Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My Public Portal
About
06 June 3, 1998 Budget and Finance
042678 RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE (COMMISSIONERS WILLIAM KLEINDIENST, JACK VAN HAASTER, JIM VENABLE) 12:30 P.M. MONDAY, JUNE 3, 1998 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 3560 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, SUITE 100 RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS. 4. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS. 5. ADMINISTRATIVE/FINANCIAL ITEMS. File 5A. Proposed Budget for FY 1998/99 O vervie w That the Commission hold a public hearing and adopt the proposed budget for period ending June 30, 1999. 5B. Contract with Cis Leroy to Support the Planning and Programming Department Overview That the Commission authorize the Executive Director to execute a contract with Cis Leroy for part-time support services to the Planning and Programming Department for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1998. This contract is not to exceed $38,000. 5C. Monthly Cost and Schedule Reports Overview That the Commission receive and file the current costs and schedule status of contracts reported by routes, commitments, and cooperative agreements executed by the Commission. 6. TRANSIT/RIDESHARE/BICYCLE. 6A. FY 98/99 Measure A Commuter Assistance Buspool Subsidy Funding Continuation Requests Overview That the Commission approve, pursuant to its existing Measure A Commuter Assistance Buspool Subsidy Policy: 1) payment of $1,175/month for the period July 1, 1998 to June 30, 1999 to the existing Riverside/Fullerton, Riverside/EI Segundo, and Moreno Valley/EI Segundo buspools, and one additional buspool upon receipt of a written request for subsidy support; and 2) continuation of the existing monthly and semi-annual buspool reporting requirements as support documentation to monthly subsidy payments. Page 2 Agenda - Budget/Finance Committee June 3, 1998 6B. Request from the Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency to Amend Its FY 1998 Operating Plan and Reprogram Capital Funds Overview That the Commission approved the request from the Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency to reprogram $20,000 in capital funds to operating funds for use in FY 98. 6C. San Bernardino Associated Governments FY 98/99 Commuter Assistance Program Contract Overview That the Commission: 1) approve, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, the SANBAG/RCTC contract to continue implementation and management of the SANBAG Commuter Assistance Program for FY 98/99; 2) authorize the Chairperson to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) approve the incorporation of the SANBAG Commuter Assistance Program consultant costs in the Commission's contracts with Inland Transportation Services in an amount not to exceed $444,114 (labor) and $228,823 (expenses), to fulfill RCTC's contractual obligations to SANBAG. 6D. FY 1997-98 SB 821 Program Extension for the Cities of Murrieta, Riverside, and San Jacinto and the County of Riverside O vervie w That the Commission grant the Cities Murrieta, Riverside, and San Jacinto and the County of Riverside the extensions as requested to complete their respective SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities projects. 6E. FY 98/99 Southern California Rideshare Agreement for Regional Rideshare Core Services O vervie w That the Commission: 1) approve the Southern California Rideshare FY98/99 Riverside Regional Rideshare Services Work Program, 2) authorize the expenditure of Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality funds in an amount not to exceed $220,000 pursuant to adoption of RCTC's FY 98/99 budget, and 3) authorize the RCTC Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute an agreement with SCR. 7. HIGHWAYS/LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS. 7A. Award of Landscaping Project between Van Buren Boulevard and Tyler Street Overview That the Commission award the landscaping project between Van Buren Boulevard and Tyler Street to Diversified Landscape Co. for an amount of $188,450 with a contingency amount of $20,000 using the attached agreement. 00JO02 Page 3 Agenda - Budget/Finance Committee June 3, 1998 7B. Award Construction Contract for Sound Walls on SR 91 Between Van Buren Boulevard and Mary Street in the City of Riverside (Phase 1 SW's) Overview Staff will bring the results of the rebid to the June 3, 1998 Administrative Review and Budget and Finance meetings with their recommendation for action by the Commission. 7C. Award Consultant Contract to Develop the Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E) for the Phase II Noise Walls on State Route 91 Overview The results of the selection process, schedule of services, scope of services and cost to perform the work will be brought back to the Commission for review and approval for a contract award to the selected firm using the standard RCTC model consultant agreement. 8. SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES 8A. Fund Transfer Agreement Between the State of California Department of Transportation and the Riverside County Transportation Commission for the Operation of a Freeway Service Patrol Program in Riverside County Overview The fund transfer agreement with the State of California Department of Transportation provides for continued funding in the amount of $636,300 for the Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol program for FY 1998-99. The Riverside County SAFE must provide matching funds of $159,075, or 20% of the total program cost. 8B. Purchase of Radio Communication Equipment for the Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol Program Overview That the Commission authorize the purchase of radio communication equipment Bear Communications for the Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol program in the amount of $24,508. 9. ADJOURNMENT. 000003 MINUTES - MAY 11, 1998 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE MONDAY, MAY 11, 1998 County of Riverside, 14th Floor Conference Room 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside City of Palm Springs (Video Conference Site) 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way, Riverside MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER. The meeting of the Budget and Finance Committee was called to order by Commissioner Will Kleindienst at 12:06 p.m. Members Present William Kleindienst Jack van Haaster* Jim Venable *Arrived after the meeting was called to order. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. M/S/C (KleindienstNenable) that the Budget and Finance Committee approve the minutes dated April 1, 1998 as submitted. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS. There were no public comments. 4. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS. There were no additions or revisions to the agenda. 5. ADMINISTRATIVE/FINANCIAL ITEMS. 5A. Mission Goals and Statement/FY 99 Draft Budget Dean Martin, Chief Financial Officer, reviewed the seven guiding principles - Efficiency, Goods Movement, Congestion Relief, Air Quality Improvement, Economic Development, Intermodalism and Accessibility, Technological Innovation - which will guide the course of the Commission for the upcoming fiscal year. Comments included: • Under the Economic Development principle, it was suggested that this guideline might be updated to mention the need for internal investment and upgrading arterial systems creating new corridors for creating economic development in Riverside County. Due to the recent action of the South Coast Air Quality Board which eliminates mandatory ridesharing program, under the Air Quality Improvement principle, add the word "voluntary" to promoting rideshare. Under the Congestion Relief principle, with regards to the Measure A program, add 000004 Page 2 Minutes - Budget/Finance Committee May 11, 1998 the word "expansion". Under the Air Quality Improvement principle, with regards to promoting the purchase of clean fuel vehicles for transit agencies, this objective be strengthened to make it a requirement unless it can be shown that it imposes an economic hardship. • Staff look at rephrasing the goal regarding linear versus broad corridor based economic development. • Highlight video conferencing capabilities and training of the equipment under the Clerk of the Board objectives. • Look at charging the last train out of Riverside as an off-peak train because every station after this is charged as an off-peak train. This was brought to the attention of the appropriate Metrolink committee and the Operating Department was asked to report back on the feasibility of changing the system wide machine switch from the 8:30 a.m. time frame to 8:15 a.m. This change will allow the Commission goal for off-peak ridership to be met immediately but the peak ridership numbers will suffer. • The ending fund balance for FY 95-96 as it relates to the beginning fund balance for the following years was questioned. Staff will research this and make the appropriate adjustments. • Look at the feasibility of a multi -year budget for the future. . The budget for administration has been in anticipation of the expanded board and the new position which will oversee the Commission's SB 45 programs to make sure all requirements are met. At the upcoming meeting, the Commission will be asked to approve these guiding principles and policies, in concept, but allow staff to refine and make them more specific. M/S/C (van Haaster/Venable) that staff make the appropriate changes and to submit the policy goals, short term (i.e., annual) objectives and department mission statements, and goals and objectives to the Commission. 5B. CPTC TollRoad MOA Revision M/S/C (van Haaster/Kleindienst) that the Commission authorize the Executive Director to execute an amendment to the Memorandum of Understanding dated January 8, 1992 to allow for quarterly reporting of projected financial results. 5C. Management Letter Comments and Responses M/S/C (van Haaster/Kleindienst) that the Commission receive and file the Management Letter Comment and responses. 5D. Membership in the Inland Empire Economic Partnership (IEEP) and the Coachella Valley Economic Partnership (CVEP) M/S/C (Kleindienst/Venable) Commission authorize RCTC's FY 1998-99 membership in the Inland Empire Economic Partnership and the Coachella Valley Economic Partnership. Page 3 Minutes - Budget/Finance Committee May 11, 1998 5E. Monthly Cost and Schedule Reports M/S/C (Venable/Kleindienst) that the Commission receive and file the attached material which depicts the current costs and schedule status of contracts reports by routes, commitments, and cooperative agreements executed by the Commission for the month ending March 31, 1998. 5F. Investment Report for Quarter Ending March 31, 1998 M/S/C (Kleindienst/Venable) that the Commission receive and file the quarterly investment and cash flow reports as required by state law and Commission policy. 5G. Single Signature Authority Report M/S/C (Venable/van Haaster) that the Commission receive and file the report on the Executive Director's single signature authority. 6. TRANSIT/RIDESHARE/BICYCLE. 6A. RTA Request for Reprogramming of Capital Funds M/S/C (Kleindienst/Venable) that the Commission approve the request from the Riverside Transit Agency to: 1. Reprogram $95,000 in Measure A Specialized Transit funds as specified above; 2. Amend their FY 1998 Short Range Transit Plan to include the purchase of 6 expansion vans; and 3. Amend the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan to identify the purchase of one of the vans with $36,000 in Section 5311 discretionary funds. 6B. Request for Additional Measure A Specialized Transit Funds from Care -A -Van Transit System M/S/C (Venable/Kleindienst) that the Commission approve the request from Care -A - Van Transit System for an additional allocation of $14,000 in Measure A Specialized Transit funds available in the Western Riverside County. 7. HIGHWAYS/LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS. 7A. Request from the City of Riverside to Reprogram Surface Transportation Funds M/S/C (Venable/Kleindienst) that the Commission approve the City of Riverside's request to reprogram STP Discretionary funds from the La Sierra Avenue project to widen Van Buren Boulevard. 8. RAIL. 8A. Proposed Metrolink Budgets for Fiscal Year 1998-99 Susan Cornelison, Program Manager, presented the proposed FY 98-99 Metrolink budget, as follows: 000006 Page 4 Minutes - Budget/Finance Committee May 11, 1998 • There is an increase in service in the fiscal year 1998-99 budget but a decrease in subsidy. Last year there was a 10% increase in subsidy required but that was shown not be needed. • Service enhancements listed in the Executive Summary of the budget include an additional evening rush hour train from Los Angeles to Riverside, an additional peak period train from Riverside to Irvine possibly as far as Oceanside and two off-peak trains one to move equipment and the other a reverse train to accommodate the additional peak period train from Irvine. Saturday train service will be running through the San Bernardino Line which will offer more stops. There will also be a Saturday morning trip from Los Angeles to Riverside which can be offered as a marketing tool for special events or to just bring people to Riverside. M/S/C (Kleindienst/Venable) that the Commission approve the proposed 1998/99 Metrolink Operating and Capital Budgets and authorize payment of RCTC's annual allocation to the Southern California Regional Rail authority in FY99 in an amount not to exceed $3.4 million. (This action does no relinquish nor convey to any other agency any of the operating rights or capacity entitlements which have been purchased by RCTC.) 9. ADJOURNMENT. There being no further business for review by the Budget and Finance Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 2:24 p.m. Respectfully submitted, j 1 Cak,, Nat Kopf n)iaver Clerk of t e Commission 000007 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Administrative Review FROM: Dean Martin, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposed Budget 1998/99 Attached is the Proposed Budget for fiscal year ending June 30, 1999. The Budget document is extensive and is organized as follows: Executive Summary - summarized review of the entire budget document. Commission Policy, Goals, Objectives, and Financial Policies. Budget Process - Summary discussion of the steps involved in completing the annual budget. Revenues - Comprehensive review of revenues by function and program. Debt Financing -Reviews the Commission's outstanding debt issues, analyzes debt capacity, and calculates the Commission's legal debt margin. Fund Budgets - Examines the budgeted revenue and expenditures from a fund perspective. Personnel - Review of personnel changes and structure. Department Budgets - Discussion of department responsibilities, mission statement, and goals and objectives. Also, included is explanation of department expenditures assumptions, major challenges, and tables detailing total expenditure. (Note: workload performance indicators are still being formulated.) Staff suggests focusing on the Executive Summary and refer to other sections for additional detail as needed or desired. Staff recommends adoption of the 1998/99 Proposed Budget as follows: Revenues $ 90,188,745 Personnel salary and fringe benefits $ 1,853,577 Services and supplies Capital outlay Professional costs Project costs Operating Transfers Contingency Total Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance STAFF RECOMMENDATION: $ 897,895 $ 166,200 $ 1,387,420 $ 69,516,379 $ 30,378,913 $ 1,502,000 $105,702,384 $ 81,381,561 $ 65,867,922 That the Commission hold a public hearing and adopt the Proposed Budget for period ending June 30, 1999. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Dean Martin, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposed Budget for FY 1998/99 Attached is the Proposed Budget for fiscal year ending June 30, 1999. The Budget document is extensive and is organized as follows: Executive Summary - Summarized review of the entire budget document. Commission Poliov, Goals, Objectives, and Financial Policies. Budget Process - Summary discussion of the steps involved in completing the annual budget. Revenues - Comprehensive review of revenues by function and program. Debt Financing - Examines the budgeted revenue and expenditures from a fund perspective. Personnel - Review of personnel changes and structure. Department Budgets - Discussion of department responsibilities, mission statement, and goals and objectives. Also, included is explanation of department expenditures assumptions, major challenges, and tables detailing total expenditure. (Note: workload performance indicators are still being formulated.) Staff suggests focusing on the Executive Summary and refer to other sections for additional detail as needed or desired. 0000{08 Staff recommends adoption of the 1998/99 Proposed Budget as follows: Revenues $ 90,188,745 Personnel salary and fringe benefits $ 1,853,577 Services and supplies $ 897,895 Capital outlay $ 166,200 Professional costs $ 1,387,420 Project costs $ 69,516,379 Operating Transfers $ 30,378,913 Contingency $ 1,502,000 Total Expenditures $105,702,384 Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance STAFF RECOMMENDATION: $ 81,381,561 $ 65,867,922 That the Commission hold a public hearing and adopt the Proposed Budget for the period ending June 30, 1999. Attachments 000009 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1999 000010 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 030011 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1998 Budget Overview Total revenues are budgeted at $90,188,745. Total projected remaining fund balance at June 30, 1998 available for expenditures (exclusive of debt service reserves of $23,947,121, loans receivables for $14,272,773, and prepaid lease for $1,071,080) is $40,4.16,028. Total funding sources of funds will be $130,604,773. All revenue categories are budgeted at higher amounts than the prior year. The increase In Measure A sales tax revenues is indicative of the expanding economy in Riverside County. Reimbursements are up, principally from federal sources, to fund rail capital (no Measure A revenues are available for rail operations and capital projects). 1999 Measure A Other ■ Investment Income Reimbursements TDA Explanatory Note: The general expenditure explanations relate to the Budget Summary By Line Item. The specific expenditures discussed in each fund type section (i.e., General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, Capital Projects Funds) should not be compared to the Budget Summary by Fund Categories. Total expenditures are budgeted at $105,702,384, with $1,754,975 for administration, $73,568,496 for programs, and $30,378,913 for debt service(including $125,000 in fees). Professional services costs have been reduced across the board, with an average reduction of 21 %. Legal fees assumes minimal litigation, while audit fees eliminate one time costs incurred in 1998. Where the Money Goes 23.8% 26.6% 000012 Project costs have declined 14% because of significantly reduced regional arterial expenditures. The reduction reflects a funding shortage and not a lack of need. The decrease in project costs is partially offset by two factors. Increases in highway right of way costs are for property acquisitions on Route 74. Rail construction costs are significant due to major facility expansion and enhancements at each of the four rail stations. Program Expenditure Comparative 1996-99 1996 1997 1998(est) 1999(proj) Highway/rail $25,005,032 $26,664,714 $24,675,017 $28,139,871 Regional Arterial 24,724,468 23,115,405 23,901,818 7,895,150 Streets & Rds RR 21,310,989 22,240,185 23,490,132 25,163,696 Special Transp. 3,900,733 3,832,904 5,734,522 4,699,207 Debt 24,376,618 25,208,531 74,169,354 30,378,913 Other 7 OM 919 5 974 767 9 279 61R 9 455 51J Total $106,354,059 $106,986,506 $161,250,461 $105,732,354 ote: Other includes management services, planning & programming, motorist assistance, and property management. Commission Personnel: Personnel salary and fringe benefits: The budget assumes a number of staffing and benefit changes. Personnel salary and benefits increases 20.4% attributable to the following factors: Staffing changes $214,601 Benefit adjustments 35,023 Health Plan increase 5,908 PERS increase 47,216 Miscellaneous (e.g, step increases) 11,648 $314,396 000013 Budget Summary for FY 1998-99 Expenditures by Full Time Equivalent Personnel Salary & Fringe Exec. Mgmt. Admin Fin! Accting Capital Project Dev & Delivery Special Transp Transp Plate? P ►g.. Rail Transp Motorist Assist Prop Mgmt Grand TOW 1.0 1.0 2.0 Assistant Directors 1.5 .89 .92 .08 .11 3.5 Program Managers .25 .45 1.44 .85 .90 5.0 Staff Analysts Support Staff 1.37 1.0 .94 .18 .81 .67 .88 .42 1.38 .83 .83 .49 .50 .30 3.6 7.0 Total Equivalent Personnel 4.12 2.83 2.44 2.66 4.16 2.51 1.47 .91 21.1 000014 Commission Funds Riverside County Transportation Commission BUDGET SUMMARY FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998-99 - BY FLIVD CATEGORES 1998-1999 Proposed Budget General Fund Special Capital Revenue Projects Grand Funds Funds Total Total Personnel Salary & Fringe Benefits 1,227,696 73000 Office Lease 206,800 OperationslOverhead (73100 thru 73700) 637,225 Projects: 25,880 13,200 40,674 1,853,576 220,000 677,898 81000 Projects -General 50,000 1,783,900 1,833,900 81100 Highway& Rail Engineering 190,250 837,283 1,027,533 81300 Highway & Rail Construction 10,316,300 4,562,225 14,878,525 81400 Highway & Rail ROW 4,568,656 4,568,656 81500 Highway & Rail Special studies 235,000 235,000 81600 SCRRA Capital Contribution 1,150,000 1,150,000 85000 Commuter Assistance 1,391,920 1,391,920 86000 Special Projects 86100 Regional Transportation 2,862,900 28,216,257 31,079,157 86200 LTFDisbursements 327,295 327,295 86300 STA Disbursements 2,746,194 2,746,194 86400 Regional Arterial 7,225,624 669,526 7,895,150 87000 Project Maintenance 225,750 371,544 597,294 87100 Project Operations 742,537 363,590 1,106,127 87200 Project Towing 679,628 679,628 Total Projects Professional Costs: 5,593,482 57,853,863 6,069,034 69,516,379 65100 General Legal Services 173,000 152,000 325,000 65200 Special Legal Services 25,000 25,000 65300 Financial Services 97,500 97,500 65400 Audit Services 211,150 78,850 290,000 65500 Other Professional Services 451,638 198,282 649,920 Total Professional Costs 958,288 429,132 1,387,420 Capital Outlay 90000 Capital Outlay -Equipment 129,438 36,762 166,200 Total Expenditures 8,752,928 58,999,511 6,069,034 73,821,473 000015 General Fund The General Fund budget of $ 8,752,928 represents approximately eight percent (8%) of the Commission's total 1999 expenditures. In addition to administrative functions, all transportation planning and programming activities and commuter rail operations are budgeted in the General Fund. Revenues The General Fund revenue sources are principally sales tax -Measure A and TDA. From Measure A sales tax revenues, $1,771,875 has been allocated toward administration. The administrative allocation is adjusted at midyear based on needed expenditures, but in no event will exceed four percent of total Measure "A" revenues. New Planning and Programming allocations available for expenditures have gone up by $97,500, from $897,000 to $994,500, due to increased sales tax revenues projected for 1998/99. The remaining budgeted revenues are: ❑ TDA sales tax comprise 65% of total revenues with an allocated amount of $5,644,500. TDA $5,644,500 65.1% W ,AI Other $360,000 orfP TCI $850,000 Interest 539,000 —_ Measure A $1.771,875 ❑ Transit Capital Improvement funding in the amount of $850,000 will be used to partially meet the capital contribution to the SCRRA. ❑ Other revenues totaling $399,000 are for planning, property management and investment earnings Expenditures Operating and Professional Costs(including office lease) have declined 12.6% from $2,062,684 to $1,931,748. The decrease is a reduction in legal, financial advisory, and audit fees. Additionally, the prior year included a number of one time expenditures for the management audit and the services of interim executive management. Project Costs have declined 6% from 5,959,990 to 5,593,482 due to a reduction in the number of planning studies. Total anticipated expenditures for various planning studies amounts to $235,000 compared to last year's total of $516,100. Project expenditures represent the largest component at 62.8% of the.total, and consists principally of rail operations of 3,756,187 and SCRRA capital contribution $1,150,000. Approximately fifty-three percent(53%) of the General Fund's expenditures are for commuter rail operations. General Fund Expenditures 1I Op/Support costa -21.6% Personnel Costs - 13.7% ProJects-62.6% Contingency -2.0% For unanticipated expenditures, a contingency of $180,000 has been set aside in the General Fund. 000016 Department Initiatives Administration The Commission may expand its board to twenty-nine members to give a seat to all cities within the County and to the five County supervisors. This will require an extensive educational process in the form of workshops and informational materials. Expanded meeting facilities will be acquired or rented for the Commission meetings. Meetings will also be rotated on a quarterly basis throughout the county. A complete review of position classifications and personnel policy will be performed by staff with the assistance of an outside consultant. Position responsibilities and salary ranges may be adjusted accordingly. Actual Actual hrough Thruug 6/3%96 6/30197: 1997/98 1998/99` Propose! udge1 Budget pallar` Percent Change Change 411,582 445,032 433,783 435,454 1,671 .4 259,512 396,591 509,330 476.,957 (32,373) (14.4)% 0 0 0 0 0 0% 184,170 217,363 330,220 224,139 (106,081) (32.1)% $855,264 $1,058,986 $1,273,333 $1,136,551 ($136,783) (10.7)% Finance and Accounting It is anticipated that accounting services will continue to be provided to the Western Riverside Council of Governments. Request for Proposals will be sent out for financial advisor, bond counsel, and auditors. Changing the Accounting Supervisor position from a contract service to an RCTC employee will allow for realignment of accounting functions. The position will now be able to fully assume responsibility for day to day general ledger duties, financial statement preparation, and annual audit coordination. Program Costs Staffing Operating Projects Prof Costs Total Actual Through 6/301% 142,882 153,491 142,984 217,421 74,437 52.1% 33,241 52,627 42,174 46,003 3,829 9.1% 0 0 0 0 0 0% 439,875 415,598 512,125 355,000 (157,125) (30.7)% $615,998 $621,716 $697,283 $618,424 ($78,859) (11.3)% 000017 Transportation Planning and Programming The new position of Program Manager will handle any new responsibilities incumbent upon the Commission as a result of SB45. The position will report to the Assistant Director of Transporatin Planning and Programming with a functional reporting relationship to the Deputy Executive Director. A corridor planning study may be initiated to look at new corridors within the County to facilitate the movement of goods and people. The Commission at the request of the County of Riverside will manage a countywide synchronization study. Pr+*grarn Costs Staffing Operating Projects Prof Costs Total Percent. Budget Budget Change Change 238,519 256,229 221,128 354,449 133,321 60.3% 66,482 98.952 84,347 92,006 7,659 9.1% 1,377,215 1,574,678 2,442,269 3,308,489 866,220 35.5% 62,573 130,421 240,000 117,500 (122,500) (51.0) % $1,744,789 $2,049,180 $2,987,744 $3,872,444 $884,700 29.6% Rail Transportation Program Service on the Riverside to Los Angeles line will be expanded to include one additional evening return trip. Inland Empire Orange County line will add one additional morning trip from Riverside to Orange County. San Bernardino line Saturday service will be connected to Downtown Riverside with five round trips as of October 1998. Progrfi Costs Staffing Operating Projects Prof Costs Total Actnal: Through 6/30/96 Actual 1997'98 1998/99 Through Revised Proposed; Dollar 6130197 Budget Budget Change', Change 46,394 49,839 137,694 193,801 56,107 40.7% 17,119 17,089 21,719 23,691 1,972 9.1% 2,816,520 3,331,729 3,584,860 3,756,187 171,327 4.8% 216,737 200,182 130,000 180,000 50,000 38.5% $3,096,771 $3,598,839 $3,874,273 $4,153,679 $279,406 7.2% 000018 Property Management Ferguson and Pierce properties will be reviewed for potential sale or the financial feasibility of joint development. Prof ram Costs Staffmg Operating Projects Prof Costs Total Actual Actual Through Through 650/961 6130197 1997198 1998/99 Revised Proposed Dollar ;Percent Budg 13ttrlget Change Change 94,019 30,103 40,622 16,195 $180,939 100,999 90,486 65,089 (25,397) (28.1)% 34,629 38,192 41,660 3,468 9.1% 38,427 114,930 75,000 (39,930) (34.7)% 40,956 30,000 95,000 65,000 216.7% $431,771 $273,608 $276,749 $3,141 1.1% SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Special Revenue Fund expenditures are for a number of activities including capital, transit, motorist assistance, those with special needs, and "soft" programs for commuters. Revenues The Special Revenue Funds account for all Measure A sales tax revenues, vehicle registration user fees, and state budgetary allocations for motorist assistance and for n -; Other 3.2% 'transit. Sales tax revenues available for Interest 1.6% projects and programs is projected to be $63,853,125 (exclusive of administrative allocation which is budgeted in the General Measure A 81.1% Fund) an increase of 8%, or $4,711,655 over the 1997/98 projected amount of $59,141,470. State and federal funding will amount to $11,133,698. Other funding sources are as follows: Special Revenue Funding J State/Federal 14.1% State transit assistance funds make up 21.2% of total state and federal funding, for a total budgeted amount of $2,360,478. The state will contribute another $636,300 for motorist asistance activities. Federal funding expected by the Commission is from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in the amount of $3,275,000, the Surface Transportation Program(STP) for $574,500, and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality funding for $908,250, for a total federal contribution of $4,757,750, or 42.7% of total state and federal funding. Vehicle registration user fees are estimated at $1,040,000, which is unchanged from the prior year. 000019 Expenditures Total resources expended from the Special Revenue funds in 1998 are budgeted at $58,999,511(exclusive of debt service of 28,910,476), representing 78.3% of total Commission expenditures (exclusive of debt service). Highlighted below are these expenditures (see Table on page ): ❑ $28,216,257 which includes $25,163,696 budgeted as distributions for local streets and roads maintenance and $3,052,561 for special transportation projects. ❑ $10,316,300 including $7,511,300 which will be spent on commuter rail and other rail improvements, and $2,805,000 allocated to various highway construction projects. ❑ $4,568,656 will be expended for right of way acquisitions, $4,100,000 of which will be on Route 74. ❑ $7,225,624 is expected to be spent on the regional arterial program in the Coachella Valley. ❑ $2,746,194 for transit operating and capital from State Transit Assistance Funding. ❑ $1,391,920 is included for commuter assistance educational and incentive programs. ❑ $1,414,762 will be expended for motorist assistance programs, $735,134 for SAFE and $679,628 for FSP in the form of maintenance, operations, and towing. The remaining Special Revenue Fund monies amounting to $3,119,798 are spent on engineering, program management and various support costs. Special Revenue funds have a contingency of $1,207,000 for unplanned expenditures. Debt Service At June 30, 1999, the Commission will have outstanding $229,403,708 in sales tax revenue bonds, consisting of $ 11,585,000 in subordinate bonds and $217,818,708 in senior bonds. During the year, $17,585,000 in principal will be retired, along with $12,881,404 in interest payments. The Commission's cost of funds is estimated to be 5.4%. The commission will continue to meet its policy of at least a 2 to 1 debt coverage ratio, with the actual ratio projected to be 2.15. The only new debt may be an interest free loan from a local developer for engineering along Route 74, and advance funding from State Transportation Improvement Program(STIP) funds assuming passage of SB 1758. Department Initiatives Capital Projects Development and Delivery Construction of improvements along Route 111 at San Pablo and Portola in the City of Palm Desert, Monroe to Rubidoux in the City of Indio, and Date Palm right of way acquisition and construction in the City of Palm Desert Regional 'arterial efforts will include final design on Palm Drive from I-10 to Two Bunch Palms, Fred Waring Drive from Madison to Indio Boulevard and Avenue 52 from SR111 to the new SR86. Preliminary engineering services and final design for Jefferson Street from Avenue 54 to Indio Boulevard. Construction will continue on the Monterey Avenue to I-10, Washington Street to I-10 interchanges, the Mid Valley Parkway project and airport expansion. Other arterials 000020 construction projects that were completed were Fred Waring Bridge over the Whitewater River, Fred Waring Bridge over the All American Canal, the Monterey Bridge and Cook to I-10 interchange. Construction of a south side platform with passenger crossover bridge and security guard station, and additional trackage at the Downtown Riverside Station. Track improvements along the San Jacinto subdivision to facilitate freight movement and for future commuter rail line. Installation of a security system at the Pedley rail station. Rehabilitation of the historic Santa Fe Depot in Downtown Riverside. Program Costs Staffing Operating Projects Prof Costs Total Actual Through 6/30/96 Actual 1997198 Through Re%'isetl 6130/97 Budget 290,983 312,591 197,937 246,269 48,332 24.4% 194,882 107,175 247,250 269,701 22,451 9.1% 67,830,554 67,179,329 67,492,573 56,517,460 (10,975,113) (16.3)% 297,763 778,330 287,750 305,000 17,250 6.0% $68,614,182 $68,377,425 $68,225,510 $57,338,430 ($1.0,887,080) (16.0)% Special Transportation The Commission will continue operating its core rideshare programs, namely, Advantage Rideshare, Club Ride, the Commuter Exchange, and buspool subsidies. Inland Empire Commuter Services will continue to be managed by the Commission to support voluntary employer programs aimed at encouraging employees to rideshare. Carryover SB836 funding will be used to fund supplemental programs which include State Route 60 Corridor Campaign to encourage use of the new High Occupancy Vehicle(HOV) lanes, and the I-10 Commute Reduction Project --a construction impact mitigation project targeted to small employers in a designated corridor within San Bernardino County and Customized Employee Rideshare Services supporting voluntary rideshare for employers with less than 250 employees. Southern California Rideshare is a regional rideshare core services program providing common services to five southern California counties. 000021 Program Costs Staffing Operating Projects Prof Costs Total Actual 1997/98 1998199 Through Through Revised Proposed Dollar 6/30/96 Budget Budget Change 6/30/97 Percent Change. 138,601 145,995 138,386 210,380 71,994 52.0% 37,379 50,057 47,422 51,728 4,306 9.1% 3,721,657 3,682,249 5,521,136 4,444,481 (1,076,655.00) (19.5)% 40,856 15,820 75,000 36,000 (39,000.00) (52.0)% $3,938,493 $3,894,121 $5,781,944 $4,742,589 ($1,039,355) (18.0)% Motorist Assistance Two tow trucks will be added to provide one additional on SR -91 and one vehicle on I-215/SR-60. Program Costs Staffing Operating Projects Prof Costs Total Actual Through 6/30/96 Actual Through 997/98 1998/99 Revised Propose Dollar Percei 6130/97 Budget Budget . Change, .. Change. 81,823 91,003 173,795 130,714 (43,081) (52.0)% 119,777 224,257 187,167 62,349 (124,818) (66.7)% 1,302,338 1,660,919 1,447,762 1,414,762 (33,000) (19.3) % 69,085 68,500 82,500 74,781 (7,719) (9.4)% $1,573,024 $2,044,679 $1,891,224 $1,682,606 (208,618) (11.0)% CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS The Capital Projects Funds account for all debt proceeds from senior bond issuances and commercial paper notes. Capital Projects Funds Revenues Reimbursements Other Revenue Revenues Total revenues are projected to be $2,456,538, representing 2.3% of total Commission revenues for 1998/99. The revenues are investment earnings of $1,362,529, loan interest payments from various cities totaling $553,438, and $300,000 in local reimbursements. 000022 Expenditures Total budgeted project expenditures for the capital project funds amounts to $6,069,034(exclusive of debt service costs of $1,468,437, operating transfers of $529,640, and contingency of $115,000). Major expenditures are for highways (including interchanges). Highlighted expenditures are as follows: $837,283 for engineering which includes $750,000 for Van Buren interchange design. $4,562,225 for construction and related costs. This includes: ► Landscaping -$1,200,000 ► Soundwall construction -$2,796,445 ► • Various small projects totaling $565,780 $669,526 to spend the remaining bond proceeds for the regional arterial program Department initiatives Capital Project Development and Delivery Construction and landscaping of soundwalls from Mary to Magnolia along Route 91 Phase II design of the Van Buren interchange in the City of Riverside Yuma interchange landscaping FUND BALANCES --BY PROGRAM AND GEOGRAPHIC AREA June 30, 1999 Rcsl:n ed; I1'wh,w• 4.v tppiki�t Si'rii'r $9,206,543 4,164,3 92 15,915.062 15.137.200 1,026,375 3,747,216 $49,196,788 $181,512 7,912,425 1,614,444 $9,668.531 2,895,384 2,139.156 $5,034.540 1.928.213 $1,928.213 $9.206,543 4,164,3 92 181,512 2,895,384 23,827,487 15,137,200 1 1,026,375 2,139,156 5,361,660 1,928,213 $65,867,922 000023 n,r 1iai lalgll Lormt X00 STATE HIGHWAY AND RAIL PROGRAMS 1998-1999 BUDGET Project Description 81000 Project General Program management and contract -administration 51 600,000 Surveying services 30,000 Park N Ride Leases 53,900 Other project support services 150,000 TOTAL PROJECT GENERAL 51,833,900 81100 Highway & Rai Engineering Rte 79 : Right turn lane 20,000 Rte.79 : Rockfalmitigation 24,000 Route 91: Van Buren interchange design-Riase II 750,000 Rte 111 : Monroe to Rubidoux 79,000 Rte 215 : Preliminary and Environrrental( 43,283 SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY 916,283 Downtown Riverside Rail Station Southside Platform design Pedley Comruter Rai Station Security Surveilance system design SUBTOTAL RAIL 10,000 101,250 111,250 TOTAL HIGHWAY & RAIL ENGINEERING 1,027 533 81300 Highway & Rail Construction Route 60 Park N Ride facility at Rgeon Pass 325,780 Route 60 soundwal construction 333,333 Route 79 right turn lanes 80,000 Route 91 soundwalliauxlliary lanes Mary to Magnolia 2,463,112 Route 91 soundwall landscaping 600,000 Route 91 materials testing and surveying 140,000 Yurra interchange landscaping 600,000 Yuma interchange landscaping management 20,000 Route 111 Portola in the City of Palm Desert 420,000 Route 111 San Pabb in the City of Palm Desert 454,000 Route 111 Monroe to Rubidoux in the City of bdio 1,061,000 Route 111 Cate Palm in the Cathedral City 870,000 SUBTOTAL HIGHWAYS 7,367,2M Downtown Riverside Station South Side Ratform 3,336,300 La Sierra and West Corona Rail Stations Over Crossings 2,500,000 Rehabilitation of hetoric Downtown Riverside Santa Fe Depot 500,000 San Jacinto branchine drainage irrproverrents 500,000 Pedley Commuter Rai Station Security Surveilance System 675,000 SUBTOTAL RAIL 7,511,300 TOTAL HIGHWAY & RAIL CONSTRUCTION 14,578,525 81400 Highway & Rail Right of Way Route 74 SHOP advance right of way acquisitions 4,100,000 Route 79 right of way settlement 40,000 Route 91 temporary construction easements • 10,000 Route 111 Cate Palen in Cathedral City 130,000 Monroe to Rubidoux in the City of Indio 203,000 Other 85,656 SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY 4,568,656 TOTAL HIGHWAY & RAIL RIGHT OF WAY 4,568,656 81500 Highway & Rail Special Studies CETA P Env von rrental Study 10,000 Clean air aternative fuel project 25,000 Various planning studies 200,000 TOTAL HIGHWAY & RAIL SPECIAL STUDIES 235,000 000024 Riverside County Transportation Commission BUDGET COMPARATIVE -BY LINE ITEM 1998-4999 Proposed Budget Line item SOURCES OF REVENUE: 1995/96 Actuals 1996/97 1997/98 Actuals Budget 1997/98 Revised Budget 1998/99 Proposed Budget Dollar Percent Changes Change Operating Revenues: Sales Tax Revenues Sales Tax TDA Planning & Admin Sales Tax TDA Transit Allocation STA Transit Allocation SAFE Fees Reimbursements: Other Revenue Investment Income Total Operating Revenues Debt Proceeds Total Sources of Funds EXPENDITURES: Personnel Salary & Frin Services and Supplies 90000 Capital Outlay-Equipme Professional Costs: 65100 General Legal Services 65200 Special Legal Services 65300 Financial Services 65400 Audit Services 65500 Other Professional Sery Total Professional Costs Projects: 81000 Projects -General 81100 Highway & Rail Enginee 81300 Highway & Rail Constru 81400 Highway & Rail ROW 81500 Highway & Rail Special 81600 SCRRA Capital Contrib 85000 Commuter Assistance 86000 Special Projects 86100 Regional Transportatio 86200 LTF Disbursements 86300 STA Disbursements 86400 Regional Arterial 87000 Project Maintenance 87100 Project Operations 87200 Project Towing Total Projects Costs 55,413,939 57,888,149 59,541,000 60,782,600 65,625,000 1,247, 000 1,298,000 1,197,000 1,197, 000 1,294,500 4,453,800 3,800,185 4,274,794 4,033,000 4,350,000 1,670,743 1,812,380 1,987,013 1,996,294 2,360,478 1,031,117 1,033,019 1,071,000 1,040,000 1,040,000 7,754,264 5,470,049 13,105,644 6,569,210 9,586,920 2,727,645 2,724,751 3,675,018 2,707,497 2,993,972 7,260,013 6,030,161 2,479,193 2,798,178 2,937,875 81,558,521 14,000,000 95,558,521 1,444,804 613,958 144,538 80,056,694 87,330,662 81,123,779 55,360,000 61,579,047 80, 056, 694 142, 690, 662 142,702, 826 1,552,075 734,557 53,677 1,563,504 865,908 79,615 1,539,181 841,465 325,336 4,842,400 8.0% 97,500 8.1% 317,000 .7.9% 364,184 18.2% 3,017,710 45.9% 286,475 10.6% 139,697 5.0% 90,188,745 9,064,966 11.2% (61,579,047) -100.0% 90,188,745 (52,514,081) -36.8% 1,853,577 314,396 20.4% 897,895 56,430 6.7% 166,200 (159,136) -48.9% 464,326 1,018,544 483,500 483,500 325,000 14,295 49,697 50,000 50,000 25,000 104,649 74,864 122,500 122,500 97,500 329,456 285,404 336,375 406,375 290,000 414,529 425,208 695,220 695,220 649,920 1,327,255 1,853,717 1,687,595 1,757,595 1,387,420 1,404,223 1,011,991 1,284,900 2,101,713 1,833,900 1,913,874 1,651,448 2,448,268 1,473,566 1,027,533 15,097,514 11,570,938 16,386,821 12, 842, 930 14,878,525 1,950,209 6,182,270 91,000 2,294,414 4,568,656 347,036 511,729 643,220 752,472 235,000 1,377,400 1,234,386 1,214,900 1,214,900 1,150, 000 999,108 978,937 1,494,180 1,271,180 1,391,920 26,459,937 351,215 1,026,000 24,724,468 447,773 657,585 514,558 77,270, 900 27,630,703 30,468,567 30,358,588 31,079,157 305,095 100,000 310,000 327,295 1,269,583 1,816,183 1,952,269 2,746,194 23,113,312 13,586,772 23,901,818 7,895,150 557,317 854,048 835,548 597,294 798,163 1,028,454 935,740 1,106,127 545,312 582,580 546,392 679,628 77361,184 71,999,893 80,791,530 69,516,379 (158,500) -32.8% (25,000) -50.0% (25,000) -20.4% (116,375) -28.6% (45,300) -6.5% (370,175) -21.1% (267,813) -12.7% (446,033) -30.3% 2,035,595 15.8% 2,274,242 99.1% (517,472) -68.8% (64,900) -5.3% 120,740 9.5% 720,569 17,295 793,925 (16, 006, 668) (238, 254) 170,387 133,236 (11, 275,151) 2.4% 5.6% 40.7% -67.0% -28.5% 18.2% 24.4% -14.0% 00002 Riverside County Transportation Commission BUDGET COMPARATIVE -BY LINE ITEM 1998-1999 Proposed Budget 1995/96 Actuals Line item Expenditures before distributions and operating transfers 80,801,455 97000 Operating Transfer 24,601,813 Total Expenditures Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues Over Expenditures Contingency 1996/97 Actuals 1997/98 1997/98 Revised Budget Budget 1998/99 Proposed Budget Dollar Percent Changes Change Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues Over Expenditures After Cont Fund Balance, July 1 Ending Fund Balance 81,555,210 76,196,515 85,255,107 25,242,712 75,089,486 74,169,354 105,403,268 106,797,922 151, 286, 001 159, 424, 461 (9,844,747) (26,741,228) (8,595,339) (16,721,635) (1,475,000) (1,826,000) (9,844,747) (26,741,228) (10,070,339) (18,547,635) 136,515,170 126,670,423 68,059,607 99,929,196 126,670,423 99,929,195 57,989,268 81,381,561 73,821,471 30,378,913 104,200,384 (14, 011, 639) (1,502,000) (15,513,639) 81,381,561 65,867,922 (11,433,636) -13.4% (43,790,441) -59.0% (55, 224, 077) -34. 6% 2,709,996 -16.2%! 324,000 -17.7% 3,033,996 -16.4% (18,547,635) -18.6% (15,513,639) -19.1% 000026 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AND FINANCIAL POLICIES 000027 The following material outlines those adopted policy goals and objectives as well as financial policies that have served as the framework for the work plan presented in the 1998/99 Proposed Budget. COMMISSION POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Efficiency The Riverside County Transportation Commission in cooperation with local jurisdictions will strive to create a transportation system that promotes efficient mobility both within and outside of the county. Continue to fund studies that examine various route alternatives for congested corridors. Pursue innovative financing strategies which provide funding for transportation enhancements. Work with transit providers to develop services through review and funding of transit plans. Develop and implement a performance -based short range transit plan process. Coordinate transit connections between commuter rail and buses within the County to ensure convenient service for passengers. Include in the RTIP projects which are financially constrained(i.e., funded). Implement a transit operator efficiency and effectiveness oversight program. Goods Movement RCTC will work with the Federal and State governments to facilitate the movement of goods and services within the county recognizing the vital role such plays in the economic health of the county, the state, and the nation. Promote rail corridors as an alternative to trucks for the movement of freight within the County and the region. Work with metropolitan planning agency for development of a regional approach to facilitating goods movement by involvement in the regional transportation plan. Continue efforts to upgrade San Jacinto branchline to ensure freight access for county shippers and future use for commuter rail. 000028 Aggressively pursue the completion of county corridors which will facilitate international trade and tourism. Congestion Relief Selection of projects and programming of funds by RCTC will be done with a view toward promoting traffic flow and reducing congested traffic corridors. Continue to promote analysis of traffic patterns(i. e., counts) as a critical element to the selection of projects for funding. Work with local jurisdictions to develop mitigation measures and strategies to address congested corridors as the Congestion Management Agency. Work with cities and the County to phase out traffic impact analysis for planned development in favor of local circulation element approach. Continue provision of innovative commuter rideshare programs with the goal of reducing single occupant vehicle trips. Continue to work with Caltrans to construct highway projects programmed in the State Transportation Improvement Program and the completion of all projects in the Measure A Strategic Plan Develop a countywide plan for the continuation and expansion of the Measure A half cent sales tax for transportation purposes. Air Quality Improvement RCTC's transportation planning will be designed to promote clear air standards recognizing them as necessary for a quality standard of living. Preserve funding for projects which improve quality in non attainment areas in the implementation of SB45. Work with the metropolitan planning organization, sub regional agencies, and local jurisdictions to strive to implement a transportation plan which meets conformity guidelines. Pursue dialogue with the SCAQMD to better coordinate project implementation with regional air quality goals. Support outreach and educational programs which promote voluntary ridesharing and use of alternative transportation fuels and strategies. 