The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About02 February 24, 2003 Budget & Implementation(,s504 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA TIME: 2:30 p.m. DATE: Monday, February 24, 2003 LOCATION: Board Chambers County Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, 1' Floor Riverside, CA 92501 RECORDS ***COMMITTEE MEMBERS*** Chris Carlson-Buydos, Chair / Jim Conner, City of San Jacinto Art Welch / Sue Palmer, City of Banning Placido Valdivia / Roger Berg, City of Beaumont Robert Crain / George Thomas, City of Blythe Jack Wamsley / Mary Craton, City of Canyon Lake Gregory S. Pettis / Paul Marchand, City of Cathedral City Juan DeLara / City of Coachella Mike Wilson / Gene Gilbert, City of Indio Robert Schiffner / Thomas Buckley, City of Lake Elsinore Terry Henderson / Don Adolph, City of La Quinta G. Dana Hobart / Ron Meepos, City of Rancho Mirage Ameal Moore / Joy Defenbaugh, City of Riverside John F. Tavaglione, District Two/ County of Riverside Jim Venable, District Three / County of Riverside ***STAFF*** Eric Haley, Executive Director Marilyn Williams, Director of Regional Programs and Public Affairs ***AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY*** Annual Budget Development and Oversight Countywide Strategic Plan Legislation Measure "A" Implementation and Capital Programs Public Communications and Outreach Programs Competitive Grant Programs: TEA 21-CMAQ & STP, Transportation Enhancement and SB 821 -Bicycle & Pedestrian Property Management SAFE/Freeway Service Patrol and other areas as may be prescribed by the Commission Comments are welcomed by the Committee. If you wish to provide comments to the Committee, please complete and submit a Testimony Card to the Clerk of the Commission No. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 2:30 p.m. Monday, February 24 , 2003 BOARD CHAMBERS* * County Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, 1S` Floor Riverside, California * * PLEASE NOTE THAT VIDEO-CONFERENCING IS NOT AVAILABLE AT THIS SITE 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS 4 APPROVAL OF MINUTES (January 27, 2003) 5. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS (The Committee may add an item to the Agenda after making a finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and that the item came to the attention of the Commission subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Committee. If there are less than 2/3 of the Committee members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote. Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.) 6. CONSENT CALENDAR - All matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 6A. CONTRACTS COST AND SCHEDULE REPORT Pg. 1 Overview Budget and Implementation Committee Agenda February 24, 2003 Page 2 This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the Contracts Cost and Schedule Report for the month ending January 31, 2003, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 6B. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT Overview This item is for the Committee to: Pg. 5 1) Receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ending December 31, 2002, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 7. AGREEMENT #03-33-055 FOR ADDITIONAL ON -CALL MATERIAL TESTING SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF MEASURE "A" CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS Pg. 22 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Award Agreement #03-33-055 (Amendment #6 to Agreement #RO- 9832) with Ninyo & Moore to provide additional on call material testing services in support of Measure "A" projects scheduled for construction for the remainder of this fiscal year, for an additional base amount of $86,000.00; 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 8. AGREEMENT #03-33-038 FOR RIVERSIDE -LA SIERRA METROLINK STATION PHASE II PARKING LOT EXPANSION Pg. 29 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Award Agreement #03-33-038 for the construction of the Riverside -La Sierra Metrolink Station Phase II Parking Lot Expansion project to Riverside Construction Co. for the amount of $1,199,850 plus a Budget and Implementation Committee Agenda February 24, 2003 Page 3 contingency amount of $150,150 to cover potential change orders encountered during construction, for a total not to exceed contract authorization of $1,350,000; 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 9. PROPOSED POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 BUDGET Pg. 42 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the proposed Commission's Policy Goals and Objectives for Fiscal Year 2003-04 Budget, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 10. CITY OF CANYON LAKE LOAN Overview This item is for the Committee to: 11. Pg. 49 1) Grant the City of Canyon Lake an advance of Measure A, Local Streets and Roads funds; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. AMENDMENT TO FY 2003 MEASURE "A" CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FOR THE CITIES OF CORONA, LAKE ELSINORE AND PALM DESERT Pg. 73 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the amendment to the FY 2003 Measure "A" Capital Improvement Plans for Local Streets and Roads for the Cities of Corona, Lake Elsinore, and Palm Desert, as submitted, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. Budget and Implementation Committee Agenda February 24, 2003 Page 4 12. FY 2002-03 LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDS ALLOCATION FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FOR THE PALO VERDE VALLEY APPORTIONMENT AREA Pg. 86 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Allocate the FY 2002-03 Local Transportation Funds for local streets and roads purposes in the Palo Verde Valley area as shown on the attached table, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 13. SB 821 EXTENSION STREAMLINING Overview This item is for the Committee to: Pg. 88 1) Adopt the attached policy regarding project extensions for the Commission's SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 14. CITY OF PERRIS CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY SUBSTITUTION REQUEST Pg. 91 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the City of Perris request to substitute the State Route 74 and Redlands signal project with a "Round About" project at the same location and transfer the unobligated CMAQ funds from the signal project to the round about project; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 15. FEDERAL FUNDING OBLIGATION BALANCES Overview This item is for the Committee to: Pg. 92 Budget and Implementation Committee Agenda February 24, 2003 Page 5 1) Approve moving unexpended CMAQ funds to the SR 60 HOV project from the east 1-215 Junction to Redlands Blvd.; 2) Receive and file a report on the status of federal funding obligation balances, and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 16. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Overview This item is for the Committee to: Pg. 94 1) Receive and file the State and Federal Legislative Update as an information item, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 17. ELECTION OF OFFICERS 18. COMMISSIONERS/STAFF REPORT Overview 1) This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and staff to report on attended and upcoming meetings/conferences and issues related to Commission activities. 19. ADJOURNMENT The next Budget and Implementation Committee meeting is scheduled to be held at 2:30 p.m., Monday, March 24, 2003, in the Board Chambers of the County Administrative Center at 4080 Lemon Street, 1st Floor, Riverside. AGENDA ITEM 4 Minutes RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE Monday, January 27, 2003 MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the Budget and Implementation Committee was called to order by Chairperson Chris Buydos at 2:34 p.m., in the Board Chambers at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. ROLL CALL Members/Alternates Present Chris Buydos Ameal Moore Robert Schiffner John F. Tavaglione Placido Valdivia Jim Venable Jack Wamsley Art Welch Members Absent Robert Crain Juan DeLara Terry Henderson G. Dana Hobart Gregory Pettis Mike Wilson 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no requests from the public to speak. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — October 28, 2002 M/S/C (Venable/Moore) to approve the October 28, 2002 minutes as submitted. Abstain: Tavaglione, Wamsley, Welch 5. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS There were no additions or revision to the agenda Budget and Implementation Committee Meeting January 27, 2003 Page 2 6. CONSENT CALENDAR M/S/C (MooreNenable) to approve the Consent Calendar. 6A. CONTRACTS COST AND SCHEDULE REPORT 1) Receive and file the Contracts Cost and Schedule Report for the month ending December 31, 2002; and, 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 613. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 1) Receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the quarter ending December 31, 2002; and, 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 6C. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT 1) Receive and file the Single Signature Authority Report for the months ending October, November, and December 2002; and, 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 6D. HIGHWAY AND COMMUTER RAIL CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM UPDATE 1) Receive and file the Highway and Commuter Rail Construction Program Update as an information item; and, 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 7. AGREEMENT NO. 03-33-035 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A CCTV SECURITY SYSTEM AT THE EXISTING PEDLEY METROLINK COMMUTER RAIL STATION Bob Wunderlich, RCTC's Consultant - Bechtel Resident Engineer, reviewed the scope of work and award recommendation for the CCTV Security System at the Pedley Metrolink Commuter Rail Station. M/S/C (Venable/Schiffner) to: 1) Award Agreement No. 03-33-035 to New Age Communications for the construction of a CCTV Security System at the existing Pedley Metrolink Commuter Rail Station, with a data link to the monitoring facilities at the existing Riverside -Downtown Metrolink Commuter Rail Station for the amount of $199,800.98 plus a contingency amount of $40,199.02 to cover potential Budget and Implementation Committee Meeting January 27, 2003 Page 3 change orders encountered during construction, for a total contract amount of $240,000.00; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8. AGREEMENT NO. 02-33-063 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CCTV SECURITY SYSTEM AT THE RIVERSIDE -LA SIERRA AND WEST CORONA METROLINK STATIONS Karl Sauer, RCTC's Consultant - Bechtel Construction Manager, reviewed the staff recommendation to increase the contract contingency amount of Agreement No. 02-33-063 with Lynch Communication, Inc. for the construction of the CCTV Security System at the Riverside -La Sierra and