Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout06 June 27, 2022 Budget & Implementation Comments are welcomed by the Commission. If you wish to provide comments to the Commission, please complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board. MEETING AGENDA Budget and Implementation Committee Time: 9:30 a.m. Date: June 27, 2022 Location: BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administration Center 4080 Lemon St, First Floor, Riverside CA 92501 COMMITTEE MEMBERS Raymond Gregory, Chair / Mark Carnevale, City of Cathedral City Jeremy Smith, Vice Chair / Larry Greene, City of Canyon Lake Mary Hamlin / Alberto Sanchez, City of Banning Lloyd White / David Fenn, City of Beaumont Linda Molina / Wendy Hewitt, City of Calimesa Steven Hernandez / Denise Delgado, City of Coachella Scott Matas / Russell Betts, City of Desert Hot Springs Bob Magee / Natasha Johnson, City of Lake Elsinore Lisa DeForest / Cindy Warren, City of Murrieta Jan Harnik / Kathleen Kelly, City of Palm Desert Lisa Middleton / Dennis Woods, City of Palm Springs Chuck Conder / Patricia Lock Dawson, City of Riverside Michael Heath / Alonso Ledezma, City of San Jacinto Ben J. Benoit / Joseph Morabito, City of Wildomar Chuck Washington, County of Riverside, District III STAFF Anne Mayer, Executive Director John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY Annual Budget Development and Oversight Competitive Federal and State Grant Programs Countywide Communications and Outreach Programs Countywide Strategic Plan Legislation Public Communications and Outreach Programs Short Range Transit Plans RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 9:30 a.m. Monday, June 27, 2022 BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor Riverside, California In compliance with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials distributed 72 hours prior to the meeting, which are public records relating to open session agenda items, will be available for inspection by members of the public prior to the meeting on the Commission’s website, www.rctc.org. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, Government Code Section 54954.2, Executive Order N-29-20, and the Federal Transit Administration Title VI, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141 if special assistance is needed to participate in a Committee meeting, including accessibility and translation services. Assistance is provided free of charge. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to the meeting time will assist staff in assuring reasonable arrangements can be made to provide assistance at the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS – Each individual speaker is limited to speak three (3) continuous minutes or less. The Committee may, either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote of the Committee, waive this three minute time limitation. Depending on the number of items on the Agenda and the number of speakers, the Chair may, at his/her discretion, reduce the time of each speaker to two (2) continuous minutes. Also, the Committee may terminate public comments if such comments become repetitious. In addition, the maximum time for public comment for any individual item or topic is thirty (30) minutes. Speakers may not yield their time to others without the consent of the Chair. Any written documents to be distributed or presented to the Committee shall be submitted to the Clerk of the Board. This policy applies to Public Comments and comments on Agenda Items. Budget and Implementation Committee June 27, 2022 Page 2 Under the Brown Act, the Board should not take action on or discuss matters raised during public comment portion of the agenda which are not listed on the agenda. Board members may refer such matters to staff for factual information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration. 5. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS (The Committee 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 Committee 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 Committee 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.) 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. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – MAY 23, 2022 Page 1 6B. QUARTERLY REPORTING OF CONTRACT CHANGE ORDERS FOR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS Page 16 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the Quarterly Report of Contract Change Orders for Construction Contracts for the three months ended March 31, 2022; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 6C. SURPLUS DECLARATION OF REAL PROPERTY Page 18 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 22-012 “Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Declaring Pursuant to Government Code Section 54221 that Certain Real Property Owned by the Commission located at assessor parcel numbers 102-091-027, a portion of 102-091-030, and a portion of certain right-of-way area, located between Serfas Club Drive and Frontage Road near Corona, California, is Non-Exempt Surplus Land, Approving the Form of Notice of Availability Therefore, Authorizing the Executive Director to Comply with the Surplus Land Act, and Finding the Foregoing Categorically Exempt from CEQA Review”; Budget and Implementation Committee June 27, 2022 Page 3 2) Adopt Resolution No. 22-013 “Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Declaring Pursuant to Government Code Section 54221 that Certain Real Property Owned by the Commission located at a portion of 219-094-014, located near Cridge Street in the City of Riverside, California, is Exempt Surplus Land Therefore, Authorizing the Executive Director to Comply with the Surplus Land Act, and Finding the Foregoing Categorically Exempt from CEQA Review”; 3) If no response for the non-exempt surplus property is received from public agencies, developers, and/or contiguous landowners, authorize the Executive Director to offer the surplus property for sale to the public; and 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. 7. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Page 41 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislation; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 8. ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM – SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS 2023 REGIONAL PROGRAM GUIDELINES – SELECTION CRITERIA FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY APPLICATIONS Page 53 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the project selection criteria for inclusion in the Metropolitan Planning Organizations’ (MPO) Regional Program Guidelines for Active Transportation Program (ATP) Cycle 6; 2) Authorize staff to award projects based on the approved selection criteria for the MPO funding; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. Budget and Implementation Committee June 27, 2022 Page 4 9. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 10. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT 11. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Overview This item provides the opportunity for brief announcements or comments on items or matters of general interest. 12. ADJOURNMENT The next Budget and Implementation Committee meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., July 25, 2022. AGENDA ITEM 6A MINUTES RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE Monday, May 23, 2022 MINUTES 1.CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the Budget and Implementation Committee was called to order by Chair Raymond Gregory at 9:30 a.m., in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California, 92501. 2.ROLL CALL Members/Alternates Present Members Absent Ben J. Benoit Mary Hamlin Russell Betts Jan Harnik Chuck Conder Michael Heath Raymond Gregory Steven Hernandez Bob Magee Linda Molina Lisa Middleton Chuck Washington Jeremy Smith Cindy Warren Lloyd White 3.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Lloyd White led the Budget and Implementation Committee in a flag salute. 4.PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no requests to speak from the public. 5.ADDITIONS / REVISIONS There were no additions or revisions to the agenda. 1 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes May 23, 2022 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. Lisa Mobley, Administrative Services Manager/Clerk of the Board stated that there were no comments on the Consent Calendar, however she clarified there are Agenda Items 6A – 6G on the Consent Calendar. At this time, Chair Gregory read each of the 6A – 6G Agenda Items that are on the Consent Calendar for the Committee’s approval. M/S/C (Benoit/White) to approve the following Consent Calendar item(s): 6A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – APRIL 25, 2022 6B. APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FISCAL YEAR 2022/23 1) Adopt Resolution No. 22-010 “Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing the Annual Appropriations Limit”, for Fiscal Year 2022/23.; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 6C. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 1) Receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the nine months ended March 31, 2022; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 6D. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS 1) Receive and file the sales tax analysis for the Quarter 4, 2021 (4Q 2021); and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 6E. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT 1) Receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2022; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 2 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes May 23, 2022 Page 3 6F. QUARTERLY PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT METRICS REPORT, JANUARY – MARCH 2022 1) Receive and file Quarterly Public Engagement Metrics Report for January – March 2022; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 6G. FISCAL YEARS 2022/23 – 2026/27 MEASURE A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR THE LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAM 1) Approve the Fiscal Years 2022/23 – 2026/27 Measure A Five-Year Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) for Local Streets and Roads (LSR) as submitted by the participating agencies; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 7. PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 2022/23 BUDGET Sergio Vidal, Chief Financial Officer, presented the proposed Fiscal Year 2022/23 Budget, highlighting the following: • Budget summary • Revenue/sources by comparison • Summary of expenditures, expenses, and uses • Management Services, Regional Programs, and Capital Project Development and Delivery, expenditures/uses • Capital Project highlights • Toll Operations • Function by breakdown • Measure A Administrative Costs • Next steps Commissioner Russell Betts requested to see slide 6 of the presentation and asked related to Motorist Assistance if this is a program that if a motorist is stranded on the freeway, then a tow truck will show up behind them and help the motorist. Sergio Vidal replied that is their Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) Program, but part of Motorist Assistance is their Vanpool Commuter Program shares. He stated RCTC’s FSP Program is related to their toll projects within the Toll Operations budget, but he can check and get back to the Committee. Commissioner Betts stated that he was at an RCTC meeting a couple years ago and this subject came up if the FSP Program has been expanded into the Coachella Valley and down the rest of Riverside County. He stated his car had broken down on State Route 91 and he was trying to figure out what to do and a FSP tow truck pulled up behind him to help. He expressed concern if he would have been in temperatures over 100 degrees and 3 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes May 23, 2022 Page 4 in a similar situation it is not so great if an FSP tow truck is not pulling up behind him. Commissioner Betts asked for the two years that has gone by has RCTC now budgeted for expanding the FSP Program down into the rest of the County area and if not, he would suggest a recommendation out of this Board to do so. Anne Mayer replied the FSP is generally offered in the more urban area with higher traffic volumes where the tow trucks can rove more frequently. Expanding out into the desert on other corridors has been more of a challenge and noted that Brian Cunanan, Commuter & Motorist Assistance Manager, is coming up to the podium to talk about the things they have looked at related to the desert and the criteria. Brian Cunanan stated they regularly evaluate expanding FSP into the Coachella Valley and the last time they had checked a couple years ago, it did not meet the benefit cost requirements. He explained the most recent expansion was in 2018 when they went to South County, but they are regularly monitoring it and without additional revenue it would be really challenging to expand into the Coachella Valley assuming it did meet the benefit cost requirements to expand into the desert. Commissioner Betts stated that there has to be a way to figure out how to do this maybe at least some type of assistance, so they just wait in