0'30029 Require the purchase of clean fuel busses by transit operators, and expand the electric vehicle lease program unless economically infeasible. Economic Development Riverside-C-otmtreannot-mairetairrecunomic-vialyility-anti-growth-virithout-wr effective trangrortatiarrsysterm Transportation decisions will not bei adei - - ,, ' u`wffl consider the economic benefits derived from any improvement and where feasible and practical will pursue transportation alternatives that enhance or complement economic development. Promote the design and construction of interchanges that are in proximity to regional economic centers and developments. Promote local projects, consistent with regional transportation goals, which enhance business development and local employment. Include in project selection a review of impact on local and regional economy once implemented Participate in regional economic forums and corridor focused economic development. Intermodalism and Accessability RCTC desires to serve as many of the County residents as possible and economically feasible by developing differing modes of transportation and considering the needs of a wide range of citizens. Continue efforts to ensure Riverside County rail service though the Joint Powers Authority. Participate in the study of high speed rail and support efforts to devise funding strategies for eventual implementation of high speed rail. Coordinate and fund paratransit services with the major transit providers in the County and with local social service agencies for activities and programs that cover a broad spectrum of socio-economic needs. Work with transit providers to assist them with funding to meet ADA and welfare -to -work requirements , as well as specialized transit needs. Work with SCRRA to develop a long range strategic plan for expansion of the commuter rail system throughout the five county area. 000030 Technological Innovation Provide vision and leadership through exploring technology for smarter highways and implementing those which are affordable and practical. Work with agencies throughout southern California to study, review and implement advanced technology and its various applications. Promote support of advanced technology strategies from the federal government through increased levels of funding. FINANCIAL POLICIES Operating budget policies The Commission's budget will include at least a two percent contingency. The Commission will budget no more than one percent of Measure A sales tax revenues for administrative salaries and benefits. Costs of administration will be budgeted at whatever is reasonable and necessary, but not to exceed four percent of Measure A sales tax revenues(inclusive of the one percent salary limitation). Amounts will be budgeted by fiscal year for multi year projects based on best estimates, with the understanding that to the extent actuals vary from those estimates, and the project is ongoing, adjustments will be made in the mid year budget process. The fiscal capital budget should be consistent with the strategic plan with deviations appropriately noted, explained, and justified. • Revenue policies Sales tax revenues projections will be revised bi-annually to ensure use of current and relevant data. Annual amounts may be adjusted by staff to reflect the most current economic trends. Federal and state matching funds will be used where possible to supplement the use of local funding sources. Debt management policies The Commission will strive to maintain a 2x debt ratio coverage on all senior debt. Debt issuances will be for major capital projects including engineering, construction, and 000031. right of way. Operating requirements must be from current ongoing revenues Costs of issuance including underwriters discount will not exceed 2%. While it is the intent of the Commission to establish a cash debt reserve for long term bond issuances, obtaining surety bonds is not precluded. Auditing, accounting, and financial reporting policies The Commission will issue a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. An audit is to be conducted annually on Commission accounting books and records. As long as the Commission has outstanding bonds, those audits must be conducted by an independent national accounting firm. •• Capital planning and programming policies The Commission will biennially complete and issue a capital planning document. Established priorities will be reviewed annually via a series of workshops and/or policy maker retreat. • • Reserve policies The Commission will maintain a cash reserve at least equal to five percent of annual revenues(exclusive of reimbursements/matching funds). Cash management/investment policies Where possible the Commission will encourage receipt of funds by wire transfer to its accounts. Balances in the bank operating account will be maintained at whatever amount is necessary to meet monthly expenditures. Idle funds will be invested per the Commission's established investment policy emphasizing in order of priority --safety, liquidity, and yield. Cash disbursements to local jurisdictions and vendors/consultants will be done in an expeditious and timely manner. Human resources management The Commission staffing levels will be consistent with the intent of its enabling legislation which envisioned a small, but effective staff 000032 Consultants will be used to augment staff efforts as much as possible to support programs or work loads which do not appear to be of a permanent nature. State of the art technology will be maintained to improve the efficiency of a small staff and to encourage working "smarter". 000033 BUDGET PROCESS SUMMARY 000034 BUDGET PROCESS SUMMARY The budget is the primary performance tool used to measure and control accountability of public agencies for taxpayer dollars. The budget communicates to all stakeholders (i.e., citizens) how the investment they made will be put to use by providing detailed information on the specifics of resource allocation and expenditures. Progress is regularly monitored and revisions and updates are made at mid year to reflect changing dynamics and realities. This results in a budget document that is truly useful and meaningful as a bench mark against which to evaluate government accomplishments and/or challenges, and to assess compliance with fiscal accountability. SHORT TERM STRATEGIC DIRECTION PHASE The first phase of the budget process is to determine the direction of the Commission in the short term and to integrate this with long term goals and objectives. Annually a seminar is held for the policy makers to evaluate and determine where the Commission plans to be and what it desires to 'accomplish over the next twenty years. Annual reviews allow for timely responsiveness to any significant political, legislative, or economic developments that may occur locally, statewide, or nationally. Staff' then adjusts its course based on the long term strategic direction of the policy makers. Staff convenes in early January to both assess actual results compared to the current year budget and to map changes in strategy for the ensuing fiscal year by reviewing and, if necessary, redefining departmental mission statements, and setting goals. Those goals upon review by the Board become the Commission's short term strategic direction. RESOURCE DEFINEMENT AND ALLOCATION PHASE Simultaneous with the short term strategic direction phase, staff focuses on what funding sources are available, and what monies are estimated as carryover from the current year. In actuality, resource identification occurs throughout the year, but is 'finalized' in the upcoming fiscal year budget. Amounts to be borrowed are determined as part of the long term strategic planning process, but are adjusted in the annual budget to reflect more current information. NEEDS ASSESSMENT PHASE Staff and consultants evaluate what projects and studies need to he accomplished. Project priority and sequencing set in the long term strategic plan are the top candidates for budget submission. However, priorities may have changed due to economic necessities or political realities, resulting in projects being rescheduled by acceleration or postponement. New projects may be added or existing priorities deleted based on Commission direction. DEVELOPMENT/REVIEW PHASE Using all the data and information gathered from the previously mentioned stages, department heads submit their desired budgets to the Commissions Chief Financial Officer. The information along with 000035 staff and overhead allocations is compiled into a preliminary or draft budget. After review by the Executive Director and inclusion of his desired changes, the draft budget is presented to the Board of Commissioners for input into the mission and goal statements and review of initial resource allocation. ADOPTION/IMPLEMENTATION PHASE The Proposed Budget is submitted to the Commission at its May meeting. A hearing is scheduled to allow for public comment on the proposed budget. The Commission may choose after public hearing to adopt the budget or to request additional information and or changes to the budget. The budget must be adopted no later than June 15th of each year. During the year if the need arises, staff may transfer part or all of any budgeted balance within financial responsible units by function. Control of the budget is maintained by monthly status reports to department heads. Corrective action must be documented and submitted to the financial officer for .any significant budget variations. Commission approval is sought for any expenditures that will exceed those amounts allocated to each financial responsibility unit (e.g., Measure A) by broad classification (i.e., administration, programs, capital outlay, and other financing uses). BUDGET, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Involvement in the budget permeates all levels of staff at the Commission from clerical staff to policy makers. Each program/project manager develops a detailed line item capital budget. Those budgets by program are submitted to the department head for review and approval. The department heads will submit their budgets to the financial officer by March 1st. The Commissions Chief Financial Officer compiles the department budgets, and completes the operating budget (administrative) with input from the Clerk ofthe Board. Both the capital and operating budgets are combined into the draft budget for the entire Commission. The Executive Director reviews the entire budget for overall consistency with both the short and long term strategic direction of the Commission, the appropriateness of funding sources for the identified projects and studies, and that the operating budget expenditures are reasonable and complementary to the capital budget. 000036 REVENUES 000037 REVENUES Revenues from all sources for fiscal year 1998/99 are expected to increase 11.2% from $81,123,779 to $90,188,745, the highest revenue year ever for the Commission. Measure A sales tax are expected to be $65,625,000, representing 72.7% of the total. This reflects an increase of 8.0% or $4,842,400 over the 1997/98 revised projected amount of $60,782,600. State and Federal funding will amount to $12,408,698 an increase of $3,343,194. Transportation Development Act(TDA) funding amounts to $5,644,500, $414,600 higher than the prior year. Vehicle registration fees($1,040,000), state budget allocations, local agency reimbursements, and interest earnings comprise the remaining $6,971,847. 1998 1999 Measure A Sales Tax Revenues Q Measure A Other Investment Income Revenue Projections - The Commission regularly updates its revenue projections. The most recent update of those projections was completed in February 1998 performed by the auditing firm of Ernst & Young, LLP. WOAD() 04000 - S120ADD ` toSIDDADO SMIADD i :MIAMI - S2DADD 5 Reimbursements TDA Measure A Sake Tax Revenues] Foal Ye= 1MEI Cm 7001 The econometrics model developed by Ernst f p 90 7➢Dl aro 760 Zi95 EGO ION MS X01 & Young LLP uses personal income and the Years unemployment rate for the Riverside -San Bernardino Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). Ernst & Young, LLP obtained projections on these two variables from Regional Financial Associates (RFA) a consulting firm specializing in the development of comprehensive regional economic models for all MSA's in the United States. RFA's forecasts utilizes a number of factors including demographic, employment, and financial. The following additional assumptions were also used in the development of the Commission's revenue forecast: The state does not change mix of items subject to the sales tax from what has been included historically. The relative sales and property tax rates of Riverside and surrounding counties does not change from historical levels. 00003,_ Inflation for the period of the forecast is assumed to be 3.17%. The State Board of Equalization's administrative fee is assumed to be 2.5%. Forecast results show Measure A revenues to be $1,134 million in nominal dollars from 1999 thru 2009. Geographic allocation- Riverside County is comprised of three geographic areas -Western Riverside County, the Coachella Valley and the Palo Verde Valley. The percentage of revenues allocated to each of these areas based on return to source is approximately 72.5% for Western County, 26.3% for the Coachella Valley, and 1.2% for the Palo 'Verde Valley for 1998/99. (Note: These percentages will experience some variations from year to year based on changes in levels of taxable sales.) Geographic Allocations Riverside County Westem Cty 72.5% $46,317,716 Palo Verde 1.2% $768,026 Coachella Vly 26.3% $16,767,383 Program Administration — Westem County ' Coachella Valley Palo Verde Vly Total Administration $1771,875 $1,771,875 Highway $17,960,070 _ $2,515,108 $20,475,178 Rail 1 $7,514,674 $7,514,674 Regional Arterial _ $6,706,953 $6706.953 Commuter Assistance $1,157,943 $1,157.943 Special Transportation $],157,943 _ $1,676,738 $2,834,681 Local Streets & Roads $18,527,086 $5,868,584 _ $768,026 $25,163,695 TOTAT iq 771 875 T4 117 716 �1fi7fi7.391 _ $768 O"fi Pfii 6'75.000 Program allocation- The Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) of Measure A defines the manner in which the sales tax revenues are to be spent as documented in the following table: Western County Highway and Rail 55% Streets and Roads 40% Special Transportation 5% Commuter Assistance & Senior and Persons with Disabilities 030033 Coachella Valley Regional Arterial Streets and Roads Highway Projects Transit Palo Verde Valley Streets and roads Total Revenue Sources - 1999 Where The Money Comes From 40% 35 - 40% 15% 5 - 10% 100% Federal State Local Other ?y a.5ure A 5hs.1525.Qtt(1 Transportation Development Act $5.644.500 State Transit Assistance e7 360478 Transit C'anital Imi+rovement -5850.000.. J/Tnes on 108/116 53 145100 State Tianse2rtation Itnorovement(SB4s) Slos 000 Surface Transportation Program 5574 500 Congestion Mitigation and Air Oualitv 5908.250 Federal Transit Administration 53 27s 000 Rai l/I-Iighw4vLeases $235 000 In�•estrncnt income 52957.575 foachella Valley Association of Govts 51.444 234 Service 4uthoriivlorFseeryayRmereencie5 5L040.000 Freeway Service Patrol State Budeet Allocation 5 636 300 Other 532.870 $300.000 5553.438 Tot -1 e5 057 750 ` C7 150 Q4R e71013 714 54 766 311 Federal, State, Local Governments Reimbursements Revenues classified as reimbursements are considered matching or shared expenditures from other governments for various projects. After Measure A sales tax revenues, reimbursements historically are the most significant source of revenue for the Commission. In the current year budget over ten percent(10%) of the revenues are derived from reimbursements. Reimbursements from all sources totals $9,586,920, an increase of $3,017,710, or 45.9% from the revised Reimbursements State $4.229,170 Other $300,000 000040 1998 budget. Much of that increase is attributable to a Federal transit grant for rail capital construction. Other Sales Tax Revenues (i.e., Transportation Development Act) Transportation Development Act (TDA) revenues consists principally of the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) which derives from one quarter of one cent (1/4) of the state sales tax. The. Commission administers these funds on behalf of the County of Riverside. The County is projected to receive $33,150,000 in LTF revenues. Revenues received from LTF totaling $5,644,500 are allocated for regional and local transportation planning, program administration and, in Western County, for transit services. The remaining $27,505,500 not used by the Commission, is reserved for and disbursed to the other transit providers within Riverside County. Program Revenues Measure A sales tax, reimbursements, and TDA funding are allocated to the various Commission programs as follows: Highway Funding. ❑ Revenues from the State totaling $300,000 will be received for the construction of a Park 'n' Ride facility at Pigeon Pass Road. ❑ Cities of Norco and Corona will pay half the costs of landscaping for the Yuma interchange reimbursing the Commission a total of $300,000. Total funding for the highway program including Measure A sales tax revenues of $20,475,178, amounts to $21,075,178. Rail Program Funding ❑ From the 1997 Transit Capital Improvement (TCI) program $850,000 has been allocated to RCTC through the SCRRA for rail cars. The TCI funds were made available by the California Transportation Commission, and are administered by Caltrans. The 50% match is satisfied with dollars on deposit with the Southern California Regional Rail Authority(SCRRA). ❑ Federal Transit Administration Section 9 transit capital funding in the amount of $3,275,000 for expenditures on rail station over crossings and security. ❑ Proposition 108/116 rail bonds totaling $3,346,300 from the state will fund the completion of construction on the Riverside Downtown Station south side platform and layover facility. 030041 ❑ The old Santa Fe Depot in downtown Riverside will be renovated and the platform at Pedley extended with $800,000 in Surface Transportation Program funding. ❑ Drainage improvements for the San Jacinto branchline will be funded with $500,000 federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality grant. ❑ Rail operations which includes SCRRA and capital contributions, station maintenance and support costs, will be funded with an allocation of TDA(i.e., Local Transportation Fund) sales tax revenues in the amount of $4,350,000(Note: part of the $5,644,500 noted earlier under Other Sales Tax Revenues). Total funding for the rail program, including Measure A sales tax revenues of $7,514,674 (which funds debt service and repayment to the Western County highway program for advance funding), will amount to $20,635,974. Special Transportation ❑ Measure A sales tax revenues of $1,157,943. ❑ CMAQ grants totaling $408,250 will fund Southern California Rideshare and Inland Commuter Services. ❑ Inland Empire Commuter Services will receive an additional Surface Transportation Program grant of $74,500. ❑ A grant from the Mobile Source Reduction Committee(MSRC) of $32,870 will partially fund the Commission's Commuter Exchange bus. The Measure A Program allocates one-half of the 5% of Special Transportation funding to programs that are designed to improve the mobility of seniors and persons with disabilities. The funds are also intended to subsidize transportation cost of the economically disadvantaged. For fiscal year 1999 new sales tax revenues amount to $1,157,943. No other revenue sources are anticipated. Revenues for the Commuter Assistance Programs of $1,673,563 and the social services programs of $1,157,943 combine for total Special Transportation new funding of $2,831,506. Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies The Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies is funded from revenues received by way of a one dollar fee included with the Department of Motor Vehicles registration fees. The SAFE fees for this fiscal year are projected at $1,040,000. Since the growth in these fees historically has not been substantial, the budget amount has remain unchanged from the prior year. Freeway Service Patrol 000042 Caltrans will allocate out of the State Highway account $636,300 for the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP). The state provides nearly 80% of the funding for freeway towing service. The allocation of funding throughout the state is based on population, freeway miles, and level of congestion. The state's contribution is matched with an operating transfer of $159,075, or 25% of total FSP revenues,from the Service Authority For Freeway Emergencies (SAFE). State Transit Assistance The State Transit Assistance (STA) allocation is based on an estimate received from the State Controllers Office. For the 1999 fiscal year the state's estimated allocation to Riverside County is $2,360,478. This estimate is prior to finalization of the state's budget which often results in revisions. Any changes to the revenues will be incorporated during the mid -year budget reviews for fiscal 1999. Local Streets and Roads The Local Streets and Roads program which is distributed to the cities to use for local street repairs, maintenance and construction will receive $25,163,696. Regional Arterial The regional arterial program will receive $6,706,953 to reduce debt service on the 1993 sales tax revenue bonds and to continue construction and improvements of the regional arterial system in the Coachella Valley. Planning and Programming ❑ LTF administrative allocation for support salaries and overhead is budgeted at $300,000. ❑ Transportation planning studies are funded with an LTF of the top allocation equal to three percent(3%) of estimated revenues. Total allocation for 1999 is $994,500. ❑ State Transportation Improvement Program(SB45) allocation for planning in the amount of $125,000. Although up to $450,000 is available, the 1999 budget does assumes that the Commission will draw down those funds in future years. Other Revenues Other revenues from the 1998 Revised Budget have increased $286,475 to $2,993,972. Those revenues have increased due to higher state allocations for the freeway towing service and SB45 allocation for planning. Other revenue allocations not discussed in other program areas are as follows: ❑ A total of $235,000 in revenues is expected from property management for licenses and leases from the San Jacinto and San Bernardino subdivision rail program of which 20% of 000043 the total or $48,400 is from leased revenues for facilities located on highway properties. These amounts are based on existing contract provisions and historical results. ❑ In the Coachella Valley revenues totaling $1,444,234 will be used to cover Coachella Valley Association of Governments share of debt service for the sales tax revenue bonds 1993 Series A. Traffic Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF) are the source for these funds. ❑ A total of $553,438 in revenues is budgeted as interest only, earned from loan reimbursement agreements with the Cities Canyon Lake, Corona, Norco, Perris, San Jacinto, and Temecula. Those funds are used to pay debt service on the 1997 Series B Junior Bonds. Investment Income Interest earnings on the County pool are estimated at 5%, unchanged from the prior year estimate. The earnings on funds held by the trustee for debt service in money market funds is also assumed to be at 5%, except for the 1993 Debt Reserve Fund which contractually pays 6.87%. The Commission's operating funds are held in various mutual funds and U.S. guaranteed agency notes. Interest rates for the mutual funds are assumed to be 5%, while the treasury notes yield approximately 6%. Total earnings are projected to be $2,937,875 for fiscal 1999 which is a five (5%) percent increase from prior year revised budget estimate. 000044 DEBT FINANCING 00004:1 DEBT FINANCING At June 30, 1999, the Commission will have outstanding $229,403,708 in sales tax revenue bonds, consisting of $ 11,585,000 in subordinate bonds and $217,818,708 in senior bonds(including $ 60,445,000 in refunding bonds). During the year, $17,585,000 in principal will be retired, along with $12,881,404 in interest payments. The Commission's cost of funds is estimated to be 5.4%. Other costs associated with debt management include bank liquidity support fees, and rating agency fees. Debt Capacity Analysis The Commission is legally prohibited from issuing additional debt if its debt coverage ratio is less than 1.5 to 1 on all senior debt. The Commission has adopted a higher standard of 2 to 1 as policy. As the chart shows, the Commission has successfully met its policy standard. Any coverage less than 2 to 1 would necessitate using other program funding to cover all debt service expenditures. Sales Tax Revenues Senior Debt Service Coverage Ratio -Senior Debt Subordinate Debt Coverage Ratio -All Debt Debt Service Coverage $60,000,000 $50,000,000 $40,000,000 - $30,000,000 $20,000,000 $10,000,000 — $o $25,000,000 $20,000,000 - $15,000,000 - $10,000,000 - $5,000,000 $o U Junior Debt Senior Debt Sales Tax Revenues Highway/Commuter Rail Debt Capacity 1996 1997 1998 Available Revenues Debt Service 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 1999 1996 1997 1998(e) 1999(p) $55,413,939 S57,888,149 $60,782,600 $65,625,000 $22,862,811 $23, 683, 742 $27,885,729 $28,997,964 2.42 2.44 2.18 2.26 $ 1,513,807 $ 1,524,789 $ 1,229,481 $ 1,468,440 2.27 2.30 2.09 2.15 (e) Estimated (p) Projected Both the highway/commuter rail and regional arterial programs have minimal capacity to handle additional debt using only Measure A sales tax revenues as the source of repayment. The individual program coverage ratios for Western County highway/commuter rail, Coachella Valley highway, and Coachella Valley regional arterial are 1.22, 1.15 and 1.17 respectively. 000046 Debt Service Schedule Sales Tax Revenue Bonds Fiscal Year Principal ' Interest Total 1999 $ 17,585,000 $ 12,881,404 $ 30,466,404 2000 18,480,000 11,982,736 30,462,736 2001 19,450,000 11,014,056 30,464,056 2002 20,490,000 9,976,424 30,466,424 2003 21,445,000 9,023,264 30,466,264 2004-2009 149,538,708 35,322,125 184,860,833 Total $ 246,988,708 $ 90,200,009 $ 337,188,717 1997 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds(Limited Tax Bonds), Series A: The Commission issued $47,910,000 principal amount of serial bonds to refund $41,000,000 of the outstanding commercial paper notes along with $6,910,000 in new debt proceeds to fund various major highway projects. 1997 Sales Tax Revenue Junior Bonds(Limited Tax Bonds), Series B: The Commission issued $13,245,000 principal amount of subordinated(junior)serial bonds to refund $3,000,000 of the outstanding commercial paper notes along with $10,245,000 in new debt proceeds to fund various streets and roads projects for local cities. 1996 Sales Tax Refunding Revenue Bonds,(Limited Tax Bonds), Series A: In January 1996, the Commission issued $61,765,000 principal amount of serial bonds to refund a portion of the 1991 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds,(Limited Tax Bonds), Series A. The bonds refunded were the serial maturities due in 2002 and 2003 for $6,945,000 and $7,405,000, respectively, and the term bonds due 2009 for $44,975,000, for a total refunded amount of $59,325,000. The refunding resulted in a total present value savings of $1,862,750. For 1998/99 the gross cash savings in debt service costs amounts to $184,852. 1993 Sales Tax revenue Bonds(Limited Tax Bonds), Series A: In February 1993, the Commission issued $136,610,000 principal amount of serial bonds to finance the purchase of the Santa Fe use rights and other rail properties, and improvements to Routes 86 and 111 as well as major regional arterials in the Coachella Valley. 1991 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds(Limited Tax Bonds), Series A: In January 1991, the Commission issued $112,996,959 principal amount of long term debt in the form of serial, term, and capital appreciation bonds to finance improvements to Route 91 and Route 86, purchase of rail properties for station sites, and engineering and/or construction for various other routes in the County including I-215, Routes 74 and 79. See description of 1996 Series A Refunding Bonds. 000047 Commercial Paper Notes: The Commission has authorized a $100,000,000 commercial paper program as a means of providing short term financing for a number of highway projects as well as to provide advance funding for local streets and roads. To date, up to $51,500,000 has been approved for issuance. It is not anticipated in the 98/99 budget year that there will be any issuance of commercial paper. Therefore, the budget has made no provision for debt service. Debt Expenditures by Program Mona Arterial 18.96% $5,777,668 ;0000100: I ighways 5650% $17,212,518 Outstanding Debt and Legal Debt Margin June 30, 1999 Authorized Debt 1991 Series A 1993 Series A 1996 Series A Refunding Bonds 1997 Series A 1997 Junior Series B Other Total Outstanding Debt Legal Debt Margin Commuter rail 19.72% $6,007,345 Loma &eel's k roads 4.82% $1,468,440 $525.000.000 18,281,153 97,750,000 60,445,000 42,085,000 11,585,000 220,383 230.366,536 Debt Service Expenditures by Geographic Area Coachella Valley 26.2% 87,970,359 Western County 73.8% $22,408,554 Historical Level of Debt vs. Legal Debt Limit 600 500 400 300 200 $294,633,464 100 0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1998 000048 FUND BUDGETS 000049 The Commission accounts for its ten budgeted funds primarily using governmental accounting. Governmental accounting differs in that it is not full accrual accounting. Although most expenditures are recognized when incurred as in private industry, there are number of expenditures that are recorded when cash is disbursed. This is known as the modified accrual basis of accounting, and is the basis for the Commission's '98/99 budget and its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report(CAFR). Under the modified accrual basis of accounting, revenues are recognized when received and available to meet current year obligations. Only those revenues which are guaranteed as to receipt based on expenditure of funds(i.e., government matching funds) or certain to be received within ninety days of the end of the fiscal year(e.g., interest earnings due from the County of Riverside; safe fees due from the State of California) are recorded as revenues. The Commission authorizes expenditures according to administration, programs, capital outlay, and other financing uses. As long as management does not exceed budgeted amounts in these broad classifications, it may transfer amounts among individual line items according to function and between financial responsibility units defined as the General Fund, Measure A Fund, Motorist Assistance Fund, and the State Transit Assistant Fund. Any other budget changes require the authorization of the Commission, including use of the budgeted contingency. The Commission may take action at any monthly meeting to amend the budget. Those amendments are incorporated into the mid year budget revision process or reflected in the CAFR by adjusting budget vs. actual statements. There are a total of ten funds which account for the Commission's budgeted resources categorized into the three remaining fund types --the General Fund, the Special Revenue Funds, and the Capital Projects Funds. There is only one reported General Fund, although General Fund activities and resources can be identified as Measure A or non Measure A. Special Revenue Funds consist of six funds and the Capital Projects funds are separated into three different funds. In addition to the ten budgeted funds, the Commission uses two fiduciary fund types -agency funds and expendable trust funds, one proprietary fund type, and one debt service fund described below: Agency Funds: The Agency Fund accounts for assets held by the Commission as trustees or agent for individuals or other governmental units. Specifically, the Commission' agency fund accounts for employee contributions to a 457 Deferred Compensation Plan. Expendable Trust Fund: The Expendable Trust Fund accounts for the sales tax dollars collected by the County of Riverside under the Transportation Development Act. These funds are administered by the Commission on behalf of the County pursuant to state law. The Commission's Expendable Trust Fund is the Local Transportation Fund. Proprietary Fund (i.e. Internal Service Fund): The Internal Service Fund accounts for the financing of goods or services provided by one department or agency to other departments 000050 or agencies of the Commission on a cost -reimbursement basis. The Commission' Internal Service Fund is the Dental/Vision Insurance Fund. Debt Service Fund: The Debt Service Fund accounts for the accumulation of resources for, and payment of, debt principal and interest. Budgets are not adopted by the Commission for the Debt Service Fund, the Fiduciary Funds, or the Proprietary Fund. The Commission's payment of interest and principal on outstanding debt along with related servicing fees flows through the Debt Service Fund. The Debt Service Fund is a non budgeted fund as the resources for payment of the debt are budgeted in the Special Revenue Funds. The monies in the expendable trust fund are monitored and controlled by means of an annual allocation process and by legal and statutory requirements, and is not a budgeted fund of the Commission. The resources for the Internal Service Fund are budgeted in the General and -Special Revenue funds. GENERAL FUND Revenues From Measure A sales tax revenues, $1,771,875 has been allocated toward administration. The administrative allocation is adjusted at midyear based on needed expenditures, but in no event will exceed four percent of total Measure "A" revenues. TDA sales tax comprise 65% of total revenues with an allocated amount of $5,644,500. The Commission will also receive an allocation of TCI funding in the amount of $850,000 to be used to partially meets it capital contribution to the SCRRA. Funding from SB45 planning funds is budgeted in the amount of $125,000. Property management revenues are budgeted at $235,000, primarily from Interest $39,000 rail properties. Investment earnings are estimated at $39,000. TDA $5,644,500 Measure A $1,771,875 Other $360,000 000051 Expenditures Personnel salary and fringe benefits have increased from the prior year by 21.2% , or $214,958. The increase is a result of adding a new Program Manager for the implementation of SB45. Additionally, the approved position of Accounting Supervisor was only budgeted for three months in fiscal year 1998, but is shown for a full year in the 1999 Proposed Budget. Operating and Professional Costs have decreased 13.4% or $300,136. Commission use of professional services is anticipated to decline dramatically in 1999. Legal costs have been reduced by one third assuming minimal litigation activity and reduced support services from bond counsel for the Commission's outstanding debt. Audit fees were 'adjusted assuming the Riverside Transit Agency will take full responsibility for its audit and related costs. Costs for the Commission's rail consultant have been reduced by $50,000 on the assumption that commuter rail capital implementation issues(i.e., SB1402) will now be overshadowed by SCRRA operational concerns. General Fund Expenditures j Op/Support costs -21.6% Personnel Costs - 13.7% Projects -62,6% 9 Contingency -2.0% There were a number of one time costs in the 1998 budget including • Triennial performance audits • Audit work performed by Ernst & Young LLP for the formula equity issue. • Interim executive director services provided by SANBAG. Project Costs have declined $147,308, a decrease of 2.6%, primarily because there are fewer major planning studies included in the budget. It has been assumed that $100,000 will be used for corridor planning studies. Another $100,000 has been set aside for follow up on performance audit recommendations. SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 1 Special Revenue Funding] Revenues Measure A Special Revenue --Of the Special Revenue Funds, three are funded primarily with Measure A sales tax revenue --the Western County Operating Fund, the Palo Verde Valley Operating Fund, and the Coachella Valley Operating Fund. These Measure A 81.1% State/Federal 14.1% Other 3.2% Interest 1.8% C3,OO52 three funds account for all Measure A expenditures that are not paid from debt proceeds. Western County Measure A Operation Fund In addition to Measure A sales tax revenues, the Western County Measure A Operating Fund will receive: ❑ Reimbursements • State rail bonds —$3,346,300 • Federal Transit Administration(FTA) Section 9—$3,275,000 • Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality(CMAQ)—$908,250 • Surface Transportation Program(STP)—$74, 500 • Mobile Source Reduction Committee(MSRC)-$32, 870 • SB836 state funding —$123,200 ❑ Interest Income —$675,511 Measure A Revenues Geographic Allocation Western County 72.2% Revenues for the Western County Operating Fund, including Measure A sales tax of $46,121,112, amounts to $54,556,743, representing 61% of total Commission revenues. Coachella Valley 26.4% Coachella Valley Operating Fund The Coachella Valley Operating Fund is budgeted to receive the following: ❑ $1,444,234 from the Coachella Valley Association of Governments toward regional arterial debt service costs. ❑ Interest Income --$284,714. All revenues for the fund amount to $18,579,788 including Measure A sales tax of $16,850,840, representing 21% of total Commission revenues. Palo Verde Valley Operating Fund The Palo Verde Valley Operating Fund only receives Measure A sales tax for streets and roads totaling $768,025, representing approximately 1.0 % of total Commission revenues. 000053 Freeway Service Patrol Fund The Freeway Service Patrol Fund accounts for the state and local resources provided to cover the costs of servicing stranded motorists by means of towing, changing tires, and providing fuel. Total revenue of $801,125 is comprised of the following: ❑ State allocation —$636,300 ❑ Operating Transfer from the SAFE Fund —$159,075 1❑ Interest Income —$5,750 Etta MI% FSP Major Revenues Service Authority For Freeway Emergencies The SAFE Fund accounts for vehicle registration fees which are used to provided emergency callbox service to motorists. ❑ Total fees collected are estimated to be $1,040,000. ❑ Interest earnings are expected to be $114,560. State Transit Assistance Fund State transit assistance funds are used to fund rail and bus transit operations and capital requirements. The two revenue sources totaling $2,575,718 are as follows: ❑ State budgetary allocation —$2,360,478 ❑ Interest income —$215,240 Expenditures Measure A Special Revenue --The Measure A Special Revenue Funds are expended on capital construction and improvements to highways, commuter rail, regional arterials, and local streets and roads. Funding is also reserved for commuter assistance and specialized transit programs. Special Revenue Funds Expenditures Regional Arterial $7.715.624 Omer $6,161,503 033054 ❑ Measure A special transportation expenditures of $4,447,481 will be disbursed for fixed route and specialized transit(i.e., social service transportation) programs and services. Western County Measure A Operating Fund-- --$1,250,000 for seniors and persons with disabilities, and $1,391,920 for commuter assistance programs. Coachella Valley Measure A Operating Fund-- $1,805,561 to the SunLine Transit Agency. ❑ Local streets and roads maintenance — $25,163,969: Local Streets & Roads Western County Measure A Operating Fund —$18,527,086 Coachella Valley Measure A Operating Fund —$5,868,584 Palo Verde Valley Operating Fund —$768,025 ❑ Commuter rail improvements from the Western County Measure A Operating Fund —$7,708,206. ❑ Regional arterial expenditures from the Coachella Valley Measure A Operating Fund -- $7,225,624 ❑ Highway expenditures total $7,550,900 from special revenue funds as follows: • Western County Measure A Operating Fund ► $4,150,000 for Route 74 right of way purchases. ► $53,900 for Park N Ride lease. Coachella Valley Measure A Operating Fund ► $79,000 for Monroe to Rubidoux engineering ► $333,000 for right of way acquisitions at Date Palm($130,000), Monroe to Rubidoux($200,000), and support services($3,000). ► $2,805,000 for construction at Date Palm, San Pablo, Portola, and Monroe to Rubidoux. 003055 D Program Management is budgeted at $1,450,000 in the Western County Measure A Operating Fund, and $150,000 in the Coachella Valley Measure A Operating Fund. ❑ Other support costs of $797,649 include salaries and benefits($456,649), legal fees($ 143,500), audit fees($70,000), and other professional services($257,500). ❑ Budgeted Contingency —$1,207,000 ❑ Operating Transfers - Debt All Measure A sales tax revenues have been pledged as the security for the Commission's senior debt issuances and commercial paper notes. (Note: Currently there are no outstanding commercial paper). Although debt service is recorded in the Debt Service Fund, most of the resources for the cash payments are provided by the Measure A Special Revenue Funds(See section on Capital Projects Funds) as follows: • Western County Measure A Operating Fund —$20, 940,117 • Coachella Valley Measure A Operating Fund —$7 ,970,359 Non Measure A Special Revenue Funds-- The non Measure A Special Revenue funds account for motorist assistance expenditures including freeway call boxes and towing service, as well as transit disbursements from the State Transit Assistance Program. These activities are budgeted in the Freeway Service Patrol Fund, the Service Authority For Freeway Emergencies, and the State Transit Assistance Fund. ❑ Freeway Service Patrol Fund, which accounts for the Commission's towing service, has total budgeted expenditures of $752,636, an increase of 26.6% from 1997/98 revised budget of $594,275. Towing service contract charges have increased 24.4% from $546,392 to $679,628. The increase is add two additional vehicles for greater coverage on I- 215 and State Route 91. Other costs of $112,162, an increase of 10.2% over 1997/98 include equipment purchases(i.e., radio communications equipment), salaries, and administrative overhead. The increase is the additional radio equipment needed for the new vehicles. Budgeted contingency —$12,000 ❑ Service Authority For Freeway Emergencies Fund accounts for the installation and maintenance of a freeway call box system within Riverside County. The expenditures for 1998/99 amount to $1,157,046, a decrease of 21.3% over the revised 1997/98 total of $1,470,741. The decrease is the elimination of the Intelligent Transportation System 03005€; Study completed in 1997/98. Additionally, there are no planned call box installations. Call box maintenance (i.e., knockdowns, vandalism, and preventive and corrective maintenance) is budgeted at $367,888, a moderate increase of 6.7% over the 1996/97 total of $344,766. Operational costs have increased 6.8%, with a budget of $362,580 compared to $339,600, an increase of $22,980. The increase reflects additional call boxes added in 1998. The budget of $47,500 for a consultant to monitor the system and provide operational data has been decreased from the 1997/98 level of $70,000. Last year's contract was larger than usual due to a site assessment study performed by the consultant. • Other budgeted expenditures of $192,454 include staffing, administrative overhead, legal costs, and a contingency of $28,000. An operating transfer of $159,075 will be made to the Freeway Service Patrol as the Commission' match to state funding. ❑ State Transit Assistance Fund is used to account for the state budgetary allocation of gas tax revenues designated for transit purposes. The Commission has budgeted $2,746,194 for bus and rail transit capital and/or operating needs. This compares with a budget of $1,952,269 from 1995/96. The increase assumes expenditure of all current year funding, and a portion of prior year reserves. CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS The Capital Projects Funds account for all debt proceeds from senior bond issuances and commercial paper notes. Revenues Total revenues are projected to be $2,456,538, representing 2.7% of total Commission revenues for 1998/99. ❑ Other revenues consist of interest payments from Temecula, Canyon Lake, Norco, Perris, San Jacinto, and Corona for outstanding loans. Capital Projects Funds Revenues Interest Income Reimbumements Other Revenue 030057 Expenditures These Funds account for all debt proceeds from senior bond issuances and commercial paper notes. Total expenditures are $8,182,111, representing 7.8% of total Commission expenditures. Major expenditures are for highways(including interchanges). The budgeted expenditures are as follows: ❑ Coachella Valley Construction Fund • $669,556 for the regional arterial program. ❑ Western County Construction Fund Construction costs are budgeted at $3,362,225 for various projects including sound wall construction on Routes 60 and 91, and Park N Ride lot at Pigeon Pass in the City of Moreno Valley. • Western County Commercial Paper Fund • Landscaping improvements for the Yuma interchange in Norco —$600,000 • Landscaping for the Route 91 sound walls from Magnolia to Mary -$600,000 • Design of Van Buren interchange and soundwalls along Route 91--$837,283 000053 RivLsrSi'de- Co Wnty-Tl2713p7Rfatian M laslo n BU DGET SUMMARY FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997.98 - BY FUN D 1998-1999 Pr oposed Budget S PECIAL REVENU E FUNDS > <-----CAPITAL PROJE CTS FUNDS-- > Fre eway Stat e Western Western County General Service Western P alo Coachella Transit Coachella Co unty C ommercial Gr and Fu nd Patr ol S AFE County Verde Valley Assistance Valley Constructi on Paper T otal To tal Pe rs onn el Salary & Fringe Benefits 1,227,696 54,154 115,078 456,649 1,853,577 73000 Offic e Lease 206,800 4,224 8,976 220,000 OperationslOve rhead (73100 thru 73700) 637,225 13,016 27,658 677,898 Projects: 81000 Projects -General 50,000 1,633,900 150,000 1,833,900 81100 Highwa y & Rail Engineering 111,250 79,000 837,283 1,027,533 81300 Highway & Rail Cons truction 7,511,300 2,805,000 3,362,225 1,200,000 14,878,525 81400 Highway & Rail ROW 4,235,656 333,000 4,568,656 81500 Highway & Rail Special Studie s 235,000 235,000 81600 SCRRA Capital C on tribution 1,150,000 1,150,000 85000 Commuter Assistance 1,391,920 1,391,920 86000 Special Projects 86100 Re gional Transpo rtation 2,862,900 19,777,086 768,025 7,671,145 31,079,157 86200 LTF Disbu rseme nts 327,295 327,295 86300 STA Disbursemen ts 2,746,194 2,746,194 86400 R egional Arterial 7,225,624 669,526 7,895,150 87000 Project Maintenan ce 225,750 371,544597,294 87100 Pro ject Operation s 742,537 1,010 362,580 87200 Project Towing 679,628 1, ,127 57799,, 628 Total Pro jects 5,593,482 680,638 734,124 34,661,112 768,025 18,263,769 2,746,194 669,526 3,362,225 2,037,283 69,516,379 Professional Costs: 65100 General Legal Services 173,000 2,940 5,560 143,500 325,000 65200 Special Le gal Service s 25,000 25,000 65300 Financia l Services 97,500 97,500 65400 Audit Serv ices 211,150 2,832 6,018 70,000 290,000 65500 Other Profess ion al Services 451,638 2,841 67,941 127,500 649,920 Total Pro fessional Cos ts 958,288 8,613 79,519 341,000 1,387,420 C apital Outlay 90000 Ca pital Outlay -Equipme nt 129,438 31,144 5,618 166,200 Co ntingen cy 180,000 15,000 27,000 1,165,000 115,000 1,502,000 Total Expenditures 8,932,929 806,789 997,973 36,623,762 768,025 18,263,769 2,746,194 669,526 3,477,225 2,037,283 75,323,474 Salar y shown includes allocated support staff -25=May-9N 09:00:29 PM REVENUE S: ' Riverside coo/irk Transporiatr`on Commi ssion BUDGET SUMMA RY FO R FISCAL YEAR 1997-98 - BY FUND 1998-1999 Pr oposed B udget SPE CIAL REVE NUE FU NDS > <------CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS----- > Freeway " State Western Western C ounty Ge neral Service Wester n Palo Coachella Tra nsit C oachella County C ommerci al Grand Fund Patrol SAFE County _ Verde V alley Assista nce Valley C onstruction Pap er T otal Sa les Tax Revenues--Meas ureA 1 ,771,875 46,317,716 768,025 16,767,384 65,625,000 Other Sales Tax Revenues 5,644,500 5,644,500 Federal, State,Loc a!& Other G ovemments Re venues 1,150,000 1,040,000 8,136,920 2,360,478 300,000 12,987,398 Other Revenues 360,000 636,300 1,444,234 479,020 74,418 2,993,972 Interest In come 39,000 5,750 114,560 675,511 284,714 215,240 529,640 1,023,460 50,000 2,937,875 TO TAL REVENUES: 8,965,375 642,050 1,154,560 55,130,147 768,025 18,496,332 2,575,718 529,640 1,502,480 424,418 90,188,745 EXPEND ITU RES: MANAGEMEN T SERVI CES: Administration 1,746,684 21,597 45,895 1,138,212 Finance and Accounting 916,614 7,874 16,732 619,252 TOTAL MAN AG EM ENT SERVICES 2,663,298 29,471 62,626 1,757,463 N ON M EASURE A PR OGRAMS Transportation Planning and Programming 139,848, 1,767 3,754 2,746,194 3,861,299 Rail Transportation P rogram 36010 455 967 Motorist Assistance 54,646 4,163,053 753,125 888,812 Properly M anage ment 63,324 800 1,682,101 1,700 TOTAL NO N MEASUEAPR OGRAMS 293,828 756,146 895,232 2,746,194 276,539 9,982,992 Co ntingen cy 30,000 15,000 27,000 1,165,000 115,000 1,352,000 Total Expenditures 3,575,698 806,789 997,973 36,623,762 768,025 18,263,769 2,746,194 669,526 3,477,225 2,037,283 76,173,474 Excess(Deficien cy)ofRevenu es O ver Expenditu res 5,389,677 (164,739) 156,587 18,506,385 232,562 (170,476) (139,886) (1,974,745) (1,612,865) 20,222,501 Other Financ in g Sources(Uses): M EASURE A PROGR AMS: Protect Development and Impleme ntation 509,946 5,178 11,004 32,590;461 768,025 16,461,208 669,526 3,362,225 2,037,283 57,358,430 Special Transportation P rogra ms 78,626 993 2,111 2,868,300 1,802,561 4,722,689 TOTAL MEASURE A PR OGRAM 588,572 6,171 13,114 35,458,762 768,025 18,263,769 669,526 3,362,225 2,037,283 62,081,019 Opbr Ling Tran sfe rs 159,075 (159,075) (20,940,117) (7,440,719) (529,640) (1,270,985) (197,452) (30,378,913, N et Fin ancing Sou rces(Use s) 159,075 (159,075) (20,940,117) (7,440,719) (529,640) (1,270,985) (197,452) (30,378,913 Excess(Deficlency)of Rev enu es Over Ex pen ditures 5,389,677 (5,664) (2,488) (2,433,732) (7,208,157) (170,476) (669,526) (3,245,730) (1,810,317) (10,156,412 Prior Year Fund Balance 464,181 100,017 2,047,290 18,145,546 9,004,112 2,194,832 8,581,951 33,114,758 5,426,262 79,078,949 En din a Fu ndpalan ce 5,853', 858 94.353 2.044.802 15,711, 814 1.795 955 2.024,356 7.912,425 29,869,028 3 .61$945 68,921.537 PERSONNEL 000081 Personnel salary and fringe benefits -The Commission provides a comprehensive package of benefits to all permanent, salaried employees (Note: all current employees are classified as permanent and salaried). That package includes ► Health, dental, vision and life insurance ► Short and long term disability ► Workers compensation ► Tuition assistance ► Sick and vacation leave ► Retirement benefits in the form of participation in the California Public Employees Retirement System(PERS) ► Deferred compensation The budget assumes a number of staffing and benefit 'changes. Personnel salary and benefits increases 20.4% attributable to the following factors: Personnel Salary & Fringes Salary 1 66.9% 51.239.133 Staffing changes $214,601 Benefit adjustments 35,023 Health Plan increase 5,908 PERS increase 47,216 Miscellaneous(e.g, step increases) 11,648 $314,396 The staff changes are described below: ► Reestablishment of Staff Analyst I project support position ► Full year for Accounting Supervisor ► Legislative staff at half cost(shared w/ SANBAG) ► Program Manager for SB45 implementation Retirement 20.1% 5972A79 Other Fringes 5.6% $105.345 Although authorized staff has increased from twenty to twenty-two, the net increase in staff is a .5 full time equivalent, assuming half a staff reduction for the shared legislative position and the new SB45 Program Manager. Measure A administrative salary and benefits are budgeted at $499,201, equal to .0076% of Measure A sales tax revenues. 