HomeMy Public PortalAbout01 January 27, 2003 91 Express Lanes Advisory0'3051
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
91 EXPRESS LANES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Chairman Ron Roberts
Commissioner Bob Buster
Commissioner Jeff Miller
Commissioner Robert Schiffner
Commissioner John Tavaglione
Commissioner Ameal Moore, Alternate
BRIEFING
1:30 P.M.
Monday, January 27, 2003
RCTC Conference Room "A"
4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor
Riverside, CA 92501
AGENDA
1. Review of Enabling Legislation
2. Committee Operations
3. OCTA Traffic and Revenue Study
4. Caltrans Plan of Potential Improvements
5. New Corridor Discussion
6. Additional Business
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
January 27, 2003
TO:
RCTC Members of 91 Express Lanes Advisory Committee Meeting
FROM:
John Standiford, Public Information Officer
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Briefing for Feb. 7 Committee Meeting
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
February 7, 2003, marks the date for the first meeting of the 91 Express Lanes Advisory
Committee. The Committee was created by Assembly 1010 (Correa) which changed
state law to allow the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) to purchase the
91 Express Lanes from the California Private Transportation Company (CPTC). Earlier
this month, OCTA completed their purchase of the 91 Express Lanes and conducted a
media event on January 10, 2003, which attracted significant news coverage and
attendance from a number of State Legislators.
RCTC supported AB 1010 for a number of sound reasons. First and foremost, the
legislation mandates the elimination of previously imposed non -compete clauses that
prohibited freeway and roadway improvements along the 91 Freeway and its vicinity
between Interstate 5 and Interstate 15. Also, the Commission foresaw the advantage of
placing the toll road in public hands that would allow for public input and eliminate the
profit incentive that deterred improvements to the rest of the freeway. The legislation
also manifested a recognition of the need for Orange and Riverside Counties to work
together to forge mutually beneficial transportation solutions. Toward this end, AB 1010
created a bi-county advisory committee to weigh in on toll road operations and
transportation improvements along the 91 Freeway Corridor.
Review of Legislation
The sale of the 91 Express Lanes and the creation of the bi-county advisory committee
meeting is all a byproduct of state legislation. When OCTA suggested purchasing the
91 Express Lanes to eliminate the non -compete clause the agency did not have the
statutory approval to purchase nor operate a toll road. Assemblyman Correa to carried
the bill which was approved by both houses and signed by Governor Davis. A copy of
AB 1010 is included as Attachment A.
AB 1010 is a rather simple bill, but it spells out a number of important provisions and
responsibilities that govern OCTA's purchase and operation of the 91 Express Lanes.
The bill spells out the legal requirements that OCTA must follow in operating the facility
and collecting revenue. For example, OCTA can only spend toll road revenue to pay off
toll road bonds or on transportation improvements in the general vicinity of the actual
corridor. Tolls can only be collected until Dec. 31, 2030 or when bonded indebtedness
is paid off in entirety, whichever occurs earlier.
Also Section 1 (i) of the legislation on page 4 clearly states, "Current tolls should be
reduced and to the extent feasible, the duration of the tolls should be minimized... "
In reading the bill, it is clear that the Legislature recognized OCTA's financial obligation
in buying the facility. As a result, OCTA is tasked with most of the major
responsibilities. For example, the legislation requires that OCTA to issue a plan and
proposed completion schedule of improvements on the 91 Freeway between 1-15 and
the 55 Freeway. The legislation is clear that this report is OCTA's responsibility and
that the report must be completed by July 1, 2003, and thereafter updated on an annual
basis. In doing so, OCTA must cooperate with RCTC and Caltrans.
OCTA is also required to conduct an annual audit of the toll revenues collected and
expenditures made during their ownership of the Express Lanes. This is to ensure that
revenues and expenditures are consistent with the legislation.
In short, the Legislature and the approved legislation reinforce the position that OCTA
shoulders the main responsibility for operating the toll road and the resulting
responsibilities and liabilities that come with it. The creation of the advisory committee
provides RCTC with a seat at the table in voicing concerns, providing advice and
counsel and carrying out a few responsibilities; however most major decisions are under
the purview of OCTA.