the Coachella Valley for this to happen longer. He asked if they could count the traffic for Coachella and the Stagecoach Festivals as they are driving up their numbers. Brian Cunanan replied when RCTC was looking at a potential measure, they had set aside an allocation for FSP so if something like that were to happen again there could be some funding for an expansion. Anne Mayer asked Brian Cunanan to that point the benefit cost ratio is established by what. Brian Cunanan replied it is a statewide guideline. Anne Mayer stated it is a statewide benefit cost ratio and that is what controls where FSP is implemented across the whole state, but as Brian Cunanan mentioned they have long felt that this is an important program and in the Traffic Relief Plan that had been identified for a potential sales tax measure and they did include money in it. This is so that the program would not be so dependent on state funding because right now they have a very small amount of RCTC controlled funding for this program. She asked Brian Cunanan about the very large Caltrans pavement project out in the desert, if he is aware where they are planning construction FSP. Brian Cunanan replied for Interstate 10 they currently have weekend FSP in that area, but it is funded by Caltrans. Anne Mayer sked for clarification in which area. Brian Cunanan replied Banning/Beaumont area. 4 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes May 23, 2022 Page 5 Anne Mayer stated staff will follow up as Caltrans has a larger pavement rehabilitation project further out on I-10 into the desert and see if Caltrans is planning to have construction FSP, because there has been so much construction going on throughout the County where RCTC has gaps in its own FSP that is a regular beat. She explained they have been able to supplement with construction FSP that roves since it is a construction project and that can also be helpful. M/S/C (Benoit/Conder) to: 1) Receive input on the proposed FY 2022/23 Budget; 2) Approve the salary schedule effective July 14, 2022, located in Appendix B of the proposed FY 2022/23 Budget; 3) Authorize the expenditure of $778,800 of 91 Express Lanes toll revenues designated as surplus in accordance with the 2013 Toll Revenue Bonds Indenture to fund Commission costs related to the development of agreements specific to the funding, construction, operations, maintenance, and use of toll revenues for the future direct, tolled connector linking the SR-241 toll road to the 91 Express Lanes (241/91 Connector); 4) Adopt Resolution No. 22-009 “Resolution of Fixing the Employer Contribution Under the Public Employees’ Medical and Hospital Care Act at an Equal Amount for Employees and Annuitants” to increase the health care premium contribution up to a maximum of $1,500 per month to each employee or non-vested retiree beginning August 1, 2022, as approved by the Executive Committee on March 9, 2022; and 5) Forward to the Commission for final action. Chair Gregory expressed appreciation to Sergio Vidal for his presentation, for all that he does, and that it was great to see him in person. 8. RECURRING CONTRACTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022/23 Alicia Johnson, Senior Procurement Analyst, provided a detailed overview for the recurring contracts for the Commission’s Fiscal Year 2022/23 single year and specialized multi-year professional services contracts. M/S/C (Warren/Benoit) to: 1) Approve the single-year recurring contracts in an amount not to exceed $14,540,448 for Fiscal Year 2022/23; 2) Approve the recurring contracts for specialized services in an amount not to exceed $3,301,373 in FY 2022/23 and $3,825,214 in FYs 2023/24 – 2026/27; 5 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes May 23, 2022 Page 6 3) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission; and 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. 9. APPROVAL OF METROLINK OPERATING AND CAPITAL SUBSIDIES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022/23 AND RELATED MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager, presented the Annual Metrolink Budget for FY 2022/23, highlighting the following areas: • RCTC/Metrolink  A map of the Metrolink Regional Rail System  Metrolink is funded by five-county JPA  Celebrating 30-year anniversary  3 RCTC Routes: Riverside, IEOC, 91/Perris Valley  9 Commission-Owned Metrolink Stations • FY 22 highlights  Appointed New CEO – Building new team  Restored Service to 90 percent of pre-pandemic levels – April 22  Free Rides for Transit Equity Day and Earth Day  New Promotions- 10-Day Flex pass  Full Conversion to renewable fuel – 1st in US  Ridership starting to rebound • Ridership recovery – November 2021 projection • FY 23 Budget goals  100 percent Service Restoration – Oct 22  New fare promotions - $15 Summer Day Pass/30 percent Discount Monthly Pass  Trial Low-Income 50 percent Fare program Improve reliability  Continued Safety Focus  Reduce Trespasser Incidents  Financial impact  Operating Subsidy Requirement $26,695,637 (21.8 percent Increase)  Capital Funding Requirement $10,391,915 (142 percent Increase) o FTA 5337 & 5307 Grants Anne Mayer stated she had some additional comments as they evaluate this item. It has been a tough couple years for transit, they had their Regional CEO meeting on May 20 with Darren Kettle, Metrolink CEO, his team, along with the other CEOs from the other counties to discuss ridership and what the future year looks like. She explained they had to cut service because the ridership was not there, which means they will lose more riders, so if they keep cutting service then it is natural that riders would find another way to travel. Anne Mayer stated with the service additions back in April 2022 they are hopeful to see ridership increase, but to Sheldon Peterson’s point about the levels of 6 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes May 23, 2022 Page 7 ridership the trends are showing that Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday are the highest level of ridership on the trains. It is still under 40 percent of original ridership on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday and on Monday and Friday ridership is closer to 30 percent of the former ridership numbers, that is even with gas approaching $7.00 per gallon and so it is clear it is not gas prices that drives ridership, employment drives ridership. She stated this also validates what they have always known about Metrolink is that generally Metrolink riders are riders who are higher income and who clearly have a choice to telecommute at this point, because it appears the telecommute patterns are now driving what ridership looks like. They had an extensive conversation about identifying who is riding the train, what do they need in terms of flexibility and in terms of fares, and Sheldon Peterson already highlighted several different types of fare types that are being explored to make riding the train easier and more flexible. She explained depending on the state budget there is talk of budgeting that would allow transit riders to ride for free in that Metrolink would get reimbursed for riders and she is uncertain if free rides are going to drive the patterns. The demographic of Metrolink users appears to be telecommuting multiple days a week and that is what is driving it. She explained that she wanted to provide in more detail what those trends are and to assure the Commissioners this is a conversation every month between the staff that Sheldon Peterson works with at Metrolink, as well as the CEOs, and the management team there in trying to determine how can they make sure they have Metrolink be a sustainable, affordable, and a convenient option for people to use. Metrolink has done a really good job through the pandemic in managing its resources and this budget is certainly very reasonable. She noted that if they want to bring back riders, they have to bring service back and that is going to require an investment, and this is one well worth taking. Chair Gregory expressed appreciation to Anne Mayer and stated it does clear up what they are seeing on the chart with an expected sharp increase that there are activities on the way. Commissioner Lisa Middleton stated as one of the alternates for representing RCTC on Metrolink thanked Sheldon Peterson for consistently providing them great information leading up to the meetings. She expressed appreciation for Anne Mayer’s comments and explained there has been a tremendous number of conversations at the Metrolink Board regarding ridership and the changing nature of the workplace. She noted not seeing anything that Metrolink is an outlier in comparison to other transit systems across the country. Commissioner Middleton asked about the business model of Metrolink as it has been almost entirely reliant on commuters going to work and suggested that part of the solution needs to be to increase opportunities for people to use transit for recreational purposes. She asked if Sheldon Peterson had any thoughts on avenues that would be helpful to RCTC in trying to add that dimension of riders to Metrolink. Sheldon Peterson replied that Metrolink through the years has done a great job at least locally to try to expand their weekend service. They had started off with a beach train many years ago where they dedicated and ran service and so trying to get that leisure 7 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes May 23, 2022 Page 8 market has always been a priority for RCTC. He stated they have expanded weekend service on the Inland Empire–Orange County (IEOC) Line and the 91 Line/Perris Valley Line (PVL), so that is the first step. He explained the bigger challenge is on the weekday service and having enough frequencies throughout the day to make sure people could take the trip for a meeting and be able to get back mid-day or do alternative trips and even stay later in the evening and go to a show or a baseball game. That will be the challenge is to provide those additional frequencies to address more riders as well as make it a cost- effective approach, Metrolink has a major score program to add additional service over time, which is also challenging to try to develop that. Sheldon Peterson reiterated that the goal is to have enough service and be price effective to make sure more people can take it at different times. Commissioner Middleton expressed appreciation for Sheldon Peterson’s comments and stated one of the things that they need to be advocating and looking at is connecting with some of the leading places that individuals go for entertainment, i.e., the beaches, the sports stadiums, the arenas, and things of that nature and what can they do that would ease that transportation network. Sheldon Peterson replied that is a great approach and stated for many years they ran the Angels Express trains with dedicated service to the baseball games and the Festival of Lights trains to bring people to events. He stated that is something they are exploring, as well as Metrolink has a SoCal Explorer program where it highlights all the destinations on their website. Anne Mayer stated Metrolink staff, Sheldon Peterson, and his peers have done a really good job of trying to hold the line in terms of budget increases and trying to be very prudent with the budgets. She explained one of the line items that was not in the budget when they originally saw it at the executive level was funding for some of these special trains and they all agreed they need to put money back in the budget for special trains because that is how people become more frequent users of the system. In addition, whatever special train they want to add for recreational purposes for the most part RCTC staff always say yes, because there are formulas in Metrolink, and their fair share has to be paid based on county miles. Anne Mayer stated as an example if Orange County and RCTC did not agree to add an Angels train then maybe there would not be enough money to do it, so from a staff standpoint RCTC staff always agrees when it is an event that makes sense meaning it has enough ridership to pay for the train. She hopes that is consistent with the conversation they are currently having and RCTC will keep doing that. She noted being aware that some other counties are having to say no to these special trains because of budget purposes so they are going to continue to advocate for investing in the kind of train service that people will want to use instead of hoping in a car to go somewhere else, and or bring people to Riverside County to have fun. 8 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes May 23, 2022 Page 9 Commissioner Cindy Warren stated that she had a few questions, but most of them have been answered and then asked about security on the Metrolink trains, and which line is the higher ridership. Sheldon Peterson replied as far as security on board the train Metrolink contracts with the L.A. County Sheriff's Department to provide security on the entire network, so they have a system in place where they have sheriffs that ride on board multiple trains and have patrol vehicles checking its stations and crossings in areas where they have issues with people crossing the trains. He explained that RCTC has been aggressive through the years with security at all the Commission-owned