000062 Commission Personnel: Budget Summary for FY 1998-99 Expenditures by Full Time Equivalent Personnel Salary & Fringe Exec Dir Dep Exec Director Asst Dir Planning & Prog Asst Dir Intergov Chief Fin Officer Ofc Mgr/ Clerk of Comm Program Mgrs fl Program Mgrs I Property Agent Accounting Supervisor Staff Analyst II Staff Analyst I Comm & Program Mgmt Total Equivalent Personnel Project Fin/ Deal & Admire Accting Imp 1.37 1.00 .94 .31 .74 Transp Plan/ Prog .69 Rail Transp .50 .18 .42 .88 1.37 Motorist Assist .90 Prop Grand M i t Total .50 1.00 1.00 .60 1.00 .91 .49 .30 7.00 4.13 2.83 2.22 2.66 4.13 2.74 1.48 .91 21.1 000063 Budget Summary for FY 98-99 Expenditures by Position Personnel Salary & Fringe Exec Dir Admin Fin/ Accting Project t}e�` & Imp Special Transp Transp Plan/ Prog Rail Transp Motorist Assist Prop Mgmt Grand Total 181,459 181,459 Dep Exec Director 159,895 159,895 Asst Dir Planning & Prog Asst Dir Intergov Chief Fin Officer 132,034 11,128 143,162 80,640 80,640 128,167 15,908 144,075 Ofc Mgr( Clerk of Comm 140,943 140,943 Program (3) Mgrs II 34,071 52,535 146,839 20,595 112,536 366,576 Program Mgrs I 77,231 119,081 196,312 Property Agent 48,970 48,970 97,940 Staff Analyst II 21,011 75,848 96,859 Staff Analyst I 63,542 47,597 31,668 142,807 Accounting Supervisor 90,082 90,082 Comm & Program Mgmt Support Total Equivalent Personnel 12,828 12,828 437.113 218.249 246,269 210,381 353,305 193,174 130,209 64,878 1.853.578 (Note: The above salaries include allocated salaries & fringe benefits of support staff.) 000064 DEPARTMENT BUDGETS 030065 x-naay-sa 09:19:06 PM versrae [ aunty Transportation +Commission BUDGET SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT 1998-1999 Proposed Budget 1995/96 Actuals 1996/97 1997/98 Actuals Budget 1997/98 Revised Budget 1998/99 Proposed Budget Dollar Percent I Changes Change REVENUES: Sales Tax Revenues —Measure A Sales Tax Revenue —Non Meas A STA Transit Allocation SAFE User Fees Reimbursements Other Revenue Investment Income I TOTAL REVENUES: EXPENDITURES: MANAGEMENT SERVI CES: Administration Finance and Accounting TOTAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE MEASURE A PROGRAMS: Capital Projects Development an Special Transportation Programs TOTAL MEASURE A PROGRAM NON MEASURE A PROGRAMS Transport Planning and Program Rail Programs Motorist Assistance Property Management TOTAL NON MEAS A PROGRAMS Contingency Total Expenditures Excess(Deficiency)of Revenues Other Financing Sources(Uses): Operating Transfers Debt Proceeds Net Financing Sources(Uses) Excess(Deficiency )of Revenues Prior Year Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 55,413,939 56,362,649 59,541,000 60,782,600 65,625,000 4,842,400 8.0% 5,700,800 6,623,685 5,471,794 5,230,000 5,644,500 414,500 7.9% 1,670,743 1,812,380 1,987,013 1,996,294 2,360,478 364,184 18.2% 1,031,117 1,033, 019 1,071,000 1,040,000 1,040,000 7,754,264 5,470,049 13,105,644 7,069,210 9,586,920 2,517,710 35.6% 2,727,645 2,724,753 3,675,018 2,207,497 2,993,972 786,475 35.6% 5,781,632 6,030,160 2,479,193 2,798,178 2,937,875 139,697 5.0% 80,080,140 80,056,695 87,330,662 81,123,779 90,188,745 9,064,966 11.2% 855,264 615,999 1,471,263 1,058,986 621,716 1,680,702 1,096,071 627,546 1,723,617 1,290,840 694,997 1,985,837 1,136, 551 618,424 1,754,975 (154,289) -12.0% (76,573) -11.0% (230,862) -11.6% 68,614,182 68,377,425 58,808,996 68,225,509 57,338,430 (10,887,079) -16.0% 3,938,494 3,894,121 6,726,170 5,779,710 4,742,589 (1,037,121) -17.9% 72,552,676 72,271,546 65,535,166 74,005,219 62,081,019 (11,924,200) -16.1% 1,744,789 2,049,180 2,843,196 Z984,209 3,872,444 3,096,770 3,598,839 3,950,692 3,942,045 4,153,679 1,573,023 1,739,932 1,855,423 1,891,224 1,682,605 180,939 215,011 288,418 272,154 276,749 6,595,521 7,602,962 8,937,729 9,089,632 9,985,477 1,475,000 1,826,000 1,502,000 80,619,460 81,555,210 77,671,512 86,906,688 75,323,471 888,235 211,634 (208, 619) 4,595 895,845 29.8% 5.4% -11.0% 1.7% 9.9% (324,000) -17.7% (11,583,217) -13.3% (539,320) (1,498,515) 9,659,150 (5,782,909) 14,865,274 20,648,183 -357.1% (24,278,512) (25,242;712) (75,089,486) 14,000,000 55,000,000 (10,278,512) (25,242,712) (20,089,486) (10,817,832) (26,741,227) (10,430,336) 125,196,281 126,670,423 68,059,607 114,378,449 99,929,196 57,629,271 (74,169,354) 61,579,047 (12,590,307) (18,373,216) 99,929,196 81,555,980 (30,378,913) (30,378,913) (15, 513, 639) 81,381,561 65,867,9 43,790,441 -59.0% (61,579,047) -100.0% (17,788,606) 141.3% 2,859,577 -15.6% (18,547,635) -18.6% 22 (15,688,058) -19.2% 003066 ADMINISTRATION Mission "Administer the activities of the agency with minimal staff complemented with consultants so as to effectuate sound transportation policies and legislation compatible with air quality standards and accomplish the delivery of expeditious and cost effective transportation programs and projects consistent with Commission direction". 000067 ADMINISTRATION Department Overview The program for administration includes executive management, office management, community relations, and legislative and intergovernmental coordination. The Executive Director is responsible for the day to day operation of the Commission. The Clerk of the Board performs a number of administrative responsibilities to assist the Executive Director including functional operation of 'Commission headquarters, agenda preparation, records management and archiving, human resources administration, and contract processing. The Commission must interact with a number of local, regional, and state agencies on a continual basis. Relationships with other agencies is key to a coordinated approach to transportation issues including congestion relief and air quality attainment. Department Goals: Executive Management Develop a program which promotes high visibility of the Commission within the community especially as it relates to significant accomplishments achieved through MeasureA or otherfunding sources controlled or administered by the Commission. Objective: Annually produce an insert in all major County newspapers that informs the public on the Commission 's programs including Measure A progress. Cultivate and maintain communications with other agencies to heighten their awareness of the role of the Commission and its impact on those agencies and their constituents and endeavor to ensure that the goals and objectives of the Commission's program are widely known. Objective. Assign designated staff members to attend other agency meetings requiring written communication on points of discussion and dissemination ofthatmaterial to all professional staff • While maintaining a small staff, promote its effectiveness by improving and developing staffskills, using state of the art working tools , and fostering an environment that encourages and rewards individual and team effort. Objective: Continue to maintain a well documented employee appraisal process which provides clear, understandable, and measurable performance criteria for all employees. 030063 Objective: Provide incentive awards to employees who demonstrate uric/ team effort with considerationfor individual achievement consistent with Commission goals and objectives Objective: Encourage participation in seminars and classes related to Commission activities and which complement job responsibilities. • Develop the framework for a RCTC culture that encourages productivity, regular and open communication among staff, and which promotes the mutual achievement of individual and organizational goals and objectives. Objective: Quarterly review organizational results as measured against planned objectives to determine progress in meeting those objectives and to determine actions steps needed, if any, where little or no progress has been made. Office Administration • Communicate Commission activities to all affected parties including the public, policy makers and staff members. Objective; Coordinate press releases to the local media announcing significant achievements and providing information on Commission actions and activities. Objective: Expand, maintain, and regularly update information on Commission activities on RCTC's web site. Objective: Provide a comprehensive annual report (and more often as time permits) to County elected officials on the Commission 's progress to date, budget and program highlights, and how Commission actions have affected the entire County. Ensure that Commission personnel policies and procedures are current and that administration of those procedures is consistent with Commission direction and Executive Director instructions. Provide efficient and effective supportfunction for Commission administrative activities and clerical responsibilities f 030069 intiitifrig 1�:oJicahij:3 cl,kl!1 Ui!rtC7/UM.G U/(U ' • Schedule meetings, and maintain and process Commission agendas, related documentation, and other records in a timely and orderly manner. Objective: Coordinate agenda processing with staff to ensure items are complete (i. e., back up documentation) and that handouts due to errors are minimized ent by tffc.ie,it1v retricv; ig, ,Tccclud Objective: Continue to ensure that all scheduled meetings comply with applicable laws and Brown Act requirements. Objective: Oversee set up and training of staff in the operation of video conferencing equipment for Commissioners and staff to participate in meetings from remote locations. Objective: Plan and carry out arrangements for special meetings/events such as meetings of the California Transportation Commission and Statewide Intercity Rail Committee and the Transportation Fair. • Ensure that Commission policy direction is received and documented prior to initiating or implementing specific action plans. Objective: After each Commission meeting, provide summary of recommendations to Executive Director and staff in order to determine the appropriate process for execution of each recommendation. Objective: Schedule annual presentations to staff regarding Commission policies on harassment and drug/alcohol-free workplace. Objective: Work with Executive Director and Department Heads to ensure appropriate recruitment of vacant and new staff positions. 000070 Legislative • Support enhancements in transportation revenues and funding sources which improve the County's ability to implement its transportation plans. Objective: Work with California Transportation Commission and Regional Transportation Planning Agencies to protect and enhance project funding for Riverside County through influencing policy decisions. Maximize flexibility in the use of existing transportation revenues by supporting legislation to protect and increase current funding levels, insure an equitable distribution of available resources, streamline administrative procedures to reduce costs and time of project development and accelerate the allocation and use of existing resources. Objective Coordinate legislative activities of federal and state legislative consultants. Obtain monthly reports on activities performed and copies of legislation and provide to Commission. Objective: Work with board members to establish policy positions, draft legislation, and take positions on pending legislation. Objective: Support legislative efforts, in coordination with Rail Program Manager, to enhance safety and reliability of commuter rail infrastructure and operations. Take appropriate steps to meet state and federal clean air standards, but ensure the practical validity of regulatory requirements in achieving air quality conformity. Effectively represent the Commission to the state and federal legislatures, state transportation commission and other agencies in funding, programming and policy matters. Objective: Maintain contact and good working relationship with state and federal lawmakers and their staffs. Regularly meet and communicate with them to keep them abreast of County transportation issues, policy positions, and project priorities. Staffing Summary: 97/98 98/99 Staff Position 95/96 Actuals 96/97 Actuals Revised Proposed Budget Budget Executive Director .94 .91 .94 1.00 Asst Dir- Planning/Programming .09 .05 .09 .00 Asst Dir-Legislative 1.00 .66 .61 .50 Programs Program Managers (3) .31 .03 .26 .26 Ofc Mgr/Clerk of the 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Board Allocated support staff 1.03 1.40 1.06 1.37 Assigned Full Time 4.37 4.05 3.96 4.13 Equivalent 000071 Performance/Workload indicators: Staff training hours N/A 720 Number of marketing events 2 2 2 Press releases N/A N/A 10 Chairperson review N/A N/A semi-annual Documents archived 10,269 9,135 9,650 Annual report newspaper circulation * 231,854 227,921 229,839 (* Based on Paid Subscriptions only) Legislative: Legislation introduced. 4 6 2 Favorable laws enacted 6 6 1 Unfavorable laws blocked 2 3 3 Intergovernmental meetings 85 97 98 Projects or programs funded through budgetary processes. 2 3 2 Volume of policies, guidelines and admin procedures revisions sought to improve programming and funding opportunities for the Commission. 5 6 6 030072 Department Budget Discussion The Executive Director oversees all day to day activities of the Commission and is responsible for policy execution as promulgated by the Board of Commissioners. The Clerk of the Board, under the direction of the Executive Director, ensures that agendas are completed consistent with legal and statutory requirements and are processed and mailed timely, that conflict of interests code requirements are met, timely processing of approved contracts and agreements, coordinates the scheduling of the Commission meetings including sub -committees, and assists the commissioners with non -policy related matters. This year, the Commission has, in place, its home page to provide another option for public and private agencies and Riverside County residents to be familiarized with Commission activities. The Clerk of the Board conducts office and personnel functions including Commission and staff secretarial support, and document control and records retention. This position also plays a significant role in community outreach and the coordination of special events and information dissemination. Staffing costs will total $355,120 along with an overhead allocation of $119,257. Supporting consultants and services of are budgeted at $224,139 including legal fees of $85,000. Intergovernmental Programs The Commission must continually stay abreast of developments at both the federal and state level that would impact the Commission and its programs. There is an interdependency that of necessity exists among the many local jurisdictions and agencies within the county and the state which requires close communication and coordination. That interdependency is closely related to transportation program funding, a long standing and key function of the Commission. The Commission will be experimenting with a new arrangement in the 1998/99 fiscal year. Recognizing that the Inland Empire(consisting of Riverside and San Bernardino counties) has a multitude of commonly shared transportation concerns, the Commission has agreed to jointly employ with the San Bernardino Associated Governments(SANBAG) a staff member to handled legislative affairs. It is anticipated that this staff member will actually be employed directly by SANBAG which will then contract with the Commission to provide legislative services. The Assistant Director of Intergovernmental Affairs works with the Legislative Committee to develop the legislative program. The position maintains close contacts with the Commission's legislative consultants in Sacramento and Washington D.C. The total amount budgeted for legislative consultants is $95,220. Staffing costs and overhead allocation amount to $80,334 and $22,000, respectively. uju07;3 Administrative Overhead Administrative Overhead -Administrative overhead(exclusive of capital outlay) increases by 6.7% due to the support costs associated with an expanded board. Once you include capital outlay, overhead has actually decreased by 2%. Overhead costs are allocated to the various departments based on the level of direct staff (exclusive of indirect staff defined as all clerical support) hours assigned to the department. The assigned amounts for administrative support costs are shown in the individual department budgets. Overhead is assigned to the Commission' s three major funding sources -Measure A, TDA, and Motorist Assistance based on management's budgetary estimates currently set at 76%, 18%, and 6%, respectively. ADMBNJSTRATIVE SLPPORT 1998-1999 Proposed Budget 1997/98 1998/99 1995/96 1996/97 1997/98 Revised Proposed Dollar Percent Actuals Actuals Budget Budget Budget Changes Change SERVICES A 73000 Office Lease 124,124 202,401 208,830 220,000 220,000 73100 Office Expenses 134,180 178,932 205,731 191,600 175,650 (15,950) -8.3% 73200 Communications 47,580 51,206 46,673 61,230 61,230 0 0.0% 73300 EquipmentMaintenanc 19,295 29,175 33,844 34,000 32,500 (1,500) -4.4% 73400 Insurance 77,126 72,941 83,835 83,835 83,835 73500 Data Processing 32,657 21,707 37,260 31,000 18,900 (12,100) -39.0% 73600 Staff Related Expenses 70,703 83,472 98,325 84,800 130,080 45,280 53.4% 73700 Information/Publicity 108,293 94,723 151,410 135,000 175,700 40,700 30.1% Total Services and Sup 613,958 734,557 865,908 841,465 897,895 56,430 6.7% FDCED ASSESTS 90000 Computer Equipment 37,166 34,962 55,000 85,000 85,000 90000 Office Furniture & Impr 11,955 2,025 5,000 5,000 5,000 90000 Office Equipment 97 2,278 5,000 5,000 5,000 90000 Communications Equipment 2,500 80,000 2,700 (77,300) -96.6% 90000 Other Improvements 2,335 5,000 5,000 5,000 Total Fixed Assets 49,218 41,600 72,500 180,000 102,700 (77,300) -42.9% TOTAL ALLOCATED OVERHEAD 663,176 776,157 938,408 1,021,465 1,000,595 (20,870) -2.0% PERSONNEL SALARY & FRINGE Salaries and Fringes 544,203 533,952 529,532 576,769 652,874 76,105 13.2% Total Salaries and Frin 544,203 533,952 529,532 576,769 652,874 76,105 13.2% TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPO 1,207,379 1,310,109 1,467,940 1,598,234 1,653,469 55,235 3.5% OJOO74 Riverside County Transportation Commission ADMINISTRATION 1998-1999 Proposed Budget 1997/98 1998/99 1995/96 1996/97 1997/98 Revised Proposed Dollar Percent Actuals Actuals Budget Budget Budget Changes Change Personnei Salary w r-rrnge: Executive Director 146,327 160,083 165,208 216,833 180,770 (36,063) -16.6% Assistant Director -Planning 9,918 10,654 11,809 12,014 (12,014)-100.0% * Assistant Director --Legislative P 111,576 119,860 81,189 37,789 80,334 42,545 112.6% Program Managers ll 33,193 35,658 31,298 31,983 33,942 1,959 6.1% Clerk of the Commission 110,568 118,777 129,227 135,164 140,408 5,244 3.9% Total Personnel Salary & Fringe 411,582 445,032 418,731 433,783 435,454 1,671 0.4% 73000 Office Lease 124,124 202,401 208,830 220,000 220,000 OperationslOverhead(73100 thr 86,170 152,590 115,590 109,330 119,257 9,927 9.1% Professional Costs: 65100 General Legal Services 92,070 95,316 85,000 135,000 85,000 (50,000) -37.0% 65500 Other Professional Ser 92,100 122,047 195,220 195,220 139,139 (56,081) -28.7% Total Professional Cost 184,170 217,363 280,220 330,220 224,139 (106,081) -32.1% Capital Outlay 90000 Capital Outlay-Equipm 49,218 41,600 72,700 180,000 137,700 (42,300) -23.5% Total Administration 855,264 1,058,986 1,096,071 1,273,333 1,136,551 (136,782) -10.7% Salary for Asst Dir-Leg. in previous years was divided between Admin. and Trans. Planning. The 99 budget allocates all time to Admin. ' Salaries shown include allocated support staff 03007;i FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING Mission "Seek financing alternatives that complement the Commission' strategic direction. Safeguard the Commission's assets by maintaining strong and prudent fiscal controls in investing, accounting, budgeting and financial reporting including ongoing disclosure to all interest parties" 030076 FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING Department Overview Finance and Accounting activities include investing the Commission's cash resources, planning and directing financings, and subsequent maintenance of legal and regulatory requirements. Fiscal accountability involves receiving all funds due the Commission and payment of all Commission obligations, general ledger accounting, regular reporting of the Commission fiscal results, budget preparation and monitoring. Other responsibilities include equipment and office supplies procurement, and the preparation and issuance of purchase orders as required. A portion of the Commission's resources are allocated to assure financial stability and fiscal accountability. Adequate cash flow must be maintained while at the same time prudently investing idle funds. Borrowing needs are carefully planned using both short and long term debt. Once debt is issued there are ongoing responsibilities including interaction with financial advisors, bankers, bond insurance companies, and rating agencies, and regular and consistent information disclosure to investors. Fiscal accountability requires coordination of budget planning and close budget monitoring, and accurate and timely accounting for all funding sources including compliance with all applicable laws and regulations governing those funds. Accounting encompasses cash receipt and disbursement functions, maintenance of the general ledger including project cost accounting, retention of and coordination with independent auditors, payroll processing, and quarterly and annual financial reporting. Safeguarding and protecting the Commission's assets is appropriately a function of fiscal accountability. For that reason, the Finance and Accounting Department oversees property management activities and administers the purchasing and procurement of Commission personal property assets. Department Goals and Objectives: • Protect the Commission's cash resources by regular monitoring of investment practices to ensure consistency with established investment policy. Objective: Achieve a rate of return at least equal to the County of Riverside Treasury pool rate. Objective: Strive to maintain arbitrage yield on debt reserve funds and achieve at least the same yield on all debt service funds. 000077 Manage the Commission's outstanding debt ensuring compliance with applicable laws and regulations and continued investor awareness and receptivity to the Commission 's program. Objective: Ensure the completion of arbitrage rebate calculation and refund to the U.S. Treasury(ifneeded) no later than the deadline required by U.S. Treasury regulations. Objective. Annual update and review of program with rating agencies to occur no later than November 1998. Objective: Provide all required disclosures per the Commission's Continuing Disclosure Agreement no later than December 31, 1998. Ensure the Commission complies with Measure A laws and regulations as they relate to annual financial and compliance audits as well as a close cooperation and coordination with independent auditors. Objective: Minimize the number of substantive RCTC management letter comments directly and solely applicable to accounting and requiring corrective action(exclusive of those applicable to other jurisdictions). Maintain budgetary control through regular monitoring of results and requiring accountability from departments for budget deviations. Objective: Obtain GFOA Distinguished Budget Award for the 98/99 budget and strive for at least one Outstanding category. Objective: Provide quarterly notification to department heads on budget performance, and work with department managers to explain and resolve unfavorable budget variances. Objective: Work closely with project staff to develop Strategic Plan process. Objective. Actively work with applicable management staff to complete a countywide Strategic Plan by June 30, 1999. Assure fiscal accountability for Measure A funds with general ledger accounting and financial reporting consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. Objective: Provide monthly activity reports to all program managers ensuring timely response to any noted errors and corrections. Objective: Obtain Certificate ofAchievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting from the GFOA. Objective: Obtain unqualified opinion on general purpose financial statements, Assist local governments with Measure A funding by providing timely allocation of funds for eligible projects and financing opportunities to the extent funding does not impact other programs and is financially feasible and prudent. 030078 Significant expenditure and staffing changes Accounting Supervisor has been moved from a contract position with Bechtel to a fulltime Commission employee. Auditing services have been reduced as prior year included substantial work on Measure A formula activities that are not anticipated in the 1999 budget. Additionally, it is assumed that some jurisdictions will elect to conduct their own audit. Staffing Summary: 97/98 98/99 Proposed Staff Position 95/96 Actuals 96/97 Actuals Revised Budget Budget Chief Financial Ofcr .89 .95 .89 .89 . Program Manager I .40 .14 .00 .00 Accounting Supervisor .00 .00 .00 1.00 Support Staff .40 .61 .33 .94 Assigned Full Time Equivalent 1.69 1.70 1.22 2.83 Performance/Workload indicators: Investment reporting to the Commission. Qtrly Qtrly Qtrly Qtrly Debt rating AI/A+ Al/A+ AI/A+ AI/A+ GFOA Certificate ofAchievement Awarded Awarded Expected Expected GFOA Budget award N/A Proficient Proficient Outstanding Audit adjustments 0 2 2 2 Invoices/checks processed 3,819 3,900 4,100 5,000 0000 7 f) Department Budget Discussion The position of Accounting Supervisor(previously a contract position) will assume greater responsibility for day to day general ledger functions and coordination of the annual audit. Responsibilities of other staff will be arranged along functional lines to improve efficiency and establish greater accountability for work performed. This realignment is critical as the department activity continues to experience growth both in the level and complexity of work performed. The past year the department has seen a 22% growth in the processing of invoices. Investment activities will receive greater attention to assure the Commission is maximizing its revenue potential from invested funds. Staff will continue to pursue prudent investment strategies and instruments that will provide strong principal protection while improving on the .Commission's investment return. Under single signature authority, staff has been using an investment advisor to assist with investment choices. The budget anticipates that will continue with an allocated amount of $28,000(assumes investment of $20,000,000 at an annual cost of fourteen basis points). During the course of the year staff will be issuing a Request for Proposal for investment advisory services. The Department has also been contracting with the Western Riverside Council of Governments. The budget assumes that will continue in the 1998/99 fiscal year based on discussions with WRCOG management. That will continue to present unique challenges to the department given the complexity of the accounting requirements. The Accounts Receivable function has been continually evolving at the Commission. WRCOG has extensive and critical billing requirements. This added impetus to the need to develop better billing procedures. At RCTC, the billing function has been bifurcated between accounting and project staff. The plan for 1999 will be to centralize all billing functions to assure timeliness of processing and receipt of billings. Department staffing costs(exclusive of property management) will total $217,421 with an overhead allocation of $46,003. Consultants and services include general legal fees of $12,500, bond counsel fees of $25,000 for debt maintenance issues, $97,500 for financial advisory services, and $220,000 for audit services(not including $70,000 budgeted in Project Development and Implementation for program audits). 030080 Riverside County ransportat►on ommission FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING 1998-1999 Proposed Budget 1997/98 1998/99 1995/96 1996/97 1997198 Revised Proposed Dollar Percent Actuals Actuals Budget Budget Budget Changes Change * Personnel Salary & Fringe: Chief FinancialOfficer 103,659 111,355 110,830 121,199 127,681 6,482 5.3% Program Manager ! 39,224 42,136 * Accounting Supervisor 21,785 89,740 67,955 311.9% * Total Personnel Salary & Fringe 142,883 153,491 110,830 142,984 217,421 74,437 52.1% 73000 Office Lease OperationslOverhead (73100 thr 33,241 52,627 44,591 42,174 46,003 3,829 9.1% Professional Costs: 65100 General Legal Services 17,975 5,633 15,000 15,000 12,500 (2,500) -16.7% 65200 Special Legal Services 14,295 49,697 50,000 50,000 25,000 (25,000) -50.0% 65300 Financial Services 104,649 74,864 122,500 122,500 97,500 (25,000) -20.4% 65400 Audit Services 302,956 285,404 334,625 324,625 220,000 (104,625) -32.2% Total Professional Cost 439,875 415,598 522,125 512,125 355,000 (157,125) -30.7% Total Measure A Project Financin 615,999 621,716 677,546 697,283 618,424 (78,859) -11.3% " The Revised 98 Budget only includes salary for three months. �` Salaries shown include allocated su oK staff 000081 CAPITAL PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND DELIVERY Mission "To keep the Commission's compact with the voters of Riverside County by accelerating the planning, programming, and implementation of projects and programs in the Measure A Transportation Improvement Plan to the extent that funds are available. To ensure that capital projects are environmentally acceptable, technically sound and effectively designed in a manner that is economical and cost effective". 000082 CAPITAL PROJECTS DEVELOPMENT AND DELIVERY Department Overview The Capital Project Development and Delivery Department is responsible for major highway and rail capital projects from initial Environmental study through preliminary engineering, final design, right of way acquisition and construction. Nearly 55% of the Commission's budget originates in this department managed by the Deputy Executive Director. The primary goal of the department is to accelerate delivery of the Measure A and STIP funded highway and rail capital improvement projects throughout the County of Riverside. Highway improvements include additional mixed flow and carpool lanes, more efficient interchanges through bridge •widening and traffic control measures such as ramp metering, and new interchanges for economic development. The Commission will continue its efforts to protect and purchase right of way for the identified highway improvements funds permit. Commuter Rail capital improvements include: the purchase of equipment; construction of pedestrian and other improvements at existing rail stations; and construction of track improvements. In addition to the projects constructed directly by the RCTC, this department provides the necessary coordination between the RCTC and Caltrans for the development of scope, cost, and project delivery schedules for major highway improvements funded by the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) through the SB 45 Process for which Caltrans is assigned responsibility for delivery and construction, and demonstration projects identified in the federal ISTEA Reauthorization Bill. Department Goals: Continue prudent rights of way protection and preservation activities for Measure A projects to control long range project costs and project feasibility. Objective: Purchase right of way to protect right-of-way required along Routes 74,79 and 60 for future projects if funding is available. Objective: Develop agreements with private property owners/ developers, where practical, to coordinate the design of Measure A funded highway improvements with improvements required for development approval. Build upon and strengthen the partnership with Caltrans toward timely delivery of identified Measure A and State Transportation Improvement Program(STIP) projects. Objective: Develop agreements with Caltrans, and the Federal Highways Administration (FHW,4) as may be required, to finalize project scoping and cost issues for the STIP, Istea II federal Demonstration Projects, and h leasure A funded highway projects on Routes 1-215, 91, and 60 in Riverside County. 0300S:3 Objective: Provide monthly contract status and cost schedule reports to the Commission and to Caltrans. In coordination with SANBAG and Caltrans District 08 provide the FHWA Regional Administrator and his key staff members, with a briefing on the overall Measure A and M Highway Programs, the status of various projects, and identify and discuss issues which need resolution in order to keep current projects on schedule To the extent permitted by law, pursue reasonable involvement of local firms and minority and women business enterprises in contract work. Objective: Maintain goal for a minimum 18.5% DBE participation in all federally funded contracts. Continue to review quarterly report on DBE participation levels. Provide effective communication of project progress to the Commission board members, Caltrans, and FHWA. • Develop a strategy with Caltrans District 08 which would allow the RCTC to move advance specific projects identified in Strategic Plan to take advantage of any unexpected state or federal funding which may come available through increased state/federal budget authorizations or potential loan programs to advance construction.. Objective: lf state legislation is passed allowing loans from the State Highway Account, work with Caltrans, the County of Riverside and the cities of Riverside County to complete preliminary and environmental studies for Measure A projects on Rtes 74, 60 and 79 as identified by the RCTC in order to take advantage of the loans and advance construction. Complete the construction of the highway projects identified in the FY 1998 - 99 Budget Objective: Construct Phase I Sound Walls along Rte 91 from Magnolia Ave to Mary Street; Construct Park -N-Ride Lot along Rte 60 in Moreno Valley; and complete Landscaping projects at the Yuma Interchange and Rte 91 Sound Wall Projects In coordination with the Rail Program manager, construct capital improvements at existing rail stations as identified in the FY 1998 - 99 Budget . Objective: Complete trackage and Southside Station improvements at Downtown Riverside Station, and administer core station and layover facility projects to support the Inland Empire Orange County line. Objective, Construct Pedestrian Overcrassings at the La Sierrs and West Corona Rail Stations. Objective: Install video surveillance equipment at the Downtown Riverside, La Sierra, West Corona, and Pedley Rail Stations with the control station at the Downtown Riverside Station. 000084 Objective: Begin making improvements to restore the Santa Fe Depot in the City of Riverside. Objective: Continue efforts to involve appropriate parties, including the adjacent communities and local jurisdictions in planning and development of additional rail stations. Assure public recognition of Measure A contributions toward local projects by requiring local agencies to use Measure A signs. Significant expenditure and staffing The reduction in project costs reflects the pace of activity for regional arterial construction expenditures through fiscal year 1997/98. Most of the Measure A funds available for the regional arterial program have been exhausted, and the 1998/99 assumes spending the remaining balances. The significant level of litigation required for property acquisitions needed for the Rte 79 improvements is essentially completed Proposed legal costs have been adjusted downward to reflect the decrease expected in costs related to appraisals, expert witness testimony, and other court costs which were necessary for the eminent domain negotiations and trials, and were expended through our agreement with Legal Counsel rather than through direct cost accounts of the Commission. Due to reduced levels ofBechtel project personnel, the level of support staff was reduced and reallocated to all Commission professional staff members. Staffing Summary: 97/98 98/99 Staff Position 95/96 Actuals 96/97 Actuals Revised Proposed Budget Budget Deputy Executive Director 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Program Manager 11 .43 .04 .15 .30 Staff Analyst ll .31 .00 .31 .18 Staff Analyst I .06 .00 .00 .00 Commission Support 2.55 .45 2.14 .74 Staff Assigned Full Time Equivalent 4.35 1.49 3.60 2.22 000085 Performance/Workload Indicators: Design or Construction Projects to be undertaken and/or completed: HIGHWAY PROJECTS: Route 91 Sound Walls Phase I, Magnolia to Mary - Complete Design and Construction. Operational improvements on Rte 111 in the cities of Cathedral City, Indio and Palm Desert - Continue to provide assistance to the cities to complete these projects. Yuma Interchange @ 1-15 - Complete Landscaping Project. Park -N -Ride Lot on Rte 60 - Complete Design and Construction Rte 74 "Safety Projects" - Purchase Right of Way. .Rte 74 from 1-15 to Wasson Canyon Road - Begin Design with developer funding. RAIL PROJECTS: South Side Platform and Pedestrian Improvements at Riverside Downtown Station - Complete Construction. Pedestrian Overcrossing at La Sierra Rail Station - Complete Design and Construction. Pedestrian Overcrossing at West Corona Rail Station - Complete Design and Construction. Video Security Surveillance System at Downtown Riverside, La Sierra, West Corona, and Pedley Rail Station - , Complete Design and Installation. Santa Fe Depot Reconstruction - Complete security and clean up work, and begin and restoration work. ISTEA II Demonstration Projects - Determine appropriate roles for Caltrans, the cities, the county, the transit operators, and the RCTC to see that specific highway and transit projects identified in the federal ISTEA Reauthorization Legislation are complete as soon as possible once funding becomes available. MEASURE A STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE: Measure A Strategic Plan - Update the Measure A Strategic Plan to reflect: revised state/federal STIP and Measure A revenue projection through the year 2008 for each area of the County based on formulas approved by the Commission; and specific projects, their priorities, and funding sources for each year of the Strategic Plan period. Department Budget Discussion State and federal revenues available through the STIP have caught up with previous projections in 1998 after four years of no programming for new projects. The SB 45 STIP process which placed more authority with the RCTC, and the formula adopted by the RCTC, has resulted in an increased number 030086 and type of projects proposed to the CTC for funding. The federal ISTEA Reauthorization Bill is expected to provide funding for a significant number of new highway and transit "demonstration projects" throughout the county. The 2000 STIP is expected to provide Riverside County additional funding for programming new projects. Legislation is being proposed which would allow the RCTC to borrow funds from the State Highway Account to advance construction of projects identified in the Measure A Strategic Plan. No significant Measure A revenues for new construction of highway or rail projects will be available for the next 2 - 3 years. The role of this Department is at crossroads. The construction projects identified in the Budget and funded by Measure A or rail funds requires the continued support of our Bechtel Program Management Team which include: the program manager; project engineers, construction engineers; inspectors and support staff through this next fiscal year Unless new projects for design and/ or construction directly by the RCTC are identified and funded next year, there will be a reduction of the Bechtel staff throughout the year. Measure A Highway projects will continue to be made ready and constructed. However, since the funding source for the major projects over the next several years is changing from Measure A revenue to state and federal gas tax revenues, the RCTC will continue to be responsible for programming funds and scheduling project development and construction, responsibility for actual project development, design right of way, and construction will be shifted from the RCTC and its consultants to Caltrans. The agencies will be responsible for project development, engineering, right of way and construction work for the highway related "demonstration projects" 4expected from the ISTEA Reauthorization has currently not defined. Under SB 45, the RCTC became the agency responsible to the CTC for STIP fund programming and project delivery, and, to our federal legislators for "demonstration project" delivery on time and within budget. Caltrans is attempting to staff up in order to be able to deliver the STIP projects. The Commission has already agreed to provide some assistance to them using our Bechtel consultants to assist them in completing the Draft EIS for the 60/91/1-215 Interchange and I-215 improvements to the 60/1-215 East Junction. It is unclear at this point if Caltrans will be able to staff up in order to meet the STIP deadlines and, if not, how the RCTC might be able to provide additional support, either through the use of consultants, or by hiring its own project development and design staff to supplement the Caltrans staff. The list of projects below identifies the improvements carried over from the 1996 STIP, new projects programmed in the 1998 STIP; and demonstration projects which have been identified for possible funding in the federal ISTEA Reauthorization legislation which are not included in the Commission's budget: STIP FUNDED PROJECTS: RTE 60 Valley Way to University Ave * Complete seismic retrofit on all bridges and widening of the freeway overpasses to provide for mixed flow and HOV lanes from Valley Way to the 60/91/I-215 Interchange and HOV lanes from the 60/91/1-215 Interchange to University Ave 030087 * Begin construction of the new mixed flow and HOV lanes in the freeway median. RTE 86 Avenue 58 to Avenue 82 * Complete Right of Way Acquisition and begin construction of Phase III of the Expressway from Avenue 66 to Avenue 82. I-215 60/91/1-215 Interchange to 60/1-215 East Junction * Complete and circulate the Draft EIS for comments by federal, state, and local agencies, and, program funding for design, right of way, and construction for a project to provide: two direct connectors at the 60/91/1-215 Interchange; HOV lanes and a truck climbing lane from University Ave to the 60/1-215 East Junction; a truck bypass at the 60/I-215 East Junction; new interchanges at Spruce Street on Rte 91, and new interchanges at Martin Luther King and Box Springs Blvd on I-215. I-10 Ramon Road Interchange * Programmed funds for widening the interchange. Various Signal Synchronization Project * Programmed funds to synchronize Traffic Signals at various locations in the Coachella Valley. Transit Metrolink Bus Purchase * Programmed funds to purchase a bus to provide a Metrolink connection from the Coachella Valley to the Riverside Downtown Rail Station. POTENTIAL DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS: HIGHWAY PROJECTS: I-15 Construct new interchange at Galena Street and I-15 for Job Development. I-15 Construct Overcrossing at Overlook Drive and I-15 I-10 Interchange at unspecified location on I-10 Rte 71 Construct new on ramps at Rte 91 Rte 91 Widen Green River Road Interchange at Rte 91 Rte 60 Construct Nason Street Interchange at Rte 60 Rte 79 Realignment Environmental and Engineering work TRANSIT PROJECTS: PERRIS Bus Maintenance Facility SUNLINE Fuel Ce11 Bus Purchase HIGHWAY AND RAIL PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION Measure A Funded Projects -The major rail construction projects in the 1998/99 budget are: ❑ South side platform project at the Downtown Riverside Station. ❑ Pedestrian over crossings at the La Sierra and West Corona Stations. ❑ Video Surveillance System at all four Rail Stations. The major highway project construction project will be : ❑ Completion of the new HOV lanes between Valley Way and University Ave. This is the first of a series of major projects on I-215 in the City of Riverside. Other highway projects include ❑ Completion of Phase I of the SR 91 soundwalls between Magnolia and Mary Street, ❑ Operational improvements along Highway 111 in the Coachella Valley ❑ Landscaping of the Yuma Interchange. The preliminary engineering and environmental documents for the I-215 projects and the new Galena Interchange will be completed. (See the Projects Summary for a brief synopsis on each project included in the Commission's capital program for 19987/99). LOCAL STREETS & ROADS The Commission disburses funds for the Measure A local streets and roads. The budgeted amount is set by formula established in the Measure A Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). Local jurisdictions will receive $25,163,696 for local streets and roads maintenance, repair, and construction. Each jurisdiction's respective allocation is based on population and sales tax generated. 030089 A number of jurisdictions in the Western County have entered into loan agreements with the Commission for advance acceleration of their Measure A streets and roads allocations. The annual principal and interest payments for these loans are deducted by the Commission from each city's respective disbursements based on the terms of the loan agreements. The participating jurisdictions are the cities of Canyon Lake, Corona, Norco, Perris, San Jacinto, and Temecula. There are three cities in the Coachella Valley which do not participate in the Traffic Uniform Mitigation Fee Program (TUMF). The Measure A allocations of those three cities, Coachella, La Quinta, and Desert Hot Springs are remitted to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) in lieu of the TUMF. Total Measure A funding under the local streets and roads programs to be received by CVAG is $815,895. The Coachella Valley has a discretionary five percent of their sales tax revenues that may be allocated for either streets and roads or transit as determined by CVAG. For the 1997/98 fiscal year , CVAG has allocated that five percent to transit which has been reflected in the current budget. The local street and road money for the Palo Verde Valley Area is divided proportionately between the City of Blythe and the County of Riverside based on population and sales tax generated. WESTERN COUNTY AREA MEASURE A FUNDS Banning $395,968.17 Beaumont $174,467.07 Calimesa $105,655.34 Canyon Lakes $148,984.23 Corona $2,084,731.97 Hemet $983,102.48 Lake Elsinore $493,916.81 Moreno Valley $2,061,622.56 Murrieta $627,642.22 Norco $459,160.82 Perris $548,311.93 Riverside $4,523,159.96 San Jacinto $342,909.01 Temecula $1,047,132.82 Riverside County $4,530,309.67 000090 COACHELLA VALLEY AREA MEASURE A FUNDS Cathedral City _ $845,946.42 Coachella $0.00 Desert Hot Springs $0.00 Indian Wells $141,933.67 Indio $690,989.54 La Quints $0.00 Palm Springs $1,216,685.69 Palm Desert $1,503,380.06 Rancho Mirage $492,782.45 Riverside County $160,970.79 Coachella Valley Association of Governments $815,894.83 PALO VERDE VALLEY AREA MEASURE A FUNDS Blythe $622,700.28 Riverside County $145,355.79 0 0091 i'��477h,'R"'�w""'%.:.vM"iY �"CShY-0.iii+%+CPOttt:6 y , \ats+'-0P}'.Atl0.YwYi{.�i{{gppSCL:{ddA\:5•••• • Capital Projects Development and Delivery: Projects Summary Western County Projects: Route 60 - Pigeon Pass/Frederick Street Park and Ride Lot The City of Moreno Valley and Caltrans both requested that the construction of the Park and Ride Lot be completed. This is in support of RCTC congestion mitigation goals, and recognizes that a facility like this supports ride sharing, removes vehicle trips from home facilities at point of origin and supports trip reduction. Caltrans will be allocating $300,00 Minor A project funds for construction. The remaining amount will be supplied by the Commission. Cost: $325,000 Operating budget Impact: None - Caltrans will have maintenance responsibility Strategic Plan Impact: This project serves as mitigation for I-215 construction which is scheduled to commence in the year 2002. Route 60 - Soundwall construction in Moreno Valley Retrofitting of soundwalls along Route 60 in the Moreno Valley to provide sound mitigation. One third of the cost will be shared equally by the Commission and Caltrans. The remaining two thirds is the responsibility of Caltrans. Cost: Operating budget Impact: Strategic Plan Impact: $333,000 None - Caltrans will have maintenance responsibility The Strategic Plan includes 215/60 to Redlands Blvd. as an identified Measure A project. Soundwall retrofit is a part of that project. This is an acceleration of a portion of the entire construction project. Route 74 - Right of way acquisitions on Route 74 Retrofitting of soundwalls along Route 60 in the Moreno Valley to provide sound mitigation. One third of the cost will be shared equally by the Commission and Caltrans. The remaining two thirds is the responsibility of Caltrans. 