Traffic and Revenue Study
In anticipation of their responsibilities in operating the toll road, OCTA contracted with
Vollmer Associates to conduct a traffic and revenue study on the Express Lanes.
Vollmer is an international firm based on the East Coast that is well -regarded and
experience in regard to traffic forecasts and toll road operations. The firm will likely
provide a detailed presentation of their work during the first Toll Road Advisory
Committee meeting on Feb. 7.
A preliminary presentation was made to the OCTA Board of Directors on Dec. 11. Their
presentation demonstrated and explained current traffic conditions and demand on the
91 Express Lanes. To summarize, the facility earns about 80 percent of its revenue
during only a few hours of each day. The prime peak period is the evening eastbound
drive back into Riverside County. The morning commute hours westbound experience
high demand as well, but not at the levels of the Eastbound commute.
During their presentation to the OCTA Board in December, the Vollmer staff warned the
OCTA Board that eastbound congestion in the evening was getting to the point that it
was affecting the average vehicle speed on the 91 Express Lanes. When the facility
was privately -owned, CPTC usually responded by raising tolls when congestion
reached this point. A number of OCTA Directors questioned this finding and were
troubled by its implications, but it is very likely that the issue will be raised again at the
first advisory committee meeting. The good news is that the findings show that tolls can
be lowered for most of the day without a significant traffic or revenue impact. The
downside is determining the course of action on the eastbound peak commute.
Caltrans Presentation on Improvements
Caltrans District 8 (Inland Empire) and District 12 (Orange County) have been working
on developing a comprehensive plan of improvements for the 91 Corridor on both sides
of the county line. The preliminary work is still being refined but lists 17 projects that
range from minor re -striping to major construction projects worth hundreds of millions of
dollars. What they have accomplished is a first -cut look at potential costs and benefits,
right-of-way needs, and potential environmental impacts.
Caltrans will make a presentation at the Advisory Committee meeting to acquaint
members from both agencies on the work they have completed. Ideally, this planning
effort will form the basis of the plan that must be adopted by OCTA for the 91 Freeway
corridor. The plan can than provide positive momentum for progress and cooperation
between the counties on a strategy for improving the 91.
Unfortunately the state's budget crisis and STIP shortfall provide a short-term challenge
to fund improvements along the freeway. RCTC is in a better position than OCTA
because of the approval of Measure A in November. A number of projects examined by
Caltrans in their planning effort include projects outlined in the Measure A extension.
OCTA has not undertaken an effort to extend their Measure M program.
New Corridor Discussions
Of course one of the most significant and costly improvements that could be made
along the 91 Freeway Corridor would be to construct a new highway between the
counties. This has comprised a significant part of the CETAP effort but has not resulted
in the same level of response from Orange County.
In recent months, the Orange County Transportation Authority has signaled a major
change in receptiveness toward studying a new corridor. OCTA staff has expressed a
desire to "catch up" with Riverside County and planning for a new corridor was included
in OCTA's recently adopted Long Range Plan. Their actions in order to prepare the
plan included surveys and public outreach that indicated strong support in Orange
County for another highway link between the two counties. OCTA is considering
committing $2 million toward a major investment study of a variety of transportation
options. Also, plans are still in place to establish express bus service between the two
counties by the end of this year. OCTA would operate the service and is working
cooperatively with RCTC and RTA and hopes to have buses operating by the end of
this year.
Ultimately, the advisory committee will play a key role in advancing plans for a new
transportation corridor between the two counties. Defining the nature of that role will be
an important discussion for both RCTC and OCTA.
Next Steps
The first meeting of the 91 Express Lanes Advisory Committee will likely attract a
significant amount of attention from the news media and the area's legislative
delegation. More importantly it has the potential of establishing a cooperative working
relationship between both counties that will result in needed, welcome improvements
along the 91 Freeway Corridor.
Assembly Bill No. 1010
CHAPTER 688
An act to amend Section 130240 of the Public Utilities Code, and to
amend Section 143 of the Streets and Highways Code, relating to
transportation.
[Approved by Governor September 18, 2002. Filed
with Secretary of State September 18, 2002.]
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 1010, Correa. Transportation: franchise agreements.