Metrolink stations as there is 24-hour security as well as security cameras at all the stations, so they are above and beyond trying to make sure it is a safe and a welcoming environment for the riders. As far as ridership the lines vary, typically lines that have more service like the San Bernardino Line tends to have higher ridership. In Riverside County the IEOC Line, which goes to Irvine and Tustin has 50 percent of the ridership coming out of Riverside County, so the IEOC has always been a fantastic ridership for RCTC especially as those routes grow. In response to Chair Gregory’s question which county sheriff, Sheldon Peterson replied L.A. County Sheriff and it has been a contentious issue from time to time as they are the only ones who has been on this project so far and so that is just kind of the challenge with that big system. In response to Commissioner Bob Magee’s question what Transit Equity Day is, Sheldon Peterson replied this year for the first time to celebrate Rosa Parks, they had a Transit Equity Day where they allowed free fares on the Metrolink system and bus systems across the country. Apparently, it is something that has gone on for a while, but Metrolink through San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) identified that all their local operators were going to support it, so Metrolink was able to pivot quickly and able to provide free fares on that day as well. In response to Commissioner Magee’s inquiry about what day Rosa Parks Day was, Sheldon Peterson replied he will follow up and get back to him. Commissioner Betts stated he is not certain that a carnival is completely analogous with transit, but he had put on a community fair in the city of Desert Hot Springs and used to have all the rides be free. It was a little bit of chaos and the carnival operator told him if he charged $1.00, they would bring some order to the ride and get rid of the sense of entitlement. He explained they charged a $1.00 per ride and all the sudden everybody is in line paying attention to the line and not cutting in because they know that the person in front of them is paying. He used to be a real strong advocate for free transit because the amount they collect was so little compared to the operating costs and now he is not so sure if that is the way to go. Commissioner Betts recommended if they were going to go that direction to do some type of study to make sure that it does not lead to unforeseen problems. He expressed appreciation the question came up on public safety and asked if it is a safe ride now with no incidents. 9 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes May 23, 2022 Page 10 Sheldon Peterson replied it is a good ride as they have not had a number of incidents on the train, and they do have the sheriffs on board. He stated in Los Angeles County on the subways they are having significantly more challenges then Metrolink is having on the trains as they typically have a different type of rider, so they have not had the same incidents as Los Angeles County is having on the subways. Sheldon Peterson noted there have not been any significant spikes for onboard safety on the Metrolink trains. Commissioner Betts stated it is always what can they do once the rider gets there as that becomes one of the detriments to riding. He spent 10 years riding mass transit when he lived in China and could walk out the door, get a ride to the train station, and go everywhere a person wants to go it is just wonderful. Commissioner Betts noted here the problem comes up what does a person do once they get there so he is uncertain how they solve that, which is many millions of dollars. At SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine) where he serves, they put in something called SunRide that gives people a ride from their home to the main station and that maybe something to explore with Metrolink. He expressed that they need to solve that problem as a society if they want to get people to ride in mass like they do in other countries. Sheldon Peterson stated Metrolink from day one has been supportive of connecting transit. All the subway lines and all the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) lines are free with a Metrolink ticket, so anything they can do to make that first mile last mile connection they are doing their best to expand that, but there is always room for improvement. Anne Mayer stated on the issue of free rides that is currently one of the hottest topics in transit in that should transit be free or should there be a nominal charge for transit. She explained being aware that Los Angeles is still looking at free fares for all, but the issue with Los Angeles right now with their subway system is the homelessness issue and that is the challenge they are facing at their stations then anything else. In talking to Kristin Warsinski, RTA CEO, one of the proposals that is coming from the state that $750 million she had mentioned before about having transit riders go free for anyone under the age of 25 goes free. She explained some of those concerns from the transit partners are that even if they just charge .25 cents someone is paying .25 cents to get on the bus and Kristin Warsinski’s comment was that having people under the age of 25 just riding the bus because it is free all day long can also present some challenges. She stated that Ms. Warsinski’s prospective is that even if they charge .25 cents it is a fare and it is someone deliberately trying to be on the transit system. Anne Mayer noted this is a debate that will be informed by a lot of data over the next couple of years because transit agencies across the country are trying anything they can to get people back into buses and back on trains. Other than Pacific Surfliner, Metrolink ridership is higher than any other ridership in the state currently Caltrain and San Joaquin’s ridership across the state has plummeted. Anne Mayer stated that they are going to see a whole lot more free transit days themed to try to bring people back, but also this conversation should students ride free or be charged .25 cents is going to be a long-term conversation not knowing what the right thing to do is and the only way to know is to try. 10 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes May 23, 2022 Page 11 Commissioner Chuck Conder expressed appreciation to Sheldon Peterson for all that he does and for a great job they are doing with the sanitation issue of this. He asked Mr. Peterson to reassure the public what they are doing because people have said to him that they do not want to get back on the train due to cleaning issues with COVID. Sheldon Peterson replied ever since COVID started the onboard cleaning at Metrolink has been a high priority. They do the electrostatic spraying and wash off all the tabletops on a regular basis, upgraded all of their ventilation systems to high performance filters, so they have really gone above and beyond to make sure those trains are safe and cleaned on a daily basis. M/S/C (Betts/Middleton) to: 1) Receive and file a report on highlights from the Southern California Regional Rail Authority’s (SCRRA) services; 2) Approve the Fiscal Year (FY) 2022/23 SCRRA operating and capital budget, which results in an operating subsidy of $26,695,637 and capital subsidy of $10,391,915 for the Commission; 3) Authorize the Executive Director to finalize and execute Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. 22-25-090-00 with SCRRA regarding annual funding, including subrecipient matters related to pass-through of federal funding; and 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. Chair Gregory expressed appreciation to Sheldon Peterson for the presentation and for all that he does for the Commission every day. 10. AGREEMENTS FOR FEDERAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND HABITAT CONSERVATION LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY SERVICES AND HABITAT CONSERVATION LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY SERVICES David Knudsen, Interim External Affairs Director, presented the award of agreements for Federal Infrastructure and Habitat Conservation Legislative Advocacy services, highlighting the following:  Federal Advocacy  RCTC and RCA have historically retained legislative advocates in Washington, D.C.  Successful advocacy includes: o Securing TIFIA loans for the 91 Project and the I-15 Express Lanes project o Obtaining grants for the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Study and the Blythe Wellness Express 11 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes May 23, 2022 Page 12 o Amendments to federal surface transportation reauthorization legislation o Changes to DOI’s land acquisition grants & working to Establish a Wildlife Refuge  New opportunities and efficiencies  New management of RCA o Create cost efficiencies o Minimize contract redundancy  Nexus between habitat conservation and streamlined infrastructure development creates new opportunities  Consolidate contracts with a new procurement to strengthen federal advocacy  Implementing efficiencies, procurement process, proposed annual rates, and the selection process M/S/C (Middleton/Benoit) to: 1) Award the following agreements to provide Federal Infrastructure/Habitat Conservation Legislative Advocacy Services and Federal Habitat Conservation Legislative Advocacy Services as follows: a) Agreement No. 22-14-064-00 to Kadesh & Associates, LLC, for a four-year term, and two, two-year options to extend the agreement; in an amount not to exceed $1,533,395; and b) Agreement No. 22-18-070-00 with Hogan Lovells US LLP, for a four-year term, and two, two-year options to extend the agreement; in an amount of $1,518,000; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to finalize and execute the agreements, including option terms, on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 11. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE David Knudsen presented an update for the state and federal legislative activities. Chair Gregory expressed appreciation for David Knudsen’s presentation and for his efforts. He stated that it is not necessarily great the bills that are being opposed are moving forward especially without any type of serious amendments. M/S/C to: 1) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislation; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 12 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes May 23, 2022 Page 13 12. FISCAL YEAR 2022/23 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN UPDATES AND TRANSIT FUNDING ALLOCATIONS Eric DeHate, Transit Manager, presented the FY 2022/23 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) update approvals and the transit funding allocations, highlighting the following areas: • The logos of transit operators in Riverside County • What is a SRTP  Planning and Programming document intended to serve three purposes: o Identify transit services and capital improvements for the next three to five years; o Serve as a management tool for the operators to guide their activities for the next year; and o Provide justification for operating and capital assistance for state and federal funding allocations. • RCTC’s role  Oversight for state and federal funding regulations.  Guidance and estimates for developing the SRTP.  Review that the plans are financially constrained, meets required farebox ratio, and major changes in operating and capital needs.  Provide SRTPs to Commission for allocating funding. • The transit operator’s role  Provide service plans and capital needs for the next three to five years.  Provide a reasonable operational and capital budget to carry out the operators needs.  Seek public comments and board approval.  Provide the approved document to RCTC for allocation of funds. • COVID-19 impacts on transit  Transit operators are continuing through a recovery period o Service planning improvements − Implementation of COA recommendation and long-term service studies, free fare programs, increased marketing, increased and small expansions of service, and rebuilding ridership o Capital improvement planning − Revamping capital programs, replacing buses, computer software upgrades, and facility improvements  Projected ridership is 13 percent higher than FY 21/22 planned ridership and approximately 45.8 percent lower than FY 18/19 actual ridership o Projected ridership is conservative • Total funding overview • FY 2022/23 funding distribution by operator • FY 2022/23 funding source breakdown 13 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes May 23, 2022 Page 14 Chair Gregory expressed appreciation for Eric DeHate’s presentation and for the work that his staff and the staff of all the agencies put in getting these plans together. M/S/C (White/Smith) to: 1) Approve the Fiscal Years 2022/23 – FY 2024/25 Draft Short Range Transit Plans (SRTPs) for the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona, and Riverside; Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency (PVVTA); Riverside Transit Agency (RTA); SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine); and the Commission’s FY 2022/23 – 2026/27 SRTP for the Rail and Vanpool Programs; 2) Approve Fiscal Year 2022/23 Transit Operator Funding Allocations of 2009 Measure A, Local Transportation Funds (LTF), State Transit Assistance (STA), and State of Good Repair (SGR) for Banning, Beaumont, Corona, and Riverside; PVVTA; RTA; SunLine; and the Commission’s Rail and Vanpool Programs aggregating $156,413,915; 3) Adopt Resolution No. 22-011, “Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Allocate Local Transportation Funds and State Transit Assistance Funds For the Fiscal Year 2022/23”; 4) Approve the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Sections 5307, 5311, 5337, and 5339 Program of Projects (POP) for Riverside County as detailed in the respective transit operators’ SRTPs; 5) Direct staff to submit the federally funded and regionally significant projects to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for inclusion into the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) as needed for the FTA POP; and 6) Forward to the Commission for final action. 13. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA There were no items pulled from the consent calendar. 14. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT 14A. Expressed appreciation for the Commissioners’ time and attention this morning as May is always a busy month as they prepare for the next budget cycle, and it looks like staff will be ready to go for the June 8 Commission meeting and for next fiscal year from a budget standpoint. 14B. Reminder that the Ribbon Cutting for the SR-60 Truck Lanes project will be held on June 2 at 10:00 a.m.in Beaumont and the lanes had opened on May 20. She apologized there may be conflicts in some of the Commissioners’ calendars for that day, but with a board this big it is hard to make sure to find a clear date where so many of the Commissioners are available. She noted that Skanska did a terrific a job and are really proud of them. 14 RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes May 23, 2022 Page 15 14C. The I-15 Express Lanes project team will be in Sacramento the evening of May 26 for the California Transportation Foundation Awards Ceremony as the I-15 Project has been nominated as a finalist and they will announce the winner at the event, and she congratulated the I-15 Express Lanes project team. Chair Gregory expressed appreciation for Anne Mayer’s comments and for updating the Commissioners on some of these great projects that are concluding and are being recognized. 15. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS 15A. Commissioner Betts stated that he will be at Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and will miss the SR-60 Truck Lane Ribbon Cutting event. He noted that it is rare to get to witness a project like that over the last two or three years. He expressed appreciation to everyone involved on this project because he uses that regularly and usually when there is construction going on the motorist would normally avoid that route. That was not the case on this project, this was first class, well done, not sure if there is a textbook example of how to do it, but from a motorist standpoint that has to have been one. 15B. Commissioner Warren expressed appreciation for the warm welcome she received today as the RCTC Alternate as this is very informative and she does enjoy it. She suggested on behalf of Commissioner Lisa DeForest to reconsider a hybrid meeting. Chair Gregory stated that he believes that the Commissioners are at the will of the full Commission on that and of course the law and expressed appreciation for sharing her comments. 16. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Budget and Implementation Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 10:48 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Lisa Mobley Administrative Services Manager/Clerk of the Board 15 AGENDA ITEM 6B Agenda Item 6B RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 27, 2022 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Bryce Johnston, Senior Capital Projects Manager THROUGH: Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Reporting of Contract Change Orders for Construction Contracts STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the Quarterly Report of Contract Change Orders for Construction Contracts for the three months ended March 31, 2022; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: During the past quarter, January through March 2022, the Commission has had the following projects under construction: 1. Mid County Parkway (MCP) Placentia project 2. I-15 Railroad Canyon Interchange project 3. SR-91 Pachappa Underpass project 4. SR-60 Truck Lanes project 5. Downtown Riverside Station Layover Facility project 6. I-15 Express Lanes project 7. SR-91 Corridor Operations project (91 COP) 8. 15/91 Express Lanes Connector DISCUSSION: At the direction of the Executive Committee at its March 2021 meeting, a report will be filed each quarter listing the construction contract change orders that were issued in the previous quarter. The following table summarizes the Contract Change Orders that occurred in the last quarter (3rd quarter of Fiscal Year 2021/22). 16 Agenda Item 6B FISCAL IMPACT: The Contract Change Orders were executed using available contingency authorized with the construction contract for each project. Project CCO No.Description Amount CCO 14 Deleted work at Intersection Placentia/Indian ($724,774.00) CCO 17 Drainage system connection onto the private property $40,000.00 CCO 18 Decrease of 84 Inch Permanent Steel Casing ($57,800.00) CCO 19 Placing AC for overside Drains (small areas)$8,000.00 CCO 20 Install Headed Bars In Lieu of Hooked Reinforcement $4,000.00 CCO 22 Install Utility Conduits in the Bridge Sidewalks $35,585.00 CCO 23 Precast RCB Additional Sections $71,404.00 CCO 25 Drainage system changes $14,796.57 CCO 52 Caltrans Location 1 left turn $80,000.00 CCO 54 In N Out Hand Rail $7,145.00 CCO 57 Soil Amendment - sulfur ($3,877.19) CCO 60 Backflow preventer: EVMWD spec vs Caltrans spec $8,385.00 CCO 61 Repair of chain link fence $5,207.40 CCO 62 Closure pour mix design change/ polyester overlay $35,000.00 CCO 66 Stage 2 Striping Changes ($3,190.15) CCO 67 Rapid Set Concrete ($14,105.00) CCO 72 TMS Repair $10,000.00 CCO 7-S3 Oil Index Adjustment ($127,686.31) CCO 69 Additional staging for remaining work on WB $22,741.58 CCO 5-S1 Additional Traffic Control at Green River Road 35,200 CCO 7-S2 Differing Site Conditions 16,200 CCO 8-S1 Additional Electrical Work 40,000 CCO 16 Just In Time Training 4,400 CCO 17 Final Striping Modifications 30,000 CCO 18 Temporary Traffic Striping 25,900 CCO 19 Green River Road Structural Section Modification (42,400) CCO 12-S2 Supplement 2 -Provisional sum for all design work for EB 2.0 (replaces the 450k from CCO 12-S1)$950,000.00 CCO 19 Design for New TTMS Pole Heights $15,000.00 15/91 Express Lanes Connector 91 C.O.P MCP Placentia Project Contractor Change Orders executed in the 1st Quarter of CY 2022 SR-60 Truck Lanes Project I-15 Railroad Canyon Interchange Project 17 AGENDA ITEM 6C Agenda Item 6C RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 27, 2022 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Timothy Green, Senior Management Analyst Hector Casillas, Right of Way Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Surplus Declaration of Real Property STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 22-012 “Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Declaring Pursuant to Government Code Section 54221 that Certain Real Property Owned by the Commission located at assessor parcel numbers 102-091-027, a portion of 102-091-030, and a portion of certain right-of-way area, located between Serfas Club Drive and Frontage Road near Corona, California, is Non-Exempt Surplus Land, Approving the Form of Notice of Availability Therefore, Authorizing the Executive Director to Comply with the Surplus Land Act, and Finding the Foregoing Categorically Exempt from CEQA Review”; 2) Adopt Resolution No. 22-013 “Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Declaring Pursuant to Government Code Section 54221 that Certain Real Property Owned by the Commission located at a portion of 219-094-014, located near Cridge Street in the City of Riverside, California, is Exempt Surplus Land Therefore, Authorizing the Executive Director to Comply with the Surplus Land Act, and Finding the Foregoing Categorically Exempt from CEQA Review”; 3) If no response for the non-exempt surplus property is received from public agencies, developers, and/or contiguous landowners, authorize the Executive Director to offer the surplus property for sale to the public; and 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Staff completed a review of the Commission’s real property and determined it would be in the Commission’s best interest to declare the following two parcels as surplus and offer them for sale. The first property was acquired by the Commission for the former alignment of the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project. It is adjacent to east side of Serfas Club Drive and is no longer 18 Agenda Item 6C necessary for current or future project purposes. The following table summarizes the property proposed to be declared surplus. APN Acres Location 102-091-027 Portion of 102-091-030 1.04 South of SR-91 on the east side of Serfas Club Drive and west of Frontage Road near the City of Corona The second property was acquired by the Commission for rail right of way and is south of the 91 freeway and east of Cridge Street. The city of Riverside approached the Commission to improve the crossing at this location. Staff has been in communications with the city of Riverside on the acquisition of the portion of the property. The city’s project requires a small sliver of the property, which is not necessary for the Commissions current or future project purposes. The following table summarizes the property proposed to be declared surplus. APN Square Feet Location Portion of 219-094-014 92 South of SR-91 on the east side of Cridge Street in the city of Riverside Process After being declared surplus by the Commission, staff will follow the Right of Way Policies and Procedures Manual (Manual), state laws and any applicable funding requirements to dispose of the property. Staff will prioritize the order of sale based on market conditions. Pursuant to the Surplus Land Act (Government Code 54220 et.seq.) (SLA), and the Manual, a Notice of Availability (NOA) (form attached hereto as Exhibit A to the Resolution) will be delivered to public agencies and developers statutorily entitled to notice of the Commission’s decision to declare the property surplus. If interested, the public agency(ies) and/or developers shall notify the Commission in writing of its intent to purchase or lease the land within 60 days after receipt of the Commission’s NOA. If the Commission receives a notice of interest in response to the NOA, the Commission must negotiate in good faith for at least 90 days. If no public agency timely expresses interest in the parcel or Commission does not come to terms with an entity who responds to the NOA, then the Commission must submit a package of information and documents to the State’s Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) showing that the Commission has complied with the SLA. Within 30 days, the HCD must respond with either a letter of approval or a notice of violation; failure of HCD to timely respond is deemed approval. Upon approval, the parcel may then be offered for sale to the public. In certain circumstances, when a parcel is identified as “exempt,” the 60-day notification requirements do not apply, as defined by the Government Code. The parcel located in the city of Riverside qualifies as an exempt surplus parcel under the Government Code since the transfer of the property will be to another public entity, the city of Riverside. 