HomeMy Public PortalAbout10 October 18, 2004 Transit PolicyRECORDS
ttl 1161
•
•
•
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION
TRANSIT POLICY COMMITTEE
MEETING AGENDA
TIME: 1:00 p.m.
DATE: October 18, 2004
LOCATION: CONFERENCE ROOM "A" - THIRD FLOOR
County of Riverside Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor, Riverside
* * * COMMITTEE MEMBERS * *
Roger Berg / Jeff Fox, City of Beaumont
Jeff Miller / Jeff Bennett, City of Corona
Percy L. Byrd / Robert A. Bernheimer / Mary Roche, City of Indian Wells
Terry Henderson / Don Adolph, City of La Quinta
Frank West / Charles White, City of Moreno Valley
Frank Hall / Harvey Sullivan, City of Norco
Dick Kelly / Robert Spiegel, City of Palm Desert
Ameal Moore / Steve Adams, City of Riverside
John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside
Roy Wilson, County of Riverside
*** STAFF ***
Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning and Policy Development
Tanya Love, Program Manager
* * * AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY * * *
Review items and make recommendations
to the Commission on the following:
• Policy directions to prepare for transit vision
and to bring regional perspective to transit
• Monitor transit implementation
• Performance of transit operators and its services
The Committee welcomes comments. If you wish to provide comments to the
Committee, please complete and submit a Testimony Card to the Clerk of the Board.
•
•
•
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION
TRANSIT POLICY COMMITTEE
www.rctc.org
AGENDA*
*Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda
1:00 p.m.
Monday, October 18, 2004
CONFERENCE ROOM "A"- "- THIRD FLOOR
County of Riverside Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor, Riverside
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section
54954.2, if you need special assistance to participate in a Committee meeting, please
contact the Clerk of the Commission at (951) 787-7141. Notification of at /east 48 hours
prior to meeting time will assist staff in assuring that reasonab/e arrangements can be made
to provide accessibility at the meeting.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS
4. 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.)
5. FINANCIAL POLICIES ADMINISTERING TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT
ACT FUNDS
Page 1
Overview
This item is for the Committee to receive and file the presentation on
Transportation Development Act funding.
Transit Policy Committee Agenda
October 18, 2004
Page 2
6. RESERVE POLICY FOR LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDS
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
Page 6
1) Establish a transit operators' reserve policy of 10% for the three
apportionment areas consisting of Western Riverside, Coachella
Valley, and Palo Verde Valley;
2) Revise the Funding Disbursement Policy such that 100% of the
operating funds are allocated and disbursed with two -twelfths of the
100% disbursed the first month and the remainder (ten -twelfths)
disbursed over the next eleven months; and,
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
7. STATUS REPORT ON TRANSIT POLICY ISSUES
Page 10
Overview
This item is for the Committee to receive and file the status report on policy
issues identified at the May 2004 Commission Workshop.
8. ADJOURNMENT
•
•
•
AGENDA ITEM 5
•
•
•
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION
DATE:
October 18, 2004
TO:
Transit Policy Committee
FROM:
Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer
Tanya Love, Program Manager
THROUGH:
Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning and Policy
Development
SUBJECT:
Financial Policies Administering Transportation Development Act
Funds
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to receive and file the presentation on
Transportation Development Act funding.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Transportation Development Act (TDA) provides two major sources of funding
for public transportation. The first, the Local Transportation Fund (LTF), provides
for a '/4 cent of the 7'/4 % state retail sales tax collected in each county. The State
Board of Equalization returns the sales tax revenues to the County of Riverside
(County), where it is held until the Commission provides written allocation
instructions for disbursement. TDA funds disbursed to the transit operators are
based on planned operating levels and capital projects identified through a Short
Range Transit Plan (SRTP).
State Transit Assistance (STA) funding is the second source of TDA funds. STA
funds are generated from the statewide sales tax on motor vehicle fuel (gasoline
and diesel). The STA funds are appropriated to the State Controller for allocation
by formula to each regional transportation planning agency (RTPA). RCTC is
responsible for the allocation of these funds for Riverside County. The formula
allocates 50% of the funds on the basis of the region's population compared to the
State's population (STA .99313 Funds). The remaining 50% is allocated according
to the prior -year proportion of the region's transit operator passenger fare and local
support revenues (STA 99314 Funds).
The Commission's FY 2001-03 Triennial Performance Audit stated that "RCTC has
a fiduciary responsibility to ensure that the operators are utilizing TDA funds
efficiently and effectively." The Commission is responsible for reviewing and
processing claims for TDA funding. It is also responsible for programming projects
Agenda Item 5
funded with TDA in the Regional Transportation Improvement Program and
ensuring that the proposed projects are consistent with the most recently adopted
Congestion Management Plan for the County. The Southern California Association
of Governments reviews the proposed projects pursuant to state laws, which
require that such expenditures be compatible with the Regional Transportation Plan
(California Government Code 66518 and 66520).