(1) Existing law authorizes the Department of Transportation to enter
into agreements with private entities for the construction by and lease to
private entities of 4 transportation demonstration projects, including at
least one in northern California and one in southern California. Existing
law authorizes these private entities to charge tolls for the use of the
privately constructed facilities. Existing Iaw requires that any excess toll
revenue be applied to any debt the entity incurred building the facilities
to be paid into the State Highway Account in the State Transportation
Fund. Existing law provides that the department may continue to charge
tolls for use of these facilities after the lease held by the private entity has
expired.
This bill would provide that the collection of tolls for the use of these
facilities would terminate at the expiration of the franchise agreement.
The bill would also delete the provisions specifying the location of the
demonstration projects and would preclude the department from
entering into a new agreement for these projects after January 1, 2003.
(2) Existing law authorizes the Orange County Transportation
Authority to acquire, construct, develop, lease, or dispose of
rights -of -way, rail lines, buslines, and other facilities necessary for
transit purposes.
This bill would additionally authorize the authority with respect to the
segment of State Highway Route 91 between Interstate Highway Route
15 and State Highway Route 55 only, to acquire streets, highways,
bridges, tunnels, and connector roads necessary for transit or
transportation purposes. The bill would require the department, if
requested by the Orange County Transportation Authority, to approve
the assignment of a franchise agreement between the department and the
California Private Transportation Company for State Highway Route 91
to the Orange County Transportation Authority. The bill would provide
that the authority shall not sell or assign its interest in the franchise
92
P
Ch. 688 — 2 —
agreement without approval of the Legislature by the enactment of a
statute. The bill would authorize the authority to impose tolls on State
Highway Route 91 to be used for specified purposes. The bill would
specify that the authority's authorization to impose the toll would
terminate upon its payment in full of certain bonded indebtedness or on
December 31, 2030, whichever occurs earlier, and that the segment of
State Highway Route 91 between Interstate Highway Route 15 and State
Highway Route 55 would revert to the depaittiient at that time. The bill
would provide that neither the state nor any other public agency is liable
for any debt of the authority. The bill would create an advisory
committee composed of 5 voting members each from the board of the
Orange County Transportation Authority and the Riverside County
Transportation Commission, and 3 nonvoting members from the San
Bernardino Associated Governments and the department to review and
make recommendations to the authority regarding the facilities acquired,
tolls imposed, and the maintenance and operations of State Highway
Route 91. The bill would make the exercise of the authority's powers in
Riverside County subject to the approval of the Board of Supervisors of
Riverside County and the Riverside County Transportation
Commission and in consultation with the advisory committee. The bill
would specify that all costs associated with the advisory committee
would be paid by the Orange County Transportation Authority.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) It is essential for the economic well-being of the state and the
maintenance of a high quality of life that the people of California have
an efficient transportation system.
(b) The Department of Transportation (hereafter the department) is a
party to a franchise agreement with the California Private Transportation
Company, L.P. (CPTC), as authorized by Section 143 of the Streets and
Highways Code, providing for privately financed transportation
facilities within State Highway Route 91 (hereafter Route 91), with
transportation facility development rights extending from Interstate 15
in Riverside County to the Los Angeles County and Orange County
boundary. The completed facilities include two lanes in each direction
for approximately 10 miles in the County of Orange. Tolls are imposed
for use of the facilities to provide a revenue stream for the CPTC to
finance the costs of construction and operation of the transportation
facilities and to earn a profit consistent with the provisions of the
franchise agreement. The franchise agreement extends to the year 2030
and includes provisions prohibiting improvements to Route 91 in order
92
P
-3 —
Ch. 688
to protect the investment in the privately financed facilities (hereafter
noncompete provisions).
(c) The County of Riverside is currently challenging the legality of
the noncompete provisions in a legal proceeding against the department
and the CPTC.
(d) Current congestion on Route 91 and projections for future vehicle
traffic and transportation demand through this corridor make it
imperative that Route 91 improvements be planned and constructed as
soon as possible.
(e) The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) has
determined that acquisition of the CPTC interest in the franchise
agreement is desirable and is the most appropriate means to eliminate the
noncompete provisions of the franchise agreement. By replacing private
control of the franchise agreement and bringing the transportation
facilities under public ownership, OCTA will restore the authority to
public agencies, including OCTA, the department, and the Riverside
County Transportation Commission (hereafter RCTC), to make much
needed improvements in the heavily congested Route 91 corridor and for
OCTA to manage the transportation facilities to maximize throughput of
vehicles and passengers rather than profits.
