taxes Depreciation and amortization: Financing costs Operator acquired property Financed property Grant acquired property Total operating expenses Operating loss Nonoperating revenues (expenses): Operating grants: Local Transportation Fund Federal Transit Administration — Section 5307 Federal Transit Administration — Section 5311 State Transit Assistance Fund Other financial assistance $ 5,495,127 $ 5,383,456 5,495,127 5,383,456 10,317,682 5,141,235 6,498,930 2,027,459 2,051,221 1,697,072 649,376 1,222,701 536,560 126,725 56,117 27,381 127,869 91,770 4,802,947 10,172,426 4,275,028 5,572,571 2,226,721 1,379,653 2,261,118 644,711 1,018,921 506,861 151,763 38,853 80,437 131,986 3,670,445 35,375,045 (29,879,918) 22,903,545 938,254 282,231 233,000 12,510 32,131,494 (26,748,038) 19,281,509 886,135 287,697 1,973,000 49,425 8 4 Riverside Transit Agency Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings (continued) Year ended June 30 2002 2001 Capital contributions: Federal Transit Administration grants State Transit Assistance grants Local Transportation Fund grants Measure A grants Other Interest income Interest expense Gain on sale of operator property Other Total nonoperating revenues Net income Other changes to retained eamings: Depreciation and amortization of property acquired by capital grant funds Net increase in retained earnings Retained earnings at beginning of year Retained earnings at end of year See accompanying notes $ 11,896,883 2,852,442 1,741,943 676,242 495,802 (799,544) 80,909 $ 4,667,065 861,631 559,822 134,569 43,995 1,290,390 (636,214) 24,307 176,029 41,314,217 29,599,360 11,434,299 2,851,322 1,873,359 3,096,036 13,307,658 5,947,358 6,724,532 777,174 $ 20,032,190 $ 6,724,532 9 5 Riverside Transit Agency Statements of Cash Flows Year ended June 30 2002 2001 Operating activities Operating loss Adjustments to reconcile operating loss to net cash used in operating activities: Depreciation and amortization Changes in operating assets and liabilities: Increase in current and other assets (Decrease) increase in other current liabilities Net cash used in operating activities Noncapital financing activities Operating grants received Other noncapital financing Net cash provided by noncapital financing activities Capital and related financing activities Capital grants received Purchase of operating property Proceeds from sale of capital grants property Payment to escrow agent Proceeds from issuance of certificates of participation Capital lease principal payments Interest payments Net cash (used in) provided by capital and related financing activities Investing activities Interest received Net cash provided by investing activities Net (decrease) increase in cash Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year Cash and cash equivalents at end of year See accompanying notes. $ (29,879,918) $ (26,748,038) 5,049,967 (24,821) 1,082,858 3,882,868 (1,480,960) (2,561,271) (23,771,914) 24,369,540 80,909 (26,907,401) 23,506,497 176,029 24,450,449 17,167,510 (19,867,860) (799,544) 23,682,526 5,758,084 (4,930,246) 24,307 (1,762,478) 20,710,000 (285,000) (617,855) (3,499,894) 495,802 18,896,812 1,325,184 495,802 1,325,184 (2,325,557) 16,997,121 24,942,749 7,945,628 $ 22,617,192 $ 24,942,749 10 , Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2002 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies The accounting policies of the Riverside Transit Agency (Agency) are in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States applicable to government units. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) is the accepted standard - setting body for establishing accounting and financial reporting principles. The following is a summary of the significant accounting policies: Reporting Entity The Agency was established in March 1977 as a Joint Powers Agency (JPA) under authority of Title I, Division 7, Chapter 5, as amended by the Government Code of the State of California. By joint exercise of their common power, the County of Riverside and the 14 cities of Western Riverside County created the Agency to serve as a separate public transportation agency. Members of the JPA reserve the right to provide transportation services within their respective jurisdictions, while the Agency serves as a unifying umbrella agency, coordinating transportation services throughout Western Riverside County. The Agency owns, maintains, and operates (directly or through contracts with other operators) the public transit system of Western Riverside County. The Riverside Transit Agency is a special purpose government with no component units and is eligible for funding under Section 99200 et. seq. of the California Public Utilities Code. Basis of Accounting The Agency accounts for its activities in an enterprise fund maintained on the accrual basis of accounting. Under this basis of accounting, revenues are recognized in the accounting period in which they are earned and expenses are recognized in the period incurred. Under GASB Statement No. 20, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Proprietary Funds and Other Governmental Entities That Use Proprietary Fund Accounting, the Agency has elected to apply all the provisions of all relevant pronouncements of the Financial Accounting Standard Board (FASB), including those issued after November 30, 1989, except for those that conflict with or contradict GASB pronouncements. 7 11 Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued) Budget The Agency's fiscal policies establish the framework for the management and control of the Agency's resources to ensure that the Agency remains fiscally sound. The Agency's goals and policies, which are approved by the Board of Directors, determine where and how the Agency resources should be dedicated. For this reason, the Agency's goals, objectives, short- and long-range planning and performance analyses are incorporated into the budget development process. It is the policy of the Agency that the Board of Directors approves an annual budget prior to the beginning of each fiscal year. The budget is developed generally using the accrual basis of accounting. All annual appropriations lapse at the fiscal year-end. Government Grants Grants for operating assistance, the acquisition of equipment or other capital outlay are not formally recognized in the accounts until the grant becomes a valid receivable as a result of the Agency's complying with appropriate grant requirements. Operating assistance grants are included in nonoperating revenues in the year in which the grant is applicable and the related reimbursable expenditure is incurred. As required by GASB Statement No. 33, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Nonexchange Transactions, capital contributions beginning in fiscal 2001 are reported as nonoperating revenues in the statement of revenues, expenses and changes in retained earnings. Prior to implementation of GASB Statement No. 33, the Agency recorded restricted capital grants as an addition to capital grant equity as the related expenditures were incurred. Assets acquired with restricted capital grant funds are included in operating property. Grants received in excess of allowable expenditures are recorded as deferred revenues (see Note 6). 8 12 Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued) Cash and Cash Equivalents For purposes of the statements of cash flows, the Agency considers all short-term investments with an initial maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents. Investments The Agency accounts for its investments in accordance with GASB Statement No. 31, Accounting for Financial Reporting for Certain Investments and for External Investment Pools, which requires that investments be reported at fair value. Pooled investments are carried at fair value based on the value of each participating dollar as provided by the pool sponsor. The fair value of the Agency's position in the pooled investments is the same as the value of the pool shares. Mutual funds are carried at fair value based on the fund's share price. All investment income, including changes in fair value, is included in nonoperating revenues. Parts Inventory Parts inventory is stated at the lower of cost (moving average) or market. Operating Property All operating property, consisting primarily of land, buildings, revenue and non -revenue vehicles, equipment and furniture, is stated at cost or fair market value at the date of donation. Depreciation and amortization is computed using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the related assets. Depreciation of assets acquired with capital grants is included in total depreciation expense charged to operations and recorded as a reduction to the respective capital grants equity. The estimated useful lives of operating property are as follows: Buildings and improvements Transit coaches (30' to 40' vehicles) Transit coaches (less than 30' vehicles) Paratransit vans and support vehicles Furniture and equipment 25 — 30 years 10 — 12 years 7 years 4 years 3 — 5 years 13 9 Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued) Financing Costs Financing costs are amortized over the life of the indebtedness using the straight-line method. Compensated Absences Administrative full-time employees annually accrue up to 240 hours of vacation and 40 hours of floating holidays, while administrative part-time employees accrue up to 96 hours of vacation only per year. Vacation and floating holidays must be taken the year in which they are earned and will not be carried over from year to year or paid -out unless approved by the Chief Executive Officer. A full-time employee shall earn 96 hours of sick leave per year but may not accumulate more than 720 hours of sick leave during his or her term of employment. Employees may elect to be paid twice per calendar year for their accrued sick leave. Employees electing such a payment option will be paid on the first paycheck in July and the first paycheck in December. Union employees annually accrue up to 240 hours of vacation, 64 hours of floating holidays and 96 hours of sick leave. Sick leave pay -outs to represented employees are issued in the same manner as noted above provided they meet the requirements stipulated in Article 37 of the Memorandum of Understanding or they may accrue sick leave time up to a maximum of 1,040 hours. Capital Grants Equity Capital grants equity represents funds granted and earned for capital acquisitions and debt service related to financed capital acquisitions less the depreciation and amortization expense attributable to the operating property purchased and the interest costs incurred with capital grant funds. 10 14 Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 2. Cash and Investments Under the provision of the Agency's investment policy, and in accordance with Section 53601 of the California Government Code, the Agency may purchase the following types of investments: Passbook Savings and Account Demand Deposits County of Riverside Treasury Pool Local Agency Investment Fund (State Pool) California Arbitrage Management (CAMP) U.S. Treasury Bills, Bonds and Notes Cash and investments were reported on the accompanying balance sheets as follows: 2002 2001 Unrestricted Restricted: Other Held by trustee $ 4,289,111 $ 1,830,501 1,421,860 2,345,991 16,906,221 20,766,257 $ 22,617,192 5 24,942,749 The following is a schedule of cash and investments at June 30: Cash and investments with trustee Pooled investments Demand deposits Workers' compensation revolving fund Petty cash 2002 2001 $ 16,906,221 1,421,860 4,241,669 45,942 1,500 $ 20,766,257 2,345,991 1,794,001 35,000 1,500 $ 22,617,192 $ 24,942,749 Pooled investments and demand deposits included monies restricted for capital use as dictated by the underlying grant agreements and allocation instructions and funds designated for insurance claims. Cash and investments with trustee are restricted for the purchase of 57 replacement buses and payment of debt service, as described in Note 5. 11 15 Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 2. Cash and Investments (continued) Classification of Deposits and Investments by Credit Risk The Agency's bank deposits are either entirely covered by appropriate Federal Deposit Insurance or are collateralized in accordance with the California Government Code, which requires California financial institutions to secure a public agency's deposits by pledging government securities as collateral. The market value of pledged securities must equal at least 110% of the Agency's deposits. California law also allows financial institutions to secure Agency deposits by pledging first trust deed mortgage notes having a value of 150% of the Agency's total deposits. The pledged securities are held by the pledging financial institution's trust department in the Agency's name. In accordance with the Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement 3, Deposits with Financial Institutions, Investments (including Repurchase Agreements), and Reverse Repurchase Agreement, the Agency's deposits and investments at June 30, 2002 and 2001 are classified in the following manner to give an indication of the level of risk assumed by the Agency at year-end. Deposits: Category 1 — Deposits that are insured or collateralized with securities held by the Agency or by its agent in the Agency's name. Category 2 — Deposits that are collateralized with securities held by the pledging financial institution's trust department or agent in the Agency's name. Category 3 — Deposits that are uncollateralized or collateralized with securities held by the pledging financial institution or by its trust department or agent, but not in the Agency's name. 12 16 Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 2. Cash and Investments (continued) Classification of Deposits and Investments by Credit Risk (continued) Investments: Category 1 — Investments that are insured or registered or securities held by the Agency or by its agent in the Agency's name. The Agency had no Category 1 investments. Category 2 — Investments that include uninsured and unregistered investments for which the securities are held by the counterparty's trust department or agent in the Agency's name. The Agency had no Category 2 investments. Category 3 — Investments that include uninsured and unregistered investments for which the securities are held by the counterparty or by its trust department or agent, but not in the Agency's name. The Agency had no Category 3 investments. Investments in pools managed by other governments, mutual funds, or guaranteed investment contracts are not subject to categorization because they are not evidenced by securities that exist in physical or book entry form. Deposits and investments were categorized as follows at June 30, 2002: Category Bank Carrying 2 3 Balances Amount Deposits: Demand deposits $ 101,500 $ 5,330,688 $ -- $ 5,432,188 $ 4,289,111 Bank investment contracts — -- 17.357.621 17,357,621 16,894,679 Total deposits $ 101,500 $ 5,330.688 $ 17,357,621 $ 22,789,809 $ 21,183,790 13 17 Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 2. Cash and Investments (continued) Classification of Deposits and Investments by Credit Risk (continued) Not Required to be Fair Categorized Value Investments: Local Agency Investment Fund $ 1,421,860 $ 1,421,860 Mutual funds 11,542 11,542 Total investments $ 1,433,402 $ 1,433,402 Total deposits and investments $ 22,617,192 Deposits and investments were categorized as follows at June 30, 2001: Category Bank Carrying 1 2 3 Balances Amount Deposits: Demand deposits $ 101,500 $ 2,324,467 $ — $ 2,425,967 $ 1,814,511 Money market funds — 15,990 — 15,990 15,990 Bank investment contracts — — 20,756,669 20,756,669 20,756,669 Total deposits $ 101,500 $ 2,340,457 $ 20,756,669 $ 23,198,626 $ 22,587,170 Investments: Local Agency Investment Fund County of Riverside Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund Mutual funds Total investments Not Required to be Fair Categorized Value $ 2,340,751 $ 2,340,751 5,240 5,240 9,588 9,588 $ 2,355,579 $ 2,355,579 Total deposits and investments $ 24,942,749 14 18 Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 2. Cash and Investments (continued) Classification of Deposits and Investments by Credit Risk (continued) A portion of operating funds is deposited with the County of Riverside Treasury pool. Monies are pooled with other County monies with interest allocated on the basis of daily cash balances on deposit with the Treasurer. These funds are invested pursuant to the County of Riverside's adopted investment policy in accordance with Government Code Section 53646. Of the total Agency cash and investments, the Agency has invested 6% in the State of California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF). LAIF invests in structured notes, whose cash flow characteristics are dependent on one or more indices and may have embedded forwards or options, and asset -backed securities, which are entitled to a share of the cash flows from a pool of assets such as principal and interest repayments. Accordingly, these investments are affected by changes in interest rates. These LAIF securities comprise approximately 3% of the LAIF investment portfolio at June 30, 2002. Restricted investments held by the trustee represent unexpended debt proceeds invested primarily in investment agreements, as permitted by the debt agreements. The investments of the debt proceeds are maintained by the trustee in project and reserve funds, as required under the terms of the debt agreements. 3. Due from Other Governmental Agencies Federal Under provisions of the Federal Transportation Administration (FTA), funds are available to the Agency for capitalized maintenance costs; transportation planning; and the acquisition, construction, improvement and maintenance of transit facilities, transit vehicles and equipment. State Transit Assistance Under provisions of a 1979 amendment to the Transportation Development Act of 1971 (TDA), State of California appropriations through the State Transit Assistance Fund are available for capital projects of a public transportation system. To qualify for operating funds, a transit operator must meet one of the efficiency standards under TDA Section 00314.6. 15 19 Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 3. Due from Other Governmental Agencies (continued) Local The State of California Local Transportation Fund (LTF) monies under the TDA, as amended, are available for transit operations and development. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) administers these funds on behalf of the County of Riverside. Funds are apportioned to eligible transit operators based on the percentage of the County's population that lies within each operator's service area. Measure A In 1988, the Riverside County voters approved the increase of sales and use tax by one- half of one percent (.5%) for a period of 20 years to fund specialized transit programs, highway and rail, and streets and road improvements. The RCTC administers these funds and distributes these funds on a discretionary competitive grant program. Amounts due from other governmental agencies consisted of the following at June 30: 2002 _ 2001 Federal (FTA): Operating $ 1,220,485 $ 287,697 Capital 329,424 831,410 State (STA): Capital 191,085 493,080 Local (LTF): Capital 373,626 262,541 Measure A: Capital 27,147 130,000 EDA (SCAG): Operating — 596,355 Capital 411,493 — $ 2,553,260 $ 2,601,083 16 20 Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 4. Operating Property Changes in operating property by funding source for the years ended June 30, 2002 and 2001 are as follows: Federal Funds July 1, 2000 $ 25,856,221 Additions 2.791.840 Asset reclassification 904.506 Work in process 888.329 Deletions June 30.2001 Additions Reclassification Work in process Deletions June 30, 2002 State TDA Funds Funds Financed Operator Donated Measure A Asset and Other Capital $ 3.260.521 $ 8.866,413 5 963,700 363.928 255,095 126.115 333.448 113.434 106.518 155,672 8.458 — (41,548) $ 1,475,987 $ 1,048.212 $ 240.686 (1.395.383) — 43.995 - 234.293 — Total $ 41,711.740 3.536.978 1.393.270 (41.548) 30.440.896 4.064.415 9.349.066 10,687,816 2,585,605 1,129,638 204,268 (166,232) 124,450 936,479 159,668 629,665 (841.093) (143,679) (90.237) $ 41,428,366 $ 6,499,777 S11,142,582 1.098.273 665,324 57,593 8,990 (95.692) S 1.734,488 80.604 1.282.505 284,681 3,010,777 53,898 — - (196,214) (23,865) $ 3,091, 81 $ 1.140,189 $ 260,816 46.600.440 18,133,058 1,734,802 (1,170,701) $ 65.297.599 During 1997, the Orange County Transportation Authority contributed three superbuses valued at $879,116 in lieu of payment of future operating expenses related to a jointly operated intercounty transit route. These superbuses are reflected in operator and other property. 5. Capital Lease Obligations Certificates of Participation In June 1993, the California Transit Finance Corporation (CTFC) issued $3,400,000 Certificates of Participation, 1993 Series A, at interest rates ranging from 3.75% to 5.75%. The proceeds from the certificates of participation were subsequently disbursed to the Agency under a capital lease agreement to provide financing to the Agency for its purchase of ten buses for service expansion and miscellaneous equipment. The Agency's sole liability under the lease agreement is to the CTFC and is not obligated to the owners of the certificates of participation in the event of default by the CTFC. Under the terms of the capital lease agreement, the Agency's lease payments have been pledged by the CTFC for the repayment of the certificates of participation. State and local transportation funds, to the extent of the Agency's eligible share, and federal funds have been pledged as support for the Agency's net lease payments to the CTFC. 17 21 Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 5. Capital Lease Obligations (continued) Certificates of Participation (continued) In March 2001, approximately $1,762,000 in capital grant funds and other available cash and investments were used to purchase government securities that were placed in an irrevocable escrow fund for future debt service payments related to the lease payments to the CTFC in connection with 1993 certificates of participation. The defeasance met the requirements of an in -substance debt defeasance and $1,690,000 in capital lease obligations were removed from the Agency's accounting records. As a result of the defeasance transaction, total debt service payments for the years 2002 through 2006 decreased approximately $1,960,000, which resulted in an economic gain (present value of savings) of approximately $196,000. Variable Rate Demand Bonds Finance Program In August 2000, the Agency executed an agreement with the California Transit Finance Authority (CTFA) to participate in the California Transit Variable Rate Finance Program (Program), a program established to assist governmental units to finance projects with proceeds from CTFA's issuance of $200,000,000 Variable Rate Demand Bonds, Series 1997. In August 2000, CTFA disbursed $20,710,000 to the Agency under a capital lease agreement to provide financing to the Agency for its purchase of 57 forty -foot transit buses and miscellaneous equipment and for payment of issuance costs approximating $270,000. The Agency's sole liability under the lease agreement is to the CTFA and is not obligated to the owners of the demand bonds in the event of default by the CTFA. Under the terms of the capital lease agreement, the Agency's lease payments have been pledged by the CTFA for the repayment of the demand bonds. Federal, state and local capital funds, in addition to revenues received from the operation of the Agency, have been pledged as support for the Agency's net lease payments to the CTFA. The lease agreement requires annual principal payments beginning October 2002 through October 2013 and monthly interest payments. The Agency's minimum principal and approximate interest payments of the Program for each of the next five fiscal years and thereafter are summarized as follows: 18 22 Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 5. Capital Lease Obligations (continued) Variable Rate Demand Bonds Finance Program (continued) Year ending June 30, 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 — 2012 2013 — 2114 Total 6. Deferred Revenues Principal Interest $ 1,440,000 1,485,000 1,535,000 1,585,000 1,635,000 9,005,000 4,025,000 $ 20,710,000 $ 4,625,000 $ 25,335,000 $ 700,000 650,000 594,000 541,000 485,000 1,513,000 142,000 Total $ 2,140,000 2,135,000 2,129,000 2,126,000 2,120,000 10,518,000 4,167,000 Deferred revenues represent excess operating and excess capital assistance. Changes in deferred revenues for the years ended June 30, 2002 and 2001 are as follows: Operating assistance: Excess operating funds at July 1, 2000 Allocations received Funds available Less: eligible costs Excess operating funds at June 30. 2001 Allocations received Funds available Less: eligible costs Excess operating funds at June 30.2002 Federal State Private TDA Measure A Other Donations Total 5 - 5 - $ 2,480.039 $ 1.173.832 1.973.000 18,020,809 1.173.832 1.973.000 20.500.848 (1.173.832) (1.973,000) (19,281.509) - 5 398,255 $ 8.978 - $ 2,878.294 - 21.176.619 1,220,485 1,220,485 (1.220,485) $ $ 233,000 233,000 (233.000) 1.219,339 22.233.661 23,453,000 (22.903545) - $ 549.455 $ 407.233 - (125.424) - 281.809 - 9.614 - 291,423 (130.2361 - $ 161,187 $ - 24,054.913 - (22.553.765) 1,501,148 - 23.696.760 - 25,197,908 - (24,487,266) - S 710.642 23 19 Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 6. Deferred Revenues (continued) Excess capital funds at July 1. 2000 Allocations received Total available Less: capital purchases Less: interest expense Less: other Excess capital funds at June 30, 2001 Allocations received Total available Less: capital purchases Less: other Reclass Excess capital funds at June 30, 2002 Total excess operating and capital funds at June 30. 2002 Federal State TDA Measure A Private Other Donations Total $ 281,778 4.550.520 4.832,298 (3.376,808) (75,190) (1.209.013) S 531,764 $ 1,391.293 $ 340.215 327.776 871,979 1,719.069 (697,376) (288.066) (40.224) (100.714) (123.966) (219.967) 20.508 $ 169.981 190.489 (126.115) (8,458) — 43.996 $ 2.269,339 — 5,388.492 43.996 7.657.831 (43.996) (4.532,361) - (216.128) - (1.561,404) 171,287 11,896,884 12,068,171 (11,817,785) (75,114) (175.272) 10,413 1,110,322 55,916 4,005,519 1,140,643 675,381 4,015,932 2,250,965 731,297 (2,745,338) (1,807,702) (673,496) (21,406) (44,207) (1,928) 127.159 84,164 (36,0511 1,347.938 - 17,718,427 - 19,066,365 - (17,044,321) - (142,655) $ — $ 1,376,347 $ 483,220 $ 19,822 $ $ $ 1376347 $ 1,032,675 $ — s 19,822 $ 161,187 $ — $ 1.81^ 189 - $ 2590.031 TDA operating funds in the amounts of $22,233,661 and $18,020,809 were received by allocation numbers 08/01-002 in 2002 and 08/00-001 and 05/01-003 in 2001, respectively. TDA capital funds in the amounts of $1,023,593 and $138,138 were received by allocation numbers 08/01-004, 08/01-005, 08/01-003, 11/01-002T, 02/02- 007T and 05/02-011T, in 2002 and 03/00-001 in 2001, respectively. Capital assistance funds at June 30, 2002 were restricted for the following projects: Satellite facility, improvements and security Radios Computer/office equipment Bus stop improvements Fueling station Operation equipment and services Support vehicles COP debt service $ 53,973 289,912 185,908 1,142 500,000 608,056 37,195 203,203 $ 1,879,389 24 20 Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 7. Liability Insurance The Agency is a participant in the California Transit Insurance Pool (CaITIP) formed under a joint power agreement for the purpose of providing general and auto liability insurance for the member agencies. The Agency's self -insured retention is $25,000 per claim and total coverage limit is $20,000,000. The Agency is self -insured for workers' compensation claims. Liabilities under this program are accrued and charged to expense when the claims are reasonably determinable and when the existence of the Agency's liability is probable. Liabilities include an amount for claims that have been incurred but not reported. For the years ended June 30, 2002 and 2001, the Agency's self -insured retention is $350,000 and $250,000, respectively, per accident/per employee and total coverage is at the state statutory level. Settled claims have not exceeded insurance coverage in any of the past three fiscal years. The Agency's liability for claims where it has retained the risk of loss is based on an annual actuarial study, as follows: Estimated liabilities at July 1, 2000 Reserves: New claims 751,991 Routine adjustments to existing claims (7,317) Payments (545,758) Estimated liabilities at June 30, 2001 2,200,924 Reserves: New claims Routine adjustments to existing claims Payments 958,990 339,110 (902,268) Workers' Compensation Vehicle Liability Total $ 2,002,008 $ 1,700,739 $ 3,702,747 522,244 (306,743) (267.540) 1,274,235 (314,060) (813,298) 1,648,700 3,849,624 501,199 (597,517) (164,249) 1,460,189 (258,407) (1,066,517) Estimated liabilities at June 30, 2002 $ 2,596,756 $ 1,388,133 $ 3,984,889 21 25 , Riverside Transit Age ncy Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 8. Capital Grants Equity Activities relating to changes in operating property capital grants equity for the years ended June 30, 2002 and 2001 are as follows: Federal State Local Measure A Do nated Capital Operating Accumulated Operating Accumulated Operating Accumulated Operating Accumulated Operating Accumulated Property D epreciation Property Depreciation Property Depreciatio n Property Depreciation Property Depreciation Total Balance at July 1, 2000, as restated Property sold Current year depreciation Balance at June 30, 2001 Property disposals Current year depreciation Balance at June 30, 2002 $ 25,958,863 $ (13,242,046) $ 3,271,865 $(1,356 ,494) $8,879,068 $ (5,507,019) — — — — (41,548) 41,548 — (2,032,352) — (308.805) — (620,185) 25,958,863 (15,274,398) 3,271,865 (1,665 ,299) 8,837,520 (6,085,656) (841,093) 836,418 (143,679) 143,679 (90,237) 89,069 - (1,218,235) — (40,831) — (504,838) — $965,950 $ (468,403) $ 240,686 $ (119,468) $18,623,002 — (101,332) 965,950 (569,735) (95,692) 95,692 (97,195) $ 25,117,770 $ (15,656,215) $ 3,128,186 $(1,562,451) $8,747,283 $ (6 .501.425) S 870.258 $ (571,238) Net balance at June 30, 2002 $ 9, 461555 $ 1,565,735 $ 2,245,858 $ 299,020 — (14,782) (3,077,456) 240,686 (134,250) 15,545,546 - (5,843) — (12,260) (1,873 359) $ 240,686 $ (146.510) $13,666,344 $ 94.176 $13 .666344 22 26 , Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 9. Employees' Retirement Plan Description The Agency contributes to the California Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS), an agent multiple -employer public employee retirement system that acts as a common investment and administrative agent for participating public entities in the state of California. Benefit provisions for PERS were established by the Public Employees Retirement Law (Part 3 of the California Government Code, Sec. 20000 et. seq.). Employees are eligible for retirement at the age of 50 and are entitled to a monthly benefit of 2% of final compensation, the highest average monthly compensation earned during any period consisting of three consecutive years, for each year of service credit. Retirement compensation is reduced if PERS is coordinated with Social Security. Retirement may begin at age 50 with a reduced benefit rate, or after age 60 to 63 with an increased rate. PERS also provides death and disability benefits. Retirement benefits fully vest after five years of credited service. Upon separation from PERS, members' accumulated contributions are refundable with interest credited through the date of separation. PERS issues a publicly available financial report that includes financial statements and required supplementary information for the PERS. That report may be obtained by writing to California Public Employees' Retirement System, Actuary and Employer Services Division, P. 0. Box 942709, Sacramento, CA 94229-2709. Actuarial Information The most recent actuarial valuation available from PERS was performed as of June 30, 2001. Funding Policy Employees are required to contribute 7% of regular earnings to PERS with the exception of the administration employees whose contributions are paid by the Agency. The Agency is required to contribute the remaining amounts necessary to fund the benefits of its members, using the actuarial basis specified by statute. The System's funding policy provides for actuarially determined periodic contributions at rates that, for individual employees, increase gradually over time so that sufficient assets will be available to pay benefits when due. The rate for the Agency's employee group as a whole has tended to remain level as a percentage of annual covered payroll. The current rate is 0.0% of annual covered payroll. 23 27 Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 9. Employees' Retirement Plan Description (continued) Annual Pension Cost For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2002, the Agency's annual pension cost of $256,000 for PERS was equal to the Agency's required and actual contributions. The required contribution was determined as part of the June 30, 2000 actuarial valuation using the credited projected benefits actuarial funding method with probation based on service. PERS uses the level percentage of payroll method to amortize the unfunded liability over a closed 30 -year period. The actuarial assumptions as of June 30, 2000 included (a) 8.25% investment rate of return (net of administrative expenses), (b) projected salary increases ranging from 3.75% to 14.20% per year, and (c) 3.75% per year cost -of -living adjustments. Both (a) and (b) included an inflation component of 3.50%. Trend Information Trend information for the current and two preceding fiscal years is as follows: Fiscal Year Annual Percentage Net Ended Pension of APC Pension June 30, Cost (APC) Contributed Obligation 2002 $ 256,000 100% $ - 2001 238,000 100 2000 295,000 100 Supplemental Information The following schedule represents required supplemental information related to fiscal year June 30, 2001 and the two preceding years. This schedule provides information about progress made in accumulating sufficient assets to pay benefits when due (in thousands): Actuarial Actuarial Overfunding Valuation Actuarial Accrued Actuarial as a Date Value of Liability Assets Funded Covered % of Covered June 30. Assets (AAL) Over AAL Ratio Payroll Payroll 2001 $ 24,675 $ 19,152 $ 5,523 128.8% $ 9,892 55.8% 2000 23,270 16,748 6,522 138.9 8,917 73.1 1999 20,452 14,483 5,969 141.2 7,783 76.7 24 28 Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 9. Employees' Retirement Plan Description (continued) Post -Retirement Health Care Benefits In addition to the pension benefits described above, the Agency provides post -retirement health care benefits, in accordance with PERS statutes, to all full-time union and nonunion employees who retire from the Agency on or after attaining age 50 with at least five years of service. Currently 39 retirees meet these eligibility requirements. The full cost of this benefit is paid for by the Agency. The Agency's contributions are financed on a pay-as-you-go basis. During the years ended June 30, 2002 and 2001, expenses of approximately $150,000 and $119,000, respectively, were recognized for post -retirement health care. 10. Transportation Development Act Conformance Matters The Agency is subject to the provision of the Public Utilities Code Section 99270.1 and must maintain a minimum fare ratio of 18.30% and 18.29% in 2002 and 2001, respectively, of operating revenues over operating expenses. After allocation of indirect costs to each type of services and taking consideration of certain costs exemption provisions of the TDA, the Agency's fare ratios for fiscal years 2002 and 2001 are 18.40% and 19.66%, respectively, as calculated below, which indicates that the Agency is in conformance with the provisions of PUC Section 99270. Operating revenues Less fare revenues for new routes Net operating revenues Operating expenses Less: Casualty and liability costs Depreciation and amortization expense Expenses reimbursed by capital grant funds Operating expenses for new routes Net operating expenses Fare ratio 2002 2001 $ 5,495,127 (84,124) $ 5,383,456 $ 5,411,003 $ 5,383,456 $ 35,375,045 (649,376) (5,049,967) (142,656) (120,292) $ 32,131,494 (644,711) (3,882,868) (225,398) $ 29,412,754 18.40% $ 27,378,517 19.66% 29 25 Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 11. Effects of New Pronouncements In June 1999, GASB issued Statement No. 34, Basic Financial Statements —and Management's Discussion and Analysis for State and Local Governments. This statement establishes financial reporting standards for state and local governments. Under the revised requirements, governmental financial statements will include management's discussion and analysis (MD&A), basic financial statements including government -wide and fund financial statements, and required supplementary information. GASB No. 34 will become effective in three phases based on a government's total annual revenues in the first year ending after June 15, 1999. The Agency will be required to implement GASB No. 34 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2003. The Agency has elected not to early implement GASB No. 34 and has determined its effects will not be material on the Agency's financial statements. 26 30 Supplemental Information and Reports 31 ii Riverside Transit Agency Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Year ended June 30, 2002 Federal Grantor/Pass-Through Gra ntor/Program Title Cumulati ve Federal CFDA Progr am or Expendit ures Federal Expenditures Incurred Number Award Amo unt Inc urred through June 30, 2002 Year Ended Ju ne 30, 2002 U.S. Department of Transportation/Federal Transit Administration For mula Grants —Capital: 90-X748 20.507 $ 833,003 $ 832,176 $ 3,335 90-X774 20.507 3,109,400 1,736,711 37,906 90-X809 20 .507 409,600 409,149 659 90-X845 20.507 3,806,550 3,686.285 1,734,538 90-X894 20.507 2,710,000 2,338,572 1,551,242 90-X968 20.507 7,998 ,000 7,643,010 4,897,570 90-Y066 20.507 5,226,000 2,924,856 2,546,239 90-Y134 20.507 2,520,000 — — Capital Investment Grants: 03-X533 20.500 3,288,911 3,278,590 549,213 03-X549 20.500 2,466,994 149,861 — 03-X588 20.500 992,500 576,181 576,181 Total capital grants 33,360,958 23,575,391 1 1,896,883 Operating Grants: 90-Y134 20.507 938,254 938,254 938.254 Total operating grants 938,254 938,254 938,254 Total Grants 34,299,212 24,513,645 12.835,137 Passed -Through the State of California Department of Transportatio n: Federal Transit Administration — Section 5311 Operating — fiscal year 2002 20.509 282,231 282,231 282,231 Total federal awards $ 34,581,443 $ 24,795,876 $ 13,117,368 27 32 • - Riverside Transit Agency Notes to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Year ended June 30, 2002 1. General The accompanying Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards presents the activity of all federal award programs of Riverside Transit Agency (the Agency). All federal awards received directly from federal agencies as well as federal awards passed through from other government agencies are included on the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards. The Agency's reporting entity is defined in Note 1 to the Agency's financial statements. 2. Basis of Accounting The accompanying Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards is presented using the accrual basis of accounting, which is described in Note 1 to the Agency's financial statements. 3. Relationship to Financial Statements Federal award monies are reported in the Agency's financial statements as revenues from federal operating and capital assistance grants. 28 33 II El ERNST&YOUNG n Ernst & Young LLP Suite 1000 18111 Von Karman Avenue Irvine, California 92 61 2-1 007 ■r Phone: (949) 794-2300 Fax: (949) 437-0590 www.ey.com Report of Independent Auditors on Compliance and on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards Board of Directors Riverside Transit Agency We have audited the financial statements of Riverside Transit Agency as of and for the year ended June 30, 2002, and have issued our report thereon dated September 23, 2002. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Compliance As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether Riverside Transit Agency's financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grants, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit and, accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. Internal Control Over Financial Reeortin. In planning and performing our audit, we considered Riverside Transit Agency's internal control over financial reporting in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control over financial reporting. Our consideration of the internal control over financial reporting would not necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control over financial reporting that might be material weaknesses. A material weakness is a condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the internal control components does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that misstatements in amounts that would be material in relation to the financial statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. We noted no matters involving the internal control over financial reporting and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses. A Member Practice of Ernst & Young Global 34 29 J ERNST &YOUNG ii Ernst & Young 11P This report is intended solely for the information and use of management, the Board of Directors, the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the California State Controller's Office, the California Department of Transportation, the U.S. Department of Transportation and federal awarding agencies and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. September 23, 2002 umg.LtP Q U 35 30 MI ERNST & YOUNG Ernst & Young LLP Suite 1000 18111 Von Karman Avenue Irvine, California 92612-1007 s Phone: (949) 794-2300 Fax: (949) 437-0590 www.ey.com Report of Independent Auditors on Compliance with Requirements Applicable to the Major Program and Internal Control Over Compliance in Accordance with OMB Circular A-133 Board of Directors Riverside Transit Agency Compliance We have audited the compliance of Riverside Transit Agency with the types of compliance requirements described in the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133 Compliance Supplement that are applicable to each of its major federal programs for the year ended June 30, 2002. Riverside Transit Agency's major federal programs are identified in the summary of auditor's results section of the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs. Compliance with the requirements of laws, regulations, contracts and grants applicable to each of its major federal programs is the responsibility of Riverside Transit Agency's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on Riverside Transit Agency's compliance based on our audit. We conducted our audit of compliance in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States; the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non -Profit Organizations. Those standards and OMB Circular A-133 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether noncompliance with the types of compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program occurred. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence about Riverside Transit Agency's compliance with those requirements and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our audit does not provide a legal determination on Riverside Transit Agency's compliance with those requirements. In our opinion, Riverside Transit Agency complied, in all material respects, with the requirements referred to above that are applicable to each of its major federal programs for the year ended June 30, 2002. A Member PraLtice of Ernst & Young Global 36 31 J ERNST & YOUNG Internal Control Over Compliance a Ernst & Young LAP The management of Riverside Transit Agency is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance with requirements of laws, regulations, contracts and grants applicable to federal programs. In planning and performing our audit, we considered Riverside Transit Agency's internal control over compliance with requirements that could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on compliance and to test and report on internal control over compliance in accordance with OMB Circular A-133. Our consideration of the internal control over compliance would not necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control that might be material weaknesses. A material weakness is a condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the internal control components does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that noncompliance with applicable requirements of laws, regulations, contracts and grants that would be material in relation to a major federal program being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. We noted no matters involving the internal control over compliance and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses. This report is intended solely for the information and use of management, the Board of Directors, the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the California State Controller's Office, the California Department of Transportation, the U.S. Department of Transportation and federal awarding agencies and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. September 23, 2002 LLP 37 32 Riverside Transit Agency Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year ended June 30, 2002 Part I — Summary of Auditor's Results Financial Statement Section Type of auditor's report issued: Internal control over financial reporting: Material weakness(es) identified? Reportable condition(s) identified not considered to be material weaknesses? Noncompliance material to financial statements noted? Federal Awards Section Internal control over compliance: Material weakness(es) identified? Reportable condition(s) identified not considered to be material weakness(es)? Unqualified Yes X No Yes X No Yes X No Yes X No Yes X No Type of auditor's report on compliance for major programs: Unqualified Any audit findings disclosed that are required to be reported in accordance with Circular A-133 (Section .510(a))? Yes X No 38 Riverside Transit Agency Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs (continued) Year ended June 30, 2002 Part I — Summary of Auditor's Results (continued) Identification of major programs: CFDA Number Name of Federal Program or Cluster 20.500 and 20.507 Transit Capital and Operating Grants Cluster Dollar threshold used to determine Type A programs: 393,521 Auditee qualified as low -risk auditee? Part II — Financial Statement Findings Schedule X Yes No This section identifies the reportable conditions, material weaknesses, and instances of noncompliance related to the financial statements that are required to be reported in accordance with Chapter 5.18 of Government Auditing Standards. Finding 01-01: Financial Accounting and Reporting There were no current -year financial statement findings. Part III — Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs Schedule This section identifies reportable conditions, material weaknesses, and instances of noncompliance, including questioned costs, related to the audit of major federal programs, as required to be reported by Circular A-133 (Section .510(a)). There were no current -year federal award findings or questioned costs. 34 39 64836 AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AND REPORTS SunLine Transit Agency Years ended June 30, 2002 and 2001 IC�C��ONIC N JUL 182003 171 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 40 R.23.09 h; SunLine Transit Agency Audited Financial Statements and Supplemental Information and Reports Years ended June 30, 2002 and 2001 Contents Audited Financial Statements Report of Independent Auditors 1 Balance Sheets .......3 Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings ....5 Statements of Cash Flows •.7 Notes to Financial Statements.. 8 Supplemental Information and Reports Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards 25 Notes to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards 26 Report of Independent Auditors on Compliance and on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards 27 Report of Independent Auditors on Compliance with Requirements Applicable to the Major Program and Internal Control Over Compliance in Accordance with OMB Circular A-133 29 Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs 31 41 9 it i� i Audited Financial Statements 42 , El ERNST & YOUNG Board of Directors SunLine Transit Agency ■ Ernst & Young LIP Suite 1000 18111 Von Karman Avenue Irvine, California 92612-1007 Report of Independent Auditors Phone (949) 794-2300 Fax (949) 437-0590 www cy corn We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the SunLine Transit Agency, an Enterpnse Fund of the SunLine Joint Powers Transportation Agency, as of and for the years ended June 30, 2002 and 2001, as listed in the table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of SunLine Transit Agency's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion. As discussed in Note 1, the financial statements present only the SunLine Transit Agency and are not intended to present fairly the financial position of the SunLine Joint Powers Transportation Agency and the results of its operations and the cash flows of its proprietary fund type and nonexpendable trust funds in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the SunLine Transit Agency at June 30, 2002 and 2001, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the years then ended in conformity with accounting pnnciples generally accepted in the United States. As discussed in Note 1 to the financial statements, in 2001 the SunLine Transit Agency changed its method of accounting for capital contributions. In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated December 6, 2002, on our consideration of SunLine Transit Agency's internal control over financial reporting and our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grants. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be read in conjunction with this report in considenng the results of our audits. A Member Practice of Ernst & Young Global 43 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 J ERNST &YOUNG 1 Ernst & Young LLP Our audits were performed for the purpose of forming an opinion on the financial statements of SunLine Transit Agency, taken as a whole. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards for the year ended June 30, 2002, is presented for purposes of additional analysis as required by U.S. Office of Management and Budget Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non -Profit Organizations, and is not a required part of the 2002 financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the 2002 financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated, in all material respects in relation to the 2002 financial statements taken as a whole. December 6, 2002 ,,v).44t.tge iruppttLLP 1 44 2 June 30 2002 2001 Liabilities and equity Current liabilities: Accounts payable Deposits Accrued payroll and benefits Accrued interest Compensated absences liability Claims payable Current portion of notes payable Current portion of capital lease obligations Total current liabilities Long-term portion of notes payable Long-term portion of capital lease obligations Liabilities payable from restricted assets: Deferred revenues Total liabilities payable from restricted assets Equity: Capital grants Retained earnings Total equity Total liabilities and equity See accompanying notes. $ 628,243 53,341 339,600 87,168 713,522 924,953 941,993 450,000 $ 730,159 133,750 430,562 74,950 619,247 775,893 450,000 4,138,820 3,214,561 348,294 1,795,000 2,245,000 1,159,213 1,165,793 1,159,213 1,165,793 4,811,431 1,601,735 6,356,990 1,901,265 6,413,166 8,258,255 $ 13,854,493 $ 14,883,609 45 4 SunLine Transit Agency Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings Year ended June 30 2002 2001 Operating revenues: Passenger fares Other revenue Total operating revenues Operating expenses: Salaries Employee benefits Other materials and supplies Services Fuel and lubricants Provision for amounts due from affiliate Casualty and liability costs Utilities Tires and tubes Taxes Miscellaneous expense Depreciation and amortization: Financing costs Operator acquired property Financed property Grant acquired property Total operating expenses Operating loss Nonoperating revenues (expenses): Operating grants: Local Transportation Fund Federal Transit Administration Section 5307 Federal Transit Administration Section 5311 Other federal grants State transit assistance Measure A Capital grants: Federal Transit Administration State transit assistance Local Transportation Fund Measure A Interest income Gain (loss) on sale of operating property Interest expense Pass through to SunLine Services Group Total nonoperating revenues Net loss $ 2,610,789 $ 2,457,426 308,326 303,936 2,919,115 2,761,362 8,358,748 8,485,489 2,564,543 2,196,886 1,211,891 1,154,777 1,115,418 1,141,157 1,222,507 1,158,413 751,000 - 605,017 750,553 249,840 260,511 122,080 94,195 13,908 21,622 67,347 60,973 16,470 16,471 103,626 78,081 376,408 376,408 1,686,478 1,776,331 18,465,281 (15,546,166) 8,883,524 590,000 175,193 278,393 338,000 2,522,000 835,174 259,637 173,690 70,359 5,377 (150,305) (278,393) 13,702,649 (1,843,517) 17,571,867 (14,810,505) 9,462,779 578,000 257,605 1,675,532 77,000 2,166,000 1,101,096 817,220 229,018 10,000 42,187 (1,337) (149,900) (1,600,000) 14,665,2.00 (145,305) 46 5 SunLine Transit Agency Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings (continued) Year ended June 30 2002 2001 Other changes to retained earnings: Depreciation and amortization of property acquired by capital grants Net (decrease) increase in retained earnings Retained earnings at beginning of year Retained earnings at end of year See accompanying notes. 1,543,987 1,959,239 (299,530) 1,813,934 1,901,265 87,331 $ 1,601,735 $ 1,901,265 47 SunLine Transit Agency Statements of Cash Flows Year ended June 30 2002 2001 Operating activities Operating loss Adjustments to reconcile operating loss to net cash used in operating activities: Depreciation and amortization Changes in operating assets and liabilities: Decrease (increase) in current assets Increase in current liabilities Increase in reserve for amount due from affiliate Net cash used in operating activities Noncapital financing activities Operating grants received Net cash provided by noncapital financing activities Capital and related financing activities Capital grants received Proceeds from sale of fixed assets Proceeds from notes Purchase of operating property Payments on note Capital lease principal payments Capital lease interest payments Net cash provided by (used in) capital and related financing activities Investing activities Interest received Net cash provided by investing activities Net (decrease) increase in cash Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year Cash and cash equivalents at end of year See accompanying notes. $ (15,546,166) 2,182,982 (1,316,255) 61,802 751,000 $ (14,810,505) 2,247,291 517,886 1,205,831 (13,866,637) 12,485,323 (10,839,497) 12,168,112 12,485,323 1,476,293 5,377 1,474,873 (1,154,703) (184,586) (450,000) (138,087) 12,168,112 1,347,688 1,890 (1,624,236) (450,000) (161,150) 1,029,167 70,359 (885,808) 42,187 70,359 42,187 (281,788) 2,819,284 484,994 2,334,290 $ 2,537,496 $ 2,819,284 48 II ii SunLine Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2002 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies The SunLine Transit Agency (the Agency) is eligible for funding under Section 99200 et. seq. of the California Public Utilities Code. The Agency is an enterprise fund of the SunLine Joint Powers Transportation Agency (SunLine JPA), the primary government. The SunLine JPA is a stand-alone government that was originally formed by the County of Riverside and the cities of the Coachella Valley to provide transportation services in the Coachella Valley. The accounting policies of the Agency are in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States applicable to governmental units. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) is the accepted standard -setting body for establishing accounting and financial reporting principles. The following is a summary of the significant accounting policies: Basis of Accounting The Agency accounts for its activities in an enterprise fund maintained on the accrual basis of accounting. Under this basis of accounting, revenues are recognized in the accounting period in which they are earned and expenses are recognized in the period incurred. Under GASB Statement No. 20, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Enterprise Funds and Other Governmental Entities That Use Enterprise Fund Accounting, the Agency has elected not to apply Financial Accounting Standards Board Pronouncements issued after November 30, 1989. Use of Estimates The financial statements are prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States and, accordingly, include amounts that are based on management's best estimates and judgments. Actual amounts could differ from these estimates. Cash and Cash Equivalents For purposes of the statements of cash flows, the Agency considers cash and cash and investments held by trustee to be cash and cash equivalents. Cash and cash equivalents are defined as short-term, highly liquid investments that are readily convertible to cash or mature within three months of the acquisition date. 8 49 SunLine Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued) Investments Mutual funds are carried at fair value based on each fund's share price. The State of California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) and the California Arbitrage Management Program (CAMP) investment pool are carried at fair value based on the value of each participating dollar as provided by LAIF and CAMP, respectively. Guaranteed investment contracts are carried at cost. Grants Grant revenues and receivables are recorded when earned on grants that have been approved and funded by the grantor. Grant sources include Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Department of Energy (DOE), California Energy Commission (CEC), State Transit Assistance (STA), Transportation Development Act (TDA), Local Transportation Fund, and Measure A. As required by GASB Statement No. 33, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Nonexchange Transactions, capital contributions beginning in fiscal 2001 are reported as nonoperating revenues in the statements of revenues, expenses and changes in retained earnings. Pnor to implementation of GASB Statement No. 33, the Agency recorded restricted capital grants as an addition to capital grants equity as the related costs were incurred. Assets acquired with restricted capital grant funds or donated are included in operating property. Parts Inventory Parts inventory is stated at the lower of cost (first -in, first -out method) or market. Operating Property All operating property, consisting pnmarily of buildings, vehicles and equipment, and vehicles under capital leases, is stated at cost. Depreciation is computed by the straight- line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets, which range from two to thirty years. 9 50 SunLine Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued) Financing Costs Financing costs are amortized over the life of the indebtedness using the straight-line method. Claims Payable The Agency's uninsured claims are accrued and charged to expense when the claims are reasonably determinable and the existence of the Agency's liability is probable. Liabilities include an amount for claims that have been incurred but not reported. Capital Grants Equity Capital grants equity represents funds granted and earned for capital acquisitions and debt service related to financed capital acquisitions less the depreciation and amortization expense attributable to the operating property purchased and the interest costs incurred with capital grant funds for assets acquired prior to July 1, 2000, and the implementation of GASB 33. Administration Expenses The Agency's staff and resources are used in the performance of its responsibilities relating to the activities of the Agency, SunLine Service Group (SSG), Community Partnerships of the Desert (CPD) and Imperial County Transit (ICT). SSG is a joint powers authority with the same governing board, which was formed to enhance public/private partnerships in the Coachella Valley. CPD is a non-profit organization formed to meet community needs. ICT is a transit operator in Imperial County, California, which entered into an agreement with the Agency to provide management of the ICT operations. Accordingly, the Agency allocates salaries and benefits to SSG, CPD and ICT on the basis of actual hours spent by activity. Other indirect overhead is allocated based on management's estimates. 10 51 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 SunLine Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 2. Cash and Cash Equivalents Cash and cash equivalents are reported on the accompanying balance sheets as follows: Unrestricted Restricted 2002 2001 $ 846,928 1,690,568 $ 2,537,496 $ 1,610,684 1,208,600 $ 2,819,284 The following is a schedule of cash and cash equivalents at June 30: Cash in financial institutions: Cash Cash and cash equivalents held by trustee Local Agency Investment Fund Petty cash 2002 2001 $ 930,482 1,108,490 494,859 3,665 $ 2,537,496 $ 2,819,284 $ 290,931 1,115,076 1,408,744 4,533 Cash and cash equivalents with trustee are restricted for the purchase of vehicles and equipment and for debt service, as described in Note 6. Such amounts are maintained by the trustee in project and reserve funds under the terms of the debt agreements. The Agency is authorized to invest in accordance with the authorized investments outlined in California Government Code (Section 53601) and further limited to the State of California Local Agency Investment Fund; United States Treasury Bills, Notes and Bonds; Certificates of Deposit issued by a state or federal chartered bank; and obligations issued by the Government National Mortgage Association. Interest income is allocated on the basis of average cash balances. Of the total Agency cash and cash equivalents, the Agency has invested 20% in LAIF. LAIF invests in structured notes with cash flow characteristics that are dependent on one or more indices and may have embedded forwards or options, and asset -backed securities, which are entitled to a share of the cash flows from a pool of assets such as principal and interest repayments. Accordingly, these investments are affected by changes in interest rates. These LAIF securities comprise approximately 3% of the LAIF investment portfolio at June 30, 2002. 1 52 11 SunLine Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 2. Cash and Cash Equivalents (continued) Demand deposits of $1,413,367 and $294,050 as of June 30, 2002 and 2001, respectively, with a corresponding bank balance of $1,944,139 and $1,580,065 as of June 30, 2002 and 2001, respectively, are collateralized in accordance with the California Government Code, except for $214,372 and $103,119 as of June 30, 2002 and 2001, respectively, which are federally insured (Category 1). Under the provisions of the California Government Code, California banks and savings and loan associations are required to secure the Agency's deposits by pledging government securities as collateral. The fair value of pledged securities must equal at least 110% of the Agency's deposits. California law also allows financial institutions to secure Agency deposits by pledging first trust deed mortgage notes having a value of 150% of the Agency's total deposits. The pledged securities are held by the pledging financial institution's trust department in the Agency's name (Category 2). Short -Terns Investments In accordance with the Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement 3, Deposits with Financial Institutions, Investments (including Repurchase Agreements), and Reverse Repurchase Agreements, the Agency's investments at June 30, 2002 and 2001, are categorized in the following manner to give an indication of the level of risk assumed by the Agency at year-end. Category 1, of which the Agency has none, includes investments that are insured, or registered, or held by the Agency or its agent in the Agency's name. Category 2, of which the Agency has none, includes uninsured and unregistered investments held by the counterparty's trust department or agent in the Agency's name. Category 3, of which the Agency has none, includes uninsured and unregistered investments held by the counterparty, or by its trust department or agent, but not in the Agency's name. 12 53 I 1 SunLine Transit Agency I Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 f 2. Cash and Cash Equivalents (continued) Uncategorized investments: Money market mutual funds Guaranteed investment contract CAMP investment pool LAIF Total investments 2002 Carrying Value Fair Value $ 44,625 $ 44,625 533,329 533,329 47,651 47,561 494,859 494,859 $ 1,120,464 $ 1,120,374 $ 2,520.701 $ 2.520.701 2001 Carrying Value Fair Value $ 14.883 $ 14,883 533,329 563,745 1.408.744 533,329 563,745 1.408.744 3. Due From Other Governmental Agencies Due from other governmental agencies consists of the following at June 30: 2002 Imperial County Transit FTA Section 5307 capital grant SCAQMD capital grant CEC capital grant Measure A Operating funds SunLine Services Group, net Other affiliates Other 2001 - $ 172,954 13,235 141,108 154,871 12,880 72,925 210,167 — 1,368,425 856,143 152,216 134,062 5,713 25,377 $ 1,762,636 $ 1,557,440 Due from SunLine Services Group ("SSG") represents financing in connection with a program involving SSG (as more fully described in Note 5) and administrative expenses for allocated salaries and benefits paid by the Agency on behalf of SSG. SSG does not have sufficient cash flow to repay the Agency within the current period. Accordingly, the Agency has reserved approximately $751,000 of this balance as a potential bad debt. The Agency plans to request that the Riverside County Transportation Commission allow a transfer of certain transit related equipment from SSG to the Agency to recover a substantial portion of the unpaid receivable, and anticipates the remaining balance will be paid over time. Until these amounts are repaid, the Agency is not in compliance with its local funding agencies' agreements, which restrict such funds for transit use only. 54 13 SunLine Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 4. Operating Property Changes in operating property by funding source for the years ended June 30, 2002 and 2001, are as follows: July 1, 2000 Additions Asset reclassification Deletions June 30, 2001 Additions Asset reclassification Deletio ns June 30, 2002 Federal Funds TDA Funds State F unds Capital Operator Measure A Leases F unds Total $ 9,686,707 $ 1,983,841 $ 8,485,940 $ 517,436 669,335 164,015 774,283 10,000 360,000 65,003 24,997 — (311,361) (103,756) (86,232) (327,462) 10,404,681 2,109,103 9,198,988 199,974 415,192 21,433 306,898 360,000 — 90,000 (60,284) (2,775) $ 2,335,367 $ 480,517 6,601 (450,000) — (80,279) 1,885,367 406,839 411,180 (450,000) - - (841) $ 23,489,808 1,624,234 (909,090) 24,204,952 1,154,703 (63,900) $ 11,179,873 $ 2,070,252 $ 9,593,111 $ 199,974 $ 1,435,367 $ 817,178 $ 25,295,755 14 55 9 it i� i 1 E 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 SunLine Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 5. Debt Line of Credit The Agency has a $450,000 unsecured line -of -credit, with interest at the bank's base rate (4.75% at June 30, 2002). The Line -of -credit expires on September 3, 2003. At June 30, 2002, the Agency had no borrowings under this line -of -credit arrangement. Notes Payable On August 16, 2001, the Agency entered into a $422,500 promissory note agreement with 1000 Palms Industries in relation to the purchase of a parcel of land. The note is collateralized by a deed of trust encumbering the property. The term of the note is six years with principal and interest payments of $101,668 due annually on August 15, and bears interest of 6.5%, and is due on August 15, 2007. As of June 30, 2002, the pnncipal amount of the note due dunng each of the next five fiscal years is as follows: 2003 $ 74,206 2004 79,028 2005 84,166 2006 89,637 2007 95,463 $ 422,500 In October 2001, the Agency agreed to provide financing for its affiliated agency SunLine Services Group, in connection with a program involving the Ford Motor Company and several government funding agencies that provided low-cost cleaner - burning CNG vehicles to the taxi industry of the Coachella Valley. The Agency entered into a note payable with a bank, which provided funds for the purchase of 45 taxicabs. The note is due on demand, bears interest at 7% per annum and is collateralized by the taxicabs. At June 30, 2002, the amount outstanding under this arrangement was $867,787. If no demand is made, monthly payments of principal and interest of $15,891 are due. This agreement puts the Agency out of compliance with its local funding agencies' agreements, which restrict such funds to transit use only. 56 15 SunLine Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 6. Capital Lease Obligations Certificates of Participation In June 1993, the California Transit Finance Corporation (Corporation) issued $5,395,000 Certificates of Participation, 1993 Series B, at interest rates ranging from 3.75% to 5.75%. The proceeds of the Certificates of Participation were subsequently disbursed to the Agency under a capital lease agreement to provide financing to the Agency for its purchase of buses and miscellaneous equipment. In 1994, the Agency purchased buses and miscellaneous equipment in the amount of $4,540,364, which is included in operating property as assets under capital lease. The Agency's sole liability under the lease agreement is to the Corporation, and it will not be obligated to the owners of the Certificates of Participation in the event of default by the Corporation. Under the terms of the capital lease agreement, the Agency's lease payments have been pledged by the Corporation for the repayment of the Certificates of Participation. State and local transportation funds, to the extent of the Agency's eligible share, and federal funds have been pledged as support for the Agency's net lease payments to the Corporation. The lease agreement requires payments equal to the obligations under the Certificates of Participation. Principal payments are due annually commencing through July 2006, and interest payments are due semiannually. Principal and interest payments due over the next five years are as follows: Year ending June 30, Principal Interest 2003 $ 450,000 $ 102,000 2004 450,000 77,000 2005 450,000 51,000 2006 450,000 26,000 2007 445,000 — $ 2,245,000 $ 256,000 57 16 SunLine Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 7. Deferred Revenues Deferred revenues represent excess operating and excess capital assistance as follows: Operating assistance: Excess of operating funds at July 1, 2000 Allocations received Funds available Less eligible costs Excess of operating funds at June 30, 2001 Allocations received Funds available Less eligible costs Excess of operating funds at June 30, 2002 Federal TDA State Meas ure A Tot al! $ 911,137 911,137 (911,137) 765,193 765,193 (765,193) $ -- $ 542,328 9,013,975 9,556,303 (9,462,779) 93,524 8,790,000 8,883,524 (8,883,524) $ 77,000 77,000 (77,000) 338,000 338,000 (338,000) $ 2,166,000 2,166,000 (2,166,000) 2,522,000 2,522,000 (3,284,606) $ (762,606) $ 542,328 12,168,112 12,710,440 (12,616,916) 93,524 12,415,193 12,508,717 (13,271,323) $ (762,606) 17 58 SunLine Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 7. Deferred Revenues (continued) Capital assistance: Excess capital funds at July 1, 2000 Allocations received Funds av ailable Less: Eligible capital purchase costs Eligible capital lease obligation interest costs Eligible COP principal payments Excess capital funds at June 30, 2001 Allocations received Funds available Less: Reclassification Eligible capital purchase costs Eligible capital lease obligation interest costs Eligible COP principal payments Excess capital funds at June 30, 2002 Federal TDA State Measure A Total $ 782,493 669,333 1,451,826 (669,335) (71,761) (360,000) 350,730 836,143 1,186,873 (415,192) (59,982) (360,000) $ 351,699 $ 677,214 677,214 (164,015) (65,003) 448,196 448,196 30,380 (21,433) $ 457,143 $ 165,165 925,398 1,090,563 $ - 10,000 10,000 (774,283) (10,000) (17,940) (24,997) 273,343 488,922 30,380 762,265 30,380 (306,898) (14,996) (90,000) $ 350,371 (30,380) $ 1,624,872 1,604,731 3,229,603 (1,617,633) (89,701) (450,000) 1,072,269 1,355,445 2,427,714 (743,523) (74,978) — (450,000) — $ 1,159,213 3 59 SunLine Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 7. Deferred Revenues (continued) TDA operating funds of approximately $8,790,000 and $9,014,000 were allocated by allocation numbers 07/01-08 in 2002 and 7/00-005 and 05/01-001 in 2001, respectively. The Agency has a deferred operating deficit of $762,606. The Agency plans to cover the deficit with future funding from state, local, and federal grants, and revenue from operations. Capital assistance funds at June 30, 2002, are designated for the following projects: Bus and vans purchase and related debt service costs $ 927,579 Office and computer equipment 67,073 H2 Infrastructure 164,561 $ 1,159,213 8. Liability Insurance The Agency is a participant in two separate risk management authorities formed under joint powers agreements for the purposes of providing general liability and workers' compensation insurance for the member agencies. The Agency's general liability self - insured retention is $125,000 per claim. The total general liability coverage limit is $20,000,000 per occurrence. Workers' compensation insurance costs are based on annual deposit premiums. The Agency's workers' compensation self -insured retention is $250,000 per claim and coverage limits are statutory limits. Settlements have not exceeded insurance coverage for each of the past three years. For claims where the Agency has retained the risk of loss, the Agency's liability for general liability is based on an annual actuarial study discounted at 5.5% and for workers' compensation based on loss reports: Total Estimated liabilities as of June 30, 2000 $ 413,044 Current year claims and changes in estimates 929,731 Claim payments (566,882) Estimated liabilities as of June 30, 2001 775,893 Current year claims and changes in estimates 391,841 Claim payments (242,781) Estimated liabilities as of June 30, 2002 $ 924,953 19 60 SunLine Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 9. Capital Grants Equity Activities relating to changes in operating property capital grants equity for the years ended June 30, 2002 and 2001, were as follows: Balance at July 1, 2000 Property disposals Current year depreciation Balance at June 30, 2001 Property disposals Current year depreciation Balance at June 30, 2002 Net balance at June 30, 2002 Federal TDA Operatin g Accumulated Operating Accumulated Property Depreciation Property Depreciation State Measure A Operati ng Accumulated Operati ng Acc um ulated Property Depreciation Property Depreciation Total $ 9,686,707 $ (5,726,406) $ 1,983,841 (311,361) 9,375,346 275,706 (1,054,690) (6,505,390) — (829,974) $ (1,326,514) (103,756) 92,369 - (104,957) 1,880,085 (1,339,102) (60,284) 58,739 - (117,402) $ 8,485,940 $(4,773,536) (86,232) 72,421 (782,530) (5,483,645) 2,775 (578,229) $ 9,375,346 $ (7,335,364) $ 1,819,801 $ 2,039,982 $(1,397,765) $ 8,396,933 $(6,059,099) $ 422,036 $ 517,436 $ (459,970) $ 8,387,498 (327,462) 317,019 (71,296) - (17,062) (1,959,239) 8,399,708 189,974 (160,013) 6,356,963 (2,775) — — (1,545) — (18,382) (1,543,987) $ 189,974 $ (178,395) $ 4,811,431 $ 2,337,834 $ 11,579 $ 4,811,431 20 61 ii SunLine Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 10. Employees' Retirement Plan The Agency contributes to the SunLine Employees Retirement System (System), a single -employer defined benefit public employee retirement system for nonbargaining unit employees, and to the SunLine Transit Employees Retirement Income Plan for Bargaining Unit Personnel (Plan), a single employer defined benefit pension plan. For a copy of separate financial statements, contact the Agency. Employees are eligible for retirement at the age of 55 and the completion of five years of service or after the completion of 25 years of employment. Nonbargaining unit employees are entitled to a monthly benefit of 2.5% of final compensation, the highest average monthly compensation earned during any period consisting of three consecutive years, for each year and month of service credit. Bargaining unit employees are entitled to a monthly benefit of 1190th of the first $400 of final compensation plus 1160th of the excess of final compensation over $400 for each year and completed quarter of service credit. Final compensation for bargaining unit employees represents the highest average monthly compensation earned during any period consisting of five consecutive years. Retirement may begin at age 55 with a reduced benefit rate, or after age 62 to 65 with an increased rate. The System and the Plan also provide death and disability benefits. Retirement benefits fully vest after five years of credited service. Employees are required to contribute 0% and 3% of covered payroll to the System and the Plan, respectively. The Agency is required to contribute the remaining amounts necessary to fund the benefits of its members. The required employer contribution of covered payroll for the System and the Plan is as follows: System Plan Required employer contribution: January 1, 2001 actuarial valuation January 1, 2002 actuarial valuation 20.72% 7.10% 22.57% 8.23% 62 21 SunLine Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 10. Employees' Retirement Plan (continued) Annual Pension Cost For 2002, the Agency's annual pension cost and combined net pension obligation, which are included in the accrued payroll liability, are as follows: Annual required contribution $ 783,000 Interest on net pension obligation Adjustments to annual required contribution (12,000) Annual pension cost 771,000 Contributions made (797,000) Increase in net pension obligation (26,000) Net pension obligation at July 1, 2001 60,000 Net pension obligation at June 30, 2002 $ 34,000 The annual required contribution for 2002 was determined as part of the January 1, 2001, actuarial valuation using the aggregate actuarial cost method, which does not identify or separately amortize unfunded liabilities. The actuarial assumptions used in the valuation are as follows: System Plan Investment rate of return 7% 7% Cost of living adjustment 3% 0% Compensation increases 4% 3% The actuarial value of System and Plan assets was determined using the market value of mutual fund investments, book value of a guaranteed investment contract, and accrued contributions and interest credits. 22 63 SunLine Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 10. Employees' Retirement Plan (continued) Annual Pension Cost (continued) Three-year trend information: June 30 2002 2001 2000 System and Plan (combined): Annual Pension Cost (APC) $ 783,000 Percentage of APC contributed 98% Net pension obligation $ 34,000 $ 665,000 97% $ 60,000 11. Transportation Development Act Conformance Matters $ 595,000 111% $ 37,000 The Agency is subject to the provisions of Public Utilities Code Section 99270.1 and must maintain a minimum fare ratio of 15.86% and 15.77% in 2002 and 2001, respectively, of operating revenues over operating expenses. During fiscal 2002 and 2001, the Agency's fare ratio was 18.6% and 18.9%, respectively, as calculated below, which indicates that the Agency is in conformance with the provisions of PUC Section 99270.1. Operating revenues Operating expenses Less: Casualty and liability costs Depreciation and amortization expense Operating expenses Fare ratio 2002 2001 $ 2,919,115 $ 2,761,362 $ 18,465,281 $ (605,717) (2,182,982) 17,571,867 (750,553) (2,247,291) $ 15,676,582 $ 14,574,023 18.6% 18.9% 23 64 SunLine Transit Agency Notes to Financial Statements (continued) 12. Commitments On July 25, 2001, the Agency entered into a five-year operating lease with the City of Palm Desert, for a parcel of land. The Agency purchased a $500 option to purchase the land at the end of the lease term for $2,100,000, which was the market value of the land at the inception of the lease. The Agency capitalized the option on the balance sheet. The Agency had rental expense related to the lease of $115,500 during fiscal year 2002. The following is a schedule, by fiscal year, of the future minimum rental payments on the lease. 2003 $ 126,000 2004 126,000 2005 126,000 2006 126,000 2007 10,500 Total $ 514,500 13. Contingencies The Agency is a defendant in various legal actions. Management believes that the ultimate resolution of these actions will not have a significant effect on the Agency's financial position or results of operations. 14. Effect of New Pronouncements In June 1999, GASB issued Statement No. 34, Basic Financial Statement —and Management's Discussion and Analysis for State and Local Governments. This statement establishes financial reporting standards for state and local governments. Under the revised requirements, government financial statements will include management's discussion and analysis (MD&A), basic financial statements, and require supplementary information. GASB No. 34 will become effective in three phases based on a government's total annual revenues in the first year ending after June 15, 1999. The Agency will be required to implement GASB No. 34 for the first fiscal year ending June 30, 2004. The Agency has elected not to early implement GASB No. 34 and has determined its effects will not be material on the Agency's financial statements. 24 65 Supplemental Information and Reports 66 II SunLine Transit Agency Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Year ended June 30, 2002 Federal Grantor/Pass-Through Grantor/ Prgram Title U S. Department of Transportation/Federal Transit Administration Transit Capital and Operating Grants Cluster Capital Grants: 90-Y036 90-Y006 90-X896 90-X918 Operating Grants: 26-7022 90-Y128 Passed -Thro ugh to SunLine Services Group Department of Transportation Operating Grants: 26-7022 Total for capital and operating assistance formula grants U.S. Department of Transportation Passed -Thro ugh the State of California Department of Transportation Operating Grant: Section 5311 Total federal awards See accompanying notes to Schedule of Federal awards. Program or Award CFDA Number Amo unt 20 .507 20.507 20.507 20 .507 20.507 20.507 20.507 20 509 Cumulative Federal Expe nditures Incurred through June 30, 2002 $ 1,203,000 $ 1,046,000 210,381 1,987,909 188,492 590,000 1,878,393 7,104,175 175,193 585,190 $ 713,035 204,484 1,251,421 75,532 590,000 1,878,393 5,298,055 175,193 Federal Expendit ures Incurred Year ended J une 30, 2002 307,253 419,982 93,925 14,982 590,000 278,393 1,704,5 35 175,193 $ 7,279,368 $ 5,473,248 $ 1,879,728 25 67 . 1p SunLine Transit Agency Notes to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Year ended June 30, 2002 1. General The accompanying Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards presents the activity of all federal award programs of the SunLine Transit Agency (Agency). All federal awards received directly from federal agencies as well as federal awards passed through to other government agencies are included on the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards. The Agency's reporting entity is defined in Note 1 to the Agency's financial statements. 2. Basis of Accounting The accompanying Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards is presented using the accrual basis of accounting, which is described in Note 1 to the Agency's financial statements. 3. Relationship to Financial Statements Federal award monies are reported in the Agency's financial statements as federal capital and operating assistance grants. 4. Pass -Through Awards to Subrecipients Included in the expenditures of federal awards is federal award 20.507 in the amount of $278,393 passed through to SunLine Services Group. 5. Contingency Grant expenditures are subject to audit and adjustment. If any expenditures were to be disallowed by the grantor agencies as a result of such an audit, any claim for reimbursement to the grantor agencies would become a liability of the Agency. In the opinion of management, all grant expenditures are in compliance with the terms of the grant agreements and applicable federal laws and regulations. 26 68 9 it El ERNST &YOUNG • Ernst & Young w' Suite 1000 18111 Von Karman Avenue Irvine, California 92612-1007 a Phone (949) 794-2300 Fax (9491 437-0590 www ey com 41, Report of Independent Auditors on Compliance and on Internal Control. Over Financial Reporting in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards Board of Directors SunLine Transit Agency We have audited the financial statements of SunLine Transit Agency, an Enterprise Fund of the SunLine Joint Powers Transportation Agency, as of and for the year ended June 30, 2002, and have issued our report thereon dated December 6, 2002, which contained an explanatory paragraph for a change in accounting for capital contributions as described in Note I to the financial statements. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Compliance As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether SunLine Transit Agency's financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit and, accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed two instances of noncompliance that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards and which are described in the accompanying Schedule of Financial Statement Findings, as Items 02-1 and 02-2. Internal Control Over Financial Reporting In planning and performing our audit, we considered SunLine Transit Agency's internal control over financial reporting in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control over financial reporting. Our consideration of the internal control over financial reporting would not necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control over financial reporting that might be material weaknesses. A material weakness is a condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the internal control components does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that misstatements in amounts that would be material in relation to the financial statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. We noted no matters involving the internal control over financial reporting and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses. A Member Practice of Ernst 8. Young Global 69 27 J ERNST &YOUNG • Ernst & Young LLP This report is intended solely for the information and use of management, the Board of Directors, the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the California State Controller's Office, the California Department of Transportation, federal awarding agencies and pass -through entities, and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. December 6, 2002 ,44442.,t 11- -(4.71_LP 70 28 J ERNS'& :YOUNG ■ Ernst & Young ur Suite 1000 18111 Von Kaman Avenue Irvine, California 92612-1007 ■ Phone (949) 794-2300 Fax (949) 437-0590 www ey coin Report of Independent Auditors on Compliance with Requirements Applicable to the Major Program and Internal Control Over Compliance in Accordance with OMB Circular A-133 Board of Directors SunLine Transit Agency Compliance We have audited the compliance of SunLine Transit Agency, an Enterprise Fund of the SunLine Joint Powers Transportation Agency, with the types of compliance requirements described in the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133 Compliance Supplement that are applicable to its major federal program for the year ended June 30, 2002. SunLine Transit Agency's major federal program is identified in the summary of auditor's results section of the accompanying Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs. Compliance with the requirements of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants applicable to its major federal program is the responsibility of SunLine Transit Agency's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on SunLine Transit Agency's compliance based on our audit. We conducted our audit of compliance in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States; the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non -Profit Organizations. Those standards and OMB Circular A-133 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether noncompliance with the types of compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program occurred. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence about SunLine Transit Agency's compliance with those requirements and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our audit does not provide a legal determination on SunLine Transit Agency's compliance with those requirements. In our opinion, SunLine Transit Agency complied, in all matenal respects, with the requirements referred to above that are applicable to its major federal program for the year ended June 30, 2002. However, the results of our auditing procedures disclosed instances of noncompliance with those requirements which are required to be reported in accordance with OMB Circular A-133 and which are described in the accompanying Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs as Items 02-3 and 02-4. A Member Practice of Ernst & Young Global 71 29 J ERNST & YOUNG Internal Control Over Comp]iance r Ernst & Young LLP The management of SunLine Transit Agency is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance with requirements of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants applicable to federal programs. In planning and performing our audit, we considered SunLine Transit Agency's internal control over compliance with requirements that could have a direct and material effect on the major federal program in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on compliance and to test and report on internal control over compliance in accordance with OMB Circular A-133. Our consideration of the internal control over compliance would not necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control that might be material weaknesses. A material weakness is a condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the internal control components does not reduce to a relative low level the risk that noncompliance with applicable requirements of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants that would be material in relation to a major federal program being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. We noted no matters involving the internal control over compliance and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the management, the Board of Directors, the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the California State Controller's Office, the California Department of Transportation, federal awarding agencies and pass -through entities, and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. December 6, 2002 5.vw%Et (� 0 72 30 SunLine Transit Agency Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year ended June 30, 2002 Part I — Summary of Auditor's Results Financial Statement Section Type of auditor's report issued: Unqualified Internal control over financial reporting: Material weakness(es) identified? Yes X No Reportable condition(s) identified not considered to be material weaknesses? Yes X No Noncompliance material to financial statements noted? Federal Awards Section Internal control over compliance: Material weakness(es) identified? Were reportable condition(s) identified not considered to be material weakness(es)? X Yes No Yes X No Yes X Type of auditor's report on compliance for major programs: Unqualified Any audit findings disclosed that are required to be reported in accordance with Circular A-133 (Section .510(a))? X Yes No 73 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i SunLine Transit Agency Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs (continued) Year ended June 30, 2002 Part 1 — Summary of Auditor's Results (continued) Identification of major program CFDA Number Name of Federal Program or Cluster 20.507 Federal Transit Formula Grants Dollar threshold used to determine Type A programs: $300,000 Auditee qualified as low -risk auditee? Part II — Schedule of Financial Statement Findings Yes X No This section identifies the reportable conditions, material weaknesses, and instances of noncompliance related to the financial statements that are required to be reported in accordance with Chapter 5.18 of Government Auditing Standards. Finding 02-1 — Impairment of Due From Affiliate Criteria The Agency's Transportation Development Act (TDA) funding is restricted to transit purposes only. Context The Agency advanced $751,000 in funds to its affiliate, SunLine Services Group ("SSG"), which does not have sufficient cash flow to repay the Agency in the current period. Condition The Agency pays administrative expenses for allocated salaries and benefits on behalf of SSG. SSG's funding comes pnmarily from contracts that pay on a reimbursement basis for SSG's services. SSG does not have sufficient cash flow to reimburse the Agency in the current period and therefore; the Agency has reserved $751,000 as a potential bad debt. 74 32 SunLine Transit Agency Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs (continued) Year ended June 30, 2002 Part II — Schedule of Financial Statement Findings (continued) Questioned Costs The finding resulted in questioned costs of $751,000. Effect The $751,000 bad debt expense is not in compliance with the local funding agencies' agreements. Recommendation We recommend that the Agency assure that amounts advanced to affiliates be repaid within a short period of time, 30 — 60 days. If amounts advanced are not repaid timely, no additional amounts should be advanced until delinquencies have been collected. We understand the Agency plans to request that its funding agencies allow a transfer of certain transit related equipment from SSG to the Agency to recover a substantial portion of the unpaid receivable. Finding 02-2 — Obtaining Loan for Affiliate Cnteria The Agency is not allowed to borrow funds to provide funding for its affiliate pursuant with local funding agencies' compliance requirements. Context The Agency obtained a loan from a bank for the benefit of its affiliate, SunLine Services Group ("SSG"). Condition The Agency agreed to provide financing for its affiliate, SSG, in connection with a program to provide CNG vehicles to the taxi industry. As part of the program, SSG purchased 45 CNG taxicabs to sell through a capital lease program to private taxicab operators. SSG did not have sufficient creditworthiness to obtain a bank loan to purchase the cabs. The Agency borrowed the funds on behalf of SSG. 33 75 SunLine Transit Agency Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs (continued) Year ended June 30, 2002 Part II — Schedule of Financial Statement Findings (continued) Questioned Costs The finding results in no questioned costs. Effect The loan encumbers funds restricted for transit use only. Recommendation We recommend the Agency eliminate the loan as quickly as possible. Part III — Schedule of Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs This section identifies reportable conditions, material weaknesses, and instances of noncompliance, including questioned costs, related to the audit of major federal programs, as required to be reported by Circular A-133 (Section .510(a)). Federal Transit Formula Grant (C1 -DA No. 20.507) Finding 02-3 — Providing Charter Services Criteria The Agency is not allowed to perform private charter services under FTA regulations. Context Per review of correspondence from the Agency's legal counsel and the FTA, a complaint has been filed against SunLine alleging that it performed 106 charter trips during the fiscal year. 34 76 SunLine Transit Agency Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs (continued) Year ended June 30, 2002 Part III — Schedule of Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs (continued) Condition Approximately five years ago, a complaint was filed with FTA alleging that SunLine's group tnp program was configured as charter service. FTA had lifted the cease and desist order initially issued in 1997 based upon alterations to the service and SunLine continued in reliance upon this to operate its group trip program. Five years later, in 2002, the FTA issued a decision finding that the group trip program as then configured was charter service. FTA's decision offered several suggestions to SunLine about how to modify the group tnp program to avoid the charter prohibition and continue the service. A subsequent charter complaint has been filed concerning the 106 trips provided during the period that SunLine was exploring modifications to the program. Questioned Costs Per correspondence with the FTA the finding does not result in questioned costs. Effect The Agency ceased providing the charter services and is waiting for the FTA to make a determination. Recommendation We recommend that the Agency carefully monitor the services they provide in order to be in compliance with the FTA regulations in the future. Federal Transit Formula Grant — (CFDA No. 20.507 Finding 02-4 — Noncompliance with the Davis -Bacon Act Criteria The Davis -Bacon Act requires that any nonfederal entity receiving federal funds for construction projects greater than $2,000 must (1) ensure that the required prevailing wage rate clauses are included in contracts for construction and (2) ensure that contractors or subcontractors pay laborers the prevailing wage rates established by the Department of Labor for the locality at the time of construction. 35 77 SunLine Transit Agency Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs (continued) Year ended June 30, 2002 Part III — Schedule of Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs (continued) Context The Agency contracted with a construction company without including the Davis -Bacon Act provisions in the contract. Condition Based on our review of the supporting documentation, we were able to determine that prevailing wage rates were paid. Ouestioned Costs Not determinable. Effect Contract is not in accordance with Davis -Bacon Act requirements. Recommendation We recommend that all construction contracts greater than $2,000 contain the prevailing wage rate clause and that the agency obtain weekly certified payrolls from the contractor or subcontractor. 36 78 AGENDA ITEM 6B I • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Louie Martin, Bechtel Project Controls Manager FROM: THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director i SUBJECT: ' Contracts Cost and Schedule Report STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Contracts Cost and Schedule report for the month ending June 30, 2003. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The attached material depicts the current cost and schedule status on contracts reported by projects, commitments, and cooperative agreements executed by the Commission. For each contract and agreement, the report lists the authorized value approved by the Commission, percentage of contract amount expended to date, and the project expenditures by route with status for the month ending June 30, 2003. Attachment: Monthly Report — June 2003 Agenda Item 6B 79 9 it RCTC MEASURE "A" HIGHWAY/R, PROJECTS BUDGET REPORT BY ROUTE COM MISSION CONTRACTURAL % COMMITTED EXPENDITURE FOR % EXPENDITURES PROJECT AUTHORIZED COMMITMENTS AGAINST AUTH MONTH ENDED EXPENDITURES TO -DATE AGAINST DESCRIPTION ALLOCATION TO DATE ALLOCATION 06/30/03 TO DATE COM MITMNTS TO DATE ROUTE 60 PROJECTS Final Design/ROW HOV 60/215 to Redlands Blvd. $37,222,727 $33,722,727 90 .6% $78,487 $7,591,863 22.5% (2042) (3000) SUBTOTAL ROUTE 60 $37,222,727 $33,722,727 90.6% $78,487 $7,591,863 22.5% ROUTE 74 PROJECTS Engineering/Environ/ROW (R02041 9954,9966, $69,847,655 $34,514,368 49.4% $2,124,863 $31,035,303 89 .9 % (R02142) (R02141) (2140) (3001) (3009) SUBTOTAL ROUTE 74 $69,847,655 $34,514,368 49.4% $2,124,863 $31,035,303 89 .9 % ROUTE 79 PROJECTS Engineering/Environ./ROW (3003) $2,894,497 $2,793,935 96.5% $2,791 $1,005,345 36.0% Realignment study & Right turn lanes (R09961) SUBTOTAL ROUTE 79 $2,894,497 $2,793,935 96.5% $2,791 $1,005,345 36.0% ROUTE 91 PROJECTS F Soundwall/Aux lane design, ROW and construction $11,902,100 $10,374,324 87.2% $5,407 $9,543,771 920% (R09101,9337,9847,9861,9848,9832,9969,2043) - (2058) (2144) (2136) (3600, 3602) • Van Buren Blvd. Hook Ramp & I/C (R03008) $2,954,000 $2,954,000 100 .0% $0 $2,109,519 71.4% Mary Street to 7th Street HOV design & ROW(3005) $1,274,430 $1,062,025 83.3% $0 $507,232 47.8% Sndwall Landscaping and Plant Establishment $1,603,450 $1,603,450 100.0% $1,260 $870,524 54.3 % (RO 9933,9946,2059,3601) SUBTOTAL ROUTE 91 $17,733,980 $15,993,799 90.2% $6,667 $13,031,046 81 .5% ROUTE 111 PROJECTS (R09219, 9227,9234,9523,9525,9530,9537,9540) $16,946,856 $16,946,856 100.0% $360 $15,619,894 92 .2 % 3410,9635,9743,9849-9851,9857,9629 (3400-3405) SUBTOTAL ROUTE 111 $16,946,856 $16,946,856 100.0% $360 $15,619,894 92 .2 % Page 1 of 3 RCTC MEASURE "A" HIGHWAY PROJECTS BUDGET REPORT BY ROUTE COM MISSION CONTRACTURAL % COMMITTED EXPENDITURE FOR % EXPENDITURES PROJECT AUTHORIZED COMMITMENTS AGAINSTAUTH. MONTH ENDED EXPENDITURES TO -DATE AGAINST DESCRIPTION ALLOCATION TO DATE ALLOCATION 06/30/03 TO DATE COMMITMNTS TO DATE 1-215 PROJECTS Preliminary Engrg/Environ. (R09008, 9018) $6,726,504 $5,878,173 87 .4 % $5,704,897 97.1% SUBTOTAL 1-215 $6,726,504 $5,878,173 87 .4 % $0 $5,704.897 1 97 .1% PROJECT & CONSTR. MGMT SERV. (Agreement (02-31-081)) $2,138,641 $2,027,483 94.8% $149,662 $2,006,904 99 .0 % SUBTOTAL BECHTEL $2,138,641 $2,027,483 94.8% $149,662 $2,006,904 99 M% PARK-N-RIDE/INCENT. PROGRAM (RO 9859) (2101-2117) (9813) (2146) (9917) 2126 $2,523,177 $2,523,177 100.0% $172,290 $2,371,275 94.0% 2127,2138,2139, 2178 SUBTOTAL PARK -N -RIDE $2,523,177. $2,523,177 100.0% $172,290 $2,371,275 94.0 % COMMUTER RAIL Studies/Engineering/Construction $26,685,414 $24,943,070 93.5 % $933,695 $22,627,253 90.7 % (RO 9731,9832,9833,9956,2028)2031,2027,2120 R02029,2128, 3800 - 3811,3813, 3814) Station/Site Acq/OP Costs/Maint. Costs (0000,2026,2056,4000-4007,4198,4199,4009,3812 $13,900,329 $13,900,329 100 .0% $123,706 $10,012,536 72.0 % SUBTOTAL COMMUTER RAIL 540,585,743 $38,843,399 95.7 % $1,057,401 $32,639,789 84.0% TOTALS $196,619,780 $153,243,917 77.9% $3,592,521 $111,006,316 72 .4 % Page 2 of 3 RCTC MEASURE "A" HIGHWAY/LOCAL._ .LETS & ROADS PROJECTS BUDGET REPORT BY PROJECT EXPENDITURE FOR TOTAL OUTSTANDING % LOAN BALANCE PROJECT APPROVED MONTH ENDED MEASURE "A" LOAN OUTSTANDING TO -DATE AGAINST DESCRIPTION COMMITMENT 06/30/03 ADVANCES BALANCE COMMITMENT APPROVED COMMIT CITY OF CANYON LAKE Railroad Canyon Rd Improvements $1,600,000 $1,600,000 $594,653 $0 37.2 % SUBTOTAL CANYON LAKE LOAN $1,600,000 $0 $1,600,000 $594,653 $0 37.2 % CITY OF CORONA Smith, M aple & Lincoln Interchanges & (1) $5,212,623 $5,212,623 $2,688,522 $0 51.6% Storm drainage structure SUBTOTAL CITY OF CORONA $5,212,623 $4 $5,212,623 $2;688,522 $0 51,6 % CITY OF PERRIS Local streets & road improvements $1,936,419 $1,936,419 $1,087,972 $0 56 .2% CITY OF SAN JACINTO Local streets & road improvements $1,324,500 $1,324,500 $744,166 $0 56 .2% CITY OF TEMECULA Local streets & road improvements $5,094,027 $5,094,027 $2,862,065 $0 56.2 % CITY OF NORCO Yuma I/C & Local streets and road Imprmts $2,139,067 $2,139,067 $1,201,829 $0 56.2% CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE Local streets & road improvements $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $572,752 $0 38.2% TO TALS $18,806,636 SO $18,846,636 $9,179,207 S0 48.8 % NOTE: (1) Loan against interchange improvement programs. All values are for total Project/Contract and not related to fiscal year budgets. Status as of: 6/30/03 Page 3 of 3 ii �, AGENDA ITEM 6C • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Naty Kopenhaver, Director of Administrative Service THROUGH: SUBJECT: Eric A. Haley, Executive Director Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Report for Fiscal Year 2002- 2003 and Proposed Goal for Fiscal Year 2003-2004 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt 12.05% as its DBE overall annual goal for Federal FY 2003-2004 (from October 1, 2003 to September 30, 2004); 2) Post the proposed DBE overall annual goal for FY 2003-2004 and receive comments for 45 -days; and, 3) Submit the methodology and FY 2003-2004 goal to Caltrans District 8 Local Assistance. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In accordance with regulations of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), 49 CFR Part 26, the Riverside County Transportation Commission must adopt its DBE annual goal as a condition to receive a commitment for federal financial assistance from DOT. Over the years, the Commission has committed to ensure equal opportunity in transportation contracting markets and increase participation in federal funded contracts by small, socially and economically disadvantaged businesses. For Federal FY 03-04, it is proposed that the annual DBE overall goal be 12.05%. Statistics were based on the U.S. Census Bureau "County Business Patterns" for 2001, using the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). As was done in previous years, staff used statistics within the four -county areas — Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino because the Commission draws bids from these counties. The analysis attached to the report details the formula utilized in developing the overall annual goal for the next federal fiscal year. For FY 2002-03, the Commission set an annual goal of 6.67%. To date, the total percentage of DBE award is 16.78%. For information, the federally -funded projects awarded were: 1) State Route 60 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Construction Project from SR 60/1-215 to Redlands Boulevard; 2) North Main Corona Station Agenda Item 6C 83 Parking Structure - Preliminary Engineering; and 3) Perris Multimodal Facility - Preliminary Engineering. The awards and the percentage of DBEs are listed below: FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 1 U 1 AL Utit UUN 1 RAU 1 AWARD AND DBE DOLLAR AMOUNT Federal -Aid Project No./ Total Project Dollar Amount % DBE Contractor Bid Amount DBE 03-31-052 (SR 60 HOV $20,159,281 _ Construction) Sudhakar Company $ 296,394 United Steel Placer $1,327,950 State Wide Sign $ 95,372 8.5% 02-31-042 (SR -60 HOV $ 2,665,124 Construction Management) I Berg and Associates $1,764,312 66.2% 03-33-009 (Pedley Metrolink $ 381,949 Station emergency Platform Extension Construction) Granitex Construction $ 230,636 60.4% 03-33-035 (Pedley Metrolink $ 176,909 Station CCTV Construction) New Age Communication $ 176,909 100% 03-31-014 (North Main Corona $ 316,798 Parking Structure Design) O'Conner Construction Management $ 17,500 Katz, Okitsu and Assoc. $ 17,000 11°/0 04-33-007 (Perris Multimodal $ 512,994 Facility) IMA Design Group Inc. $ 42,000 Sanchez Kamps and Assoc. $ 11,298 Manuel Oncina Architect Inc. $ 39,900 Katz Okitsu and Assoc. $ 22,900 J.L. Paterson and Assoc. $ 21,279 27% TOTAL $ 24,213,058 $4,063,452 16.78% Agenda Item 6C 84 For FY 2003-04, there are three federally -funded projects: 1) State Route 74 Segment II Realignment and Widening Project between Wasson Canyon in the County of Riverside and 7th Street in the City of Perris - Construction; 2) San Jacinto Branch Line Project from the City of Perris to Downtown Riverside — Engineering Design; and 3) CETAP Corridor — Preliminary Engineering / Environmental Document. It is estimated that the total cost of the three projects is $33,000,000 ($8,941,000 federal funds). In conformance to 49 CFR Part 26.45, the proposed annual DBE goal is published in the local newspaper's Legal Notice Section. As required, comments on the proposed goal will be accepted for 45 -days from the date of the public notice. If there are no substantive comments received with the 45 -day public comment period, the annual goal 12.05% will remain as the Commission's DBE goal for FY 2003-04. Agenda Item 6C 85 ii RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) PROGRAM PROPOSED ANNUAL OVERALL GOAL I. GOAL METHODOLOGY As required by Federal Regulations 49 CFR Section 26, public agencies receiving Federal Department of Transportation -assisted funds must adopt its annual overall DBE goal by using every effort to meet its goal through race neutral measures. Agencies may establish specific contract goals, including goals for particular projects through subcontracting opportunities, in those instances when race neutral measure are not sufficient to meet the Commission's overall goal. The following methodology was used in establishing a Base Figure for DBE availability for FY 2003-2004: NUMERATOR - DBE firms in the four -county area (Riverside, San Bernardino, Los Angeles, Orange) DENOMINATOR — Total number of construction firms, the work category identified within the four -county area based on the more recent available date from the U.S. Census Bureau — 2001 Under the Construction/Consulting Categories, the following lists the number of DBEs in each of the four county areas: CONSTRUCTION CALTRANS DBE CODE NAICS COUNTY CODE COUNTY NO. OF DBE FIRMS 19 037 Los Angeles 12,078 30 059 Orange 6,081 33 065 Riverside 3,452 36 071 San Bernardino 2,885 TOTAL 24,496 There are 1,032 identified available DBE firms in the Caltrans DBE directory of firms in the construction work codes that operate within the four -county areas. Agenda Item 6C 86 CONSULTING SERVICES CALTRANS DBE CODE NAICS COUNTY CODE COUNTY NO. OF DBE FIRMS 19 037 Los Angeles 26,046 30 059 Orange 11,271 33 065 Riverside 2,201 36 071 San Bernardino 1,819 TOTAL 41,337 There are 1,043 identified available DBE firms in the Caltrans DBE directory of firms in the consultant services work codes that operate within the four -county areas. The following lists the total amount of contracts in each of the Work Category and the projected federal funds for FY 2003-04. WORK CATEGORY AMOUNT OF FY 03-04 CONTRACTS ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF FEDERAL FUNDS % OF FEDERAL FUNDS Consultant Services $11,000,000 $6,000,000 54.5% Construction (Including Materials and Trucking) $22,000,000 $2,941,000 13.4% The weighted Base Figure is calculated by first determining the number of ready, willing, and able DBEs in the four counties for the work category shown above, divided by the number of total firms in the category. Using this method determines the availability by the number of firms that have directly participated in, or attempted to participate in, past federally -funded assisted contracting efforts. The application of the formula yields the following baseline information: Number of Ready, Willing and Able DBEs Number of All Ready, Willing and Able Firms The Base Figure resulting from the calculation is as follows: A. Construction 1,032 = 4.21% 24,496 Base Figure Agenda Item 6C 87 B. Consulting Services 1,043 41,337 C. Base Figure 2.52% Using the percentage of federal funds projected to be available for FY 03-04 and the percentage of DBEs for each work category, the result is a base figure of 1.94% 0.134 ( 1,032 ) + 0.545 ( 1,043) = 24,496 1,337 II. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE BASE FIGURE: 0.0194 Staff reviewed and assessed other known relevant evidence to determine what additional adjustments, if any, were needed to adapt the Base Figure to the four -county area marketplace. Several factors as outlined under Title 49 were considered to see if there was a need to adjust the base goal. In reviewing last year's goal, the Commission set a 6.67% annual goal based on the DBEs available in the four -county area. In awarding its federally -funded projects for this fiscal year, the Commission awarded 16.78% to DBEs. Staff is recommending that an adjustment be made to the base figure using the difference of its FY 02-03 annual goal and the attained percentage to date, which is 10.11%. With the adjustment, the base figure and proposed goal for FY 2003-04 is 12.05%. III. ANTICIPATED PROJECTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 The following projects represent the projected federally funded contracts for Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 2003 through September 30, 2004. A. State Route 74 Scope of Work - This is a re -alignment and widening project between the County of Riverside and the City of Perris. Estimated Total Amount of Contract: $22,000,000 Estimated Federal Funds: $ 2,941,000 Agenda Item 6C 88 B. San Jacinto Branch Line Scope of Work - This is for Engineering Design of the San Jacinto Branch Rail line from the City of Perris to Downtown Riverside for the extension of Metrolink Commuter Rail Service. Estimated Total Amount of Contract: $1,000,000 Estimated Federal Funds: $1,000,000 C. CETAP Corridor Scope of Work - This is for Preliminary Engineering / Environmental Document for highway improvements. Estimated Total Amount of Contract: $10,000,000 Estimated Federal Funds: $ 5,000,000 IV. UTILIZATION OF RACE/GENDER-NEUTRAL METHOD Staff foresees meeting the proposed 12.05% goal utilizing race -neutral methods by: 1) making efforts to ensure that the Request for Proposals (RFPs) and Invitation for Bids (IFBs) process and the contracting requirements facilitate participation by DBEs and other small businesses; 2) encouraging the prime consultant and contractors to subcontract portions of the work to DBEs; 3) distributing the RFPs and IFBs to organizations that represent and assist DBEs; and, 4) listing the RFPs and IFBs on the Commission website www.rctc.org. V. PUBLIC NOTICE IN SETTING OVERALL ANNUAL DBE GOAL As required, the Notice informs the public of the proposed goals and the rationale for setting the goal and they are available for inspection at the Commission for 30 days following the date of the Public Notice. Public comments on the proposed annual goal will be accepted for 45 days from the date of the Public Notice. The Notice was published on July 25, 2003. The adopted goal and goal methodology must be submitted to the Department of Transportation prior to October 1, 2003. VI. ESTABLISHMENT OF GOAL Based on the information presented in the report, it is proposed that the Commission's overall annual DBE goal for federal FY 2003-04 be established at 12.05%. Agenda Item 6C 89 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ADOPTION OF DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) OVERALL ANNUAL GOAL FOR FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR 2003-04 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Riverside County Transportation Commission will be adopting its overall annual DBE goal, applicable to contracting opportunities scheduled to be awarded during the period of October 1, 2003 through September 30, 2004. RCTC's proposed overall annual goal of 12.05% and its rationale were developed in accordance to U.S. Department of Transportation's New Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program Final Rule (49 CFR Part 26) and are available for inspection for 30 days following the date of this Notice, from 8:00 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, at its principal place of business located at 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor, Riverside, California 92501. Comments will be accepted on the proposed annual goal for 45 days from the date of this Notice. Comments can be forward to RCTC at the above address or to Caltrans District 8, Local Assistance, 464 W. Fourth Street, San Bernardino, California 92401-1400. Dated at Riverside, California this 24th day of July 2003. By: Naty Kopenhaver Director of Administrative Services Agenda Item 6C 90 II AGENDA ITEM 6D • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM; Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning and Policy Development THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Annual Local Transportation Fund Planning Allocations to CVAG and WRCOG STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve allocation of Local Transportation Funds totaling $223,602 to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) and $409,938 to the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) to support transportation planning programs and functions as identified in the attached work programs. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On an annual basis the Commission, CVAG and WRCOG develop transportation planning programs. The Commission's planning program is identified in the annual budget that was approved on June 11, 2003. Staff has reviewed the attached FY 2003-04 transportation planning and administrative work programs submitted by CVAG and WRCOG and finds them consistent with the overall RCTC transportation program and planning objectives. The funding requested is consistent with the approved FY 2003-04 Commission budget. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Y 1 Year: FY 03-04 Amount: $223,602 CVAG $409,938 WRCOG Source of Funds: Local Transportation Funds Budget Adjustment: N GLA No.: 106-65-86205 Fiscal Procedures Approved: 4ti. _ , 151-.,-(:--- Date: 07/21/2003 Agenda Item 6D 91 11 "IRCOG Western Riverside Council of Governments County of Riverside • City of Banning • City of Beaumont • City of Calimesa • City of Canyon Lake City of Corona • City of Hemet • City of Lake Elsinore • City of Moreno Valley • City of Murrieta City of Norco • City of Penis • City of Riverside • City of San Jacinto • City of Temecula Fiscal Year 2003-2004 Local Transportation Funds Program Objectives The Work Plan for FY2003-04 is divided into 4 key program areas: Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Programs ($21,800) Participate in the SCAG Technical Advisory Committees and work with our Policy Committee members to assist SCAG with the performance of specific transportation, air quality, planning and GIS work for SCAG as part of their Overall Work Program; work with SCAG and our partners regarding Inland airports and their role in the regional system, with a focus on ground access, transit, and employment issues; conduct outreach on air quality, transportation, and planning issues with the public, member jurisdictions and regional agencies. State and Federal Programs ($22,138) Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) projects/programs Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and California Air Resources Board Federal Highway Administration and Caltrans Department of Energy (DOE) and California Energy Commission Continue the Clean Cities program and expand the Coalition to include the entire WRCOG subregion; participation in the National Clean Cities Conference; continue to develop emission reduction strategies; assist in the purchase of alternative fuel vehicles and development of infrastructure; continue to apply for and administer grants; attend regional air quality and transportation meetings and conferences to provide subregional input. Regional Transportation, Planning and Air Quality Programs (335,000) South Coast Air Quality Management District Riverside Transit Agency Riverside and San Bernardino County Transportation Commissions Participate in the continued development of the General Plan Air Quality Element and the Air Quality Management Plan; participate in outreach to our jurisdictions regarding SCAQMD rule making; assist the Riverside County Governing Board Members, participate/attend in EPA and Air resources Board hearings and workshops; continue to implement the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) for western Riverside County. 4080 Lemon Street, 3'" Floor Annex • Riverside, CA 92501-3679 • (909) 955-7985 • Fax (909) 787-7991 www.wrcog.cog.ca.us Riverside Transportation Commission Programs ($31,000) Community Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) RCTC Technical Advisory Committee MSHCP Provide assistance in transportation planning and air quality programs; participation in the Surface Transportation Program/CMAQ project evaluations, assist in the evaluation of the SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian projects and other evaluation committees as expected; assist RCTC in ensuring Riverside County projects are included in the RTP; continued participation in CETAP and other planning related tasks as determined in consultation with the RCTC Executive Director. TRANSPORTATION FISCAL YEAR 2003/04 PROGRAM OBJECTIVES The Work Plan for 2003/04 is separated into eight main program areas: 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) 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 TEA -21) Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Programs . State Highway Routes in the Coachella Valley . Congestion Management Program/System (CMP/CMS) . RCTC Technical Advisory Committee . State Highway Measure A Discussions Includes staff time to, (i) 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, (ii) participation in the Surface Transportation Program/Congestion Management Air Quality (STP/CMAQ) project selection for CVAG and western County areas, (iii) assist RCTC staff in the 10 selection of SB 821 bicycle and pedestrian projects for the Coachella Valley and western County areas, (iv) provide RCTC staff regional transportation project information for the State Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), and (v) support the RCTC Technical Advisory Committee, This also includes the state highway project construction program. This area includes staff time to monitor, assist in problem resolution, (funding/environmental/political) and report on the status of construction projects for State Routes 74, 86S, and 111. (Funded from CMAQ, TUMF and State Highway Measure A) 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 Prioritization Study (TPPS), coordination of updates to the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), 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 TEA -21 PP&M, LTF and Measure A) Miscellaneous Programs . GIS Information Services . Maintain Transportation Model . Regional Arterial Traffic Count Program . I-10 Corridor This area involves support to multiple programs with a focus on key project areas. These areas include staff time and project management to, (i) GIS Information Services, (ii) the regional transportation model (CVATS), (iii) the regional arterial traffic count program, and (iv) 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 Coachella Valley Area Transportation Study (CVATS) regional transportation model involves support to update the current transportation model to the year 2025 and add the proposed 2025 land use plus socio-economic data for forecasting projected transportation system needs. (Funded from Measure A, TUMF, CMAQ and Special Program Funds) 11 Support Congestion Management /Air Quality Programs ▪ SB 821 Program . Conformance with SIP requirements Involves Transportation Department staff support to CMAQ program areas. Support will focus on the SB 821 program. Also includes implementation of State Implementation Plan (SIP) conformance to CVAG regional projects. (Funded from TEA -21, Measure A and SB 821) Transportation Uniform 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 (i) monitor the implementation of the TUMF program in member jurisdictions, (ii) perform annual fiscal reviews of building permits and TUMF collections, (iii) research, analyze and prepare reports for TUMF appeals, (iv) enter TUMF collections in the TUMF data base, (v) meet with developers on request to review potential TUMF assessments, and (vi) 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) 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 SCAG OWP 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 and General Funds) 12 • 4 AGENDA ITEM 6E • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning and Policy Development THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Orange County - Riverside County Major Investment Study Cooperative Agreement STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve development of a Cooperative Agreement between the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and RCTC for the initiation of a Major Investment Study to develop solutions to address the significant demand for transportation capacity between Riverside and Orange Counties; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Staff has been working with Orange County Transportation Authority to initiate the study of a new corridor between Riverside County and Orange County. We have been working cooperatively to develop a scope of work to obtain consultant assistance to complete a Major Investment Study (MIS). A MIS is a federally and regionally approved corridor evaluation process and will include a strategic assessment of multimodal alternatives for improving inter -county travel and is expected to help achieve consensus on additional SR91 improvements and a new corridor alignment between Orange and Riverside Counties. Once the program of projects and/or locally preferred corridor alignment is determined, the process would then move to a project level environmental process. Assuming funding for the study is secured by both agencies (we have a separate agenda item to address proposed funding), the MIS is scheduled to begin in late Fall and be complete 18 months later. The OCTA will provide contract management services for this work effort, however, the project will be jointly managed by OCTA and RCTC staff and both agencies will equally participate in the study process including developing and reviewing consultant deliverables, working Agenda Item 6E 92 with future committees, and guiding the project through local jurisdictions and Commission/Authority Boards. The technical work produced for the project will be based on the same travel demand model, demographic data sets, and transportation network assumptions. The technical work will be the basis for communicating consistent information to stakeholders and the public. OCTA expects to release a Request for Proposal within the next 45 days with the goal of securing a consultant in October/November. Both RCTC and OCTA will be involved in consultant selection. We are requesting the Commission's approval to develop a Cooperative Agreement which will outline the funding responsibilities for each agency (will be equally funded 50/50), joint management of the work effort, review and acceptance of deliverables, etc., with authorization for execution of the agreement given to the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review. Agenda Item 6E 93 AGENDA ITEM 6F • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: h Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposed Funding for the Orange County - Riverside County Major Investment Study STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve $1.5 million in Surface Transportation Program Funds for the Orange County - Riverside County Major Investment Study; and, 2) Continue to seek alternate funding opportunities for CETAP and staff monitoring costs. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its May 14, 2003 meeting, the Commission approved reprogramming $1.875 million of State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Funds for Planning, Programming and Monitoring (PPM) Activities. This was a result of the City of Blythe's decision to fund the Hobsonway Project with local funds, thereby freeing up $1 .875 million of STIP fund capacity. The PPM activities included $1 million for the Orange County — Riverside County Major Investment Study (MIS), $778,985 for CETAP, and $96,000 for staff monitoring costs. In discussions with California Transportation Commission (CTC) staff, we were told that they would not support our reprogramming request. The reason is that the Hobsonway Project is not included in the allocation plan scheduled for a vote. Therefore, no fund capacity was made by rescinding the Hobsonway allocation as we had hoped. The Orange County — Riverside County MIS is scheduled to begin this Fall. The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and RCTC have agreed to split the cost of the $3 million study (50/50). The OCTA also planned to use STIP PPM funds to fund their portion of the study and are now considering alternative fund sources. Agenda Item 6F 94 Staff has researched the ability to use federal funds for the MIS. Recently, TEA 21 apportionment levels for the sixth and last year (federal fiscal 2002/03) were released and were higher than anticipated. This last apportionment year brings the six -year (1997-98 through 2002-03) Surface Transportation Program (STP) total to $66 million. The amount RCTC approved through previous calls for projects is $64 million. Therefore, a balance of $2 million in STP funds is available for programming. Staff recommends programming $1.5 million of TEA 21 STP Funds for the Orange County - Riverside County MIS. STP Funds are available countywide and not allocated on an intra-county formula basis. If approved, the MIS Project would be programmed in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) with federal approval following in approximately three to four months. Once the project is included in an approved FTIP, the required paperwork for obligation of the STP Funds will be submitted to Caltrans. As for the additional funding needs for CETAP and staff monitoring costs that we had hoped to fund by rescinding the Hobsonway allocation request, staff will continue to seek alternate funding opportunities or future STIP PPM programming for these two projects. It should be noted that due to the State's budget problems, PPM programming may not be approved by the CTC until the 2004-05 fiscal year. Agenda Item 6F 95 AGENDA ITEM 6G • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: SCAG Agreement for Cost Sharing to Upgrade the Regional Travel Demand Model STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 04-65-010 for Cost Sharing to Upgrade SCAG's Regional Travel Demand Model; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In September 2002, the Commission approved the allocation of $28,000 in Local Transportation Funds (LTF) Planning Funds to support SCAG's Regional Model Improvement Program. The agreement (attached) formalizes the funding contribution and identifies the scope of services for upgrading the Regional Travel Demand Model. The total cost for the model improvements is estimated at $1,340,000. The other county transportation commissions are also contributing based on a population share. SCAG is in the process of selecting a consultant that will assist SCAG with the model improvements with RCTC staff participating on the Model Improvement Sub- Committee. Attachment: Agreement No. 04-65-010 Agenda Item 6G 96 II 04-070.SCGC2.RCTC RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION and THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS AGREEMENT FOR COST SHARING TO UPGRADE SCAG'S REGIONAL TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of , 2003, by and between the Riverside County Transportation Commission, P.O. Box 12008, Riverside, California 92502 (hereinafter referred to as RCTC), and the Southern California Association of Governments, 818 West Seventh Street, 12th Floor, Los Angeles, California 90017 (hereinafter referred to as SCAG). RECITALS WHEREAS, the current Regional Travel Demand Model used by SCAG needs to be updated with current input data. WHEREAS, SCAG has worked with RCTC and other county transportation commissions to collect model input data. WHEREAS, the Regional Travel Demand Model Improvement Project is a joint effort of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG), Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), RCTC, Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), and SCAG. WHEREAS, SCAG is preparing a Request for Proposals (RFP) to upgrade the Regional Travel Demand Model as part of the Regional Travel Demand Model Improvement Project. WHEREAS, it is anticipated that over time, one or more of the entities named above will contribute funds toward the Travel Demand Model Improvement Project. • WHEREAS, RCTC and SCAG desire to move forward with enhancement to the Travel Demand Model even though funding for the total Travel Demand Improvement Project has not yet be obtained. PC Doc 84541 Page 1 of 7 ._ _97 04-070.SCGC2.RCTC WHEREAS, RCTC is willing to contribute $28,000 to enhance the Regional Travel Demand Model components including trip generation, trip distribution, mode choice, and trip assignment. WI1EREAS, SCAG, desires to accept and is willing to utilize the RCTC contribution for the enhancement of the Regional Travel Demand Model as described herein. WHEREAS, this Regional Travel Demand Model Improvement Project will facilitate the missions of RCTC and SCAG by providing better projections of future travel demand and future air quality conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual understandings of the parties hereto, RCTC and SCAG agree as follows: AGREEMENT ARTICLE 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES A. SCAG shall prepare a Request for Proposal to upgrade the Regional Travel Demand Model, which shall seek a consultant to perform the work outlined in the attached scope of services. SCAG shall oversee, subject to section 5, the consultant selection process and the work of the consultant. B. SCAG shall establish a Model Improvement Sub -committee (Sub -committee) as defined in section 5 below. C. SCAG and its consultant shall furnish all technical and professional services necessary to fully and adequately perform the tasks set forth in this agreement. ARTICLE 2. TERM OF AGREEMENT The term of this MOU shall commence on the date this MOU is fully executed and terminate on September 30, 2004. ARTICLE 3. FUNDING A. RCTC shall pay SCAG twenty-eight thousand dollars ($28,000) within 10 days of the commencement date of this MOU. B. It is understood that the source of RCTC funds made available under this MOU shall be non-federal funds and by execution of this MOU, RCTC certifies that funds it contributes under this MOU are in fact non-federal funds. C. SCAG's supervisory and administrative costs, including direct labor and overhead are eligible for reimbursement through this MOU. D. It is mutually understood between the parties that this MOU has been written before ascertaining the availability of funds for the entire Regional Travel Demand Model Improvement Project. SCAG therefore retains the option to terminate this MOU pursuant to section 3 or to amend this MOU to reflect any reduction in funds. PC Doc 84541 Page2of7 -98 04-070.SCGC2.RCTC E. Prior to SCAG exercising its option to terminate this MOU for lack of funding, SCAG shall consult with RCTC to ascertain the merit termination or a reduction in the scope of work. ARTICLE 4. REPORTING REOUIREMENTS A. SCAG shall submit to RCTC within 10 days of receipt thereof by SCAG, copies of the invoices received from the consultant for all work accomplished with funds provided under this MOU. The consultants will be required to provide invoices detailing the work hours completed by project and task during the invoice period. Invoices shall also include all appropriate documentation such as subcontractor invoices, receipts, etc. All supporting documents will include a clear justification and explanation of the relevance to the Scope of Work. B. SCAG shall submit to RCTC a monthly statement for the entire work program, which indicates the work hours completed by project and task during the reporting period. Such statement shall be of sufficient detail to demonstrate work effort completed and shall document products produced and goals met. ARTICLE 5. MODEL IMPROVEMENT SUB -COMMITTEE A. SCAG shall establish a Model Improvement Sub -committee, which shall be composed of one representative from each funding agency. The SCAG Project Manager shall serve as the Chair of the Sub -committee. B. The Sub -committee shall make recommendations to the SCAG Project Manager with regard to the scope of work to be undertaken by the consultant; and shall select the consultant and review the work of the consultant, including making a recommendation as to final acceptance of the consultant's work. However, final decisions in all matters related to SCAG's consultant work shall rest with the SCAG Project Manager. C. The Sub -committee shall meet monthly, unless otherwise determined by a majority vote of the Committee, to hear a monthly progress report. D. RCTC shall appoint its member to the Sub -committee within 10 days of execution of this MOU. ARTICLE 6. PROJECT MANAGER A. All work under this MOU shall be coordinated with SCAG through the Project Manager. For purposes of this Agreement, SCAG designates Deng Bang Lee as the Project Manager. SCAG reserves the right to change this designation upon written notice to RCTC. RCTC designates Shirley Medina as its Project Manager. RCTC may change the designation of the RCTC Project Manager with written notification to the SCAG Project Manager. B. The SCAG Project Manager shall in conjunction with the Consultant prepare monthly progress reports for the Sub-conunittee and shall serve as the chair of the Sub -committee. PC Doc 84541 Page 3 of 7 -99 04-070.SCGC2.RCTC ARTICLE 7. AMENDMENTS No alteration or deviation of the terms of this MOU shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by the parties. ARTICLE 8. NOTICES Any notice or notices required or permitted to be given pursuant to this contract may be personally served on the other party by the party giving such notice, or may be served by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the following addresses: To: ' SCAG Attention: Deng Bang Lee Southern California Association of Governments 818 West Seventh Street, 12th Floor Los Angeles, California 90017-3435 Phone: (213) 236-1855 Fax: (213) 236-1803 To: RCTC Attention: Shirley Medina Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, California 92502 Phone: (909) 787-7141 Fax: (909) 787-7920 ARTICLE 9. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS/USE OF DATA All documents, data, and materials provided to, produced, distributed, or otherwise related to the Project shall become the property of SCAG. Upon completion of the model update and acceptance of the model by the Sub -committee and SCAG, RCTC shall have the right to the output of the improved model, including the full model itself, model inputs such as origin and destination travel survey data, and RCTC shall have full access to all data revisions and model updates in the future. ARTICLE 10. INDEMNITY Neither RCTC nor any officer or employee thereof shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by SCAG under or in connection with any work, performed by and or service provided by SCAG, its officers, agents, employees and consultants under this MOU. SCAG shall indemnify, defend and hold RCTC its officers, agents and employees harmless from any liability and expenses, including without limitation, defense costs, any costs or liability on account of bodily injury, death or personal injury of any person or for damage to or loss of risk of property and any claims for damages of any nature whatsoever arising out of and to the extent caused by anything done PC Doc 84541 Page4 of 7 -- 10,0 04-070.SCGC2.RCTC or omitted to be done by SCAG or its officers, agents, employees or consultants in the performance of the services in this MOU. ARTICLE 11. TERMINATION A. SCAG may by written notice to RCTC terminate the whole or any part of this MOU at any time with or without cause by giving written notice to RCTC of such termination, and specifying the effective date thereof, at least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. B. In the event SCAG terminates this MOU, SC`AG's only responsibility to RCTC shall be to provide a final progress report on the Project and a report on the expenditures to date of termination. C. RCTC may by written notice to SCAG terminate the whole or any part of this MOU at any time with or without cause by giving written notice to SCAG of such termination, and specifying the effective date thereof, at least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. D. In the event that RCTC terminates this MOU, RCTC's only obligation to SCAG shall be to provide funds necessary to complete the work to the effective date of termination. ARTICLE 12. SEVERABILITY If any provision of this MOU is held to be illegal, invalid, or enforceable, in whole or in part, such provision shall be modified to the minimum extent necessary to make it legal, valid and enforceable, and the legality, validity, and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected thereby. ARTICLE 13. JURISDICTION AND VENUE This MOU shall be deemed an Agreement under the laws of the State of California, and for all purposes shall be interpreted in accordance with such laws. Both parties hereby agree and consent to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the State of California and that the venue of any action brought thereunder shall be Los Angeles, County, California. ARTICLE 14. WAIVER No delay or failure by either Party to exercise or enforce at any time any right or provision of this MOU shall be considered a waiver thereof of such Party's right thereafter to exercise or enforce each and every right and provision of this MOU. A Waiver to be valid shall be in writing but need not be supported by consideration. No single waiver shall constitute a continuing or subsequent waiver. • ARTICLE 15. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This writing contains the entire agreement of the Parties relating to the subject matter hereof, and the Parties have made no agreements, representations or warranties relating to the PC Doc 84541 Page 5 of 7 04-070.SCGC2.RCTC subject matter hereof which are not set forth herein. Except as provided herein, this Agreement may not be modified or altered without formal written amendment thereto. ARTICLE 16. RECORDS RETENTION AND AUDITS A. SCAG agrees to establish and maintain proper accounting procedures and cash management records and documents in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. (GAAP) SCAG shall reimburse RCTC for any expenditure not in compliance with the Scope of Work and/or not in compliance with other terms and conditions as defined in this MOU. B. SCAG and its Consultant and its Subconsultants shall maintain all books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertinent to this MOU during the period of performance of the MOU and for three years from the date that SCAG makes final payment to the Consultant and all other pending matters are closed. C. RCTC or any of its duly authorized representatives, upon reasonable written notice shall have access to all the necessary records of SCAG and its Consultant to conduct audits to assure SCAG and its consultants have complied with the terms and conditions of this MOU. D. RCTC shall maintain all books, documents, papers, accounting records and other evidence pertinent to this MOU, particularly those records, which verify that the funds provided by RCTC pursuant to this MOU are non-federal funds. Such records shall be maintained during the period of performance of the MOU and for three years from the date that SCAG makes final payment to the Consultant and all other pending matters are closed. E. At any time during normal business hours, and as often as SCAG, the California Department of Transportation, the Comptroller General of the United States, or other appropriate State and Federal agencies, or any duly authorized representative may deem necessary, RCTC shall make available for examination all of its records with respect to all matters covered by this MOU. For purposes of audit, examination, or to make copies or transcripts of such records, such records and access to the facilities and premises of RCTC shall be made available during the period of performance of this MOU, and for three years from the date that SCAG makes final payment to the Contractor and all other pending matters are closed. ARTICLE 17. ASSIGNMENT AND SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST A. Neither SCAG nor RCTC shall assign this MOU or any part thereof, without the written consent of each party to this MOU. Any assignment without such written consent shall be void and unenforceable. B. The covenants and agreement of this MOU shall inure to the benefit of, and shall be binding upon, each of the parties and their respective successors and assignees. ARTICLE 18. TIME OF THE ESSENCE Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this MOU. PC Doc 84541 Page 6 of 7 - - 402 04-070.SCGC2.RCTC This Agreement shall be made effective upon execution by both parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date first above written. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ' RIVERSIDE COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Date 1,5- 03 By Date By Jam - .. osnell Ron Roberts Dep Executive Director Chair of the Board APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By By Steven De Baun, Esq. Chief Legal Counsel Attorney PC Doc 84541 Page7of7 - - 103 II AGENDA ITEM 6H • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 16, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Caltrans Local Assistance Contribution Agreement State Route 71 Widening / Animal Crossing Project for STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 04-66-01 1, Local Assistance Contribution Agreement with Caltrans District 8 allowing Caltrans to claim $10 million of TEA 21 Demonstration Funds as local contribution for the SR 71 Widening/Animal Crossing Project; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement of behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the June California Transportation Commission (CTC) meeting, the CTC approved STIP amendments to move funds among the SR 71/ SR 91 Connector Project, the SR 71 Widening/Animal Crossing, and the Green River Interchange Project. This was done to replace the suspended Traffic Congestion Relief (TCR) Funds on the Green River Interchange Project, and address cost increases on the SR 71 and Green River Interchange Projects. As a result, the following actions took place: • TEA 21 Demonstration Funds in the amount of $10 million were moved from the SR 71/ SR 91 Connector Project to the SR 71 Widening/Animal Crossing Project • $8.5 million of STIP Interregional Improvement Program (IIP) Funds were moved from the SR 71 Project to the SR 91 Green River Project. These steps ensure the full funding and implementation of the SR 71 Widening/Animal Crossing Project and the Green River Interchange Projects. The SR 71/ SR 91 Connector Project remains underfunded with construction funds Agenda Item 6H 104 unprogrammed. It is anticipated that SR 71/ SR 91 Connector Project will receive construction funding through future STIP cycles. The movement of $10 million of TEA 21 Demonstration Funds to the SR 71 Project requires RCTC to approve the attached Local Assistance Contribution Agreement. The Agreement does not impact the RCTC budget. On May 5, 2003, a letter was sent to Congressman Ken Calvert notifying him of the actions that the CTC would be taking. Attachment: Agreement No. 04-66-01 1 Agenda Item 6H 105 08-Riv-71-PM 0.0/2.6 Widen SR -71 to 4 lanes In Riverside County from County line to Route 91 08303 - 44651 District Agreement No. 08-1218 LOCAL ASSISTANCE CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, ENTERED INTO EFFECTIVE ON , is between the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, acting by and through its Department of Transportation, referred to herein as "STATE", and the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, acting as the Riverside County Metropolitan Planning Organization, referred to herein as "RCTC". RECITALS 1. STATE and RCTC, pursuant to Streets and Highways Code Section 130, are authorized to enter into a cooperative agreement to contribute funds for improvements to State highways within the County of Riverside. 2. STATE contemplates widening State Route 71 to a 4 -lane Expressway including two(2) additional animal crossings from the Riverside/San Bernardino County Line to State Route 91 in Riverside County referred to herein as "PROJECT". 3. RCTC desires to contribute TEA 21 (Demo) apportionments, of federal funds, referred to herein as "FUNDS", to be matched with non-federal STIP funds, referred to herein as "MATCH FUNDS", to be applied towards allowable PROJECT costs as shown on Exhibit "A" (Contribution Letter for State Administered Projects) and Exhibit "B" (Finance Letter for State Administrated Projects with Local Programs Funding) attached and made part of this Agreement. 4. The parties hereto intend to define herein the terms and conditions under which PROJECT is to be partially financed by this contribution of FUNDS from RCTC. 1 106 District Agreement No. 8-1218 SECTION I STATE AGREES: 1. To undertake and complete PROJECT. 2. Upon completion of PROJECT and all work incidental thereto, to furnish RCTC with a detailed statement of the total FUNDS and MATCH FUNDS expended to complete PROJECT. 3. To process all Federal authorizations, State allocations, and/or State application of funds on behalf of RCTC as applicable under Federal and State law for the contribution of FUNDS and MATCH FUNDS towards PROJECT. 4. To obtain RCTC approval in writing, should additional available FUNDS and/or MATCH FUNDS be required for PROJECT. SECTION II RCTC AGREES: L _ STATE may encumber FUNDS and/or MATCH FUNDS as shown on Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B", towards PROJECT. 2. To program all PROJECT funding in the appropriate RTIP, FTIP and STIP documents, and process all amendments thereto for any funding changes to PROJECT. 3_ In the event changes to the FUNDS or MATCH FUNDS are necessary, to promptly notify STATE in writing. 4. To enter into a separate cooperative agreement or an amendment to this Agreement with STATE when funds other than FUNDS or MATCH FUNDS that are under the direct control of RCTC are to be contributed towards PROJECT or when any portion of the work on PROJECT is to be performed by RCTC. 2 -- 197 District Agreement No. 8-1218 SECTION III IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED: 1. All obligations of STATE under the terms of this Agreement are subject to the ap- propriation of resources by the Legislature the allocation of resources by the California Transportation Commission, and the encumbrance of those FUNDS and MATCH FUNDS to PROJECT. 2. The expenditure of FUNDS or MATCH FUNDS, under the sole control of RCTC, by STATE is subject to the programming and appropriation of those funds by RCTC. 3. Exhibit "A" may be revised by mutual agreement in writing, by both parties in the absence of a formal Agreement amending this Agreement to reflect funding increases by the approval of PROJECT manager with the consent of RCTC. No amendment to this Agreement is necessary to reflect such increases in funding. Exhibit "A" and "B" revision shall be the responsibility of the STATE's District 08 Local Assistance Office. 