030092 Cost: Operating budget Impact: Strategic Plan Impact: $4,100,000 None - Caltrans will have maintenance responsibility The Strategic Plan includes 215/60 to Redlands Blvd. as an identified Measure A project. Soundwall retrofit is a part of that project. This is an acceleration of a portion of the entire construction project. Route 79 - Minor maintenance and construction closeout Complete the engineering and construction of the right turn lane along Route 79. Additionally, there are wrap up costs for right of way acquisitions and eminent domain activities. Cost: Operating Budget Impact: Strategic Plan Impact: $ 40,000 (Right of Way and Support Services) $ 24,000 (Environmental Services) $100,000 (Right turn lane engineering and construction) There are no long term operational budget impacts. The Commission will for the first five years maintain vegetation control. The estimated annual cost is estimated not to exceed $10,000. After five years Caltrans will assume maintenance responsibility. The 97/98 budget includes Phase I of the soundwall construction. Phase II is not funded until the year 2000 in the Plan. The Strategic Route 91 - Soundwall construction These improvements provide required mitigation for the Route 91 HOV projects between Magnolia Ave. to Mary St. The purpose is to suppress the intensity of noise generated by freeway traffic. The Project will require the acquisition of temporary construction easements to provide access to construct these walls. Design is complete and the award for construction will be made just prior to the beginning of the fiscal year. Cost: $ 10,000 (Appraisals and Acquisition of Easements) $165, 000(Construction engineering) $3,063,112 (Construction and landsca in ) i 030003 Operating Budget Impact: The Commission will be responsible for plant establishment for landscaping for the first three years. The Commission will conrtact for these services and Costs have already been included in the cost of construction. The Caltrans will then assume maintenance responsibility. Strategic Plan Impact: The 97/98 budget includes Phase I of the soundwall construction. Phase II is not funded until the year 2000 in the Plan. The Strategic Route 91- Van Buren Interchange Design (Phase II) Phase II of this project is to complete design of the future interchange improvements on Van Buren Blvd. This phase of the project will improve the local circulation element, widen and lengthen that span of the bridge and improve ramp access. This interchange is currently the most congested interchange along Route 91. The first phase (Phase I) which added a new eastbound off ramp was completed in 1996. The construction of the interchange improvement which is identified as Phase III is currently scheduled in the year 2001. Cost: $750,000 Operating Budget Impact: Strategic Plan Impact. None. Caltrans and City of Riverside will share responsibilities for the maintenance, signaling and landscaping. One of the aspects of Measure A is construction of interchanges which improve local circulation or promote job development. Van Buren is one of the interchanges to relieve local congestion. Yuma Interchange Construction was completed and the grand opening held in fiscal 1998. Landscaping will be completed in the 1999 fiscal year Cost: $20,000 (Landscaping maintenance) $600,000 (Landscaping) 030094 Operating Budget Impact: Strategic Plan Impact: None. Once construction is completed, Cities of Norco and Corona along with Caltrans will share responsibilities for maintenance, signaling and landscaping. The Yuma interchange is listed in the Strategic Plan as a project to promote job development. The Strategic Plan allocated up to $5.5 million for design and construction. The final construction segment of that project was included in the 97/98 budget Route 215 Improvement Measure A funding has been programmed to provide Caltrans with technical assistance to develop an agreement between RCTC, Caltrans and the Federal Highways Administration that addresses the scope of improvements to be constructed along I-215, including the SR60/91/I-215 interchange and prepare a draft Environmental Impact Study (EIS) for I-215 projects. Scope of improvements on I-215 will include adding HOV lanes in each direction, truck by-pass lane and a truck climbing lane for traffic easement and improvements to various interchanges, as well as two direct connectors at the interchange. Cost: Operating Budget Impact: Strategic Plan Impact: $43,283 (Preliminary Engineering & Environmental) None. Only funding at this time is to complete the EIS report. This is shown in the Strategic Plan as primarily a STIP funded project. The Commission early on elected to move completion of this project along by assuming funding responsibility for engineering and design. Environmental clearance is expected in the 98/99 fiscal year. Route 111 The Commission and CVAG cooperatively programmed an initial $10 million using Measure A highway program funds to complete signal improvements and local intersection widening improvements along State Route 111. 030095 Cost: - Cathedral City $870,000 Date Palm Construction $130,000 Date Palm Right of Way - Palm Desert $454,000 San Pablo Avenue Construction $420,000 Portola Avenue Construction - Indio $1,061,000 Monroe St. to Rubidoux St. Construction $ 203,000 Monroe St. to Rubidoux Right of Way and Support $ 79,000 Final Design Operating Budget Impact: None - Caltrans will be responsible for maintenance Strategic Plan Impact The projects that are completed or will be completed as part of this initial amount are identified as Tier I in the Strategic Plan. Rail Projects: Riverside -Downtown Station A new south side passenger platform is being constructed at the Downtown Riverside Station. New track work will be required and the revenues to cover these cost will be reimbursed by Union Pacific railroad. The new platform is required to eliminate conflicts between freight and commuter rail traffic along the Santa Fe Main Line and to improve train schedule reliability along the Inland Empire to Orange County Line. Funding is programmed from State Rail Bond Program revenues allocated by the California Transportation Commission and passed through to RCTC by the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA). Cost. Operating Budget Impact: Strategic Plan Impact: $ 10,000 (Engineering) $3,346,300 (Construction) $144,000 for Landscape and surface maintenance, water/electric services and security guards costs during construction of the facility. These costs will increase once all construction is complete. The Strategic Plan assumes although the project has significantly increased in costs over what was anticipated in the Strategic Plan, no Measure A funds are budgeted and state funds are sufficient to cover the increased costs. 000096 Other Station Improvements To start preparation for engin crossings at the West Corona Cost: Operating Budget Impact: Strategic Plan Impact: eering plans for miscellaneous improvements for pedestrian and La Sierra rail stations. $2,500,000 (Construction) None Existing Tier I stations shown in the Strategic Plan require pedestrian improvements and additional trackage for freight and passenger rail. Pedley Station Improvements The Commission purchased the old Santa Fe Depot in Downtown Riverside from the City of Riverside for S85, 000 using available property management revenues. The plan was to use a portion of the building for Metrolink crew quarters and the remainder to develop for either rail educational purposes and/or joint development to generate rail operating revenues. Federal frrnding(with a small Commission match) has been designated as the source to cover the costs of rehabilitation. Cost: Operating Budget Impact: Strategic Plan Impact: $560,000 (Design and Construction) Not known at this time. Final usage will have to be determined before operational costs can be calculated. If jointly developed, any costs must be more than offset by revenues generated. Not included in the Strategic Plan. However, funding source was also not anticipated in the plan. These improvements are being entirely funded by Surface Transportation Program grant along with matching funds from available ro erty management revenues. 000097 San Jacinto Branchline Track Improvement The Track improvement study proposes $9.2 million for improvements of which $500,000 of federal and state funds is for grade crossings and drainage improvements. Cost: $535,000 (Construction) Operating Budget Impact: None Construction cost will be reimbursed by CMAQ funds. Strategic Plan Impact This is consistent with Commission's long term policy goals. While not specifically in the Strategic Plan, the planned improvements can also be used for commuter rail service on the San Jacinto Branch Line, currently an unfunded project in the Strategic Plan. Pedley Station Improvements To design and install a security surveillance system at the Pedley station. Cost: Operating Budget Impact: Strategic Plan Impact: $776,250 (Design and Construction) Not included in the Strategic Plan. However, funding source was also not anticipated in the plan. These improvements are being entirely funded by Federal Transit Administration Section 9 funding currently allocated for rail usage. 030098 Rfversrde County Transportatjon omm,ssron CAPITAL PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND DELIVERY 1998-1999 Proposed Budget 1995/96 1996/97 Actuals Actuals 'Personnel Salary & Fringe: Deputy Executive Director Program Manager II Staff Analyst 11 Staff Analyst I Commission Support Staff for Be Total Personnel Salary & Fringe OperationslOverhead (73100 thr Projects: • 81000 81100 81300 81400 81500 81600 86100 86400 Projects -General Highway & Rail Enginee Highway & Rail Constru Highway & Rail ROW Highway & Rail Special SCRRA Capital Contrib Regional Transportatio Regional Arterial Total Projects Professional Costs: 65100 65400 65500 General Legal Services Audit Services Other Professional Sery Total Professional Cost 128,328 43,187 24,688 4,110 90,670 1997198 1997/98 Revised Budget Budget 1998/99 Proposed Budget Dollar Percent Changes Change 137,858 46,393 26,522 4,416 97,402 148,448 18,371 21,810 149,139 18,473 19,735 159,895 52,535 21,011 81,703 10,590 12,828 10,756 7.2% 34,062 184.4% 1,276 6.5% 2,238 21.1% 290,983 312,591 270,332 197,937 246,269 48,332 24.4% 194,882 107,175 261,419 247,250 269,701 22,451 1,404,223 1,011,991' 1,284,900 2,101,713 1,833,900 1,913,874 1,651,449 2,448,268 1,473,566 1,027,533 15, 097, 514 11, 570, 939 16,386,821 12, 842, 930 14, 878, 525 1,948,960 6,182,269 91,000 2,091,414 4,568,656 53,126 174,793 94,220 376,100 1,377,400 1,234,386 1,214,900 1,214,900 1,150, 000 21,310,989 22,240,190 22,888,615 23,490,132 25,163,696 24,724,468 23,113,312 13,586,772 23,901,818 7,895,150 9.1% (267,813) -12.7% (446, 033) -30.3% 2,035,595 15.8% 2,477,242 118.4% (376,100) -100.0% (64,900) -5.3% 1,673,564 7.1% (16,006,668) -67.0% 67,830,554 67,179,329 57,995,496 67,492,573 56,517,460 (10,975,113) -16.3% 195,041 751,072 230,000 206,000 127,500 26,500 51,750 81,750 50,000 76,222 27,258 127,500 297,763 778,330 281,750 287,750 305,000 (78, 500) -38.1 % (31,750) -38.8% 127,500 17,250 6.0% Total Measure A Project Develop 68,614,182 68,377,425 58,808,997 68,225,510 57,338,430 (10,887,080) -16.0% * Salaries shown include allocated support staff 000099 SPECIAL TRANSPORTATION Mission "To maintain and enhance, as resources allow, transportation options for commuters, seniors and persons with disabilities through innovation and community interaction." 000100 SPECIAL TRANSPORTATION Department Overview Often characterized as the "soft" programs of Measure A, these programs provide a valuable service to the community. Use of alternate forms of transportation is encouraged and promoted through various technical assistance, incentive and educational programs offered to commuters and employers to reduce single occupant vehicle trips and improve air quality. Substantial support is furnished to social service and public transit agencies which serve special and unique needs of seniors and persons with disabilities. Department Goals: • Provide timely information to the public regarding Commission implemented projects and support public relations activities of Measure A funded programs by grant recipients. Objective: Produce and distribute public information materials as needed including press releases, fliers, brochures, marketing materials, and newspaper ads. Reduce congestion levels by changing commuter patterns to maximize capacity of existing infrastructure. Objective: Reduce single occupant vehicle trips through provision of commuter rideshare incentives, and educational prrtectrthat outreach, and employer rideshare technical assistance and services. • Provide leadership to influence maximization of funding resources, public and private, for rideshare programs and services within Riverside County. Objective: Monitor and affect rideshare regulatory requirements and funding allocations at the federal, state and regional levels through partcipation in allied organizations. Objective: Facilitate development of public/private partnerships in the funding and delivery of rideshare programs. 030101. • Provide staff resources to assist and support the coordination of rideshare programs in Riverside County, the region, and throughout the state. Objective: Regularly attend the Technical Advisory Committee of RTAC and its Rideshare subcommittee and other working groups to provide coordination and leadership at the regional level regarding rideshare issues. Objective: Provide assistance and input at various regional and state groups addressing rideshare issues(i.e., Caltrans 1(800)Commute, Southern California Rideshare Board, CALCOG TDM Technical Advisory Committee, SCAQMD Roundtable). • Provide Measure A Specialized Transit Funds and technical assistance to support services which will maintain and/or enhance mobility for seniors, persons with disabilities, and the truly needy. Objective: Complete a call for projects for Specialized Transit Grants. Objective: A1iuLate funds to grans , e giients Liu J Monitor performance of Specialized Grant recipients through analysis of their quarterly performance reports. throughottt-the year - Objective: Support social service capital acquisition which will improve mobility for seniors and persons with disabilities. Seek grant applications specifically for that purpose. Objective: Provide technical assistance and program support to agencies offering specialized transit programs to ensure the maximum benefit of funding for improved mobility for seniors, persons with disabilities, and the economically disadvantaged. • Continue to provide staff resources to assist and support the coordination of transit services, within the County and throughout the State. Objective: Regularly participate in meetings which focus on the coordination of transit services, such as: the Regional Transportation Agencies Coalition, the California Association for Coordinated Transportation, the Service Providers Association of Riverside County and the SunLine Access Committee. - seruc 0W3102 Significant Expenditure and Staffing Changes Commuter assistance program has increased by 9.5% as a result of the CMAQ grant to provide flow through funding for Southern California Rideshare. Staffing Summary: 97/98 98/99 Staff Position 95/96 Actuals 96/97 Actuals Revised Proposed Budget Budget Asst Dir-Planning/Programming .04 0 0 0 Program Manager 11 .70 .82 .69 .69 Program Manager II .42 .30 .42 .42 Staff Analyst .31 .26 0 .67 Support Staff .45 .59 .41 .88 Assigned Full Time Equivalent 1.92 1.97 1.52 2.66 Performance/Workload Indicators: Commuter Assistance 1. Number of one-way single occupant vehicle trips reduced as a result ofAdvantage Rideshare incentives. FY 95/96 FY 96/97 FY 97/98 FY 98/99 Actuals Estimated Proposed - Freeway: (commuters traveling to work 59,241.60 32,760 30,240 Outside the country) - Local: (commuter traveling to work inside 58,249.80 48,825 41,850 inside The country) 2. Number of Club Ride members: 1,901 2,300 2,500 3. Number of Club Ride business discount partnerhsips: 133 150 150 4. Provision of Employer Transportation Forums:' 14 7 8 5. Number of services provided by Inland Empire Commuter Services to support employer trip reduction efforts at worksites: - Survey/RideGuide Services: N/A 188 210 - Technical Assistance Services: N/A 180 85 - RideGuides Produced: N/A 16,000 15,000 000103 6. Number of events participated in by the Commuter Exchange: - Public Events 14 11 10 - Employer Worksites: 14 12 10 - Elementary Schools 3 36 40 7. Delivery of "Rideshare Connection" broadcast fax information bulletin to employers: N/A 8 18 8. Development and distribution of rideshare marketing campaigns for implementation by employers: Specialized Transit Number of specialized transit grants awarded. Amount of specialized transit grant funds disbursed for improved mobility. Number of one-way trips provided by Measure A funded non-profit transit operators. 1 3 3 97Actuals 98 Est. Actuals 99 Proposed 14 16 To be provided $1,281,490 $ 2,584,317 57,073 73,013 Number of one-way trips reimbursed through the Transportation Reimbursement and Information Project (TRIP) -Western County. 37,810 17,792 Staffing of Citizens' Advisory Committee/Social Service Transportation Advisory Council meetings. Monthly Monthly Monthly Number of transit tickets provided through the Transportation Access Program (TAP) 97,433 103,345 Department Budget Discussion The Commission has long demonstrated a strong commitment to assisting in the mobility of those with specialized transit needs. Through its Specialized Transit Program, the Commission has provided millions of dollars to public and non-profit transit operators to assist in the provision of special transit services to improve the mobility of seniors and persons with disabilities. Along with support of traditional dial -a -ride services, the Commission supports innovative programs which provide transit assistance in hard to serve rural areas or for riders having very special transit needs. In August 1997, the Commission approved funding changes to the Western County Measure A Specialized Transit Program for implementation in FY 1998/99. These changes were recommended in light of a review of the transit services that are provided with the provision of these funds. For over five years the Commission has provided operating grants to a number of non-profit agencies in the western county to assist in the provision of very specialized transit service. The riders, many frail elderly, have 0:30104 come to depend on these services which provide a higher level of assistance than can be provided by the public providers and/or operate in areas unserved by public transit. The Commission approved the discontinuation of a 50/50 funding split between public and non-profit operators in light of the need to continue support of the specialized transit services. "Off the top" funding to public operators is to be discontinued in FY 1998/99 and all operators, public and non -profits, will be considered for funding on a needs basis. Additionally, the Commission approved a two-year programming cycle for this next round of specialized transit grants. Approximately $2.5 million will be available for programming over the two years in the Western County. A call for projects is underway and allocations are scheduled to occur at the June 10, 1998 Commission meeting. In order to assure the availability of funds to support matching of Section 5310 federal capital grants, $100,000 per year will be budgeted on top of this amount. In the Coachella Valley, the Measure A Specialized Transit funds will be used by SunLine Transit Agency to help support the operation of the Sundial Service. Total funds budgeted for SunLine amount to $1,802,561, compared to $1,529,639 in FY 1997/98. In FY 1997/98 SunLine set aside $30,000 of the .Specialized Transit funds to support special programs in the Valley. They anticipate following that same course in FY 1998/99. In additional to funding grants of $3,052,561, the Commission will support these activities as follows: ❑ Salary and fringe benefits of $87,114 ❑ General legal costs of $3,500 D Overhead allocation of $21,419 Total program costs are budgeted at $3,164,594. Commuter Assistance Congestion and air quality are important elements affecting quality of life for individuals and communities within Riverside County. Given that the region can't build its way out of congestion, commuter's personal transportation choices become even more important in that they directly impact the efficiency of local roads and freeways and generation of pollution from automobiles. In response to this fact, the Commission remains committed to providing innovative, cost effective services, incentives and information to commuters and employers. With the passage of Measure A in 1988, on -going funding for a Commuter Assistance Program (Program) was put in place. The Program provides a three pronged approach offering: 1) incentives to first time and long term ridesharers; 2) rideshare services and tools to employers; and 3) education for the general public, work sites and elementary schools. This multifaceted approach recognizes the value of partnership. A partnership between government, business and individuals who through voluntary efforts make a collective difference in increasing the efficiency of our transportation system - local roads, freeways, commuter rail and public bus - as a result of trip reduction and decreased vehicle miles traveled. 03310'5 Performance is just one measurement of success. Recently, one of the Commission's Program projects, Advantage Rideshare, was selected by the South Coast Air Quality Management District to receive a 1997 Clean Air Award. The awards ceremony marked the region's 50th anniversary on the war against smog honoring individuals and organizations that have made outstanding contributions toward improving air quality in five designated categories. Advantage Rideshare was recognized in the Innovative Transportation Projects category for its effective efforts in providing short term, direct financial incentives to single occupant vehicle drivers to begin ridesharing. Established as a congestion mitigation strategy, the incentives work to reduce or eliminate vehicle miles traveled and result in quantifiable emissions reductions. While the Commission's Program was implemented as a specific requirement under Measure A to address congestion mitigation, two factors have continued over the past two years to impact its voluntary, business friendly approach in marketing to commuters through employers. First, the South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule 2202 was amended to allow employers to select other options than rideshare programs to reduce air pollution. Due to employer's negative attitudes regarding regulation under Rule 2202, many employers were turned off to the idea of participating in projects offering rideshare incentives even when they were free, voluntary and provided complete marketing materials for work site implementation. Second, the implementation of SB836 in January 1997 had even greater impact on the Commission's Program as it exempted all employers having 100 to 249 employees at a work site from meeting Rule 2202 requirements. Through provision of $1.5 million for the implementation of voluntary rideshare projects annually, SB836 established a one year demonstration period to determine if equivalent emission reductions could be achieved through voluntary efforts by employers. The results of the one year demonstration effort were recently released and concluded that equivalent emission reductions were not achieved through employer voluntary efforts. While the level of ridesharing at work sites remained unchanged in the year, employers who had chosen other options under Rule 2202 did not maintain their same level of participation. Unless SB836 is amended, Rule 2202 will again include all employers having 100 to 249 employees in June 1998. The continuous changes to Rule 2202 directly and legislatively, SB836, create a difficult and confusing environment for employers. Given that the highest percentage of rideshare arrangements are formed at work sites, voluntary employer participation is critical to addressing congestion and air quality goals as employers are the conduit to directly influencing their employees' personal transportation choices. The Program's annual Performance/Workload Indicators serve as a good indicator of employer participation rates over time. To ensure voluntary participation by employers in a continually changing environment, it is essential that the Commission's Program structure its services and tools to employers so that it makes good business sense to participate in them. They must be designed to compliment an employers total benefit package, offer something of value to the employer and their employees, and be simple and cost effective to implement at work sites. The Commuter Assistance Program total expenditures are as follows: ❑ Project budget of $1,268,720 ❑ Salary and fringe benefits of $123,266 OJ0106 ❑ Overhead allocation of $30,309 ❑ General legal costs of $5,000 Total budgeted costs for Commuter Assistance Program is $1,427,295. To assist staff with the administration and on -going operations of the Program and its multiple projects, a consulting firm has been retained annually by the Commission. Based on excellent performance, the consulting firm will again be retained for 1998/99. The total consultant contract value is budgeted at $656,404. Although not a part of the Commission's budget, the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) contracts with the Commission for administration and implementation of its Commuter Assistance Program and employs the same consulting firm. The 1998/99 Commuter Assistance Program consists of the following core and supplemental projects. Project budgets have been developed based on experience, current trends, scope of work, goals, estimated staff hours, marketing tasks, and estimated participation rates: CORE PROJECTS 1) Advantage Rideshare- Freeway: To reduce single occupant vehicle trips, this short term incentive project offers up to $2/day for each day new ridesharers use an alternate mode of transportation in a three month period. Commuters must live in western Riverside County and travel to work in adjoining counties. Fund: Measure A Budget: $185,750 2) Advantage Rideshare - Local: To reduce single occupant vehicle trips, this short term incentive project offers up to $2/day for each day new ridesharers use an alternate mode of transportation in a three month period. Commuters must live in western Riverside County and travel to work within the county. Fund: Measure A Budget: $179,650 3) Club Ride: To recognize the contribution of long term ridesharers, this project offers over 150 unlimited merchant discounts to commuters who live in western Riverside County and have been ridesharing at least six months. In addition, Club Ride members receive a quarterly newsletter and special discount offerings. Fund: Measure A Budget: $175,050 4) Commuter Exchange: To provide information and materials regarding the importance and ease of using alternate modes of transportation, the 40' mobile resource center attends various events including employer transportation fairs, community activities and schools. The Commuter Exchange recently introduced a new service called Education on the Road for third and fourth grade classes in western Riverside County. The mobile unit brings a field trip experience to elementary schools through creative and interactive lessons about the importance of continuing their ridesharing activities when they become drivers. Customize take-home newsletters help students share what they have learned with their parents. In FY 1998/99, the Commuter Exchange will expand its Education on the Road outreach in Riverside through a Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Committee (MSRC) grant. In addition the grant will fund the development and implementation of an Education on the Road program for elementary school sites in San Bernardino County. Fund: Measure A Budget: $ 92,250 Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Committee (MSRC) Budget: $ 32,870 Measure A: MSRC grant match Budget: $ 5,000 000107 5) Inland Empire Commuter Services (IECS): To support voluntary efforts by local employers in maintaining and implementing rideshare activities at work sites, this project provides services and tools to Riverside County employers including: technical assistance; continuing education through transportation forums and Rideshare Connection, a broadcast fax; themed marketing campaign materials including state rideshare week; ridematching and AVR survey services; and other specialized efforts as determined by changing conditions. Staff actively participates with other regional and state rideshare entities to provide leadership and coordination of services to Riverside County employers. Fund: Surface Transportation Program Budget: $ 74,500 Fund: Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality ($8,450/Multi-site) Budget: $188,250 6) Employer Transportation Forums: To support employer rideshare efforts this project provides continuing education forums and employer networking opportunities as part of the IECS overall scope of work. This project budget supports expenses not allowed under the federal Surface Transportation Program which funds all other activities of IECS. Fund: Measure A Budget: $ 4,000 .7) Buspool Subsidies: To facilitate the use of buspools originating in Riverside County this project offers a $25 per seat per month subsidy ($1,175/bus/month) to employer and/or commuter operated buspools. Budget supports three existing buspools and reserves funding for one new buspool. Fund: Measure A Budget: $ 56,400 8) Southern California Rideshare: To support the provision of core regional rideshare services as defined through the Regional Transportation Agencies Coalition annual process, funding is provided based on a population formula to maintain a regional rideshare database, produce Rideguides, staff the 1 -800 -COMMUTE telephone customer information line, and conduct various studies and regional marketing activities. Fund: Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality Budget: $220,000 SUPPLEMENTAL PROJECTS 1) I-10 Commute Reduction Project: To address impacts of construction along the I-10 corridor between the I-15 and the Los Angeles County line and increases in traffic resulting from new activity centers (Ontario Mills mall, Ontario Convention Center and Ontario International Airport) this project provides expanded marketing efforts along the designated corridor to employers with less than 250 employees. Based on source of funding, the project offers short term financial incentives to all commuters traveling to work in the target area regardless of their county of origin, provides a commuter club for long term ridesharers, and encourages use of a simplified ridematching survey at work sites. Fund: SB836 Budget: FY 1997/98 Carryover 2) SR 60 Corridor Campaign: To encourage use of the newly opened SR 60 HOV lane by single occupant vehicle drivers commuting to work in Los Angeles and Orange Counties this project offers short term financial incentives to all employees of work sites in the destination counties with less than 250 employees who have Riverside and San Bernardino based employees traveling on the SR 60. Fund: SB836 Budget: FY 1997/98 Carryover 3) Customized Employer Rideshare Services: To develop voluntary rideshare participation by Riverside and San Bernardino employers with less than 250 employees this project provides extended outreach to employers who have not implemented a matchlist survey for the past 18 months or employers who have 0UOJOS terminated their rideshare efforts. It offers assistance in executing a ridematching survey, marketing short-term financial incentives, and enrolling long-term ridesharers in a rewards club. Fund: SB836. Budget: FY1997/98 Carryover 4) Special Project Development/Contingencies: To provide flexibility in addressing changing conditions or needs in providing transportation demand management services to employers and commuters within a fiscal year this project allocates funds for work efforts not anticipated such as special promotions, transportation fairs, studies, reduced funds, etc. Fund: Measure A Budget: $55,000 Commuter Assistance Program Budget Public Education 10,3% $130,120 Employer Services 40 5% $514,250 Commuter Incentives 49.2% $624,350 030109 Riverside County Transportation Cntmrssson SPECIAL TRANSPORTATION 1998-1999 Proposed Budget 1995/96 1996/97 Actuals Actuals 1997/98 1997/98 Revised Budget Budget 1998/99 Proposed Budget Dollar Percent Changes Change ersonne Sa ary ; nnge: Assistant Director -Planning Program Manager 11 Program Manager 11 Staff Analyst I Total Personnel Salary & Fringe OperationslOverhead (73100 thr Projects: 81000 85000 86100 Projects -General Commuter Assistance Regional Transportatip Total Projects Professional Costs: 65100 General Legal Services 65400 Audit Services 65500 Other Professional Sery Total Professional Cost 4,959 5,327 71,567 73,983 x#4,368 86,216 91,495 41,526 44,610 51,029 52,170 55,344 20,550 22,075 63,542 138,602 145,995 135,397 138,386 210,380 37,379 50,057 50,140 47,422 51,728 999,108 978,936 1,494,180 2,722,549 2,703,313 4,961,452 5,279 6.1% 3,174 6.1% 71,994 52.0% 4,306 9.1% 1,271,180 1,391,920 120,740 9.5% 4,249,956 3,052,561 (1,197,395) -28.2% 3,721,657 3,682,249 6,455,632 5,521,136 4,444,481 (1,076,655) -19.5% 40,856 15,820 25,000 15,000 16,000 1,000 6.7% 20,000 20,000 100.0% 60,000 60,000 (60,000) -100.0% 40,856 15,820 85,000 75,000 36,000 (39,000) -5Z0% Total Measure A Special Transpo 3 938,494 3,894,121 6,726,169 5,781,944 4,742,589 1,039,355 -18.0% Salaries shown include allocated support staff TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING Mission "To exert leadership in providing a sound planning basis for transportation policies and ,programs and to achieve maximum leveraged return of federal and state resources on local investment 000111 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING Department Overview The Commission is responsible for short range transportation planning and programming. Planning includes the development of the county wide short range transit plan including coordination and input to long range transportation planning efforts at the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) and the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG). Coordination on long range planning efforts with CVAG and WRCOG is integral to .the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) "bottoms up" regional planning process. The Commission serves as the designated Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for Riverside County and is responsible for developing and maintaining the Congestion Management Program (CMP). Programming includes program development, review and approval of funding programs/projects to be incorporated into the county wide Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). The funding programs the Commission has responsibility for include: Measure A programs/projects, Local Transportation Funds (LTF), State Transit Assistance (STA), Surface Transportation Program (STP), Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ), Regional Improvement Program (RIP), Inter -regional Improvement Program (IIP), Intercity Rail, Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA), and Federal Transit Assistance (FTA Sections 5309, 5307, 5310, 5311). In the fall of 1997 SB 45 was signed by the Governor. SB45 made substantial changes to the State Transportation Improvement Program development process. SB 45 placed increased funding authority and responsibility on the Commission. Development of the FY 1998-2004 STIP was the first STIP constructed under SB45. Staff will seek Commission direction on carrying out increased administrative requirements to support the SB 45 process as it develops. SB 45 provided for distribution of flexible congestion relief funds, noted above, into the following categories: Regional Improvement Program (RIP), Interregional Improvement Program (I P), and Intercity Rail. The former Transit Capital Improvements (TCI) has been eliminated. The Reauthorization of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act is expected to be approved during mid -1998. When reauthorization occurs, the Commission will determine the need to program available funds and establish a call for projects for STP discretionary, CMAQ, and TEA funds. The current budget anticipated reauthorization to occur over the 1997/98 fiscal year and, therefore, allocated staff hours for the preparation of a call for projects. 000112 Department Goals: Planning • Build upon relationships with sub regional planning entities and other affected agencies to coordinate long range planning to ensure that long range projects are consistent with the RCTC short range program of projects. Objective: Work with CVAG, WRCOG, and Caltrans to coordinate projects to be included in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Objective: Seek a strong role in the 1999 RTP Update. Objective: Ensure an active role in corridor planning. Continue to seek a stronger role, including funding, for county transportation agencies in the broader regional transportation and air quality programs of the Southern California Association of Governments and the South Coast Air Quality Management District through the Regional Transportation Agencies' Coalition. Objective: Work to establish direct RTAC or county transportation commissions representation on the SCAG board. 1pply the formula allocation transit planning process which evolved from the recommendations of the Barton :.lschtnan study. With this policy direction including recommendations from the triennial Performance Audits, to comprehensively review transit planning, resource allocation, and service implementation policys requirements, including appropriate coordination of commuter rail, inter - county and inter -city bus, local bus and paratransit, and social service transportation services. Objective: Review the short range transit plans of all operators ensuring consistency with Commission policy and established standards and constructively critique those plans. Objective: Monitor transit operators Quarterly Capital Grants Reports Objective: Work with a Commission developed committee of transit operators to address the Performance Audit recommendations and develop recommendation(s) to fully address the Commission's finding of non-compliance. Work with Southern California Association of Governments, Western Riverside Council of Governments i1JRCOG), Coachella l alley Associated Governments (CMG), and local agencies to implement an enhanced traffic monitoring program to replace the land use coordination element of the Congestion Management Program. Objective: Maintain federal certification for the Congestion Management System. Objective: Develop the Enhanced Transportation Monitoring Element using existing traffic information data to the extent possible and in a cost efficient manner Objective: To implement a pilot program approved by the Commission which includes the purchase of smart call boxes and place them at critical locations on the CMP System to obtain efficient count data. 030113 Objective: To provide data collected on the CMP System to SLAG for reporting on the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS). • Work with Caltrans and local governments including transit operators and seek opportunities to develop and implement Intelligent Transportation System applications which improve the accessability of highway and transit information to the public as well as seek opportunities to achieve operational efficiencies. Objective: Seek federal and state funding sources to support implementation of ITS strategies and projects consistent with the Inland Empire ITS Strategic Plan. Objective: Complete the ITS Si, at,;gu.. Dep! i t e,it Plan by DDLe,,rbe? 31. 1997. Work with CVAG, WRCOG, Caltrans and local governments to develop a county wide traffic signal coordination program/plan. RCTC staff will serve as project lead for this effort. In light of CRAG; s Coachella Valley wide traffic signal coordination study, ensure coordination with CVAG to effectively further their plan and integrate it into the county wide effort. • Work with Caltrans, public operators and social service agencies to ensure a competitive process statewide for the allocation of Federal transportation dollars for social service programs. Objective: Co„d.[Lt Facilitate a competitive call for projects to allocate FTA Section 16 program funds. Programming • Improve the maintenance of project database to more accurately reflect priorities and to better measure air quality attainment efforts. Objective: Work with SLAG and other commissions to refine and maintain the regional database. Objective: Work with Caltrans to assure database compatibility among the regional and State databases. Provide maximum funding and flexibility for programming of projects in the State Transportation Improvement Program. Objective: Work with the California Transportation Commission and Regional Transportation Planning Agencies to coordinate the development of procedures for implementing SB45. Objective: Continue to strategically program projects and obligate funds in an expeditious manner for the maximum use of all available funding. Objective: Work on any STIP amendments to obtain maximum funding levels for projects in Riverside County. Air Quality • Facilitate public and private investments in clean air technology in support of the broader air quality programs of the Southern California Association of Governments, the South Coast Air Quality Management District and Riverside County local entities. Objective: Actively participate on the Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee at both the policy and staff levels to provide leadership in the development of its work program disbursing $12 million annually to reduce mobile source emissions. 003114 Objective: Influence the development of the Interstate Clean Transportation Corridor plan to facilitate the location of clean fuel infrastructure and deployment of clean fuel equipment along designated corridors in Riverside County and the greater region through financial support and staff participation. Objective: Support Regional and local agencies efforts in establishing and maintaining Clean Cities designations from the Environmental Protection Agency through staff participation and adoption of policies requiring use of clean fuels technology where appropriate. Significant expenditure and staffing changes Staffing levels have increased due to the addition of a Program Manager to handle expanded responsibilities of SB45. Additionally, since the Inland Empire Strategic Deployment Plan has been completed, the Assistant Director of Planning and Programming will expend significantly more time in this area than in the prior year. State Transit Assistance funding from the state has increased significantly as the state's budget woes have passed. The budget assumes complete expenditure of all funds due in 1999 and as partial spend down of prior year unallocated and unreserved amounts. Staffing Summary: Staff Position 97/98 98/99 95/96 96/97 Revised Proposed Actuals Actuals Budget Budget Asst Dir- Planning/Programming .61 .40 .44 .91 Asst Dir-Intergovernmental .00 .33 .39 .00 Program Manager 11 .13 .03 .00 .05 Program Manager II .06 .07 .05 .58 Program Manager 11 .58 .69 .58 .10 Program Manager I .10 .12 .10 .70 Staff Analyst ll • .69 .97 .69 .42 Staff Analyst I .42 .73 _00 .00 Allocated Support Staff .80 1.23 .82 1.37 Full Time Equivalent 3.39 \ 4.57 3.07 4.13 030115 Performance/Workload indicators(ntan hours): Projects for 1998 STIP. 44 80 258 Complete 1998-2005 RTIP. 31 42 375 STP and CMAQ project call. 160 300 0 TDA Administration 212.5 240 270 Call for TCl funds. N/A 20 20 Call for TEA funds. N/A N/A 0 Federal Transit Program 34 40 54 Allocation ofFTA Section 16 158 270 252 'Administration of the CMP 179 270 37 Monitor the Congestion Mgmt. System 179 150 0 Short Range Transit Plans. 839 810 830 RTIP project amendments . 190 300 420 Monitoring obligational authority 40 180 250 No. Of Claims Processed 36 38 38 Regional Transportation Plan Air Quality Planning STIP Monitoring (SB45) 000116 Departmental Budget Discussion Transportation Planning and Programming Transportation Planning Planning & Programming Expenditures Total $1,051,216 Planning Studies 53.5% $562,295 Congestion Management 8.6% Transit $90,588 10.2% $107,106 Planning 8.9% s $93,564 Other -- 10% $10,000 Programming 17 9% $187,663 The Commission's role in regional decision making and planning throughout the year will involve working with local, regional, state and federal agencies to ensure local agency(s) project(s) are included in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) update scheduled for adoption by the SCAG Regional Council in December 1999. Information will be shared with other agencies on regional discussions in updating the Regional Transportation Plan and its consistency with the 1997 AQMP. Staff will keep local agencies apprized of the status of the RTP conformity finding. Being a participant in these processes enables the Commission to continue to be a resource to local agencies by facilitating the exchange of information on specific requirements set forth by regional, state, and federal transportation agencies. As the designated Congestion Management Agency for the County of Riverside, the Commission administers and updates the state mandated Congestion Management Program (CMP). Prior year efforts for the biennial update were focused on modifying the Land Use Coordination Element to align it with the Federal Congestion Management System (CMS) and Traffic Monitoring System (TMS) requirements. Staffwil work closely with SCAG, other county transportation agencies, Caltrans, and local agencies to streamline existing processes and enhance the ability to monitor, evaluate, and improve the local street and highway system in Riverside County. The Conunission provides staff support and consulting support for this responsibility. The Proposed 1998/99 budget includes $80,000 for the services of a congestion management consulting firm, and $18,737 for staffing costs. Several agencies are supported by the Commission in performing short range transit planning functions through committees such as the Western Riverside Short Range Transit Plan Committee and the Southern California Regional Rail Authority(SCRRA) Technical Advisory Committee. Staff support is also provided to the Commission's Citizens Advisory Committee which makes recommendations to the Commission on transit planning including coordination of social service transportation issues. In 1995/96, the Commission, along with the Western County transit 003117 operators incorporated the recommendations of the Barton Aschman report to have RTA lead the development of the State Transit Assistance 1998-2004 Short Range Transit Plan. In the 1998/99 fiscal year, the Commission will conducted unmet needs hearings, assisted in coordinating the development, review and approval of the annual countywide Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) and allocated transit funding resources. Transit funding includes local transportation and state ` R all Transits transit assistance funds under the state Transportation 0472,065 Development Act (TDA), and various Federal Transit Administration (FTA) sources. The Commission's budget includes the STA funds as a budgeted special revenue fund. Total expenditures are estimated to be $2,746,194. This amount is subject to state budgetary allocation, and may be revised once the State's budget is adopted. The division of STA funds is based on a population formula allocation with an 80/20 split between bus and rail transit for planning purposes. Transportation Programming Tr n 11 Mode Afacstlon Bus Transit 00.8% $1.8813.382., :1^`. -. Annually, Commission staff administers bicycle and pedestrian funds made available through TDA funding sources and selects eligible projects which meet established criteria. Local Transportation planning funds are also disbursed by the Commission after a call for projects and an eligibility screening process. Federal funds allocated to various agencies under ISTEA must be approved by the Commission prior to submittal to the state. Those funds include STP discretionary and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality funds, and the Transportation Enhancement Activities program. As with the bicycle and pedestrian funds, projects are ranked and selected based on meeting eligibility standards. These activities are carried out with the staff supported involvement of the Commission's Technical Advisory Committee. 