The FY 2001-03 Triennial Performance Audit highlighted that several transit
operators have experienced a growth in ridership demand for public transportation
in the County. This growth has resulted in increased operating costs between 26%
and 115% over the past three years. The audits further identified that several
operators are not meeting the state mandated farebox recovery ratio.
The intent of this staff report is to review the Commission's financial practices that
are to be utilized in the Commission's fiduciary capacity to ensure that transit
operators utilize TDA funds efficiently and effectively.
Funds Allocated, Unclaimed/Deferred Operating Revenue
As a matter of practice, the Commission has a three -step process for operators to
obtain TDA funds: apportionment, allocation and payment. As stated earlier, there
are three apportionment areas in Riverside County: Western Riverside (six
operators: five bus and one commuter rail); Coachella Valley (one operator); and
Palo Verde Valley (one operator).
On an annual basis, the Commission determines each area's share of the projected
TDA funds for the fiscal year plus the unapportioned carryover from the prior year.
That share, once determined, is the area apportionment. Allocation of funds to a
specific operator (within each apportionment area) is determined based on service
levels and capital projects identified in each operator's annual SRTP.
If an operator realizes a cost savings usually resulting from lower capital and/or
operating costs, the amount of funds allocated should be reduced and returned to
the area's apportionment balance. Additionally, as a result of the year-end audit
process related to each public bus operator, the amount of funds classified as
deferred operating revenue should be applied against the following year's operating
budget. In past years, unclaimed allocated TDA funds administered by the
Commission have been associated with specific operators and deferred operating
revenues that have been received by the operators have not been consistently
applied against the subsequent year's funding allocation. In order to ensure that
the TDA funds are used efficiently and effectively, the Commission will work with
the operators to draw down on accumulated and unclaimed allocations as of
June 30, 2004 and to apply deferred operating revenues against future allocations.
•
Agenda Item 5
2
•
These procedures as well as the proposed reserve policy in another agenda item
should ensure that the Commission is properly exercising its fiduciary responsibility.
FY 2004-2005 Transit Budgets
For FY 2004-05, transit operators in the County rely on TDA funding for
approximately 55% of their operating and capital budgets, and, as such, must meet
farebox recovery ratio requirements as defined by the TDA. In Riverside County,
there are three apportionment areas for the TDA funds: Western Riverside,
Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley.
The following provides a summary of FY 2004-05 TDA funds by apportionment
area:
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDS
Area Population Population %
Western Riverside
Coachella Valley
Palo Verde Valley
1,322,192 77.52%
355,287
28,058
20.83%
1 .65%
TOTAL LTF
Apportionment
$39,003,324
10,480,606
827,683
$
50,311,613
Bus
$
30,422,593
10,480,606
827,683
$
41,730,882
Rail
$
8,580,731
$
8,580,731
STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUNDS (99313 Funds)
Area Population Population % Apportionment
Western Riverside 1,322,192 77.52% $1,881,160
Coachella Valley 355,287 20.83% 505,477
Palo Verde Valley 28,058 1.65% 40,040
TOTAL STA 99313 $2,426,677
STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUNDS (99314 Funds)
Area Population Population % Apportionment
Western Riverside — —
Coachella Valley
Palo Verde Valley
Bus Rail
$1,467,305 $ 413,855
505,477
40,040
$2,012,822
Bus
$ 140,695
120,676
833
$ 413,855
Rail
$ 74,285
TOTAL STA 99314 $
$ 262,204
$ 74,285
TOTAL STA $2,275,026 $ 488,140
TOTAL LTF & STA FUNDING
$
44, 005, 908
$
9,068,871
Agenda Item 5
Growth in Operating Costs Compared to Available Funding
In FY 2004-05, public bus operators requested approximately $1,640,000 (4%) in
funding over the $44,005,908 in TDA funds projected to be available.
The 4% overage was allocated from prior year unallocated carryover funds.
Of the $9,068,871 in TDA funds projected to be available to commuter rail in
FY 2004-05, a total of $5,442,800 was allocated. It is anticipated that the
remaining balance of $3,626,071 will be allocated in future years to fund the
growth in existing commuter rail services as well as the Perris Valley Line
extension.
Ending TDA Fund Balances as of June 30, 2004
Historically, there have been excess LTF funds available at year-end.