19 Agenda Item 6C After completing the SLA process, an appraisal will be completed to determine the current fair market value of the surplus property. The surplus property will then be advertised for sale, utilizing the Commission’s website, online publications as well as signage on the property. An Invitation for Bids will be added to the Commission’s website and a defined submittal date will be provided. Staff will review the offers received based on the following criteria: 1) Price; and 2) Terms and conditions of sale. All applicants will be required to complete the Commission’s Conflict of Interest form. Staff will return to the Commission for approval before entering into a purchase and sale agreement for the properties, if necessary. Staff requests that the Commission declare the following parcels as surplus property and authorize the Executive Director to offer the surplus property for sale pursuant to the SLA and subsequently to the public. APN(s) Ownership Type Vacant/ Improved Sq. Ft. 102-091-027 Portion of 102-091-030 Fee Vacant 45,377 219-094-014 Fee Vacant 92 Adoption of the Resolutions does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. When the property is sold, the buyer’s proposed use of the property may require a discretionary permit and CEQA review. The future use and project will be analyzed at the appropriate time in accordance with CEQA. FISCAL IMPACT There is no financial impact at this time; however, upon sale of the above referenced properties, revenue for the Commission will be generated and deposited in the Property Sale proceeds account. Attachments: 1) Resolution Nos. 22-012 and 22-013 2) Legal Descriptions, Plat Maps, and Aerial Exhibits 20 RESOLUTION NO. 22-012 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DECLARING PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54221 THAT REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY THE COMMISSION LOCATED AT ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS 102-091-027, A PORTION OF 102-091-030, AND A PORTION OF CERTAIN RIGHT-OF-WAY AREA, LOCATED BETWEEN SERFAS CLUB DRIVE AND FRONTAGE ROAD NEAR CORONA, CALIFORNIA, IS NON-EXEMPT SURPLUS LAND, APPROVING THE FORM OF NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY THEREFORE, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO COMPLY WITH THE SURPLUS LAND ACT, AND FINDING THE FOREGOING CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM CEQA REVIEW WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the “Commission”) is the owner in fee simple of that certain real property identified as Assessor Parcel Numbers 102-091-027, a portion of 102-091-030, and a portion of certain right-of-way area, which together is approximately 45,377 square feet in size and is located between Serfas Club Drive and Frontage Road in Corona, California (together, the “Property”); and WHEREAS, the Commission no longer has any use for the Property; and WHEREAS, the Surplus Land Act, Government Code sections 54220 et seq. (as amended, the “Act”), applies when a local agency disposes of “surplus land,” as that term is defined in Government Code section 54221; and WHEREAS, the Property is “surplus land” under the Act, because it is land owned in fee simple by the Commission for which the Commission will take formal action (in the form of adoption of this resolution) in a regular public meeting declaring that the land is surplus and is not necessary for the Commission’s use; and WHEREAS, the Act requires that prior to the disposal of any surplus land, unless an exemption applies, a local agency must issue a Notice of Availability to, among others, affordable housing developers, and thereafter, if any entity submits a qualified Notice of Interest within sixty (60) days of issuance of the Notice of Availability, the local agency must negotiate in good faith for at least ninety (90) days with any such submitting entities; and WHEREAS, the Property is not exempt from the Act; and WHEREAS, a form of Notice of Availability is attached hereto as Exhibit A, and the Property is depicted in Exhibit 1 attached thereto; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Riverside County Transportation Commission AS FOLLOWS: ATTACHMENT 1 21 SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and correct and are a substantive part of this Resolution. SECTION 2. The Commission hereby finds and declares that the Property is “surplus land” as used in the Act, because the Property is owned in fee simple by the Commission, and the Property is surplus and is not necessary for the Commission’s use. SECTION 3. The Commission hereby approves the form of Notice of Availability substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A. SECTION 4. The Commission hereby authorizes the Executive Director or her designee to take all necessary actions to fully comply with the Act without further need to obtain Commission approval. SECTION 5. This Resolution has been reviewed with respect to the applicability of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) (“CEQA”). Commission staff has determined that the designation of this property as non-exempt surplus, approval of the form of NOA, and authorization for the Executive Director to comply with the Act do not have the potential for creating a significant effect on the environment and are therefore exempt from further review under CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3), because such actions do not constitute a “project” as defined by the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378. In the alternative, even if the actions contemplated here constituted a “project” under CEQA, they involve the sale of surplus government property, which is exempt from environmental review under CEQA pursuant to a Class 12 categorical exemption. Specifically, the government property is not located in an area of statewide, regional or areawide concern as defined in CEQA Guidelines section 15206(b)(4). The Property is not located in any of the following: the Lake Tahoe Basin, the Santa Monica Mountains Zone, the California Coastal Zone, an area within ¼ mile of a wild and scenic river, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, the Suisun Marsh, or the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. Therefore, the Commission’s adoption of this Resolution is exempt from CEQA review. Finally, adoption of the Resolution does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. If and when the Property is sold to a purchaser, and that purchaser proposes a use for the Property that requires a discretionary permit and CEQA review, that future use and project will be analyzed at the appropriate time in accordance with CEQA. SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Resolution is declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. SECTION 5. The Clerk of the Board shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. 22 . PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Commissioners of the Riverside County Transportation Commission on this 13th day of July 2022. ______________________________ V. Manuel Perez, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission __________________________ Lisa Mobley, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 23 EXHIBIT A Notice of Availability of Surplus Land [Attached] 24 DATE To All Interested Parties: RE: Notice of Availability of Surplus Property As required by the Surplus Land Act (Government Code Section 54220 et seq.) (the “Act”), the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (the “Commission”) is providing notification that the Commission intends to sell/lease the surplus property listed in the accompanying table (together, the “Property”). APN ADDRESS SIZE (AC) ZONING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION CURRENT USE 102-091- 027 and a portion of 102-091- 030 and certain right-of- way area Between Serfas Club Drive and Frontage Road in Corona, CA Approx. 45,377 square feet C-1/C-P (General Commercial) Commercial Retail Vacant The Property is comprised of two (2) numbered parcels and a portion of right-of-way area and together total approximately 45,377 square feet of vacant land, bounded on the west by Serfas Club Drive and on the east and south by Frontage Road, and on the north by State Route 91, in Corona, California, as depicted in the site map attached hereto as Exhibit 1. In accordance with Government Code Section 54222, you have sixty (60) days from the date this Notice was sent via certified mail or electronic mail to notify the Commission of your interest in acquiring the above property. However, this offer shall not obligate the Commission to sell the property to you. Instead, if your notice of interest is compliant with the Act, the Commission would enter into at least ninety (90) days of negotiations with you pursuant to Government Code Section 54223. If no notices of interest are received during the 60-day period or no agreement is reached on sales price and terms, or lease terms, with a submitter of a qualifying notice of interest, the Commission may market the property to the general public. As required by Government Code Section 54227, if the Commission receives more than one letter of interest during this 60-day period, it will give first priority to entities proposing to develop housing where at least 25 percent of the units will be affordable to lower income households. If more than one such proposal is received, priority will be given to the proposal with the greatest number of affordable units. If more than one 25 proposal specifies the same number of affordable units, priority will be given to the proposal that has the lowest average affordability level. In the event your agency or company is interested in purchasing or leasing one or more of the properties, you must notify the Commission in writing within sixty (60) days of the date this notice was sent via certified mail or electronic mail. Notice of your interest in acquiring the property should be delivered to: Riverside County Transportation Commission Attn: Timothy Green, Senior Management Analyst 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502 You may also direct your questions to tgreen@rctc.org or by calling (951) 955-0042. Entities proposing to submit a letter of interest are advised to review the requirements set forth in the Surplus Land Act (Government Code Section 54220-54234) and the Surplus Land Act Guidelines (April 2021) promulgated by the State Department of Housing and Community Development. 26 EXHIBIT 1 Depiction of Surplus Land 27 RESOLUTION NO. 22-013 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DECLARING PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54221 THAT REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY THE COMMISSION LOCATED AT A PORTION OF 219-094-014, LOCATED NEAR CRIDGE STREET IN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA, IS EXEMPT SURPLUS LAND, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO COMPLY WITH THE SURPLUS LAND ACT, AND AUTHORIZATION IS EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the “Commission”) is the owner in fee simple of that certain real property identified as a portion of Assessor Parcel Numbers 219-094-014, approximately 92.1 square feet in size and is located south of State Route 91 and on the east side of Cridge Street in Riverside, California (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, the Commission is anticipating the transfer of the Property to a public agency, in this case to the city of Riverside; and WHEREAS, the Commission no longer has any use for the Property; and WHEREAS, the Surplus Land Act, Government Code sections 54220 et seq. (as amended, the “Act”), applies when a local agency disposes of “surplus land,” as that term is defined in Government Code section 54221; and WHEREAS, the Property is “surplus land” under the Act, because it is land owned in fee simple by the Commission for which the Commission will take formal action (in the form of adoption of this resolution) in a regular public meeting declaring that the land is surplus and is not necessary for the Commission’s use; and WHEREAS, the Act requires that prior to the disposal of any surplus land, unless an exemption applies, a local agency must issue a Notice of Availability to, among others, affordable housing developers, and thereafter, if any entity submits a qualified Notice of Interest within sixty (60) days of issuance of the Notice of Availability, the local agency must negotiate in good faith for at least ninety (90) days with any such submitting entities; and WHEREAS, the Property is exempt from the Act; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Riverside County Transportation Commission AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and correct and are a substantive part of this Resolution. 28 SECTION 2. The Commission hereby finds and declares that (i) the Property is “surplus land” and not necessary for the Agency’s use, and (ii) the Property is exempt from the Act pursuant to section 54221(f)(1)(D) of the Act. The basis for this declaration is the finding that the property is being transferred to another public agency. SECTION 3. The Commission hereby authorizes the Executive Director or her designee to take all necessary actions to fully comply with the Act without further need to obtain Commission approval. SECTION 4. This Resolution has been reviewed with respect to the applicability of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) (“CEQA”). Commission staff has determined that the designation of this property as exempt surplus does not have the potential for creating a significant effect on the environment and is therefore exempt from further review under CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3), because it is not a project as defined by the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378. Adoption of the Resolution does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. If and when the Property is sold to a purchaser, and that purchaser proposes a use for the Property that requires a discretionary permit and CEQA review, that future use and project will be analyzed at the appropriate time in accordance with CEQA SECTION 5. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Resolution is declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. SECTION 6. The Clerk of the Board shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Commissioners of the Riverside County Transportation Commission on this 13th day of July 2022. ______________________________ V. Manuel Perez, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission __________________________ Lisa Mobley, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 29 ATTACHMENT 2 30 31 32 33 APN 102-091-030 APN 102-091-027SE R F A S C L U B D R SUGARLN RIDGEVIEWTER FR O N T A G E R D City ofCorona ÄÄ91 San Bernardino County Orange County ÄÄ91 ÄÄ60 ÄÄ71 §¨¦15 §¨¦15 §¨¦215 I Surplus Land City Boundary Highway Centerline036Miles APN's: 102-091-027, Portion of 102-091-030, and Portion of ROWArea: Approximately 45,377 ± square feet 0 100 200Feet^_Project Site VICINITY MAP 5/17/2022 Surplus LandParcel 22129-11 Remnant 34 35 36 APN 219-094-014 Crid g e S t Vin e S t Com m e r c e S t Vin e S t ¬ƭƑƎŕƭƙgîŠēɠ¡ūƑƥĿūŠūIJ¡sȃȂȊɠȁȊȅɠȁȂȅ ¡ūƑƥĿūŠūIJ¡sȃȂȊɠȁȊȅɠȁȂȅɍƎƎƑūNJĿŞîƥĚŕNjȊȃɍȂƙƐIJƥ 'îƥĚ ¬îDŽĚēɇ ȇɓȉɓȃȁȃȃ (Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, FEMA, City of Riverside, County of Riverside, California State ȁ ȃȁ ȅȁ ȇȁ dĚĚ ƥ Surplus Land Centerline 37 38 39 APN 219-094-014 Crid g e S t Vin e S t Com m e r c e S t Vin e S t ¬ƭƑƎŕƭƙgîŠēɠ¡ūƑƥĿūŠūIJ¡sȃȂȊɠȁȊȅɠȁȂȅ ¡ūƑƥĿūŠūIJ¡sȃȂȊɠȁȊȅɠȁȂȅɍƎƎƑūNJĿŞîƥĚŕNjȊȃɍȂƙƐIJƥ 'îƥĚ ¬îDŽĚēɇ ȇɓȉɓȃȁȃȃ (Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, FEMA, City of Riverside, County of Riverside, California State ȁ ȃȁ ȅȁ ȇȁ dĚĚ ƥ Surplus Land Centerline 40 AGENDA ITEM 7 Agenda Item 7 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 27, 2022 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: David Knudsen, External Affairs Director THROUGH: John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: State and Federal Legislative Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislation; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State Update The Legislature is expected to pass the 2022-23 Budget by the constitutional deadline of midnight, June 15, 2022, or forfeit a portion of their salaries. As of the writing of this staff report, the estimated surplus of $68 billion and discussions of how to avoid the Gann Limit are expected to dominate negotiations between the Governor, Speaker of the Assembly, and President Pro Tempore of the Senate. As with previous budget cycles, it is anticipated legislators will continue to negotiate outstanding budget details past the June 15 deadline, to be incorporated into budget trailer bills that implement the topline spending programs per agency, or a “budget bill junior,” to revise the Budget Act of 2022-23. Staff continued work to support the Inland Empire Caucus’ budget request for $2.2 billion for transportation projects in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. Additionally, Assemblymember Kelly Seyarto (Murrieta) has agreed to submit RCTC’s request for $3 million to fund the next phase of the I-15 Express Lanes Southern Extension. A determination to fund these projects may be reached any time before the legislative session concludes on August 31, 2022, either in the Budget Act or a budget trailer bill. Assembly Bill 2344 (Friedman) Oppose Unless Amended – Action taken based on platform On June 3, 2022, Executive Director Anne Mayer sent a letter to Assembly Transportation Committee Chair Laura Friedman, proposing amendments to her bill, AB 2344, with the caveat 41 Agenda Item 7 that RCTC will oppose if it is not amended. If enacted as written, AB 2344 would require Caltrans, in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), to establish a wildlife connectivity project list of wildlife passage projects. The bill would require the list to be included in the wildlife connectivity action plan and require Caltrans and DFW to prioritize the implementation of projects on the list based on specified factors, including, among others, the project’s ability to enhance connectivity and permeability within a connectivity area or natural landscape area identified in the wildlife connectivity action plan. RCTC aligns with efforts to protect the biodiversity of our ecosystems through sustainable development and is already doing the work, but AB 2344 would also implement duplicative impact assessments and remediation processes for transportation projects. As such, the bill currently fails to acknowledge the conservation efforts already underway in areas with habitat conservation plans. A vast majority of transportation, infrastructure, and housing development projects in Riverside County are assessed for impacts to the habitat of any of the 146 species protected by the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) or the 27 species protected by the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP). The same is true for projects impacting protected species elsewhere in the state that are covered by HCPs or NCCPs. Impacts to habitat covered by these plans are assessed in close collaboration with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. What sets these plans apart from piecemeal mitigation processes, is that they have already identified priority wildlife corridors and habitats to add to their comprehensive habitat reserve systems via streamlined mitigation processes. RCTC requested that the following language be amended into AB 2344: Amend Section 3, Article 3.8, § 158.1 to read: 158.1. For any project using state or federal transportation funds programmed after January 1, 2024, the department shall ensure that, if the project is located in an area identified as a connectivity area or a natural landscape area in the wildlife connectivity action plan pursuant to Section 1961 of the Fish and Game Code and not in an area covered by a Natural Community Conservation Plan pursuant to Section 2800 of the Fish and Game Code or a habitat conservation plan, an assessment of potential barriers to wildlife movement is done before commencing project planning and again during project design. The department shall submit the assessment to the Department of Fish and Wildlife. If any structural barrier to wildlife movement exists, remediation of the problem shall be designed into the project by the implementing agency. New projects or improvements to existing infrastructure or projects shall be constructed so that they do not present a barrier to fish and wildlife movement. When addressing barriers to wildlife movement, plans and projects shall be developed in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife The action to oppose, unless amended, is consistent with the Commission adopted 2022 State and Federal Legislative Platform, including: 42 Agenda Item 7 Regional Control • Policies should be sensitive to each region’s unique needs and avoid “one size fits all” assumptions, over-reliance on one mode of transportation, and lack of distinction between urban, suburban, and rural needs. Protect Our Authority and Revenue • Oppose efforts to place mandates on agencies which would drive up operating costs and thereby reduce the amount of funds available to deliver mobility improvements which could nullify RCTC priorities. Alignment of Responsibilities • Support policies that provide decision-making authority and flexibility to agencies bearing financial risk for projects. Oppose policies that place unfunded mandates and other undue burdens and restrictions on agencies that bear financial risk for projects. Environment • Support efforts or initiatives that limit the liability of transportation projects for long-term conservation or mitigation. • Oppose efforts to place new environmental criteria (such as GHG reduction or vehicle miles traveled reduction) on transportation projects and programs without commensurate funding for alternatives or mitigations. Projects • Oppose policies that inhibit the efficient, timely delivery of such projects. Senate Bill 1121 (Gonzalez) – Support action taken based on platform Senate Bill (SB) 1121 authored by Senate Transportation Committee Chair, Lena Gonzalez, would require the California Transportation Commission (CTC) to biennially develop a needs assessment of the cost to operate, maintain, and provide for the future growth and resiliency of the state and local transportation system. In developing the needs assessment, the CTC would be required to consult with relevant stakeholders, including, but not limited to, metropolitan planning organizations, county transportation commissions, regional transportation planning agencies, local governments, and transit operators. In addition, the bill requires the CTC to estimate the cost to provide for future growth of the state and local transportation system in the needs assessment and must include the cost to address climate change impacts. In opposition letters to AB 2237 (Friedman) and AB 2438 (Friedman), RCTC has expressed concerns regarding legislative efforts that prematurely restructure how transportation projects are planned, funded, and delivered, without a comprehensive analysis of infrastructure and service need, nor increased funding and regulatory flexibility. SB 1121 would be a meaningful first step as the state explores how to advance climate action goals by transitioning our transportation systems to multimodal transit alternatives. 43 Agenda Item 7 Supporting this legislation is consistent with the Commission’s 2022 adopted State and Federal Legislative Platform, including: Regional Control • State and federal rulemakings, administrative processes, program guidelines, and policy development activities should include meaningful collaboration from regional transportation agencies. • Policies should be sensitive to each region’s unique needs and avoid “one size fits all” assumptions, over-reliance on one mode of transportation, and lack of distinction between urban, suburban, and rural needs. Alignment of Responsibilities • Support strong collaborative partnerships with state and federal agencies. Alternatives to Driving – Transit and Rail • Support integration of public transportation systems in southern California. Projects • Support programs and policies that advantage transportation projects in Riverside County, including, but not limited to: o Measure A-funded projects o Grade separations o Transit capital projects and operations by regional and municipal transit agencies o Commuter rail capital projects and operations o Intercity Rail Service to the Coachella Valley and San Gorgonio Pass o Local streets and road projects sponsored by the county and municipalities o Active transportation projects o Projects included in the Traffic Relief Plan adopted in May 2020 o Locally led bridge projects Continued Legislative Advocacy Staff continue to work with members of Riverside County’s State delegation on Assembly Bills 1778 (Cristina Garcia), 2237 (Friedman), and 2438 (Friedman). All three bills passed out of the Assembly with razor thin majority vote. July 1 is the last day for policy committees to meet and consider bills before the legislative summer recess. The Legislature will reconvene on August 1 and August 31 is the last day for each house to pass bills. Staff will continue to be active throughout legislative process and keep commissioners apprised of opportunities to advocate. 44 Agenda Item 7 Federal Update Congressionally Directed Spending and Community Project Funding As part of the federal fiscal year 2023 appropriations process, RCTC requested $21 million in funding for three projects, including: • Downtown Third Street Grade Separation, Safety and Mobility project; • I-15 Express Lanes Southern Extension; and • Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Tier II environmental. RCTC learned that each one of these requests were reviewed by congressional offices and have been submitted to congressional appropriation committees. This includes: • $3 million request for the Downtown Third Street Grade Separation, Safety and Mobility project – submitted by Representative Takano; • $3 million for the I-15 Express Lanes Southern Extension – submitted by Representative Calvert; and • $5 million for CV Rail Tier II environmental – submitted by Senator Padilla. RCTC’s requests made it past the individual member office reviews and will now be considered by congressional appropriation committees. FISCAL IMPACT: This is a policy and information item. There is no fiscal impact. Attachments: 1) State and Federal Update Legislative Matrix – June 2022 2) Assembly Bill 2344 (Friedman) Oppose Unless Amended – Letter 3) Senate Bill 1121 (Gonzalez) Support – Letter 45 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - POSITIONS ON STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION – JUNE 2022 Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption SB 1121 (Gonzalez) This bill would require the California Transportation Commission (CTC) to biennially develop a needs assessment of the cost to operate, maintain, and provide for the future growth and resiliency of the state and local transportation system. In developing the needs assessment, the CTC would be required to consult with relevant stakeholders, including, but not limited to, metropolitan planning organizations, county transportation commissions, regional transportation planning agencies, local governments, and transit operators. In addition, the bill requires the CTC to estimate the cost to provide for future growth of the state and local transportation system in the needs assessment and must include the cost to address climate change impacts. Referred to Assembly Transportation Committee May 27, 2022 SUPPORT Staff action based on platform June 15, 2022 AB 2344 (Friedman) If enacted as written, AB 2344 would require Caltrans, in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), to establish a wildlife connectivity project list of wildlife