030118 ► :versicie County ransportation ommissron TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING 1998-1999 Proposed Budget 1997/98 1998/99 1995/96 1996/97 1997/98 Revised Proposed Dollar Percent Actuals Actuals Budget Budget Budget Changes Change Personnel Salary & Fringe: Assistant Director Assistant Director -Legislative Pr Program Manager II 12,734 13,680 Program Manager II 5,772 6,200 Program Manager II 58,136 62,452 Program Manager I 9,806 10,534 Staff Analyst ll 56,109 60,275 Staff Analyst / 28,396 30,505 67,566 72,583 58,279 59,322 132,462 73,140 123.3% 51,666 24,048 (24,048) -100.0% 6,804 6,953 7,379 426 6.1% 71,441 73,006 77,481 4,475 6.1% 11,074 12,218 76,093 63,875 522.8% 49,568 45,581 47,752 2,171 4.8% * Total Personnel Salary 8 Fringe 238,519 256,229 248,832 221,128 341,167 120,039 54.3% OperationslOverhead (73100 thr 66,482 87,852 89,181 84,347 92,006 7,659 9.1% 81500 Highway & Rail Special 349,000 180,000 235,000 55,000 30.6% 86200 LTFDisbursements 351,215 305,095 100,000 310,000 327,295 17,295 5.6% 86300 STA Disbursements 1,026,000 1,269,583 1,816,183 1,952,269 2,746,194 793,925 40.7% 1,377,215 1,574,678 2,265,183 2,442,269 3,308,489 866,220 35.5% Total Projects Professional Costs: 65100 General Legal Services 7,866 8,039 10,000 10,000 20,000 10,000 100.0% 65500 Other Professional Sery 54,707 122,382 230,000 230,000 97,500 (132,500) -57.6% Total Professional Cost 62,573 130,421 240,000 240,000 117,500 (122,500) -51.0% Total Transportation Planning an 1,744,789_ 2,049_,180 2,843,196 2,987,744 3,859,162 871,418 29.2% Salaries shown include allocated support sta 000119 RAIL PROGRAM: DEVELOPMENT, OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT Mission "To develop and support rail transportation options for increased mobility within Riverside County and the region". RAIL PROGRAM: DEVELOPMENT, OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT Department Overview The Riverside County Transportation Commission has directed efforts in the areas of regional commuter rail, intercity passenger rail, high speed rail, and capital improvements to support enhanced passenger and freight rail service. The entire program includes elements of planning, programming, commuter rail development and support, station and corridor management, mitigation of community and environmental impacts, legislative and regulatory advocacy, and construction of capital projects. Many elements are managed or supported by other RCTC departments, by Bechtel project management, and by legal counsel and consultants. Departmental efforts contributing to the rail program are found throughout the budget document. Coordination and consultation also occurs with a variety of public and private entities, including the California Transportation Commission, Caltrans, California Public Utilities Commission, Federal Railroad Administration, Federal Transit Administration, Amtrak, environmental agencies, the University of California, transit providers, SCAG, WRCOG, CVAG, local governments, private freight railroads, businesses and property owners. Commuter Rail: As directed by Measure A, the Commission helped create the infrastructure and institutional umbrella for commuter rail service in Southern California. RCTC participates in the ongoing funding and governance of the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metrolink), a joint powers authority consisting of the transportation commissions of Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, Los Angeles and Ventura counties. The Commission holds two voting positions on SCRRA's eleven member Board. RCTC staff serves on the five -county Technical Advisory Committee which negotiates service and funding levels, based upon the counties' established priorities, and provides technical assistance, coordination between various SCRRA and RCTC departments, and linkages to local communities. Currently there are two commuter rail lines operating weekdays within Riverside County: Riverside to Los Angeles via Ontario (Riverside Line), and San Bernardino via Riverside to Irvine (Inland Empire -Orange County Line). One additional trip on each of these lines is planned for October, 1998. The FY 1998/99 operating plan also calls for extension of the San Bernardino Line's Saturday Service into downtown Riverside. Significant capital improvements have been made on the private freight corridors over which these services operate. Public investments have included the improvements necessary for limited service between Riverside and Los Angeles via Fullerton, which was originally envisioned in the rail plan for Southern California but has been delayed by the availability of sufficient passenger coaches and by budget constraints within Orange County. Two reverse trips between Los Angeles and Riverside were moved to this corridor in FY 1997/98 in order to free capacity on the Riverside Line; however, demand for regular peak -direction service from Western Riverside County through Fullerton remains. 0,30121 Intercity Passenger Rail: In recent years the rail program has also focused attention on the creation of intercity passenger rail service between the Coachella Valley, Riverside and the Los Angeles basin (with future extension to the Mexican border at Calexico) through advocacy efforts with state, federal, and local government entities and negotiation with the freight railroads. The Commission's current efforts include seeking capital and operating funds and participation with seven other Southern California counties on the Interim Joint Powers Board considering intercity rail administration. High Speed Passenger Rail: The Commission recently expanded the scope of its rail program to include a proactive rose in the development of a statewide, high-speed passenger rail system, including routing of the backbone corridor through the Inland Empire. Rail -related Properties and San Jacinto Corridor: Unlike the other SCRRA county agencies, RCTC owns and operates the four commuter rail stations serving Riverside County: Riverside - Downtown, The Pedley Station, Riverside -La Sierra, and West Corona. Station operation and 'maintenance costs are included in this rail program budget with services coordinated by RCTC's property management department. New and ongoing construction projects at these stations, funded by state rail bonds, Surface Transportation Funds, are described in the capital budget. The Commission holds title to and manages the 38 -mile San Jacinto Branchline and several adjacent properties, preserved for future passenger rail service. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad holds the freight rights in the corridor, providing service to local shippers, and performs maintenance on the line. Grants have been secured for limited capital improvements, but full funding to upgrade the line for passenger service is not yet available. Facilitating efficient freight service on the line has also become a priority. Department Goals Commuter Rail Goals: - Improve utilization and increase efficiency of commuter rail lines serving Riverside County. Objective: Increase peak period patronage on existing lines by 10 % in FY99 through increased frequencies, added seating capacity, and improved host railroad adherence to schedules. Objective: Increase off-peak and reverse peak patronage by 10 % in FY 99 by aggressively marketing unused capacity for business, recreational and school trips. Objective: Reduce public subsidy per passenger mile traveled on lines currently serving Riverside County through economies of scale, efficient use of train sets and crew hours, and increased passenger fares. 000122 Maximize opportunities for public use of rail -related investment. Objective: Connect downtown Riverside to San Bernardino Line Saturday service with increased frequencies. Objective: Support efforts to expand availability and use of connecting transit in order to improve access and reduce demand on parking capacity. Objective: Contract for and promote self-supporting or chartered special train service (i.e. Beach Trains, special event service, etc.). Objective: Expand opportunities for inter -line travel through coordination of schedules with Amtrak intercity and long distance trains and other Metrolink lines. Encourage joint ticketing options. Objective: Work toward securing Amtrak train service at Downtown Riverside. Identify and plan for capital improvements necessary to increase the scope, appeal and reliability of commuter rail operations. Objective: Together with SCRRA, complete a 10 year capital improvement plan as an element of SCRRA's long range Strategic Plan. Objective: Undertake study to help identify and prioritize future new or expanded station sites within Riverside County (Tier II stations). Continue to work toward implementation of the SB1402 commuter rail system plan which envisioned additional service corridors both within Riverside County and between Riverside and Los Angeles via Fullerton. Intercity Rail Goal Maintain efforts with local agencies, other Southern California counties, the State, and the federal government to expand intercity passenger rail service into Riverside County and the Coachella Valley. Objective: Support Coachella Valley communities, other local agencies, and Amtrak in securing infrastructure improvements and operating funds necessary to initiate intercity rail. Objective: Establish an institutional framework for the coordination and/or administration of intercity rail within Southern California. 000123 High Speed Rail Goal Continue to support and influence state efforts in the creation of a high speed passenger rail system along an Inland Empire alignment, through sponsorship of the Inland Empire High Speed Rail Task Force. Rail Corridor Goals Continue efforts to reduce community impacts of rail infrastructure and operation. Objective: Support further research and investigation into clean fuel, alternative rail technology for both passenger and freight service in the region. Objective: Work toward reduction of grade crossing conflicts by 1) securing the cooperation of Caltrans, SCAG and local entities in conducting an analysis of desired grade separations and 2) advocating that additional grade separation funding be available for projects in Riverside County. Seek capital improvements, operating practices and institutional arrangements which improve the viability of corridors, serve shippers and alleviate freight rail conflicts. Plan for the incremental improvement of the San Jacinto Branchline and maintain and operate RCTC-owned rail infrastructure in a safe and cost-effective manner (see Property Management goals). Significant expenditure and staffing changes Added service on the Riverside and Inland lines will not increase RCTC's estimated operating subsidy to the SCRRA (including maintenance -of -way) this year. Increases in personnel costs for this budget reflects approximately one-third of a new staff analyst position and a modification to the manner in which existing RCTC staff are charged against the rail program. Staffing Summary: 97/98 Revised 98/99 Staff Position 95/96 Actuals 96/97 Actuals Budget Proposed Budget Asst Dir- Planning/Programming .08 .07 .00 .00 Program Manager II .37 .91 .85 1.00 Property Agent .00 .00 .33 .50 Staff Analyst I .00 .00 .00 .33 Support Staff .14 .60 .43 .91 Assigned Full Time Equivalent .59 1.58 1.61 2.74 030124 Performance/Workload indicators: 96/97 Revised 97/98 Proposed 95/96 Actuals Budget Budget Growth on existing commuter lines - Riverside Line 3605 3769 4200 - Inland Empire Orange Co. 694 1069 1150 Bus/train and train/train connections. N/A N/A Measurable Improvement Off-peak utilization of existing lines N/A N/A Measurable Improvement Fare box recovery ratio IEOC Line N/A N/A 27% Riverside Line N/A N/A 48% Use of scheduled "reverse" trains. N/A N/A Measurable Improvement Special event trains 3 dates 9 dates 22 dates Saturday service on Riverside Line N/A N/A By Feb 1998 10 year capital improvement plan for commuter rail system. N/A N/A Complete Intercity rail service . N/A N/A Progress Department Budget Discussion SCRRA is a joint powers authority (JPA), whose operation is funded entirely by its five member agencies. In effect, the JPA is renewed every year through the adoption of operating and capital budgets by all five counties. Service levels, operating preferences, and the funding constraints of each county effect every other county. Since all but one of the six Metrolink lines runs through more than one county, the member agencies share the actual costs of operating the lines within their borders, and, through a complicated formula, pay a portion of system wide overhead and administration. Constant negotiation occurs among the agencies' staffs, with each agency promoting the interests of its own county while trying to safeguard the system as a whole. Since most technical issues are resolved before Board action, SCRRA board members are freer to develop, discuss and direct Metrolink policy. 030125 The Riverside -to -Los Angeles market is served by the Riverside Line, along Union Pacific right of way, between downtown Riverside and Los Angeles Union Station. The Inland Empire -Orange County Line, on the Burlington Northern Santa Fe mainline, operates between San Bernardino, through Riverside and Corona, to Orange County cities. As a system, Metrolink has met and 4,000 exceeded every benchmark set for ridership and passenger revenues (i.e., farebox recovery); it will close 1997/98 with approximately 50% revenue recovery. The system is, however, a victim of its own success. Passenger load on existing peak period trips is approaching maximum seating capacity on several routes. With most existing train sets operating a good part of each weekday, adding trips in peak periods has become a particularly difficult challenge. Twenty-five additional passenger cars have been delivered, but fourteen leased cars had to be returned to owners in 1997/98. RCTC and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) were awarded grant funds for 50% of the purchase price of up to 11 new or refurbished coaches, with the remaining costs provided locally. SCRRA has submitted applications for new state and federal funds for sufficient cars and locomotives to keep pace with growth. Metrolink Ridership I 1996 1998 Legend E RNeislde E Inland Empire As the system continues to grow, additional capital improvements will be necessary. With the completion of the currently programmed projects, state rail bond funds will have been expended. The Measure A capital commitment to commuter rail is also reaching its threshold. Some federal capital dollars are accruing based on current operations, but their use is somewhat restricted. The Commission and SCRRA's other member agencies must seek additional funding sources for ongoing capital requirements. Efforts are now focused on maintaining a well -received and efficient commuter rail system and adding service wherever possible. With two major freight railroads and two Metrolink routes operating on one corridor through Riverside, extensive expansion of the Riverside -Downtown station and layover facility was approved by the Commission, utilizing the remainder of Prop. 116 funds allotted to Riverside County. Completion of the phase I expansion is anticipated in the second quarter of 1998/99. An assessment of other potential station sites will also be undertaken. Although the Commission owns the San Jacinto Branch line, and anticipates someday operating passenger service between Riverside and Hemet, there are currently no funds available for the extensive capital necessary to rebuild the line. Small, incremental improvements are planned in OUO126 order to marginally increase efficiency and facilitate freight movement along the corridor. A total of $2,862,900 in local funds has been budgeted as the Commission's contribution to the SCRRA for Metrolink operations and maintenance of way (including freight railroad operating payments). This includes costs of one additional trip each on the Riverside and Inland Empire Orange County line, as well as initial Saturday service via San Bernardino. The $850,000 local match for rolling stock has been satisfied by operational savings in FY 95/96 and a state sales tax refund on previous rolling stock purchases, and this amount is included in RCTC's carry-over capital funds at SCRRA which total $1,256,000. New capital funds of $300,000 (for extension of the emergency platform at the Pedley rail station) and a capital maintenance obligation to SCRRA in the amount of $225,800 are reflected in RCTC's Highway & Rail Capital Budget. Additional regional choice monies have been programmed for rehabilitation of the old Santa Fe Depot in downtown Riverside and the depot's conversion into train crew headquarters. (See RCTC 's Capital Projects Development and Delivery Budget.) I Rail Operations and Support Expenditures, Total -44,153,679 Legal and Support Costs 8.5% 5347,492 SCRRA Main, of Way 5.5% $225,750 St anon Maintenance SCRRA Operating Contribution 16.3% 69.8% $667,537 $2,862,900 Stations Maintenance Casts Total -$667.537 Grounds Maint: 22.3Q y ,^ General Maint. 7.2% i142,009 Utilities 13.9% — Security 56.6% The Commission, unlike the other SCRRA members, directly controls and operates four commuter rail stations. Property maintenance and security costs for these stations are budgeted at $667,537, reflecting an anticipated increase in maintenance and operating expense at the expanded downtown Riverside station. Other direct costs include the following: Legal fees-- $40,000 Rail consultant contract and other professional services —$140,000 Staffing and administrative overhead —$217,492 030127 Schedule of Rail Expenditures by Department Capital Projects Rail: Development, RCTC Capital 7,743, 206 7.743.206 SCRRA Capital 1.150, 000 1,150, 000 RCTC Operating 667,537 1 667,537 SCRRA Operating 3,088,650 3,088, 650 Debt Service 6,007,345 6,007,345 Support Costs 1 800,000 397,492 1,197, 492 Tnta' 15 700,551 4 153 679 19 854, 23(1 r 030128 versnie County Transportation omen RAIL TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM 1998-1999 Proposed Budget 1997/98 1998/99 1995/96 1996/97 1997/98 Revised Proposed Dollar Percent Actuals Actuals Budget Budget Budget Changes Change Personnel Sa ary & ringe: Assistant Director 9,298 9,988 Program Manager!! 37,096 39,851 104,100 106,380 112,901 6,521 6.1% Property Agent 29,768 31,314 49,129 17,815 56.9% Staff Analyst l 31,771 31,771 100.0%1 Total Personnel Salary & Fringe 46,394 49,839 133,868 137,694 193,801 56,107 40.7% OperationslOverhead (73100 thr 17,119 17,089 22,964 21,719 23,691 1,972 9.1% 86100 Regional Transportatio 2,426,400 2,687,200 2,618,500 2,618,500 2,862,900 87000 Project Maintenance 127,514 233,848 392,965 392,965 225,750 87100 Project Operations 262,606 410,681 592,395 573,395 667,537 Total Projects 2,816,520 3,331,729 3,603,860 3,584,860 3,756,187 171,327 4.8% Professional Costs: 244,400 9.3% (167,215) -42.6% 94,142 16.4% 65100 General Legal Services 77,280 117,725 50,000 40,000 40,000 65500 Other Professional Sery 139,457 82,457 140,000 90,000 140,000 50,000 55.6% Total Professional Cost 216,737 200,182 190,000 130,000 180,000 50,000 38.5% Total Commuter Rail 3,096,770 3,598,839 3,950,692 3,874,273 4,153,679 279,406 7.2% . Salaries shown include allocated su ort staff 000129 MOTORIST ASSISTANCE Mission "To improve safety and convenience to motorists who experience mechanical difficulty on the roadway". 000130 MOTORIST ASSISTANCE Department Overview The Service Authority For Freeway Emergencies (SAFE) is the call box system that allows motorists to call for assistance in the event of a mechanical breakdown on the freeway. Additionally, the Freeway Service Patrol(FSP) assists stranded motorists on the freeway by towing, changing tires, providing a gallon of fuel, etc., at no charge to the motorists. Department Goals: Maintain the integrity of the call box system and service levels. Objective: Work closely with consultants to monitor the performance of the call box system. and provide quarterly call box reports to obtui,r to kvd of system operations l eyo, tirrg for policy board information and management information purposes. Objective: Perform a ten year forecast of the call box program to review any potential financial constraints, identify new technological improvements available, and any other unanticipated call box replacement and upgrades the Commission may choose to make to the system. Continue the Freeway Service Patrol as long as state funding support is available, examine the possibilities of providing additional service if increased funding is available, explore the possibility of assisting Caltrans to provide a similar tow service on highways where temporary construction is underway. Objective: Objective: Objective: Consult with Caltrans and the California Highway Patrol to determine where additional service will be provided iffunding is made available. Review construction projects with Caltrans and coordinate use of temporary tow service to mitigate congestion. Work cooperatively with Caltrans, the California Highway Patrol, and other FSP program managers to achieve long term/permanent funding for the program. Explore cost effective ways to provide access to persons with disabilities. Objective: Review the feasibility of 7TY installation for the hearing impaired with Caltrans, the CHP, and other SAFEs at bi-monthly CaLSAFE meetings. 0D013_ tluLhl,wud lr ae.1b ceo be- j.1ddrd AS t/rL Slur-Iha-ihc, r.aszd the futfd ding allae..attort fie the f, cerrtty SCrViCd rat,vi pr ogt anl. Staffing Summary: 97/98 98/99 Staff Position 95/96 Actuals 96/97 Actuals Revised Proposed Budget Budget Asst Dir- Planning/Programming .17 .46 .47 .09 Program Manager II .00 .00 .00 .90 Program Manager I .50 .71 .90 .00 Staff Analyst I .21 .00 .00 .00 Support Staff .27 .57 .50 49 Full Time Equivalent 1.15 1.74 1.87 1.48 Performance/Workload indicators: 96/97Actuals 97/98 Est. 98/99Est. No. of call box calls 83,043 84,000 85,000 No. of vehicle assists 17,975 18,000 18,600 Review of motorist's satisfaction of FSP Program 98% 100% 100% Excellent Excellent Excellent Department Budget Discussion The motorist assistance programs are excellent examples of government providing cost effective, "service" oriented benefits to its customers (i.e., commuters). The Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies call box program and the Freeway Service Patrol program were instant success stories with motorists, and their popularity has grown over time. This has occurred simultaneous with the accomplishment of key transportation objectives, that of mitigating traffic congestion and facilitating traffic flow. Service Authority For Freeway Emergencies There are no planned call box installations for fiscal year 1998/99. The existing system appears to adequately meet the need in the near term. There are approximately 1,146 call boxes in service, answering approximately 84,000 calls, and serving 657 miles of freeways within the County. Budgeted costs are $364,980 for operations which includes California Highway Patrol(CHP) staff support and phone access charges. An additional $371,544 is budgeted for knockdowns, vandalism, and preventive and corrective maintenance. Other direct costs include $47,500 for a consulting firm that provides 030132 support services such as auditing monthly billings, monitoring system usage, supplying monthly reports, and handicapped access issues. Freeway Service Patrol The Freeway Service Patrol offers towing services to motorists stranded along three segments of Route 91 and one segment of Route 60/1-215. The Commission contracts with two tow truck operators to patrol these routes Monday through Friday during peak commute hours. Preliminary funding estimates from Caltrans indicate additional funding becoming available in FY 1998-99 to provide one additional vehicle on SR -91 and one vehicle on I-2151SR-60. Consequently, the contracts will increase accordingly to $665,820. The program's day to day field supervision will continue to be handled by the CHP. Communications costs of $5,508 includes cellular phone service charges and radio air time. Equipment costs of $28,500 is for the purchase of a 450 MHz radio communication system. A budget of $11,000 has been set aside for various promotional materials. Motorist Assistance Expenditures 1998 1999 Q CHP Support Callbox Maint 0 Call Box Installation -T542 $301,584 8.5 / $141,878 Call Box Operations in Towing Ni Support Costs Riverside County transportation Commission MOTORIST ASSISTANCE 1998-1999 Proposed Budget 1997/98 1998/99 1995/96 1996/97 1997/98 Revised Proposed Dollar Percent Actuals Actuals Budget Budget Budget Changes Change Personnel Salary & Fringe: Assistant Director 18,596 19,977 62,737 63,828 Program Manager! 49,029 52,670 99,670 109,967 Staff Analyst I 14,198 15,252 • Total Personnel Salary & Fringe 11,172 (52, 656) -82.5%: 119,542 9,575 8.7% 81,823 87,899 162,407 173,795 130,714 (43,081) -24.8% OperationslOverhead (73100 thr 24,458 30,137 32,809 31,031 33,849 2,818 9.1% 81500 Highway & Rail Special 111,915 336,936 200,000 211,372 (211,372) -100.0% 87000 Project Maintenance 291,295 298,508 367,888 349,388 371,544 22,156 6.3% 87100 Project Operations 384,570 374,016 414,324 340,610 363,590 22,980 6.7% 87200 Project Towing 514,558 545,312 582,580 546,392 679,628 133,236 24.4%, Total Projects Professional Costs: 1,302,338 1,554,772 1,564,792 1,447,762 1,414,762 (33,000) -2.3% 65100 General Legal Services 19,500 5,078 18,500 12,500 4,000 (8,500) -68.0% 65500 Other Professional Sery 49,585 49,969 70,000 70,000 70,781 781 1.1% Total Professional Cost 69,085 55,047 88,500 82,500 74,781 (7,719) -9.4% Capital Outlay 90000 Capital outlay-Equipme 95,319 12,077 6,915 156,136 28,500 (127,636) -81.7% Total Motorist Assistance 1,573,023 1,739,932 1,855,423 1,891,224 1,682,606 (208,618) -11.0% '' Salaries shown include allocated support staff 00134 PROPERTY MANAGEMENT Mission "To preserve the real property assets of the Commission in a cost effective manner with awareness of potential economic benefit to be derived from the sale, lease, or development of said property." OJ0135 PROPERTY MANAGEMENT Department Overview A number of properties have been acquired by the Commission in the course of project implementation. Those properties have to be managed, accounted for, and potentially converted to a revenue stream. Department Goals: • To Continue to review current and projected uses of all Commission owned real properties on a parcel by parcel basis to generate leads for potential joint development projects. a- d�sposrita,i of C muSS ian owned property. Objective: Manage a consultant contract for devising a plan for the disposition of the Pierce and Ferguson properties. Increase existing sources of property management revenues through updated valuation of licenses and leases. Objective: Analyze existing leases for current market value and adjustment of annual lease rate. • Promptly respond to and resolve property maintenance issues. Objective: Work with project team to complete the installation of video surveillance equipment at all Metrolink Stations in Riverside County. • Maintain the working relationship with affected railroads for ongoing rail property issues requiring their participation. ncern with the railroad officials. 0:J0136' Objective: Meet with BNSF Asset Management to gain a better understanding of the accounting of and the process for collection of out lease billings. Significant expenditure and staffing changes Nearly one half of the man hours for the property agent are expended on managing property maintenance issues related to the commuter rail stations. For that reason, man hours have been reallocated to the Rail Program. Staffing Summary: 97198 98/99 Staff Position 95/96 Actuals 96/97 Actuals Revised Proposed Budget Budget Executive Director .06 .07 .06 .00 Chief Financial Officer .11 .05 11 11 Property Agent 1.00 .98 .67 .50 Asst Dir-Planning .01 .00 .00 00 Support Staff .36 .53 .31 30 Full Time Equivalent 1.54 1.63 1.15 .91 Performance/Workload indicators: Number of Sales/Development 14 6 Increase in revenues N/A 0 Number of IicensesJeases 30 30 4 7% 33 Department Budget Discussion The Commission controls over 5,000,000 square feet of real property in the County of Riverside. These properties are directly managed by the Commission and involve weed abatement, fencing, obtaining appropriate liability coverage, and looking for opportunities to sell or jointly develop. One of the parcels owned by the Commission is a 6,000 square feet , single story commercial building located in the City of Riverside. The Commission fully manages all aspects of this building, and uses part of it to house the Commuter Assistance Program consultant staff. An interdepartmental allocation is made from Specialized Transportation to Property Management for use of this facility. During the 1996/97 fiscal year a review was made of two of the Commission's larger pieces of property to determine if efforts should be heightened to either sell or develop them. A professional real estate development firm performed a preliminary analysis of the Ferguson and 030137 Pierce Street properties and arrived at their determination of the best use for these properties. After considering this report and evaluating the difficulties associated with development, particularly of the Ferguson parcels, and recognizing the reality of an improving but still weak real estate market, it was concluded that it would be advantageous for the Commission to continue to hold these properties. Making efficient use of these assets will continue to present a real challenge to the Commission. It is critical that staff stay abreast of developments in the market for real property including changing circumstances that would impact potential public/private partnerships for commercial, industrial, or retail development. A budget of $75,000 has been included to allow for continued use of professional assistance if and as opportunities arise. In November 1997 the Commission purchased the historical Santa Fe Depot in downtown Riverside. The depot has been earmarked for a crew quarters for the Metrolink Engineers and other possibilities will be explored in 1999. The Commission is scheduling a STP Grant of $500,000 for rehabilitation of this site. Resources have been budgeted to secure the building. Another challenge facing the Commission is full realization of the revenue potential for the out leases on the San Bernardino subdivision. The Commission owns the use rights, but not fee title(i.e., actual ownership of the line itself) and is entitled to the income generated from the leases along this line(i.e., out leases). Staff will be seeking a greater understanding and knowledge of the out lease database and the manner in which Burlington Northern Sante Fe(BNSF) accounts for these leases. Staff will use the knowledge gained to ensure that the Commission is receiving all revenues, and that amounts due from BNSF can be reasonably estimated from year to year. San Jacinto Subdivision Property Management Revenues San Jacinto Subdivision 51.1% $120.000 San Bernardino Subdivision 34.0% $80.000 Other 14.9% $35.000 Property management expenditures are shared between highway and rail properties. Total budgeted expenditures, including legal and personnel costs, have been set at $276,749. 036138 Riverside County ransportatlon ommrssron PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 1998-1999 Proposed Budget Personnel Sa ary & ringe: 1997/98 1998/99 1995/96 1996/97 1997198 Revised Proposed Dollar Percent '1 Actuals Actuals Budget Budget Budget Changes Change l Executive Director Chief Financial Officer Property Agent Assistant Director -Planning " Total Personnel Salary & Fringe 8,607 9,246 9,718 12,755 (12,755) -100.0% 12,233 13,140 13,854 15,150 15,960 810 5.3%f1 71,939 77,281 59,535 62,581 49,129 (13,452) -21.5%1 1,240 1,332 1 94,019 100,999 83,107 90,486 65,089 (25,397) -28.1%11 OperationslOverhead (73100 thr 30,103 34,629 40,381 38,192 41,660 3,468 9.1%11 81400 Highway 8 Rail ROW 1,249 87000 Project Maintenance 28,964 24,961 93,195 93,195 (93,195) -100.0% 87100 Project Operations 10,409 13,466 21,735 21,735 75,000 53,265 245.1% Total Projects 40,622 38,427 114,930 114,930 75,000 (39,930) -34.7% Professional Costs: 65100 General Legal Services 13,738 19,861 50,000 30,000 20,000 (10,000) -33.3% 65500 Other Professional Sery 2,457 21,095 75,000 75,000 Total Professional Cost 16,195 40,956 50,000 30,000 95,000 65,000 216.7% Total Property Management 180,939 215,011 Salaries shown include allocated support staff 288,418 273,608 276, 749 3,141 1.1% 0OO13) AGENDA ITEM 5B RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Hideo Sugita, Assistant Director Planning and Programming THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Contract with Cis Leroy to Support the Planning and Cis Leroy has been a contract employee of the Commission supporting project programming in the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP). Her primary assignment has been a job sharing arrangement with Shirley Medina to support the RTIP data base. The RTIP is one of the Commission's most important responsibilities in that all federal and state transportation funds can only be accessed if the project and its funding are included in an approved, air quality conforming RTIP document. This requires Shirley and Cis to coordinate closely with local governments, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), Caltrans, state and federal funding agencies to insure projects are accurately included in the RTIP in a timely fashion. This arrangement has worked very well over the past year. Given the recommendations and finding of non-compliance coming from the Commission's recent Triennial Performance Audit, as well as, the new requirements of SB 45, I recommend retaining Cis Leroy as a contract employee to assist in supporting a broader work area under the Commission's Transportation Planning and Programming department. This recommendation is based on an excellent working relationship which has been established, as well as, Cis is very dedicated and a quick study. Cis's rate will remain the same $35.00 per hour with a not to exceed ceiling of $35,000. Financial Assessment Project Cost $35,000 Source of Funds 50% LTF, 50% Measure A Included in Fiscal Year Budget Y Year Included in Program Budget Y Year Programmed 1998-99 Approved Allocation Year of Allocation 1998-99 000140 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission authorize the Executive Director to execute a contract with Cis Leroy for part-time support services to the Planning and Programming Department for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1998. This contract is not to exceed $35,000. 000141 AGENDA ITEM 5C RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: William Hughes, Measure A Project Manager Louis Martin, Project Controls Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Monthly Cost and Schedule Reports The attached material depicts the current costs and schedule status of contracts reported by routes, commitments, and cooperative agreements executed by the Commission. For each contract and agreement, the report lists the authorized value approved by the Commission, percentage of contract amount expended to date, and the project expenditures by route with status for the month ending April 30,1998. Detailed supporting material for all schedules, contracts and cooperative agreements is available from Bechtel staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission receive and file. Attachments 030142 RCTC MEASURE "A" HIGHW AY/RAIL PROJECTS BUDGET REPORT BY ROUTE CO MMISSI ON CONTRACTURAL % CO MMITTED EXPENDITURE FOR % EXPENDITURES PROJECT AUTHORIZED COMMIT MENTS AGAINST AUTH . MONTH ENDED EXPENDITURES TO -DATE AGAINST DESCRIPTI ON ALLOCATI ON TO DATE ALL OCATION April 30, 1998 TO DATE COM MIT MNTS TO DATE ROUTE 60 PROJECTS Park 'n' Ride Lot Final Design (R 09738) SUBTOTAL ROUTE 60 ROUTE 79 PROJECTS Engineering/Environ./ROW (R09111,9301,9302, 9306,9337,9735, 9329,9737) Project is Complete. Performing project close- out tasks and consultant performing on -going environmental inspections. SUBTOTAL ROUTE 79 ROUTE 111 PROJECTS (R09219, 9227,9234,9523,9525,9530,9537,9538) 9635 SUBTOTAL ROUTE 111 ROUTE 91 PROJECTS Soundwall design and construction (R09101, 9337,9827) Van Buren Blvd. Frwy Hook Ramp (R09535) Corona Bypass Study (R09736) SUBTOTAL ROUTE 91 1-215 PROJECTS Preliminary Engrg/Environ. (R09008, 9018) SUBTOTAL 1-215 $39,697 $39,697 $9,696,360 $9,696,360 $10,334,000 $10,334,000 $2,608,424 $2,300,000 $169,220 $5,077,644 $6,726,504 $6,726,504 $39,697 $39,697 $9,696,360 $9,696,360 $10,334,000 $10,334,000 $2,539,519 $2,300,000 $169,220 $5,008,739 $5,878,173 $5,878,173 Page 1 of 3 100 .0 % 100 .0% 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 % 100 .0% 97 .4 % 100 .0 % 100 .0% 98.6% 87.4% 87.4% $o $145 $145 $1,102 $1,102 $374,476 S374,476 so $34,158 $34,158 $9,632,695 86.0% 86 .0% 99 .3 % $9,632,695 99.3% $6,602,655 $6,602,655 $1,379,881 $1,229,442 $144,554 $2,753,877 $5,697,757 $5,697,757 63.9 % 63 .9% 54.3% 53 .5% 85 .4 % 55.0% 96 .9 % 96 .9% RCTC MEASURE "A" HIGHWAY PROJECTS BUDGET REPORT BY R OUTE C OMMISSION C ONTRACTURAL % C OMMITTED EXPENDITURE FOR % EXPENDITURES PROJECT AUTHORIZED COM MITMENTS A GAINST AUTH. MONTH ENDED EXPENDITURES TO - DATE AGAINST DESCRIPTI ON _ ALL OCATI ON TO DATE ALLOCATION April 30, 1998 TO DATE COM MITMNTS TO DATE INTERCHANGE IMPROV. PROGRAM Yuma IC Final Design (PS&E) (R09428) Yuma IC Constr. Mgmt (R09631) Yuma IC Construction (R09636) (Project is complete - doing contract close-out) SUBTOTAL INTERCHANG E PRO JECT & CO NSTR. MGMT SERV. (R09800) SUBTO TAL BEC HTEL PROGRAM PLAN & SERVICES Special Study (ITS Plan - R09727) SUBTOTAL PROGRAM PLAN & SVCS. PARK-N-RIDE/INCENT. PROGRAM (RO 9801 thru 9812) (9740-9742) SUBTOTA L PARK -N -RIDE COMMUTER RAIL Studies/Engineering (RO 9420,9731,9832,9833,9844,9854) Station/Site Acq/OP Costs/Maint. Costs (RO 0000, 9820,9843,9845) SUBTOTAL COMMUTER RAIL TOTALS $1,314,508 $1,023,500 $6,600,000 $8,938,008 $1,974,813 $1,974,813' $450,000 $450,000 $1,683,280 $1,683,280 $1,433,202 $9,207,502 $10,640,704 $55,561,010 $1,314,508 $988,050 $6,304,649 100.0 % 96.5 % 95 .5 % $8,607,2071 96.3%c $1,904,813 $1,904,813. 96.5 % 96.5% $450,000 100.0 % $450,000 $1,028 $1,028 $159,759 $159,759 100 .0% so $1,683,280 100.0 % $268,622 $1,683,280 100.0% $268,622 $1,292,354) 90 .2 % $17,901 $8,226,000 $9,518,354 89.3 % 89.5% $53,120,623 95.6% Page 2 of 3 $48,769 $66,670 $1,313,508 $979,358 $6,304,152 $8,597,018 $1,389,873 $1,389,873 $322,575 $322,575 $1,209,007 $1,209,007 $1,145,084 $577,726 $1,722,810 $871,802] $37,962,425 99 .9 % 99.1% 100 .0% 99 .9% 73.0% 73.0% 71.7 % 71 .7% 71.8% 71.8% 88.6% 7.0% 18.1% 71 .5% RCTC MEASURE "A" HI GHWAY/L OCAL STREETS & ROADS PROJECTS BUD GET REPORT BY PR OJECT PR OJECT DESCRIPTION CITY OF MURRIET A Loan Agreement 1-15/1-215 Interchange improvements (R09334) (Loan Agreemen t is Terminated) SUB TOTA L MURRIETA LOAN EXPENDITURE FOR TOTAL OUTSTANDIN G APPR OVED MONTH ENDED MEASURE "A" L OAN OUTSTANDING C OMMITMENT April 30, 1998 ADVANCES BALANCE C OMMITMENT (1) CITY OF CANYON LAKE Railroad Canyon Rd Improvements (R09422) SUBTOTAL CA NYO N LAKE LOAN CITY OF CORONA Smith, Maple & Lincoln Interchanges & Storm drainage structure SUBTOTAL CITY OF CO RO NA CITY OF PERRIS Local streets & road improvements CITY OF SAN JACINTO Local streets & road improvements CITY OF TEMECULA Local streets & road improvements (1) CITY OF NO RCO Yu ma IIC & Local stre ets and road Imprmts TOTALS $17,000,0001 117,000,000 $0 $1,600,000 $1,600,000 $5,212,623 $5,212,623 $1,936,419 $1,324,500 $5,094,027 $2,139,067 $32,167.689 NOTE: (1) Loan against interchange improvement programs All values are for total Project/Contract and not related to fiscal year budgets. ' Total advances of $1.377M represents the total Measure "A" previous advances under this agreement. This amt . was paid in full by City of Murrieta November 1995. 10 10 10 $1,377,000 $0 $1,377,000 10 $1,600,000 $1,414,493 $1,600,000 $1,414,493 $5,212,623 $4,464,033 $5,212,623 $4,464,033 $1,936,419 $1,851,704 $1,324,500 $1,266,555 $5,094,027 $4,871,173 $2,139,067 $2,045,487 $16,544,689 $13.868,078 $0 10 $0 10 $0 10 $0 % EXPENDITURES TO -DATE AGAINST APPR OVED CO MMIT. 8.1 % 8.1% 100.0 % 100.0% 100.0 % 100.0% 100.0 % $0 100.0% $0 100.0% $0 100.0% 10 51.4 % Page 3 of 3 AGENDA ITEM NO. 6A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Marilyn Williams, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: FY 98/99 Measure A Commuter Assistance Buspool Subsidy As part of the Measure A Commuter Assistance Program, the Commission provides funding support to buspools used by Riverside County residents for their home to work commutes along the Route 91 corridor. The Commission adopted the Measure A buspool subsidy in October 1990 and established a monthly subsidy rate of $1,175 ($25/seat/month) in support of commuter buspool operations. • The subsidy rate has not changed since inception of the policy. To provide additional guidance, the Commission established a minimum buspool ridership policy in June 1995. The policy requires staff to report to the Commission when a buspool's ridership falls to 25 or below and seek direction regarding the continuation of the buspool's subsidy. A ridership summary chart for FY 97/98 subsidized buspools is attached as Exhibit A. To renew their annual subsidy, an existing buspool is required to request continuation funding for the new fiscal year from the Commission in writing. Attached as Exhibit B are the FY 98/99 request letters from the following three existing buspools: RIVERSIDE/FULLERTON BUSPOOL: Begun in the early 1980's, the Riverside to Fullerton - Raytheon (formerly known as Hughes) buspool route includes stops at park and ride lots at La Sierra University and Corona areas. The average monthly ridership for the current fiscal year is 31 passengers with the lowest single monthly ridership being 21 and the highest 35. As Raytheon pays its employees a $21 transit subsidy, the monthly pass cost for Raytheon employees is $65. Any non -Raytheon employee passengers pay $86. The monthly pass cost is low in comparison to similar buspools due to the fact it is the longest running buspool and there is a close family relationship between the buspool contractor, Hunt Transportation, and its driver. The contract provider has accessible coaches available for use on the route if a person with disabilities purchases a monthly buspool pass. RIVERSIDE/EL SEGUNDO BUSPOOL: Begun in June, 1995, the Riverside to El Segundo - Raytheon buspool route includes stops at the park and ride lots at the Galleria at Tyler Mall and Corona Community Church. The average monthly ridership for the current fiscal year is 46 passengers with the lowest single monthly ridership being 45 and the highest 47. As Raytheon pays its employees a $21 transit subsidy, the monthly pass cost for Raytheon employees is $109. Any non - Raytheon employee passengers pay $130. The contract provider, Mark IV, has accessible coaches available for use on the route if a person with disabilities purchases a monthly buspool pass. O,3U14G MORENO VALLEY - EL SEGUNDO BUSPOOL: Begun in February, 1996, the Moreno Valley to El Segundo - Raytheon buspool route includes stops at the Moreno Valley Mall and travels directly to its destination. The average monthly ridership for the current fiscal year is 46 passengers with the lowest single monthly ridership being 44 and the highest 49. As Raytheon pays its employees a $21 transit subsidy, the monthly pass cost for Raytheon employees is $119. Any non - Raytheon employee passengers pay $140. The contract provider, Mark IV, has accessible coaches available for use on the route if a person with disabilities purchases a monthly buspool pass. Like all of the commuter assistance incentives provided by the Commission to encourage commuters to use alternative modes of transportation, the Measure A $25/seat/month subsidy is administered as a "user side subsidy". Unlike all of the other incentives, the buspool subsidy is provided for a 12 month period. This annual subsidy remains cost- effective in comparison to the typical public transit subsidy rate of 80%. While the monthly cost of each existing buspool varies according to the number of route miles and the resulting negotiated service price, the Commission's monthly subsidy represents an average rate of 21 %. When taking other factors into consideration such as the reduction of vehicles on Route 91 during morning peak periods, the number of vehicle miles saved and the elimination of mobile source emissions, the annual buspool subsidy is an effective use of Measure A commuter assistance funds. The three existing buspools have completed all requirements for funding as set forth by the Commission including submittal of: 1) monthly ridership reports; 2) semi-annual operations status reports; and 3) annual funding continuation requests. These reports allow staff to monitor the activities of the buspools to track ridership levels, monitor marketing efforts, and ensure availability to persons with disabilities. The Commission's proposed FY 98/99 budget contains a line item in the amount of $56,400 to provide buspool subsidies. Based on the established monthly $1,175 buspool subsidy policy, the funds are sufficient to support the three existing buspools and one new buspool should a written request for funding assistance be received. Financial Assessment Project Cost $56,400 included as part of the RCTC FY 98/99 Proposed Budget Source of Funds Measure A STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission approve, pursuant to its existing Measure A Commuter Assistance Buspool Subsidy Policy: 1) payment of $1,175/month for the period July 1, 1998 to June 30, 1999 to the existing Riverside/Fullerton, Riverside/EI Segundo, and Moreno Valley/EI Segundo buspools, and one additional buspool upon receipt of a written request for subsidy support; and 2) continuation of the existing monthly and semi-annual buspool reporting requirements as support documentation to monthly subsidy payments. Attachments 00014'? EXHIBIT A Sheet! RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Commuter Assistance Program 1746 Spruce Street Riverside, CA 92507 Buspool Ridership Report FY 97/98 5/15/98 Reporting Period July, 1997 August, 1997 September, 1997 October, 1997 Origin/Destination/Buspool Provider RIVERSIDE/ MORENO RIVERSIDE/ EL VALLEY/ FULLERTON SEGUNDO EL SEGUNDO TOTAL (Hunt) (Mark IV) (Mark IV) RIDERSHIP 33 461 47 33 47 47 33 47 34 47 126 127 48 128 46 127 November, 1997 35 46 48 129 December, 1997 28 46 49 123 January, 1998 February, 1998 March, 1998 29 46 44 29 45 44 32 45 46 119 118' 123 April, 1998 May, 1998 291 47 21 47 45 441 112 121 Total Ridership 336 509 508 1,353 Average Monthly Ridership 31 46 46 123 Page 1 EXHIBIT B Raytheon 5 -May -98 Ms. Tanya L. Love Commuter Assistance Representative Riverside County Transportation Commission P. O. Box 51540 Riverside, CA 92517-2540 Dear Tanya: Raytheon Systems Company 2000 East El Segundo Boulevard Po Box 902 El Segundo, CA 90245-0902 (310) 616-1375 HAY 1 199a ----------------------- RIVERSIDE/CORONA - FULLERTON COMMUTER BUSPOOL In compliance with the requirements of the Riverside County Transportation Commission, Raytheon Systems Company is requesting an extension of funding for the period of 1 July 1998 to 30 June 1999 for the Riverside/Corona Commuter Buspool, The monthly fare for this route is $111 per employee. In addition to the $25 subsidy offered by RCTC, Raytheon and Hughes employees receive a company subsidy of $21 per month for utilizing mass transit. Ridership on this buspool has averaged 32 passengers per month over the past year. Schedule AM Departure AM Departure AM Arrival PM Departure PM Arrival PM Arrival La Sierra Park & Ride Corona Park & Ride Raytheon, Fullerton Raytheon, El Segundo Corona Park & Ride Riverside Tyler Mall Park & Ride 5:00 a.m. 5:15 a.m. 6:00 a.m. 3:30 p.m. 4:30 p.m. 4:45 p.m. Hunt Transportation, the service provider, has coaches available to accommodate the physically challenged if required, The Raytheon Commuter Transportation Center regularly markets rideshare information to our employees, including buspools and vanpools. Employees receive this information through direct mailings, newsletter articles, and from our electronic rideshare bulletin board and website.. In addition, we share resources with other local Employees Transportation Coordinators through our association with industry groups such as ACT. Thank you again, Tanya, for another year of support and assistance by RCTC. If you have questions, contact me at (310) 616-1461. Sincereiy, RAYTHEON SYSTEMS COMPANY 'TOL.fCID( Ros Farooq, Team Leader Commuter Transportation Center c: R. Fries, Riverside/Corona Bus Coordinator 1 r 000149 EXHIBIT B Raytheon 5 -May -98 Ms. Tanya L. Love Commuter Assistance Representative Riverside County Transportation Commission P. O. Box 51540 Riverside, CA 92517-2540 Dear Tanya: RIVERSIDE/CORONA - EL SEGUNDO COMMUTER BUSPOOL Raytheon Systems Company 2000 East El Segundo Boulevard Po Box 902 El Segundo, CA 90245-0902 " (310) 616-1375 In compliance with the requirements of the Riverside County Transportation Commission, Raytheon Systems Company is requesting an extension of funding for the period of 1 July 1998 to 30 June 1999 for the Riverside/Corona Commuter Buspool. The monthly fare for this route is $155 per employee. In -addition to the $25 subsidy offered by RCTC, Raytheon and Hughes employees receive a company subsidy of $21 per month for utilizing mass transit. Ridership on the Riverside/Corona buspool has averaged 46 passengers over the past year. Schedule AM Departure AM Departure AM Arrival PM Departure PM Arrival PM Arrival Riverside Tyler Mall Park & Ride Corona Park & Ride Raytheon, El Segundo Raytheon, El Segundo Corona Park & Ride Riverside Tyler Mall Park & Ride 4:30 a.m. 4:45 a.m. 5:25 a.m. 3:20 p.m. 4:30 p.m. 4:45 p.m. Mark IV, the service provider, has coaches available to accommodate the physically challenged if required. The Raytheon Commuter Transportation Center regularly markets rideshare information to our employees, including buspools and vanpools. Employees receive this information through direct mailings, newsletter articles, and from our electronic rideshare bulletin board and website.. In addition, we share resources with other local Employees Transportation Coordinators through our association with industry groups such as ACT, South Bay Transportation Forum, Westchester/LAX TMA, etc. Thank you again, Tanya, for another year of support and assistance by RCTC. If you have questions, contact me at (310) 616-1461. Sincerely-, RAYTHEON SYSTEMS COMPANY Rose Farooq, Team Leader Commuter Transportation Center c: D. Cross, Riverside/Corona Bus Coordinator 000150 EXHIBIT B Raytheon 5 -May -98 Ms. Tanya L. Love Commuter Assistance Representative Riverside County Transportation Commission P. O. Box 51540 Riverside, CA 92517-2540 Dear Tanya: Raytheon Systems Company 2000 East El Segundo Boulevard Po Box 902 El Segundo, CA 90245-0902 (310) 616-1375 MORENO VALLEY - EL SEGUNDO COMMUTER BUSPOOL In compliance with the requirements of the Riverside County Transportation Commission, Raytheon Systems Company is requesting an extension of funding for the period of 1 July 1998 to 30 June 1999 for the Moreno Valley Commuter Buspool. The monthly fare for this route is $165 per employee. In addition to the $25 subsidy offered by RCTC, Raytheon and Hughes employees receive a company subsidy of $21 per month for utilizing mass transit. Ridership on the Moreno Valley buspool has averaged 47 passengers over the past year. Schedule AM Departure AM Arrival PM Departure PM Arrival Moreno Valley Mall Raytheon, El Segundo Raytheon, El Segundo Moreno Valley Mall 4:15 a.m. 5:25 a.m. 3:20 p.m. 5:00 p.m. Mark IV, the service provider, has coaches available to accommodate the physically challenged if required. The Raytheon Commuter Transportation Center regularly markets rideshare information to our employees, including buspools and vanpools. Employees receive this information through direct mailings, newsletter articles, and from our electronic rideshare bulletin board and website.. In addition, we share resources with other local Employees Transportation Coordinators through our association with industry groups such as ACT, South Bay Transportation Forum, Westchester/LAX TMA, etc. Thank you again, Tanya, for another year of support and assistance by RCTC. If you have questions, contact me at (310) 616-1461. Sincerely, RAYTHEON SYSTEMS COMPANY Rose Farooq, Team Leader Commuter Transportation Center c: F. Peevy, MV Bus Coordinator 000151 AGENDA ITEM 6B RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Cathy Bechtel, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Request from the Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency to Amend Its FY1998 Operating Plan and Reprogram Capital Funds As a result of comments received through previous Unmet Transit Needs Hearings, the Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency had made strong efforts in FY 1998 to improve their marketing regarding available transit services in the Valley. They have included information regarding the Dial -A -Ride service in the City's utility bills as well as in regular weekly advertising in the Palo Verde Times. The advertising has proven to be a success in that ridership has increased by 33% over FY97. With the increased demand for service, the agency has tried to be responsive by adding a third vehicle during peak ridership times (10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.). The Agency is requesting the Commission's approval to transfer $20,000 in surplus capital funds to support operating expenses in FY 98. The Commission programmed $150,000 in capital for the purchase of two replacement vehicles in FY 98. The Agency was able to purchase the vehicles for $102,061, so sufficient revenues are available to meet this request. Financial Assessment Project Cost Source of Funds Included in Fiscal Year Budget Included in Program Budget Approved Allocation Budget Adjustment Required Financial Impact Not Applicable $20,000 Palo Verde Valley Local Transportation Funds Y Y N Year Programmed Year of Allocation Year 98 98 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission approved the request from the Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency to reprogram $20,000 in capital funds to operating funds for use in FY 98. 