(f) The noncompete provisions shall be eliminated through the sale
of CPTC's interest in the franchise agreement to the OCTA. This will
facilitate the end of the litigation and enable planning and construction
of critically needed transportation improvements to Route 91 through
the Counties of Orange and Riverside.
(g) In pursuing the acquisition of the franchise agreement, OCTA
undertook a rigorous valuation process that was comprised of three
discrete elements. First, OCTA staff examined pertinent traffic and
related revenue projections provided by CPTC and determined a value
of the CPTC enterprise based on a discounted cashflow, a business
valuation method in common use and believed to be most appropriate
in this circumstance in the absence of other comparative business
enterprises operating privately controlled toll lanes in public highways.
This produced a valuation range between two hundred ten million
dollars ($210,000,000) and two hundred fifteen million dollars
($215,000,000). Second, OCTA examined the cost to replace the
transportation facility at today's construction costs. This produced a
valuation estimate of two hundred million dollars ($200,000,000).
Finally, OCTA engaged an outside accounting firm to prepare an
independent third -party fairness opinion on the valuation process, which
validated the OCTA valuation methods and produced a valuation
estimate of the transportation facility in a range between two hundred
92
P
Ch. 688 — 4 —
two million dollars ($202,000,000) and two hundred twenty million
dollars ($220,000,000).
(h) OCTA used the valuation range produced as a guideline in
bilateral negotiations with CPTC to acquire the franchise agreement
rights. A purchase price was negotiated with a value of two hundred
seven million five hundred thousand dollars ($207,500,000). Based on
this purchase price, OCTA has structured a financing plan that would
have OCTA assume existing CPTC debt of one hundred thirty-five
million dollars ($135,000,000), supplemented by an additional payment
by OCTA to CPTC of seventy-two million five hundred thousand dollars
($72,500,000) in cash from existing reserves available to OCTA. As a
result of the proposed transaction, OCTA will replace CPTC as the
holder of the franchise agreement and the authority for CPTC to collect
tolls will terminate.
(i) Current tolls should be reduced and to the extent feasible, the
duration of the imposition of tolls should be minimized, but tolls shall
be adequate to assure the payment of all financing required to acquire the
facilities, and tolls shall be eliminated no later than the year 2030,
consistent with the terms of the franchise agreement and Section 143 of
the Streets and Highways Code.
SEC. 2. Section 130240 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to
read:
130240. (a) "Transit" means as defined in Section 40005.
(b) (1) The Orange County Transportation Authority may acquire,
construct, develop, lease, jointly develop, own, operate, maintain,
control, use, jointly use, or dispose of rights -of -way, rail lines,
monorails, guideways, buslines, stations, platforms, switches, yards,
terminals, parking lots, air rights, land rights, development rights,
entrances and exits, and any and all other facilities for, incidental to,
necessary for, or convenient for transit service, including, but not limited
to, facilities and structures physically or functionally related to transit
service, within or partly without the county, underground, upon, or
above the ground and under, upon or over public streets, highways,
bridges, or other public ways or waterways, together with all physical
structures necessary for, incidental to, or convenient for the access of
persons and vehicles thereto, and may acquire, lease, sell, or otherwise
contract with respect to any interest in or rights to the use or joint use of
any or all of the foregoing. However, installations on state freeways are
subject to the approval of the Department of Transportation and
installations in other state highways are subject to Article 2
(commencing with Section 670) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of the Streets
and Highways Code.
92
P
— 5 —
Ch. 688
(2) With respect to the segment of State Highway Route 91 between
Interstate Highway Route 15 and State Highway Route 55 only, the
Orange County Transportation Authority may exercise all of the powers
contained in paragraph (1) that apply to streets, highways, bridges, and
connector roads.
(3) The exercise of the powers provided to the Orange County
Transportation Authority in paragraph (2) is subject to approval by the
Board of Supervisors of Riverside County and the Riverside County
Transportation Commission and in consultation with the advisory
committee described in paragraph (1) of subdivision (h) as it relates to
the use of those powers in Riverside County under the terms of the
franchise agreement described in subdivision (c).