4. This Agreement shall terminate following completion of PROJECT when STATE has completed the final PROJECT accounting and returned all unused FUNDS due RCTC or on June 30, 2008, whichever is earlier in time. Signatures are on the following page. 3 108 District Agreement No. 8-1218 STATE OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION Department of Transportation COMMISSION By: ERIC HALEY JEFF MORALES Executive Director Director of Transportation By: Anne Mayer District 08 Director CERTIFIED AS TO FUNDS: By: District Budget Manager Approved as to form and procedure: By: Attorney Department of Transportation Certified as to procedure: By: Accounting Administrator, Local Assistance 4 -- 409 Contribution Letter for ate Administered Projects Date Local Agency Agreement No. State E. A. No. Amendment No . 14 -May -03 RCTC 08-1218 08-RIV-44651 Local - Federal Fund Type Local - Federal Contributor Amount Reimbursement Ratio Match Fund Type Match Amount Current Total Previous Total Proposed Change TEA -21 DEMO $10,000,000 80 .00 % ITIP-STATE ONLY $1,754,000 Comments: This information is based on RCTC's (RTIP LIST INFO .) Notes: 1) Identify each Local Federal fund type and match on separate lines with current and previous contributor totals towards the State - Administered project. 2) A separate finance letter is required to identify the type and amount of funds to be authorized, allocated, and/or applied to each phase of the work by STATE. • 3) An amendment to this contribution letter is required for any change to the type and/or amount of funds contributed towards the State Administered project or changes to the EA. 4) Local Agency is responsible for all programming changes to the RTIP, FTIP and/or STIP. Local Agency Signature Caltrans Project Manager Signature EXHIBIT "A" D08 05 / 30 110 FINANCE LETTER FOR STATE ADMINISTRATED PROJECTS WITH LOCAL PROGRAMS FUNDING DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF ACCOUNTI NG LOCAL PR OG RAM ACCOUNTING BRANC H A TTN: John Peterson Project sponsored by: 1) State ?_X_ work) Overhead Rate (%) ? Date: 05/14/2003 EA # (Current Phas Local Programs Project Contributor Agency *Agreement #: 44651 #: - 2) Local Agency (Reimb urseme nt RCTC 08-1218 Project Location: Near City of Chino from SBD Co . line to North Abutment Santa Ana River Widen To 4 Ln Expressway , Incl. 2 Additional Animal Crossings State Administrated Phases of Work „* ** *Local Program Funds * **Local Program Funds ***Other Funds •**Other Funds Totals Federal % 80 Match % 20 Federal % Match%. ;�' ' ,I T-,tt'':t, t ? ` zf , :,, Fund Tvpe DEMO Fund Type ST A Fund Tvpe Fund Tvpe Fund Tvpe ITIP Fund Type STATE SUPPORT Phase Prgm Code 400,000 _ Prgm Code 025,700 Prgm Code Prgm Code Prgm Code 025,700 Prgm Code ',g Y.P.: PE/Environmental "0" $0 $0 $0 $0 $288,000 $0 ` $288 .000 Design "'1" $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,513 ,000 $0 $1,513,000 R/W Support "2" $0 $0 $0 $0 $67,000 $0 $67,000 Construction En gineering °3" $0 $1,535,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,535,000 STA TE CAPITAL Phase Prgm Code Prgm Code Prgm Code Prgm Code Prgm Code Prgm Coder R/W Capital "9"' 50 $0 $0 $0 $0 , $0 $0 Construction Capital "4" $8,550,000 $219,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,769,000 TOTALS $8,550,000 $1,754,000 $0 $0 $1,868,000 - $0 $12,172,000 NOTES: > Identify type of Local Program with reimbursement percentages. > Identify other funds which include Developer funds, etc. > Provide Program codes such * Identify Co-op Agreement # ** Identify any Sub Jobs for each ***Include All the fu nds required Funds such as RSTP, DEMO, CMAQ, and A lso include copy of allocation letter with State -Federal Funds such as STIP RIP, as 20.10... (State Support), 20. 20.... (State Capital), or Contribution Agreement # (include copy of phase and fund source if applicable (identify for the current phase an d all the Local Program type of match Funds such as STIP Match, TCRP, SHOPP, Local Sales Tax, STIP Match. STIP HP, State funds such as SHOPP, TCRP and Local funds such as Sales Tax, See: jlttp://adsc.dot.ea .govfASC/Codings Manuals/chanter 07/index.htm the agreement if not already provided to Local Programs) in remarks) Funds / Match identified in previous phases (include any changes) (1) Project Manager Name: (2) Program Coordinator (3) O LP Area Engineer Nassim Elias Calnet: 8-670-6713 Signature: Name: Name: Calnet: Signature: Calnet:: Signature:: REMA RKS: ATTACHMENTS: RTIP/FTIP Listing / Amendments_ Environmental Clearance Federal Authorizaion (E76)_ R/W Certification Agreements_ Allocation Letter: ATTACHMENT "B" 111 AGENDA ITEM 61 • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Program Manager Brian Cundelan, Project Coordinator THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Authorization to Bid Revegetation Work for the State Route 74 Segment I Realignment STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Authorize staff to advertise to receive revegetation bids for the State Route 74 Segment I Highway Improvement Project, from Dexter Avenue in Lake Elsinore to approximately 1,640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Road, in the County of Riverside; and, 2) Bring back to the Commission the results of the bidding for contract award to the lowest, responsive bidder. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The State Route 74 Realignment project is a Measure "A" project from Dexter Avenue in Lake Elsinore to 7th Street in the City of Perris. The project will be constructed in two segments. Segment I is from Dexter Avenue in Lake Elsinore to approximately 1,640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Road. Segment 2 is from approximately 1,640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Road to 7th Street in the City of Perris. Segment I is currently under construction and is on schedule to complete construction by the end October 2003. Segment 2 will begin construction in the Spring of 2004. The overall objective of the Segment I revegetation work is the successful reestablishment of plant communities where they have been temporarily disturbed by construction of the portion of the roadway project in Segment I. This revegetation project addresses the on -site mitigation measures, per special conditions under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 of the Clean Water Act authorization, under Nationwide Permit No. 14, the Regional Water Quality Control Board Section 401 of the Clean Water Act Water Quality Certification, and the California Department of Fish and Game Section 1601 of the Fish and Game Code. The Engineer's estimate for this work is between $35,000 and $60,000. Agenda Item 61 112 SCHEDULE The schedule for the bid process is as follows: CALENDAR OF EVENTS Advertise Request for Bids August 20, 2003 Pre -Bid Meeting September 3, 2003 Request for Bids Deadline September 10, 2003 Evaluate the Bids and Submit to the Commission for Approval to Award Contract October 8, 2003 Agenda Rem 61 113 AGENDA ITEM 6J • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: TO: July 28, 2003 Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Program Manager Brian Cundelan, Project Coordinator THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Authorization to Bid Vegetation Removal Construction Package for State Route 74 Segment 2 Realignment STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Authorize staff to advertise to receive vegetation removal bids for the State Route 74 Segment II Highway Improvement Project, from Wasson Canyon Road to Seventh Street, in the County of Riverside; and, 2) Bring back to the Commission the results of the bidding for contract award to the lowest, responsive bidder. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The State Route 74 Realignment project is a Measure "A" project from Dexter Avenue in Lake Elsinore to 7th Street in the City of Perris. The project will be constructed in two segments. Segment I is from Dexter Avenue in Lake Elsinore to approximately 1,640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Road. Segment 2 is from approximately 1,640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Road to 7th Street in the City of Perris. Segment I is currently under construction and is on schedule to complete construction by the end October, 2003. Segment 2 will begin construction in the Spring of 2004. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, in their Biological Opinion for the project, required that gnatcatcher habitat within the proposed right-of-way be removed outside of the gnatcatcher breeding season (March 15 to September 30) to avoid disruption of its breeding and nesting activities. Vegetation removal will consist of cutting vegetation flush with the ground surface. No ground disturbance will occur with this contract. The equipment used will most likely be chain saws and weed -whackers. The work must be completed by March 14, 2004. The Engineer's estimate for this work is between $255,000 and $370,000. Agenda Item 6J 114 SCHEDULE The schedule for the bid process is as follows: CALENDAR OF EVENTS Advertise Request for Bids July 30, 2003 Pre -Bid Meeting August 13, 2003 Request for Bids Deadline August 20, 2003 Evaluate the Bids and Submit to the Commission for Approval to Award Contract September 3, 2003 Agenda Item 6J 115 AGENDA ITEM 6K • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION, CO*M/SS/ON DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Karl Sauer, Bechtel Construction Coordinator THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Approval of Agreement No. 04-33-012 with the City of Corona for Joint Use of Existing City Conduit From the North Main Corona Metrolink Station to the State Route 91 Caltrans Fiber Optics Backbone STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 04-33-012 with the City of Corona for joint use of existing city conduit, which will be used to install a fiber optics line, from the North Main Corona Metrolink Station to the SR 91 Caltrans Fiber Optics Backbone, at Main Street, to connect the North Main Corona CCTV Security System to the Downtown Riverside Station Security Monitoring Facility; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In September 1998, the Commission approved Cooperative Agreement No. 8-1055 with Caltrans which authorized RCTC to use Caltrans fibers along State Route 91. Caltrans has allowed RCTC the use of their fiber system at no cost to RCTC. The designated fibers, along SR 91, are used to connect the Riverside -La Sierra, North Main Corona, and West Corona Stations to the Riverside -Downtown Metrolink Station. The Riverside -Downtown Station has a monitoring facility above the stairway on the north side of the pedestrian overcrossing that is the designated area to receive data sent from the other Riverside stations. The monitoring facility also provides both electronic and visual surveillance of the extensive facilities at the Riverside -Downtown Station. In June 2002, the Commission approved Agreement No. 02-33-064 with Adams/Mallory Construction Co. for the construction of the North Main Corona Metrolink Commuter Rail Station. Construction of a CCTV Security System, with a Agenda Item 6K 116 connection from the station to the Caltrans SR 91 Fiber Optics Backbone was included as part of the construction of the station. The connection to the Caltrans SR 91 Fiber Optics Backbone is required to transmit the signals from the station the main security monitoring facility, located at the Downtown Riverside Metrolink Station. In subsequent discussions with the City, for the installation of a new conduit to connect the station CCTV Security system to the Caltrans SR 91 Fiber Backbone, RCTC became aware that the City had recently installed a conduit, along the same route and the City was acceptable to share the conduit with RCTC. Attached is a copy of draft Agreement No. 04-33-012, with the City of Corona, for joint use of existing City conduit, which will be used to install a fiber optics line, from the North Main Corona Metrolink Station to the Route 91 Caltrans Fiber Optics Backbone, at Main Street, to connect the North Main Corona CCTV Security System to the Downtown Riverside Station Security Monitoring Facility Agreement. The main points of the Agreement states, that the City will allow RCTC joint use of their existing conduit for a period of twenty (20) years for a license fee of $15,000. Staff is also currently working with the Contractor, to finalize a Change Order, for a credit to RCTC for the deletion of the requirement to construct a new conduit from the North Main Corona Station to Main Street at SR 91. The credit for the deleted work will more than offset the cost of the City of Corona License Agreement. Staff recommends approval of the attached City of Corona License Agreement and requests that the Commission authorize the Chairman to execute the Agreement, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, on behalf of the Commission. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Y I Year: FY 03-04 Amount: $15,000 Source of Funds: Measure "A" and Federal 5307 Budget Ad ustment: N GLA No.: 221-33-81301 Fiscal Procedures Approved: �, . 7. c : . _ Date: 07/21/2003 Agenda Item 6K 117 CONDUIT LICENSE AGREEMENT CITY OF CORONA This LICENSE AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made this day of ,2003 ("Effective Date"), by and between the CITY OF CORONA, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California ("City"), and the Riverside County Transportation Commission, a public agency organized and existing under the laws of the State of California ("Licensee"). City and Licensee are sometimes individually referred to as "Party" and collectively as the "Parties." All references to City and Licensee include their respective elected officials, officers, directors, employees, agents, contractors, and volunteers. RECITALS A. City is the owner of a two inch (2") diameter HDPE conduit, and certain hand holes or pullboxes, located within the rights -of -way commonly known as Blaine Street and North Main Street in the City of Corona, and more particularly depicted in Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated by this reference ("Conduit"). B. Licensee seeks to install, operate, and maintain within the Conduit one (1) twelve strand multi -mode fiber optic cable, measuring three -eighth inches (3/8") in diameter, and to install, operate, and maintain in the rights -of -way a pullbox connected thereto, all as more particularly identified and depicted in Exhibit "A," for purposes of connecting the CCTV Security System at the North Main Metrolink Commuter Rail Station, located at 250 E. Blaine Street, Corona, California, to the CalTrans Route 91 Fiber Optics Backbone on the southeast side of Route 91 and Main Street. TERMS 1 .0 Grant of License for Use of Conduit. City hereby grants to Licensee, for the purposes set forth in this Agreement and subject to any limitations and restrictions described herein, the following: (i) A nonexclusive license, irrevocable during the term of this Agreement, to use that portion of the Conduit generally described as approximately 1,300 linear feet of the Conduit located within the public right-of-way and beneath the public streets generally known as Blaine Street and North Main Street, Agenda Item 6K 118 as more particularly depicted in Exhibit "A" ("Licensed Conduit"), for the purpose of installing operating, and maintaining within the Licensed Conduit one (1) twelve strand multi -mode fiber optic cable, measuring approximately three - eighths inches (3/8") in diameter ("Licensee's Fiber"); (ii) A nonexclusive license, irrevocable during the term of this Agreement, to install, operate and maintain within the City's rights -of -way commonly known as Blaine Street and North Main Street, one (1) pullbox within the North Main Street right-of- way, as more particularly depicted in Exhibit "A" ("Pullbox"); and (iii) A nonexclusive license, irrevocable during the term of this Agreement, in, over, and under those portions of the Blaine Street and North Main Street, more particularly shown in Exhibit "A," necessary to provide Licensee physical access to the Licensed Conduit and Pullbox by its personnel and equipment. 2.0 Installation of Licensee's Fiber. Licensee, at its own cost and expense, shall provide and install innerducting within the Licensed Conduit that physically separates the 3/8" diameter area licensed to Licensee for Licensee's Fiber from the remaining and unused 1-5/8" diameter area. The method and installation of the innerducting shall be approved by City prior to the commencement of work by Licensee. 3.0 Term. The term ("Term") of this Agreement shall be twenty (20) years commencing on the Effective Date of this Agreement. 4.0 License Fee. Within fifteen (15) days of the Effective of this Agreement, Licensee shall pay to City the sum of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000.00) as consideration for the rights granted by City to Licensee by this Agreement ("License Fee"). 5.0 Risk of Loss; Damage or Destruction Facilities. Licensee acknowledges and agrees that Licensee bears all risk of loss of or damage to Licensee's Fiber and Pullbox except as may be provided herein. City shall not be liable for any damage to or loss of Licensee's Fiber or the Pullbox unless such damage or loss is caused by the gross negligence or willful misconduct of City. Any damage to or destruction of the Licensed Conduit, or any damage to the public right-of-way or other public property or improvement, caused directly or indirectly by Licensee, shall be promptly repaired at Licensee's sole cost and expense, to the complete satisfaction of City. If Licensee fails to repair the damage after receiving Agenda Item 6K 119 notice from City or if an emergency necessitates immediate repair of the damage, City may, in its reasonable discretion, choose to perform the repair work itself, in which case Licensee shall reimburse City for the full costs of the repair or replacement work within thirty (30) days after receiving a statement detailing such costs. If the Licensed Conduit or Licensee's Fiber is damaged or destroyed, Licensee may elect to terminate this Agreement as of the date of the damage or destruction by giving notice to City no more than forty-five (45) days following the date of such damage or destruction; but in no circumstance shall such termination relieve Licensee of its obligations under this Section. City shall have no obligation to maintain the Licensed Conduit, or to repair or replace any portion of the Licensed Conduit that may be damaged or destroyed. 6.0 Utilities. Licensee shall be responsible for and pay for all utility costs associated with Licensee's use of the License Conduit, and shall be responsible directly to the serving utility companies for all utilities required for Licensee's use of the Licensed Conduit. Licensee acknowledges City has made no warranties or representations that Licensee shall be provided uninterrupted utility service. 7.0 Noninterference. City shall provide Licensee with written notice of any proposed installation of additional fiber optic cable or other telecommunication medium within the Conduit. Such notice shall include technical information from the party proposing such installation which is sufficient for Licensee to evaluate whether the installation will interfere with the operation of Licensee's Fiber. Licensee shall advise City within fifteen (15) days of receipt of such notice whether the proposed use will cause interference with the operation of Licensee's Fiber. City shall not permit any use of the Licensed Conduit if such new use would interfere with the operation of Licensee's Fiber. 8.0 Conformance to Applicable Laws or Regulations. Licensee shall keep fully informed and in compliance with all applicable statutes, ordinances, rules, regulations, orders, and decisions issued by any federal, state, or local governmental body or agency, including without limitation those issued by the California Public Utilities Commission and Federal Communications Commission ("Standards"). Licensee shall at all times be in full compliance with all Standards, present or future. Licensee shall indemnify City, in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, for all liability and costs incurred by City as a result of Licensee's failure to comply with such Standards. Licensee's indemnification obligation under this provision shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 9.0 Abandonment. Should Licensee at any time abandon the use of the Licensed Conduit or Pulibox, or any part thereof, or fail at any time for a continuous period of six (6) months to use the same for the purposes contemplated by this Agreement, then City may terminate this Agreement in accordance with Agenda Item 6K 120 Section 10.0 to the extent of the portion so abandoned or discontinued. In addition to any other rights or remedies, City shall immediately be entitled to exclusive possession and ownership of the portion so abandoned or discontinued, without the encumbrance of this Agreement. 10.0 Termination. This Agreement may be terminated on thirty (30) days prior written notice as follows: (i) by either Party upon a default of any covenant or term in this Agreement by the other Party, which default is not cured within sixty (60) days of receipt of written notice of default, provided the grace period for any monetary default is fifteen (15) days from receipt of notice; or (ii) by Licensee if it does not obtain or maintain any permits, authorization, or approval necessary for the construction and operation of Licensee's Fiber; or (iii) by Licensee if Licensee determines the Licensed Conduit is not appropriate for its operations for economic or technological reasons, including, without limitation, signal interference; or (iv) by City if the Licensed Conduit is damaged or destroyed and the use of Licensed Conduit contemplated under this Agreement is no longer possible; or (v) by either Party as may be provided elsewhere in this Agreement. 11.0 Surrender of Conduit. Upon the expiration of this Agreement at the end of the Term, or whenever Licensee is required to surrender the License Conduit to City due to abandonment, destruction, termination of this Agreement or for any other reason, Licensee shall promptly, safely, and carefully remove all Licensee's Fiber from the Licensed Conduit and return the Licensed Conduit to City in the condition in which the Licensed Conduit existed immediately prior to installation of Licensee's Fiber, normal wear and tear excepted. If Licensee fails to commence performing the work required by this Section within thirty (30) days from date Licensee is determined to have abandoned the Licensed Conduit and written notice thereof to Licensee, or thirty (30) days following the expiration of the notice period under Section 10.0, and if Licensee or fails to diligently perform all work required by this Section to its completion, then City shall have the right to perform such work. In such event, City shall not be liable to Licensee for any damage or destruction of Licensee's Fiber, and Licensee shall reimburse City for all costs and expenses incurred by City in performing such work, within fifteen (15) days after a bill is rendered to Licensee. Upon receipt of payment City shall promptly return Licensee's Fiber and other equipment removed by City pursuant to this Section. The provisions of this Section shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement. 12.0 Relocation. City shall have the right to provide six (6) months prior written notice to Licensee of City's desire to relocate the Licensed Conduit. Following delivery and receipt of such notice, City and Licensee shall use their best efforts to identify an alternate location in the City's rights -of -way or other property owned by City acceptable to Licensee, for relocation of Licensed Conduit. Such Agenda Item 6K 121 relocation shall be performed at City's sole cost and expense; provided, however, that in the event such relocation is due to maintenance or replacement of any facilities that were installed prior to the Effective Date of this Agreement, Licensee and City shall equally share the cost and expense of relocating the Licensed Conduit. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, City shall not be liable to Licensee or any third party for any claims or damages for lost wages, lost profits, or other incidental or consequential damages arising out of the relocation of the Licensed Conduit in accordance with this section. 13.0 No Warranties of Fitness or Suitability. Licensee acknowledges that City has made no warranties or representations regarding the fitness or suitability of any of the Licensed Conduit for the installation of Licensee's Fiber or for Licensee's intended use of the Licensed Conduit. Except as expressly provided for elsewhere in this Agreement, any performance of work or costs incurred by Licensee for the uses contemplated under this Agreement by Licensee is at Licensee's sole risk and expense. 14.0 Warranty of Title. City warrants that is owns good and sufficient title to and interest in the Licensed Conduit, and City has the full right, power, and authority to execute deliver and perform this Agreement. 15.0 No Interference. Except as permitted by this Agreement, Licensee shall not interfere in any manner with the existence and use of any public or private right-of-way, sanitary sewer, water main, storm drain, gas main, pole, ariel, electrical or telephone wire, electrolier, cable television, or other telecommunications, utility, or municipal property, without the express written approval of the owner of the affected property. Licensee shall use the Licensed Conduit in a manner that does not create a danger to, or interfere with, the public's prior and superior use of the public rights -of -way within which the License Conduit is located. 16.0 Subordinate Rights. This Agreement is subject and subordinate to the prior and future rights and obligations of City, its successors and assigns, to use the affected rights -of -way in the exercise of its powers and in the performance of its municipal functions, provided that the foregoing not unreasonably interfere with Licensee's use of the Licensed Conduit as provided in this Agreement. Accordingly, there is reserved and retained unto City, its successors, assigns, grantees, and permittees, the right to construct and reconstruct facilities and appurtenances in, upon, over, under, across, and along the Licensed Conduit or the affected public rights -of -way, and in connection therewith, the right to grant and convey to others, rights and interests to such property, provided that the foregoing not unreasonably interfere with Licensee's use of the Licensed Conduit as provided in this Agreement. This Agreement is subject to all licenses, leases, easements, Agenda Item 6K 122 restrictions, conditions, covenants, encumbrances, liens, claims, and other matters of title which may affect the Licensed Conduit or affected public rights -of -way as of the Effective Date. 17.0 Indemnification. Licensee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers, from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liability, loss, damage, injury, or death, to persons or property, whether imposed by a court of law or an administrative action of any federal, state, or local governmental body or agency, arising out of or incident to any acts, errors, omissions, or willful misconduct by Licensee, its personnel, employees, agents, or subcontractors pursuant to this Agreement, including the installation, erection, maintenance, operation, or removal of any improvements made by Licensee, its personnel, employees, agents, or subcontractors. This indemnification includes, without limitation, the payment of all penalties, fines, judgments, awards, decrees, attorneys fees, and related costs or expenses, and the reimbursement of City, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and/or volunteers for all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them. Licensee's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by City, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, or volunteers, and such obligation shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement. 18.0 Insurance. 18.1 Types; Amounts. License shall obtain, and shall require any subcontractor to obtain, insurance in the amounts described below unless specifically altered or waived by City in writing ("Required Insurance"). Alternatively, Licensee may provide City with certificates of self-insurance meeting the requirements set forth herein. If any of the Required Insurance contains a general aggregate limit, such insurance shall apply separately to this Agreement or be no less than two times the specified occurrence limit. (i) General Liability Insurance. Licensee shall maintain occurrence version general liability insurance, or equivalent form, with a combined single limit of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence. (ii) "All Risk" Property Insurance. Licensee shall maintain a policy of property insurance for perils usual to a standard "all risk" insurance policy (including earthquakes and floods if requested by City in writing) for the installation of Licensee's Fiber in the Licensed Conduit and the Agenda Item 6K 123 Pullbox, with limits equal to the value of all such improvements or installations. 18.2 General Provisions. The Required Insurance shall name City, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers as additional insureds. The Required Insurance shall be primary with respect to any insurance or self- insurance programs covering City, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers, or if in excess stand in an unbroken chain of coverage in excess of Licensee's scheduled underlying coverage. The Required Insurance shall contain standard separation of insureds provisions, and shall contain no special limitations on the scope of its protection to City, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers. 18.3 Certificates; Insurer Rating; Cancellation Notice. Prior to any work being undertaken pursuant to this Agreement, Licensee shall furnish to City properly executed certificates of insurance or (if applicable) self-insurance, and if requested, certified copies of endorsements and policies which evidence all Required Insurance. Licensee shall maintain the Required Insurance at all times while this Agreement is in effect, and shall replace any certificate, policy, or endorsement which will expire prior to that date. All policies shall be endorsed to provide the Required Insurance shall not be suspended, voided, reduced, canceled, or allowed to expire except on thirty (30) days' prior written notice to City. Unless approved in writing by City, Licensee shall place the Required Insurance with insurers licensed to do business in the State of California and with a current A.M. Best rating of at least A:VIII. 19.0 Hazardous Substances. Licensee agrees that it will not use, generate, store or dispose of any Hazardous Material on, under, about or within the Licensed Conduit or affected City rights -of -way in violation of any law or regulation. City represents, warrants and agrees (i) that neither City nor, to City's knowledge, any third party has used, generated, stored or disposed of, or permitted the use, generation, storage or disposal of, any Hazardous Material on, under, about or within the Licensed Conduit or affected City rights -of -way in violation of any law or regulation, and (ii) that City will not, and will not permit any third party to use, generate, store or dispose of any Hazardous Material on, under, about or within the Licensed Conduit or affected City rights -of -way in violation of any law or regulation. City and Licensee each agree to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the other and the other's officials, directors, affiliates, agents, and employees against any and all losses, liabilities, claims and/or costs (including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs) arising from any breach of any representation, warranty, or agreement contained in this Section. As used in this Section, "Hazardous Material" shall mean petroleum or any petroleum product, asbestos, or any substance known by the State of California to cause cancer/or reproductive Agenda Item 6K 124 toxicity, and/or any substance, chemical or waste that is identified as hazardous, toxic or dangerous in any applicable federal, state or local law or regulation. This Section shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement. 20.0 Transfer or Change in Use. Neither this Agreement, nor any facility installed, owned, controlled, operated, or managed by Licensee, shall be sold, transferred, leased, licensed, assigned, or disposed of in whole or in part, either by involuntary or voluntary sale, merger, consolidation, stock transfer, transfer in trust, or otherwise, without the prior written consent of City. Any proposed transferee must agree to comply with all provisions of this Agreement. Any authorized transferee under this Section must sign an acknowledgment with City that such transferee understands and shall comply with each and every provision of this Agreement. 21.0 Miscellaneous Terms. 21.1 This Agreement shall not be construed to convey any right, title, or interest in any public right-of-way, but shall be deemed an agreement only to use and occupy the Licensed Conduit for the limited purposes stated herein. 21.2 Any privilege claimed by Licensee in any public right-of-way shall be subordinate to any prior lawful occupancy of the public right-of-way. 21.3 Authority to Enter Agreement. Each Party warrants that the individuals who have signed this Agreement have the legal power, right, and authority make this Agreement and bind each respective Party. 21.4 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. 21.5 Notice. All notices, demands, invoices, and written communications to required to be provided under this Agreement, shall be delivered at following addresses or such other addresses as Parties may designate by written notice: To City: City of Corona Attn: Public Works Director 815 West Sixth Street Corona, California 91720 Tel: (909) 736-2447 Fax: (909) 736-2496 Agenda Item 6K 125 To Licensee: RCTC 3560 University Avenue Attn: Executive Director Tel: (909) 787-7141 Fax: (909) 787-7920 Depending on the method of transmittal, notice shall be deemed received as follows: by facsimile, as of the date and time sent; by messenger, as of the date delivered; and by U.S. Mail first class postage prepaid, as of seventy-two (72) hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail. 21.6 Construction; Captions. It being agreed the Parties or their agents have participated in the preparation of this Agreement, the language of this Agreement shall be construed simply, according to its fair meaning, and not strictly for or against any Party. Any term referencing time, days, or period for performance shall be deemed calendar days and not work days. The captions of the various articles and sections are for convenience and ease of reference only, and do not define, limit, augment, or describe the scope, content, or intent of this Agreement. 21.7 Amendment; Modification. No supplement, modification, or amendment of this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing and signed by the Parties. Any valid supplement, modification, or amendment of this Agreement shall have no effect on any other provision of this Agreement, including all indemnity requirements. 21.8 Waiver. No waiver of any default shall constitute a waiver of any other default or breach, whether of the same or other covenant or condition. No waiver, benefit, privilege, or service voluntarily given or performed by a Party shall give the other Party any contractual right by custom, estoppel, or otherwise. 21.9 Binding Effect. Each and all of the covenants and conditions shall be binding on and shall inure to the benefit of the Parties, and their successors, heirs, personal representatives, or assigns. This section shall not be construed as an authorization for any Party to assign any right or obligation. 21.10 No Third Party Beneficiaries. There are no intended third party beneficiaries of any right or obligation assumed by the Parties. 21.11 Invalidity; Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is declared invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect. Agenda Item 6K 126 21 .12 Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California. Any lawsuit brought in connection with this Agreement shall be brought in the appropriate court in the County of Riverside, California. 21.13 Attorneys' Fees and Costs. If any legal action or other proceeding is brought in connection with this Agreement, the successful or prevailing Party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and other related costs, in addition to any other relief to which the Party is entitled. 21.14 Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement, and the Parties agree to execute all documents and proceed with due diligence to complete all covenants and conditions. 21.15 Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original and which collectively shall constitute one instrument. 21.16 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the Parties and supersedes any prior oral or written statements or agreements between the Parties. [signatures of parties on next page] Agenda Item 6K 127 CITY OF CORONA, CALIFORNIA By: By: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (signature) (signature) (print name) (print name) Its: Its: (title) (title) ATTEST: ATTEST: By: By: (signature) (signature) (print name) (print name) Its: Its: (title) (title) Agenda Item 6K 128 II EXHIBIT A MAP OF PROPOSED FIBER OPTIC CABLE INSTALLATION IN LICENSED CONDUIT AND AFFECTED RIGHTS -OF -WAY [ATTACHED BEHIND THIS PAGE] Agenda Item 6K 129 II AGENDA ITEM 6L • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Tanya Love, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2004 Federal Transit Administration's Section 5307 Program of Projects STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the Federal Transit Administration's Section 5307 Program of Projects for Riverside County for FY 2004; and, 2) Authorize SCAG to add $78,340 in projects to the Los Angeles urbanized area's Program of Projects for the Riverside Transit Agency. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Annually, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) distributes federal operating and capital block grant funds to urbanized areas through its Section 5307 Program. There are four urbanized areas in Riverside County: Western Riverside County; Hemet -San Jacinto; Temecula-Murrieta; and Indio -Cathedral City -Palm Springs. In order for grants from these funds to be approved, the Commission must develop a Program of Projects for each area and approve the programs. In addition to the four urbanized areas, approximately $78,340 in funding is available to the Riverside Transit Agency from the Los Angeles urbanized area. Staff from the Southern California Association of Governments will add RTA to the Los Angeles area Program of Projects if Commission approval is granted. RTA is requesting to use those funds to reduce its debt service for the 57 buses purchased in FY 2001. The actual apportionment for FY 2004 will not be known until later this calendar year when final appropriations are made by Congress. The Programs were developed at the highest anticipated amount to allow the operators to proceed with filing their grant applications and to avoid delays, program amendments and additional paperwork if the actual apportionments are in fact lower than estimated. Agenda Item 6L 130 Program of Projects for three of the four urbanized areas in Riverside County are attached for review and approval. The proposed Program of Projects contains projects taken from the approved Short Range Transit Plans for FY 2004-06 and were developed in cooperation with the eligible public transit operators. Balances, if any, will be carried over to the next fiscal year. Once the internal audit for SunLine Transit Agency is completed, a Program of Projects for the Indio -Cathedral City -Palm Springs UZA will be presented together with the SRTP for SunLine Transit Agency. Attachment: Fiscal Year 2004 Program of Projects Agenda Item 6L 131 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PROGRAM OF PROJECTS FTA SECTION 5307 Fiscal Year 2004 URBANIZED AREA: Total Apportionment (projected) Riverside - San Bernardino $10,946,254 Bus Rail Apportionment $6,843,244 $4,771,163 Carryover $3,885,007 $8,844,611 Transfer of Funds (CMAQ) $0 $0 Total Funds Available $10,728,251 $13,615,774 Less Current Requests $7,683,953 $7,064,000 Balance: $3,044,298 $5,551,774 SUB AREA TOTAL TOTAL RECIPIENTS APPORTIONMENT BUS RAIL Corona, City of $324,000 $324,000 $0 Riverside, City of $236,000 $236,000 $0 Riverside Transit Agency $7,123,953 $7,123,953 $0 RCTC's Commuter Rail $7,064,000 $0 $7,064,000 TOTAL: ALL RECIPIENTS $14,747,953 $7,683,953 $7,064,000 NO. PROGRAM OF PROJECTS 1) Corona: Dial -A -Ride Replacement Buses -2 (RIV 030601) 2) Corona: Mobile Data Terminal and Automatic Vehicle Locator for 14 Transit Vehicles (RIV 030602) TOTAL FEDERAL PROJECT DESIGNATED AMOUNT SHARE TYPE RECIPIENT $140,000 $116,000 C SCAG $100,000 $80,000 C SCAG 3) Corona: Capitalized Preventative Maintenance (RIV 030603) $160,000 $128,000 C SCAG 4) Riverside: Dial -A -Ride Replacement Vehicle (RIV 030604) $70,000 $58,000 C SCAG 5) Riverside: Capitalized Preventative Maintenance (RIV 030605) $100,000 $80,000 C SCAG 6) Riverside: Dial -A -Ride Expansion Vehicle (RIV 030606) $90,000 $74,000 C SCAG 7) Riverside: Office Equipment, Vehicle Location Equipment, Software and Miscellaneous Items (RIV 010905) $30,000 8) RTA: Debt Service for 57 Buses Purchased in FY 01 (RIV 030626) $2,654,516 9) RTA: Capitalized Preventative Maintenance (RIV 030608) $2,500,000 10) RTA: Facility Improvements at Hemet and Riverside (RIV 030609) $457,600 11) RTA: Bus Stop Amenities (benches, signs, shelters) (RIV 030610) $500,000 12) RTA: Office Equipment (RIV 030611) $116,000 13) RTA: Aerial Mapping Software (RIV 030612) $10,000 14) RTA: Automated Traveler Information System at Bus Stops (RIV 030613) $1,000,000 15) RTA: Dial -A -Ride Vehicles: 5 expansion (RIV 030614) $700,000 and 8 replacement (RIV 030615) 16) RTA: Automatic Passenger Counting System (RIV 030616) 17) RTA: Project Studies: 1) Compensation and Benefits Study and 2) Fare Study Analysis (RIV 030617) $24,000 $1,789,273 $2,000,000 $366,080 $400,000 $92,800 $8,000 $800,000 $581,000 C C C C C C C C C SCAG SCAG SCAG SCAG SCAG SCAG SCAG SCAG SCAG $50,000 $40,000 C SCAG $201,000 $160,800 C SCAG 18) RTA: ADP Software (RIV 030618) $635,000 8508,000 C SCAG 19) RTA: Shop Equipment: Four Post Portable Electric Lift and a Fall Protection Tool (RIV 030619) $30,000 $24,000 C SCAG 20) RTA: Trade Show Presentation Booth Accessories, Consulting Services and Display Designs $30,000 $24,000 C SCAG 21) RTA Support Vehicles: 1 Utility Truck, 9 Support Vehicles and 4 Supervisor Vans (replacement) (RIV 030621) $300,500 $240,400 C SCAG 22) RTA: Surveillance Security Cameras at the Hemet and Riverside Facilities (RIV 030622) $100,000 $80,000 C SCAG 23) RTA: Survey Costs: Title VI Requirement $12,000 $9,600 C SCAG 24) RCTC: SCRRA Rehab/Renovation - RCTC's FY 04 Share $892,000 $892,000 C SCAG 25) RCTC: Eastern Area Maintenance Facility - Phase 1 $1,843,000 $1,843,000 C SCAG 26) RCTC: SCRRA Rolling Stock - 18 Cars - Expansion $4,329,000 $4,329,000 C SCAG 7/22/2003 4:00 PM Approved: 7/28/03 132 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PROGRAM OF PROJECTS FTA SECTION 5307 Fiscal Year 2004 'URBANIZED AREA: Total Apportionment (projected) Hemet/San Jacinto $1,496,905 Bus Apportionment $1,496,905 Carryover $772,561 Transfer of Funds (CMAQ) $0 Total Funds Available $2,269,466 Less Current Requests $2,172,330 Balance: $97,136 RECIPIENTS Riverside Transit Agency SUB AREA APPORTIONMENT S2,172,330 NO. PROGRAM OF PROJECTS TOTAL FEDERAL PROJECT DESIGNATED AMOUNT SHARE TYPE RECIPIENT 1) RTA: Operating Assistance - Fixed Route and Dial -A -Ride (RIV 030607) $34,613,251 $2,172,330 0 Caltrans 7/22/20034:00 PM Approved: 7/28/03 133 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PROGRAM OF PROJECTS FTA SECTION 5307 Fiscal Year 2004 I1 URBANIZED AREA: Total Apportionment (projected) Temecula/Murrieta $1,247,633 Bus Apportionment $1,247,633 Carryover $1,247,633 Transfer of Funds (CMAQ) $0 Total Funds Available $2,495,266 Less Current Requests $1,247,633 Balance: $1,247,633 RECIPIENTS Riverside Transit Agency SUB AREA APPORTIONMENT $1,247,533 J NO. PROGRAM OF PROJECTS TOTAL FEDERAL PROJECT DESIGNATED AMOUNT SHARE TYPE RECIPIENT 1) RTA: Operating Assistance - Fixed Route and Dial -A -Ride (RIV 030607) $34,613,251 $1,247,633 0 Caltrans Note: $1,247,633 available for operating during FY 04, This applies only to FY 04 due to the area changing from a small UZA to a large UZA. 7/22/20034:00 PM Approved: 7/28/03 134 II AGENDA ITEM 6M • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Tanya Love, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director Fiscal Years 2001-2003 Performance Audit SUBJECT: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Authorize the release of a Request for Proposal to conduct a performance audit of the Riverside County Transportation Commission's activities and the seven public transit operators providing services in Riverside County; and, 2) Direct the Audit Ad Hoc Committee to select the consultant to conduct the audits. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In accordance with Public Utilities Code 99246, the Commission is required to designate an entity other than itself to conduct a performance audit of its activities and the activities of each operator to whom we allocate funds. The audits are required to evaluate the efficiency, effectiveness and economy of the Commission and the public transit operators. The audits must be conducted in accordance with the guidelines set by the State Comptroller General's Office. These audits are required every three years and our next audit must be completed by June 30, 2004. The audits will cover FY 2000-01, 2001-02, and 2002-03 and will include the Commission and the seven public operators: City of Banning, City of Beaumont, City of Corona, City of Riverside Special Services, Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency, Riverside Transit Agency, and SunLine Transit Agency. -; A draft Request for Proposal is attached. Cost for both the Commission audit and the seven public operators should not exceed $ 100,000 and will be paid for with Local Transportation Funds. Agenda Item 6M 135 Financial Information i Fiscal Year Budget: 11 Year: FY 03 04 Amount: $100,000 Source of Funds: Local Transportation Funds GLA No.: 106-62-65401 Budget Adjustment: N Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 07/17/2003 Attachment: Draft Request for Proposal Agenda Item 6M 136 TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDIT OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSIT OPERATORS SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) is soliciting proposals to conduct a performance audit of 1) the Commission's activities and 2) seven public transit operators providing services in Riverside County. The Commission is statutorily required by Section 99246 of the California Public Utilities Code to designate entities other than itself to make a performance audit as a condition for receiving Transportation Development Act funds. In addition, the activities of each operator to whom it allocates funds must also be audited. The performance audits will cover fiscal years 01, 02 and 03. The audits must be completed and submitted to the State by June 30, 2004, and must be conducted in compliance with relevant sections of the Transportation Development Act. The audits shall evaluate the efficiency, effectiveness, and economy of the operation of the entity being audited and shall be conducted in accordance with the efficiency, economy and program results portion of the Controller General's "Standards for Audit of Governmental Organizations, Programs, Activities and Functions". The Commission further expects that the performance audits will be conducted consistent with the "Performance Audit Guidebook for Transit Operators and Regional Transportation Planning Entities" issued by the California Department of Transportation. A listing of all operators to be audited is included as Attachment A to this RFP. CONTACT PERSON Prospective proposers shall direct any questions regarding this request for proposal to Tanya Love, Program Manager at (909) 787-7141. SCHEDULE July 29, 2003 August 29, 2003 September 4, 2003 September 22, 2003 October 8, 2003 October 9, 2003 December 9, 2003 January 9, 2004 January 26, 2004 February 11, 2004 RFP Issued Proposals Due to the Commission (by 4 p.m.) Interview of Finalists (Optional) Plans and Program Committee Commission Selects Consultant Notice to Proceed Issued and Work Commences Consultant Submits Draft Audit Report Consultant Submits Final Audit Report Plans and Program Committee Performance Audits Presented to the Commission 137 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Proposers must submit 8 copies of their technical and cost proposal, sealed, and clearly marked "Riverside County Transportation Commission Performance Audits" on or before Friday, August 29, 2003 at 4:00 p.m. The envelope must also be marked clearly with the proposer's name, address, and telephone number, and with a contact person's name. The Commission will not accept proposals submitted after the designated lime or date. Postmarks will not be accepted. Late proposals will be returned unopened. PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND SELECTION A proposal review panel will evaluate the proposals and determine the necessity for oral interviews. The operators to be audited will be consulted prior to contractor selection. The Commission reserves the right to select a consultant based solely on the written proposals and not convene oral interviews. However, please keep in mind that there will be a very short time period between proposal evaluations and the decision for interviews. Please keep September 4, 2003 open in case you are called to interview. The evaluation criteria that will be used in the selection process are as follows: 1 • • Understanding of the purpose and requirements of the audit; Experience in public transit, performance auditing, and the issues and functional areas to be analyzed; Approach to be followed and the tasks to be performed, including detailed steps and resources required, and proposed project schedule; Relative allocation of resources, in terms of quality and quantity, to key tasks; and Education and specific experience of the project team. PROPOSAL CONTENT AND ORGANIZATION 1) Transmittal Letter The transmittal letter should include the name, title, address, phone, fax number, e- mail address and original signature of an individual with authority to negotiate on behalf of and to contractually bind the proposer. 