000152 AGENDA ITEM 6C RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: TO: June 3, 1998 Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Marilyn Williams, Program Manager THROUGH: SUBJECT: Eric Haley, Executive Director San Bernardino Associated Governments FY 98/99 Commuter Assistance Program Contract For the past five years, San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) has contracted with the Commission to develop, implement and manage a commuter incentive project for San Bernardino County commuters. The project, known as Option Rideshare was developed as a "sister" incentive project to the Commission's Measure A commuter incentive project, Advantage Rideshare. Additionally, SANBAG and the Commission jointly established /n/and Empire Commuter Services in FY 95/96 when it was determined by the two agencies that the Inland Empire would assume direct responsibility for the provision of local employer rideshare services as opposed to contracting with Southern California Rideshare, a division of Southern California Association of Governments. Together, Option.Rideshare and Inland Empire Commuter Services make-up SANBAG's Commuter Assistance Program. Based on SANBAG staff's review of the two projects' performance this current fiscal year, the Commission was asked to develop and submit a FY 98/99 work plan and budget for continuation of their Commuter Assistance Program. The proposed budget, attached as Exhibit A, was prepared by staff in cooperation with the Commission's transportation demand management consultant, Inland Transportation Services (ITS), who administers and staffs the Program under the direction of the Commission. Attached as Exhibit B is the proposed contract between SANBAG and the Commission which defines the terms and conditions regarding project goals, budgets, reporting, invoicing and payment for services rendered. The SANBAG prepared contract is being reviewed by Commission staff and Legal Counsel. The contract was approved by the SANBAG Board at its May, 1998, meeting. Staff seeks Commission approval to enter into the contract with SANBAG as part of the Commission's continuing bi-county partnership with SANBAG in the delivery of coordinated commuter and employer rideshare services. The project budgets detailed in Exhibit A assume the same labor rates for ITS services as set forth in the Commission's draft FY 98/99 budget. Also included in SANBAG's Commuter Assistance Program budget is funding for the development and production of marketing materials by Geographics. As the SANBAG contract budget is not part of the Commission's proposed budget, staff seeks approval to incorporate the ITS and Geographics costs in the Commission's consultant agreements with the two firms in an amount not to exceed $444,114 (labor) and $10,973 (expenses) for ITS and $45,000 for Geographics. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission: 1) approve, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, the SANBAG/RCTC contract to continue implementation and management of the SANBAG Commuter Assistance Program for FY 98/99; 2) authorize the Chairperson to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) approve the incorporation of the SANBAG Commuter Assistance Program consultant costs in the Commission's contracts with Inland Transportation Services and Geographics in an amount not to exceed $444,114 (labor) and $10,973 (expenses), and $45,000 respectively for services to fulfill RCTC's contractual obligations to SANBAG. Attachments RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Marilyn Williams, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: San Bernardino Associated Governments FY Assistance Program Contract 98/99 Commuter For the past five years, San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) has contracted with the Commission to develop, implement and manage a commuter _incentive project for San Bernardino County commuters. The project, known as Option Rideshare was developed as a "sister" incentive project to the Commission's Measure A commuter incentive project, Advantage Rideshare. Additionally, SANBAG and the Commission jointly established In/and Empire Commuter Services in FY 95/96 when it was determined by the two agencies that the Inland Empire would assume direct responsibility for the provision of local employer rideshare services as opposed to contracting with Southern California Rideshare, a division of Southern California Association of Governments. Together, Option Rideshare and Inland Empire Commuter Services make-up SANBAG's Commuter Assistance Program. Based on SANBAG staff's reviewof the two projects' performance this current fiscal year, the Commission was asked to develop and submit a FY 98/99 work plan and budget for continuation of their Commuter Assistance Program. The proposed budget, attached as Exhibit A, was prepared by staff in cooperation with the Commission's transportation demand management consultant, Inland Transportation Services (ITS), who administers and staffs the Program under the direction of the Commission. Attached as Exhibit B is the proposed contract between SANBAG and the Commission which defines the terms and conditions regarding project goals, budgets, reporting, invoicing and payment for services rendered. The SANBAG prepared contract is being reviewed by Commission staff and Legal Counsel. The contract was approved by the SANBAG Board at its May, 1998, meeting. Staff seeks Commission approval to enter into the contract with SANBAG as part of the Commission's continuing bi- county partnership with SANBAG in the delivery of coordinated commuter and employer rideshare services. The project budgets detailed in Exhibit A assume the same labor rates for ITS services as set forth in the Commission's draft FY 98/99 budget. As the SANBAG contract 0a0153 budget is not part of the Commission's proposed budget, staff seeks approval to incorporate the ITS costs in the Commission's consultant agreement in an amount not to exceed $444,114 (labor) and $228,823 (expenses). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission: 1) approve, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, the SANBAG/RCTC contract to continue implementation and management of the SANBAG Commuter Assistance Program for FY 98/99; 2) authorize the Chairperson to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) approve the incorporation of the SANBAG Commuter Assistance Program consultant costs in the Commission's contracts with Inland Transportation Services in an amount not to exceed $444,114 (labor) and $228,823 (expenses), to fulfill RCTC's contractual obligations to SANBAG. Attachments OUti154 EXHIBIT A San Bernardino Commuter Assistance Programs Fiscal Year 1998-99 Inland Empire Commuter Services $287,205 Provides a variety of services to employers who participate in trip reduction activities, including network meetings, technical assistance, promotions, coordination of average vehicle ridership surveys and RideGuide dissemination, Rideshare Connection broadcast fax and coordination with other rideshare agencies and service providers. Also includes special project assistance from IECS staff towards other related SANBAG projects, such as 1-800 Commute, I-10 and Route 30 public awareness campaigns, RTAC,inventory of existing Park & Ride lots in San Bernardino County. Goals: • Provide 150 AVR/RideGuide services to employer worksites • Coordinate production of 33,000 surveys • Provide 170 technical assistance and survey/RideGuide services to assist employers in preparing and implementing trip reduction programs. • Sponsor three employer transportation network meetings. • Develop and implement three employer rideshare marketing campaigns • Broadcast 18 Rideshare Connection facsimiles to approximately 288 employer worksites • Implement the 4th Annual SANBAG Employer Partnership Awards Program Cost Funding Expense Category $' 2,000 Measure I Expenses associated with hosting ETC Network events $285,000 STP Consulting labor. expenses marketing, equipment, telephone $287,205 Option Rideshare - In -County Program $197,997 Offers San Bernardino County residents who commute to employment within the county, up to $2 a day (in local merchant gift certificates) for each day they participate in a rideshare mode, during a three month period. Goal: Solicit 500 participants to try a rideshare mode for three months Reduce 48,090 one-way vehicle trips Cost Funding Expense Category $ 65,000 Measure I Direct commuter incentives in certificates/vouchers/subsidies $132.997 STP Consulting labor. expenses, marketing. equipment, telephone $197,997 A99002.wpd 030155 FY 1999 San Bernardino Commuter Assistance Programs, Continued Option Rideshare - Out -of -County Program 5187 735 Offers San Bernardino County residents who commute to employment outside the county, up to $2 a day (in local merchant gift certificates) for each day they participate in a rideshare mode, during a three month period. Goal: Solicit 250 participants to try a rideshare mode for three months Reduce 30,060 one-way vehicle trips. Cost $ 35,000 $152,735 $187,735 Funding Measure I STP Expense Category Direct commuter incentives in certificates/vouchers/subsidies Consultin labor ex enses market` rnent. tele hone Budget/Funding Summary SANBAG's FY 1999 Commuter Assistance Program Summary of Program Funding STP Funds $ 570,937 Measure I Funds $ 102,000 Total Program Funding: $ 672,937 Summary of Expenses by Labor Incentives Marketing Computer/Equipment Postage Operational Expenses Total Expenses Summary of Funding by Program Category Program Category Option Rideshare Out -of -County Option Rideshare In -County Inland Empire Commuter Services Special Projects Total STP $ 152,735 $ 132,997 $ 269,882 $ 15.323 $ 570,937 Measure I $ 35,000 $ 65,000 $ 2,000 $ 0 $ 102,000 Category $ 444,114 $ 102,000 $ 45,000 $ 22,550 $ 14,000 $ 45.273 $ 672,937 Total $187,735 $197,997 $271,882 $ 15.323 $672,937 M:\MICHELLE\A99002.WPD April 8, 1998 A99002.wpd 000156 EXHIBIT B AGREEMENT NO. 99-002 BETWEEN SAN BERNARDINO ASSOCIATED GOVERNMENTS AND RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF EMPLOYER AND COMMUTER RIDESHARE SERVICES AND PROGRAMS THIS CONTRACT is entered into as of this day of June 1998, in the State of California by and .between SAN BERNARDINO ASSOCIATED GOVERNMENTS referred to herein as "SANBAG", and the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, referred to herein as "RCTC". WHEREAS, SANBAG approved allocation of federal Surface Transportation Program for trip reduction services and Measure I funds to fund incentives for the commuter programs. WHEREAS, SANBAG requires professional and consulting services with respect to the provision of commuter services within San Bernardino County. WHEREAS, RCTC has managed the bi-county Inland Empire Commuter Services program since November 3, 1993, and has the expertise and resources necessary to manage such services for SANBAG. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: A. Contract Services. 1. RCTC will select a Consultant to administer, market, and implement a commuter services program in coordination with RCTC's commuter services program and in coordination with the regional ridesharing core services program in compliance with and as specified in Attachment A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 2. RCTC shall provide program administration and oversight and assure that its Consultant performs its services within the budgets set forth in Attachment A. 3. RCTC shall provide SANBAG with a bi-monthly report of progress relative to tasks identified in Attachment A to this Agreement and in such detail as may be approved by SANBAG. B. Compensation. 1. It is understood that SANBAG funding for the program under this Agreement will not exceed $672,937 and is being provided from the following sources: a) $570,937 from federal Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act Surface Transportation Program (ISTEA-STP) funds, A99002.wpd 030157 b) $102,000 from San Bernardino's local %2 cent sales tax, Measure I funding. It is agreed that SANBAG Measure I funds will reimburse RCTC for the cost of purchasing direct commuter incentives and other promotional items not reimbursable by STP. STP funds shall not be used for direct commuter incentives and promotional items, and invoices submitted to SANBAG shall clearly delineate this program expenditure. It is agreed that in the event funds set forth in (a) andlor (b) above do not become available to SANBAG for this Agreement, SANBAG shall pay to RCTC from other sources any amounts required to cover RCTC's costs to the date of Agreement termination. 2. SANBAG shall pay RCTC on a cost -reimbursement basis, based upon invoices which delineate charges based on tasks identified in Attachment A. All invoices shall be provided to SANBAG no more frequently than on a monthly basis. 3. SANBAG shall be fully responsible for obtaining cost reimbursements of ISTEA-STP funds. 4. SANBAG shall review all billings submitted by RCTC for accuracy and process payment based thereon to RCTC in a timely manner. 5. RCTC shall maintain during the terms of this Agreement and for three years thereafter accounting records which cover the receipt and disbursement of all funds provided for the programs administered and implemented under this Agreement. Such records shall be made available for inspection during normal business hours by duly authorized representatives of SANBAG, Caltrans and the United States Department of Transportation. C. Term. 1.' This Agreement shall commence on July 1, 1998, and terminate on June 30, 1999 unless it is extended by a written amendment approved by the parties. 2. Either party may terminate this Agreement by giving thirty (30) days written notice to the other for any reason, including, but not limited to, changes in legislation, rules and regulations impacting trip reduction programs. SANBAG shall pay for any service provided up to the effective date of the termination. 3. The Executive Directors of both RCTC and SANBAG shall have the authority in their sole discretion to give notice of termination on behalf of their respective agencies. D. Indemnification and Insurance. 1 a) It is understood and agreed that neither RCTC nor any officer, employee, consultant or agent thereof is responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reasons of anything done or omitted to be done by SANBAG under or in connection with any work authority or jurisdiction delegated to SANBAG under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, SANBAG shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless RCTC, and all its officers, employees, consultants and agents from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done A99002.wpd by SANBAG under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to SANBAG under this Agreement. b) It is understood and agreed that neither SANBAG nor any officer, employee, consultant or agent thereof is responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reasons of anything done or omitted to be done by RCTC under or in connection with any work authority or jurisdiction delegated to RCTC under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, RCTC shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless SANBAG, and all its officers, employees, consultants and agents from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by RCTC under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to RCTC under this Agreement. 2. Commercial General Liability Insurance. RCTC's Consultant shall maintain occurrence version commercial general liability insurance or equivalent form with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. If such insurance contains a general aggregate limit, it shall apply separately to this Agreement or be no less than two times the occurrence limit. Such insurance shall: a) Name SANBAG, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and Consultants as insured with respect to performance of Services. Such insured status shall contain no special limitations on the scope of its protection to the above -listed insured. b) Be primary with respect to any insurance or self insurance programs covering SANBAG, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and Consultants. c) Contain standard separation of insured provisions. 3. Business Automobile Liability Insurance. RCTC's Consultant shall maintain business automobile liability insurance or equivalent form with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. Such insurance shall include coverage for owned, hired and non - owned automobiles. 4. Workers' Compensation Insurance. RCTC's Consultant shall maintain workers' compensation insurance with statutory limits and employers' compensation insurance with statutory limits and employers' liability insurance with limits of not less than $1,000,000 per accident. E. Rights of SANBAG. The Executive Directors of both SANBAG and RCTC shall have full authority to exercise their respective entity's rights under this contract. F. Independent Contractor. RCTC. and its Consultant shall be an independent contractor in performing service under this contract. A99002.wpd 030159 IN WITNESS THEREOF, THE AUTHORIZED PARTIES HAVE BELOW SIGNED AND EXECUTED THE AGREEMENT ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE: SAN BERNARDINO ASSOCIATED RIVERSIDE COUNTY GOVERNMENTS TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION David R. Eshleman, President REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL Norman R. King, Executive Director APPROVED AS TO FORM FOR SANBAG Ronald D. Reitz, Deputy County Counsel Bob Buster, Chair REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL Eric A. Haley, Executive Director APPROVED AS TO FORM FOR RCTC Best, Best & Krieger, Counsel RCTC REVIEWED FOR FISCAL IMPACT Dean Martin, Chief Financial Officer A99002.wpd 030160 AGENDA ITEM NO. 6D RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Budget & Finance Committee Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: FY 1997-98 SB 821 Program Extension for the Cities of Murrieta, Riverside, and San Jacinto and the County of Riverside City of Murricta The City of Murrieta was allocated $113,622 in FY 1997-98 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program funds for the construction of the Jefferson Avenue Bike Lane project. The City has plan specifications and engineering reports 90% complete, but need to finalize utility relocation issues related to road widening for the proposed bike lanes. Therefore, the City of Murrieta is requesting a one year extension to June 30, 1999 to award the construction contract for the project. City of Riverside The City of Riverside was allocated $82,110 in FY 1997-98 SB 821 Program funds for the construction of one sidewalk project and four wheelchair ramp projects. The plans are in final design for three of the projects and the City expects to begin construction by mid -August. However, they must postpone construction of the Central Avenue Wheelchair Ramps until early 1999 when Arlington Avenue is reopened to through traffic. The fifth project, Lincoln Avenue Wheelchair Ramps, will be completed by the June 30, 1998 deadline. Therefore, the City of Riverside is requesting a six-month extension to December 31, 1998 for the Blaine Street sidewalk project ($5,200), the Brockton Avenue wheelchair ramp project ($18,360), and the Chicago Avenue wheelchair ramp project ($11,500) and a one-year extension to June 30, 1999 to complete the Central Avenue wheelchair ramp project ($21,600). City of San Jacinto The City of San Jacinto was allocated $35,000 in FY 1997-98 SB 821 Program funds for the construction of the Shaver Street sidewalk project. The City has completed the engineering for the project; however, construction of water, sewer, and other street improvements are also included in the project which may delay advertisement until June 1998. Therefore, the City of San Jacinto is requesting a sixty day extension to August 30, 1998 to award the contract for the Shaver Street sidewalk project. 0u016_t County of Riverside The County of Riverside was allocated $180,900 in FY 1997-98 Program funds for the construction of four sidewalk projects throughout the county. They have completed the final design and environmental work on two of the projects and expects to advertise and award the bids by mid -June. However, they are unable to advertise and award the construction contracts for the Serfas Club Drive ($43,000) and Airport Boulevard/Palm Street ($70,000) sidewalk projects prior to the June 30, 1998 deadline. Therefore, the County of Riverside is requesting a one-year extension to June 30, 1999 to award the bids for these two sidewalk projects. Financial Assessment Project Cost $318,282 Source of Funds TDA Article 3 Included in Fiscal Year Budget Y �v. Year Included in Program Budget Y Year Programmed 1997- 98 Approved Allocation Y Year of Allocation 1997- 98 Budget Adjustment Required Financial Impact Not Applicable STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission grant the Cities Murrieta, Riverside, and San Jacinto and the County of Riverside the extensions as requested to complete their respective SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities projects. 030162 0419:4 CITY OF MURRIETA 26442 Beckman Court. Murrieta. CA 92562 Internet Address: Telephone: 909-698-1040 Fax: 909-698-4509 ci.murrieta.ca.us May 19, 1998 Mr. Jerry Rivera Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 Subject: FY 1997-98 SB 821 Program; Jefferson Avenue; Project 96-136 Dear Mr. Rivera: RCTC has allocated $113,622 of SB 821 funds for Jefferson Avenue bike lanes. We request an extension of allocated funds from June 30, 1998 to June 30, 1999. This will allow time to finalize utility relocation issues related to road widening for the proposed bike lanes. We have plan specifications and engineering reports 90% complete and expect to begin construction in June 1999. Thank you for partnering in this project that will provide a completed north -south bicycle route connection between the southerly City limits and Murrieta Hot Springs Road. Sincerely, Dan Clark Assistant City Engineer DC/rlb "People Serving People" 041683 CITY OF RIVERSIDE Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 Attention: Mr. Jerry Rivera Subject: SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities -1997/98 RE: Time Extension Dear Jerry: We are requesting a time extension for our fiscal year 1997/98 SB821 Claims since we will not be able to award four of the five sites by June 30, 1998. However, we anticipate construction of the following three sites by mid -August 1998 with claims submitted in November 1998. We would appreciate a six-month time extension for these three sites: 1.) Blaine Street Sidewalk 2.) Brockton Avenue Wheelchair Ramps 3.) Chicago Avenue Wheelchair Ramps Construction for a fourth site, Central Avenue Wheelchair Ramps, must be postponed until early 1999. During the remainder of 1998 Central Avenue will be used as the primary detour route for the Arlington Avenue Underpass project. Any construction along Central Avenue will impair traffic flow. Therefore, we will postpone this construction until early 1999, when Arlington Avenue is reopened to through traffic. We would appreciate a one-year time extension for this site. The fifth site, Lincoln Avenue Wheelchair Ramps, is presently under construction. A claim for these facilities will be submitted next month. If you have any questions, please call me at 782-5575. Sincerely, Rick McGrath Public Works Director PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 3900 MAIN STREET • RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92522 • (909) 782-5341 FAX: (909) 782-5622 Administration THEE C I TY OF SAN J AC I NTO April 24, 1998 Mr. Jerry Rivera Progress Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 Re: 97-98 / SB-821 Update The City of San Jacinto is anticipating the. start and completion of the construction of sidewalk along Shaver Street this summer. The engineering for the sidewalk improvement has been completed for some time now, but we are including construction .of water, sewer and other street improvements along Shaver Street which may delay advertisement until June of this year. If you wish to review the sidewalk improvement plans, please call me, otherwise we will notify you when the contract is awarded in late June or early July of this year. For this reason, we respectfully request sixty (60) days extension to award the contract and submit our invoice to RCTC. Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Habib Motlagh City Engineer 20! E Main Srreer • San Jacinto CA 92583 lei: 909/654-7337 • Fax: 909/654-3728 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE SIDE TRANSPORTATION AND LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY Transportation Department April 10, 1998 Mr. Hideo Sugita Assistant Director - Planning and Programming Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 Attention: Jerry Rivera, Program Manager RE: FY 1997/98 SB 821 Extension of Time Request - Sidewalks Dear Mr. Sugita: U41496 David E. Barnhart Director of Transportation The County Transportation Department was approved to receive FY1997/98 SB 821 Funds for the following projects: (1) Serfas Club Drive Sidewalk, Coronita Area - $43,000 (2) Airport Boulevard/Palm Street Sidewalks, Thermal Area $70,000 (3) Ontario Avenue Sidewalk, El Cerrito Area $45,900 (4) Sun City Disability Access Ramps - $22,000 The current status of these projects is as follows: (1) The preliminary design for the Serfas Club Drive Sidewalk has been completed. We intend to commence the acquisition process to secure right of way for this sidewalk project in the next few weeks. (2) The preliminary design for the Airport Boulevard/Palm Street Sidewalks project has been completed. Environmental work is expected to commence shortly. (3) The Ontario Avenue Sidewalk final design and environmental work have been completed. The construction project will be advertised by the end of April, with award expected by June 15, 1998. Construction is expected to be completed by September 15, 1998. (4) The Sun City Disability Access Ramps project will be advertised, awarded, and constructed as a part of the bid document for the Ontario Avenue Sidewalk project. 4080 Lemon Street, 8th Floor • Riverside, California 92501 • (909) 275-6740 P.O. Box 1090 • Riverside, California 92502-1090 • FAX (909) 275-6721 Hideo Sugita - RCTC Page 2 April 10, 1998 We are unable to advertise and award construction contracts for the Serfas Club Drive and Airport Boulevard/Palrn Street Sidewalk projects prior to the current SB 821 deadline of June 30, 1998. Therefore, we respectfully request a one year extension of time, until June 30, 1999, for these two projects. If you have any questions regarding these projects, please contact George A. Johnson, Deputy Director of Transportation, at (909) 955-6741, or Atef Zaki, Senior Civil Engineer, at (909) 955-6787. Director of Transportation SBW:jas cc: Atef Zaki Edwin Studor Roy Null AGENDA ITEM 6E RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Marilyn Williams, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: FY 98/99 Southern California Rideshare Agreement for Regional Southern California Rideshare (SCR), formerly known as Commuter Transportation Services, Inc. (CTS), has provided regional rideshare services for over 20 years in the southern California r egion including Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura Counties. For many years, stable funding was secured from Caltrans at the state level with addition contributions from each of the respective county transportation commissions (CTC's). As the Commission will recall, for the last several years state funding was continually in question requiring extensive lobbying efforts at various levels to secure the following years allocation. In FY 97/98, Caltrans authorized the use of Transportation System Management (TSM) fund savings for regional rideshare services as the "last" bridge funding with the expectation that local jurisdictions would assume all future funding responsibilities. The five county region received $4.96M in TSM funds. Based on the adopted roles and responsibilities between the Regional Transportation Agencies Coalition (RTAC) and SCR, a regional rideshare core services work program was prepared in cooperation with SCR and approved by the RTAC. Of the total funding received, $3.79M was allocated to SCR and $1.17M was allocated to the CTC's for specific employer services at the local county level. With the passage of SB45, each of the CTC's worked internally to identify funding commitments for SCR in FY 98/99. At the staff level, efforts were targeted toward securing each agency's population based share of the prior years TSM allocation of $3.79M . The effort was also aimed at securing funding commitments for a six year period. At the same time, the RTAC's Rideshare Subcommittee began development of the FY98/99 regional rideshare core services work program which generally includes database maintenance, survey and RideGuide production, telephone customer information service and marketing implementation. By February 1998, each of the five CTC's had formalized budgets relative to SB45 and established funding levels for SCR. Of the Commission's, OCTA and RCTC did not allocate the target amount initially sought by staff. As none of the CTC's elected to pay more than their fair share based on a population formula, OCTA and RCTC equally constrained the total SCR funding for FY98/99 at $2,712,730. RCTC represents 8.05% of the five county population base. Included in RCTC's FY98/99 draft budget under the Commuter Assistance Program is a Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality (CMAQ) line item allocation to SCR in the amount of $220,000 equaling its population share. 000163 The final $2.7M CTC funding for SCR plus an estimated $255,986 in carryover funds left an unfunded target amount of $800,000+. Staff from the CTC's and SCR revised the work program to reflect available funding. See Attachment A for the work program scope of services and budget summary information. Concerned about the reduced funding level, SCR has been in the process of seeking additional revenues through other sources including the SCAG Overall Work Program and South Coast Air Quality Management District to fund tasks not included in the constrained work program. As the CTC's have taken a collaborative approach in the development of the work program, and expect to oversee the performance of SCR through the collective RTAC process, a model agreement was prepared by RCTC's Legal Counsel for use by the individual CTC's. The model agreement, see Attachment B, has been reviewed by SCAG Legal Counsel who has requested a number of changes to the document. RCTC Legal Counsel and staff are in the process of negotiating final contract language. It is staff's recommendation that no work should be performed by SCR beginning July 1998 until all contract issues are finalized. Financial Assessment Project Cost $220,000 Source of Funds STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Congestion Mitigation/ Air Quality included in proposed FY98/99 RCTC budget That the Commission: 1) approve the Southern California Rideshare FY98/99 Riverside Regional Rideshare Services Work Program, 2) authorize the expenditure of Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality funds in an amount not to exceed $220,000 pursuant to adoption of RCTC's FY98/99 budget, and 3) authorize the RCTC Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute an agreement with SCR. 030164 Attachment A Fiscal Year 98-99 Riverside County Regional Rideshare Core Services Work Program Services to be Provided by Southern California Rideshare Note: The Total Program Costs will be shared by the five local county transportation commissions on a population basis; therefore, RCTC will be contributing 8.05% of the total program costs funded by Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality monies. Survey and RideGuide Production Total: $968,283 - RCTC: $77,947 Produce and disseminate survey registration packets for client sites, including Average Vehicle Ridership (AVR)/Transportation survey forms and RideGuide registration instructions. Receive and log client registration materials. Process materials for data entry, enter data, correct data, and perform quality checks for accuracy. Fulfill and mail RideGuides to clients for distribution to employees/commuters. Maintain software to adapt the RideGuide and AVR survey to changing needs. Goals: • Schedule and track 2,500 employer survey packages • Generate 250,000 RideGuides from employer requests, placing approximately 15% of these or 37,000 commuters into a rideshare mode • Generate 25,000 RideGuides from remote terminals, teleservices and internet requests(20,000 call in requests, 1,500 internet inquiries and 3,500 ROLA) Expense Category: Labor, data entry, paper and postage Database Management Total: $810,898 - RCTC: $65,277 Maintain a quality database of rideshare information, secure from tampering yet accessible to user's needs, with timely and accurate software. Provide commuter matching, vanpool matching, transit itineraries and schedules, Park'N'Ride locations, commuter incentives, reports, maps, statistics and information displays. Provide technical support, training, and quality assurances as appropriate. Goals: Maintain a an accurate database of 425,000 registrants. Maintain a five day turnaround time for RideGuide processing. Expense Category: Labor, temporary labor, and software licences Telephone Customer Information Center Total: $ 522,128 - RCTC: $42,031 Provide rideshare information to callers via the 1 -800 -COMMUTE information line and the internet, providing matching and other information on carpools, vanpools, buspools, and Park'N'Ride lot locations. Conduct outbound customer calls to provide ongoing service, update database information, and generate rideshare placements. Goals: • Conduct 12,000 outbound customer calls • Respond to internet inquiries generating 1,500 rideguides as a result • Respond to 21 ,500 phone inquiries Expense Category: Labor and 1(800) COMMUTE Line Charges 030165 Studies and Regional Marketing Total: $411,423 - RCTC: $33,120 Conduct the annual placement rate study to determine the percentage or recipients of the RideGuide being placed into a rideshare mode. Other Regional Marketing activities to include the planning and implementation of the annual media Rideshare Luncheon event and the production and dissemination of Crossroads to regional employer transportation coordinators. Goals: • Conduct the annual placement rate study/evaluation • Conduct one rideshare week media luncheon, related press releases and materials • Distribute 11 issues of Crossroads brochure, distributing 77,000 copies in the five county region (Los Angeles: 45,430, Orange: 17,710, San Bernardino: 4,620, Riverside: 4,620 and Ventura: 4,620). Expense Category: Labor, consultant, printing/postage & other expenses Budget/Funding Summary A. Program Funding SCAG FY 97/98 Carryover CTC Funds Total Program Funding: B. Expenses by Category Labor/Benefits/Overhead Key Entry/Temporary Labor Placement Study Rideshare Week Event 1(800) COMMUTE Line Charges Software Licenses Printing/Postage Total Expenses C. Funding by Program Category Survey and RideGuide Database Management Telephone Customer Information Center Studies and Regional Marketing Subtotal RCTC Contingency Total $ 255,986 $2,712.730 $2,968,716 $2,387,217 $ 305,000 $ 25,000 $ 5,000 $ 30,000 $ 50,000 $ 166,500 $2,968,716 Total Program Cost $ 968,283 $1,066,882 $ 522,128 $ 411.423 $2,968,716 $ 0 $ 2,968,716 RCTC's Share $ 77,947 $ 65,277 $ 42,031 $ 33.120 $218,375 $ 1.625 $220,000 Attachment B 0;.0166 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF REGIONAL CORE RIDESHARE SERVICES THIS CONTRACT is entered into as of this day of June 1998, in the State of California by and between RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION referred to herein as "RCTC", and the SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS, referred to herein as "CONSULTANT". WHEREAS, RCTC approved allocation of federal Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality funds for regional core rideshare services, and WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is a public agency possessing the knowledge, personnel and capability to provide regional rideshare services to effect a reduction of traffic congestion, air pollution, and energy consumption in the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura; and WHEREAS, the County Transportation Commissions (CTCs) for each of the above listed counties have collectively participated in formulating and have approved a Work Program, described in Attachment "A" hereto, which describes the core regional rideshare services that CONSULTANT will provide to all of the CTCs as a group; and WHEREAS, each CTC desires to contract with CONSULTANT individually to render the core regional rideshare services to the CTC's as a group, with each CTC paying a certain portion of the overall compensation based on population, as set forth in Attachment "B" hereto, and with CONSULTANT collectively reporting to all of the CTC's on the progress of the Work Program; and NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration for the promises set forth herein, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: SECTION I SERVICES OF THE CONSULTANT; TERM 1. General Scope of Services. CONSULTANT shall furnish all technical and professional services, including labor, material, equipment, transportation, supervision and expertise, necessary to fully and adequately perform the tasks set forth in the Work Program attached hereto as Attachment "A" and incorporated herein by reference (hereinafter referred to as "Services"). 2. Unless earlier terminated as provided herein, the term of this Agreement shall be from July 1, 1998, to June 30, 1999. 030167 SECTION II RESPONSIBILITIES OF CONSULTANT 1. Control and Payment of Subordinates. RCTC retains CONSULTANT on an independent contractor basis and CONSULTANT is not an employee of RCTC. The personnel performing the Services under this Agreement on behalf of CONSULTANT shall at all times be under CONSULTANT's exclusive direction and control. CONSULTANT shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due its employees in connection with their performance of Services under this Agreement and as required by law. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such employees, including, but not limited to, social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance, and workers' compensation insurance. 2. Conformance to Applicable Reauirements. All work prepared by CONSULTANT shall be subject to the approval of RCTC. 3. Indemnification. CONSULTANT shall defend, indemnify and hold RCTC, its officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any and all liability from loss, damage, or injury to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any negligent acts, omissions or wilful misconduct of CONSULTANT arising out of or in connection with CONSULTANT's performance of this AGREEMENT, including without limitation the payment of attorneys' fees. Further, CONSULTANT shall defend at its own expense, including attorneys' fees, RCTC, its officials, officers, employees, and agents in any legal action based upon such negligent acts, omissions or willful misconduct. 4. Standard of Care; Licenses. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services under this Agreement in a skillful and competent manner. CONSULTANT shall be responsible to RCTC for any errors or omissions in its execution of this Agreement. CONSULTANT represents and warrants to RCTC that it has all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to practice its profession. CONSULTANT further represents and warrants that it shall keep in effect all such licenses, permits, and other approvals during the term of this Agreement. 5. Insurance. CONSULTANT shall obtain and shall require its subcontractors to obtain insurance of the types and in the amounts described below and satisfactory to RCTC. A. Commercial General Liability Insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain occurrence version commercial general liability insurance or equivalent form with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. If such insurance contains a general aggregate limit, it shall apply separately to this Agreement or be no less than two times the occurrence limit. Such insurance shall: 1) Name RCTC, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and consultants, as insureds with respect to performance of Services. Such insured status shall contain no special limitations on the scope of its protection to the above -listed insureds. 2) Be primary with respect to any insurance or self insurance programs covering RCTC, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and consultants. 3) Contain standard separation of insureds provisions. 000168 B. Business Automobile Liability Insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain business automobile liability insurance or equivalent form with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. Such insurance shall include coverage for owned, hired and non -owned automobiles. C. Workers' Compensation Insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain workers' compensation insurance with statutory limits and employers' liability insurance with limits of not less than $1,000,000 per accident. D. Certificates/Insurer Rating/Cancellation Notice. 1) CONSULTANT shall, prior to commencement of the Services, furnish to RCTC properly executed certificates of insurance, and certified copies of endorsements, and policies if requested by RCTC, which shall clearly evidence all insurance required in this Section. CONSULTANT shall not allow such insurance to be canceled, allowed to expire or be materially reduced in coverage except on 30 days' prior to written notice to RCTC. 2) CONSULTANT shall maintain such insurance from the time the Services commence until the Services are completed, except as may be otherwise required by this Section. 3) CONSULTANT shall place insurance with insurers having an A.M. Best Company rating of no less than A:VIII and licensed to do business in California. 4) CONSULTANT shall replace certificates, policies and endorsements for any insurance expiring prior to completion of the Services. SECTION III FEES AND PAYMENTS 1. Compensation and Reimbursements. CONSULTANT shall receive compensation and reimbursements for all Services and expenses on a not to exceed basis. The total amount of compensation and reimbursements shall be two million and seven hundred and twelve thousand seven hundred and thirty dollars and no cents ($2,712,730), of which RCTC's share shall be two hundred and twenty thousand dollars and no cents ($220,000), as described more fully in Attachment "B." CONSULTANT shall identify reimbursements by project and task. CONSULTANT shall not reallocate costs between projects and tasks without previous written approval by RCTC. 2. Reporting Requirement and Payment of Compensation. CONSULTANT shall provide to RCTC a monthly statement for the entire Work Program which indicates work hours completed by project and task during the reporting period. Such statement shall be of sufficient detail to demonstrate work effort completed and shall document products produced and goals met. Such statement shall also contain the required information in both narrative and numeric form, in a single format to be approved collectively by RCTC. RCTC shall, within 45 days of receiving such statement, review the statement and pay all approved charges thereon. 3. Sources of Fundinq. It is understood that RCTC funding for the program under this Agreement is being provided from the following source: a) $220,000 from federal Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality Program (ISTEA-CMAQ) funds. It is agreed that in the event funds set forth in this section do not become available to RCTC for this agreement, RCTC shall pay to CONSULTANT from other sources any amounts required to cover RCTC's costs to the date of Agreement termination. 4. Conformance with Funding Source Requirements. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible for conforming with the requirements of the above funding sources. 5. Extra Work. At any time during the term of this Agreement, RCTC may request CONSULTANT 030169 to perform Extra Work. "Extra Work" shall mean any work which is determined by RCTC to be necessary for proper completion of the Services, but which the parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the time of the execution of this Agreement and was not included in the Work Program. CONSULTANT shall not perform, nor be compensated for, Extra Work without obtaining authorization in the form of a written Extra Work Order issued by RCTC's Representative. Such authorized Extra Work shall be compensated at the rates and in the manner set forth in the Extra Work Order. However, no compensation or reimbursements for Extra Work shall be paid except upon this issuance of a written Extra Work Order by RCTC's Representative. In the event an Extra Work Order is not issued and signed by RCTC's Representative, CONSULTANT shall not provide such Extra Work. SECTION IV ACCOUNTING RECORDS CONSULTANT shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to costs incurred under this Agreement. All such records shall be clearly identifiable. CONSULTANT shall allow a representative of RCTC during normal business hours to examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of such records. CONSULTANT shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment under this Agreement. SECTION V GENERAL PROVISIONS 1 . Termination of Agreement. A. RCTC may, by written notice to CONSULTANT, terminate the whole or any part of this Agreement at any time and without cause by giving written notice to CONSULTANT of such termination, and specifying the effective date thereof, at least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. Upon termination, CONSULTANT shall be compensated only for those services which have been adequately rendered to RCTC, and CONSULTANT shall be entitled to no further compensation. CONSULTANT, in executing this Agreement, shall be deemed to have waived any and all claims for damages which may otherwise arise from RCTC's termination of this Agreement for convenience or cause. CONSULTANT may not terminate this Agreement except for cause. 