(c) If the Orange County Transportation Authority requests, the
department shall approve the assignment to the Orange County
Transportation Authority of the Amended and Restated Development
Franchise Agreement, as amended, between the department and the
California Private Transportation Company, L.P. (CPTC) for the State
Highway Route 91 median improvements as authorized by Section 143
of the Streets and Highways Code, subject to the requirement that
subdivisions (a) to (f), inclusive, of Section 2 of Article 3 of the restated
franchise agreement be deleted in their entirety in the event that CPTC
and the authority agree to the assignment of all of CPTC's interests in
the franchise agreement to the authority.
(d) The Orange County Transportation Authority shall have the
authority to impose tolls for use of the State Highway Route 91 facilities
as authorized by the franchise agreement. After the bonds issued
pursuant to subdivision (f) are paid in their entirety or on December 31,
2030, whichever occurs earlier, the Orange County Transportation
Authority shall have no further authority to impose or to collect a toll for
the use of the segment of State Highway Route 91 between Interstate
Highway Route 15 and State Highway Route 55.
(e) Toll revenues from the use of State Highway Route 91 facilities
between Interstate Highway Route 15 and State Highway Route 55 shall
only be used by the Orange County Transportation Authority for capital
and operating expenses, including payment of purchase costs, debt
service, and satisfaction of other covenants and obligations relating to
indebtedness, and for transportation related to State Highway Route 91
between Interstate Highway Route 15 and State Highway Route 55,
excluding other toll roads. Prior to July 1, 2003, the Orange County
Transportation Authority, in consultation with the department and the
Riverside County Transportation Commission, shall issue a plan and a
proposed completion schedule for the improvements on State Highway
Route 91 between Interstate Highway Route 15 and State Highway
92
P
Ch. 688
—6—
Route 55. The Orange County Transportation Authority shall update the
plan on an annual basis until all improvements described in the plan have
been completed.
(f) The Orange County Transportation Authority may incur
indebtedness and obligations, and may issue bonds, refund bonds, and
assume existing bonds for purposes authorized by this section for a
period not to extend beyond the year 2030. Indebtedness and bonds
issued under this section do not constitute a debt or liability of the state
or any other public agency, other than the authority, or a pledge of the
faith and credit of the state or any other public agency, other than the
authority. Bonds issued under this section shall not be deemed to
constitute a debt or liability of the state or any political subdivision
thereof, other than the bank and the authority, or a pledge of the faith and
credit of the state or of any political subdivision, but shall be payable
solely from the revenues and assets pledged to the repayment of the
bonds. All bonds issued under this section shall contain on the face of
the bond a statement to the same effect.
(g) Notwithstanding Section 143 of the Streets and Highways Code,
the State Highway Route 91 facility constructed and operated under the
authority of a franchise agreement approved pursuant to that section
shall revert to the state at the expiration of the lease or termination of the
franchise agreement at no cost to the state.
(h) (1) An advisory committee shall be created to review issues and
make recommendations to the Orange County Transportation Authority
regarding the transportation facilities acquired from CPTC, including
tolls unposed, operations, maintenance, and use of toll revenues, and
improvements in the area of State Highway Route 91 between Interstate
Highway Route 15 and State Highway Route 55, including the
identification and siting of alternative highways. The committee shall
consist of 10 voting members and three nonvoting members, as follows:
(A) Five members of the board of directors of the Orange County
Transportation Authority appointed by that board.
(B) Five members of the Riverside County Transportation
Commission appointed by that commission.
(C) One member of the San Bernardino Associated Governments
appointed by that body and the district directors of Districts 8 and 12 of
the Depaitment of Transportation, all of whom shall be nonvoting
members.
(2) When reviewing the initial toll structure proposed by the Orange
County Transportation Authority or any changes to the toll structure, the
advisory committee shall place an information item on a regularly
scheduled agenda for due public comment and consideration of the
advisory committee.
92
P
— 7 —
Ch. 688
(3) The Orange County Transportation Authority shall conduct an
audit on an annual basis of the toll revenues collected and expenditures
made during the term of franchise agreement. The audit shall review
revenues and expenditures for consistency with the provisions of this
section and shall be provided to the advisory committee.