At June 30, 2004, the apportioned TDA fund balance was $18,220,322. Of that
amount, approximately $4,000,000 was available for public bus operators,
$10,070,000 for the commuter rail program, and $4,150,000 for specific
operating and capital purposes allocated but not claimed by the operators.
Additional TDA fund balance amounts at June 30, 2004 include unapportioned LTF
carryover of $5,490,333, which represents LTF revenues in excess of projected
amounts, and prepaid allocations of $5,700,000, which represents an advance of
FY 2004/05 LTF allocations to Riverside Transit Agency of $4,300,000 and
SunLine Transit Agency of $1,400,000. These advances were approved as a
result of the delay in the reauthorization of federal funding legislation.
In addition to the LTF carry over balances, $2,566,624 is available in STA funds at
June 30, 2004. This balance consists of approximately $1,990,000 apportioned
to public bus operators and $575,000 apportioned to commuter rail.
Attached is an excerpt from the Commission's draft financial statements which
provides details of these ending LTF and STA fund balances.
Attachment: Summary of LTF and STA Fund Balances as of June 30, 2004
•
Agenda Item 5
4
•
•
•
Summary of LTF and STA Fund Balances as of June 30, 2004
Prepaid allocations:
Riverside Transit Agency
SunLine Transit Agency
Total prepaid allocations
Transit apportionments:
Western County:
Bus transit:
City of Banning
City of Beaumont
City of Corona
City of Riverside
Riverside Transit Agency
Apportioned and unallocated
Commuter rail:
Riverside County
Transportation Commission
Apportioned and unallocated
Total Western County
Coachella Valley:
SunLine Transit Agency
Apportioned and unallocated
Total Coachella Valley
LTF
STA Total
$4,300,000
1,400,000
$- $4,300,000
1,400,000
$5,700,000 $- $5,700,000
$161,442 $14,687 $176,129
140,320 1,293 141,613
77,000 2,896 79,896
4,068 4,068
3,525,197 521,770 4,046,967
3,794,531 717,996 4,521,457
250,000 (23,234) 226,766
10,067,152 598,680 10,665,832
$18,015,642 $1,838,156 $19,853,798
143,558
528,307
156,865
528,307
300,423
$143,558
$685,172 $828,730
Palo Verde Valley:
Bus Transit:
Transit 61,122 - 61,122
Palo Verde Valley Transit
Agency (1 17,1 15) (1 17,1 15)
Apportioned and unallocated - 160,411 160,411
Total Palo Verde Valley 61,122 43,296 104,418
Subtotal -apportioned $18,220,322 $2,566,624 $20,786,946
Unapportioned carryover
5,490,333 - 5,490,333
Total transit apportionments $23,710,655 $2,566,624 $26,277,279
Agenda Item 5
AGENDA ITEM 6
•
•
•
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION
DATE:
October 18, 2004
TO:
Transit Policy Committee
FROM:
Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer
Tanya Love, Program Manager
THROUGH:
Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning
Development
and
Policy
SUBJECT:
Reserve Policy for Local Transportation Funds
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Establish a transit operators' reserve policy of 10% for the three
apportionment areas consisting of Western Riverside, Coachella
Valley, and Palo Verde Valley;
2) Revise the Funding Disbursement Policy such that 100% of the
operating funds are allocated and disbursed with two -twelfths of the
100% disbursed the first month and the remainder (ten -twelfths)
disbursed over the next eleven months; and,
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
During the Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) process for FY 2004-05, it was noted
that operating costs appeared to be outpacing projected LTF revenues available for
public transit operators. The projected excess costs of 4% for FY 2004-05 were
funded from prior year carryover funds. Since 1995, LTF revenues have increased
annually, although LTF revenues from 1992 through 1994 were below the 1991
level. As a result of the increasing operating costs over available revenues for
substantially all Riverside County public transit operators, staff recommends a
change in the reserve policy.
A reserve is a fiscally prudent tool to manage periods of higher than anticipated
costs as well as periods of lower than expected revenues. In 1999, the
Commission approved the Riverside Transit Agency's (RTA) request to establish a
20% operating reserve and $800,000 capital reserve for unforeseen capital
expenditures. The initial operating reserve for RTA was set at $4,000,000
(representing 20% of that year's RTA operating budget). The Commission's 1999
staff report further stated that:
Agenda Item 6
"Currently, there are sufficient funds available in the Western Riverside
County apportionment area to allow the Commission to establish the
reserves for RTA. However, should other operators also choose to set up
reserve funds at the same levels, the Commission may be forced to build
those reserves over a two or three year period; depending on which
operators and how many decide to establish reserves."