2) Table of Contents The Table of Contents should include a listing of the major sections in the proposal and the associated page number. 3) Introduction In this section, the Proposer should demonstrate an adequate understanding of the roles and relationships of the Commission, the operators, and local conditions within Riverside County. 138 4) Audit Plan and Technical Approach The audit plan should include: a. A description of the overall audit program being submitted, including an explanation of the basic purpose and focus of the audit. b. A thorough explanation of the proposer's approach to the audits. References should be made to the RFP requirements and the consultant's plans for meeting those requirements. Please specify staff to be interviewed, documents to be reviewed, etc. c. An explanation of the consultant's intended role as auditor, as related to the role of RCTC and the operators, including the division of work between RCTC staff, if any, and the consultant. d. An itemized description of the proposed project schedule, and the end projects to be produced. 5) Project Management The Proposer must prepare an explanation of the project management system and practices to be used to assure that the project is completed within the scheduled time frame and that the quality of the required products will meet RCTC's requirements. 6) Staffing The proposal must describe the qualifications and experience of each professional who will participate in the project, including a resume for each member of the project team. A Project Manager must be designated, and an organizational chart showing the manager and all project staff must be included. A matrix must be presented indicating the effort, in man-hours, which will be contributed by each professional, during each phase or task making up the project. 7) Consultant Qualifications and Reference The proposal must describe the nature and outcome of projects previously conducted by the consultant which are related to the work described within this RFP. Descriptions should include a client contact name, address, phone number, a description of the type of work performed, approximate date on which work was completed, and professional staff who performed on the project. 8) Cost Proposal In addition to a technical proposal, the prospective contractor shall prepare a detailed cost proposal for the work to be performed. The cost proposal shall itemize all items that will be charged to the Commission including travel expenses that will 139 be involved in the project and included in the bid amount. Costs shall be segregated to show staff hours, rates and classifications, and administrative overhead. DESCRIPTION OF PERFORMANCE AUDIT PROJECT REQUIREMENTS Commission Audit: Determine Compliance with Legal and Regulatory Requirements Follow-up on Prior Performance Audit Recommendations Detailed Review of Commission Functions and critique the current operation Interview staff and key individuals Transit Operators: Determine Compliance with Legal and Regulatory Requirements Follow -Up on Prior Performance Audit Recommendations Verify Performance Indicators Review Operator Functions REQUIRED DELIVERABLES On or before December 9, 2003, the consultant shall provide copies of the management audit and transit operator draft reports for review and comment prior to finalization. After the Commission and the operators review and comment upon the draft, the consultant shall deliver 60 copies of the final report. Scheduled date for final report is January 9, 2004. The consultant should be prepared to make an oral presentation of the reports to the Riverside County Transportation Commission's Plans and Programs Committee at their meeting on January 26, 2004 and at the Commission's meeting on February 11, 2004. BUDGET AND PAYMENT SCHEDULE The consultant will be paid based on work actually performed. A copy of all invoices for payment should include record of work completed to date and all associated expenses. Ten percent of the total payment will be withheld until the successful completion of the project and delivery and acceptance of all final products. For consultant budgeting purposes, the Commission paid $66,230,000 for the previous RCTC and transit operators' audits. AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES (MODEL CONTRACT) Proposers are encouraged to review the model contract prior to preparing their proposal. Exceptions to the language contained in the Model Contract should be noted in the proposal. 140 Exhibit A Riverside County Transit Operators CITY OF BANNING Service Area: Type of Service: Days of Service: Hours of Service: FY 03 Operating Budget: CITY OF BEAUMONT Service Area: Type of Service: Days of Service: Hours of Service: FY 03 Operating Budget: CITY OF CORONA Service Area: Type of Service: Days of Service: Hours of Service: FY 03 Operating Budget: City of Banning Fixed routes (2) and elderly & handicapped Bial- a -ride service, complementary paratransit Monday -Saturday 6:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m., Monday -Friday 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., Saturday $857,369 City of Beaumont and Cherry Valley General public dial -a -ride and fixed route Monday -Friday 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. $860,000 City of Corona and the adjacent unincorporated areas of Home Gardens, El Cerrito and Coronita. General public and complimentary paratransit dial -a -ride and fixed routes (2) Monday -Saturday 4:30 a.m. - 8:15 p.m., Monday -Friday (varies depending on the service) 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., Saturday for dial -a -ride $1,282,000 CITY OF RIVERSIDE - SPECIAL SERVICES Service Area: Type of Service: Days of Service: Hours of Service: FY 03 Operating Budget: City of Riverside Dial -a -ride for seniors and persons with disabilities 7 Days/week 8:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m., Monday -Thursday 8:00 a.m. - 8:30 p.m., Friday 9:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m., Saturday and Sunday $1,755,000 Page 2 of 2 141 PALO VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY Service Area: Type of Service: Days of Service: Hours of Service: FY 03 Operating Budget: RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY Service Area: Type of Service: Days of Service: Hours of Service: FY 03 Operating Budget: SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY Service Area: Type of Service: Days of Service: Hours of Service: FY 03 Operating Budget: City of Blythe and adjacent unincorporated area General public dial -a -ride, fixed route and mileage reimbursement program Sunday -Saturday 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., Monday — Friday 8:30 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday $501,435 Western Riverside County Local and intercity fixed routes (40), local dial -a -ride services (14), and complementary paratransit services. 5-7 days per week, depending on service 4:15 a.m. - 11:00 p.m., depending on service and day of week $31,527,681 Coachella Valley Local and intercity fixed routes (12), plus SunLink Commuter Service from the Coachella Valley to Riverside and intercity dial -a -ride services for seniors and persons with disabilities and complementary paratransit. 5-7 days per week, depending on service 5:00 a.m. - 11:25 p.m., depending on type of service and day of week $16,059,000 Page 2 of 2 142 AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES TO CONDUCT THE COMMISSION AND TRANSIT OPERATOR PERFORMANCE AUDITS PURSUANT TO PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE SECTION 99246 This Agreement is made and entered into this day of , 2003, by and between the Riverside County Transportation Commission (hereinafter referred to as "RCTC") and (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT"). RECITALS WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is a professional consultant, experienced in providing performance auditing services to public clients and familiar with the plans of RCTC; and WHEREAS, RCTC is required by Public Utilities Code Section 99246(a) to designate an entity other than itself, a transportation planning agency or an operator to make a performance audit of itself and those of its operators located in the area under its jurisdiction to whom it directs the allocation of funds (hereinafter the "Transit Operators"). A complete list of Riverside County Operators is described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, Public Utilities Code Section 99246(b) also requires the performance audit to evaluate the efficiency, effectiveness and economy of the operation of the Commission and Transit Operators; and WHEREAS, Public Utilities Code Section 99246(b) also requires the audit to be conducted in accordance with the efficiency, economy and program results portion of the Comptroller General's "Standard for Audit of Governmental Organizations, Programs, Activities and Functions"; and WHEREAS, RCTC further requires the audit to be conducted in accordance with the "Performance Audit Guidebook for Transit Operators and Regional Transportation Planning Entities issued by the California Department of Transportation; and WHEREAS, RCTC issued a Request for Proposals ("RFP") for the Services provided herein on July 29, 2003; and WHEREAS, RCTC has determined, based upon the evaluation criteria stated in the RFP, that CONSULTANT is best suited to provide the Services stated herein; and WHEREAS, RCTC desires to engage CONSULTANT to render the certain consulting Services as set forth herein. 143 SECTION I SERVICES OF THE CONSULTANT; TERM 1. General Scope of Services. CONSULTANT shall provide professional consulting services regarding the performance audit of the Commission and Transit Operators required by Public Utilities Code Section 99246 (hereinafter referred to as "Services"). The Services are more particularly described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 2. Commencement of Services/Term. The CONSULTANT has commenced work upon receipt of a written Notice to Proceed from RCTC dated . The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of issuance of the Notice to Proceed by RCTC to the date of completion of Services and resolution of any disputes, or until termination of this Agreement as provided herein. All applicable indemnification provisions of this Agreement shall remain in effect following termination of this Agreement. 3. RCTC's Representative. RCTC's Executive Director, or his designee, shall serve as RCTC's Representative and shall have the authority to act on behalf of RCTC for all purposes under this Agreement. RCTC's Representative shall also review and give approval, as needed, to the details of CONSULTANT's work as it progresses. 4. CONSULTANT's Representative. CONSULTANT hereby designates as CONSULTANT's Representative to RCTC. CONSULTANT's Representative shall have the authority to act on behalf of CONSULTANT for all purposes under this Agreement and shall coordinate all phases of the Services. CONSULTANT shall work closely and cooperate fully with RCTC's Representative and any other agencies which may have jurisdiction over or an interest in the Services. CONSULTANT's Representative shall be available to RCTC' s staff at all reasonable times. Any substitution in CONSULTANT's Representative shall be approved in writing by RCTC's Representative. Specifically, as further described in Exhibit "C ", CONSULTANT is required to make an oral presentation regarding its final audit reports to RCTC's Commissioners during the meeting at which the reports are presented. 5. Appearance at Hearings. If and when required by RCTC, CONSULTANT shall render assistance at public hearings or other meetings related to the Services. Specifically, as further described in Exhibit "C", CONSULTANT is required to make an oral presentation regarding its final audit reports to RCTC's Commissioners during the meeting at which the reports are presented. CONSULTANT agrees to perform and fully complete the Services for the costs set forth in Section 111(1), below. 144 SECTION II RESPONSIBILITIES OF CONSULTANT 1. Control and Payment of Subordinates. RCTC retains CONSULTANT on an independent contractor basis and CONSULTANT is not an employee, agent or representative of RCTC. Any personnel performing the Services under this Agreement on behalf of CONSULTANT shall at all times be under CONSULTANT's exclusive direction and control. CONSULTANT 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. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such additional personnel, including, but not limited to, social security taxes, income tax withholdings, unemployment insurance, and workers' compensation insurance. 2. Conformance to Applicable Requirements. All work prepared by CONSULTANT shall be subject to the approval of RCTC. 3. Substitution of Key Personnel. CONSULTANT has represented to RCTC that certain key personnel will perform and coordinate the Services under this Agreement. Should one or more of such personnel become unavailable, CONSULTANT may substitute other personnel of at least equal competence upon written approval of RCTC. In the event that RCTC and CONSULTANT cannot agree as to the substitution of key personnel, RCTC shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement for cause, pursuant to provisions of Section V of this Agreement. The key personnel for performance of this Agreement are as follows: 4. Coordination of Services. CONSULTANT agrees to work closely with RCTC staff in the performance of Services and shall be available to RCTC's staff, consultants and other staff at all reasonable times. 5. Standard of Care: Licenses. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services under this Agreement in a skillful and competent manner, and in conformance to and consistent with the standards generally recognized as being employed by professionals in the same discipline in the State of California. CONSULTANT shall serve and maintain in force any and all licenses, permits or other approvals necessary for it to carry out the Services. CONSULTANT represents and maintains that it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the Services. 6. Insurance. CONSULTANT shall obtain and shall require its subconsultants to obtain insurance of the types and in the amounts described below and satisfactory to RCTC. A. Commercial General Liability Insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain occurrence version commercial general liability insurance or equivalent form with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. If such insurance contains a general aggregate limit, it shall apply separately to this Agreement or be no less than two times the occurrence limit. Such insurance shall: 145 1) Name RCTC, its officials, officers, employees and agents as insureds with respect to performance of Services. Such insured status shall contain no special limitations on the scope of its protection to the above -listed insureds. 2) Be primary with respect to any insurance or self insurance programs covering RCTC, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and consultants. 3) Contain standard separation of insureds provisions. B. Business Automobile Liability Insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain business automobile liability insurance or equivalent form with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. Such insurance shall include coverage for owned, hired and non -owned automobiles. C. Workers' Compensation Insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain workers' compensation insurance with statutory limits and employers' liability insurance with limits of not less than $1,000,000 per accident at any times during the term of this Agreement during which CONSULTANT may retain employees. D. Certificates/Insurer Rating/Cancellation Notice. 1) CONSULTANT shall, prior to commencement of the Services, furnish to RCTC properly executed certificates of insurance, and certified copies of endorsements, and policies if requested by RCTC, which shall clearly evidence all insurance required in this Section. CONSULTANT shall not allow such insurance to be canceled or allowed to expire except on 30 days' prior to written notice to RCTC. 2) CONSULTANT shall maintain such insurance from the time the Services commence until the Services are completed, except as may be otherwise required by this Section. 3) CONSULTANT shall place insurance with insurers licensed to do business in California. 4) CONSULTANT shall replace certificates, policies and endorsements for any insurance expiring prior to completion of the Services. 7. Schedule of Services. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services in accordance with the Schedule of Services set forth in Exhibit "C," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. In order to facilitate CONSULTANT' s conformance with the Schedule, RCTC shall respond to CONSULTANT's submittals in a timely manner. Upon request of RCTC, CONSULTANT shall provide a more detailed schedule of anticipated performance to meet the Schedule of Services. 146 SECTION III FEES AND PAYMENTS 1. Compensation. CONSULTANT shall receive compensation including reimbursements, for all Services rendered under this Agreement at the rates set forth in Exhibit "D" attached hereto. The total compensation (including labor and expenses) shall not exceed $ for the Commission Audit and Transit Operator Audits without written approval of RCTC's Executive Director. Extra work may be authorized, as described below, and if authorized, will be compensated at the rates and manner set forth in this Agreement. 2. Payment of Compensation. CONSULTANT shall submit to RCTC monthly statements which indicates work completed and hours of services rendered by Consultant in line with the hours allocated for each task in Exhibit "D". The statements 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. RCTC shall, within 45 days of receiving such statements, review the statements and pay ninety percent (90%) of all approved charges thereon. The ten percent (10%) retention shall be withheld by RCTC and paid to CONSULTANT within thirty (30) days following satisfactory completion of the Services. Such completion shall be evidenced by a Notice of Completion, further described in Exhibit "C". No interest shall accrue on the 10% retentions and CONSULTANT shall not be entitled to interest thereon. 3. Reimbursement for Expenses. Eligible expenses for reimbursement are mileage, telephone, supplies, postage, parking, express mail, courier service, graphics and printing. 4. Extra Work. At any time during the term of this Agreement, RCTC may request that CONSULTANT perform Extra Work. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work which the parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the execution of this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not perform, nor be compensated for, Extra Work without written authorization from RCTC's Executive Director. SECTION IV ACCOUNTING RECORDS 1. CONSULTANT shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to costs incurred under this Agreement. Records for the Commission Audit and Transit Operators Audit shall be maintained separately. All such records shall be clearly identifiable. CONSULTANT shall allow a representative of RCTC during normal business hours to examine, audit and make transcripts or copies of such records and any other documents created pursuant to this Agreement. CONSULTANT 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. 147 SECTION V GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. Termination of Agreement. A. RCTC may, by written notice to CONSULTANT, terminate the whole or any part of this Agreement at any time and without cause by giving written notice to CONSULTANT of such termination, and specifying the effective date thereof, at least seven (7) days before the effective date of such termination. Upon termination, CONSULTANT shall be compensated only for those services which have been adequately rendered to RCTC, and CONSULTANT shall be entitled to no further compensation. CONSULTANT may not terminate this Agreement except for cause. B. In the event this Agreement is terminated in whole or in part as provided in paragraph A of this section, RCTC may procure, upon such terms and in such manner as it may determine appropriate, services similar to those terminated. C. If this Agreement is terminated as provided in paragraph A of this section, RCTC may require CONSULTANT to provide all finished or unfinished documents, data, programming source code, reports, etc., prepared by CONSULTANT in connection with the performance of Services under this Agreement. 2. 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: CONSULTANT: RCTC: Eric Haley, Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission P. O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 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. 148 3. Ownership of Materials/Confidentiality. A. Property of RCTC. All materials and data. including data on magnetic media, prepared by CONSULTANT under this Agreement shall become the property of RCTC upon the completion of the term of this Agreement, except that CONSULTANT shall have the right to retain copies of all such documents and data for its records. RCTC shall not be limited in any way in their use of such data at any time, provided that any such use not within the purposes intended by this Agreement shall be at RCTC's sole risk and provided that CONSULTANT shall be indemnified against any damages resulting from such use, including the release of this material to third parties for a use not intended by this Agreement. Should CONSULTANT, either during or following termination of this Agreement, desire to use any materials prepared in connection with this Project, it shall first obtain the written approval of RCTC. B. Confidentiality. All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings, descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other materials described in subsection A either created by or provided to CONSULTANT in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by CONSULTANT. Such materials shall not, without the prior written consent of RCTC, be used by CONSULTANT 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 CONSULTANT which is otherwise known to CONSULTANT or is generally known, or has become known, to the related industry shall be deemed confidential. CONSULTANT shall not use RCTC'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 RCTC. 4. Attorney's Fees. If either party commences an action against the other party 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 suits. 5. Idemnification. CONSULTANT shall defend, indemnify and hold RCTC, its officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any and all liability from loss, damage, or injury to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any negligent acts, omissions or willful misconduct of CONSULTANT arising out of or in connection with CONSULTANT's performance of this AGREEMENT, including without limitation the payment of attorneys' fees. Further, CONSULTANT shall defend at its own expense, including attorneys' fees, RCTC, its officials, officers, employees, and agents in any legal action based upon such negligent acts, omissions or willful misconduct. 149 6. 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. 7. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County. 8. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement. 9. RCTC's Right to Employ Other Consultants. RCTC reserves right to employ other consultants in connection with this Project. 10. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties, and shall not be assigned by CONSULTANT without the prior written consent of RCTC. 11. Prohibited Interests. A. Solicitation. CONSULTANT maintains and warrants that it has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for CONSULTANT, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, CONSULTANT 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 CONSULTANT, 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, RCTC shall have the right to rescind this Agreement without liability. B. Conflict of Interest. For the term of this Agreement, no member, officer or employee of RCTC, during the term of his or her service with RCTC, shall have any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising therefrom. 12. Equal Opportunity Employment. CONSULTANT 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. CONSULTANT shall also comply with all relevant provisions of RCTC's Minority Business Enterprise program, Affirmative Action Plan or other related Commission programs or guidelines currently in effect or hereinafter enacted. 150 SECTION VI SUBCONTRACTING 1. Written Approval. CONSULTANT shall not subcontract any portion of the work required by this Agreement, except as expressly stated herein, without prior written approval of RCTC. 2. Subordination of Subcontract. Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision making them subject to all provisions stipulated in this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement was executed on the date first written above. RIVERSIDE COUNTY CONSULTANT TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: By: Ron Roberts, Chairman Reviewed and Recommended for Approval: By: Eric Haley, Executive Director Approved as to Form: By: Best, Best & Krieger LLP General Counsel 151 Exhibit A Riverside County Transit Operators CITY OF BANNING Service Area: Type of Service: Days of Service: Hours of Service: FY 03 Operating Budget: CITY OF BEAUMONT Service Area: Type of Service: Days of Service: Hours of Service: FY 03 Operating Budget: CITY OF CORONA Service Area: Type of Service: Days of Service: Hours of Service: FY 03 Operating Budget: City of Banning Fixed routes (2) and elderly & handicapped Bial- a -ride service, complementary paratransit Monday -Saturday 6:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m., Monday -Friday 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., Saturday $857,369 City of Beaumont and Cherry Valley General public dial -a -ride and fixed route Monday -Friday 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. $860,000 City of Corona and the adjacent unincorporated areas of Home Gardens, El Cerrito and Coronita. General public and complimentary paratransit dial -a -ride and fixed routes (2) Monday -Saturday 4:30 a.m. - 8:15 p.m., Monday -Friday (varies depending on the service) 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., Saturday for dial -a -ride $1,282,000 CITY OF RIVERSIDE - SPECIAL SERVICES Service Area: Type of Service: Days of Service: Hours of Service: City of Riverside Dial -a -ride for seniors and persons with disabilities 7 Days/week 8:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m., Monday -Thursday 8:00 a.m. - 8:30 p.m., Friday 9:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m., Saturday and Sunday 152 FY 03 Operating Budget: $1,755,000 PALO VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY Service Area: Type of Service: Days of Service: Hours of Service: FY 03 Operating Budget: RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY Service Area: Type of Service: Days of Service: Hours of Service: FY 03 Operating Budget: SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY Service Area: Type of Service: Days of Service: Hours of Service: FY 03 Operating Budget: City of Blythe and adjacent unincorporated area General public dial -a -ride, fixed route and mileage reimbursement program Sunday -Saturday 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., Monday — Friday 8:30 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday $501,435 Western Riverside County Local and intercity fixed routes (40), local dial -a -ride services (14), and complementary paratransit services. 5-7 days per week, depending on service 4:15 a.m. - 11:00 p.m., depending on service and day of week $31,527,681 Coachella Valley Local and intercity fixed routes (12), plus SunLink Commuter Service from the Coachella Valley to Riverside and intercity dial -a -ride services for seniors and persons with disabilities and complementary paratransit. 5-7 days per week, depending on service 5:00 a.m. - 11:25 p.m., depending on type of service and day of week $16,059,000 153 Exhibit B Scope of Services (Note: Copy of the successful consultant's Scope of Work will be attached as Exhibit B and will become part of this contract) 154 Exhibit C Schedule of Services 1) CONSULTANT shall perform its Services so as to ensure that RCTC may submit adequate audit statements to the California Department of Transportation by June 30, 2004. 2) On or before December 9, 2003, CONSULTANT shall submit to RCTC draft reports of its audits of the Commission and Riverside County Transit Operators. Number of copies to be determined. 3) On or before January 9, 2004, CONSULTANT shall submit sixty (60) copies of the Commission and Riverside County Transit Operators' final reports. 4) CONSULTANT is expected and shall be prepared to make an oral presentation regarding its final audit reports to RCTC's Plans and Programs Committee which is scheduled for January 26, 2004 and RCTC's Commission meeting which is scheduled for February 11, 2004. 5) Following the Commissioners' review and acceptance of the final audit reports, RCTC's Representative shall prepare and send, or cause to be prepared and sent, a written Notice of Completion of CONSULTANT's services. 155 Exhibit D Compensation See Attached 156 AGENDA ITEM 6N • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Tanya Love, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Riverside Transit Agency's Request to Reprogram Funds STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to reprogram funds to purchase wheelchair securement devices, purchase up -grade amenities for commuter buses, and to cover in -plant bus delivery inspection fees. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In FY 1996, the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) was approved to receive Measure "A" funding to purchase wheelchair lifts. In addition, in FY 2000, RTA was provided State Transit Assistance Funds (STA) and Local Transportation Funds (LTF) to purchase 37 replacement dial -a -ride vehicles. Both the wheelchair lifts and vans have been purchased. The following table provides a breakdown of the excess funds available for reprogramming by fund type: Measure "A" $23,112 STA $32,498 LTF $33,424 Total $89,034 In order to close out the grants, RTA is requesting that the balance remaining be reprogrammed to purchase wheelchair securement devices, to cover the cost of amenities for ten 30 -foot commuter buses and lastly to cover the expense of in -plant inspection of the new buses. This request was approved by RTA's Board of Directors at their June 26, 2003 meeting. Agenda Item 6N 157 ii AGENDA ITEM 60 • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Tanya Love, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Request from Exceed for Measure "A" Specialized Transit Funds as Match for Fiscal Year 2003 Section 5310 Program STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve allocation of $49,800 in Measure "A" Specialized Transit Funds to Exceed, A Division of Valley Resource Center, to provide the required local match for the purchase of six vehicles. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Exceed was recently notified by Caltrans that they were approved for $249,100 in funding under the Federal Transit Administration's Section 5310 Program for the purchase of two minivans, two small buses, and two large buses. The Section 5310 program provides 80% of the cost of capital projects. Exceed is requesting that the required 20% match ($49,800) be funded from Measure "A" Specialized Transit Funds available in western Riverside County. These funds are specifically set aside, on an annual basis, to provide local match to non-profit operators located in western Riverside County participating in the Section 5310 program. Exceed provides transit assistance to disabled adults with developmental disabilities whose primary diagnosis is mental retardation. Although Exceed coordinates its transportation services with the Riverside Transit Agency, their clients have trouble riding mass transportation due to lack of mobility skills and presence of physical and mental disabilities. Exceed does utilize Care -A -Van services whenever possible. Exceed currently provides 1,322 one-way passenger trips per day. It is projected that with the additional six expansion vehicles, Exceed will provide an additional 202 one-way trips per day. Operating funds for Exceed's transportation services are paid primarily by Inland Regional Center. Other revenue sources include the Department of Rehabilitation, donations and Exceed's general fund. Agenda Item 60 158 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Y Year: FY 03-04 Amount: $49,800 Measure "A" Specialized Transit Source of Funds: Funds Budget Adjustment: N GLA No.: 225-26-86103 Fiscal Procedures Approved: w_ :., :,=t/I-A. , C, Date: 07/17/2003 Agenda Item 60 159 AGENDA ITEM 6P • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Tanya Love, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Measure "A" Specialized Transit: Taxi Demonstration Program STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the implementation of a twelve-month taxi demonstration program; 2) Allocate up to $87,174 in Western Riverside County Measure "A" Specialized Transit Funds to Diversified Paratransit, Inc. (DPI) to cover the administrative costs of the program; 3) Allocate up to $612,826 in Western Riverside County Measure "A" Specialized Transit Funds to the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) to cover the cost of taxi services; and, 4) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission has had a long-time commitment to meeting the special transit needs of seniors and persons with disabilities through its specialized transit grant program. In addition to traditional public dial -a -ride services, the Commission has granted funds to non-profit agencies to provide transit assistance in hard to serve rural areas for inter -community travel, and for riders having very special transit needs. While these programs have been successful over the years in providing improved transit access for western county riders, there are still residents that encounter difficulties in scheduling rides. As indicated by the 2000 census, Riverside County's population is continuing to grow. As stated in the Specialized Transit Study conducted by AMMA, the largest growth in population, with specialized transit needs, is seniors and the disabled. Both segments of the population rely on alternate forms of transportation. Public transit provides needed mobility to access life -maintenance trip purposes (healthcare, groceries, etc.) as well as life -enriching trip purposes (church, social engagements, etc.). Agenda Item 6P 160 Western Riverside County has, in response to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), maintained a transit commitment through RTA's local dial -a -ride system as well as ADA-only intercity dial -a -ride services. However, with the aging population, more and more seniors are becoming ADA certified which is placing a strain on an already burdened system. As a result, RTA finds itself in an uncomfortable position of having to frequently cancel paratransit trips scheduled by the senior population to accommodate the mandates of the ADA. In January and again in February 2003, RTA conducted a demonstration project using taxicabs to transport a total of nineteen paratransit customers. The customers were senior citizens and/or persons with disabilities who were not certified under the ADA. The customers would have been bumped from their scheduled trips by persons with ADA status and would have been denied transportation due to capacity constraints had it not been for the use of taxicab transportation. The nineteen round-trip rides were provided at a total cost of $453.08. The average cost per trip was $23.84. In comparison, RTA's operating cost per revenue hour for the first two quarters of FY 2003 was $41.16. If approval is given to implement the program, actual costs to provide the trips will be compared and reported back to the Commission. Based on the declining number of non-profit transportation providers as well as the success of RTA's two-day trial run of utilizing taxi cabs, RCTC staff was given approval to develop a taxi demonstration program to enhance the transportation options for western Riverside County residents. Proposed Taxi Demonstration Program Since that time, working in close cooperation with RTA, staff is proposing that a one-year taxi demonstration program be launched with the first day of transportation service scheduled for October 6, 2003. The major goals of the demonstration program will be to 1) reduce or eliminate trip denials from the current dial -a -ride program; and 2) maintain or expand the amount of specialized transportation service available to seniors and disabled riders. Again, if approval to implement the program is given, trip data will be tracked and reported back to the Commission. Following are the proposed highlights of the program: 1) Geographical Areas Served: all western Riverside County currently being provided transportation by RTA, the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona and Riverside Special Services; Agenda Item 6P 161 2) Clients Served: all clients that request a trip (in the geographical areas currently being served) that the transit providers can not accommodate. This includes: a. Passengers bumped to create space for ADA-priority passengers; b. Trips that result in efficiencies for the public transit agencies; and c. Trips that provide better access for passengers (those with serious illness or need for daily treatments such as dialysis, therapy, etc.). 3) Passenger Fares: regardless of whether the passenger is transported by taxi or the traditional dial -a -ride vehicle, passengers will pay the same fare to the driver. On a monthly basis, RTA will bill RCTC for trips provided by the various taxi providers. Western Riverside County Measure "A" Specialized Transit Funds will pay for the cost of the trips less fares paid by the passengers. Requesting Transportation Services RTA will provide reservation and dispatching functions for the taxi demonstration program. Any trip request that can not be provided by the public agency will be given to DPI to schedule with an approved taxi provider. Once scheduled, DPI will inform the passenger that the service will be provided by a taxi company. The individual rider does not select which transportation provider they want as one of the goals of the program is to maximize the effectiveness of the paratransit fleet. Program Administration and Oversight Staff is recommending that an agreement with DPI be entered into to provide program administration and oversight for the duration of the demonstration period. DPI has experience as both a taxi operator and administrator of paratransit programs. They are familiar with the data tracking requirements of the National Transit Database and have the ability to track rides by geographic area, trip type, distance, etc. Major tasks will include accounting, reporting, program coordination and administration. This includes a Project Manager that will provide day-to-day program management and oversight. It is proposed that his duties include: a. Coordination with RCTC, RTA and taxi provider staff; b. Responding to service issues and complaints; c. Recruitment of taxi providers; Agenda Item 6P 162 d. Training taxi drivers including safety, sensitivity and program requirements; and, e. Verification of trips provided, program compliance and regulatory compliance of taxi providers. DPI's proposal and Scope of Work are attached. At this time, the demand for taxi services is unknown. However, based on program experience in West Hollywood and Los Angeles, it is anticipated that the taxi demonstration program will create its own demand. As residents realize that they will no longer be bumped to accommodate the ADA mandates, staff expects that requests for rides will increase. As a result, DPI's proposed cost to administer the program is based on actual monthly trips provided. As the program grows, administrative costs increase to accommodate the additional accounting and management workload generated by additional service. The following table illustrates the proposed cost based on escalating demand/trips provided: COST TO ADMINISTER THE PROGRAM Monthly Trips Monthly Cost Annual Cost 0 — 2,500 $5,705 $68,462 2,501 — 4,999 $6,485 $77,821 5,000 + $7,264 $87,174 RTA, DPI and RCTC staff will closely monitor the number of taxi trips to ensure that the costs stay within the approved budget. In addition to providing program oversight, DPI will: a. Contact existing taxi companies in the service area and enroll all qualified companies; b. Ensure that participating taxi companies have a $1 million minimum insurance coverage; c. Establish driver qualifications and recruit and enroll qualified drivers from the authorized taxi providers; d. Provide passenger sensitivity and program training to all enrolled taxi drivers; e. Ensure continuous program compliance of taxi operators, including verification of insurance coverage, operating authority, regulatory compliance, and demonstration program compliance; and f. Monitor, review and attempt resolution of customer service matters relating to demonstration program operations. Agenda Item 6P 163 A total of $700,000 in Western Riverside County Measure "A" Specialized Transit Funds was budgeted in the FY 2004 Specialized Transit budget to cover the cost of the taxi demonstration program. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Y Year: FY 03-04 Amount: $700,000 Source of Funds: Measure "A" Specialized Transit — Western Riverside County Budget Adjustment: N GLA No.: 225-26-86101 Fiscal Procedures Approved: :. .j_ -`t A C,,- 1 Date: 07/17/2003 Agenda Item 6P 164 ii 64869 OIVERSIFIED PARATRANSIT, INC. Thursday, July 17, 2003 Ms. Tanya Love Program Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 4080 Lemon Street, 3`d Floor Riverside, CA 92502-2208 RE: Taxi Demonstration Program Proposal 1400 EAST MISSION BOULEVARD POMONA, CALIFORNIA 91766 PHONE (909) 622-1316 FAX (909) 622-3035 VECEIIWIE JUL 212003 TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COUNTY Dear Tanya: Thank you for the opportunity to work with you in developing the taxi demonstration program. We have seen the advantages of this service for improving delivery of transportation services to seniors and the disabled community. We have also seen the pitfalls that can happen using taxi service without the appropriate, and sometimes difficult to foresee, control measures. Our goal is to help RCTC and RTA through this process by identifying and implementing the appropriate control measures so we can all focus on improving the delivery of service to your Specialized Transit ridership. The systems and staff we have in place to accomplish this task have been developed over time by experience. As a taxi operator, we have converted and started taxi based dial -a -ride services as well as provided overflow taxi service in concert with traditional paratransit service. This experience dates back to the early 1980's and continues today. For example, DPI partnered to operate the first ADA paratransit service in Los Angeles County, under the Metro Access program, and we are a current Access Services provider. We currently serve dial -a -cab riders in 7 local communities, and provide taxi service from Fontana to Covina. We operate under contract to the County of San Bernardino providing senior nutrition transportation and transportation of foster care teens. The data collection, reporting, and control measures we have discussed and placed in the scope of work for this project have been developed from this extensive, direct operating experience. Our proposal for the taxi demonstration program includes the use of optical scanning technology and sophisticated database management tools which accurately report service activity. Accurate information is the key to making good service design and operations decisions. The accounting function of the proposal also includes customized data collection and reporting as well as trip and invoice verification for all the trips provided under this demonstration program. The unique feature of taxi companies is independent contractor drivers, who operate as independent business owners. Independent contractor drivers will compete for your business and have every incentive to maximize their income. Strict auditing and verification is essential to ensure the appropriate use of your funds. 165 T.25.2.32 Mr. Todd Baker, our designated Project Manager for the demonstration program has extensive experience managing independent contractor drivers and understands the oversight these drivers and companies require for effective service delivery. His task is to provide the day-to-day program management and oversight of the demonstration program, so that RCTC staff time can be more effectively spent elsewhere. His duties will include coordination with RCTC, RTA, and taxi provider staff; responding to service issues and complaints; recruiting taxi providers and drivers; training taxi drivers; verifying program and regulatory compliance; and accurately reporting and analyzing all service activity. By providing these functions during the demonstration program, DPI intends to ensure the viability of the taxi program, and help improve the amount and quality of transportation service available to your riders. The cost to provide these functions includes staff time for accounting staff and the Project Manager, direct operating expenses and overhead expense. The proposed cost is presented with a threshold that increases as the program grows to accommodate the additional accounting and management workload generated by additional service. Monthly Trips Monthly Cost Annual Expense 0 - 2500 $5,705 $68,462 2501 - 4999 $6,485 $77,821 5000+ $7,264 $87,174 The costs presented are a reasonable alternative to providing dedicated staff from RTA or RCTC for project staffing. On a per hour basis, the cost is less than $30 per payroll hour, and is probably much lower than either agency could provide. We are able to accomplish this cost reduction by integrating the accounting, data collection, and reporting functions into our existing structure and management duties. Todd and 1 look forward to working with you on this project., and appreciate the time and effort you have made to work cooperatively with us. Please be assured that cooperative spirit will continue as we work together to make this program a success. Sincerely, Scott E. Williams Business Development Manager Diversified Paratransit, Inc. 166 ADDITION TO AGENDA ITEM 6P 9 it i� i Taxi Dial -A -Ride Demonstration Program Scope of Work A - Program Description: The Taxi Dial -A -Ride Demonstration Program is a 1 year program to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness and operational performance of taxi service as an additional or alternative delivery method for traditional dial -a -ride transportation services in Riverside County. B - Program Goals: The major goal of the demonstration program is to reduce or eliminate trip denials from the current Dial -A -Ride program operated by the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA). The next major goal is to maintain or expand the amount of specialized transportation service available to seniors and disabled riders. These goals will be accomplished by expanding the dial -a -ride service delivery methods to include taxi service, thereby adding capacity to the current dial -a -ride operations. C - Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Responsibilities: RCTC will guide and direct the policies and procedures of the demonstration program. In addition, RCTC will act as the funding agency for the demonstration program. Task 1 - Demonstration Program Coordination: RCTC shall provide guidance and maintain oversight and direction of the demonstration program. Program oversight and direction shall include establishing program goals, evaluating program performance, and approving policies and procedures for operation of the demonstration program. Task 2 - Provide Funding and Payment of Invoices: Diversified Paratransit, Inc. (DPI) will provide audited and verified invoices to the RTA for payment directly to approved taxi providers. Invoices will be provided to RTA twice monthly for the prior two weeks activity. RTA will process invoices for payment, and issue payments directly to approved taxi providers twice monthly. D - Consultant Responsibilities: DPI will provide demonstration program administration and oversight for the duration of the demonstration period. Major tasks will include program administration, program coordination, accounting and reporting. Task 1 - Administration: Overall responsibility for program administration and day-to-day program operation. Dedicated resources will include a full-time Project Manager available to respond to contracting agencies and other interested parties in person and via telephone, fax, mobile phone, and email. 