passage projects. The bill would require the list to be included in the wildlife connectivity action plan and require Caltrans and DFW to prioritize the implementation of projects on the list based on specified factors, including, among others, the project’s ability to enhance connectivity and permeability within a connectivity area or natural landscape area identified in the wildlife connectivity action plan. Referred to Senate Committees on Natural Resource and Water and Transportation June 8, 2022 OPPOSE Unless Amended Staff action based on platform June 3, 2022 SB 1410 (Caballero) This bill would require, by January 1, 2025, to conduct and submit to the Legislature a study on the impacts and implementation of the guidelines described above relating to transportation impacts. The bill would require the office, upon appropriation, to establish a grant program to provide financial assistance to local jurisdictions for implementing those guidelines. Referred to Assembly Committee on Natural Resources June 2, 2022 Support May 11, 2022 AB 2237 (Friedman) AB 2237 would limit use of State Transportation Improvement Program funding and reframe the administration of such, while also seeking a redefinition of the roles and responsibilities for metropolitan planning organizations Referred to Senate Committees on Environmental Quality, Transportation and Housing. June 8, 2022 OPPOSE May 11, 2022 ATTACHMENT 1 46 Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption AB 2438 (Friedman) This bill would require the agencies that administer those programs to revise the guidelines or plans applicable to those programs to ensure that projects included in the applicable program align with the California Transportation Plan, the Climate Action Plan for Transportation Infrastructure adopted by the Transportation Agency, and specified greenhouse gas emissions reduction standards. The bill would require the Transportation Agency, the Department of Transportation, and the California Transportation Commission, in consultation with the State Air Resources Board and the Strategic Growth Council, to jointly prepare and submit a report to the Legislature on or before January 1, 2025, that comprehensively reevaluates transportation program funding levels, projects, and eligibility criteria with the objective of aligning the largest funding programs with the goals set forth in the above-described plans and away from projects that increase vehicle capacity. Referred to Senate Committee on Transportation June 8, 2022 OPPOSE Staff action based on platform March 24, 2022 AB 1778 (Cristina Garcia) This bill would prohibit any state funds or personnel time from being used to fund or permit freeway widening projects in areas with high rates of pollution and poverty. Referred to Senate Committee on Transportation June 1, 2022 OPPOSE March 9, 2022 AB 1499 (Daly) Removes the January 1, 2024 sunset date for Department of Transportation and regional transportation agencies to use the design- build procurement method for transportation projects in California. Signed by the Governor September 22, 2021 SUPPORT April 14, 2021 SB 623 (Newman) Clarifies existing law to ensure toll operators statewide can improve service to customers and enforce toll policies while increasing privacy protections for the use of personally identifiable information (PII). Failed to Pass House of Origin by January 31, 2022 deadline. February 1, 2022 SUPPORT Staff action based on platform April 5, 2021 SB 261 (Allen) This bill would require that the sustainable communities strategy be developed to additionally achieve greenhouse gas emission reduction targets for the automobile and light truck sector for 2045 and 2050 and vehicle miles traveled reduction targets for 2035, 2045, and 2050 established by the board. The bill would make various conforming changes to integrate those additional targets into regional transportation plans. Failed to Pass House of Origin by January 31, 2022 deadline. February 1, 2022 OPPOSE May 12, 2021 Federal 47 Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption HR 972 (Calvert) This bill establishes the Western Riverside County Wildlife Refuge which would provide certainty for development of the transportation infrastructure required to meet the future needs of southern California. Ordered Reported by the House Committee on Natural Resources July 14, 2021 SUPPORT Staff action based on platform June 11, 2021 48 June 3, 2022 The Honorable Laura Friedman Assemblymember, District 43 California State Assembly P.O. Box 942849 Sacramento, California 94249-0043 RE: A B 2344 (Freidman) – Oppose Unless Amended Dear Assemblymember Friedman: On behalf of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), I write with proposed amendments to Assembly Bill (AB) 2344. As the managing agency of the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA), which administers the state’s largest Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) and the nation’s largest Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), RCTC commends your interest in developing a comprehensive plan to bolster wildlife connectivity across the state. RCTC aligns with efforts to protect the biodiversity of our ecosystems through sustainable development and is already doing the work but must oppose AB 2344 if duplicative impact assessments and remediation processes for transportation projects remain in place. A vast majority of transportation, infrastructure, and housing development projects in Riverside County are assessed for impacts to the habitat of any of the 146 species protected by the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) or the 27 species protected by the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP). The same is true for projects impacting protected species elsewhere in the state that are covered by HCPs or NCCPs. Impacts to habitat covered by these plans are assessed in close collaboration with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. What sets these plans apart from piecemeal mitigation processes, is that they have already identified priority wildlife corridors and habitats to add to their comprehensive habitat reserve systems via streamlined mitigation processes. In western Riverside County alone, we have conserved 412,393 acres to date—over 82 percent of our 500,000-acre reserve goal, conserving habitat of protected species and securing open space for countless communities. The MSHCP not only contributes to the state’s “30 by 30” conservation goals, but also incentivizes more dense development by permanently protecting vast landscapes from irreversible conversion to development. In turn, those conserved habitats advance nature-based solutions to climate change through naturally occurring carbon sequestration. RC TC recently opened its State Route 60 Truck Lanes project, which features two new, 20 feet by 20 feet wildlife crossings that provides connectivity for protected species such as the mountain lion in San Timoteo Canyon, a vital linkage between San Bernardino National Forest and Cleveland National Forest. A video of the new wildlife crossings is linked in the exhibit of this letter. This project was completed in partnership with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), but our partnership has not stopped there. We continue to work with Caltrans and other conservation partners to seek state funding to retrofit crossings in locations on State Route 91 and Interstate 15. As such, we continue to advocate for increased budget funding for new wildlife crossings, as well as for retrofits of existing wildlife crossings. ATTACHMENT 2 49 The Honorable Laura Friedman June 3, 2022 Page 2 In Riverside County, we are doing the work and have done so since the Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) was completed over 20 years ago to sustainably plan for housing and transportation infrastructure need, balanced with open space and habitat preservation. Riverside County believes so much in the mission of the RCIP and the MSHCP, that Measure A—our voter -approved transportation sales tax—conditions that cities in western Riverside County must be a permittee of the MSHCP and must adopt a Local Development Mitigation Fee (LDMF) that funds the RCA’s land acquisition and habitat management programs. RCTC applauds efforts by the state to implement comprehensive and sustainable development measures like Riverside County has. However, RCTC believes that measures such as AB 2344 should recognize regional plans in place and exempt projects within those plans from duplicative requirements for assessment for impact to wildlife connectivity and subsequent remediation. RCTC requests that the following language be amended into AB 2344: Amend Section 3, Article 3.8, § 158.1 to read: 158.1. For any project using state or federal transportation funds programmed after January 1, 2024, the department shall ensure that, if the project is located in an area identified as a connectivity area or a natural landscape area in the wildlife connectivity action plan pursuant to Section 1961 of the Fish and Game Code and not in an area covered by a Natural Community Conservation Plan pursuant to Section 2800 of the Fish and Game Code or a habitat conservation plan, an assessment of potential barriers to wildlife movement is done before commencing project planning and again during project design. The department shall submit the assessment to the Department of Fish and Wildlife. If any structural barrier to wildlife movement exists, remediation of the problem shall be designed into the project by the implementing agency. New projects or improvements to existing infrastructure or projects shall be constructed so that they do not present a barrier to fish and wildlife movement. When addressing barriers to wildlife movement, plans and projects shall be developed in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife. RCTC is a willing partner and will continue to work with the state to turn the page toward innovative and sustainable transportation solutions that advance sustainable development and landscape-scale habitat conservation. For these reasons, RCTC requests your due consideration of our proposed amendments to AB 2344. If you have any questions regarding RCTC's position on this issue, please contact me or David Knudsen, External Affairs Director, at (951) 787-7141. Sincerely, Anne Mayer Executive Director Exhibit: State Route 60 Truck Lanes Wildlife Crossing Video 50 June 15, 2022 The Honorable Laura Friedman Chair, Assembly Committee on Transportation California State Assembly 1020 N Street, Room 112 Sacramento, California 95814 RE: Support for SB 1121 (Gonzalez) Dear Chair Friedman: On behalf of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), I write in support of SB 1121 (Gonzalez). As written, the bill would require the California Transportation Commission (CTC), in coordination with transportation planning agencies and other key state, regional, and local stakeholders, to prepare a biennial needs assessment of the costs to operate, maintain, and provide for the future growth of local and state transportation systems for the next 10 years. RCTC recognizes various efforts in the state to secure an equitable and climate-resilient future, including for residents in Riverside County. However, a number of those efforts prematurely seek dramatic rewrites of state and local transportation funding requirements, impacting how transportation projects are planned, programed, and delivered. By forcing all regions—regardless of their existing mobility infrastructure and resources available locally or from the state—to limit the modes of transportation which they may improve, the disadvantaged communities of under-resourced regions without reliable multimodal transit alternatives would be socioeconomically stranded in traffic. The prudent approach of SB 1121 to engage stakeholders such as RCTC and comprehensively assess the need and associated cost of all transportation systems, including multimodal transit systems, demonstrates a meaningful first step for the state to coordinate a just transition to a climate-resilient future for all communities. Such a needs assessment would provide clarity for staggering investments the State must make—not just in coastal urban centers, but also in more inland regions—in order to transition away from roadway usage while addressing climate change impacts and promoting system resiliency. ATTACHMENT 3 51 The Honorable Laura Friedman July 15, 2022 Page 2 RCTC is a willing partner and has every interest in working with the state to turn the page toward innovative, sustainable transportation solutions that are accessible, equitable, and inclusive. But these inequities look different from community to community and from region to region. SB 1121 will allow for stakeholders across the state to work together to build the capacity of our multimodal transit systems and avoid the worst impacts of climate change. If you have any questions regarding RCTC's position on this issue, please contact me at (951) 787-7141. Sincerely, Anne Mayer Executive Director CC: Senator Lena A. Gonzalez, District 33 Members of the Riverside County State Legislative Delegation 52 AGENDA ITEM 8 Agenda Item 8 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 