In 2002, the RTA Board approved a change to the Commission's 1999 reserve
policy from the 20% Commission -approved reserve to a formula -driven dollar
reserve amount set at 1 /12th (or 8.3%) of the total annual Local Transportation
Fund (LTF) allocated amount. Additionally, RTA earmarked the operating funds on
account at the Commission for the bus rapid transit project, anticipated land
acquisition, and the formula -based reserve. This reserve policy change was an RTA
implemented policy and did not go before RCTC for concurrence because a formal
request was not received from RTA. Currently, RTA is the only operator that has
requested to set up reserves.
It is recommended that, effective for the FY 2005-06 SRTP process, the
Commission establish a 10% county -wide reserve for operations and/or capital for
each of the three apportionment areas: Western Riverside, Coachella Valley, and
Palo Verde Valley.
The amount of the required reserve for the fiscal year would be calculated as 10%
of the LTF apportionment balance after deductions for administration, planning, and
SB 821 program funding. The unallocated reserve balance of 10% would be set
aside before allocation to the three apportionment areas based on population.
Attachment A is an illustration of the calculation using FY 2004-05 amounts. In
this illustration, the current methodology for apportionment would result in
$50,31 1,612 to be apportioned for transit purposes to the three apportionment
areas. If the proposed reserve policy is approved, the unallocated reserve would be
$5,031,161 and the amount available for apportionment would be $45,280,451.
Operators may then request additional funding through the established SRTP
amendment process. Each request would be considered based on its own merit,
and any set -asides of reserves would need to be adequately supported as to
purpose and need prior to approval by the Commission. Additionally, the
Commission will collaborate with the operators to ensure that existing unclaimed
allocations are used prior to unallocated reserves.
In order to implement the revised reserve policy, staff recommends that the
Commission also revise the Funding Disbursement Policy adopted on February 13,
2002. Currently, 10% of the annual allocation for each operator is not disbursed
until June after the Commission has determined that sufficient revenues have been
received. The disbursement of the 90% is two -twelfths in the first month with the
•
Agenda Item 6
7
•
•
•
remainder of the 90% over the next ten months. Under the new reserve policy,
this approach is no longer necessary as the 10% reserve can cover costs if revenue
comes in lower than projected. Accordingly, staff recommends that 100% of the
annual allocation be disbursed with two -twelfths in the first month and the
remainder of the 100% over the next eleven months.
Attachment: Riverside County LTF 2004-2005 Apportionment
Agenda Item 6
8
•
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND
2004-2005 APPORTIONMENT
Budget
FY 2004-2005
Projection
Estimated Carryover (Unapportioned) $0
Est. Receipts 53,744,000
TOTAL 53,744,000
Less: Auditor 12,000
Less: RCTC Administration 675,000
Less: RCTC Planning (3% of revenues) 1,612,320
Less: SCAG Planning 106,300
BALANCE 51,338,380
Less: SB 821 (2% of balance) 1,026,768
BALANCE AVAILABLE BEFORE RESERVES 50,311,612
Less: 10% Transit Reserves 5,031,161
BALANCE AVAILABLE AFTER 10% RESERVE $45,280,451
Current Policy: Budget
Population FY 2004-2005
Population % of Total Apportionment 22% Rail 78% Transit
(no reserves)
Western 1,322,192 77.52% $39,003,324 $ 8,580,731 $ 30,422,592
Coachella Valley 355,287 20.83% 10,480,606
Palo Verde Valley 28,058 1.65% 827,683
1,705,537 100.00% $50,311,612
Proposed Policy:
Budget
Population FY 2004-2005
Population % of Total Apportionment
(after 10% reserves)
Western 1,322,192 77.52% $35,102,991 $ 7,722,658 $ 27,380,333
Coachella Valley 355,287 20.83% 9,432,546
Palo Verde Valley 28,058 1.65% 744,914
1,705,537 100.00% 45,280,451
Reserve Allocation:
Western:
Rail 858,073
Transit 3,042,259
Coachella Valley 1,048,061
Palo Verde Valley 82,768
Total Reserve 5,031,161
Total Apportionment $50,311,612
NOTES: Estimate for Planning Purposes, subject to change
Population Source: California Department of Finance, Demographic Research Unit as of January 1, 2003
AGENDA ITEM 7
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION
DATE:
October 18, 2004
TO:
Transit Policy Committee
FROM:
Tanya Love, Program Manager
THROUGH:
Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning
Development
and
Policy
SUBJECT:
Status Report on Transit Policy Issues
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to receive and file the status report on policy issues
identified at the May 2004 Commission Workshop.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Based on the findings contained in the Commission's FY 2001-03 Triennial
Performance Audit, the Transit Policy Committee was formed to:
•
•
1) Guide the preparation of a transit vision;
2) Monitor transit implementation;
3) Review performance of operators; and,
4) Bring a regional perspective to transit.