9 it i� i Products • Contact all existing taxi companies in the service area and enroll all qualified companies as authorized taxi providers. • Establish driver qualifications and recruit and enroll qualified drivers from the authorized taxi providers. • Provide passenger sensitivity and program training to all enrolled taxi drivers. • Ensure continuous program compliance of taxi operators, including verification of insurance coverage, operating authority, regulatory compliance, and demonstration program compliance. • Monitor, review, and attempt resolution of customer service matters relating to demonstration program operations. • The Riverside Transit Agency will forward copies of all customer complaints related to service provided by taxis to DPI, when appropriate. • Receive Customer -List from RTA Call -Center daily of those persons who will be traveling by taxi on the following day. Contact all customers on list to let them know that they will be traveling in a taxi rather than on standard RTA vans. Task 2 - Accounting & Reporting: Perform data collection, data verification, and reporting functions for the demonstration program using state of the art scanning, optical recognition, and database software. Provide detailed and customized program reporting and evaluation tools. Products • Develop and provide custom trip sheets for use by all taxi drivers and taxi providers. • Review and process all trip sheets and taxi provider billings. • Develop and maintain demonstration program database. • Verify as legitimate all trips submitted for payment by taxi providers. • Audit taxi provider billings for accuracy. • Provide customized program data collection and reporting as coordinated with agency staff. • Ensure demonstration program expenditures do not exceed established budget. • Provide reports in electronic and paper formats, including digital data archives. • Report program statistics twice monthly and program activities on a monthly basis. • Provide original document storage and retrieval. • Provide customer service surveys as required to determine customer satisfaction. Task 3 - Program Coordination: Provide day-to-day program coordination between RTA, RCTC, DPI, and the taxi providers for the duration of the demonstration program. Products • Meet in person with RCTC as necessary during the demonstration program. • Meet in person with RTA as necessary during the demonstration program. • Maintain contact with all interested parties through telephone or electronic communication during normal business hours. • Provide emergency contact through mobile phone after normal business hours. E - Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) Responsibilities: RTA will continue to serve as the reservations and dispatching center for ADA and Dial -A -Ride services. RTA will maximize the productive use of its paratransit vehicle fleet, and direct overflow trips to DPI. DPI will determine the correct taxi -provider and make taxi reservations for those persons whose name appears on the overflow list. Task 1 - Trip Reservations: RTA will continue to accept all reservations through its reservations center, and record all trip requests in the dispatching software. After routing for maximum productivity of the RTA paratransit vehicle fleet, overflow trips will be designated for the demonstration program taxi providers. Task 2 - Trip Dispatching: RTA will forward designated overflow trips to DPI who will make appropriate reservations with taxi providers based on the pick up location. After the close of RTA reservation hours each day, RTA will forward trips for the following day to DPI. In the case of two or more taxi providers servicing a geographic area, no taxi provider will be given preference, and trips will be evenly distributed among the approved taxi providers. Task 3 - Trip Data: RTA will maintain a record of all taxi trips provided under the demonstration program. These records will be provided to DPI for use in verifying trip eligibility on a daily basis in paper and/or electronic format. RTA will provide DPI with a cost estimate of what each trip would have cost had it been provided by the RTA for comparison purposes. F - Taxi Company Responsibilities: Approved taxi provider companies will be responsible for actually delivering transportation service to riders. This will be accomplished by receiving and scheduling trip requests received from DPI, dispatching trip requests to taxi drivers, providing the trip, and properly accounting for all trips provided. 9 it i� i Task 1 - Receive and Schedule Trip Reservations: Trip requests will be transmitted to approved taxi providers by telephone, fax, or electronic means by DPI as soon as possible following receipt from the RTA call center. Taxi providers will schedule trips using their dispatching software or manual process and dispatch trips directly to taxi drivers by voice or data radio on the day of travel. Task 2 - Provide Trips: Approved taxi drivers will provide the trip on the day of travel by picking the passenger up at their origin location, and transporting them to their destination by the most direct route. Drivers will document all trip details using the trip sheets provided by DPI. Trips will be provided in compliance with established performance standards for RTA Dial -A -Ride service, including but not limited to, on time windows, wait time, and customer service. Task 3 - Trip Billing & Reporting: Approved taxi providers will provide a detailed billing of all trips provided to DPI twice monthly, or more frequently if possible. Invoices for trips performed must be documented on the trips sheets provided by DPI, and a complete trip sheet for all invoiced trips shall be included as back- up for the matching invoice. Trips not matched to a complete trip sheet shall be returned unpaid to the taxi provider, and the taxi provider shall assist DPI in obtaining complete and accurate trip information for all trips provided. The trip billing information will be provided at least twice monthly to the RTA for payment. Task 4 - Driver Accounting: Approved taxi providers shall be fully responsible for any and all payments to drivers that perform trips under this demonstration program. Taxi providers shall provide complete driver accounting services, and neither RTA, RCTC, or DPI shall be liable for any payments to drivers under this program. i� AGENDA ITEM 6Q • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission Jerry Rivera, Program Manager FROM: THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Years 2004-2008 Measure "A" Five Year Capital Improvement Plan for Local Streets and Roads for the City of Moreno Valley STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the FY 2004-08 Measure "A" Five Year Capital Improvement Plan for Local Streets and Roads for the City of Moreno Valley. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Measure "A" Ordinance requires each recipient of streets and roads monies to annually provide to the Commission a five year plan on how those funds are to be expended in order to receive their Measure "A" disbursements. In addition, the cities in the Coachella Valley and the County (representing the unincorporated area of the Eastern County) must be participating in CVAG's Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program. The agencies are required to submit the annual certification of Maintenance of Effort (MOE) along with documentation supporting the calculation. On April 24, 2003, RCTC staff provided the local agencies with Measure "A" revenue projections for local streets and roads to assist them in preparation of the required Five Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The agencies were asked to submit their Plans by June 11 for submission to the Budget and Implementation Committee at its June 23, 2003 meeting and to the Commission on July 9, 2003. At its July 9, 2003 meeting, the Commission approved the Plans for all but five (5) cities: Beaumont, Desert Hot Springs, Indian Wells, Indio, and Moreno Valley. Subsequently, we have received the required Plan, MOE certification and supporting documentation from the City of Moreno Valley. The other four cities have been informed that no disbursement of Measure "A" funds for local streets and roads will be made until all of the required documents have been received and approved by the Commission. Attachment: Measure "A" Capital Improvement Plan for the City of Moreno Valley Agenda Item 6Q 167 ;s7 July 7, 2003 Mr. Jerry Rivera, Program Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street Riverside, California 92502 64827 ]ECEONIIE Al JUL 15 2003 Public Works Department Capital Projects City Hall 14177 Frederick Street P.O. Box 88005 Moreno Valley, CA 92552-0805 Telephone: (909) 413-3130 FAX: (909) 413-3170 TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION #.1 Subject: Fiscal Years 2004-2008 Measure "A" Local Streets and Roads Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans Dear Mr. Rivera: Please find enclosed the City of Moreno Valley's Streets and Roads Capital Improvement Five -Year Projection for Fiscal Years 2004-2008. The City Council specifically reviewed and approved these individual projects on June 10, 2003. If there are changes to the list, the City will forward these to you for subsequent Commission action. If you have any questions, please contact John T. Hogard, Senior Engineer, at (909) 413-3137. Since JTH/ah Trent D. Pulliam, P.E. Public Works Director/City Engineer Enclosure: Fiscal Years 2004-2008 Measure "A" Local Streets and Roads Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan c: File Gene Rogers, City Manager Steve Chapman, Finance Director Prem Kumar, Assistant City Engineer U \CAPPRQJ\Measure A\5YEAR\2004-08\Letters\070703 Revised RCTC5'R2004-2008 doc X.29.12 168 II RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) MEASURE "A" STREETS AND ROADS FIVE YEAR PROJECTIONS FISCAL YEAR 2004-2008 Cib '1reno Valley Jol gard & Prem Kumar (909) 413-3130 June 25, 2003 2 3 4 2003/04 2003/04 2003/04 Annual Pavement Resurfacing Bicycle Lane Account (BTA) Ironwood Ave. Rehabilitation/Day St. -Pigeon Pass Rd. Perris Valley Storm Drain Lateral 5 2003/04 IPerris Blvd./Ramona Expressway to Perris Valley Storm Drain Lateral "A" 6 2003/04 Iris Ave./Indian St. — Traffic Signals BTA funding - $123,750 2 TEA 21 STP funding - $123,000 3 CMAQ funding - $146,000 Rehabilitation/ Overlay Bicycle Lane Reconstruction Bridge Rehabilitation Widening Ongoing annual program. Ongoing annual program. Release 10% retention. Construction by RCFC & WCD. Moreno Valley's portions of the bridge cost. Planning stage and project report - joint project with City of Perris. Traffic Signal Construction. !:Total+ 2003/04 $2,923 Page 1 of 15 $2,923 $190 $66 $139` $455 $455 $310 $310 $2003j $54 169 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) MEASURE "A" STREETS AND ROADS FIVE YEAR PROJECTIONS FISCAL YEAR 2004-2008 ;ity of Moreno Valley John Hogard & Prem Kumar (909) 413-3130 lune 25, 2003 Page 2 • 5 (tern Mal Tipt.i, 3 F 1dln •agecTetn IN + ~ eci T e - ' 4*-' Wit Cost4 M --a A WIN* ro :;Stat{rr'`s'''` _ t 7 2003/04 Reche Vista Realignment/Perris- Heacock to North City Limits Street Construction Environmental, PSR, and design. $283 $283 8 2003/04 Perris Blvd./Sunnymead Ranch Pkwy Traffic Signal Traffic Signal 'Construction. $255 $255 9 2003/04 Heacock St./Parkland Ave. Traffic Signal Traffic Signal Construction. $240 $240 10 2003/04 Krameria Ave./Kitching St. Traffic Signal Traffic Signal Construction. $88 $88 11 2003/04 Moreno Beach Dr./Cottonwood Ave. Traffic Signal Road Widening/ Traffic Signal Design and construction. $275 $275 12 2003/04 Cactus Ave./Joshua Tree Ave. Yellow Solar Flashing Beacons Traffic Signal Design and construction. $19 $19 13 2003/04 Pavement Management Street Pavement Condition Update Ongoing annual program to update condition of street pavement. $20 -1 170 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) MEASURE "A" STREETS AND ROADS FIVE YEAR PROJECTIONS FISCAL YEAR 2004-2008 ;ity areno Valley ohr. jard & Prem Kumar (909) 413-3130 lune 25, 2003 15 16 17 18 19 2003/04 2003/04 2003/04 2003/04 2003/04 2003/04 2r 2003/04 Moreno Beach/Alessandro Blvd. Street and Drainage Improvements GIS —Graphic Information System Preliminary Street Engineering Installation of Battery Back-up System for 10 Signalized Intersections Newhope Street Retrofit Signalized Intersections with LED's Reche Vista/Reche Canyon Route Concept Report/PSR Street and Drainage Construction Creating Street Data Layers Project Study Report Stati. Design and construction. Add public infrastructure information onto City-wide mapping system for tracking, query, and efficient maintenance. Preparing RFP's to hire consultants. Traffic Signals Construction. Street Improvements Traffic Signals Project Study Report Advertise for bids and construction. Construction. Retain consultant to prepare PSR. $1,400 $49 Page 3 of 15 $179 $157 $1,400 $265 $49 171 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) MEASURE "A" STREETS AND ROADS FIVE YEAR PROJECTIONS FISCAL YEAR 2004-2008 :ity of Moreno Valley 'ohn Hogard & Prem Kumar (909) 413-3130 rune 25, 2003 Item ' r .11:6M Prajccttfl# To14 Eunitl a�a� sr.* 21 22 23 24 25 26 2003/04 2003/04 2003/04 2003/04 2003/04 2003/04 Route 60 Interchange Study/PSR Slurry Seal Program Resurface Street Improvement Inventory for GASB 34 Requirements Eucalyptus Ave./Wichita to 660 Feet East Atwood Ave./Indian St. to Perris Blvd Surface Recycling Safe Route to School (maximum) funding - $23,000 erAgertiWil Project Study Report Evaluate Public Infrastructure Pedestrian Walk Street Improvements Rehabilitation 'ISM sr rxk Retain consultant to prepare PSR. Review and evaluate public infrastructure. Construction or pedestrian walk for school children. Construction of street improvements. Ongoing annual program. Ongoing annual program. Page 4r"'5 *vital C st assure At $2,309 $125 $125 $2,309 172 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) MEASURE "A" STREETS AND ROADS FIVE YEAR PROJECTIONS FISCAL YEAR 2004-2008 :ity zreno Valley lohh Bard & Prem Kumar (909) 413-3130 lune 25, 2003 i Item ND'' 27 =.Pra ect .a -. - �. F. undmg .:,f '�, i Year s r' -. :. --y -. _�... , r F!ro)ectPhlamefLim�ts r . #: i, i', r _+, °"':*.�[. . �[rka�,.d'f -ate - d.�N ! f3+` "+$ y; " '�^�.ar r s a�L c 1--,�.., J. Yt_—} -..:'� s � _ E A �Frajec yP e2f i C F a �r � gR- R a tti _ . x tatus,, ;, �t� .� �� " ; µ.. , t,_ z-.., 7 0`a'-�€ �..�� y .. .`..w" Y .ii. t F - t 7 i' ,, 1;9s —L '" i-e fir. �d'`.�r-n � , , ..; .s' - p. . ."r ..• '„ ta+ _ _ �btal�Gostp , ±TY i. ¢; .'r T+�'�' v'i`'7 i-*-" rt 0 a x :�[,�ULirS;�'p� $1,076 $250 Measures.' t .� LI iIUIiI `_ -. �` eS gr g j Er nn `,.+r�;:Q 1l V�$ ; $376 $250 Interchange Imp. East and West Bound Ramps Requires revised project report, design, Caltrans & FHWA environmental approval, utility relocation and RNV. Estimated construction completion date is December 2006. Ongoing annual program. 2003/04 Route 60/Nason Street Interchange 28 2003/04 Street Improvement Program Street Improvements $115 29 2003/04 Reche Vista Dr./Reche Canyon Rd. Traffic Signal Perris Blvd./Red Maple Ln. Traffic Signal Traffic Signal Coordination of traffic signal design with the County of Riverside. Design and construction of traffic signal. $115 $200 $200 $80 30 2003/04 Traffic Signal 31 32 2003/04 ironwood Ave./Moreno Beach Dr. Improvements Street Improvements/ Traffic Signal Design of street and traffic signal improvements. $80 $200 $200 2003/04 Perris Blvd./Manzanita Ave. Traffic Signal Traffic Signal Design and construction of traffic signal. Page 5 of 15 ' CMAQ funding - $700,000 173 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) MEASURE "A" STREETS AND ROADS FIVE YEAR PROJECTIONS FISCAL YEAR 2004-2008 :ity of Moreno Valley Iohn Hogard & Prem Kumar (909) 413-3130 lune 25, 2003 ftemf1a -1.66) ct raj ctt'NarnOli H F�� go Years^ 33 35 2003/04 2003/04 John F. Kennedy Dr,/Lasselle St. Flashing Beacon 2003/04 Ironwood Ave./Nason St. Traffic Signal Indian St /Cactus Ave. Improvements `a •?003?004 SU�Tfl�i'd * Includes carryover funds Jgc Street Improvements/ Traffic Signal Hashing Beacon Street/Storm Drain Improvements Design of street improvements and traffic signal. Construction of Flashing Beacom. Design of street and storm drain improvements. Page F -15 $80 $80 512,550' x. 174 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) MEASURE "A" STREETS AND ROADS FIVE YEAR PROJECTIONS FISCAL YEAR 2004-2008 .1ity oreno Valley loth jard & Prem Kumar (909) 413-3130 lune 25, 2003 36 2004/05 37 2004/05 38 2004/05 39 2004/05 40 2004/05 41 2004/05 Annual Pavement Resurfacing Bicycle Lane Account (BTA) — Various Locations Pavement Management (Paver Geographic Information System (GIS) Preliminary Street Engineering Retrofit Signalized Intersections with LED's 5 BTA funding - $306,000 Rehabilitation/ Ongoing annual program. Overlay Bicycle Lanes Street Pavement Condition U • date Creating Street Data Layers Project Study Report Traffic Signals Ongoing annual program. Design and construct designated Class II/III bicycle routes pending receipt of grant. Ongoing annual update of pavement management program for street condition. Annual data input into various street data. Ongoing annual program for preliminary engineering, cost estimate, and PSR. Construction. $537 $340" $10 $50 $115 $140 Page 7 of 15 $10 $50 $115 $140 175 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) MEASURE "A" STREETS AND ROADS FIVE YEAR PROJECTIONS FISCAL YEAR 2004-2008 :ity of Moreno Valley John Hogard & Prem Kumar (909) 413-3130 lune 25, 2003 Page 8 ' 5 Iteimi -� t .tc - --, .-.,.rte_ � '� lert Narrie[Li s. . a .�. Pr ij�e` t a OP � 1 -a"�` 'iii: - .�� - , ,. � . atus v�' -�, -��:r���� �, -,, s ,'tiS- le" � �v. rte: u �i -'S�'c..', is x,.-�:�.- �. �. �i* ' s 't,t7�t� �T'gtal�+D�SsL+T� a i _ �tU'leasx Mire:::!A:4:,: 0 undl�ng � Q01 .s r..., rt ,� ��. ..�- ar,. aa.. - cak _ 42 43 44 2004/05 2004/05 2004/05 Slurry Seal Program Surface Recycling (Route 60/Nason Interchange Resurface Rehabilitation Interchange Imp. East and West Bound Ramps Ongoing annual program. $537 $537 Ongoing annual program. $125 $250 $125 $50 Design of east and west bound interchange ramps and utility relocation. Estimated completion date is December 2006. 45 2004/05 Street Improvement Program Street Improvements Ongoing annual program. $250 $250 46 47 2004/05 Reche Vista Dr./Reche Canyon Rd. Traffic Signal Ironwood Ave./Pigeon Pass Rd. to Graham St. Traffic Signal Reconstruction Moreno Valley will share the construction cost of the traffic signal with the County of Riverside. $5 $92 $5 $92 2004/05 Design. TEA 21 STP funding - $200,000 176 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) MEASURE "A" STREETS AND ROADS FIVE YEAR PROJECTIONS FISCAL YEAR 2004-2008 "oreno Valley loft. gard & Prem Kumar (909) 413-3130 lune 25, 2003 ,3-'31?-711-ojer,a0 Pro fectkNamelLitriits"" tp: p r 48 2004/05 Ironwood Ave./Moreno Beach Dr. Improvements and Traffic Signal 49 2004/05 50 2004/05 Indian St./Cactus Ave. Improvements Street Maintenance 2004-2005 SUrBTOTA> 8 HES Funding $360,000 Street Improvements/ Traffic Signal Street/Storm Drain Improvements Street Maintenance Construction of street improvements and traffic signal. Construction of street and storm drain improvements. Ongoing annual expenses for street maintenance. • Tot�if%Co7t1 $250 Page 9 of 15 rfirelfairk4 Funding $250 $2;865 177 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) MEASURE "A" STREETS AND ROADS FIVE YEAR PROJECTIONS FISCAL YEAR 2004-2008 :ity of Moreno Valley John Hogard & Prem Kumar (909) 413-3130 Tune 25, 2003 Page 10 r' 'S ProjectbTiyp : 3S#a# s G 47176talt ' s"� � -leaf +.P.4. saU t le ra �' r i � {% /tern: Vi csjeetA NJZiCiIRg r ip pr" bc.O.Name1!-iris ° rY . i } , r' ''.�s 51 2005/06 Annual Pavement Resurfacing Pavement Management (Paver) Preliminary Street Engineering Retrofit Signalized Intersections with LED's Rehabilitation/ Overlay Street Pavement Condition Update Project Study Report Traffic Signals Ongoing annual program. $876 $15 $115 $140 $876 52 53 2005106 Ongoing annual update of pavement management program for street condition. $15 Ongoing annual program for preliminary engineering, cost estimate, and PSR. $115 $140 2005/06 54 2005/06 'Construction. 55 56 2005/06 Slurry Seal Program Surface Recycling Resurface Ongoing annual program. $876 $876 $125 2005/06 Rehabilitation Ongoing annual program. $125 57 2005/06 Street Improvement Program Street Improvements Ongoing annual program. $250 J 178 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) MEASURE "A" STREETS AND ROADS FIVE YEAR PROJECTIONS FISCAL YEAR 2004-2008 ;ity areno Valley loh, .gard & Prem Kumar (909) 413-3130 lune 25, 2003 iiKeViijrvrrp7j1tN Project Wit_. Keifig s r 58 59 Ironwood Ave./Pigeon Pass Rd. to Graham St. 2005/06 Street Maintenance s f :20,05,'t2006 rSU 8� 1rfl1TA">' TEA 21 STP funding - $797,000 Street Maintenance Ongoing annual expenses for street maintenance. Page 11 of 15 $500 179 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) MEASURE "A" STREETS AND ROADS FIVE YEAR PROJECTIONS FISCAL YEAR 2004-2008 :ity of Moreno Valley John Hogard & Prem Kumar (909) 413-3130 lune 25, 2003 Page12 15 -, Prv}ect , AIii. tai't .��; .p,F�n ing _ ";+'�{=y�•. ,_ I n. n .. i ? a Project Name/ ii ��ts,i, .t ,•:- r �r �t�•' J' - � 3 nii t ..a.. t! -' a�r14 �._x..�`� � �,��� �_f�. r ..r: w.,-� � .t:. �7 Pro• T] -.P, , . s k. .. i-r. : s�. ��".�xr.� .�. •�sr Y' V ,[,91 L` '4.�Y :-. }_ , C -far,ti * J r 2tri T.� ta.-- .;;, h y.• " it T y , =- `gN - � �, x _ iE f . �����t `-- - —1'-F -N' . ,T _fit ! i�.r���T -:�`�,..-�-i�•� �,.F-_... .��' rr'�`.��-� 1[ A rt751<` x _ .. . y r.,�? .rpA--54 , f_ �.,r- x.�� , V f7" •. Y`Y,ear,(s) 1A cl �'dSflr f Y�1"Item; -v .. -Z=: =FtAnding ,.- �Y• f 'i., �4;0.00-,51.2_,•-. 60 2006/07 Annual Pavement Resurfacing Rehabilitation/ Overlay • Ongoing annual program. $1,025 $1,025 61 2006/07 Pavement Management (Paver) Street Pavement Condition Update Ongoing annual update of pavement management program for street condition. $80 $80 62 2006/07 Preliminary Street Engineering Project Study Report Resurface Ongoing annual program. Retain consultant for preliminary engineering, cost estimate, and PSR. Ongoing annual program. $115 $115 $1,025 $1,025 63 2006/07 Slurry Seal Program 64 65 2006/07 2006/07 Surface Recycling Rehabilitation Ongoing annual program. i $120 $250 $120 $250 Street Improvement Program Street Improvements 'Ongoing annual program. 66 2006/07 Street Maintenance Street Maintenance Ongoing annual expenses for street maintenance. $500 J0 180 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) MEASURE "A" STREETS AND ROADS FIVE YEAR PROJECTIONS FISCAL YEAR 2004-2008 :ity lreno Valley oh, jard & Prem Kumar (909) 413-3130 rune 25, 2003 Page 13 of 15 Lb�tal,costi ,Measure- Fund1T1g ,000.8; 1,O s = 181 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) MEASURE "A" STREETS AND ROADS FIVE YEAR PROJECTIONS FISCAL YEAR 2004-2008 ',ity of Moreno Valley John Hogard & Prem Kumar (909) 413-3130 lune 25, 2003 Page 14 '5 item, No .-_� < <,-.,,,- t,l Fundeng .t ? !ear(s),u' P.roaect latnelL-)mi#s yfr-* y- qr'*`` � � '' ; :1 . e'ri i'� k '` - %'k w ' Profeet�fype p. f s . , atus v w . ., { r I.Fy { .e3 1r ` . :=.c ° . : ,.:a: ._ -X27•`:-h �A[a � " L 4� `,� /� y�a a vC .'—ia F�V T-.1 i, ;un ng T'Y f 1 ,0 _ i- 67 2007/08 Annual Pavement Resurfacing Rehabilitation/ Overlay Ongoing annual program. $1,125 $1,125 68 2007/08 Preliminary Street Engineering Project Study Report Ongoing annual program. Retain consultant for preliminary engineering, and cost estimate. $115 $115 69 2007/08 Slurry Seal Program Resurfacing Ongoing annual program. $1,125 $1,125 70 2007/08 Surface Recycling Rehabilitation Ongoing annual program. $120 $120 71 2007/08 Street Improvement Program Street Improvements Ongoing annual program. $250 $250 72 2007/08 Street Maintenance Street Maintenance Ongoing annual expenses for street maintenance. $500 $500 182 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) MEASURE "A" STREETS AND ROADS FIVE YEAR PROJECTIONS FISCAL YEAR 2004-2008 Ireno Valley Johi jard & Prem Kumar (909) 413-3130 June 25, 2003 J:CAPPROJ\Measure ALSYEA 04-M062503 5 yr P`ojections.doc Page 15 of 15 183 ii �, AGENDA ITEM 6R • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Stephanie Wiggins, Rail Department Manager Karen Leland, Staff Analyst THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Commuter Rail Program Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file Commuter Rail Program Update as an information item. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Riverside Line Weekday Patronage: Passenger trips on Metrolink's Riverside Line for the month of June averaged 4,075, a 1% decrease from the month of May. The Line has averaged an overall decrease of 3% from a year ago June 2002. June on -time performance averaged 85% inbound (-13% from May) and 81 % outbound (-17% from May). Inland Empire -Orange County Line Weekday Patronage: Passenger trips on Metrolink's Inland Empire -Orange County (IEOC) Line for the month of June averaged 3,319, basically unchanged from the month of May. The line has averaged an overall increase of 11% from a year ago June 2002. June on -time performance averaged 96% inbound (+1% from May) and 88% outbound (-3% from May). 91 Line Weekday Patronage: Passenger trips on Metrolink's 91 Line for the month of June averaged 1,631, a 1% increase from the month of May. The Line has averaged an overall increase of 40% from a year ago May 2002. Agenda Item 6R 184 June on -time performance averaged 95% inbound (+1% from May) and 93% outbound (+ 3% from May). Rideshare 2 Rails (R2R) Program Rideshare VMS Rideshare Incentives: As of June 30th, enrollment totaled 284 (Riverside -Downtown 83, Pedley 59, La Sierra 42, West Corona 19, North Main Corona 21), potentially freeing up 142 spaces for new riders. RTA Express Bus Shuttle (Route 99): Ridership for the month of June averaged 23 one-way trips per day, a 9% increase from the month of May. Effective May 27, 2003, the Riverside Transit Agency revised the Route 99 schedule to include an additional stop at the University of California, Riverside. The new trips were added to provide later morning and earlier evening express bus service between Metrolink, downtown Riverside and Moreno Valley. RCTC will continue to monitor the Route 99 schedule change. Special Charter Train Beach Trains: The 8th Beach Train season is off to a good start with sales slightly exceeding last year. As of July 17, 6,969 tickets have been sold, a 2% increase over last year this time. New this season, Beach Train customers have another option for buying tickets — credit card purchases online at www.takethebeachtrain.com. Customers may also download an order form from the dedicated web site as well as purchase tickets from outlets located at Parks and Recreation Departments located in Riverside, Corona, Moreno Valley, San Bernardino, and the City Clerk's Office in Rialto. Tickets can also be purchased through Amtrak online and by phone, and at the Amtrak Office in San Bernardino. RCTC Metro/ink Station Daily Activities: Daily activities are recorded by station security guards. Attached is summary data covering fourth quarter (March — June 2003). Attachments: 1) Metrolink Performance Summaries (June 2003) 2) RCTC Metrolink Stations Daily Activity Report (March — June 2003) Agenda Item 6R 185 64778 SW "Le METR OLINK PASSEN GER TRIPS MONTH OF JUNE 2003 Ju ne -03 VENTURA COUNTY LINE ANTELOPE Inbd Outbd Total V ALLEY LIN Inbd O utbd Total �Inbd SAN BERN ARDINO LINE O utbd Total BURBANK TU RNS Inbd Outbd T ot al RIVERSIDE LINE label O utbd Total ORANGE COUNTY LINE Inbd Outbd Total INLAND EMPIREJOC LINERIV-FULLERT ON-LA Southbd Northbd T ot al LINE Inbd Outbd Total TOTAL SYSTE M Inbd O utbd Tot al DAY a Sun 1 0 0 856 974 1,830 0 0 0 0 856 974 1,830 2 1,913 2,037 3,950 2,697 2,722 5,419 5,515 5,124 10,639 388 152 540 2,081 2,187 4,268 2,897 2,475 5,372 1,642 1,558 3,200 684 828 1,512 17,817 17,083 34,900 3 1,914 2,078 3,992 2,802 2,816 5,618 5,973 5,720 11,693 326 158 484 2,281 2,236 4,517 3,209 2,712 5,921 1,781 1,682 3,463 771 851 1,622 19,057 18,253 37,310 4 1,915 2,112 4,027 2,492 2,779 5,271 5,251 5,142 10,393 374 188 562 1,991 2,189 4,180 3,020 2,576 5,596 1,695 1,665 3,360 671 871 1,542 17,409 17,522 34,931 5 1,871 1,887 3,758 2,637 2,891 5,528 5,235 5,275 10,510 362 157 519 2,333 2,173 4,506 3,062 2,686 5,748 1,768 1,720 3,488 687 757 1,444 17,955 17,546 35,501 6 1,567 1,703 3,270 2,630 3,132 5,782 5,106 4,789 9,895 342 144 486 2,187 1,939 4,126 2,519 2,439 4,958 1,487 1,589 3,076 881 837 1,718 16,719 16,572 33,291 Sat 7 0 853 743 1,596 1,340 1,427 2,767 0 0 0 0 0 2,193 2,170 4,363 Sun 8 0 0 714 802 1,516 0 0 0 0 0 714 802 1,516 9 1,771 2,024 3,795 2,624 2,668 5,292 5,290 5,062 10,352 368 168 536 2,184 2,171 4,355 3,142 2,594 5,736 1,720 1,682 3,402 734 859 1,593 17,833 17,228 35,061 10 1,915 2,044 3,959 2,732 2,669 5,401 5,445 5,121 10,566 365 149 514 2,355 2,512 4,867 3,051 2,705 5,756 1,767 1,802 3,569 890 776 1,666 18,520 17,778 36,298 11 1,794 1,912 3,706 2,794 3,039 5,833 5,118 4,974 10,092 418 189 607 2,276 2,231 4,507 3,070 2,647 5,717 1,743 1,665 3,408 717 773 1,490 17,930 17,430 35,360 12 1,615 2,047 3,662 2,781 3,165 5,946 5,024 5,144 10,168 417 165 582 2,160 2,241 4,401 3,037 2,591 5,628 1,640 1,722 3,362 686 784 1,470 17,360 17,859 35,219 13 1,696 1,437 3,133 2,921 3,349 6,270 5,363 4,955 10,318 302 132 434 2,004 1,928 3,932 2,723 2,453 5,176 1,505 1,517 3,022 684 898 1,582 17,198 16,669 33,867 Sat 14 0 917 966 1,883 1,419 1,391 2,810 0 0 0 0 0 2,336 2,357 4,693 Sun 15 0 0 913 970 1,883 0 0 0 0 0 913 970 1,883 16 1,645 2,002 3,647 2,882 3,200 8,082 5,048 5,156 10,204 396 152 548 2,122 2,107 4,229 2,985 2,746 5,731 1,630 1,755 3,385 814 948 1,762 17,522 18,066 35,588 17 1,916 2,028 3,944 2,732 2,908 5,638 5,041 5,091 10,132 505 161 666 2,135 2,168 4,303 2,979 2,684 5,663 1,753 1,774 3,527 711 855 1,566 17,772 17,667 35,439 18 1,880 2,009 3,889 2,677 2,945 5,622 5,176 4,915 10,091 418 189 605 2,268 2,054 4,322 2,406 2,606 5,012 1,701 1,725 3,426 1,031 993 -- 2,024 17,555 17,436 34,991 19 1,700 1,833 3,533 2,787 2,770 5,557 5,229 5,177 10,406 419 175 594 2,049 1,999 4,048 2,912 2,637 5,549 1,623 1,708 3,331 819 873 1,692 17,538 17,172 34,710 20 1,489 1,587 3,076 2,837 2,917 5,754 4,984 5,070 10,054 387 169 556 1,853 718 2,571 2,661 2,189 4,850 1,419 1,462 2,881 844 771 1,615 16,474 14,883 31,357 Sal 21 0 730 643 1,373 1,332 1,304 2,636 0 0 0 0 0 2,062 1,947 4,009 Sun 22 0 0 638 974 1,612 0 0 0 0 0 638 974 1,612 23 1,680 1,916 3,596 1,829 2,277 4,106 4,819 4,993 9,812 403 113 516 2,013 1,819 3,832 2,897 2,491 5,388 1,658 1,719 3,377 651 816 1,467 15,950 16,144 32,094 24 1,660 1,911 3,571 2,810 2,609 5,219 5,356 5,329 10,685 427 159 586 2,212 2,138 4,350 3,058 2,808 5,866 1,783 1,743 3,526 669 1,096 1,765 17,775 17,793 35,568 25 1,647 1,744 3,391 2,677 2,745 5,422 5,873 5,397 11,270 414 181 595 1,447 1,952 3,399 3,041 2,523 5,564 1,721 1,746 3,467 751 1,139 1,890 17,571 17,427 34,998 26 1,689 1,880 3,569 2,915 2,845 5,760 5,495 5,106 10,601 436 191 627 1,883 1,952 3,835 2,879 2,544 5,423 1,635 1,706 3,341 740 1,006 1,746 17,672 17,230 34,902 27 1,683 1,744 3,427 2,555 2,694 5,249 5,047 4,854 9,901 392 182 574 1,582 1,620 3,202 2,522 2,324 4,846 1,373 1,448 2,819 704 783 1,487 15,858 15,647 31,505 Sal 28 0 737 631 1,368 1,617 1,575 3,192 0 0 0 0 0 2,354 2,206 4,560 Sun 29 0 0 805 860 1,665 0 0 0 0 0 805 860 1,665 30 1,692 1,890 3,582 2,619 2,888 5,507 5,135 5,012 10,147 389 174 563 1,953 1,866 3,819 2,930 2,509 5,439 1,661 1,604 3,265 721 880 1,601 17,100 16,823 33,923 TOTAL 36,65 39,8251 76,477 59,4671 63.0091122.476 120,1571117,6831 237.840 8,2461 3,4481 11,694 43,3691 42,2001 85,669 61,0001 63,9391114,939 34,7051 34,9901 69.695 15.8601 18,3941 34 .254 379.4561373.4881752,944 AVERAGE WEEKDAY TRIPS; CURRENT MO NTH: !Avg W kday 1,745 1,895 3,541 2.678 2,858 5,536 5,263 5,115 10,378 393 164 557 2,065 2,010 4,075 2.90 2,569 5,474 1,653 1,666 3,319 755 875 1,531 17,457 17,154 34,611 AVERAGE WEEKDAY TRIPS; CURR ENT MONTH (HOLIDAY ADJUSTED): 'HolidayACJ 1 1,7451 1,8961 3,6411 2,6781 2,6561 5,5361 5,2531 5,ii5 10, 3781 3831 1641 5571 2,0651 x0101 4,075 2,9051 2,5691 5.4741 1.6531 1.6661_ 3,311 7551 8761 1,6311 17,457 17 .1541 34,6111 AVERAGE SATURDAY TRIPS: Avg Sat AVERAGE SUNDAY TRIPS: Av g Sun f 609 7461 1555 1427 7424 2851 2,236 2,170 4,4061 785 916 1701 785 916 1.701 Current M onth vs Prio r Month: % Change _ -1.4% Reference: Metrolink Morning Report 2.5% 1. 7% Operating Notes: Tota l o perating days this month = Wee kdays o pe rated thLs mon th = 30 21 -2.6% -0.9% f),)ECEOWE JUL 9 0 2003 0 -0 1% .0 1' , 1.5% Nn1 0.6% Holidays Adjusted this mon th: None 18 gRIVERSIDE COUNTY -n• unnnnw+wrnu r'•MH►l1@Qir11.1 Mel Se .c F5&, io0210 METROLINK. Pa ssenger Monthly Ridership Trip Dates Fr om 06/01/2003 to 06/30/2003 Metr olink S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M Average Train # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Total 1 Ventura County - Inbound 100 0 178 192 192 217 142 0 0 168 207 215 185 185 0 0 185 195 207 185 138 0 0 192 190 197 179 158 0 0 182 3889 185 102 0 450 399 399 389 312 0 0 330 346 386 356 320 0 0 329 451 355 367 322 0 0 369 339 330 342 361 0 0 310 7562 360 104 0 459 432 451 443 391 0 0 458 451 464 413 379 0 0 359 362 458 441 391 0 0 391 412 392 389 357 0 0 385 8676 413 106 0 339 363 300 340 303 0 0 294 365 327 309 288 0 0 288 359 322 314 275 0 0 323 299 305 291 289 0 0 284 6577 313 108 0 101 92 92 87 81 0 0 76 72 70 71 143 0 0 75 57 80 79 76 0 0 71 79 82 87 57 0 0 78 1706 81 110 0 72 198 245 145 54 0 0 215 225 79 72 83 0 0 169 280 178 96 52 0 0 62 56 89 103 62 0 0 97 2632 125 112 0 102 48 29 58 23 0 0 18 40 25 21 29 0 0 30 40 114 23 30 0 0 64 43 18 59 37 0 0 48 899 43 114 0 30 23 24 29 35 0 0 48 51 38 31 53 0 0 24 24 29 31 30 0 0 48 44 56 53 44 0 0 30 775 37 116 0 44 36 49 48 95 0 0 42 45 68 57 65 0 0 54 45 41 50 65 0 0 51 56 50 57 177 0 0 65 1260 60 118 0 138 131 134 115 131 0 0 122 113 122 100 151 0 0 132 103 98 114 110 0 0 109 142 128 129 141 0 0 213 2676 127 Subtotal 0 1914 1871 0 1771 1794 1696 0 1916 1700 0 1680 1647 1683 0 1744 1913 1915 1567 0 1915 1615 0 1645 1880 1489 0 1660 1689 0 1692 36652 1Ventura County - Outbound 101 0 117 125 104 105 98 0 0 115 109 105 132 95 0 0 145 135 104 138 87 0 0 212 82 95 92 95 0 0 68 2358 112 103 0 150 168 141 147 124 0 0 120 121 122 123 117 0 0 107 111 121 128 131 0 0 91 171 41 121 121 0 0 223 2699 129 105 0 48 46 43 36 55 0 0 55 44 55 68 43 0 0 46 49 66 36 31 0 0 46 62 47 48 40 0 0 49 1013 48 107 0 48 34 32 32 39 0 0 23 17 16 25 15 0 0 21 15 20 18 12 0 0 23 24 26 22 33 0 0 16 511 24 109 0 46 134 139 92 94 0 0 139 41 43 57 40 0 0 160 210 121 47 49 0 0 53 46 45 54 76 0 0 74 1760' 84 111 0 134 149 159 147 168 0 0 132 139 159 200 179 0 0 138 129 139 133 135 0 0 164 148 132 143 143 0 0 155 3125 149 113 0 390 398 389 301 322 0 0 384 369 346 321 275 0 0 301 335 336 327 321 0 0 312 331 338 337 279 0 0 335 7047 336 115 0 456 340 463 412 362 0 0 432 462 451 409 321 0 0 463 437 468 404 321 0 0 397 441 381 436 338 0 0 330 8524 406 117 0 485 525 475 465 310 0 0 445 575 448 412 125 0 0 445 458 465 460 395 0 0 455 458 485 473 465 0 0 468 9292 442 119 0 163 159 167 150 131 0 0 179 167 167 300 227 0 0 176 149 169 142 105 0 0 163 148 154 154 154 0 0 172 3496 166 Subto tal 0 2078 1887 0 2024 1912 1437 0 2028 1833 0 1916 1744 1744 0 1896 2037 2112 1703 0 2044 2047 0 2002 2009 1587 0 1911 1880 0 1890 39825 1Ventura County Totals 0 3992 3758 0 3795 3706 3133 0 3944 3533 0 3596 3391 3427 0 3950 4027 3270 0 3959 3662 0 3647 3889 3076 0 3571 3569 0 3582 76477 3640 * Days w' - passenger counts of zero are not Included in the averages. Selectior, na: Route = 1Ventura County,Route = 2Antelope Valley,Route = 3San Bemardin, to = 4Riverside,Route = 50range County,Route = 6lnland Empire/Orange Lin,Rc 7Riverside-Fullerton-LA,Route = 9Burbank Tums 187 101 METROLINK Passenger 1, 'tidy Ridership Trip Dates From 06/01/2003 to 06/30/2003 Metrolink S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M Average Train # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Total 2Antelope Valley - Inbound 200 0 289 261 195 196 141 0 0 172 196 194 191 155 0 0 186 190 193 215 144 0 0 189 197 193 196 169 0 0 179 4041 192 202 0 545 532 472 525 324 0 0 417 482 541 610 519 0 0 525 554 512 524 445 0 0 133 472 620 633 382 0 0 424 10191 485 204 0 449 451 453 438 367 0 0 480 483 489 441 427 0 0 500 476 467 400 483 0 0 96 441 436 432 403 0 0 451 9063 432 206 0 420 395 387 445 425 0 0 435 425 405 420 410 0 0 435 435 435 465 415 0 0 235 427 402 465 415 0 0 460 8756 417 208 0 300 370 220 370 385 0 0 380 320 320 330 310 0 0 360 300 325 315 275 0 0 280 265 320 385 295 0 0 320 6745 321 210 0 55 112 100 66 75 0 0 85 82 163 141 61 0 0 68 78 69 130 109 0 0 82 97 68 72 91 0 0 58 1862 89 212 0 97 182 129 126 161 0 0 136 140 123 121 126 0 0 146 129 119 148 141 0 0 151 119 108 114 135 0 0 146 2797 133 214 0 142 120 140 170 159 0 0 145 160 170 135 225 0 0 220 160 140 160 230 0 0 235 165 120 160 160 0 0 155 3471 165 216 0 142 114 117 78 195 0 0 155 150 143 144 266 0 0 179 177 139 172 244 0 0 154 149 136 168 204 0 0 165 3391 161 218 0 32 29 46 32 87 0 0 46 50 46 43 68 0 0 33 36 57 31 72 0 0 34 39 24 23 24 0 0 27 879 42 220 0 105 105 125 95 105 0 0 71 148 115 90 145 0 0 105 95 95 115 95 0 0 105 122 117 125 90 0 0 115 2283 109 222 0 121 131 108 96 206 0 0 102 96 85 115 209 0 0 125 102 126 112 184 0 0 135 117 133 142 187 0 0 119 2751 131 290 0 0 0 0 0 0 150 0 0 0 0 0 0 193 0 0 0 0 0 0 155 0 0 0 0 0 0 167 0 0 665 166 292 0 0 0 0 0 0 215 0 0 0 0 0 0 219 0 0 0 0 0 0 240 0 0 0 0 0 0 201 0 0 875 219 294 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 275 0 0 0 0 0 0 133 0 0 0 0 0 0 172 0 0 780 195 296 0 0 0 0 0 0 288 0 0 0 0 0 0 230 0 0 0 0 0 0 202 0 0 0 0 0 0 197 0 0 917 229 Subtotal 0 2802 2637 853 2624 2794 2921 0 2732 2787 730 1829 2677 2555 0 3486 2697 2492 2630 0 2732 2781 917 2882 2677 2837 0 2610 2915 737 2619 59467 2Antelo pe Valley - Ou tbound 201 0 82 71 162 149 166 0 0 121 144 130 120 143 0 0 131 110 122 92 155 0 0 44 154 122 97 155 0 0 114 2584 123 203 0 65 39 75 46 38 0 0 54 61 64 68 47 0 0 64 34 39 34 49 0 0 188 72 185 81 52 0 0 47 1402 67 205 0 75 90 140 140 110 0 0 115 120 130 85 260 0 0 110 100 110 115 110 0 0 150 80 110 80 95 0 0 135 2460 117 207 0 84 63 112 91 126 0 0 126 92 119 127 139 0 0 136 104 112 83 119 0 0 120 93 99 139 141 0 0 134 2359 112 209 0 97 144 90 94 92 0 0 92 96 141 140 159 0 0 100 91 90 113 152 0 0 108 113 89 84 77 0 0 113 2275 108 211 0 306 325 303 343 368 0 0 294 352 372 336 353 0 0 356 348 301 334 355 0 0 248 304 334 298 389 0 0 317 6936 330 213 0 270 255 289 240 265 0 0 152 180 275 290 245 0 0 265 250 255 205 195 0 0 185 186 180 270 235 0 0 245 4932 235 215 0 715 745 607 715 749 0 0 715 643 581 735 690 0 0 769 739 672 714 662 0 0 389 615 720 718 492 0 0 664 14049 669 217 0 433 436 436 413 482 0 0 502 501 535 584 601 0 0 612 503 562 436 467 0 0 359 436 436 423 425 0 0 422 10004 476 219 0 410 445 310 435 435 0 0 261 255 455 450 435 0 0 425 415 440 475 385 0 0 285 302 276 425 415 0 0 495 8229 392 221 0 107 125 160 150 200 0 0 170 140 165 145 165 0 0 145 140 140 105 155 0 0 140 145 105 130 125 0 0 130 2987 142 223 0 78 78 95 75 101 0 0 66 85 72 85 112 0 0 87 72 102 64 113 0 0 61 109 89 100 93 0 0 72 1809 86 291 0 0 0 0 0 0 140 0 0 0 0 0 0 95 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 0 0 470 118 293 0 0 0 0 0 0 162 0 0 0 0 0 0 134 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 0 0 536 134 Days with passenge r counts of zero are not included in the averages. Selection Criteria: Route=1Ventura County,Route = 2Antelope Valley,Route = 3San Bemardino,Route = 4Riverside,Route = 50range County,Route = 6lnland Empire/Orange Lin,Route = 7Riverslde-Fullerton-L4 Route = 9Burbank Tums 188 11 }il METROLINIC Passe nger M onthly Ridership Trip Dates From 06/01/2003 to 06/30/2003 Metrolink S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M Average Train # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Total 2Antelope Valley - Outbound 295 0 0 0 0 0 0 160 0 0 0 0 0 0 312 0 0 0 0 0 0 180 0 0 0 0 0 0 174 0 0 826 207 297 0 0 0 0 0 0 281 0 0 0 0 0 0 425 0 0 0 0 0 0 228 0 0 0 0 0 0 217 0 0 1151 288 Subtotal 0 2816 2891 743 2668 3039 3349 0 2906 2770 643 2277 2745 2694 0 3604 2722 2779 3132 0 2669 3165 966 3200 2945 2917 0 2609 2845 631 2888 63009 2Antelope Valley Totals 0 5618 5528 1596 5292 5833 6270 0 5638 5557 1373 4106 5422 5249 0 7090 5419 5271 5762 0 5401 5946 1883 6082 5622 5754 0 5219 5760 1368 5507 122476 * Days v' iassenger counts of zero are not included in the averages. Selection ,1a: Route = 1Ventura County,Route = 2Antelope Valley,Route = 3Sa n Bernardino, e = 4Riverside,R oute = 50range County,Route = 6lnland Empire/Orange Lin,RoL 7Riverside-Fullerton-LA,Route = 9Burbank Tums 189 iit11 METROLINIC Passeng er 1, ,thly Ridership Trip Dates From 06/01/2003 to 06/30/2003 Metrolink S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M Average Train # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Total 3San Bernardino - Inbound 301 0 378 410 379 379 323 0 0 368 390 401 375 330 0 0 358 400 394 371 299 0 0 353 399 415 364 223 0 0 345 7654 364 303 0 559 617 569 621 463 0 0 552 583 537 537 477 0 0 553 549 523 563 550 0 0 604 633 618 601 464 0 0 577 11750 560 305 0 649 654 672 651 694 0 0 689 708 672 655 591 0 0 652 559 664 679 647 0 0 514 679 689 677 629 0 0 624 13648 650 307 0 896 914 834 801 756 0 0 824 988 896 862 818 0 0 714 747 793 826 688 0 0 779 849 927 846 694 0 0 857 17309 824 309 0 1045 1034 803 642 610 0 0 661 674 640 621 651 0 0 649 811 815 894 754 0 0 761 841 911 927 839 0 0 875 16458 784 311 0 577 709 683 703 569 0 0 701 709 634 611 709 0 0 693 672 703 703 508 0 0 589 709 703 701 703 0 0 629 13918 663 313 0 361 426 362 346 314 0 0 444 487 421 389 310 0 0 378 369 322 329 285 0 0 308 343 479 389 389 0 0 389 7840 373 315 0 379 414 377 491 482 0 0 459 302 259 366 376 0 0 350 289 276 321 289 0 0 299 302 354 327 287 0 0 263 7262 346 317 0 223 291 179 201 231 0 0 267 206 210 163 279 0 0 147 181 230 155 231 0 0 140 171 233 161 173 0 0 171 4243 202 319 0 132 111 116 101 129 0 0 97 113 110 103 184 0 0 128 106 171 105 120 0 0 119 145 125 143 92 0 0 121 2571 122 321 0 15 31 19 17 38 0 0 64 31 11 16 19 0 0 24 21 18 23 39 0 0 35 31 26 48 36 0 0 50 612 29 323 0 111 127 79 89 169 0 0 51 88 141 133 220 0 0 153 140 89 82 221 0 0 119 69 95 85 157 0 0 65 2483 118 325 0 87 86 73 87 123 0 0 40 80 84 78 146 0 0 74 84 69 73 129 0 0 69 76 89 91 112 0 0 76 1826 87 327 0 35 34 35 39 125 0 0 39 27 41 38 114 0 0 55 37 51 39 86 0 0 41 38 53 49 97 0 0 45 1118 53 329 0 68 115 71 67 80 0 0 34 59 61 77 139 0 0 120 76 58 66 138 0 0 89 71 156 86 152 0 0 48 1831 87 381 93 0 0 0 0 0 151 92 0 0 0 0 0 112 87 0 0 0 0 0 171 82 0 0 0 0 0 167 89 0 1044 116 383 0 0 0 0 0 0 169 0 0 0 0 0 0 305 0 0 0 0 0 0 251 0 0 0 0 0 0 306 0 0 1031 258 385 223 0 0 0 0 0 283 108 0 0 0 0 0 241 203 0 0 0 0 0 222 159 0 0 0 0 0 251 281 0 1971 219 387 218 0 0 0 0 0 271 209 0 0 0 0 0 267 194 0 0 0 0 0 226 167 0 0 0 0 0 312 169 0 2033 226 389 0 0 0 0 0 0 133 0 0 0 0 0 0 126 0 0 0 0 0 0 140 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 126 0 0 525 131 391 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 0 0 248 62 393 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 0 0 0 0 0 0 119 0 0 0 0 0 0 135 0 0 0 0 0 0 231 0 0 589 147 395 0 0 0 0 0 0 186 0 0 0 0 0 0 177 0 0 0 0 0 '0 132 0 0 0 0 0 0 146 0 0 641 160 397 322 0 0 0 0 0 0 305 0 0 0 0 0 0 429 0 0 0 0 0 0 230 0 0 0 0 0 0 266 0 1552 310 Subtotal 856 5973 5235 1340 5290 5118 5363 913 5041 5229 1332 4819 5873 5047 805 6891 5515 5251 5106 714 5445 5024 1419 5048 5176 4984 638 5356 5495 1617 5135 120157 3San Bernardino - Outbound 300 0 87 76 57 65 61 0 0 81 59 61 60 58 0 0 72 61 72 56 55 0 0 79 59 61 64 63 0 0 73 1380 66 302 0 59 73 96 179 95 0 0 103 89 72 101 183 0 0 141 73 72 84 127 0 0 86 73 87 108 78 0 0 87 2066 98 304 0 134 111 112 108 169 0 0 151 134 128 138 154 0 0 170 112 101 122 140 0 0 109 123 136 105 118 0 0 128 2703 129 306 0 127 111 117 147 114 0 0 117 98 108 99 136 0 0 119 129 97 115 133 0 0 111 98 102 116 132 0 0 114 2440- 116 308 0 184 415 180 160 310 0 0 238 118 93 246 131 0 0 110 84 143 184 178 0 0 142 173 242 143 215 0 0 104 3793 181 310 0 489 518 510 488 483 0 0 450 511 533 515 608 0 0 508 485 508 552 487 0 0 507 482 517 531 578 0 0 490 10750 512 * Days with passenger counts of zero are not included in the ave rages. Selection Criteria: Route = 1 Ventura County,Route = 2An telope Valley,Route = 3San Bemardino,Route = 4Riverside,Route = 50range Cou nty,Route = 6lnland Empire/Orange Lin, Route = 7Riverside-Fullerton-LA,Route = 9Burbank rums 190 !{{ 111 METRQLINIC Passenger Monthly Ridership Trip Dates Fr om 06/01/2003 to 06/30/2003 Metrolink S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M Average Train # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Total 3San Bernardino Outbound 312 0 302 375 335 345 349 0 0 464 329 351 359 392 0 0 391 348 379 389 427 0 0 335 372 372 409 376 0 0 407 7806 372 314 0 535 589 561 511 398 0 0 415 535 565 509 511 0 0 566 507 495 591 585 0 0 521 529 549 508 469 0 0 495 10944 521 316 0 455 471 549 409 377 0 0 444 491 499 412 356 0 0 433 507 589 531 429 0 0 431 589 499 466 390 0 0 436 9763 465 318 0 576 580 593 693 591 0 0 550 604 578 548 464 0 0 531 695 472 475 624 0 0 461 622 607 580 506 0 0 580 11930 568 320 0 1029 1004 982 1008 846 0 0 952 1091 947 1076 872 0 0 991 1021 989 1028 828 0 0 981 1026 1133 981 942 0 0 921 20648 983 322 0 516 656 399 419 399 0 0 456 456 429 456 383 0 0 456 473 489 493 303 0 0 523 541 456 483 399 0 0 631 9816 467 324 0 353 401 380 400 296 0 0 375 363 379 398 378 0 0 315 343 276 316 473 0 0 370 400 394 360 291 0 0 336 7597 362 326 0 186 246 172 214 171 0 0 186 146 158 133 168 0 0 236 164 142 156 169 0 0 196 110 143 156 194 0 0 136 3582 171 328 0 92 94 99 129 130 0 0 80 97 73 94 161 0 0 117 89 91 85 112 0 0 141 132 99 96 103 0 0 74 2188 104 380 0 0 0 0 0 0 57 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 0 0 183 46 382 122 0 0 0 0 0 167 118 0 0 0 0 0 136 141 0 0 0 0 0 169 100 0 0 0 0 0 244 84 0 1281 142 384 0 0 0 0 0 0 164 0 0 0 0 0 0 171 0 0 0 0 0 0 135 0 0 0 0 0 0 108 0 0 578 145 386 184 0 0 0 0 0 123 88 0 0 0 0 0 161 237 0 0 0 0 0 133 277 0 0 0 0 0 151 289 0 1643 183 388 0 0 0 0 0 0 192 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 0 0 0 0 0 0 167 0 0 0 0 0 0 167 0 0 630 158 390 289 0 0 0 0 0 252 326 0 0 0 0 0 243 280 0 0 0 0 0 231 250 0 0 0 0 0 258 221 0 2350 261 392 0 0 0 0 0 0 298 0 0 0 0 0 0 319 0 0 0 0 0 0 245 0 0 0 0 0 0 363 0 0 1225 306 394 0 0 0 0 0 0 174 0 0 0 0 0 0 218 0 0 0 0 0 0 176 0 0 0 0 0 0 245 0 0 8.13 203 396 379 0 0 0 0 0 0 270 0 0 0 0 0 0 312 0 0 0 0 0 0 347 0 0 0 0 0 0 266 0 1574 315 Subtotal 974 5720 5275 1427 5062 4974 4955 970 5091 5177 1304 4993 5397 4854 860 6874 5124 5142 4789 802 5121 5144 1391 5156 4915 5070 974 5329 5106 1575 5012 117683 3San Bernardino Totals 1830 11693 10510 2767 10352 10092 10318 1883 10132 10406 2636 9812 11270 9901 1665 10639 10393 9895 1516 10566 10168 2810 10204 10091 10054 1612 10685 10601 3192 10147 237840 13765 Days vy' 'assenger counts of zero are not included in the averages. Selection L. . ia: Route = 1Ventura County,Route = 2Antelope Valley,Route = 3San Bernardino,. .a = 4Riverside,Rou te = 50range County,Route = 6lnland Empire/Orange Lin,Rou, 7Riverside-Fullerton-LA,Route = 9Burbenk Tums 191 I METROLINI( Passenger h,, thly Rider ship Trip Dates From 06/01/2003 to 06/30/2003 Metrolink S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M Average Train # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Total 4Riverside - Inbound 401 0 299 351 339 351 267 0 0 359 367 377 341 227 0 0 349 351 357 329 271 0 0 341 347 269 288 241 0 0 329 6750 321 403 0 515 587 563 552 459 0 0 533 575 564 532 492 0 0 520 581 551 507 419 0 0 489 652 468 685 371 0 0 481 11096 528 405 0 519 584 316 557 517 0 0 469 567 565 577 483 0 0 518 463 578 515 469 0 0 443 503 295 430 410 0 0 479 10257 488 407 0 563 576 576 522 553 0 0 523 533 563 553 523 0 0 537 546 563 518 526 0 0 538 543 264 295 379 0 0 473 10667 508 409 0 161 166 168 321 311 0 0 257 301 183 141 194 0 0 174 162 194 139 138 0 0 177 152 128 144 119 0 0 165 3895 185 411 0 24 17 29 30 80 0 0 43 12 24 16 85 0 0 24 32 25 41 30 0 0 25 15 23 41 62 0 0 26 704 34 Subtotal 0 2281 2333 0 2184 2276 2004 0 2135 2049 0 2013 1447 1582 0 2064 2081 1991 2187 0 2355 2160 0 2122 2268 1853 0 2212 1883 0 1953 43369 4Riverside - Ou tbound 402 0 57 59 83 206 206 0 0 187 215 114 204 186 0 0 66 59 94 77 49 0 0 53 41 41 61 67 0 0 70 2195 105 404 0 431 517 493 446 479 0 0 506 721 527 546 505 0 0 513 539 472 457 7 0 0 463 503 540 446 424 0 0 398 9933 473 406 0 684 597 554 562 481 0 0 533 569 566 517 451 0 0 577 539 561 531 327 0 0 463 571 339 379 389 0 0 494 10684 509 408 0 511 533 553 471 411 0 0 472 537 497 483 404 0 0 475 511 488 469 137 0 0 422 621 719 715 431 0 0 459 10319 491 410 0 315 354 338 329 223 0 0 317 318 334 286 229 0 0 293 307 283 269 26 0 0 0 239 184 218 223 0 0 249 5334 267 412 0 189 176 168 159 139 0 0 156 152 193 205 153 0 0 183 213 156 196 172 0 0 418 163 129 133 86 0 0 196 3735 178 Subtotal 0 2236 2173 0 2171 2231 1928 0 2168 1999 0 1819 1952 1620 0 2023. 