27, 2022 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Technical Advisory Committee Jenny Chan, Planning and Programming Manager THROUGH: Jillian Guizado, Planning and Programming Director SUBJECT: Active Transportation Program – Southern California Association of Governments 2023 Regional Program Guidelines – Selection Criteria for Riverside County Applications TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the project selection criteria for inclusion in the Metropolitan Planning Organizations’ (MPO) Regional Program Guidelines for Active Transportation Program (ATP) Cycle 6; 2) Authorize staff to award projects based on the approved selection criteria for the MPO funding; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: ATP is a highly competitive statewide program that funds bicycle and pedestrian facilities and programs to enhance or encourage walking and biking. The California Transportation Commission (CTC) awards 50 percent of the funds at the statewide competitive level, 10 percent to small urban and rural regions, and 40 percent at the large MPO level. The ATP evaluation process allows applicants in Riverside County two opportunities for award – at the statewide level and the large MPO level. As part of the sequential project selection process, projects are first evaluated statewide and those that do not score high enough for statewide funding are automatically provided a second opportunity for funding through the large MPO share. As the MPO, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is required to work with county transportation commissions, the CTC, and Caltrans to develop its regional program guidelines. Based on the approved ATP Fund Estimate, SCAG is expected to receive $137.68 million for the upcoming cycle, Cycle 6. Like past cycles, the SCAG share is split 95 percent for implementation projects and 5 percent for Non-Infrastructure (NI) projects and plans, which supplemented SCAG’s Sustainable Communities Program (SCP). However, for this cycle, SCAG will not be utilizing the 5 percent share to supplement its SCP. Instead, the 5 percent share will be distributed to the county transportation commissions based on population. Table 1 illustrates this cycle’s programming capacity for each county. The Commission will have approximately $17.69 million 53 Agenda Item 8 to award for Cycle 6 - $16.8 million for implementation projects and $884,000 for NI and planning projects. Table 1: County Share for Implementation and NI and Planning Projects ($ in 1,000s) County Population % Implementation NI and Planning Total Capacity Imperial 1% $1,249 $66 $1,315 Los Angeles 53% $69,579 $3,662 $73,241 Orange 17% $22,144 $1,165 $23,309 Riverside 13% $16,802 $884 $17,686 San Bernardino 12% $15,159 $798 $15,957 Ventura 4% $5,863 $309 $6,172 100% $130,795 $6,884 $137,680 DISCUSSION: Implementation Projects As part of the development of the regional program guidelines, SCAG allows each county transportation commission to assign up to 20 points to the CTC’s statewide project scores. Each county transportation commission in the SCAG region is responsible for defining “plans” and developing its guidance and methodology for assigning the 20 points. The points distribution approved for the last cycle, Cycle 5, is provided in Table 2. The points distribution allowed the Commission to meet its goal of awarding projects that were construction ready and rewarding agencies that invested in pre-construction activities. Additionally, as an unexpected result, the Commission was able to award projects that were unsuccessful in prior cycles. Table 2: ATP Cycle 5 20-Point Distribution Criteria Points 1. Requesting construction-only funding 6 2. Construction funding in the first two years of programming & PA/ED (environmental) completed 10 3. Projects identified in WRCOG Sub-regional Active Transportation Plan or CVAG Non-Motorized Plan; or an adopted local active transportation plan, bike or pedestrian master plan, or Safe Routes to School Plan 4 For Cycle 6, staff is proposing minor revisions to the points distribution methodology. With the passage of the new federal transportation bill, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), Cycle 6 includes more federal dollars compared to Cycle 5. More federal dollars may lead to more projects being subject to National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements which prolong project delivery timelines. To manage this program change, Commission staff is proposing to update the methodology, as presented in Table 3. The revised point distribution continues to reflect the Commission’s goal of funding projects that are construction-ready and 54 Agenda Item 8 reward agencies that have invested or will invest in pre-construction activities. Lastly, at the March 2022 Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meeting, TAC members suggested offering partial funding for applicants that have initiated the environmental process. This suggestion is incorporated into the new recommended 20-point distribution. Table 3: Recommended 20-Point Distribution Criteria Points 1. Requesting construction-only funding 6 2. Construction funding in the first three years of programming 4 3. 3a. PA/ED completed – either CEQA, NEPA, or both PA/ED started – either CEQA, NEPA, or both (partial funding) 7 or 3 4. Projects identified in WRCOG Sub-regional Active Transportation Plan or CVAG Non-Motorized Plan; or an adopted local active transportation plan, bike or pedestrian master plan, or Safe Routes to School Plan 3 Proposed updates are as follows: 1. Award 4 points for projects with construction funding in the first three years of the program cycle. 2. Award 7 points for projects with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and/or NEPA approved. Award partial funding of 3 points for projects that have initiated CEQA or NEPA. 3. Award 3 points for projects identified in Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) Sub-regional Active Transportation Plan or Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) Non-Motorized Plan; or an adopted local active transportation plan, bike or pedestrian master plan, or Safe Routes to School Plan. In the last ATP cycle, to satisfy criterion 3, applicants were required to submit a copy of the CEQA and/or NEPA signature page to demonstrate environmental clearance. Commission staff provided applicants an additional six months from the CTC application deadline to submit the CEQA and/or NEPA clearance. Submitting NEPA clearance is only required if the project is already federalized at the time of application. This criterion was beneficial in the last cycle as it was the main criterion for award, and it allowed all awardees to receive state funding for their projects because they cleared CEQA. At the March 2022 TAC meeting, staff received feedback from the TAC regarding the deadline for applicants to submit their completed CEQA and/or NEPA to Commission staff. TAC members expressed a strong desire to have as much time as possible to demonstrate conformity with criterion 3. As such, staff is allowing applicants to submit their CEQA and/or NEPA documentation to staff by January 3, 2023, to satisfy criterion 3 and 3a. To satisfy criterion 3a, applicants will need to provide a letter detailing the environmental work that has been performed to date. Non-infrastructure and Planning As previously stated, SCAG will not be utilizing the 5 percent share to supplement its SCP for this cycle. Instead, the 5 percent share will be distributed to the Commission based on population 55 Agenda Item 8 share. The Commission will have $884,000 to award to NI and planning projects that are not awarded at the statewide level. Like with implementation projects, SCAG allows each county transportation commission to assign up to 20 points to the CTC’s project scores and allows the Commission to establish any other eligibility criteria. Staff is recommending the Commission not establish a 20-point distribution methodology for the NI and planning projects. Instead, staff is recommending to award funds to NI and planning projects that receive a minimum statewide score of 80 points with a maximum award amount of $442,000 per project. This item was also discussed with the TAC at the March and May 2022 meetings and the TAC members agreed with this approach. Next Steps Upon Commission approval of the selection criteria methodology, staff will forward the methodology to SCAG for incorporation into the SCAG ATP Regional Guidelines. The deadline to submit the ATP award list to SCAG for the MPO share is January 30, 2023. To meet this deadline and allow applicants maximum time to provide CEQA and/or NEPA documentation, staff is recommending the Commission authorize staff to award the ATP projects based on the Commission-approved methodology. For implementation projects, staff will utilize the approved methodology to assign 20 points to the statewide scores and will award the highest scoring projects. For NI and planning projects, staff will award the highest-scoring projects with a minimum statewide score of 80 points and limit the award amount to $442,000 per project. Any remaining funds for NI and planning projects will be utilized for implementation projects, and vice versa. Staff will provide the award list as an informational item at the next available Commission meeting, anticipated to be March 2023. Fiscal Impact This item does not have a fiscal impact to the Commission. The CTC allocates ATP funding to awardees and awardees seek reimbursement for eligible project expenditures through Caltrans. 56 2023 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM –ATP CYCLE 6 Jenny Chan, Planning and Programming Manager 1 ATP Program Overview 2 •Administered by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) •Funds bicycle and pedestrian facilities and programs to enhance or encourage walking and biking •Competitive program •25% of ATP funds must fund projects in disadvantaged communities Funding Pots –Cycle 6 3 ATP Cycle 6 $650.7 M (FY 23/24 –26/27) Round 1 -State Pot $325.4 M (50%) Small/Rural Pot $65.1 M (10%) Not applicable for Riverside County Round 2 –MPO Pot $260.3 M (40%) Distribution of Funds –Cycle 6 4 $650.7 M (FY 23/24 –26/27) $325.4 M (50%) State Pot $65.1 M (10%) Small/Rural Pot $260.3 M (40%) MPO Pot $137.679M SCAG $130.795 M (95%) Implementation/ Construction $16.802 M (13%) Riverside County $6.884 M (5%) Planning/Non- infrastructure $884 K (13%) Riverside County $17.686 K Riverside County Total + = ATP Cycle 5 20-Point Distribution 5 Criteria Points 1.Requesting construction-only funding 6 2.Construction funding in the first two years of programming &PA/ED completed 10 3.Projects identified in WRCOG Sub-regional Active Transportation Plan or CVAG Non-Motorized Plan;or an adopted local active transportation plan, bike or pedestrian master plan,or Safe Routes to School Plan 4 ATP Cycle 6 20-Point Distribution 6 Criteria Points 1.Requesting construction-only funding 6 2.Construction funding in the first two three years of programming & PA/ED completed 10 4 3. 3a. PA/ED completed –either CEQA,NEPA or both PA/ED started –either CEQA,NEPA or both (partial funding) 7 or 3 3 4.Projects identified in WRCOG Sub-regional Active Transportation Plan or CVAG Non-Motorized Plan;or an adopted local active transportation plan,bike or pedestrian master plan,or Safe Routes to School Plan 4 3 7 Criteria Points 1.Requesting construction-only funding 6 2.Construction funding in the first three years of programming 4 3. 3a. PA/ED completed –either CEQA,NEPA or both PA/ED started –either CEQA,NEPA or both (partial funding) 7 or 3 4.Projects identified in WRCOG Sub-regional Active Transportation Plan or CVAG Non-Motorized Plan;or an adopted local active transportation plan,bike or pedestrian master plan,or Safe Routes to School Plan 3 ATP applications Due June 15, 2022 to CTC CEQA and or NEPA documentation Due Jan 3, 2023 to Commission ATP Cycle 6 Award list Due Jan 31, 2023 to SCAG Program Deadlines Non-infrastructure & Planning 8 •SCAG not supplementing Sustainable Communities Program •$884K available to award •Selection criteria: –Minimum 80 points state score –Maximum award $442K •Any remaining NI & Planning funds will be utilized for infrastructure/implementation projects, and vice versa Next Steps 9 •Forward Commission adopted methodology to SCAG •Authorize staff to award projects for MPO funding based on adopted methodology •Staff will return at later date with list of adopted projects ATP applications Due June 15, 2022 to CTC CEQA and or NEPA documentation Due Jan 3, 2023 to Commission ATP cycle 6 award list Due Jan 31, 2023 to SCAG ATP cycle 6 award list Spring 2023 presentation to Commission RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE SIGN -IN SHEET JUNE 27, 2022 NAME AGENCY E_MAIL ADDRESS Oki ik Ori✓C(.1 ? 4 c�P 1/ ("dl-[Yr � li1�I� S--- Q QDi L " `"1) 4/f-'rf A vr9/ �.1, • ) Y L/.�ir1 j)-1 Goy. 44 � (Q n 10 l .11(_4 ac. ( 1 ( ( d1 � ��"g¢,4114414 ►1/32 C1 F 0 t 141 Gtd.MJ rrtwxy J i n�.�,n G-� l<a— j �'Nb; Ur�fi cc+riaa+.twt oz .1 co K ( 061e_ (-4a H‘7/teems ►Z v sse l I '6,e.,+ -)-s era- rttd fr eriv5j _Cl e, c'(}y 66 OW o !' (.._,A, --. -=.---. -=.-k--X. C] -c> , ——tC.,N---� jS I�L .i`r-N. -(` t2-' ti L�Ca 1 t 5," M . SL\ l e Or `'L..`^. 1Q 17 ;- I