(4) The Orange County Transportation Authority shall pay all costs
associated with the requirements of this subdivision.
(i) The Orange County Transportation Authority shall not impose
tolls for the use of nor construct and operate State Highway Route 91
facilities in the County of Riverside without prior approval by the Board
of Supervisors of the County of Riverside, the Riverside County
Transportation Commission, and the advisory committee.
(j) The Orange County Transportation Authority shall not sell or
assign its interest in the franchise agreement without approval by the
Legislature by enactment of a statute provided that approval shall not be
required in connection with granting rights and remedies to lenders
under Article 16 of the restated franchise agreement.
(k) After the bonds issued pursuant to this section are paid off in their
entirety, or on December 31, 2030, whichever occurs earlier, that
segment of State Highway Route 91 between Interstate Highway Route
15 and State Highway Route 55 shall revert to the depai tcuent.
(1) In the event that the Orange County Transportation Authority
decides to sell or assign its interest in the franchise agreement, the
Orange County Transportation Authority shall provide written notice at
least 90 days in advance of the date they submit their request for approval
by the depai tment pursuant to this subdivision. The written notice shall
be provided to the advisory committee and the Riverside County
Transportation Commission.
SEC. 3. Section 143 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended
to read:
143. (a) The department may solicit proposals and enter into
agreements with private entities, or consortia thereof, for the
construction by, and lease to, private entities of two public transportation
demonstration projects. The department shall not enter into an
agreement for any new proposals under this authority after January 1,
2003.
(b) For the purpose of facilitating those projects, the agreements may
include provisions for the lease of rights -of -way in, and airspace over or
under, state highways, for the granting of necessary easements, and for
the issuance of permits or other authorizations to enable the private
entity to construct transportation facilities supplemental to existing
state-owned transportation facilities. Facilities constructed by a private
entity pursuant to this section shall, at all times, be owned by the state.
92
P
Ch. 688
—8—
The agreement shall provide for the lease of those facilities to the private
entity for up to 35 years. In consideration therefor, the agreement shall
provide for complete reversion of the privately constructed facility to the
state at the expiration of the lease at no charge to the state.
(c) The department may exercise any power possessed by it with
respect to the development and construction of state transportation
projects to facilitate the development and construction of transportation
projects pursuant to this section. Agreements for maintenance and police
services entered into pursuant to this section shall provide for full
reimbursement for services rendered by the department or other state
agencies. The department may provide services for which it is
reimbursed with respect to preliminary planning, environmental
certification, and preliminary design of the demonstration projects.
(d) (I) Agreements entered into pursuant to this section shall
authorize the private entity to impose tolls for use of a facility
constructed by it, and shall require that over the term of the lease the toll
revenues be applied to payment of the private entity's capital outlay costs
for the project, the costs associated with operations, toll collection,
administration of the facility, reimbursement to the state for the costs of
maintenance and police services, and a reasonable return on investment
to the private entity. The agreement shall require that any excess toll
revenue either be applied to any indebtedness incurred by the private
entity with respect to the project or be paid into the State Highway
Account, or both.
(2) The authority to collect tolls for the use of these facilities shall
terminate at the expiration of the franchise agreement.
(e) The plans and specifications for each project constructed pursuant
to this section shall comply with the depaitment's standards for state
transportation projects. A facility constructed by and leased to a private
entity shall, during the term of the lease, be deemed to be a part of the
state highway system for purposes of identification, maintenance,
enforcement of traffic laws, and for the purposes of Division 3.6
(commencing with Section 810) of Title 1 of the Government Code.
(f) The assignment authorized by subdivision (c) of Section 130240
of the Public Utilities Code is consistent with this section.
SEC. 4. Notwithstanding Section 17610 of the Government Code,
if the Commission on State Mandates determines that this act contains
costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local agencies and school
districts for those costs shall be made pursuant to Part 7 (commencing
with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code.
If the statewide cost of the claim for reimbursement does not exceed one
92
P
— 9 — Ch. 688
million dollars ($1,000,000), reimbursement shall be made from the
State Mandates Claims Fund.
0
92
P