2187 2189 1939 0 2512 2241 0 2107 2054 718 0 2138 1952 0 1866 42200 4Riverside Totals 0 4517 4506 0 4355 4507 3932 0 4303 4048 0 3832 3399 3202 0 4087 4268 4180 4126 0 4867 4401 0 4229 4322 2571 0 4350 3835 0 3819 85569 * Da ys with passenger cou nts of zero are not Included in the average s. Selection Criteria: Route = 1Ventura County,Route = 2Antelope Valley,Route = 3San Bemardino,Route = 4Riverside,Rou te = 50range County,Route = 6lnla nd Empire/Ora nge Li n,Route = 7Riverside-Fullerton-LA,Route = 9Burbank Tums 192 .,__._ d _ _ �,.. t., ,, ... f1 METROLINK. Pas se nger Monthly Ridership Trip Dates From 06/01/2003 to 06/30/2003 Metrolink S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M Average Train # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Total 50range County - Inbound 601 0 488 493 521 536 373 0 0 513 507 571 491 477 0 0 492 529 511 529 439 0 0 503 585 518 529 381 0 0 449 10435 497 603 0 610 590 550 500 460 0 0 560 610 500 500 375 0 0 510 545 490 485 360 0 0 560 610 610 550 430 0 0 620 11025 525 605 0 409 481 506 452 328 0 0 518 505 503 517 484 0 0 528 466 509 432 419 0 0 372 386 405 428 336 0 0 428 9412 448 607 0 517 527 545 537 480 0 0 527 532 525 527 485 0 0 500 527 0 527 480 0 0 500 517 517 537 480 0 0 522 10309 515 609 0 197 170 161 278 240 0 0 192 169 177 208 228 0 0 181 192 166 190 219 0 0 150 151 195 174 235 0 0 188 4061 193 681 0 123 129 117 121 99 0 0 131 117 128 116 102 0 0 102 107 123 112 109 0 0 128 126 100 110 91 0 0 108 2399 114 683 0 297 307 271 281 216 0 0 321 235 335 291 273 0 0 280 259 215 272 305 0 0 305 295 305 155 225 0 0 315 5798 276 685 0 111 166 161 100 84 0 0 111 127 123 113 119 0 0 131 120 146 121 95 0 0 117 147 131 116 113 0 0 89 2541 121 687 0 53 235 92 125 132 0 0 128 139 94 182 88 0 0 118 92 105 111 82 0 0 106 115 122 98 122 0 0 103 2442 116 689 0 92 111 96 132 107 0 0 141 110 114 92 92 0 0 143 142 141 133 153 0 0 156 126 138 142 109 0 0 108 2578 123 Subtotal 0 3209 3062 0 3142 3070 2723 0 2979 2912 0 2897 3041 2522 0 2928 2897 3020 2519 0 3051 3037 0 2985 2406 2661 0 3058 2879 0 2930 61000 50ran ge County - Outbound 600 0 69 81 69 200 94 0 0 71 81 75 82 90 0 0 129 85 111 85 90 0 0 110 95 94 80 75 0 0 110 1976 94 602 0 177 210 239 209 343 0 0 291 246 240 209 241 0 0 231 241 227 241 267 0 0 190 467 241 238 209 0 0 198 5.155 245 604 0 478 486 450 385 404 0 0 447 526 511 459 522 0 0 532 448 431 519 419 0 0 425 481 466 478 431 0 0 457 9755 465' 606 0 645 647 637 652 580 0 0 642 657 645 647 585 0 0 637 652 637 637 515 0 0 617 635 637 642 577 0 0 637 13160 627: 608 0 409 395 379 390 325 0 0 381 408 413 408 325 0 0 402 385 389 382 190 0 0 364 388 402 354 308 0 0 383 7780 370 682 0 163 177 231 130 142 0 0 144 161 168 154 117 0 0 159 231 161 171 149 0 0 147 163 141 145 115 0 0 137 3306 157 684 0 128 255 136 129 146 0 0 154 148 128 129 112 0 0 133 147 152 138 174 0 0 168 128 127 122 168 0 0 126 3048 145 686 0 89 153 92 168 123 0 0 126 136 129 161 153 0 0 192 168 156 149 153 0 0 132 123 123 153 149 0 0 123 2951 141 688 0 317 308 343 423 282 0 0 338 342 338 342 308 0 0 331 327 342 315 232 0 0 338 328 292 332 292 0 0 338 6808 324 Subtotal 0 2712 2686 0 2594 2647 2453 0 2684 2637 0 2491 2523 2324 0 2568 2475 2576 2439 0 2705 2591 0 2746 2606 2189 0 2808 2544 0 2509 53939 50range County Totals 0 5921 , 5748 0 5736 5717 5176 0 5663 5549 0 5388 5564 4846 0 5372 5596 4958 0 5756 5628 0 5731 5012 4850 0 5866 5423 0 5439 114939 5496 * Days wit' passenger counts of zero are not included in the av erages. Selection( a: Route = 1Ventura County,Route = 2Antelope Valley,Route = 3San Bernardino, = 4Riverside,R oute = 50range Coun ty,Route = 61nland Empire/Orange Lin,Rou, 7Riverside-r-u derton-LA,Route = 9Burbank Turns 193 n-r�s �.l -_ n-i inninnnn l ( ]11 METROLINK. Passenger IL. thly Ridership Trip Date s From 06/01/2003 to 06/30/2003 Metrolink S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M Average Train # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Total 6lnland Empire/Orange Lin - I nbound 803 0 322 414 331 413 323 0 0 397 426 419 323 240 0 0 397 414 426 296 260 0 0 387 411 388 313 213 0 0 340 7453 355 805 0 421 397 412 381 288 0 0 379 401 391 385 317 0 0 386 341 421 351 305 0 0 335 389 409 379 310 0 0 331 7729 368 807 0 478 523 542 539 525 0 0 541 532 548 538 538 0 0 538 572 532 537 523 0 0 515 549 523 503 503 0 0 538 11137 530 809 0 377 370 369 380 272 0 0 358 381 362 353 317 0 0 269 381 280 383 281 0 0 368 398 353 390 277 0 0 414 7333 349 811 0 26 33 24 16 29 0 0 12 15 20 21 41 0 0 20 25 22 30 20 0 0 32 21 26 26 30 0 0 17 506 24 813 0 18 44 17 39 50 0 0 33 12 3 20 52 0 0 20 20 20 26 30 0 0 21 15 22 24 40 0 0 21 547 26 Subtotal 0 1781 1768 0 1720 1743 1505 0 1753 1623 0 1658 1721 1373 0 1652 1642 1695 1487 0 1767 1640 0 1630 1701 1419 0 1783 1635 0 1661 34705 6lnlan d Empire/Orange Lin - Outbo und 800 0 20 51 15 33 31 0 0 27 25 28 26 39 0 0 27 18 15 25 33 0 0 55 26 22 18 22 0 0 21 577 27 802 0 46 42 42 81 106 0 0 58 32 11 51 96 0 0 53 49 49 53 57 0 0 42 38 60 46 73 0 0 54 1139 54 804 0 622 678 689 648 589 0 0 677 677 644 684 590 0 0 668 674 634 655 635 0 0 598 672 645 624 612 0 0 629 13544 645 806 0 457 416 382 406 391 0 0 493 486 462 442 386 0 0 452 472 451 457 372 0 0 477 492 498 454 386 0 0 433 9265 441 808 0 342 396 419 404 284 0 0 289 414 401 396 259 0 0 427 438 438 376 248 0 0 429 413 399 432 248 0 0 349 7801 371 810 0 71 99 118 148 188 0 0 138 168 119 123 147 0 0 128 123 138 142 117 0 0 118 102 122 132 105 0 0 118 2664 127 Subtotal 0 1682 1720 0 1682 1665 1517 0 1774 1708 0 1719 1746 1446 0 1665 1558 1665 1589 0 1802 1722 0 1755 1725 1462 0 1743 1706 0 1604 34990 6lnland Empire/Orange Lin Totals 0 3463 '3488 0 3402 3408 3022 0 3527 3331 0 3377 3467 2819 0 3317 3200 3360 3076 0 3569 3362 0 3385 3426 2881 0 3526 3341 0 3265 69695 • Days with passenger counts of zero are not included in the averages. Selection Criteria: Route = 1Ventura County,Route = 2Antelope Valley,Route = 3San Bemardino,Route = 4Riverside,Route = 50range County,Route = 6lnland Empire/Orange Lin,Route = 7Riverside-Fullerton-LA,Route = 9Burbank Tums 194 Dri- .#...I .... n7ino Mnno 1I 1 METROI.INK. Passenger Mo nthly Ridership Trip Date s From 06/01/2003 to 06/30/2003 Metr olink S M TWT F S S M TWT F S S M TWT F S S M T W .. T F S S M Average Train # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Total 7Riverside-Fu llerton-LA - Inbound 701 0 293 327 314 311 320 0 0 301 323 307 312 329 0 0 462 358 496 436 389 0 0 329 319 401 359 297 0 0 399 7382 352 703 0 271 339 269 261 381 0 0 315 451 329 265 221 0 0 262 247 408 261 291 0 0 211 256 257 261 261 0 0 221 6038 288 705 0 49 49 47 46 69 0 0 55 58 43 51 89 0 0 58 49 56 59 67 0 0 72 53 51 60 72 0 0 59 1212 58 707 0 71 56 41 69 111 0 0 63 58 38 58 45 0 0 32 57 71 63 97 0 0 39 41 42 60 74 0 0 42 1228 58 Subtotal 0 771 687 0 734 717 684 0 711 819 0 651 751 704 0 756 684 671 881 0 890 686 0 814 1031 844 0 669 740 0 721 15860 7Riverside-Fullerto n-LA - Ou tbo und 700 0 26 22 21 23 24 --0 0 24 18 22 20 16 0 0 17 20 21 17 24 0 0 35 22 15 16 20 0 0 22 445 21 702 0 66 44 58 52 -66 0 0 59 42 39 47 49 0 0 51 39 39 39 41 0 0 32 37 38 59 37 0 0 63 997 47 704 0 78 61 69 59 77 0 0 61 63 67 55 137 0 0 78 72 75 57 52 0 0 64 67 69 63 81 0 0 67 1472 70 706 0 307 314 317 278 321 0 0 319 311 321 321 435 0 0 411 384 417 413 313 0 0 311 319 377 312 301 0 0 304 7106 338 708 0 351 410 406 345 349 0 0 396 342 324 341 261 0 0 391 340 441 347 341 0 0 374 651 640 556 344 0 0 424 8374 399 Subtotal 0 851 757 0 859 773 898 0 855 873 0 816 1139 783 0 875 828 871 837 0 776 784 0 948 993 771 0 1096 1006 0 880 18394 7Riverside-Fullerton-LA Totals 0 1622 1444 0 1593 1490 1582 0 1566 1692 0 1467 1890 1487 0 1512 1542 1718 0 1666 1470 0 1762 2024 1615 0 1765 1746 0 1601 34254 1631 ' Days with passenger counts of zero are not included in the av erages. Selection ( 1: Route = 1Ventura County,Route = 2Antelope Valley,Route = 3San Bernardino,, = 4Riverside,Route = 50range County,Route = 6lnland Empire/Orange Lin,Rout, 7Riverside-1 _..arton-LA,Route = 9Burbank Tums 'I 95 Drinhnd nn 1171110 /1 1111.3 1 f[I ll 1 METROLINK. Passenger h. filly Ridership Trip Dates From 06/01/2003 to 06/30/2003 Metrolink S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M Average Train # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Total 9Bu rbank Turns - Inbound 900 0 66 44 51 60 42 0 0 70 79 85 70 70 0 0 85 92 77 80 85 0 0 90 83 89 76 80 0 0 76 1550 74 902 0 10 8 11 22 13 0 0 10 11 13 16 15 0 0 7 81 15 24 14 0 0 8 12 11 14 12 0 0 11 338 16 904 0 27 29 37 31 34 0 0 31 31 38 33 31 0 0 38 31 31 27 34 0 0 24 28 32 41 31 0 0 39 678 32 906 0 75 26 67 56 68 0 0 51 48 65 68 0 0 0 52 68 64 69 48 0 0 57 73 56 75 79 0 0 41 1206 60 908 0 121 127 116 98 120 0 0 114 124 125 115 182 0 0 128 138 137 127 132 0 0 138 134 133 .132 116 0 0 127 2684 128 910 0 89 92 92 95 65 0 0 92 72 92 115 0 0 0 86 95 92 92 74 0 0 86 97 93 98 74 0 0 95 1786 89 910X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 Subtotal 0 326 362 0 368 418 302 0 505 419 0 403 414 392 0 403 388 374 342 0 365 417 0 396 416 387 0 427 436 0 389 8246 9Burban k Turn s - Outbound 901 0 42 38 43 28 28 0 0 31 32 50 41 39 0 0 40 50 53 51 48 0 0 52 55 52 58 39 0 0 51 921 44 903 0 52 55 71 59 52 0 0 68 54 62 51 44 0 0 41 52 44 61 50 0 0 11 56 66 44 60 0 0 50 1103 53 905 0 32 42 46 37 40 0 0 42 41 52 48 38 0 0 47 34 52 36 48 0 0 23 29 39 58 52 0 0 42 878 42: 907 0 11 9 13 17 14 0 0 13 9 13 13 11 0 0 9 13 29 13 15 0 0 16 9 10 21 23 0 0 7 288 14 909 0 15 14 15 16 10 0 0 14 13 12 12 0 0 0 15 12 11 14 8 0 0 11 10 14 10 8 0 0 24 258 13 Subto tal 0 158 157 0 168 189 132 0 161 175 0 113 181 182 0 166 152 188 144 0 149 165 0 152 189 169 0 159 191 0 174 3448 9Burbank Turns Totals 0 484 • 519 0 536 607 434 0 666 594 0 516 595 574 0 540 562 486 0 514 582 0 548 605 556 0 586 627 0 563 11694 Metrolink Totals 569 1830 37310 35501 4363 35061 35360 33867 1883 35439 34710 4009 32094 34998 31505 1665 39595 34900 34931 33291 1516 36298 35219 4693 35588 34991 31357 1612 35568 34902 4560 33923 752944 Days with passenger counts of zero are not included in the av erages. Selection Criteria: Route = 1Ventura County,Route = 2Antelope Valley,Route = 3San Bemardino,Route = 4Riverside,Route = 5Orange County,Route = 6lnland Empire/Orange Lin,Route = 7Riverside-Fullerton-LA,Route = 9Burbank Tums 196 __ Ate,., ,M, , r% ii �, Daily Activity Report 'lrr,raporrrrrlon 0.111. liSMA1A Metrolink Stations Generated from 4/01/2003 to 6/30/2003 Riverside Pedley La Sierra W. Corona N. Corona Total 1 - Standard Procedures 1A - RCTC Staff on Site 3 0 3 1 3 10 1B - Customer Assistance 69 68 69 70 70 346 1C - Ambassador on Site 66 36 14 11 36 163 2 - Criminal Incidents 2D - Criminal Behavior Total 138 104 86 82 109 519 2 0 0 0 0 2 Total 2 0 0 0 0 2 4 - Maintenance/Repairs 4A - Lights 1 0 1 1 0 3 4B - TVM / Validator Machine 21 12 6 6 10 55 4C - Elevator 4 0 0 3 0 7 4D - Station Cleaning 25 21 24 23 6 99 4E - Landscaping 15 20 13 16 9 73 4F - Dumpster/Porta Potti 4 21 10 10 0 45 4H - Other 0 0 0 1 0 1 Total 70 74 54 60 25 283 5 - Miscellaneous 5A - Miscellaneous Activity 22 5 79 21 17 144 Total 22 5 79 21 17 144 6 - Parked Overnight * 6A - Parked Overnight 27 3 11 5 7 53 Total 27 3 11 5 7 53 7 - Overflow * 7A - Veh. In Overflow 48 0 57 0 0 105 Total 48 0 57 0 0 105 9 - Empty Spaces * 9A - Empty Spaces 98 0 201 290 0 589 Total 98 0 201 290 0 589 91 - R2R Vehicles * 91A - R2R Vehicles 9 1 7 2 8 27 Total 9 1 7 2 8 27 92 - Vehicles Parked * 92A - Vehicles Parked 41 0 69 0 422 532 Total 41 0 69 0 422 532 * Value is averaged over the data entry days Wednesday, July 23, 2003 197 9 it i • ADDITION TO AGENDA ITEM 6R Jul -18-03 12:23 From-SCRRA-fvETROLINN EXC +2134520452 T-253 P.O7/15 F-843 - BACK-UP F- CC V W cc 0 W d 0 2 trib METROLINK AVERAGE WEEKDAY PASSENGER TRIPS THIRTEEN MONTH WIND OW- HOLIDAY ADJUSTED JuP 02 Feb 03 Mar 03 May 03 Change Jun 03 vs May 03 % Change Jun 03 vs Jun 02 5,694 10,286 5,840, 9,817 5,694 9,688 5,495 10,141 5,704 10,328 6,OT 1 10,411 3,402 5,437 3,673 5,253 3,727 5,370 3,919 5. 384 3,880 5,584 -1% -4% 2% -3f° 10,112 10,248 10,652 10,208 10,378 2% -3% 5% 4,047 5,556 4,222 5,432 4,380 5,465 4,444 5,372 -1% -3% 2,982 2 ,958 3,092 3,139 11% 1 ,631 34,294 33,759 33,485 34,109 34,912 35,160 :32,032 33,708 34,988 35,505 34,611 4n%( 1% OX3 NNI1ONI3^I-M3S mull CO C a 01 1,1 CO Jun -02 Jul -02 Se -02 Oct -02 Nov -02 726 159 Dec -02 Jan -03 lange Jun a3 vs % Use rigs Jun 03vsJrn02 692 119 797 128 848 284 865 199 951 253 892 150 914% AVERAGE DAILY METROLINK MONTHLYPASSHOLDERS ON A MTRAK THIRTEEN MONTH WI ND OW Firaimikt 71 23 15 22 47 101 22 18 806 765 885 935 951 1059 99S 230 142 143 306 229 104 116 -14% 473 % 30% -5% 16% (1) (1) 115 % 160 % -55 % 12% 24 % 5 '1% -32% 18% 62 59 66 71 61 82 90 155 134 89 24 14 1,052 179 143 5% -3% -5% 89 (1) (1) 790% P jUl (1) 902% (1) Prior to Rail 2 Rail, Amtrak Slep•Up!No Step-up progra rn was only good on Amtrak weekday tra ins. (2) Ra ll 2 Rad pro vam started September 1.2002. (3) Mis sing data has been adjusted by using the lowest ridership oounl foe lie respe ctA'e iraln, day of week and month. 4 ;rest sumro-Rail 2 Ra11T1212003 METROLINK AVERAGE WEEKDAY PASSENGER TRIPS - H OLIDAY ADJUSTED 39,000 INCEPTION TO D ATE 36,000 33,000 30,000 27,000 24,000 21,000 18,000 15,000 - 1Z000 9,000 6,000 Jul Aug Sep Oc! Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr 4 x�. M ay FY 02103 01/02 FY 00101 Y 99/00 FY 98199 FY 9719s F1' 3'197 Y 95/96 FY 94/95 FY 93194 Jun 3X3 )IN 110NAA-VMS wo1: 9 Avg D affy Riders Qv C [n q N pp G�G77 � O p O O �r O O air w fno U3 7 01 (CI N €P$ -d 91/ZVd 69Z-1 Z9YOZ9Y6R+ �X3 NNI10813N-Ydd)S-W0J4 9Z:Z1 60-91-Inf R01.1 Jun 02 sup' 99% 989 METROLINK SCHEDULE ADHERENCE SUMMARY Pe.rcentage of Trains Arriving Within 5 Minutes of Schedul ed Time LATEST 13 MONTHS u 9B% 99% Sep 02 Ott 92 99% 990.' 106% 9746 98% 99% 99% 98% 96% 95% 99% 96%! 95% 94% 99% 99% Nov 02 989(0 9796 Dec 02 Jan Ora Feb OS Mar 03 Aar 03 May 03 Jun 03 98% 97% 99% 98% 97% 06% 98°x6 9646: 98% 99°.6 95% 91% 94 % 9196 96% 95% 98% 97% 94% 849 98% 975'0 97% 91% 89% 89% 95% 85% 95% 92% 95% 95% 97% 99461 88% 92% 9x4.% 94% 98% 97% 98% 97°%- 97% 94% 99% 89% 92% 90% 92% 89% 98% 97%1 9194 91% 93% 88% Peak Pert ad Trains ArrIvfnWithin 5 Minu tes .o Scheduled Time Jun 03 Peek Perixd?ralns 99% 97% 580% 99°I 10096 99% 98% 96% 9B%6 95% 160% 99% 99% 100% 97% 97% 100% 96 % 99% 97% 99% 9996• 99% 99%6 100% 160% ' i R vur, Sl Rc Lite ;' `;BUR 761115;. 92% 85% 95% 84% 100%_ 10x% ers. i»I�rla �i -95% 97% 93 % 96% 9990 95% 9196 95% 97% 95% 95% 98% 9.5% 96 % 94% 99% 93 % 90% 89% 91%6 I 92% 90% 85 % 9Zr 92% 96 % 97% 98'Y 85 % 8996 97% 97%. 93 % 97% 9S% 910 97% 81% 92% 93 % BB% 1.8% 85% 81% 96% 97% 94 % 93%. 93% 92% 9 99% 93 % 94 % 9796 9.4 B9% 96 93% 87 % 93% 76% 85% 95% 94% 93% 94% 93% 93% 87% 9O% B1 % 85% 95% 91% 9694 88% -.• Tp1aI B .LrTn 95%. 90% 92% 9 91% 90% 89% 92% L 92% 95% 85% 54%. X33% 95 8240 98% 91 % 92 % 85. % 90% B2% 82% 94% 90% 95% 93% 97% 96% 97% 98 % 949E 94% 93 % 95 % 95 % 94% 93 %. Jfi°^0 $5 % 95 % 94 % 92% 9© % 91:0 9 95% 93% 94% 91% .. RIl7F+"su� v ,:. • LOOliau t," .:,'}' -41IEfipi=#} .gale i7g"irtbd% Tat=Crab. 93% 813%1 94% 89% 9G% 80%_ 92% 94% - 14% 66% No_adjustmen ts time been made for relievable delays. Terminated !raids are considered OT ff h eywere on -time at po]n1 or tenni realion. Annulled trains are not Included h the onAlme calculation. Riverside rvuOSOTP represents ar►trneperformance anal nstschedules temporarily modreed for the JJP.RRIle rep'aoement program. OTP against regular srihelvre Is 94 % Inbound, sn4 05% aulboun0. S-ohedults realized 5116103 7•9+1'Syi 3X3 NNI1Oa13'1-MS wog3 01 C .) 2 OT.t31101sw C AUSES OF IITETR OL1NK DELAYS JUNE 2003 CAUSE: Signals/Detectors SIDw OrdersfMOW Track/Switch Dispatching 'M ischa Ica! Freight Train 'Amtrak Train M etro]ink MeetfTurn Vandalism Passenger(s) SORR,A Hold Policy Other TOTAL PiIMAM' CAUSE OF TRAIN DELAYS GREATER TI -IAN 5 MINUTES Saturday Saturday VEN AVL SNB BUR Rl ' OC FNLIOC Wit_ TOTAL % of TOT SNB AVL 0 8 4 0 2 0 1 1 16 7% 1 I 0 4 0 2 0 1 4 0 0 7 3% 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 4 0 a 4% 0 1 1 1 0 3 16 7 9 38 18% 0 0 0 3 8 0 0 1 2 0 14- 6% 0 0 1 1 8 0 1 0 0 0 11 5% 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0% 0 0� 1 13 11 0 1 2 1 0 29 13 % 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 2% 0 0 3 17 28 0 32 2 5 1 88 41% 0 0 11 44 61 0 43 26 20 11 216 100% f 7 1 I Sum .g 106 C ACI S MINUTES LATE: NO DELAY 1 MIN- 5 MIN 6 MIN- 10 MIN 11 MIN -20 MIN 21 MIN -30 MIN GREATER THAN 30 MIN 04NNULLED TOTAL TRAINS OPTD , FREQUENCY OF TRAIN DELAYS BY DURATION JUNE 2003 VEN AVL SNB BUR RIV GC IEIOC RIV/FULL TOTAL 376 376 464 222 183 331 200 161 33 84 105 7 25 42 32 17 5 29 29 0 9 14 14 2 3 9 20 0 12 11 4 7 0 2 7 0 11 0 0 1 3 4 5 0 11 1 2 1 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 420 504 630 _ 229 251 399 252 189 ITRAINS DELAYED >0 min 44 128 166 7 68 66 52 28 TRAINS DELAYED > 5 mirl 11 44 61 0 43 26 _ 20 11 2313 345 102 66 21 27 4 2874 561 % of TOT 80.5 % 12 .0 % 3.5% 2.3% 0.7 % 0.9% 0.1% 100% 19.5% 216 7 .5%1 From-SCRRA-NETROLINK EXC 14 0306FREQ • 1 - Standard Procedures 1A - RCTC Staff on Site 1B - Customer Assistance 1C - Ambassador on Site 2 - Criminal Incidents 2D - Criminal Behavior Daily Activity Report Metrolink Stations Generated from 4/01/2003 to 6/30/2003 Riverside Pedley La Sierra W. Corona N. Corona Total 3 0 3 1 3 10 69 68 69 70 70 346 66 36 14 11 36 163 Total 138 104 86 82 109 519 2 0 0 0 0 2 Total 2 0 0 0 0 2 4 - Maintenance/Repairs 4A - Lights 1 0 1 1 0 3 4B - TVM / Validator Machine 21 12 6 6 10 55 4C - Elevator 4 0 0 3 0 7 4D - Station Cleaning 25 21 24 23 6 99 4E - Landscaping 15 20 13 16 9 73 4F - Dumpster/Porta Potti 4 21 10 10 0 45 4H - Other 0 0 0 1 0 1 Total 70 74 54 60 25 283 5 - Miscellaneous 5A - Miscellaneous Activity 22 5 79 21 17 144 Total 22 5 79 21 17 144 6 - Parked Overnight * 6A - Parked Overnight 27 3 11 5 7 53 Total 27 3 11 5 7 53 7 - Overflow * 7A - Veh. In Overflow 48 0 57 0 0 105 Total 48 0 57 0 0 105 9 - Empty Spaces * 9A - Empty Spaces 98 0 201 290 0 589 Total 98 0 201 290 0 589 91 - R2R Vehicles * 91A - R2R Vehicles 9 1 7 2 8 27 Total 9 1 7 2 8 27 92 - Vehicles Parked * 92A - Vehicles Parked 41 0 69 0 422 532 Total 41 0 69 0 422 532 * Value is averaged over the data entry days Wednesday, July 23, 2003 03:60,--nf versleiaCco utu y rattiSpa rtaliall Cnn vmts 1 n Riverside - Downtown Activity Detail Report Metrolink Stations Date Time A ctivity Log # Description 4/7/2003 6:07pm 68277 2 vehicles were broken into 4/15/2003 6:00pm 68524 Vehicle broken into (window cut open) Activity Type Activity Subtype # Vehicles 0 2 - Criminal Incidents 2D - Criminal Behavior 0 2 - Criminal Incidents 2D - Criminal Behavior Wednesday, July 23, 2003 Page 1 of I AGENDA ITEM 6S • • 0 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: John Standiford, Director of Public Information THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: State Route 91 Advisory Committee Meeting Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the State Route 91 Advisory Committee Meeting Update as an information item. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The State Route 91 Advisory Committee met on July 11th to consider the adoption of a toll policy for the 91 Express Lanes. The Committee has been meeting on a monthly basis since February after the purchase of the toll road by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). The enabling legislation which allowed OCTA to buy the 91 Express Lanes also mandated the creation of a bi-county advisory committee comprised of OCTA Board members and Commissioners from RCTC. The Committee is to provide input and counsel regarding the operation of the toll road as well as on transportation policy issues regarding both counties. RCTC's members on the advisory committee, include Chariman Ron Roberts, John Tavaglione, Bob Buster, Jeff Miller, and Robert Schiffner. Ameal Moore acts as an alternate. The committee is merely advisory in nature, the actual decisions on toll rates and daily operations and any policy concern for the 91 Express Lanes falls under the purview of the road's owners, the Orange County Transportation Authority. Since the first meeting in February the Advisory Committee has considered a number of issues including background information on daily operations, the adoption of a plan of improvements for the corridor and whether to allow carpools of three or more to ride in the lanes for free. A number of presentations have also been made including a briefing on CETAP provided by Cathy Bechtel of RCTC, the 1-15 HOT Lane facility in San Diego was presented by Heather Werdick of SANDAG and Bill Vardoulis an Irvine engineer made a presentation of his Tri-Tunnel concept. The background information on daily operations has been helpful for Board members from both counties. The plan adoption was required by law for OCTA to update but also came before RCTC and the Advisory Committee in May. As for the Agenda Item 6S 198 three plus HOV policy, OCTA eventually adopted a policy to let carpools of three or more to operate without having to pay a toll with the exception of two peak afternoon hours per day for eastbound travelers. Carpools of three or more, pay half price between 4 and 6 p.m. when traveling eastbound Monday through Friday. Toll Policy Since its initial meeting in February, the Advisory Committee discussed toll rates on a couple of occasions but had yet to recommend a policy on an overall policy framework to guide future decisions. This is important to OCTA because the agency seeks to refinance their current debt which was assumed from the previous private sector owner with an interest rate of 7.63 percent. As a government entity, OCTA should be able to obtain financing at a rate at least three points lower than they are currently paying. According to OCTA, this is contingent on the establishment of a toll policy that would allow bondholders to have a reliable set of revenue assumptions for the toll road. For that reason, the Advisory Committee considered an OCTA toll policy proposal at its last meeting on July 11. The policy, which was recommended by the Advisory Committee, will set toll policy for the future and will result in limited toll increases in August. The policy includes a set of trigger points that will result in a toll adjustment when hourly traffic volume consistently reaches or exceeds the threshold of 92 percent of maximum optimal capacity. OCTA has defined this point as 3,128 vehicles per hour. When the trigger point is reached, the individual hourly toll rate in the affected direction will be increased. Adjustments would be limited to being imposed only once during a six-month period. The goals of the toll increase are to ensure high travel speeds to make the toll road an attractive option to commuters who are willing to pay top dollar to access it. Obviously, toll increases pegged to transportation capacity are directed primarily at peak travel hours which take place during the eastbound afternoon commute. Tolls during non -peak hours will remain at current rates but will be adjusted annually based on inflation. While there was some consideration of lowering tolls during the middle of the night and other off hours, the final toll policy will not change off hour tolls but inflation hikes could come next year. The vote on the new toll policy by the Advisory Committee was 8 to 1 in support. RCTC Commissioner Jeff Miller cast the dissenting vote. The OCTA Board of Directors approved the new toll policy on July 14. The action will result in a 75 cent increase in eastbound tolls between 4 and 6 p.m. on Thursday afternoon. This increase will be implemented in August. A copy of the new policy is attached. Agenda Item 6S 199 The Future: Dynamic Pricing? The new OCTA toll road policy attempts to incorporate some of the appeal of the 1- 15 HOT (High Occupancy Toll) Lanes in San Diego County. The 1-15 facility employs dynamic congestion pricing that can be adjusted every 15 minutes depending on the level of traffic in the lanes. Tolls usually average between $2 and $4 but can be adjusted as high as $8. In Orange County, a form of congestion pricing is used in that tolls differ depending on day and time, but they are fixed on a schedule. The other big difference between the San Diego HOT Lanes and the 91 Express Lanes is that in San Diego, carpools of two or more travel for free while on the 91 Express Lanes the carpool must contain at least three or more people before receiving a break on tolls. As part of its action to recommend the new toll policy, the Advisory Committee also directed OCTA staff to commence a study to determine the feasibility of instituting a dynamic toll policy similar to San Diego County on the 1-15. Making that change result in costs for monitoring hardware/software and other infrastructure and could result in changes to operations and in revenue collection. Commissioner Tavaglione offered RCTC's assistance to OCTA in researching the issue and even suggested that the Commission could consider providing funding in moving toward this type of system. The analysis of dynamic pricing will likely take four to six months and will also include research with existing customers to determine support. Next Advisory Committee Meeting The next State Route 91 Advisory Committee meeting will take place in October. A major subject to be considered will be the implementation of a Major Investment Study of major capacity improvements between Riverside and Orange Counties which would include an analysis of potential new highway corridors. Agenda Item 6S 200 ii AGENDA ITEM 6T • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION , DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission 1 FROM: John Standiford, Director of Public Information THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: State and Federal Legislative Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt the following bill positions and associated policy positions: Support - S 1140 (Lautenberg , D — New Jersey) as introduced 5/22/03 and HR 2180 (McGovern, D -Massachusetts) as introduced 5/22/03; Oppose - SB 18 (Burton, D — San Francisco) as amended 7/9/03; and, 2) Receive and file the State and Federal Legislative Status Report as an information item. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Federal Update While the Commission's main concern continues to be the reauthorization of the federal transportation bill, there is little to report regarding substantial progress. Most insiders believe that Congress will pass a continuing resolution to ensure ongoing federal funding of transportation for the near future but that a comprehensive multi -year reauthorization might be more than a year away. Currently, there are significant differences among Congressional leaders as to what level of transportation funding should be maintained. Congressman Don Young (R - Alaska) who chairs the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is looking for a six -year bill with a price tag of $375 billion. That represents a major increase from the President's proposal that keeps funding at current levels which is at $31.8 billion for the current fiscal year. Paying for Congressman Young's bill would require a tax increase given the burgeoning federal deficit. One plausible scenario is that Congress will probably wait to vote on a reauthorization that includes a gas tax hike until after the November elections in 2004 and before a new Congress is seated in 2005. While it might take Congress awhile to pass the reauthorization of the federal transportation act, the business of lawmaking will not stop. The issue of goods Agenda Item 6T 201 movement and its transportation impacts are an important priority. S 1140 by Senator Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey and HR 2180 by Congressman James McGovern of Massachusetts have been titled as the "Safe Highways and Infrastructure !Preservation Act." The major focus of both bIIl, i, the Issue of oversize and extended length trucks. Triple trailer truckers, which are known as Longer Combination Vehicles or LCV's are currently allowed on specified highways in 21 states. They are not allowed to be operated in California. In 1991, Congress passed a freeze that prevented the expansion of LCV use to other states or highways without specific legislation to allow for it. These bills would continue the ban and expand it to the entire National Highway System. The operation of LCV's raises a number of safety considerations and can lead to premature damage to highways and bridges. Last year Commissioner Robin Lowe asked for staff to return with information to give the Commission an opportunity to officially state objections to longer trucks. Both S 1 140 and HR 2180 were introduced in late -May of this year which provides an excellent and appropriate opportunity for the Commission to support this policy direction. A full analysis is attached. State Update The state budget remains the main unresolved topic in Sacramento. While action was taken to avoid a complete shutdown of all state -funded highway work after July 20, the impact of this year's fiscal crisis will loom over California and its local jurisdictions for years to come. The state's level of debt is unprecedented and affects transportation because the state has borrowed liberally from the state highway account. While repayment will be required, the optimism that was held a few years regarding increased transportation funding has been replaced with declining expectations. This only strengthens the need for local transportation funding measures and Riverside County can take comfort in a brighter future thanks to the voter approval of Measure A last November. In terms of state legislation, the continuing budget saga has slowed the progress of some bills but the pace will pick up with the end of the summer recess (assuming that a budget is passed after the writing of this agenda item on July 21). One bill that could have a dramatic impact on transportation development throughout the state is SB 18 by Senator Burton of Sacramento. SB 18 will create a procedure in the California Environmental Quality Act for the protection of Traditional Tribal Cultural Sites as determined by the Native American Heritage Commission. The bill would require the lead agency of any project covered by CEQA to ask the Native American Heritage Commission whether a proposed project is within a 5 -mile radius of a Traditional Tribal Cultural Site. If the Native American Heritage Commission, the Tribe and interest parties determine that mitigation would be needed, it would be included in the Environmental Impact Report. Agenda Item 6T 202 While it is usually advisable to take caution in opposing legislation from the Senate President Pro Tem, this bill has the potential of impacting, delaying or even preventing new transportation projects throughout Riverside County. Given Riverside County's unprecedented achievements as part of the Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP), this bill could undermine the environmental streamlining benefits that the RCIP will establish. Staff recommends an OPPOSE position. Update on Assembly Bill 496 Assemblyman Lou Correa's bill to establish a Santa Ana River Conservancy has passed yet another hurdle and was approved by the Senate Natural Resources Committee. The bill has now been referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee where it will likely be placed on the Suspense File. While Assemblyman Correa has indicated that he would make this a two-year to bill to allow for input and amendments, it appears as if the bill is moving ahead at full speed for disposition this year. Commissioner Ashley and Commission staff recently attended a meeting of water agencies, development interests, and transportation interests who share objections to the bill for a variety of reasons. One concern that was raised in the meeting is that a number of government agencies in Riverside and San Bernardino County could be impacted by the bill but have not expressed their concern. In Riverside County, the bill has been opposed by the Board of Supervisors, the Commission and the City of Corona but a number of other cities have not formally adopted a position. What is important to note is that the bill defines the area of the Conservancy to include the entire Santa Ana Basin as designated by the United States Geological Survey's Santa Ana Basin Water - Quality Assessment Program. This means that the conservancy's legislative requirement to develop a river parkway and open space plan could affect most cities in Western Riverside County even if they are located miles from the river itself. The Commission took action on June 11 to oppose the bill unless amended to recognize transportation projects in the Regional Transportation Plan. While amendment language has been offered to Assemblyman Correa, no action has been taken to protect transportation projects such as the widening of State Route 71 and 91. The next hearing for the bill will likely take place on August 18 in the Senate Appropriations Committee. Attachments: 1) S 1 140 Analysis 2) SB 18 Analysis 3) Federal Legislative Matrix 4) State Legislative Matrix Agenda Item 6T 203 ii BILLS: S 1 140 (Lautenberg, D -New Jersey) Introduced May 22, 2003 HR 2180 (McGovern, D -Massachusetts) Introduced May 22, 2003 SUBJECT: Enacts the Safe Highways and Safe Infrastructure Preservation Act STATUS: S 1140 has been referred to the Senator Committee on Environment and Public Works, HR 2180 has been referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure SUMMARY AS INTRODUCED MAY 22, 2003 These two bills are identical in nature and would extend the current federal freeze on truck sizes and weights to the National Highway System. Triple trailer trucks which are often referred to by transportation officials as "Longer Combination Vehicles" are allowed on selected highways in 21 states. Citing serious safety concerns, Congress passed an "LCV Freeze" in 1991 which prevents allowing LCV's on additional highways without specific Congressional approval. The current federal law that prevents additional LCV use applies only to Interstate Highways. This bill extends the provisions to the entire National Highway System. The current ban will lapse with the expiration of the federal highway act on September 30. California law currently bans triple trailer trucks and the Legislature recently passed Senate Joint Resolution 7 which calls on the President and Congress to maintain current federal truck size and weight limitations and to oppose proposals to experiment with longer and heavier trucks on public highways as part of the process to reauthorize the federal transportation act. IMPACTS ON RIVERSIDE COUNTY Triple trailer trucks can measure as long as 10 -story building and are 50 tons heavier than the largest SUV on the highway. According to the United States Department of Transportation triple trucks would likely have fatal crash rates that are 11 percent higher than trucks that are currently allowed by law. The same study states that nationwide operation of triple trucks and other oversize vehicles would result in more than $300 billion in new bridge construction and other infrastructure needs. 204 Opposition to LCV's is widespread among public safety and transportation agencies primarily due to safety and cost considerations. The Automobile Club of Southern California and the nation Automobile Association of America are also solidly opposed to any legislation that would expand LCV use. Unfortunately, political gamesmanship in Washington has often posed this issue as a fight between the trucking industry and the railroads. Railroad interests have always opposed longer trucks due to competition and some trucking interests have supported longer trucks with the argument that it would result in an overall decline of actual trucks on the roads since the longer vehicles have a higher capacity. Thankfully, the trucks vs. railroad fight does not appear to be an issue this year. According to a June 26, 2003 article in the Washington Post the American Trucking Association and the Association of American Railroads have effectively called a truce on this issue and will work together to promote freight industry issue. Without impetus from the trucking industry, a lifting of current length and weight restrictions on the federal level is unlikely. While this addresses the political issues in Congress, support for LCV's has recently come from an unusual local source in the Southern California Association of Governments with their Operation Jump -Start proposal. Operation Jump -Start is intended to be SCAG's major initiative in the coming year and seeks a comprehensive program of 1) User -Supported Dedicated Truck Ways, 2) Rail Improvements and Grade Separations, and 3) Development of a Regional Maglev system. In its Powerpoint presentation regarding Operation Jump -Start, SCAG states a need for state legislation to authorize LCV's to operate on proposed truck ways. While there will be a number of opportunities to consider and debate the Jump -Start program in the coming months, raising the LCV issues seems to be a counterproductive distraction that will obscure SCAG's message. While the development of dedicated truck ways will be years in the making, SCAG should rethink emphasizing LCV use before the overall proposal can even be considered. Recommended Position Both S 1140 and HR 2180 will extend effective provisions in federal law that protect the public and public infrastructure from triple trucks and Longer Combination Vehicles. While the longer vehicles have the potential of increasing overall goods movement efficiency, safety and damage considerations far outweigh any potential benefit. For that reason, staff recommends a position of SUPPORT. 205 BILL: SB 18 (Burton, D -San Francisco) Introduced December 2, 2002 Amended July 9, 2003 SUBJECT: Establishes the Traditional Tribal Cultural Site Register and makes changes to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to protect Native American Cultural Sites STATUS: Referred to Assembly Natural Resources Committee SUMMARY AS AMENDED July 9, 2003: SB 18 This bill creates a new process for projects under CEQA and expands the role and powers of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The bill would require the lead agency on a project covered by CEQA to ask the NAHC whether the proposed project is within a 5 -mile radius of a Traditional Tribal Cultural Site (TTCS). The NAHC would have 45 days to inform the lead agency if the proposed project is determined to be in proximity to a TTCS and another 75 days to determine whether the project would have an adverse impact on the cultural site. If the NAHC, the Tribe, and interested parties determine that mitigation is required for the proposed project, it would be included in the EIR. If there is not agreement, but the NAHC determines that the mitigations must be completed, the lead agency must adopt the mitigations. Under a new process proposed by this bill, it would take three members of the Native American Heritage Commission to place a proposed TTCS on the list of sites unless the decision is appealed to the full NAHC. The executive secretary of the NAHC, appointed by the Governor, can also be authorized to make these decisions on behalf of the NAHC. The projects on the TTCS are kept confidential; developers and the construction industry will not know whether the proposed CEQA project is within five miles of a TTCS until they ask the NAHC. A TTCS can be added to the list of sacred sites at any time. IMPACTS ON RIVERSIDE COUNTY According to the analysis completed by the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources, SB 18 would give the NAHC precedence and influence over the CEQA process that no other party, agency or governmental body now has. A public agency would be prohibited from carrying out a project that will result in a substantial adverse change to a traditional tribal cultural site unless it has made a good faith effort to consult with affected Native American tribes and the NAHC and finds that "all available means" for preserving the site have been considered to the "maximum extent possible." This provision supercedes the existing authority in CEQA for a public agency to make a finding that certain mitigation measures or project alternatives are infeasible and that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment. Obviously, the proposed process has the potential to significantly slow the CEQA process for the development of transportation projects and could add additional costs for the new NAHC process. Current law already authorizes the NAHC to bring an action to prevent severe and irreparable damage to a Native American place of worship, religious or ceremonial site, or sacred shrine located on public property. In Riverside County, local agencies have developed a positive and effective working relationship with local tribes on issues of mutual concern. This legislation will add a significant and un-necessary burden on the CEQA process for important infrastructure process. This is especially unfortunate given recent long-range planning efforts such as the Riverside County Integrated Project that has sought to protect the environment while streamlining the cumbersome entitlement process for new transportation corridors. In addition to impacting new transportation corridors, this legislation could impact a number of other projects although the impact is unknown because state law requires that traditional tribal cultural sites remain confidential. Last year, the Governor vetoed SB 1828 (Burton) which would have required a lead agency to notify affected tribes when determining if a negative declaration or an environmental impact report was completed for any proposed project within 20 miles of a Native American reservation or sacred site. The Governor stated in his veto message that it would have given Native American Tribes influence over the environmental process beyond that of any other party and other law might be better used to protect sacred sites. This bill provides even greater influence to Native American Tribes over the CEQA process and could impact much larger areas of the state. This year, Governor Davis has stated his inclination to sign this bill although it does not seem to address the concerns he raised last year with SB 1828. Recommended Position While staff realizes the need to protect Native American sacred sites and historical areas of significance, this bill's unintended impacts far outweigh its potential benefits in protecting sacred lands. For that reason, staff recommends that the Commission take an OPPOSE position on this bill. 2 207 RIVERS/ :OUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - POSITION. J FEDER AL LEGISLATION — UPD ATED May 27, 2003 Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of B oard Adoption H.R. 697 M illender- McDonald (Los Angeles) Designates 1-710 as a new high -priority transportation corridor in ISTEA Referred to House Committee on Transportation and Infrastucture H.R. 1150 M iller (Brea) Directs the Secretary of Transportation to award grants to OCTA for the purchase of 46 buses for intercounty express bus service. Two of the identified routes serve Riverside County. Coauthored by Rep . Calvert - Referred to House Committee on Transportation and Infrastucture H.R. 1617 Lipinski (Illinois) Establishes a National Rail Infrastructure Program to provide grants for railroad infrastructure that could include grade separations. Grants would be financed by excise taxes on railroad equipment and rail passenger tickets. Referred to House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and Ways and Means Committee H. R. 2180 McGovern (M ass. ) Enacts the Safe Highways and Infrastructure Preservation Act which would keep intact current federal restrictions on triple trucks and other longer combination vehicles on Interstate Highways and extend the restrictions to the entire Nation Highway System. Referred to House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Staff Recommends: SUPPORT S 725 Bingaman (New Mexico) Tribal Transportation Program Improvement Act of 2003 — provides additional funding for Tribal transportation needs. Referred to Committee on Indian Affairs S 821 Harkin (Iowa) Establishes the Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Energy Act of 2003 . Would authorize federal grants to promote the development of hydrogen fuel cells Referred to Committee on Natural Resources S 1140 Lautenberg (New Jersey) Enacts the Safe Highways and Infrastructure Preservation Act which would keep intact current federal restrictions on triple trucks and other longer combination vehicles on Interstate Highways and extend the restrictions to the entire Nation Highway System. Referred to Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works Staff Recommends: SUPPORT F:\users\preprint\j s\legmat. doc 208 II RIVERS! ;OUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - POSITION: I ST ATE LEGISLATION — UPDATED May 27 , 2003 Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption AB 114 Nakano Permits hybrid -electric vehicles to use HOV Lanes regardless of the number of passengers in the car. Referred to Assembly Transportation _ AB 420 Longville Includes county welfare -to -work programs among alternative transportation methods in a county congestion management program. AB 427 Longville Changes enabling legislation that permits some counties (including San Bernardino and Orange but not Riverside) to impose half -cent transportation sales tax programs by eliminating the 20 -year time limit. Passed Assembly 48- 27 and Passed Senate 21-13. Amendments were received concurrence and it was sent to the Governor on July 14. Inland Empire Legislative Program Sponsored AB 467 Dutra Requires transit operators who have automated ticket machines with video instructions to also include an audio feature Passed Assembly 73- 2 Passed Senate 29-3 and sent to the Governor on July 17. AB 496 Correa Creates the Santa Ana River Conservancy to direct the management of public lands along the river. This could impact potential transportation projects on Routes 71 and 91. Passed Assembly 52- 24, passed Senate Natural Resources 5- 3. Referred to Senate Appropriations. OPPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED 6/10/03 AB 1289 Benoit Would allow additional franchises for privately owned toll roads and would prohibit the state from granting non -competition clauses in order to support the toll facility. Referred to Senate Transportation Committee ACA 7 Dutra Reduces voter threshold for transportation sales tax measures to 55 percent Passed Assembly Elections and Appropriations Committees SUPPORT ACA 9 Levine Allows local jurisdictions to approve special taxes for infrastructure projects with only a majority vote. The bill includes a number of restrictions and specifications on how this could be imposed. Passed Assembly Local Government and Appropriations Committees ACA 11 Levine Lowers the v oter threshold to 55 percent for local bond measures for specified infrastructure projects. Passed Assembly Local Government and Appropriations Committees F:\users\preprint\j s\legmat. doc 209 Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption ACA 14 Steinberg Lowers the voter threshold to 55 percent for local special taxes for either general infrastructure needs or specified housing, open space and neighborhood enhancement projects. Passed Assembly Local Go vernment Appropriations Committee SB 18 Burton Establishes changes to the CEQA project for traditional tribal cultural sites A different version of the bill was approved by the Senate. It has been referred to the Assembly Natural Resources Committee Staff Rec ommends: OPPOSE 7/28/03 SB 87 Hollingsworth Would relinquish part of State Route 79 to the City of Temecula. Passed Senate 40-0 Passed Assembly Transportation Committee and referred to Appropriations Committee SUPPORT 6/10/03 SB 234 011er Allows persons with disabilities driving a vehicle with a disabled placard or license plate to use an HOV lane regardless of the occupancy of the vehicle. Failed Assembly Transportation SB 380 McClintock and Murray Requires Caltrans to evaluate and establish standards for all existing HOV lanes in accordance with specified criteria. Furthermore Caltrans would be required to conduct a traffic model study comparing the alternativ es of establishing an HOV lane, establishing a HOT Lane, adding a mixed flow lane or not doing anything at all when considering new HOV Lanes. Passed Senate Transportation Committee and is now Senate Appropriations Suspense File. SB 427 Dunn Spot bill regarding Caltrans procedure when acquiring homes for highway projects. The final text and intent of this bill has yet to be determined. No action taken SB 541 Torlakson Indexes the state gas tax to ensure that it increases with inflation. Failed passage in Senate Transportation . Reconsideration has been granted . SB 585 Soto States need for statewide general obligation bond for impacts of freight movement. No dollar figure or details on eligible expenditures have been included. (Spot bill) No action taken F:\users\pre js\legmat. doc 210 Legislatio n/_1 Description Auth Bill Status Positi on Da *-. of B oard )ption SB 701 Florez Authorizes the sale of State General Obligation Bonds in the amount of $4 .55 billion for air pollution reduction and control efforts which would include reducing emissions from farming, purchasing clean fuel vehicles, advancing propane technology, and biomass to energy programs. If approved, it would go to state voters in March 2004 . Passed Senate Environmental Quality Committee, referred to Senate Appropriations Committee SB 708 Florez Makes changes to the California Smog Check program which would expand the repair assistance program and increase the fine for unlawful motor vehicle exhaust. Passed Senate 26-13, passed Assembly Transportation, referred to Approprations SB 795 Karnette Allows Service Authorities for Freeway Emergencies (SAFES) to use excess call box revenues to operate the Freeway Service Patrol Passed Senate 21-12, passed Assembly Transportation Committee, referred to Assembly Approprations SB 957 McClintock Authorizes the Governor to declare a "traffic congestion emergency" and requires Caltrans to prepare a report on transportation delay Failed Senate Transportation, reconsideration granted. WATCH 5/14/03 SB 981 Soto and Romero Imposes a 40 cent per barrel fee on oil refined in California to pay for air quality programs Passed Senate Environmental Quality Committee and referred to Senate Revenue and Taxation SCA 2 Torlakson Would lower the threshold on half -cent sales tax measures to a simple majority but would require that at least 25 percent of the revenues be spent on "smart growth planning." Passed Senate Transportation and Constitutional Amendments Committees . SEEK AMEND MENTS SCA 7 Murray Would require that all loans made to the General Fund from transportation sources such as the STIP be repaid with interest Senate Appropriations — Hearing date pending SUPPORT _ 5/14/03 F:\users\preprint\js\legmat.doc 211 II AGENDA ITEM 7 • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Diana Kotler, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Approval of Agreement No. 04-41-014 with Entertainment Publication Operating Company, Inc. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve entering into Agreement No. 04-41-014 with the Entertainment Publication Operating Company, Inc., as part of the Commission's Commuter Assistance Program for FY 2003-04; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Club Ride Program was developed in 1997 as part of the Riverside County Transportation Commission's desire to provide a comprehensive Commuter Assistance Program to serve employers and commuters of Riverside County. The primary purpose of the Commuter Assistance Program, funded by Measure "A", is to encourage solo drivers to try alternative modes of transportation and provide recognition for long-term ridesharing efforts. The Club Ride Program provides a 20% discount at local restaurants and other business establishments. Since the Program's inception, the discounts have been provided via a membership card at pre -selected merchant locations. For the past four years, annual contracts with merchants were secured by GenLor, Inc., as part of their work effort for the Commission. Recently, Commission staff was informed that GenLor is no longer interested in renewing their contract with the Commission due to the company's pursuit of other business ventures. In an effort to continue to provide Club Ride members with valuable discounts without interruption, and taking into consideration the need to maintain a high level of participation in the Club Ride Program, staff evaluated a number of other vendors in the similar sphere of service and conducted seven focus group meetings — six with commuters and one with employer representatives. Input from the focus Agenda Item 7 212 groups revealed that even though the current Club Ride Program is valued by the membership, addition of new geographic areas, greater diversity of participating merchants and increase in discount offerings, will be of benefit and will lead to the increased popularity and use of the Club Ride Program. Based on the responses from the focus groups and evaluation of the available vendors, Entertainment Publications Operating Company, Inc., (Entertainment Book) is recommended as the preferred vendor for the Club Ride Program. The Entertainment Book will be developed specifically for the Inland Empire and will include 80 pages of discount offerings providing coverage for the entire Inland Empire. The transition from GenLor to Entertainment Book presents several prospects for the Club Ride Program participants: 1) The Entertainment Book provides an opportunity for a different discount medium -- a combination of discount coupons and discount cards. This feature will meet the needs of a wide variety of demographic areas; 2) Due to its name recognition with consumers and business establishments, the Entertainment Book will bring a greater diversity of vendors to the Club Ride Program; 3) Addition of new business establishments will provide for a greater distribution of merchants throughout the Inland Empire, allowing commuters to support businesses where they live, work, and play; 4) The Commission staff will have direct input into the selection of merchants throughout the Inland Empire, which will ensure greater distribution of discounts between services, retail establishments, entertainment venues, restaurants, etc.; and 5) The Entertainment Book provides a larger array of discounts adding new excitement to the program and may result in the overall measured participation in the Commission's Commuter Assistance Program. Since the Commission enjoys a close professional relationship with the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) and administers a "sister" program on SANBAG's behalf, all changes proposed to the Commission's Club Ride Program will apply to the SANBAG's Team Ride Program. The Commission approved a contract with SANBAG at it's last meeting of July 9, 2003, no amendments to this contract will be necessary as a result of this recommendation. Currently, over 5,000 commuters are enrolled in Club Ride and Team Ride programs and enjoy the benefits of their membership. With the introduction of the new Club and Team Ride Entertainment Book Program, staff will monitor enrollment Agenda Item 7 213 and retention rates to ascertain success of the new Entertainment Book discount program, which were developed by the Commission to reward long-term ridesharing efforts of its constituency and encourage patronage of local business establishments in the Inland Empire. Financial In formation In Fiscal Year Budget: Y Year: FY 03-04 Amount: $50,000 Source of Funds: Measure "A" Budget Adjustment: N GLA No.: 226-41-65520 Fiscal Procedures Approved: (.___. ,,,:,,5 ? -rte-. Date: 07/21/03 i Attachment: Entertainment Publication Company Draft Scope of Work Agenda Item 7 214 II Agreement No.: 04-41-014 Draft RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CONSULTANT AGREEMENT FOR DISCOUNT BOOK SERVICES WITH ENTERTAINMENT PUBLICATIONS OPERATING COMPANY, INC. 1. PARTIES AND DATE. This Agreement is made and entered into this day of , 2003, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("Commission") and ENTERTAINMENT PUBLICATIONS OPERATING COMPANY, INC. ("Consultant"). 2. RECITALS. 2.1 The Commission provides rideshare incentive programs for Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. Commuters participating in the incentive program may join Club Ride (for Riverside County residents) or Team Ride (for San Bernardino County residents). Club Ride and Team Ride are collectively referred to herein as the Membership Group. 2.2 Consultant is in the business of obtaining discounts from restaurants, entertainment providers, merchants, and recreational service providers ("Vendors") for groups similar to the Members Groups. Commission intends, by this Agreement, to hire Consultant as an independent contractor, to provide such services for Commission. 3. TERMS. 3.1 Incorporation of Recitals. 3.1.1 Incorporation of Recitals. The parties agree that the Recitals constitute the factual basis upon which the City and the Consultant have entered into this Agreement. The Commission and the Consultant each acknowledge the accuracy of the Recitals and agree that the Recitals are incorporated into this Agreement as though fully set forth at length. 3.2 Scope of Services and Term. 3.2.1 General Scope of Services. Consultant promises and agrees to furnish to Commission all materials, labor materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidental and customary work necessary to fully and adequately perform the scope of work as described in Exhibit "A" (Services). All Services shall be subject to, and performed in accordance with, this Agreement, the attachment attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and all applicable local, state, and 1 V:\USERS\PREPRINT\Commuter Assistance Program\FY 03 04\EntertaiRnjst Agreement.doc 7/22/2003 Agreement No.: 04-41-014 federal laws, rules, and regulations. 3.2.2 1 erm. The term of this Agreement begins on the date first set forth above and continues for one year from the Commencement Date ("Term"). All Services shall be delivered according to the working time frames described in Exhibit "A" to this Agreement. The Term may be renewed by mutual written agreement of the parties. 3.3 Responsibilities of Consultant. 3.3.1 Schedule of Services. Time is of the essence in performing the Services under this Agreement. Consultant shall perform the Services expeditiously. Consultant represents that it has the professional and technical personnel required to perform the Services in conformance with such conditions. The Commission shall respond to Consultant's submittals in a timely manner. If Consultant is unable provide the Services, due to Consultant errors, on or before the time periods further described in Exhibit "A," the Commission has the option to terminate Agreement and Consultant shall return to Commission any deposit given to Consultant under this Agreement. 3.3.2 Independent Contractor: Control and Payment of Subordinates. The Services shall be performed by Consultant under its supervision. Consultant will determine the means, method and details of performing the Services subject to the requirements of this Agreement. Commission retains Consultant on an independent contractor basis and Consultant is not an employee of Commission. Consultant 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 Consultant shall not be employees of Commission and shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Consultant 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. Consultant 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. 3.3.3 Conformance to Applicable Requirements. All work prepared by Consultant shall be subject to the approval of Commission. 3.3.4 Substitution of Key Personnel. Consultant has represented to Commission that certain key personnel will perform and coordinate the Services under this Agreement. The key personnel for performance of this Agreement are as follows: Mike Foley in California and Denise Weaver in Michigan. 3.3.5 Commission' s Representative. Commission hereby designates Marilyn Williams, 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. Consultant shall not accept direction from any person other than Commission' s Representative or his or her designee. 2 V:\USERS\PREPRINT\Commuter Assistance Program\FY 03 04\EntertaiRn3eg Agreement.doc 7/22/2003 Agreement No.: 04-41-014 3.3.6 Consultants Representative. Consultant hereby designates Mike Foley in California and Denise Weaver in Michigan, or his or her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement ("Consultant' s Representative"). Consultant' s Representative shall have full authority to represent and act on behalf of the Consultant for all purposes under this Agreement. The Consultant' 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. 3.3.7 Coordination of Services. Consultant agrees to work closely with Commission staff in the performance of Services and shall be available to Commission' s staff, consultants and other staff at all reasonable times. 3.3.8 Standard of Care: Licenses. Consultant represents and maintains that it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the Services. Consultant warrants that all employees and subcontractors shall have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. Finally, Consultant 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. Consultant 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 Consultant' 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 Consultant' s errors and omissions. 3.3.9 Laws and Regulations. Consultant 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 OSHA requirements, and shall give all notices required by law. Consultant shall be liable for all violations of such laws and regulations in connection with Services. If the Consultant performs any work knowing it to be contrary to such laws, rules and regulations and without giving written notice to Commission, Consultant shall be solely responsible for all costs arising therefrom. Consultant 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. 3.3.10 Insurance. 3.3.10.1 Time for Compliance. Consultant 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, Consultant shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any subcontract until it has secured all insurance required under this section. 3 V:\USERS\PREPRINT\Commuter Assistance Program\FY 03 04\Entertainegt Agreement.doc 7/22/2003 Agreement No.: 04-41-014 3.3.10.2 Minimum Requirements. Consultant 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 perforrnance of the Agreement by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Consultant 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) and (2) Workers' Compensation and Employer 's Liability: Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer' s Liability Insurance. (B) Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant 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 T,iability 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 and (2) if Consultant has any 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. 3.3.10.3 Insurance Endorsements. The insurance policies shall contain the following provisions, or Consultant 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 Consultant, 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 Consultant' 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 Consultant' s insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any way. (B) 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 Consultant. 4 V:\USERS\PREPRIN \Commuter Assistance Program\FY 03 04\Entertai njeet Agreement.doc 7/22/2003 Agreement No.: 04-41-014 (C) 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 provided to the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents. 3.3.10.4 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, Consultant 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 Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigation costs, claims and administrative and defense expenses. 3.3.10.5 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. 3.3.10.6 Verification of Coverage. Consultant 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. 3.4 Fees and Payment. 3.4.1 Compensation. Commission shall pay Consultant a fee ("Fee") for the Services in the amount of Forty Two Thousand Dollars and no cents ($42,000.00) for the production of five thousand (5,000) discount books. After the mutual execution of this Agreement, Commission shall pay Consultant 25% of this Agreement's Maximum Obligation Amount, or Ten Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($10,500.00), as a deposit towards the fee. Upon Commission's acceptance of the remainder of the Services, the remaining balance will be paid in full. 3.4.2 Reimbursement for Expenses. Consultant shall not be reimbursed for any expenses unless authorized in writing by Commission. 3.5 Accounting Records. 3.5.1 Maintenance and Inspection. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to all costs and expenses incurred and fees charged under this Agreement. All 5 V:\USERS\PREPRINT\Commuter Assistance Program\FY 03 04\Entertai T9eg Agreement.doc 7/22/2003 Agreement No.: 04-41-014 such records shall be clearly identifiable. Consultant 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. Consultant shah allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the dale of final payment under this Agreement. 3.6 General Provisions. 3.6.1 Termination of Agreement. 3.6.1.1 Grounds for Termination. Commission or Consultant may, by thirty days written notice to the other, terminate this Agreement at any time and without cause by giving written notice to the other of such termination, and specifying the effective date thereof. 3.6.2 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. 3.6.3 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: CONSULTANT: Entertainment Publications Operating Co., Inc. 2125 Butterfield Road Troy, MI 48084 Attn: Denise Weaver COMMISSION: Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Attn: Marilyn Williams 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. 3.6.4 Ownership of Materials/Confidentiality. 3.6.4.1 Confidentiality. All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings, descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other Documents and Data and/or Work Product either created by or provided to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by Consultant. Such materials shall not, without the prior written consent of Commission, be used by Consultant 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 Consultant which is otherwise known to Consultant or is generally known, or has become known, to the related industry shall be deemed confidential. Consultant shall not use 6 V:\USERS\PREPRINT\Commuter Assistance Program\FY 03 04\Entertaineot Agreement.doc 7/22/2003 Agreement No.: 04-41-014 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. 3.6.5 Limitations and Remedies. 3.6.5.1 Consultant warrants that it has complete authority to enter into this Agreement with Commission. Further, Consultant warrants that this Agreement is not in conflict with any other agreement to which Consultant is a party. 3.6.5.2 Consultant warrants that it is capable of providing Services with respect to this Agreement. 3.6.5.3. Consultant shall only recommend Vendors which Consultant believes are good faith and will fully honor any discounts. Consultant shall not be responsible if such Vendors, recommended in good faith, fail to fulfill discounts. Consultant shall make all commercially reasonable efforts to correct all errors related to Vendors not honoring Member discounts and coupons or Vendors canceling their participation in the discount program as described below: i) Within 24 hour notice from Commission, Consultant will contact any Vendor that refuses to honor any discounts or coupons provided in the discount program. Consultant shall make all commercially reasonable efforts to compel Vendor to honor the discount or resolve the matter in a manner that maintains the market value of the discount. All such resolutions must be submitted to the Commission in writing. ii) If Consultant receives a Vendor notice canceling participation in the discount program, Consultant shall notify Commission within 24 hours of cancellation notice and Consultant shall make all commercially reasonable efforts to compel Vendor to honor the discount or resolve the matter in a manner that maintains the market value of the discount. All Vendor cancellation resolutions must be submitted to the Commission in writing. 3.6.6 Competing Programs Restriction. Consultant is in agreement that Commission will offer individual incentives as value added to members and that the individual incentives may or may not have a relationship with Consultant. 3.6.7. 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. 3.6.8 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 reason- able attorney's fees and costs of such actions. 7 V:\USERS\PREPRINT\Commuter Assistance Program\FY 03 04\Entertainment Agreement.doc 7/22/2003 221 Agreement No.: 04-41-014 3.6.9 Indemnification. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, 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 Consultant, its officials, officers, employees, agents, consultants 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 attorneys fees and other related costs and expenses. Consultant shall defend, at Consultant' 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, consultants, agents and volunteers. Consultant shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents and volunteers, in any such suit, action or other legal proceeding. Consultant shall reimburse Commission and its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, 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, including without limitation the payment of all consequential damages and attorneys fees and other related costs and expenses. Consultant's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees, consultants, agents and volunteers. 3.6.10 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. 3.6.11 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County. 3.6.12 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement. 3.6.13 Commission's Right to Employ Other Consultants. Commission reserves right to employ other consultants in connection this Agreement. 3.6.14 Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties, and shall not be assigned by Consultant without the prior written consent of Commission. 3.6.15 Prohibited Interests. 8 V:\USERS\PREPRINT\Commuter Assistance Program\FY 03 04\Entertainment Agreement.doc 7/22/2003 222 Agreement No.: 04-41-014 3.6.15.1 Solicitation. Consultant maintains and warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, Consultant 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 Consultant, 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. 3.6.15.2 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. 3.6.16 Equal Opportunity Employment. Consultant represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employ- ment 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. Consultant shall also comply with all relevant provisions of Commission's Minority Business Enterprise program, Affirmative Action Plan or other related Commission programs or guidelines currently in effect or hereinafter enacted. 3.6.17 Subcontracting. Consultant 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. 3.6.18 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. [signatures on following page] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement was executed on the date first written above. 10 V:\USERS\PREPRINT\Commuter Assistance Program\FY 03 04\Entertainment Agreement.doc 7/22/2003 223 Agreement No.: 04-41-014 RIVERSIDE COUNTY CONSULTANT TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: By: Ron Roberts Chairman Reviewed and Recommended for Approval: By: Eric Haley Executive Director Approved as to Form: By: Best, Best & Krieger LLP General Counsel EXHIBIT A Signature Name Title 11 V:\USERS\PREPRINT\Commuter Assistance Program\FY 03 04\Entertainment Agreement.doc 7/22/2003 224 Agreement No.: 04-41-014 SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY CONSULTANT The Commission and Consultant will work to produce an Entertainment Discount Book for Club Ride and Team Ride Membership Groups. The book will contain approximately 80 pages of various types of offers and discounts including: • Buy one item and receive one of those items free • Buy one item and receive one item, up to a certain value, free • 20% discount off selected purchases • Buy up to a certain amount of items and receive one item free • $2.00 off a selected service These types of offers will be available to Membership Groups at selected restaurants including fast food venues, auto repair shops and car washes, video rental stores, selected amusement centers and other merchants who provide goods and services to residents in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. Membership Groups will be able to utilize discounts by tearing out coupons from the Discount Book or by using a Discount Membership Card which will be included in the Discount Book. Coupons and the Discount Card will apply to selected Vendors as available and as selected by Commission. The distribution of the mentioned offers within the 80 pages will remain up to the Commission based on a list of Vendors supplied by Consultant. Commission will submit art work for the Discount Book cover three weeks before agreed upon Delivery Date. All Commission art work submitted electronically to Consultant will be provided as indicated under the general guidelines of Consultant's Guidelines and Specifications for Client Supplied Art document, included in this Agreement as Exhibit "B." All art work submitted from Commission to Consultant shall be provided to the following address: Entertainment Publications Operating Company, Inc. Attn.: Denise Weaver 2125 Butterfield Road Troy, MI. 48084 Facsimile: (248)637-9771 dweavernn entertainment.com All art work submitted from Consultant to Commission for review shall be provided to the following address: Riverside County Transportation Commission Attn: Marilyn Williams, 12 V:\USERS\PREPRINT\Commuter Assistance Program\FY 03 04\Entertainment Agreement.doc 7/22/2003 225 Agreement No.: 04-41-014 Director of Regional Programs and Public Affairs 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor PO Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Facsimile: (909) 787-7920 mwilliams@rctc.org Consultant shall provide Commission working and final drafts of the Vendor list, and discount book along with a blue line copy for final review and approval by the Commission. The Consultant shall not print the discount book until the Blue Line documents are approved by the Commission in writing. Transmittal of the items mentioned above and all items mentioned throughout this entire Agreement along with edit requests by all parties to this Agreement and finalization of all edit requests by all parties to this Agreement shall be executed in a timeframe that does not impede, amend or interfere in any matter or way with the time periods described in this Agreement or Exhibits to this Agreement. Consultant shall provide Commission the most up-to-date lists of willing and able merchants in a timeframe that does not impede, amend or interfere in any matter or way with the time periods described in this Agreement or Exhibits to this Agreement, for selection of Vendors in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. Commission will review the vendor list and supply Consultant with a final list eight weeks before the agreed upon Delivery Date of October 17, 2003. If Commission needs a geographical area or type of vendor not available in the list, the Commission may approve additional funding for extra work in which Consultant will attempt to obtain those additional vendors. Consultant will update Commission weekly on the status of obtaining Commission selected vendors and both Commission and Consultant will communicate weekly on this subject and agree this selection process will not interfere with the agreed upon Delivery Date. Within two weeks after the final vendor list is supplied to Consultant, Consultant will submit a PDF file to Commission which will contain the preliminary proof of offers and cover art work. Commission will review the said PDF file contents and provide any feedback to Consultant within 10 days of file receipt. Consultant will respond to Commission feedback by making changes, edits or other needed modifications within a 10 day period. Commission and Consultant agree that editing and approval of the preliminary proof of offers and art work will be provided within a timeframe that will not impede the agreed upon Delivery Date. Upon receipt of the preliminary proof, Commission will review the preliminary proof and provide comments, feedback, and edits to Consultant with one week of receipt. Consultant shall respond to the Commission feedback by making changes, edits and other needed modifications as requested by the Commission. Upon completion of the changes, Consultant shall deliver to the Commission a final proof. Consultant may deliver preliminary and final proofs in electronic format. Upon receipt of the Commission's approval of the final proof, Consultant shall prepare and provide a blue line. Should any changes recommended by the Commission in the final proof be omitted from the blue line, cost for corrections shall be born by Consultant. Shall Commission require changes above and beyond those recommended in the final proof, the Commission shall be responsible for the costs 13 V:\USERS\PREPRINT\Commuter Assistance Program\FY 03 04\Entertainment Agreement.doc 7/22/2003 226 Agreement No.: 04-41-014 associated with the additional changes. The above described process shall be conducted as expeditiously as possible and shall not impede with the final Delivery Date Consultant will deliver or make certain that all the final discount books are delivered in presentable and usable condition to the Commission on or before the agreed upon Delivery Date. Commission will consider the delivered discount books accepted only after Commission has reviewed a sample of the discount books with approval. Commission will not approve any discount books that are damaged, unusable, contain discounts, values or any other offers that are different or deviate from the Commission's final selection as indicated in the final blue line copy. Consultant shall maintain and establish contracts with Vendors to provide the Discount benefits described below to serve the Riverside and San Bernardino County areas according to a zip code list provided to Consultant by Commission, for a twelve month period beginning November 1, 2003 to October 31, 2004. Consultant shall make a good faith effort to "secure all participating Vendors. 14 V:\USERS\PREPRINT\Commuter Assistance Program\FY 03 04\Entertainment Agreement.doc 7/22/2003 227 ii AGENDA ITEM 8 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning and Policy Development THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Oral Presentation - Update on the Winchester to Temecula CETAP Corridor d STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to update the Commission on the Winchester to Temecula CETAP Corridor. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) for the Winchester to Temecula CETAP Corridor has been completed and was distributed to public agencies and other interested parties beginning June 11, 2003. We had hoped to request RCTC's certification of the document at the July 28th Commission meeting. However, the County of Riverside's General Plan update and their Final EIR must be certified by the Board of Supervisors prior to any action on the Winchester to Temecula Corridor EIR since project conditions analyzed for this Corridor are based on future land uses assumed in the General Plan update. As of the date of this agenda preparation, the County's General Plan had not yet been certified. Staff will provide a verbal update at our Commission meeting on anticipated dates for approval of the General Plan and the Winchester to Temecula Final EIR. Agenda Item 8 228 ii AGENDA ITEM 9 • • AGENDA ITEM 9(A) RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: State Budget Impasse — Impact on Construction Projects STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Authorize the Executive Director to execute an agreement with the State of California that assures repayment of funds loaned to support the continuation of needed highway safety and capacity enhancing projects that are either under construction or have been awarded by Caltrans in Riverside County, subject to Legal Counsel review; and 2) Authorize approximately $8.837million in short term (two months) loans to the State of California. Such loans would be made by the Commission making payments on behalf of the State to State contractors working on highway projects in Riverside County; and 3) Require staff to report monthly to the Commission on the status of the loan and repayment. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The lack of a State budget has begun to impact the delivery of projects currently under construction as well as those that have been awarded and not yet under construction. The lack of budget authority will halt all Caltrans construction contracts unless short term "bridge" loans can be established between Caltrans and other entities. As you may have read in the paper, Caltrans Director Jeff Morales was quoted in the news that there were only three options for the department to consider in continuing contracted work absent a budget: 1) The projects would be halted; 2) the contractors, if willing, could continue work on their own; and lastly, 3) if agencies like RCTC would provide short term (2 month) bridge loans the existing and awarded construction projects could continue. (See Attachment) In reviewing the possible options, staff recommends the provision of a short term (2 month) loan to Caltrans to keep construction projects going. Stopping the projects would likely result in demobilization and remobilization costs, contractor delay claims, and attorney fees associated with settling claims. These costs are unknown and difficult to predict but would far exceed the lost interest cost the Commission would incur in providing the loan. The single most important advantage to this loan arrangement is assuring the continued delivery of important safety and capacity enhancement projects. it r The single most important downside to this arrangement is the lack of an enforceable agreement that requires repayment. However, at the California Transportation Commission's (CTC) Special Meeting on July 22, 2003, the Chairman of the CTC, Kirk Lindsay and Caltrans Director Morales stated on the record that it is a priority for Caltrans to produce an agreement to assure the prompt repayment of funds to the agencies providing the loans. The other potential downside is that there is no way of predicting when the budget would be resolved and therefore RCTC may be again asked to support the projects should the budget continue to not be enacted. Another issue that arose at the Special CTC Meeting was a discussion on whether or not the State could reimburse interest cost of the loan. In response to the question, Caltrans provided the following response: "Article 16 of the California Constitution prohibits the pledging of the credit of the State of California. While certain funding mechanisms are authorized by Article 16 and further specified in stature, the Department (Caltrans) has no general stand-alone statutory authority to accept a loan and pledge the credit of the State, regardless of interest. State agencies are clearly authorized by statute to pay interest in certain instances (e.g., pre - and post judgment, certain late payments, etc.). However, there is no express or implied statutory authority for payment of interest on loans from outside sources for the fundamental reason that there is currently no direct authority for such loans. Absent such authority, payment of interest would violate the constitutional prohibition against the gift of public funds." While the above wording is cause for concern, staff will review the proposed State agreement, when available, before moving forward. The last issue to work out is that RCTC will be paying contractors who have contracts with the State of California, not with RCTC. Staff raised the issue of RCTC providing the payment to the State and the State paying the contractors but staff could neither receive assurance that controls were in place to guarantee that our funds would flow to the contractors working on projects in Riverside County nor could the State act to pay with our money without a budget in place. Staff will work with Legal Counsel to craft language to be either printed on the check or on a cover memo accompanying the check to affirm the purpose and receipt of the check and releasing RCTC from any liability related to the transaction. Clearly we are in uncharted territory and while we are positioned to assist the State in continuing work in Riverside County, staff makes the following recommendations: 1) Authorize the Executive Director to execute an agreement with the State of California that assures repayment of funds loaned to support the continuation of needed highway safety and capacity enhancing projects that are either under construction or have been awarded in Riverside County, subject to Legal Counsel review; 2) Authorize approximately $8.837 million in a short term (two months) loan to the State of California. Such loans would be made by the Commission making payments on behalf of the State to State contractors working on highway projects in Riverside County; and 3) Require staff to report monthly to the Commission on the status of the loan and repayment. 9 it i� i Riverside County District 8 Construction Projects Route Project Description Contractor Estimated Cost of a 2 month suspension Estimated cost for 2 months of work Cost of completing the project 50,400 27,300 15 Highway Planting and Irrigation Revco Erosion Control 186,380 4,200 86 Visual Mitigation Planting Cost Landscape 157,000 3,500 10 60 Highway Planting Restoration Tiffany Group 15.800 4,000 36,000 Replacement Planting and Irrigation Belaire West Landscape Inc_ 208,000 14,000 21,000 15 Highway Planting and Irrigation Reyco Erosion Control 191,200 5.600' 50,400 60 Tree & Shrub Planting with Automatic irrigation System Acacia Landscape & Erosion Control Inc. 134,000 7,000 3,500 60 Replace Damaged Girder J. McLoughlin 180,000 144,000 102,600 91 Pavement Rehabthtataion and Fiber FCI Contractors 150,000 270,000 1,200,000 4,000,000 4,752 000 6,130,000 91 Widen Existing Bridge, Construct New Bridge Sema Construction Inc. 91 Widen Existi Highway and Bridge Bruloco Engineering 72,000 _ 1,500,000 3,697„000 10 Upgrade CMS Republic Electric 180.000 60,000 50,000 300,000 118,000 10 Remove RV Dump Station and RR A.P. Engineering Sidewalk at Wileys Well Rest Area 120,000 10 Resurface Asphalt Concrete Granite Construction Co, 84,000 400,000 400,000 15 Install Median Bamer C&W Fence 120,000 315,000 160,000 315,000 540.000 86 Realign Left Turn Lane and Modify Signals Granite Construction Co, 360,000 various Upgrade Existing Guard rail end treatments EDT Eng. Co. 300,000 250,000 2,198,000 10 Replace Concrete Ditch and CSP downdrain AP Engineering 120,000 49,171 24,605 49,171 83 83 Construct Concrete Curb and Gutter TOS Engineering 120.000 24,605 Place 30 mm Rubberized AC All American _ 135,000 646,000 646,000 Subtotal 3,103,380 8,837,0761 19,460,976 1 of 1 list as of 7/25/2003 ii ITEM 9(B) RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: July 28, 2003 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: State Budget Impasse — Impact on Construction Projects STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Authorize up to $34 million of Western County Measure "A" funds to advance the 60/91/215 Interchange project to construction subject to California Transportation Commission approval of an AB 3090 action to provide a cash repayment of the up to $34 million to RCTC in 2006-07; and, 2) Authorize the Executive Director, in consultation with the RCTC officers to negotiate the deal points for this potential transaction and execute any agreement that may be necessary, subject to Legal Counsel's review. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: With the transportation project funding crisis created in the State highway account due to "loans" to the State General Fund, suspension of a significant portion of the TCRP program and reduced truck weight fees the California Transportation Commission (CTC) and regional agencies like RCTC have been faced with the confounding predicament of trying to maintain or create funding arrangements to keep transportation infrastructure projects moving forward. At the March 21, 2003 retreat in Temecula, the Commission established the 60/91/215 Interchange Improvement Project as the RCTC's highest priority project. Subsequently, at the June 18, 2003 special meeting, the RCTC authorized a $7.5 million internal loan from the Western County Commuter Assistance and Specialized Transit programs to assist the State in getting the 60/91/215 project to construction. The $7.5 million internal loan was based upon an expectation of $26.5 million of State funds being made available, possibly through legislative means, in the State budget. Given the severe financial issues facing the State budget, staff informed Caltrans that in the event the $26.5 million of State funds were not available that RCTC ii would seek AB 3090 approval for up to $34 million to advance the project. What this would require is having the Commission advance $34 million in local funds up front with a commitment from the California Transportation Commission (CTC) approving a cash repayment to RCTC in 2006-07. This arrangement, if approved by CTC, would have RCTC shouldering the interest cost of the funds for a period of approximately 3 years. According to RCTC CFO, RCTC has the financial capacity to provide this amount of funds without impacting our existing project development and construction commitments. If approved, this recommendation results in providing another option in the effort to get our highest priority project under construction. 9 it i� i ADDITION TO AGENDA ITEM 9B II STATE CAPITOL P.O. BOX 942849 SACRAMENTO, CA 94249-0064 (916) 319-2064 FAX (916) 319-2164 DISTRICT OFFICE 1223 UNIVERSITY AVE., SUITE 230 RIVERSIDE, CA 92507 (909) 369-6644 FAX (909) 369-0366 July 23, 2003 Assritthiv ilifuruit Tirgislaturr JOHN J. BENOIT ASSEMBLYMAN, SIXTY-FOURTH DISTRICT Mr. R. Kirk Lindsey, Chair California Transportation Commission 1120 N Street, Room 2221 (MS -52) Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Mr. Lindsey: COMMITTEES • BUDGET • RULES • INSURANCE • TRANSPORTATION I am writing to convey my strongest support for funding to be used in the reconstruction of the 91/60/215 Interchange. This project represents an opportunity for the Riverside/San Bernardino County area to provide local employment, and thus, tax revenue to the state and local jurisdictions, while providing relief for the hundreds of thousands of daily commuters using this bottlenecked interchange. The Riverside County Transportation Commission has identified the reconstruction of the 91/60/215 Interchange as its primary transportation priority. The interchange has reached capacity with traffic either stopped or barely crawling at all hours of the day. The loss of time and money for both individuals and businesses represents a huge quality of life and economic impact issue. There exists within this problem a great opportunity. The economic impact of the jobs and revenue created by this five-year construction project are enormous. The Inland Empire is the fastest growing region in the state and this project will bring a substantial number of jobs to the area. This allows more residents to work closer to home and provides a sustained economic benefit to the area. For these reasons, it is important that you and your fellow Commissioners support funding for the 91/60/215 Interchange. I understand these times require a real prioritization of projects and appreciate your consideration of this request. If you have any questions or would like additional information, you may contact me in Sacramento at (916) 319-2064 or in the District at (909) 369-6644. Sincerely, coey_ JOHN J. BENOIT Assemblyman, 64th District JJB:bn Printed on Recycled Paper 9 it i� i Eric Haley - Senate Budget Transit Funding _ - Pagel, From: "Chris Micheli"<cmicheli@carpentersnodgrass.com> To: "Wally Kreutzen" <kreutzen@sjhtca.com>, "Sue Zuhlke" <szuhlke@octa.net>, "Sarah West" <westdir@aol.com>, "Natasha Fooman" <foomann@cacities.org>, "Kurt Evans" <kurt.evans@vta.org>, "Eric Haley" <ehaley@rctc.org>, "DeAnn Baker" <dbaker@counties.org>, "Darren Kettle" <kett_da@sanbag.ca.gov>, "Ian McAvoy" <mcavoyi@samtrans.com> Date: 7/27/2003 9:04:59 PM Subject: Senate Budget -- Transit Funding Proposition 42. AB 1765 defers transferring $856 million of the $1,145 million, from the General Fund to the Transportation Investment Fund, by five years. This amount is $82 million less than the $938 million proposed by the Governor and has the effect of increasing General Fund expenditures by that amount. The remaining $289 million will provide nominal funding for projects in the TCRP and State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP). Related trailer bill legislation proposes repayment of $856 million by June 30, 2009. However, repayment is not guaranteed due to the state's uncertain fiscal future and because legislation to forgive repayment could be enacted at a later date by a simple majority. State Highway Account Loan Repayment. AB 1765 includes early payment of a loan from the State Highway Account to the General Fund in the amount of $173 million. The loan was initiated in 2001-02 and is due by 2004-05. Provisions in the bill would (for budgeting purposes) reflect this expenditure in the prior year. Public Transportation Account (PTA) "spill -over" funds. AB 1765 adopts the Governor's proposal to eliminate a $87 million transfer to the PTA and retain this amount in the General Fund for non -transportation purposes. However, the Governor's budget bill language was deleted so that revenues in excess of $87 million would be transferred to the PTA. Current law contains an arcane formula that requires the General Fund to transfer sales tax revenues to the PTA under specified conditions. This transfer is often triggered during periods of high gasoline prices and is used to fund rail and mass transit projects. The proposal does not set a precedent — similar proposals have been adopted in the past. Caltrans project delivery staffing. AB 1765 reduces the Governor's proposal for staffing by $18 million, from $147.9 million and 1,648 positions to $129.9 million. These positions provide project design, planning and oversight support. These funds were redirected to the State Highway Account for construction projects. Consolidation of transportation agencies 0 The High Speed Rail Authority is responsible for planning the development and implementation of a high-speed inter -city rail service. AB 1765 adopts the Governor's proposal to reverse the consolidation of the Authority with Caltrans, for an increase in special fund expenditure of $2 million. 0 The Office of Traffic Safety is responsible for distribution of federal funds for various educational programs on traffic safety. AB 1765 rejects the Governor's proposal to consolidate the Office with the Business, Transportation, and Housing Agency, for an increase of $135,000. Truck weight fees. AB 1765 assumes enactment of trailer bill language that would allow the administration to increase weight fees on commercial trucks. In 2000, SB 2084 (Polanco) changed the criteria for assessment of commercial truck fees and was supposed to have a net zero fiscal impact on fee revenues. However, collections have been lower than anticipated for various reasons. Hence, the administration is requesting authority to adjust the fee schedule to make up for the revenue shortfall. Fee increases on motorists. AB 1765 adopts the Governor's fee increases of $163 million for the Motor Vehicle Account, or MVA. This Account provides funding for support of the California Highway Patrol and the Department of Motor Vehicles. Over the years, depressed MVA fee collections and escalating retirement costs have resulted in a variety of fee increases on California motorists. Last year, fees were increased by $76 million for the 2002-03 fiscal year and $98 million for the 2003-04 fiscal year for late vehicle registration, DUI suspension appeals, driver information requests, and driving tests. Again this 1 1111 TI I I 11 111 - '-.. - I]• . 'r7 .. -I . -1 I■ -.Fr.' 1 T• - I17- 1_ I' 1171- 'rLL - - -- •1•'ii11-�- - r1 • - ■r •,.1 ' - - - _ II _ • - - 1 r - •' - 1- 1. er} r r 1 -i'I-' 1 rw1 _ I. I I. I I -_I- I II - 1 I 1 p r'11. n'Ir •K an r1 1-r rl I 1Jim 111- T 1 • I� ti '1 . • h ▪ - 1 -my 1 1-• ' - - - T :r Mr - 1 T 1 _11 - -1ri. 1' r . 11 - 11 T•• I i r l - - • - 1 1 1A }' 71 ' 71 ' • 1 11 1 - - -1 1- •T 1 1 -1 • -- I - I - r' - -' - 1 • 1} 11 I N- 11 1f • T • -' IIr.17Tay - ■ Er' -• •4•' • 1 I - ,. • 11 - _ III _ - 1 1' •-11 1 -n-: - 1 11 r ' 1 I _ • - 1,11 .T r x-11 II- I 111` rut r.iln 1 11 11■ 1 --r 11 {-- TI 1- - 1 -- 11!J - 11. mo 1 I I - - I .^y 1 11 1 , - I. - - 1 - • -•T- ..11 %.mr'■ .4I 1 -. -1• - - LL• .41 1.1 'Ir' -17. al --1.I 1:1- ` I.11 1- -1111 4.1 r. - 1 - 1 `I - -.0q71 1 I -..r- IL - -N.0 .j n'r'ti+ I .. Isla NI • ' L WWI! - ti I, is a - - 1!.I 1r•-rril ". 1 I- 1-'y ■1. - ' 7' - . J��I - Is LI 1 -7y 7. • 1 r■I L; - • 1 .41 • 1 1L TE m;1' .-1..nirm IL -L1 1 • _• - 1 -1i-«-r IBFIT �■•-ya L N -N lip ■1rr - 1 J - LI • - -f ■ • 1 W. -' • 1 ■ .-r.:1 1 1-.6 � • 1 '.J-.. 11 - - 1Orr ••1tr . 1 1"11 .r 511. I I} I - -L _ ■ 'TW1 ti - - -1 ■ 7-m 1 - 7 1. I - - J7 Y_-11 - ■I . •_ ' 1' 1 1 i� 11 -'f:l■ -I I y'1r^. , r•r� a1�1 . •. - - �ITI a1 I. J T _I_ 1 --'II !, ...L 1i as a_..�-1 ■air N. N.= r .uaL■j.I ' 1 :'2 - J I - - - T J '.0 ' 1•13' !Y T` �7-' 4 I 11 5L3 i- t m 1 a J_ J! LI -. IT I _ 1 - .111.14U -re '.'EL t1at'._U } UrIJI- 1,11-a■I71161•11 . L-- _ -• '- LI+iJ , 1 111 •{J TLIL� _ J IU •L■1111 11:11•My" "UM 1•11i7-' .1J VII 11" • 0111/1 I T X1111 f I I 11 II . 1 L L L 1 13 I 1 .111a1II 11I%l • 1 ILZ LAW L al=I.1-I 1 • I. 1' 1 la 11111x1■ 11 1 1. 1:111.• I I L 11 - 1111 1 MI11 1141114 Ti111 I 4. .1II LI 1 .I L U01.17 ILU y 1 I I I IIL 1 1 11.711 x.111 1 11 11re 1- In 1 1 11 1111 1 pi, 1r■ 11 • I Lur■ 11 ulu111 T I rn 11.1 111■ 1 11 - 11 LI 5r ni, rr 11 n rum ■g1TI 1 1■1111•' in 11 ■ ■ 11 -L5 1 11 - 41 1 r-iir - • .in 11111 1,1 { 1 1111 1111 111r mill mill I N-1 111111 !um 1 _ 111 17 ■1• Q JII 1 1 ■111-IRIJ 1111 I1.-■Il_ CPI Lr. 111111 1■ `_ �1 .r I milli 11 minim!! 11 1 I 11111 1 Cllr &i 1 - 1L Ti i,.w r 1 r 111•x1 I. 1111 RCM x111 ■.lfir' TIm r_ 1 1 111 fTr II I 1 , n E. 11111111 rs l Ill it Irn Try." Irrl■1 I 1 ra 71 11rr 1111 'Ti.f :i - I I 1111 T 11 1 1 f}I Exr ii It rlfl ■p 1 1 IIw rJN p111 71 11111' I1 'x}111 1r• 1 1 1 TW-' r ■Ir ICI .1 U. 1 11 I d hop - 11 x•1111 IIJ-141 11x1 - 1111 ri 1 - IIi/Trm ifihr■i�oily rIIId 111■di11T111■ •r, a■T1tYT1J 11 11.1 1x1111iLIpl1rTinl 11 - ▪ In .1 TIN/ 1 II1111IIIr 11 • .1 rrlrl rn11 ./1171 •11' X11+1 a•II■ - ' r1 L r'r �T11 �•L■ , �'I r 111 - -Ti �1rI v r'rr 1 1 1 r� zimarri r mrrra -wind I L 111x9 rrrii x1111 .trp'r ,iit 1r hail , r. n .I n X11 m.% 1 11 -' .. I11•1111.' ''.'` 11 L.. =.1. 151' •,Lr1�r.-1 tTrl 1 T.h `i. ra',.`•i.��1L,11.11 '' Fr•I--1 - 111 - ' �=- h r sVw t' r' 111P -I I '• U T �I ' -114'•�IP 'T1 rr i I 1 7} f ..., -me 1 -1 '. Art's! I - I"!■' •i I .. , 1 _ wm-T LI ' 1-17 I rIT11 IrLI -' , rI •LL t111s - ■, 1 -- in ' -1 11 ■ I #tJ1{Il f' 1i - U a .4 -� i i m •y+f -• a • - i 0-1 ■"■■-ris/V 'qv - i■ • - 11ILI .LITI}Ltl, r■ - I Erie Haley - Senate Budget — Transit Funding Page year, the Budget proposes to increase fees which are expected to generate $163 million in additional revenues in 2003-04 and $333 million in 2004-05. Chris Micheli, Esq. Carpenter Snodgrass & Associates 1201 K Street, Suite 710 Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 447-2251 FAX: (916) 445-5624 EMAIL: cmicheli@carpentersnodgrass.com i i HANDOUT FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT ii Western Riverside Council of Governments Traffic Unif orm Mitigation Fee Pr ogram TUMF Areas Beginning Balance 7/1/2003 Ending Balance Zone Revenue E xpenditures 7/24/2003 Total Admin 1148 $ 8,504.28 $ 11,986.40 $ 20,490 .68 $ 20,490.68 Co unty Northern 3001 98,166.55 9,499 .99 107,666.54 Riverside_ 3002 0 .00 0.00 Corona 3003 0.00 0.00 Norco 3004 0 .00 0.00 $ 107,666.54 County Southwest 3100 159,911 .22 472,6.13 .81 632,525.03 Temecula 3101 88,666.48 _ 88,666 .48 Murrieta 3102 0.00 0 .00 Lake Elsinore 3103 0.00 0 .00 Canyon Lake 3104 0.00 0 .00 $ 721,191.51 Co unty Central 3200 45,554.19 15,833.32 61,387.51 Moreno Valley 3201 0.00 0 .00 Perris 3202 0.00 0.00 $ 61,387.51 County Pass 3300 0.00 3,166.66 3,166.66 Calimesa 3301 0.00 0 .00 Banning 3302 0.00 _ 0 .00 Beaumont 3303 0.00 0 .00 $ 3,166 .66 County Hemet/San Jacinto 3400 12,666.64 69,666. 60 _ 82,333 .24 Hemet 3401 0.00 _ 0 .00 San Jacinto _ 'Regional 3402 0.00 0.00 $ 82,333.24 Transit 3500 31,993.56 45,092. 84 77,086 .40 $ 77,086.40 Regio nal Facilities 3501 404,965.08 570,780. 38 975,745 .46 $ 975,745 .46 To tal _ $ 850,428. 00 $ 1,198,640. 00 $ - $ 2,049,068.00 $ 2,049,068.00 Printed on 7/28/2003 ii �, _, RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMISSION MEETING SIGN -IN SHEET July 28, 2003 NAME AGENCY — TELEPHONE # G- ' /! D _MD/ 9A) c cc� �v 3Y4 a v , ,t of.es=-/ vSc 7 -6dre - /4 44%rk,fr..r. .56'.9'&26' - 06/S ig ' ST "Id,r6wo L"4Ge- G= i Fo f= y/3-So06 r' / Na2Cz, (9o9)73S -2/90 ,/!-GL �6v ise4-- Sr- iio/e., '/- 4,6-64./ r-e14-ete5 9'10-r-131- i-lai ,4L ,t/ c-- f6�1.9A/ - --ix-,/c./ /2/,— 7'6 0 - 3a -c/s7/ ,A/ne4 ( D0f c_ Crict o fR "c r s Lt, 769 8;26.-S 11 f et -4 IC -C- 1 P-2 J 14,7 s j Des- � (760)3 IO " 6�/ -I CoZ o it,./1--- 4707 -735 3S6 We/2 _ _ ,r ay.g, _Da., . 1 Je., ei (c.,4 -,_r —Q___ C56 �if0*-c r/i-cdo O z ?e'? - - 7-1 4/ ---r--2.- .. , /,/1-- 0. - \,(`a (71p_ilss.c3 5l,i L.,,„_____ ,E-- O 7C01303 a -o � 'k5 .1.-2b `i sic 000 _ t ri''. ), e, z r -c4 L4ea /1 i rl - ..)--(-e-e)c- 4 a7- I.,c) E. l -c, -) 7 b 9 -19 3 L- , 1� :cc � n_ L. 1` b 1lll,, 11 cl�i_r�Ylp, 85:2O 76 't 40 ni 64J Aii-e6 �-V V 7 1/4.s7 GRC 6 ,ri S 1 ' eoRAL. Crcry 140- 35-q31 Mal.(0fro As 1141_6-..‘i / /9 r/9v- cad -pi --,-�9'92") 94-4 /cSc' l'4,11.-1- 1- I -A "' '4,16-1C.. L5' 41- ,1-I r SPOT N 140o- Z 0-43411 14. l • • ` 1 • '• • a I L 1. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ROLL CALL July 28, 2003 Present Absent 17 County of Riverside, District I ❑ County of Riverside, District II County of Riverside, District III ❑ County of Riverside, District IV County of Riverside, District V ❑ City of Banning ❑ City of Beaumont City of Blythe ❑ City of Calimesa ❑ City of Canyon Lake ❑ City of Cathedral City ❑ City of Coachella ,� ❑ City of Corona ❑ City of Desert Hot Springs F ❑ City of Hemet ❑ City of Indian Wells ❑ City of Indio /l r ❑ City of La Quinta ❑ City of Lake Elsinore ❑ City of Moreno Valley City of Murrieta City of Norco ,Q ❑ City of Palm Desert ❑ ;;1 City of Palm Springs _Q ❑ City of Perris ❑ City of Rancho Mirage Q ❑ City of Riverside ❑,,. City of San Jacinto ❑ City of Temecula ❑ Governor's Appointee, Caltrans District 8 1 I� fi