000170 B. In the event this Agreement is terminated in whole or in part as provided in paragraph (A) of this section, RCTC may procure, upon such terms and in such manner as it may determine appropriate, services similar to those terminated. C. In the event this Agreement is terminated as provided in paragraph (A) of this section, RCTC may require CONSULTANT to provide all finished or unfinished documents, data, reports, etc. Prepared by CONSULTANT in connection with the performance of Services under this Agreement. 2. RCTC's Representative. RCTC's Executive Director, or designee, shall serve as RCTC's Representative and shall have the authority to act on behalf of RCTC for all purposes under this Agreement. RCTC's representative shall also review and give approval, as necessary, to the details of CONSULTANT's work as it progresses. 3. Delivery of Notices. All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be given to the respective parties at the following address, or at such other address as the respective parties may provide in writing for this purpose: Southern California Association of Governments 818 West Seventh Street 12th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017-3435 Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 Such notice shall be deemed made when personally delivered or when mailed, forty-eight (48) hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid and addressed to the party at its applicable address. 4. Attorneys' Fees. If either party commences an action against the other party arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing party reasonable attorney's fees and costs of suits. 5. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings or agreements. This Agreement may only be modified by a writing signed by both parties. 6. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. 7. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement. 8. RCTC's Right to Employ Other Consultants. RCTC reserves right to employ other rideshare consultants in connection with managing its affairs. 000171 9. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties, and shall not be assigned by CONSULTANT without the prior written consent of RCTC. 10. Conflict of Interest. A. CONSULTANT covenants that at present time it has no interest, and will not have any interest, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner with the performance of the Services required hereunder. B. As a "public official," as defined by Government Code Section 82048 and California Code of Regulations Section 18700, CONSULTANT agrees to abide by the provisions of the Conflict of Interest Code of RCTC and the determination of the Executive Director as to the status of CONSULTANT's position and the filing of Statements of Economic Interests pursuant to the Political Reform Act (Government Code Section 81000, et seq.). RCTC shall provide a copy of said Conflict of Interest Code to CONSULTANT if CONSULTANT is requested to file. 1 1. Equal Opportunity. CONSULTANT hereby agrees to comply with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, the California Fair Employment Practices Act, and any other applicable federal and state laws and regulations hereinafter enacted. 12. Administration of Agreement. The Executive Director of RCTC or his designee shall be responsible for administering this Agreement on behalf of RCTC. 13. Ownership of Materials/Confidentiality. A. Property of RCTC. All materials and data, including data on magnetic media, prepared by CONSULTANT under this Agreement shall become the property of RCTC upon the completion of the term of this Agreement, except that CONSULTANT shall have the right to retain copies of all such documents and data for its records. RCTC shall not be limited in any way in its use of such data at any time, provided that any such use not within the purposes intended by this Agreement shall be at RCTC's sole risk and provided that CONSULTANT shall be indemnified against any damages resulting from such use, including the release of this material to third parties for a use not intended by this Agreement. Should CONSULTANT, either during or following termination of this Agreement, desire to use any materials prepared in connection with this Agreement, it shall first obtain the written approval of RCTC. B. Confidentiality. All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings, descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other materials described in subsection A either created by or provided to CONSULTANT in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by CONSULTANT. Such materials shall not, without the prior written consent of RCTC, be used by CONSULTANT for any purposes other than the performance of the Services. Nor shall such materials be disclosed to any person or entity not connected with the performance of the. Services. Nothing furnished to CONSULTANT which is otherwise known to CONSULTANT or is generally known, or has become known, to the related industry shall be deemed confidential. CONSULTANT shall not use RCTC's name or insignia, photographs of the project, or any publicity pertaining to the Services in any magazine, trade paper, newspaper, television or radio production or other similar medium without the prior written consent of RCTC. SECTION VI SUBCONTRACTING 1. CONSULTANT shall not subcontract any portion of the work required by this Agreement, except as expressly stated herein, without prior written approval of RCTC. 2. Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision making them subject to all provisions stipulated in this Agreement. 0UOi 7? IN WITNESS THEREOF, THE AUTHORIZED PARTIES HAVE BELOW SIGNED AND EXECUTED THE AGREEMENT ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE: RIVERSIDE COUNTY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS Bob Buster, Chair Judy Mikels, Chair REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL FOR APPROVAL Eric Haley, Executive Director Mark Pisano, Executive Director REVIEWED FOR FISCAL IMPACT REVIEWED FOR FISCAL IMPACT Dean Martin, Chief Financial Officer Louis F. Moret, Chief Operating Officer APPROVED AS TO FORM APPROVED AS TO FORM Best Best & Krieger LLP Counsel to the Riverside County Transportation Commission Helen V. Smookler, SCAG Legal Counsel 000173 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 1 DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager THROUGH: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Award of Landscaping Project between Van Buren Boulevard and Tyler Street At the October 8, 1997 RCTC meeting, the Commission awarded the construction of Soundwall 35B along Diana Street to R. Fox. As a part of this action, the Commission also elected to delete the landscaping component of the work because the bid for these items was not viewed to be competitive by staff. Staff was also directed to rebid the landscaping .portion of the work and have the project ready to award when the construction of the sound wall was complete. The soundwall is now complete and the landscaping portion of the project has been repackaged and rebid. Two Bidders elected to place bids for the project. The results are shown in the following table: Bid Results for Landscaping between Van Buren & Tyler Firm Bid Amount 1 Diversified Landscape Co. $196,442 2 Soholt & Company Landscape Inc. $238,500 E Engineers Estimate $218,450 The low bid is $45,794 lower than the bid received from R. Fox ($242,236 for items 13 - 16) in the previous bid. A detailed bid summary is attached as Exhibit 1. Staff recommends that a $20,000 contingency be established for any contingencies that might be encountered. The form of the agreement is attached as Exhibit 2 for your review. Financial Assessment Project Cost $196,442 + $20,000 Source of Funds Measure A Included in Fiscal Year Budget y Year Included in Program Budget y Year Programmed Approved Allocation Year of Allocation Budget Adjustment Required n STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission award the landscaping project between Van Buren Boulevard and Tyler Street to Diversified Landscape Co. for an amount of $188,450 with a contingency amount of $20,000 using the attached agreement. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager THROUGH: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Award of Landscaping Project between Van Buren and Tyler Streets At the October 8, 1997 RCTC meeting, the Commission awarded the construction of Soundwall 35B along Diana Street to R. Fox. As a part of this action, the Commission also elected to delete the landscaping component of the work because the bid for these items was not viewed to be competitive by staff. Staff was also directed to rebid the landscaping portion of the work and have the project ready to award when the construction of the sound wall was complete. The soundwall is now complete and the landscaping portion of the project has been repackaged and rebid. Two Bidders elected to place bids for the project. The results are shown in the following table: Bid Results for Landscaping between Van Buren & Tyler Firm Bid Amount 1 Diversified Landscape Co. $196,442 2 Soholt & Company Landscape Inc. $238,500 E Engineers Estimate $218,450 The low bid is $45,794 lower than the bid received from R. Fox ($242,236 for items 13 - 16) in the previous bid. A detailed bid summary is attached as Exhibit 1. Staff recommends that a $20,000 contingency be established for any contingencies that might be encountered. The form of the agreement is attached as Exhibit 2 for your review. Financial Assessment Project Cost $196,442 + $20,000 Source of Funds Measure A Included in Fiscal Year Budget Y Year Included in Program Budget Y Year Programmed Approved Allocation Year of Allocation Budget Adjustment Required n Financial Impact Not Applicable 030174 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission award the landscaping project between Van Buren & Tyler streets to Diversified Landscape Co. for an amount of $188,450 with a contingency amount of $20,000 using the attached agreement. 000175 EXHIBIT 1 Item Description Unit of Measure Estimated Quantity Engineers Unit Price Est. Total Cost Diversified Unit Price Landscape Total Cost Soholt & Unit Price Company Total Cost 1 Construction Area Signs LS 1 $1,800 .00 $1,800.00 $4,000 .00 $4,000.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 2 Traffic Control System LS 1 $2,000.00 $2,000 .00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $12,500 .00 $12,500.00 3 Highway Planting LS 1 $50,000 .00 $50,000.00 $36,309.00 $36,309.00 $50,000.00 $50,000 .00 4 Maintain Existing Plants LS 1 $4,825.00 $4,825.00 $10,000.00 $10,000 .00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 5 Plant Establishment LS 1 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $25,000 .00 $25,000 .00 6 8 Station Irrigation Controller (Pedestal Mounted) LS 1 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $2,500 .00 $2,500.00 7 Irrigation System LS 1 $60,000 .00 $60,000.00 $65,133 .00 $65,133.00 $125,000.00 $125,000.00 8 Electrical Service (irrigation) LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000 .00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 9 Mobilization LS 1 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 10 Maintain Existing Irrigation Facilities. LS 1 $4,825.00 $4,825.00 $24,000.00 $24,000 .00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 _ 5/26/983:14 PM Page 1 ($196,442 .00 $238,500.00 y BIDCO MP.XLS EXHIBIT 2 CONTRACT FOR THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION HIGHWAY 91 LANDSCAPE PROJECT (TYLER STREET TO VAN BUREN BLVD.) RCTC Contract No. RO-9848 1. PARTIES AND DATE. This Contract is made and entered into this day of , 19_, by and between the Riverside County Transportation Commission ( hereinafter called the "Commission") and (hereinafter called the "Contractor"). This Contract is for that Work described in the Contract Documents entitled "Highway 91 Landscape Project (Tyler Street to Van Buren Boulevard) RCTC Contract No. RO-9848." 2. RECITALS. 2.1 The Commission is a County Transportation Commission organized under the provisions of Sections 130000, gl seq. of the Public Utilities Code of the State of California, with power to contract for services necessary to achieving its purpose; 2.2 Contractor, in response to a Invitation for Bids issued by Commission on April 27, 1998, has submitted a bid proposal for construction of the Highway 91 Landscape Project (Tyler Street to Van Buren Boulevard) RCTC Contract No. RO-9848. 2.3 Commission has duly opened and considered the Contractor's bid proposal and duly awarded the bid to Contractor in accordance with the Notice Inviting Bids and other Bid Documents and has given written notice to Contractor on 2.4 Contractor has obtained, and delivers concurrently herewith, Performance and Payment Bonds and evidences of insurance coverage as required by the Contract Documents. 3. TERMS. 3.1 Incorporation of Documents. This Contract includes and hereby incorporates in full by reference this Contract and the following Contract Documents provided with the above referenced Notice Inviting Bids, including all exhibits, drawings, specifications and documents therein, and attachments thereto, all of which, including all addendum thereto, are by this reference incorporated herein and made a part of this Contract: RCTC Hwy 91 Landscape Project (R0-9848) (4/27/98) RVPUB\DRD\38219 CONTRACT - 1 0J3178 a. NOTICE INVITING BIDS b. INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS c. CONTRACT BID FORMS d. PAYMENT AND PERFORMANCE BOND FORMS e. ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR SECURITY DEPOSITS (optional) f. CONTRACT APPENDIX PART "A" - Permits PART "B" - General Conditions PART "C" - Special Provisions (under separate cover) PART "D" - Contract Drawings (under separate cover) g. ADDENDUM NO. (S) 3.2 Contractor's Basic Obligation. Contractor promises and agrees, at his own cost and expense, to furnish to the Commission all labor, materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidental and customary work for the construction of the Highway 91 Landscape Project (Tyler Street to Van Buren Boulevard) RCTC Contract No. RO-9848, including alll structures and facilities described in the above referenced Contract Documents (the "Work"). Notwithstanding anything else in the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall complete the Work for a total of _ ($ ), as specified in the bid proposal and pricing schedules submitted by the Contractor in response to the above referenced Notice Inviting Bids. Such amount shall be subject to adjustment in accordance with the applicable terrns of this Contract. All Work shall be subject to, and performed in accordance with the above referenced Contract Documents. 3,3 Period of Performance Contractor shall perform and complete all Work under this Contract, except the plant establishment work, within Forty (40) Working Days of the effective date of the Notice to Proceed, and in accordance with any completion schedule developed pursuant to provisions of the Contract Documents. Contractor shall perform and complete all plant establishment for a full Seven Hundred Fifty (750) Working Days from and after substantial completion of the other Work under this Contract, and in accordance with any completion schedule developed pursuant to the provisions of the Contract Documents. Contractor agrees that if such Work is not completed within the aforementioned periods, liquidated damages will apply as provided by the applicable provisions of the General Conditions, found in Part "B" of the Contract Appendix. The amount of liquidated damages shall equal Seven Hundred Fifty Dollars ($750) for each day, or fraction thereof, it takes to complete the Work, or specified portion(s) of such work, except the plant establishment work, over and above the number RCTC Hwy 91 Landscape Project (R0-9848) (4/27/98) RVPUB\DRD\38219 CONTRACT -2 030:x_'/Y of days specified herein or beyond the Project Milestones established by approved Construction Schedules. The amount of such liquidated damages shall equal Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250) per day for every day it takes to fully and adequately complete the plant establishment work over the above specified period. 3.4 Commission's Basic Obligation. Commission agrees to engage and does hereby engage Contractor as an independent contractor to furnish all materials and to perform all Work according to the terms and conditions herein contained for the sum set forth above. Except as otherwise provided m the Contract Documents, the Commission shall pay to Contractor, as full consideration for the satisfactory performance by the Contractor of services and obligation required by this Contract, the above referenced compensation in accordance with Compensation Provisions set forth in the Contract Documents. 3.5 Con a trctor's I bor Certif cation. Contractor maintains that he is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and agrees to comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Work. A certification form for this purpose is enclosed with this Contract, and shall be executed simultaneously with this Contract. 3.6 Attorneys' Fees. If either party commences an action against the other party arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing party reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit. 3.7 Successors. The parties do for themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns agree to the full performance of all of the provisions contained in this Contract. Contractor may not either voluntarily or by action of law, assign any obligation assumed by Contractor hereunder without the prior written consent of Commission. 3.8 Notices. All notices hereunder and communications regarding interpretation of the terms of the Contract or changes thereto shall be provided by the mailing thereof by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid and addressed as follows: RCTC Hwy 91 Landscape Project (R0-9848) (4/27/98) RVPUB\DRD\38219 CONTRACT -3 OU0180 Contractor: Commission: Attn: Riverside County Transportation Commission 3650 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, California 92501 Attn: Executive Director With Copy to: Erik Galloway Contract Manager RCTC Highway 91 Landscape Project Any notice so given shall be considered received by the other party three (3) days after deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid, addressed to the party at the above address. .Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service. CONTRACTOR By: Name Title Tax I.D. Number: RCTC Hwy 91 Landscape Project (R0-9848) (4/27/98) RVPUB\DRD\38219 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: Supervisor Robert Buster Chairperson RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL By: Eric Haley Executive Director REVIEWED FOR FISCAL IMPACT By: Dean Martin Chief Financial Officer APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Best Best & Krieger LLP Counsel, RCTC CONTRACT -4 000181 CERTIFICATION LABOR CODE - SECTION 1861 I, the undersigned Contractor, am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 el 5.gq. of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability. for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of the Code. I agree to and will comply with such provisions before commencing the Work governed by this Contract. CONTRACTOR: Name of Contractor: By: Signature Name Title Date RCTC Hwy 91 Landscape Project (R0-9848) (4/27/98) RVPUB\DRD\38219 CONTRACT -5 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7B RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Budget & Finance Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Karl Sauer, Bechtel Resident Engineer THROUGH: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Award Construction Contract for Sound Walls on SR 91 Between Van Buren Boulevard and Mary Street in the City of Riverside (Phase 1 SW's) At the January 14, 1998 RCTC meeting, the Commission directed staff to bid the remainder of the Phase I noise walls on State Route 91 in the City of Riverside. The bids were advertised on February 23, 1998 and the bids were opened on April 14, 1998. Six bids were received and opened for the project. The apparent low bidder was DW Powell with a bid of $2,612,431 the second low bidder was Modern Alloy with a bid of $2,613,186. The apparent low bidder was $755 lower than the second low bidder. After the bids were opened and the bid amounts were disclosed the second low bidder, Modern Alloy, pointed out an error in the bid sheets where 4 items out of the total of 175 were labeled in imperial units instead of metric units. Modern Alloy was the only bidder that marked their bid sheet for metric units for the items in question and provided metric unit prices. Staff performed a comparison of the 4 items in question. To determine the impact of the use of imperial units rather than metric units on the bid results Staff multiplied the imperial unit bid items by an appropriate conversion factor for the other bidders. The result of this comparison is that Modern Alloys could have been the low bidder by as much as $14,908. This exercise was done for comparison purposes only since the bidders were instructed not to modify the bid documents in any way and to bid the documents as provided. Based on the above circumstances regarding the error in the bid documents which could have materially changed the outcome of the bid process, and the other discrepancies in the bids, staff recommended that the Commission reject all the April 14, 1998 bids for the project and rebid the project with the corrected bid sheets. At the May 13, 1998 meeting the Commission concurred with staff's recommendation to reject the previous bids and rebid the project. Based on this decision, staff issued a letter rejecting all bids on May 14, 1998 and notified all previous bidders of the Commission's intent to rebid the project. The project was rebid and advertised starting on May 18, 1998 with all new bids required to be submitted no latter than 1:00 pm, on May 29, 1998. All previous plan holders were provided with new "corrected" sets of bid documents without charge. Four new bids were received and opened for the project. A summary of the new bids is shown below: SR 91 Phase I Noise Wall Re -Bid Summary 1 2 3 Firm (in order from low bid to high bid) R. Fox Modern Alloys D.W. Powell Bid Amount $2,486,486 $2,550,963 $2,574,471 Amount Over Low Bid $0 $64,477 $87,985 4 4 LeHigh Construction $2,606,338 $119,852 Engineer's Estimate $2,630,030 $143,544 Note that the R. Fox low re -bid is $125,945 lower than the previous apparent low bidder, D.W. Powell. The new bids were reviewed by Legal Counsel and Bechtel, and all concurred that R. Fox's re -bid was the lowest responsive bid received for the project. A summary of the review of all of the new bids received and the responsiveness of the bids are as follows: Checklist Item R. Fox Modern Powell 1 Bid Letter 2 yes Schedule of Prices - Bid Amount (math check) - Bid Item Comparison - w/Eng's Est - w/other Bidders - Unbalanced Bid Items yes correct good good none yes yes correct good good minor LeHigh yes yes minor error good good none 3 Bid Bond yes yes yes yes yes minor error good good none yes 4 List of Subcontractors - Prime Performs > 50% Work yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes 5 Bidder Information Forms yes yes 6 Non -Collusion Affidavit yes yes yes yes 7 Evidence of Insurance yes yes yes yes yes no Based on the review by staff and legal counsel, staff recommends that the Commission award Contract No. RO-9847, for the construction of Sound Walls on Route 91, from Van Buren Blvd., to Mary St., in the City of Riverside, to R. Fox Construction, Inc., for the amount of $2,486,486. Staff also recommends that a contingency amount of $113,514 (5%) be authorized to cover potential change orders encountered during construction. Financial Assessment Project Cost $2,486,486 + $113,514 = $2,600,000 Source of Funds Measure "A" Included in Fiscal Year Budget Y Year Included in Program Budget Y Year Programmed Approved Allocation NA Year of Allocation Budget Adjustment Required N STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission award Contract No. RO-9847, for the construction of Sound Walls on Route 91, from Van Buren Boulevard to Mary Street, in the City of Riverside, to R. Fox Construction, Inc., for the amount of $2,486,486. Staff also recommends that a contingency amount of $113,514 (5%) be authorized to cover potential change orders encountered during construction. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Budget & Finance Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Karl Sauer, Bechtel Resident Engineer THROUGH: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Award Construction Contract for Sound Walls on SR 91 Between Van Buren Boulevard and Mary Street in the City of Riverside At the January 14, 1998 RCTC meeting, the Commission directed staff to bid the remainder of the Phase I noise walls on State Route 91 in the City of Riverside. The bids were advertised on February 23, 1998 and the bids were opened on April 14, 1998. The apparent low bidder was DW Powell with a bid of $2,612,431 the second low bidder was Modern Alloy with a bid of $2,613,186. The apparent low bidder was $755 lower than the second low bidder. After the bids were opened and the bid amounts were disclosed the second low bidder, Modern Alloy, pointed out an error in the bid sheets where four items out of the total of 175 were labeled in imperial units instead of metric units. Modern Alloy was the only bidder that marked their bid sheet for metric units for the items in question and provided metric unit prices. Staff performed a comparison of the four items in question. To determine the impact of the use of imperial units rather than metric units on the bid results Staff multiplied the imperial unit bid items by an appropriate conversion factor for the other bidders. The result of this comparison is that Modern Alloys could have been the low bidder by as much as $14,908. This exercise was done for comparison purposes only since the bidders were instructed not to modify the bid documents in any way and to bid the documents as provided. Based on the above circumstances regarding the error in the bid documents which could have materially changed the outcome of the bid process, and the other discrepancies in the bids, staff recommended that the Commission reject all the April 14, 1998 bids for the project and rebid the project with the corrected bid sheets. At the May 13, 1998 meeting the Commission concurred with staff's recommendation to reject the previous bids and rebid the project. Based on this decision, staff issued a letter rejecting all bids on May 14, 1998 and notified all previous bidders of the Commission's intent to rebid the project starting on May 18, 1998. The new project bids must be delivered to the Commission no latter than 1:00 p.m. on May 29, 1998. The bids will be opened and read aloud immediately after the 1:00 p.m. deadline. Staff and Legal Counsel will review the new bids and present their recommendation for award to the Commission at the June 3, 1998 Admin and Budget and Finance meetings 0001.8:' STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff will bring the results of the rebid to the June 3, 1998 Administrative Review and Budget and Finance meetings with their recommendation for action by the Commission. 000184 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7C RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Budget & Finance Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager THROUGH: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Award Consultant Contract to develop the Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E) for the Phase II Noise Walls on State Route At the March 11, 1998 RCTC meeting, the Commission directed staff to advertise a request for proposals to develop the Plans,. Specifications, and Cost Estimate (PS&E) for Phase II of the SR 91 noise walls that are required to mitigate the SR91 HOV lanes between Magnolia Avenue and Mary Street. The currently adopted Strategic Plan indicates the start of construction for the Phase II Noise Walls to be in the year 2000. The Phase II noise walls project will also include the construction of auxiliary lanes at various locations within the same project limits; the widening of under crossings at Monroe Street, and Jefferson Street; and the replacement of the Jackson Street overcrossing. The general scope of work that is required will be consistent with the findings of the engineering study dated December 1995 regarding the noise walls and auxiliary lanes that are required to be constructed to mitigate the HOV lanes previously constructed and improve the operations of the freeway by adding the necessary, auxiliary lanes. The completion of this project will complete the Measure A designated project of adding up to two lanes in each direction between Magnolia Avenue and Mary Street. The following tables indicate the scope of work to be included in the design package. SR 91 Phase II Noise Walls Between Magnolia & Mary Streets Wall # Location Remarks 635 North side of SR91 West of La Sierra 98 South side of SR91 Between Jackson and Monroe Streets 110 South Side of SR 91 Between Jackson and Monroe Streets 121 North Side of SR 91 Between Monroe and Adams Streets 161 North Side of SR 91 Between Adams and Jefferson Streets SR 91 Phase II Noise Walls Between Magnolia & Mary Streets 183 North Side of SR 91 Between Jefferson and Madison Streets Note: This wall was advanced and included with the Phase I walls. Location SR 91 Phase II Auxiliary Lanes Between Magnolia & Mary Streets Between Tyler and Van Buren Blvd. Impacted Structures Type of Structure Modification None NA Jackson Street Over Crossing Jackson Street Over Crossing Replacement North Side of SR 91 Between Van Buren and Adams Street South Side of SR 91 Between Van Buren and Adams Street Monroe Street Under crossing Monroe Street Under crossing Widening Widening North Side of SIR 91 Between Adams Street and Madison Street South Side of SR 91 Between Madison Street and Jane Street Jefferson Street Under Crossing Mary Street Under Crossing Widening Widening A selection panel was formed to review the nine proposals received form interested engineering firms. The selection panel short listed the firms down to three firms and held interviews on Thursday, May 28, 1998. The three short listed firms were URS Greiner, Parson Brinckerhoff, and Sverdrup Civil, Inc. The selection committee was composed of Hiep Bui and Kahalil Saba from Caltrans; Bob Mease from the City of Riverside; Bill Hughes from Bechtel; and was headed by Paul Blackwelder representing RCTC. The selection panel was genuinely impressed with the quality of all nine firms proposing to perform the work. The three short listed firms were especially impressive with the experience and quality of personnel that they offered to dedicate to the successful completion of the project. After the completion of the interviews, the selection panel determined that URS Greiner was the best choice to provide the design services. URS Greiner has a dept of experience on State Route 91 project design in general and specifically in the delivery of PS & E packages that have been acceptable to Caltrans. URS Greiner has indicated that they can deliver this project for $1,029,436. This is a very aggressive price for a project that has a construction value of about $16 million dollars. The proposed scope of work, schedule, and proposed costs are attached for your review. The standard RCTC consultant agreement will be used for this contract. In addition to the base contract amount, Staff recommends that a contingency amount of $150,000 be established to address unscoped items such as the need to provide supplemental documentation for the previously approved Project Report and Environmental documents. Financial Assessment Project Cost $1,029,436 + $150,000 = $1,179,436 Source of Funds Measure A - funded from the $15.98 million currently designated for the Phase II Noise wall project on SR 91 between Magnolia to Mary Streets Included in Fiscal Year Budget Included in Program Budget Approved Allocation Budget Adjustment Required n Y y Year Year Programmed 2000 Year of Allocation Financial Impact Not Applicable STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That Commission award a contract with URS Greiner for an amount of $1,029,436 to deliver the plans, specifications and cost estimate for the Phase II sound wall and auxiliary lane improvements to State Route 91 between Magnolia Avenue and Mary Street using the RCTC standard consultant agreement subject to RCTC Legal Counsel review. A contingency account of $150,000 will be established for this contract. Attachments: URS Greiner Scope, Schedule of services, and Cost estimate RIVERSIDE COUNTY STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE 11 NOISE WALLS, AUXILIARY LANES TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND STRUCTURE MODIRCAflONS SCOPE OF WORK (MILESTONE/TASK LIST): The scope of work for the State Route 91 Phase II Noise Walls, Auxiliary Lanes and Structure Modifications will follow the preliminary and final design tasks required by Cattrans and fully defined in the Caftrans Project Development Procedures Manual (Gold Book). Generally the scope of work will be similar to the milestones and tasks completed on the Phase I Noise Wall project with several important additions. The structure work will follow Caftrans DOS procedures and requires a separate, but parallel, review process in Sacramento. The auxiliary lanes and structure modifications may require re -visiting the study and environmental documents completed previously for the SR91 Median Widening or Outside Widening projects. If necessary, a Supplemental Project Report and a new CE/CE will need to be prepared in Task No. 3 while preliminary design is initiated. The following tasks and subtasks represent the major elements of the project. A full scope of work with detailed task descriptions will be prepared for inclusion in the contract. TASK NO. 1 - PROJECT CONTROL: Target Schedule Quality Control Plan Detailed Management Plan Milestone Management TASK NO. 2 - DATA COLLECTION/ASSEMBLY: Data Collection (Freeway As-Builts, Utility As-Builts, Etc.) Metnc Mapping Design Surveys Right -of -Way Research (Supplemental Materials and Foundation Reports) Geatechnicai Engineering Milestone Management TASK NO. 3 - PRELIMINARY DESIGN (15% PSSE): Preliminary Roadway Plans Conceptual Landscape Planting Plan Initial Temporary Construction Easements Milestone Management TASK NO. d - PRELIMINARY STRUCTURES DESIGN: Type Selection Reports General Plans Seismic Retrofit Strategy Type Selection/Strategy Meeting at Division of Structures Milestone Management TASK NO. 5 - DRAFT DESIGN (90% PS&E): Draft Roadway Plans Draft Planting and Irrigation Plans Draft Edited Standard Special Provisions Draft Cost Estimate Utility Coordination Final Temporary Construction Easements Easement Plats Caftrans R)W Map Supplemental Exhibits Milestone Management WS Greiner RIVERSIDE COUNTY STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE 11 NOISE WALLS, AUXIUARY LANES TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS TASK NO. s - DRAFT STRUCTURES DESIGN PS&E (65% UNCHECKED DETAILS): Draft Bridge Plans Draft Edited Standard Special Provisions Draft Cost Estimate Milestone Management TASK NO. 7 - FINAL STRUCTURES DESIGN (100% PS&E): Final Bridge Plans Final Specifications Final Cost Estimate Milestone Management TASK NO. 8 - FINAL DESIGN (100% PS&E): Final Roadway (Civil) Plans Final Planting and Irrigation Plans Final Specifications Final Cost Estimate Construction Encroachment Permit Resident Engineers File Milestone Management TASK NO. 9 - BIDDING ASSISTANCE: Bid Package Assembly Pre -Bid Conference Responses to Bidders Questions Bid Evaluation Milestone Management TASK NO. 10 - CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES: Pre -Construction Meeting Review Requests for Information/Shop Drawings/Submittals Periodic Site Visits/Construction Meetings Geotechnical Site Reviews As -Built Drawing Preparation Milestone Management RIVERSIDE COUNTY STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE II NOISE WALLS. AUXILIARY LANES TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS Nake le Proceed 0.e. Collceeioo Project Flowchart Nola w.0 PS&E Temporary C.R.11tie1N11 EO.MA° Old pa re Acfhity Activity Wig Early Ea 4y 199. 1990 10 Description Our Stan Flnr]N JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP 01 030 Nano To Peloaa 0101JULAO • 01.380 Propel Conan 20 E01J1JL33 'WASS 02000 Dam Caaamr.Aer...y e0101JULN. ,25AUO99 01000 Pr.mrmyrr O..g1113% P3401 40172..891 225EP99 01300 Mom me Idr1a11e.aen [0 900 , Pr.arwMry Damp1 Rome ]0113 EP8N 1133140V91 01.000 ' PnnrlAr Sa1a.9... 0.mgrr 04 000 Pn.rrnmrlr 51nmorm O.agn Ammo ! ]01233EP88 , O OMY9. 03 000 1 Dr.R Da. ,190% P840) 2012940399 225EP95 1 101 OA JL99 I725EPe9 03300 Firer TCE.D.rra 8010180QU9. 127FEON9 2010200088 1290ECO! I 03.900 Droll Damps Remo 30124F8099 109APR99 09.000 Dna 51n.:.... O..qn P380 9010IMOM93 1730€099 00.900 Or.. SIn.au .O.mgn Roview 70121FEBW IO.APRON 07 000 Fb.l Stirv..a D.mgn (100% P55E) 20107APR9. i0e61Ay99 07 900 r Fbml Se1lla..a Demp1 Apparel 101417YAlg9 1 I OMAy99 05000 ,Finn Deem (100% P9.E) 20107APR9. '00rAyU 069[0 'Floe Demon A.p.nml ! 101031AAY99 11.euY99 06110 I Rosy To Lb. 01 I1.MAYW 09.[00 1_9141 q A.m urs 30119MAY99 1111UIIN Ole' j Ole Og.arq 01 16030 j 9eRr Cmmlremr 1 0114R0L99 1 29109 'Aep..ee1a 1 1001273PP9. i0.FEOe9 26[00 Eeem.mtEI.elam.imdlAfwramm 1 130IIOPEO.. I22.amd9 24100 1 Rlpma4.ve1. Ca n.mf.an Imural MUMPS I n=1ei MIEN • � awri. Yol sm. NM. RIVERSIDE CO. TRANS. COMMISSION 3811 PRASE 11 NOISE wau.sahux VINES Proposal Schedule Layout URS Greiner URS Greiner RIVERSIDE COUNTY STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE 11 NOISE WALLS, AUXIUARY LANES TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS: The State Route 91 Phase 11 Noise Walls and Auxiliary Lanes project will involve a wide variety of technical, as well as procedural, considerations to successfully accomplish the project. State Route 91 is one of the most critical transportation condors in southern California, serving very heavy commuter traffic throughout the day. URS Greiner, in partnership with RCTC and Cattrans District 8, has been involved with the study and improvement designs to this route since 1990. Our team has all of the technical background, studies, as-builts, record information and site -specific knowledge to Ahit the job running@ quicker than any other team. Because the SR91 studies have been distribute over many years of development, there is an extensive catalogue of pertinent information that URS Greiner has available. More importantly, we have the staff that has firsthand understanding of that background information contained in those reports so that it can be interpreted correctly and applied to the project in an appropriate and cost-effective manner. Some of the documents and studies that URS Greiner has prepared and has specific familiarity with include: • SR91 Future Conditions Report, Magnolia Ave. To Mary St.; JHK, December, 1991 • Noise Barrier Analysis for SR91, Magnolia Ave. To Mary St.; Gordon Bricken & Associates/Albert Webb & Associates/URS Greiner, March & September 1992 • SR91 Sound Wall Study, Magnolia Ave. To Mary St.; URS Greiner, November 1992 • SR91 Median Widening Project, Magnolia Ave. To Mary St. Combined PSR/PR/CE; URS Greiner, April, 1992 • SR91 Outside Widening Project, 1-15 To Cridge St.; URS Greiner, September 1993 • SR91 Median Widening (HOV) Project, Magnolia Ave. To Mary St. PS&E; URS Greiner/J.F. Davidson, March, 1993 • SR91 Median Widening (HOV) Project, Magnolia Ave. To Mary St., Supplemental PSR/PR; URS Greiner, October, 1994 • SR91 Sound Wall and Auxiliary Lane Prioritization Study, Magnolia Ave. To Mary St.; URS Greiner, December 1995 • SR91 Phase I Sound Walls (SW Nos. 35, 77, 78, 149, 183 & 221) PS&E; URS Greiner, August 1997 & March 1998 URS Greiners long history and extensive background understanding of State Route 91 will be invaluable to RCTC for implementation of the Phase II Noise Walls and Auxiliary Lanes project. Due to our complete understanding of the many specific details associated with these projects, we have selected a short sampling of technical consideration highlights to discuss in this proposal. Construction Phasing - It may be desirable to phase implementation of the improvements on SR91 into several distinct construction packages. The noise walls can be designed and constructed as a separate project and could be accelerated since they currently have an approved environmental clearance document. The walls can be designed to accommodate any adjacent future auxiliary lane widening. The auxiliary lanes and the structure work (widenings and replacement could also be separated into different construction contracts to take advantage of particular bidding conditions or to coincide with approval schedules which may not be identical between the highway and structure approvals from Caltrans. Temporary construction easements may also dictate specific construction phasing sequences as was the case during the Phase I Noise Walls project. The landscaping improvements are another element that can be conveniently broken out into individual construction projects which could result in lower bid prices. RIVERSIDE COUNTY STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE 11 NOISE WALLS. AUXILIARY LANES TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND STRUCTURE MODIRCATIONS Structure Replacement (Jackson Overcrossing) — The replacement design of the Jackson Street O.C. will involve the typical challenges and constraints posed by; existing traffic, limited vertical clearance envelope, significant existing utilities carried in the bridge, possible staged construction requirements, and the removal of the existing bridge over a busy freeway. Focus will be on designing a shallow structure that provides increased the vertical clearance over Rt 91( to current. 5.1M standard), spans an extra lane, and minimizes profile impacts to Jackson Street Initial review suggests the profile grade will need to be about a foot higher than existing. Question exist as to the final width of a new bridge and whether the existing bridge can'be closed during construction. Challenges such as these are becoming commonplace and the URS Greiner team will utilize the latest technologies and techniques to meet them. Structure Wldenings (Monroe, Jefferson & Mary Undercrossings) — The widenings planned for the three bridges are very similar in nature that can utilize similar details and design effort. All three bridges are nearly identical, buitt in the same contract in 1959 and widened in 1968. Focus will be on designing a widening that is compatible with the existing and does not infringe on the limited existing vertical clearance. One altemative will be to widen with similar plate girders (see sketch). 4.3 rn (+1 *DEN Challenges will involve designing for the addition of a sound wall atop the barrier on the north side of the Jefferson Avenue U.C. Retaining walls will probably be required along the widened side of Rt 91 and they must be coordinated with bridge wingwalls/retaining walls. Traffic control and work area requirements on the bridge deck will also need to be coordinated within the design team. REMOVE EXISTING RAILING Jf, TYPICAL UNDERCROSSING WIDENING Auxiliary Lane Widenings - Two auxiliary lanes have previously been constructed along SR91, both westbound between Tyler and Van Buren and downtown at Fourteenth Street. It is anticipated that the auxiliary lanes proposed in this project will follow similar designs. Retaining walls will be necessary along most of the widening segments. Replacement landscaping will be required along the backfiil side of the retaining walls and within the limits of disturbance from construction activities. Current Caltrans design standards require •I! Dowel that new shoulders be I win Lamm i00 a.25 on yr -tabi. Slobs and Flowed 300 am constructed of concrete with Into Cane Strulaar ES lwrrl LIrr O.ES a. „ ISO on concrete dikes. URS Greiner •„ Cfattlnuoa{ -- developed one of the first concrete shoulder with concrete dike auxiliary lanes as part of the I-15/Yuma Drive interchange Conat Joint 'r project. The concrete dike was a special design requiring Caltrans TYPE D CONCRETE DIKE (11401, approval, see adjacent detail. 