At the May 2004, Commission Workshop, staff identified several policy issues for
the TPC to review. Since that time, much progress has been made, and as a
result, staff thought it prudent to provide the following status report:
1) State Mandated Farebox Recovery Ratio
Staff developed a Fare Box Recovery Policy (approved at the
October 13, 2004 Commission meeting) to clarify the rules and
regulations regarding fare box ratios, defining allowable revenues to
calculate fare box recovery ratios and summarizing when certain
exclusions expire.
2) Route Productivity
Commission staff met with transit agency representatives on
October 12, 2004 to review the Productivity Improvement Program
(PIP) which was adopted by the Commission in 1999. A follow-up
Agenda Item 7
10
meeting is scheduled for October 21, 2004, wherein it is anticipated
that transit staff will provide feedback on the effectiveness of the
existing PIP program and/or recommendations for improving the
current process. An update on current discussions will be provided at
the October 2004 TPC meeting.
3) Reserves: What, if any, is an Appropriate Level
An agenda item will be presented at the October 18th TPC meeting
requesting approval to establish a 10% reserve policy for the three
apportionment areas consisting of Western Riverside, Coachella
Valley, and Palo Verde Valley.
4) Funds Allocated, Unclaimed
An agenda item will be presented at the October 18th TPC meeting
entitled: "Financial Policies Administering Transportation Development
Act Funds" requesting that unclaimed funds be drawn down against
future allocations.
5) Accrual of Interest on Allocated, Unclaimed Funds
The agenda item referenced under number 4 above will substantially
eliminate the problem of interest accrual as it is anticipated that funds
allocated will be claimed in a timely manner.
6) Timeliness of Spending Allocated Capital Funds
The TPC took action at its September 20th meeting to approve the
timeline for completion of outstanding capital projects covering Fiscal
Years 1996/97 through FY 2002/03. (Approved at the October 13,
2004 Commission meeting). Commission staff is working with
Federal Transit Administration staff to develop a "go -forward policy"
modeled after AB 1012's "Use it or Lose it" provisions. Currently
federal funding has a four year life cycle; if the funds are not obligated
within that time frame, they have the potential to lapse. Commission
staff will provide a status report and/or draft policy at a future TPC
meeting establishing a process for FY 2003/04 and beyond capital
projects.
•
•
•
Agenda Item 7
11
•
•
•
7) Allocation of 2009 Measure "A" Funds: Western Riverside
Work on this task has not yet begun since these funds will not
become available until 2009. The TPC may want to consider
developing a funding formula for the 2009 Measure "A" funds as part
of the Transportation Development Act discussion for Western
Riverside County. That formula established funding levels at 78% for
Western Riverside public bus operators and 22% for the commuter rail
program.
The Measure "A" 2009 — 2039, established the following funding
thresholds:
• $390,000,000 Western County
o Commuter Rail
o Intercity Bus
o Specialized Transit ($85M — minimum threshold)
o Commuter Assistance ($50M — minimum
threshold)
• $188,000,000 Coachella Valley
o Specialized and Public Transit
Agenda Item 7
12
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TRANSIT POLICY COMMITTEE
SIGN -IN SHEET
October 18, 2004
NAME
AGENCY
E-MAIL ADDRESS
''E). t_ (1 \ \
_\ \l L\
Seu¢r+ Degree WI G
/ n
G u Ceuri S,.t�l'
0/z' 6 61-y d, a,n---6
,5 6 e,L., ",-7.,--/-
L AI C% t ,J '-0
' Te-,e-,e / ems f e-ye5 0/3
ei4toa e.4.4>
Vio. C!. 9-63-7,10-7.
meaA IAA oof <--
G i € u- tilerst
Q.-? 1 ----ox'
c; t e ea,�r-1 -�-(4- ing-
,J ‘n� nyl
y
e ,- 4 of a 1r /tri4
�(A)
0,41/.7.1/ /c id -co
j"i7,49
Lf:'il,./(e( (12six_I
Ql$ GAtt 65
'i'A eNlgN i t.►inri n;
(---,c2 d d-,4 S4,/
-7—)
-S 'r o,✓ ..-refeSe l
KC?e'_
} - P aL n -o
R -TA
3--v6In CV,LA01r,
%Lo Ut-vci l)alley�Tyg ' {rri
JQH6iC1 '; ,I��Pdiw/&,tip
-k e... -ten (\.C'
A n
Sbrorte.:' 4�i rtAAAs ,,k cc •
Sca,