1Far Da -tolls mar Seeaai Soo Sts Alan WI Costs for concrete shoulders versus the historically traditional asphalt concrete shoulders are approximately 30 percent higher. This needs to included with the initial cost estimating for the project since concrete shoulders are a relatively new design standard and were not previously accounted for in previous studies for SR91 auxiliary lanes. URS Greiner RIVERSIDE COUNTY STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE 11 NOISE WALLS, AUXILIARY LANES TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS Field Reconnaissance - One of the most important components of improvement projects that widen or retrofit new facilities into existing freeways, is to have an extensive and detailed field reconnaissance program. There are so many physical constraints that new facilities may conflict with that can never be shown (or are not apparent) on topographic mapping. To that end, the URS Greiner team conducts ular field walkthrou+hs for these types of projects. A voluminous photo log is assembled containing photographs of all physical elements that could impact the projects designs. It is important that the entire team participate in the field reconnaissance so that they are all familiar with the site and their particular area of the design can be specifically coordinated with the site constraints. The adjacent photo shows the Phase I Noise Walls project team in the field checking and documenting the physical existing constraints. Temporary Construction Easements - While we do not anticipate the need for new right- of-way to implement the Phase II Noise Walls and Auxiliary Lanes, there will be a significant number of temporary construction easements (TCEs) required to provide adequate access to construct the project. Noise walls at the top of freeway cut sections, such as SW No. 98, require the removal of the existing Caitrans right-of-way fence which necessitates a TCEs along the private property. The close proximity of the cut slope also requires that more of the "T construction be accomplished for the private property side of the new wall. Since many of the walls in Phase II will be constructed at the edge of shoulder on the freeway, we do not anticipate as many TCEs as were required in Phase I; however since the TCEs are a long lead time item, early identification of the TCEs will help expedite the project. An example of the private property issues that arose along the right-of-way fence in Phase I is illustrated in the adjacent photograph. Landscaping - Landscaping is an important component of the overall improvement project work program. Landscaping issues were a primary concem for the City of Riverside in the development of noise walls through the City. Currently SR91 is relatively well landscaped, containing a wide variety of mature trees, shrubs and groundcover. The City does not wont to lose the landscaped appearance of the freeway sidesiopes and therefore requires that replacement landscaping be included in any improvements to the freeway. lliSGreiner RIVERSIDE COUNTY STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE II NOISE WALLS, AUXILIARY LANES TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS Landscaping also serves a separate purpose. it will be used to screen the new noise walls from view and from potential graffiti vandalism. Tree clusters at the ends of the noise walls help to "soften" the end treatments of the noise walls. Fast climbing vines are used along the extent of the walls to cover the wall faces, minimizing the flat wall surfaces and deterring graffiti. Taking into account the large number of mature trees and the relatively slow -growing existing Canary Island Palms. it would be a prudent strategy to begin the landscape design process by first taking an accurate inventory of the specific species of trees and their locations. This information can then be correlated with the safety setbacks established by Caltrans for each specific tree type and the proposed State Route 91 modifications. This will help to assess which trees must be removed and which trees can remain. Along with these setback considerations, we will also solicit input from Caltrans maintenance staff regarding personnel safety. This will provide a clear illustration of the existing landscaping which can remain and the extent of re -landscaping areas. Supplemental PRIED - The new noise walls are fully described in the approved Combined PSR./PR that was prepared for the Median Widening Project in 1992. The Categorical Exemption/Exclusion clearly includes the noise wall improvements, therefore the noise walls should not require any additional environmental clearance. The auxiliary lanes and structure improvements may need addition& Caltrans documentation. The Outside Widening PSR discusses the need for auxiliary lanes to improve merge/diverge operations within weaving sections of SR91. The Future Conditions Report also illustrates the operational deficiencies in these locations. Since most of the technical analyses have been completed for the auxiliary lanes, Caltrans may only require that supplemental documents be prepared for the additional program elements. A Supplemental Project Report that utilizes the information in the Outside Widening PSR could be prepared in a relatively short period of time. It could be expected that Caltrans would approve the document on an accelerated schedule since most of the information in the supplemental document would have appeared in previously approved studies. A new CE would then be prepared with significant references made to the original technical studies for the Median Widening Project CE. Greiner FEE ESTIMATE STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE II NOISE WALLS, AUXILIARY LANES AND STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS DIRECT LABOR HOURLY NAME. FUNCTION HOURS RATE TOTAL SUMMARY J. CHAPMAN PROJECT MANAGER 580 $40.00 $23,180.00 R. LEW SR. PROJECT ENGINEER 1000 $30.00 $30,000.00 PROJECT ENGINEER 1211 $26.00 $31,486.00 ENGINEER 1886 $22.00 $41,492.00 TECHNICIAN/CADD 2445 $20.00 $48,900.00 PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR 310 $18.00 $5,580.00 CLERICAL 58 $16.00 $928.00 TOTAL HOURS 7490 SUBTOTAL $181,566.00 COLA @ 0% $0.00 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS $181,566.00 FRINGE BENEFITS RATE TOTAL 48.12% $87,369.56 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS $87,369.56 OTHER COSTS TRAVEL COSTS $1,220.00 REPRODUCTION $21,330.00 MISC COSTS $1_,360.00 SUBCONSULTANTS URS GREINER - SURVEY URS GREINER - BRIDGE ATHALYE CONSULTING LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES TATSUMI AND PARTNERS SUBTOTAL $23,910.00 $71,800.00 $125,200.00 $30,000.00 $80,600.00 $157.600.00 SUBTOTAL $465,200.00 SUBCONSULTANT FEE RATE TOTAL 5.00% $13,410.00 INDIRECT COSTS OVERHEAD & GENERAL TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $502,520.00 RATE TOTAL 114.51% $207,911.23 TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS $207,911.23 FEE RATE 10.50% $50,068.91 TOTAL COST $1,029,435.70 MKTG\PROPOSAL\PS&EIRCTC\RCTC2FEE.WK4 Print Date: 05/01/98 FEE ESTIMATE STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE II NOISE WALLS, AUXILIARY LANES AND STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS DIRECT LABOR HOURLY NAME FUNCTION HOURS RAZE TOTAL TASK NO. 1 J. CHAPMAN PROJECT MANAGER 52 $40.00 $2,080.00 R. LEW SR. PROJECT ENGINEER 52 $30.00 $1,560.00 PROJECT ENGINEER 12 $26.00 $312.00 ENGINEER 0 $22.00 $0.00 TECHNICIAN/CADD 4 $20.00 $80.00 PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR 24 $18.00 $432.00 CLERICAL 28 $16.00 $448.00 TOTAL HOURS 172 SUBTOTAL $4,912.00 COLA @ 0% $0.00 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS $4,912.00 FRINGE BENEFITS RATE TOTAL 48.12% $2,363.65 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS $2,363.65 OTHER COSTS TRAVEL COSTS $0.00 REPRODUCTION $250.00 MISC COSTS $250.00 SUBTOTAL $500.00 SUBCONSULTANTS URS GREINER - SURVEY/RIGHT OF WAY URS GREINER - BRIDGE ATHALYE CONSULTING LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES TATSUMI AND PARTNERS $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 SUBTOTAL $0.00 SUBCONSULTANT FEE RATE TOTAL 5.00% $0.00 INDIRECT COSTS OVERHEAD & GENERAL FEE TOTAL COST TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $500.00 RATE TOTAL 114.51% $5,624.73 TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS RATE 10.50% $5,624.73 $1,354.54 $14,754.93 MKTG\PROPOSALIPS&EIRCTC\RCTC2FEE.WK4 Print Date: 05/01/98 FEE ESTIMATE STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE II NOISE WALLS, AUXILIARY LANES AND STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS DIRECT LABOR HOURLY NAME FUNCTION HOURS RATE TOTAL TASK NO. 2 J. CHAPMAN PROJECT MANAGER 24 $40.00 $960.00 R. LEW SR. PROJECT ENGINEER 32 $30.00 $960.00 PROJECT ENGINEER 4 $26.00 $104.00 ENGINEER 10 $22.00 $220.00 TECHNICIAN/CADD 26 $20.00 $520.00 PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR 20 $18.00 $360.00 CLERICAL 8 $16.00 $128,00 TOTAL HOURS 124 SUBTOTAL $3,252.00 COLA @ 0% $0.00 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS $3,252.00 FRINGE BENEFITS RATE TOTAL 48.12% $1,564.86 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS $1,564.86 OTHER COSTS TRAVEL COSTS $100.00 REPRODUCTION $600.00 MISC COSTS $60.00 SUBTOTAL $760.00 SUBCONSULTANTS URS GREINER - SURVEY/RIGHT OF WAY URS GREINER - BRIDGE ATHALYE CONSULTING LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES TATSUMI AND PARTNERS $63,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $58,600.00 $0.00 SUBTOTAL $122,100.00 SUBCONSULTANT FEE RATE TOTAL 5.00% $2,930.00 INDIRECT COSTS OVERHEAD & GENERAL FEE TOTAL COST TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $125,790.00 RATE TOTAL 114.51% $3,723.87 TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS $3,723.87 RATE 10.50% $896.78 $135,227.50 MKTG\PROPOSAL\PS&EIRCTC\RCTC2FEE.WK4 Print Date: 05/01/98 FEE ESTIMATE STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE II NOISE WALLS, AUXILIARY LANES AND STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS DIRECT LABOR HOURLY NAME FUNCTION HOURS BRIE • TOTAL TASK NO. 3 J. CHAPMAN PROJECT MANAGER 107 $40.00 $4,284.00 R. LEW SR. PROJECT ENGINEER 232 . $30.00 $6,960.00 PROJECT ENGINEER 282 $26.00 $7,342.40 ENGINEER 611 $22.00 $13,446.40 TECHNICIAN/CADD 791 $20.00 $15,820.00 PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR 40 $18.00 $720.00 CLERICAL 4 $16.00 $64.00 TOTAL HOURS 2068 SUBTOTAL $48,636.80 COLA @ 0% $0.00 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS $48,636.80 FRINGE BENEFITS RAC TOTAL 48.12% $23,404.03 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS $23,404.03 OTHER COSTS TRAVEL COSTS $130.00 REPRODUCTION $2,000.00 MISC COSTS $100.00 SUBTOTAL $2,230.00 SUBCONSULTANTS URS GREINER - SURVEY/RIGHT OF WAY URS GREINER - BRIDGE ATHALYE CONSULTING LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES TATSUMI AND PARTNERS $6,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $51.800,00 SUBTOTAL $57,800.00 SUBCONSULTANT FEE RATE TOTAL 5.00% $2,590.00 INDIRECT COSTS OVERHEAD & GENERAL FEE TOTAL COST TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $62,620.00 RATE TOTAL 114.51% $55,694.00 TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS BRIE 10.50% $55,694.00 $13,412.16 $203,766.98 MKTG\PROPOSAL\PSBEIRCTC\RCTC2FEE.WK4 Print Date: 05/01/98 FEE ESTIMATE STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE II NOISE WALLS, AUXILIARY LANES AND STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS DIRECT LABOR HOURLY NAME FUNCTION HOURS BATE TOTAL TASK NO.4 J. CHAPMAN PROJECT MANAGER 0 $40.00 $0.00 R. LEW SR. PROJECT ENGINEER 0 $30.00 $0.00 PROJECT ENGINEER 0 .$26.00 $0.00 ENGINEER 0 $22.00 $0.00 TECHNICIAN/CADD 0 $20.00 $0.00 PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR 0 $18.00 $0.00 CLERICAL 0 $16.00 $0.00 TOTAL HOURS 0 SUBTOTAL $0.00 COLA @ 0% $0.00 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS $0.00 FRINGE BENEFITS RATE 48.12% TOTAL $0.00 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS $0.00 OTHER COSTS TRAVEL COSTS $450.00 REPRODUCTION $1,930.00 MISC COSTS $100.00 SUBTOTAL $2,480.00 SUBCONSULTANTS URS GREINER - SURVEY/RIGHT OF WAY URS GREINER - BRIDGE ATHALYE CONSULTING LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES TATSUMI AND PARTNERS $0.00 $46,800.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 SUBTOTAL $46,800.00 SUBCONSULTANT FEE RATE TOTAL 5.00% $0.00 INDIRECT COSTS OVERHEAD & GENERAL FEE TOTAL COST TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $49,280.00 RATE TOTAL 114.51% $0.00 TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS RATE 10.50% $0.00 $0.00 $49,280.00 MKTG\PROPOSAL\PS&EIRCTC\RCTC2FEE.WK4 Print Date: 05/01/98 FEE ESTIMATE STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE I1 NOISE WALLS, AUXILIARY LANES AND STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS DIRECT LABOR HOURLY NAME FUNCTION HOURS BATE TOTAL TASK NO. 5 J. CHAPMAN PROJECT MANAGER 241 $40.00 $9,624.00 R. LEW SR. PROJECT ENGINEER 420 $30.00 $12,588.00 PROJECT ENGINEER 672 $26.00 $17,461.60 ENGINEER 873 $22.00 $19,197.20 TECHNICIAN/CADD 1116 $20.00 $22,324.00 PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR 144 $18.00 $2,592.00 CLERICAL 12 $16.00 $192.00 TOTAL HOURS 3477 SUBTOTAL $83,978.80 COLA @ 0% $0.00 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS $83,978.80 FRINGE BENEFITS RATE TOTAL 48.12% $40,410.60 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS $40,410.60 OTHER COSTS TRAVEL COSTS $160.00 REPRODUCTION $6,600.00 MISC COSTS $250.00 SUBTOTAL $7,010.00 SUBCONSULTANTS URS GREINER - SURVEY/RIGHT OF WAY URS GREINER - BRIDGE ATHALYE CONSULTING LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES TATSUMI AND PARTNERS $2,300.00 $0.00 $0.00 $6,000.00 $69_,300.00 SUBTOTAL $77,600.00 SUBCONSULTANT FEE RATE TOTAL 5.00% $3,765.00 INDIRECT COSTS OVERHEAD & GENERAL FEE TOTAL COST TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $88,375.00 RATE TOTAL 114.51% $96,164.12 TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS $96,164.12 RATE 10.50% $23,158.12 $332,086.64 MKTG\PROPOSAL\PS&E\RCTC\RCTC2FEE.WK4 Print Date: 05/01/98 FEE ESTIMATE STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE II NOISE WALLS, AUXILIARY LANES AND STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS DIRECT LABOR HOURLY NAME FUNCTION HOURS BATE "I=IL TASK NO. 6 J. CHAPMAN PROJECT MANAGER 0 $40.00 $0.00 R. LEW SR. PROJECT ENGINEER 0 $30.00 $0.00 PROJECT ENGINEER 0 . $26.00 $0.00 ENGINEER 0 $22.00 $0.00 TECHNICIAN/CADD 0 $20.00 $0.00 PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR 0 $18.00 $0.00 CLERICAL 0 $16.00 $0.00 TOTAL HOURS 0 SUBTOTAL $0.00 COLA © 0% $0.00 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS $0.00 FRINGE BENEFITS RATE TOTAL 48.12% $0.00 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS $0.00 OTHER COSTS TRAVEL COSTS $200.00 REPRODUCTION $1,830.00 MISC COSTS .$150.00 SUBTOTAL $2,180.00 SUBCONSULTANTS URS GREINER - SURVEY/RIGHT OF WAY $0.00 URS GREINER - BRIDGE $49,000.00 ATHALYE CONSULTING $30,000.00 LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES $6,000.00 TATSUMI AND PARTNERS $0.00 SUBTOTAL $85,000.00 SUBCONSULTANT FEE RATE TOTAL 5.00% $1,800.00 INDIRECT COSTS OVERHEAD & GENERAL FEE TOTAL COST TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $88,980.00 RATE TOTAL 114.51% $0.00 TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS RATE 10.50% $0.00 $0.00 $88,980.00 MKTG\PROPOSALTS&EIRCTC\RCTC2FEE.WK4 Print Date: 05/01/98 FEE ESTIMATE STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE II NOISE WALLS, AUXILIARY LANES AND STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS DIRECT LABOR HOURLY NAME FUNCTION HOURS RAIE TOTAL TASK NO. 7 J. CHAPMAN PROJECT MANAGER 0 $40.00 $0.00 R. LEW SR. PROJECT ENGINEER 0 $30.00 $0.00 PROJECT ENGINEER 0 $26.00 $0.00 ENGINEER 0 $22.00 $0.00 TECHNICIAN/CADD 0 $20.00 $0.00 PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR 0 $18.00 $0.00 CLERICAL 0 $16.00 $0.00 TOTAL HOURS 0 SUBTOTAL $0.00 COLA c 0% $0.00 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS $0.00 FRINGE BENEFITS RATE 48.12% TOTAL $0.00 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS $0.00 OTHER COSTS TRAVEL COSTS $0.00 REPRODUCTION $1,600.00 MISC COSTS 1 0 04 SUBTOTAL $1,700.00 SUBCONSULTANTS URS GREINER - SURVEY/RIGHT OF WAY $0.00 URS GREINER - BRIDGE $20,200.00 ATHALYE CONSULTING $0.00 LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES $0.00 TATSUMI AND PARTNERS $0.00 SUBTOTAL $20,200.00 SUBCONSULTANT FEE RATE TOTAL 5.00% $0.00 INDIRECT COSTS OVERHEAD & GENERAL FEE TOTAL COST TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $21,900.00 RATE TOTAL 114.51% $0.00 TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS RATE 10.50% $0.00 $0.00 $21,900.00 MKTGIPROPOSAL\PS&EIRCTC\RCTC2FEE.WK4 Print Date: 05/01/98 FEE ESTIMATE STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE H NOISE WALLS, AUXILIARY LANES AND STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS DIRECT LABOR HOURLY NAME FUNCTION HOURS BALE TOTAL TASK NO. 8 J. CHAPMAN PROJECT MANAGER 80 $40.00 $3,192.00 R. LEW SR. PROJECT ENGINEER 148 $30.00 $4,452.00 PROJECT ENGINEER 229 $26.00 $5,954.00 ENGINEER 364 $22.00 $8,012.40 TECHNICIAN/CADD 462 $20.00 $9,236.00 PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR 40 $18.00 $720.00 CLERICAL 6 $16.00 $96,00 TOTAL HOURS 1329 SUBTOTAL $31,662.40 COLA @ 0% $0.00 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS $31,662.40 FRINGE BENEFITS RATE TOTAL 48.12% $15,235.95 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS $15,235.95 OTHER COSTS TRAVEL COSTS $50.00 REPRODUCTION $3,900.00 MISC COSTS $200.00 SUBTOTAL $4,150.00 SUBCONSULTANTS URS GREINER - SURVEY/RIGHT OF WAY URS GREINER - BRIDGE ATHALYE CONSULTING LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES TATSUMI AND PARTNERS $0.00 $0,00 $0.00 $0.00 $36.500.00 SUBTOTAL $36,500.00 SUBCONSULTANT FEE RATE TOTAL 5.00% $1,825.00 INDIRECT COSTS OVERHEAD & GENERAL FEE TOTAL COST TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $42,475.00 RATE TOTAL 114.51% $36,256.61 TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS BATE 10.50% $36,256.61 $8,731.27 $134,361.23 MKTG\PROPOSAL\PS&E\RCTC\RCTC2FEE.WK4 Print Date: 05/01/98 FEE ESTIMATE STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE II NOISE WALLS, AUXILIARY LANES AND STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS DIRECT LABOR HOURLY NAME FUNCTION HOURS RATE J. CHAPMAN PROJECT MANAGER 24 $40.00 $960.00 R. LEW SR. PROJECT ENGINEER 32 $30.00 $960.00 PROJECT ENGINEER 8 .$26.00 $208.00 ENGINEER 8 $22.00 $176.00 TECHNICIAN/CADD 6 $20.00 $120.00 PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR 4 $18.00 $72.00 CLERICAL 0 $16.00 $0.00 TOTAL HOURS 82 FRINGE BENEFITS TOTAL TASK NO. 9 SUBTOTAL $2,496.00 COLA @ 0% $0.00 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS $2,496.00 RATE TOTAL 48.12% $1,201.08 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS $1,201.08 OTHER COSTS TRAVEL COSTS $30.00 REPRODUCTION $2,500.00 MISC COSTS $50.00 SUBTOTAL $2,580.00 SUBCONSULTANTS URS GREINER - SURVEY/RIGHT OF WAY $0.00 URS GREINER - BRIDGE $0.00 ATHALYE CONSULTING $0.00 LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES $0.00 TATSUMI AND PARTNERS $0.00 SUBTOTAL $0.00 SUBCONSULTANT FEE RATE TOTAL 5.00% $0.00 INDIRECT COSTS OVERHEAD & GENERAL FEE TOTAL COST TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $2,580.00 RATE TOTAL 114.51% $2,858.17 TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS RATE 10.50% $2,858.17 $688.30 $9,823.55 MKTG\PROPOSAL\PS&EIRCTC\RCTC2FEE.WK4 Print Date: 05/01/98 FEE ESTIMATE STATE ROUTE 91 PHASE II NOISE WALLS, AUXILIARY LANES AND STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS DIRECT LABOR HOURLY NAME FUNCTION HOURS RATE TOTAL TASK NO. 10 J. CHAPMAN PROJECT MANAGER 52 $40.00 $2,080.00 R. LEW SR. PROJECT ENGINEER 84 $30.00 $2,520.00 PROJECT ENGINEER 4 . $26.00 $104.00 ENGINEER 20 $22.00 $440.00 TECHNICIAN/CADD 40 $20.00 $800.00 PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR 38 $18.00 $684.00 CLERICAL 0 $16.00 $0.00 TOTAL HOURS 238 SUBTOTAL $6,628.00 COLA @ 0% $0.00 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR COSTS $6,628.00 FRINGE BENEFITS RATE TOTAL 48.12% $3,189.39 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS $3,189.39 OTHER COSTS TRAVEL COSTS $100.00 REPRODUCTION $120.00 MISC COSTS $100.00 SUBTOTAL $320.00 SUBCONSULTANTS URS GREINER - SURVEY/RIGHT OF WAY URS GREINER - BRIDGE ATHALYE CONSULTING LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES TATSUMI AND PARTNERS $0.00 $9,200.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 $0.00 SUBTOTAL $19,200.00 SUBCONSULTANT FEE RATE TOTAL 5.00% $500.00 INDIRECT COSTS OVERHEAD & GENERAL FEE TOTAL COST TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $20,020.00 RATE TOTAL 114.51% $7,589.72 TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS RAZE 10.50% $7,589.72 $1,827.75 $39,254.86 MKTG\PROPOSAL\PS&EIRCTC\RCTC2FEE.WK4 Print Date: 05/01/98 "saes Serving 02544 CITY OF RIVERSIDE - l Dhllui-. April 1, 1996 Mr. Jack Reagan, Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 SUBJECT: 91 FREEWAY SOUND WALLS AND AUXILIARY LANES Dear Mr. Reagan: On March 26, 1996, the Riverside City Council reviewed the plans prepared by your agency for sound attenuation walls and auxiliary lanes along segments of the Riverside 91 Freeway between Magnolia Avenue and Mary Street. The City Council endorsed the proposed project substantially as described in the Sound Wall and Auxiliary Lane Study - December, 1995 with some requested modifications. The City's detailed recommendations regarding such issues as wall heights, locations, landscape treatment and installation priorities are attached. The City of Riverside appreciates the cooperation it has received from your staff and consultant in keeping the City staff and Council Members informed and involved in the planning of this project. If any additional information or assistance is required, please contact Bob Meese, Principal Planner, at 782-5383. Sincerely,' to n HolmeaAilF ity Manager Attachment cc: mayor and City Council Planning Director Public Works Director OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER 3900 MAIN STREET + RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92522 • (909) 782-5553 RIVERSIDE 91 FREEWAY SOUND WALLS AND AUXILIARY LANES RIVERSIDE CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (PURSUANT TO CITY COUNCIL ACTION MARCH 26, 1996) Recommended sound wall desi n and installation priorities Wall segment general locations are depicted and numbered on maps contained in Appendix A of the Greiner report. City Council recommendations are listed for each proposed wall segment in the table below. The City Council Recommendations column indicates walls which should be built initially and those which should be installed later, when funding becomes available. Wall Genii Location #635 N side/W of La Sierra #35 N side/Tyler-Van Buren #77 N side/Van B. -Jackson #78 S side/Van B. -Jackson #98 S side/Jackson-Monroe #110 S side/Jackson-Monroe #121 N side/Monroe-Adams #129 N side/Monroe-Adams #149 N side/Adams-Jefferson #161 N side/Adams-Jefferson #183 N side/Jeff.-Madison #221 N side/Madison-Mary 14' Max Ht. City Council Recommendation 12' Acceptable; future phase 12' Acceptable; Phase I 10' Acceptable; Phase I 10' Acceptable; Phase I 10' Future phase 10-12' Future phase 10' Acceptable; future phase 10° Delete (adjacent to Baptist College which formally objected to wall) 10-12' 10-14' 10' Acceptable; Acceptable; Acceptable; Acceptable; Cal has the Phase I future phase future phase Phase I The following additional recommendations relate to aesthetic treatment of proposed walls: 1. Wall heights should generally not exceed ten feet in overall height (see above table for exceptions); height should be limited as much as possible but have sufficient height to achieve a 5 dBA noise reduction for adjoining area residents. 2. Walls adjoining Diana Avenue where it serves as a frontage road should be located a minimum of 5 feet from the edge of the Diana Avenue pavement and planted with an impenetrable landscape buffer. - Recommendation continue on following page - RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Budget & Finance Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager THROUGH: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Award Consultant Contract to develop the Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E) for the Phase II Noise Walls on State Route 91. At the March 11, 1998 RCTC meeting, the Commission directed staff to advertise a request for proposals to develop the Plans, Specifications, and cost Estimate (PS&E) for Phase II of the SR 91 noise walls that are required to mitigate the SR91 HOV lanes between Magnolia and Mary Streets. The currently adopted Strategic Plan indicates the start of construction for the Phase II Noise Walls to be in the year 2000. The Phase II noise walls project will also include the construction of auxiliary lanes at various locations; the widening of under crossings at Monroe Street, and Jefferson Street; and the replacement of the Jackson Street overcrossing. The general scope of work that is required will be consistent with the findings of the engineering study dated December 1995 regarding the noise walls and auxiliary lanes that are required to be constructed to mitigate the HOV lanes previously constructed and improve the operations of the freeway by adding the necessary, auxiliary lanes. The completion of this project will complete the Measure A designated project of adding up to two lanes in each direction between Magnolia and Mary Streets. The following tables indicate the scope of work to be included in the design package. SR 91 Phase II Noise Walls Between Magnolia & Mary Streets Wall # Location Remarks 635 North side of SR91 West of La Sierra 98 South side of SR91 Between Jackson and Monroe Streets 110 South Side of SR 91 Between Jackson and Monroe Streets 121 North Side of SR 91 Between Monroe and Adams Streets 161 North Side of SR 91 Between Adams and Jefferson Streets 183 North Side of SR 91 Between Jefferson and Madison Streets Note: This wall was advanced and included with the Phase I walls. 01 85 SR 91 Phase II Auxiliary Lanes Between Magnolia & Mary Streets Location Impacted Structures Type of Structure Modification Between Tyler and Van Buren Blvd. None NA Jackson Street Over Crossing Jackson Street Over Crossing Replacement North Side of SR 91 Between Van Buren and Adams Street Monroe Street Under crossing Widening South Side of SR 91 Between Van Buren and Adams Street Monroe Street Under crossing Widening North Side of SR 91 Between Adams Street and Madison Street Jefferson Street Under Crossing Widening - South Side of SR 91 Between Madison Street and Jane Street Mary Street Under Crossing Widening A selection panel was formed to review the nine proposals received form interested engineering firms. The selection panel short listed the firms down to three firms and will hold interviews on Thursday, May 28, 1998. The results of these interviews and the status of the cost negotiations will be presented at the Budget & Finance meeting. Financial Assessment Project Cost To be determined from RFP and selection panel scoping negotiations Source of Funds Measure A - funded from the $15.98 million currently designated for the Phase II Noise wall project on SR 91 between Magnolia to Mary Streets Included in Fiscal Year Budget n Year Included in Program Budget Approved Allocation Year Programmed 2000 Year of Allocation Budget Adjustment Required y Financial Impact Not Applicable STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The results of the selection process, schedule of services, scope of services and cost to perform the work will be brought back to the Commission for review and approval for a contract award to the selected firm using the standard RCTC model consultant agreement. Mid 18 6 F.cl. S.Mnp P—. 02541 CITY OF RIVERSIDE . _ TRANE :.;:j-ZISSMN April 1, 1996 Mr. Jack Reagan, Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue, suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 SUBJECT: 91 FREEWAY SOUND WALLS AND AUXILIARY LANES Dear Mr. Reagan: On March 26, 1996, the Riverside City Council reviewed the plans prepared by your agency for sound attenuation walls and auxiliary lanes along segments of the Riverside 91 Freeway between Magnolia Avenue and Mary Street. The City council endorsed the proposed project substantially as described in the Sound Wall and Auxiliary Lane Study - December, 1995 with some requested modifications. The City's detailed recommendations regarding such issues as wall heights, locations, landscape treatment and installation priorities are attached. The City of Riverside appreciates the cooperation it has received from your staff and consultant in keeping the City staff and Council Members informed and involved in the planning of this project. If any additional information or assistance is required, please contact Bob Meese, Principal Planner, at 782-5383. Sincerely,' eE-14401-2- oY manager iit Manager Attachment cc: Mayor and City Council Planning Director Public Works Director OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER 3900 MCI STREET * RIVERSIDE, CAUFORNL 92522 s (909) 782.5553 030187 RIVERSIDE 91 FREEWAY SOUND WALLS AND AUXILIARY LANES RIVERSIDE CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (PURSUANT TO CITY COUNCIL ACTION MARCH 26, 1996) Recommended sound wall design and installation priorities Wall segment general locations are depicted and numbered on maps contained in Appendix A of the Greiner report. City Council recommendations are listed for each proposed wall segment in the table below. The City Council Recommendations column indicates walls which should be built initially and those which should be installed later, when funding becomes available. Wall #635 #35 #77 #78 #98 #110 #121 #129 Gen '1 Location N side/W of La Sierra N side/Tyler-Van Buren N side/Van B. -Jackson S side/Van B. -Jackson S side/Jackson-Monroe S side/Jackson-Monroe N side/Monroe-Adams N side/Monroe-Adams #149 N side/Adams-Jefferson #161 N side/Adams-Jefferson #193 N side/Jeff.-Madison #221 N side/Madison-Mary 14' Max Ht. City Council Recommendation 12' Acceptable; future phase 12' Acceptable; Phase I 10' Acceptable; Phase I 10' Acceptable; Phase I 10' Future phase 10-12' Future phase 10' Acceptable; future phase 10' Delete (adjacent to Cal Baptist College which has formally objected to the wall) 10-12' Acceptable; Phase I 10-14' Acceptable; future phase 10' Acceptable; future phase Acceptable; Phase I The following additional recommendations relate to aesthetic treatment of proposed walls: 1. Wall heights should generally not exceed ten feet in overall height (see above table for exceptions); height should be limited as much as possible but have sufficient height to achieve a 5 dBA noise reduction for adjoining area residents. 2. Walls adjoining Diana Avenue where it serves as a frontage road should be located a minimum of 5 feet from the edge of the Diana Avenue pavement and planted with an impenetrable landscape buffer. - Recommendation continue on following page - AGENDA ITEM NO. 8A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fund Transfer Agreement Between the State of California Department of Transportation and the Riverside County Transportation Commission for the Operation of a Freeway Service Patrol Program in Riverside County The Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) Program has been in operation for almost five years and provides roving tow truck service on four beats of SR -91 and I- 215/SR-60 during the morning and afternoon commute hours. The FSP program is funded by the State of California (80%) and local SAFE fees (20%). Funds are allocated to participating local agencies through a formula based on population, freeway lane miles, and levels of congestion. The attached agreement provides for continued State funding for fiscal year 1998-99 in the amount of $636,300. This is an increase of $136,200 over the funding level for FY 1997-98, and will provide funding for an additional vehicle on SR -91 and one vehicle on I-215/SR-60. The Riverside County SAFE must provide matching funds of $159,075. The increased funding levels were included in the Commission's FY 1998-99 budget for the Motorist Assistance Program. Annually, the program provides approximately 18,000 assists to stranded motorists along three segments of SR -91 and one segment of I-215/SR-60. The Commission contracts with two tow truck operators to patrol these routes Monday through Friday during peak commute hours. The program's day to day field supervision is handled by the California Highway Patrol. Financial Assessment Project Cost Source of Funds Included in Fiscal Year Budget Included in Program Budget Approved Allocation Budget Adjustment Required Financial Impact Not Applicable $159,075 SAFE Yes Yes N/A No Year Programmed Year of Allocation Year 1998-99 0 ,x) ;1 '? �� STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission approve the agreement with the State of California Department of Transportation, subject to Legal Counsel review, in the amount of $636,300 in State funding for the Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol program for FY 1998-99. 0001.90 FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL PROGRAM FUND TRANSFER AGREEMENT (Non -Federal) Agreement No.: FSP-6054(009) Location: 08-RIV-0-RCTC Project No.: FSP-6054(009) EA: 08-924273L THIS AGREEMENT, entered into on , 1998, is between the State of California, acting by and through the Department of Transportation, hereinafter referred to as STATE, and the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, a public agency, hereinafter referred to as "LOCAL AGENCY." WHEREAS, Streets and Highways Code (S&HC) Section 2560 et seq. authorizes STATE and local agencies to develop and implement a Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program on traffic -congested urban freeways throughout the state; and WHEREAS, STATE has distributed available State Highway Account funds to local agencies participating in the FSP Program in accordance with S&HC Section 2562; and WHEREAS, LOCAL AGENCY has applied to STATE and has been selected to receive funds from the FSP Program for the purpose of operating a FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL in Riverside County on State Routes 60, 91 and 215, hereinafter referred to as "PROJECT"; and WHEREAS, proposed PROJECT funding is as follows: Total Cost State Funds Local Funds(SAFE) $ 795,375 $ 636,300 $ 159,075 ; and WHEREAS, STATE is required to enter into an agreement with LOCAL AGENCY to delineate the respective responsibilities of the parties relative to prosecution of said PROJECT; and WHEREAS, STATE and LOCAL AGENCY mutually desire to cooperate and jointly participate in the FSP program and desire to specify herein:the terms and conditions under which the FSP program is to be conducted; and WHEREAS, LOCAL AGENCY has approved entering into this Agreement under authority of Resolution No. approved by LOCAL AGENCY on , a copy of which is attached. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows; For Caltrans Use Only I hereby Certify upon my own personal knowledge that budgeted funds are available for this encumbrance Chapter Statutes Item Accounting Officer Fiscal Program Year Date BC Category 1998 2660-101-0042 98- 99 20.30.010.600 C Fund Source 262042 X102 -042T Non -Fed FSP 5/7/98 SECTION I STATE AGREES: 1. To define or specify, in cooperation with LOCAL AGENCY, the limits of the State Highway segments to be served by the FSP as well as the nature and amount of the FSP dedicated equipment, if any, that is to be funded under the FSP program. 2. To pay LOCAL AGENCY the STATE's share, in amount not to exceed $ 636,300 of eligible participating PROJECT costs. 3. To Deposit with LOCAL AGENCY, upon LOCAL AGENCY's award of a contract for PROJECT services and receipt of an original and two signed copies of an invoice in the proper form, including identification of this Agreement Number and Project Number, from LOCAL AGENCY, the amount of $ 101,800. This initial deposit represents STATE's share of the estimated costs for the initial two months of PROJECT. Thereafter, to make reimbursements to LOCAL AGENCY as promptly as state fiscal procedures will permit, but not more often than monthly in arrears, upon receipt of an original and two signed copies of invoices in the proper form covering actual allowable costs incurred for the prior sequential month's period of the Progress Payment Invoice. (The initial deposit will be calculated at 16% of the STATE's total share.) 4. When conducting an audit of the costs claimed by LOCAL AGENCY under the provisions of this Agreement, STATE will rely to the maximum extent possible on any prior audit of LOCAL AGENCY performed pursuant to the provisions of State and federal laws. In the absence of such an audit, work of other auditors will be relied upon to the extent that work is acceptable to STATE when planning and conducting additional audits. SECTION II LOCAL AGENCY AGREES: 1. To commit and contribute matching funds totaling $159.075 from LOCAL AGENCY resources, which shall be an amount not less than 25 percent of the amount provided by STATE from the State Highway Account. Any additional contributions by LOCAL AGENCY shall be contingent upon approval of the LOCAL AGENCY's governing Board. 2. The LOCAL AGENCY's detailed PROJECT Cost Proposal which identifies all anticipated direct and indirect PROJECT costs which LOCAL AGENCY may invoice STATE for reimbursement under this Agreement is attached hereto and made an express part of this Agreement. The detailed PROJECT Cost Proposal reflects the provisions and/or regulations of Section III, Article 8, of this Agreement. 3. To use all state funds paid hereunder only for those transportation related PROJECT purposes that conform to Article XIX of the California State Constitution. Non -Fed FSP 5/7/98 3 4. STATE funds provided to LOCAL AGENCY under this Agreement shall not be used for administrative purposes by LOCAL AGENCY. 5. To develop, in cooperation with STATE, advertise, award and administer PROJECT contract(s)in accordance with LOCAL AGENCY competitive procurement procedures. 6. Upon award of a contract for PROJECT, to prepare and submit to STATE an original and two signed copies of invoicing for STATE's initial deposit specified in Section I, Article 3B. Thereafter, to prepare and submit to STATE an original and two signed copies of progress invoicing for STATE's share of actual expenditures for allowable PROJECT costs. 7. Said invoicing shall evidence the expenditure of LOCAL AGENCY's PROJECT participation in paying not less than 20% of all allowable PROJECT costs and shall contain the information described in Chapter 5 of the Local Assistance Procedures Manual and shall be mailed to the Department of Transportation, Accounting Service Center, Local Programs Accounting Branch, P.O. Box 942874, M.S. 33, Sacramento CA, 94274-0001. 8. Within 60 days after completion of PROJECT work to be reimbursed under this Agreement, to prepare a final invoice reporting all actual eligible costs expended, including all costs paid by LOCAL AGENCY and submit that signed invoice, along with any refund due STATE, to the District Local Assistance Engineer. Backup information submitted with said final invoice shall include all FSP operational contract invoices paid by LOCAL AGENCY to contracted operators included in expenditures billed for to STATE under this Agreement. 9. Any costs for which LOCAL AGENCY receives payment that are determined by subsequent audit to be unallowable are to be repaid to STATE by LOCAL AGENCY within thirty (30) days of LOCAL AGENCY receiving notice of audit findings. Should LOCAL AGENCY fail to reimburse moneys due STATE within (30) days of demand, or within such other period as may be agreed between both parties hereto, STATE reserves the right to withhold future payments due LOCAL AGENCY from any source, including, but not limited to, the State Treasurer and the State Controller. 10. LOCAL AGENCY and its subcontractors shall establish and maintain an accounting system conforming to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) to support reimbursement payment vouchers or invoices which segregate and accumulate costs of PROJECT work elements and produce monthly reports which clearly identify reimbursable costs, matching costs, and other expenditures by LOCAL AGENCY. 11 LOCAL AGENCY and its subcontractors shall maintain all source documents, books and records connected with its performance under this Agreement for a minimum of three years from the date of final payment to LOCAL AGENCY or until audit resolution is achieved and shall make all such supporting information available for inspection and audit by representatives of the STATE. Copies will be made and furnished by LOCAL AGENCY upon request. Non -Fed FSP 5/7/98 4 SECTION III IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED: 1 All obligations of STATE under the terms of this Agreement are subject to the appropriation of resources by the Legislature and the encumbrance of funds under this Agreement. Funding and reimbursement is available only upon the passage of.the State Budget Act containing these STATE funds. The starting date of eligible reimbursable activities shall be July 1, 1998 or the execution date of this ageement, whichever is later. 2 All obligations of LOCAL AGENCY under the terms of this Agreement are subject to authorization and allocation of resources by LOCAL AGENCY. 3. LOCAL AGENCY and STATE shall jointly define the initial FSP program as well as the appropriate level of FSP funding recommendations and scope of service and equipment required to provide and manage the FSP program. No changes shall be made in these unless mutually agreed to in writing by the parties to this Agreement. 4. Nothing in the provisions of this Agreement is intended to create duties or obligations to or rights in third parties not parties to this Agreement or affect the legal liability of either party to the Agreement by imposing any standard of care with respect to the maintenance of State highways different from the standard of care imposed by law. 5. Neither STATE nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury damage or liability occurring or arising by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by, ADMINISTERING AGENCY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to ADMINISTERING AGENCY under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless the State of California, its officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by ADMINISTERING AGENCY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to ADMINISTERING AGENCY under this Agreement. 6. Neither LOCAL AGENCY nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage or liability occurring or arising by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to STATE under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, STATE shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless LOCAL AGENCY, its officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to STATE under this Agreement. 7. LOCAL AGENCY will maintain an inventory of al] non expendable PROJECT equipment, defined as having a useful life of at least two years and an acquisition cost of $500 or more, paid for with PROJECT funds. At the conclusion of this Agreement, LOCAL AGENCY may either keep such equipment and credit STATE its share of equipment's fair market value or sell such Non -Fed FSP 5/7/98 5 equipment at the best price obtainable at a public or private sale (in accordance with established STATE procedures) and reimburse STATE its proportional share of the sale price. 8. LOCAL AGENCY and its sub -contractors will comply with all applicable Federal and State laws and regulations, including but not limited to, Office of Management and Budget Circular A-97, Cost Principles for State and Local Governments (49 CFR, Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to.State and Local Governments). 9. In the event that LOCAL AGENCY fails to operate the PROJECT commenced and reimbursed under this Agreement in accordance with the terms of this Agreement or fails to comply with applicable Federal and State laws and regulations, STATE reserves the right to terminate funding for PROJECT, or portions thereof, upon written notice to LOCAL AGENCY. 10. This Agreement shall terminate on June 30, 2000; However, the non expendable equipment, and liability clauses shall remain in effect until terminated or modified in writing by mutual agreement. STATE OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Department of Transportation By: By: Chief, Office of Local Programs Title: Project Implementation Date: Date: Non -Fed FSP 5/7/98 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8B RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Budget & Finance Committee Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Purchase of Radio Communication Equipment for the Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol Program The Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program operates eight tow trucks five days a week during the morning and afternoon peak commute hours (5:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.) on SR -91 from the Riverside/Orange County line to the SR -91/60/I-215 interchange and on SR -60/I-215 from the interchange to the 60/215 interchange in Moreno Valley. There are four FSP beats that cover approximately 26 miles of county freeways. The program operates as a cooperative effort between Caltrans District 8, the California Highway Patrol, and RCTC, with the Commission administering the tow truck contracts and Caltrans and CHP providing daily field supervision of the program. Currently, the CHP uses a 220 MHz radio system to dispatch the tow trucks and remain in constant communications with the drivers. CHP has been experiencing numerous problems with the radio system including breakdowns, repair parts not being readily available, "dead spots" where they cannot communicate with the drivers, and headset incapability with the CHP radio system which produces poor reception. In fact, the CHP is having difficulty staffing the FSP radio dispatch desk because of all of the above problems. Commission staff and the CHP have been searching for a new radio system that would better meet the needs of the FSP program. We met with the County Information Services department staff to discuss the possibility of using a county government frequency, and the county is attempting to. acquire a 450 MHz frequency we could share with another agency. They feel confident that they have located one, and they will field test the frequency once they have received approval from license granting agency. However, because of the on -going problems with the system and the possibility of losing CHP dispatch personnel, Caltrans, CHP and Commission staff believe the radio system should be replaced as soon as possible. With this in mind, a 450 MHz system has been found that will meet the needs of the program. The County Information Services department will maintain the system once they identify a frequency, but for now, it is proposed that a frequency be leased on a month -to -month basis. The County has reviewed the proposed equipment list and states that it is compatible with their system. The attached quote from Bear Communications lists all of the required equipment for $24,508. The equipment will be funded by the State of California (80%) and local SAFE fees (20%). There are sufficient program savings in the current fiscal year budget to fund the purchase of the equipment. Financial Assessment Project Cost $24,508 $21,585.74 Source of Funds State of California (80%) SAFE Fees (20%) Included in Fiscal Year Budget Included in Program Budget Approved Allocation Budget Adjustment Required No No Yes Yes Financial Impact Not Applicable Year Year Programmed Year of Allocation STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission authorize the purchase of radio communication equipment Bear Communications for the Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol program in the amount of $24,500. $21,585.74. BEARC'3M 1860 Chicago Avenue, Ste I-9 Riverside, California 92507 Tel 909.686.7062 Fax 909.686.1669 Date: 29 -May -98 QUOTE FOR UHF REPEATER SYSTEM FOR CHP FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL REPEATER Item Quantity Description Price Extended 1 1 Motorola MTR2000 UHF $9,070.00 $9,070.00 100 watt repeater Commercial grade; full duplex, continues duty *435-470 MHz . *System software *Progammable *Zetron 38 Max Tone Panel *One Channel *EMR High Power 7" Cavity *Polyhaser Lightning Arrestor ANTENNA 2 1 Celwave 5dBd Station Master $710.00 $710.00 w/Hanger Kit COAX 3 1 718" Heliax 150' w/Connectors $1,100.00 $1,100.00 25' LMR400 w/Connectors 4 1 Grounding Kit wlCable Hangers $158.00 $158.00 INSTALL 5 1 Install & Test $1,000.00 Mountain Top Repeater MOBILE UNITS 6 10 Motorola Maxtrac 100 UHF $595.00 $5,950.00 2 channel, 45 watt 7 2 Motorola GM300 UHF $706.00 $1,412.00 16 channel, 4o watt Includes: large palm mic, external speaker & remote head ALBUQUERQUE • ATLANTA • BOSTON • BRISBANE, AUS - CHANTILLY, VA • CHICAGO • COSTA MESA. CA • DALLAS • DENVER • DETROIT HARTFORD. CT • HOUSTON . HONOLULU • LAS VEGAS • LOS ANGELES - MINNEAPOLIS : MIAMI NEW YORK • OAKLAND. CA • ORLANDO PHOENIX PORTLAND • RIVERSIDE. CA • SACRAMENTO • SAN DIEGO • SAN FRANCISCO - SEATTLE • SYDNEY, AUS • WASHINGTON. DC BEARCOM 1860 Chicago Avenue. Ste 1-9 Riverside, Califomia 92507 Tel 909.686.7062 Fax 909.686.1669 • ANTENNA 8 14 Motorola UHF 5 dB Antenna $43.00 $602.00 9 4 HLN5189 Mt. Bracket $8.00 $32.00 10 4 HKN4137 Power Cable $18.00 $72.00 DISPATCH STATION BASE UNIT 14 1 Motorola Maxtrac 2 ch,45 watt $1,055.00 $1,055.00 w/interface card for console 15 1 Power Supply $175.00 $175.00 ANTENNA 16 1 Base UHF Yagi 7.12dB Ant. $62.00 $62.00 17 1 Palyhaser Lightning Arrestor $64.95 $64.95 INSTALL 18 1 Install of Base Antenna $200.00 OPTIONS Subtotal: $20,462.95 Trade in allowance for all SEA equipment: ($1,600.00) Tax 7.75%: $1,522.79 Install: 51,200.00 TOTAL: $21,585.74 Mobile & portable Motorola ESP warranty add 2 yrs beyond the standard 1 yr warranty (for total of 3 yrs.) (Turn around time is 3 days on repairs) LICENSING Three repeater frequencies SITE Monthly site rental Box Springs HT1000 Maxtrac 100-300 Total $669.00 $275.00 $25 per radio $30 per radio PERFORMANCE STATEMENT BearCom guaranties this system to perform as -well -as the Kaiser system used for the Demo. ALBUQUERQUE • ATLANTA • BOSTON • BRISBANE, AUS • CHANTILLY, VA • CHICAGO COSTA MESA. CA - DALLAS • DENVER • DETROIT HARTFORD. CT • HOUSTON • HONOLULU • LAS VEGAS • LOS ANGELES • MINNEAPOLIS MIAMI NEW YORK • OAKLAND. CA • ORLANDO • PHOENIX PORTLAND - RIVERSIDE. CA • SACRAMENTO • SAN DIEGO • SAN FRANCISCO • SEATTLE • SYDNEY, AUS • WASHINGTON. DC RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 3, 1998 TO: Budget & Finance Committee Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Purchase of Radio Communication Equipment for the Riverside The Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program operates eight tow trucks .five days a week during the morning and afternoon peak commute hours (5:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.) on SR -91 from the Riverside/Orange County line to the SR -91/60/I-215 interchange and on SR -60/I-215 from the interchange to the 60/215 interchange in Moreno Valley. There are four FSP beats that cover approximately 26 miles of county freeways. The program operates as a cooperative effort between Caltrans District 8, the California Highway Patrol, and RCTC, with the Commission administering the tow truck contracts and Caltrans and CHP providing daily field supervision of the program. Currently, the CHP uses a 220 MHz radio system to dispatch the tow trucks and remain in constant communications with the drivers. CHP has been experiencing numerous problems with the radio system including breakdowns, repair parts not being readily available, "dead spots" where they cannot communicate with the drivers, and headset incapability with the CHP radio system which produces poor reception. In fact, the CHP is having difficulty staffing the FSP radio dispatch desk because of all of the above problems. Commission staff and the CHP have been searching for a new radio system that would better meet the needs of the FSP program. We met with the County Information Services department staff to discuss the possibility of using a county government frequency, and the county is attempting to acquire a 450 MHz frequency we could share with another agency. They feel confident that they have located one, and they will field test the frequency once they have received approval from license granting agency. However, because of the on -going problems with the system and the possibility of losing CHP dispatch personnel, Caltrans, CHP and Commission staff believe the radio system should be replaced as soon as possible. With this in mind, a 450 MHz system has been found that will meet the needs of the program. The County Information Services department will maintain the system once they identify a frequency, but for now, it is proposed that a frequency be leased on a month -to -month basis. The County has reviewed the proposed equipment list and states that it is compatible with their system. 0 0_I' The attached quote from Bear Communications lists all of the required equipment for $24,508. The equipment will be funded by the State of California (80%) and local SAFE fees (20%). There are sufficient program savings in the current fiscal year budget to fund the purchase of the equipment. Financial Assessment Project Cost $24,508 Source of Funds State of California (80%) SAFE Fees (20%) Included in Fiscal Year Budget No Year Included in Program Budget No Year Programmed Approved Allocation Yes Year of Allocation Budget Adjustment Required Yes Financial Impact Not Applicable STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission authorize the purchase of radio communication equipment Bear Communications for the Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol program in the amount of $24,508. 0 0 :;_r r,