West Corona Metrolink Stations and connection to the Riverside -Downtown Metrolink Station, including the major four change orders that impacted this project. M/S/C (SchiffnerNenable) to: 1) Approve an increase to the contract contingency amount of Agreement No. 02-33-063 with Lynch Communication, Inc., by $30,000, from $40,100 to $70,100, to cover the costs for additional unforeseen work associated with the construction of the CCTV Security System at the Riverside -La Sierra and West Corona Metrolink Stations and connection to the Riverside -Downtown Metrolink Station; and, 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 9. AGREEMENT NO. 03-31-054 WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TO CONSTRUCT RIGHT TURN LANES ON GILMAN SPRINGS ROAD TO STATE ROUTE 79 Bill Hughes, RCTC's Consultant - Bechtel Project Manager, reviewed the funding agreement with the County of Riverside for the construction of right turn lanes on Gilman Springs Road to State Route 79. At the request of Commissioners Jim Venable and Placido Valdivia, Bill Hughes provided a more detailed description of the project. Chairperson Buydos asked for the project delivery schedule. Bill Hughes responded that he would follow-up with the County to provide this information. M/S/C (Wamsley/Schiffner) to: Budget and Implementation Committee Meeting January 27, 2003 Page 4 1) Approve entering into Shared Funding Agreement No. 03-31- 054 with the County of Riverside for the construction of right turn lanes on Gilman Springs Road to SR 79 for $100,000; 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and, 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 10. AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE BIDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE STATE ROUTE 60 HOV PROJECT IN MORENO VALLEY Bill Hughes reviewed the State Route 60 HOV Project in Moreno Valley, highlighting the Project Construction Program Supplement to obligate CMAQ funding and the request to advertise bids for construction. Commissioner Valdivia asked for status of the bridges in the project footprint that are vertically below the Caltrans standard. Bill Hughes responded that staff has come to an agreement with Caltrans that the bridges will not be reconstructed at this time. The HOV lanes will be slightly lowered to maintain existing vertical clearances. Eric Haley, Executive Director, asked what the projected time to begin construction once the funds are obligated. Bill Hughes indicated that construction will begin approximately three months after funding is obligated with estimated completion in two years. M/S/C (MooreNenable) to: 1) Approve entering into a Project Construction Program Supplement to obligate CMAQ funding for construction of the SR 60 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes in the City of Moreno Valley; 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the Supplement on behalf of the Commission; 3) Authorize staff to advertise bids for construction of the SR 60 HOV lanes within the City of Moreno Valley, contingent upon finalization of the Project Construction Program Supplement and receipt of the Authorization to Proceed with Construction from the Caltrans Office of Local Assistance; 4) Bring back to the Commission the results of the bidding for contract award to the lowest, responsive bidder; and, 5) Forward to the Commission for final action. Budget and Implementation Committee Meeting January 27, 2003 Page 5 11. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR SURVEY AND MATERIAL TESTING ON - CALL SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF FUTURE MEASURE "A" HIGHWAY AND COMMUTER RAIL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS Karl Sauer reviewed the Request for Proposal for Survey and Material Testing On - Call Services in support of future Measure "A" Highway and Commuter Rail Construction Projects. M/S/C (SchiffnerNenable) to: 1) Authorize staff to prepare and advertise a Request for Proposal (RFP), for consultant services to provide Survey and Material Testing On -Call Services in support of future Measure "A" Highway and Commuter Rail Construction Projects; 2) Form a selection committee, comprised of staff representatives from RCTC, County of Riverside, City of Riverside, City of Moreno Valley, City of Perris, and Caltrans, to review, evaluate, and rank all RFPs received; 3) Negotiate contracts with the top ranked consultant(s) and return to the Commission with contract recommendations; and, 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. 12. BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS Ivan Chand, Chief Financial Officer, reviewed the budget adjustments for Administrative Legal Services, STA Distributions, and Rail Station and Legal Expenses. M/S/C (Venable/Schiffner) to approve the following budget adjustments: 1) $55,000 increase for Administrative Legal Services; 2) $1,000,000 increase for STA Distributions; 3) $100,000 increase for Rail Station and Legal Fees; and, 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. 13. MID -YEAR REVENUE PROJECTIONS Ivan Chand reviewed the Measure "A and LTF revenues projections, indicating that these revenues are 8% higher that the prior fiscal year and therefore recommending an increase of current year revenue projections of 2.5%. He also noted a 17.17% increase from fourth quarter of 2001 to fourth quarter of 2002. M/S/C (WamsleyNaldivia) to approve: Budget and Implementation Committee Meeting January 27, 2003 Page 6 1) The Mid -Year Revenue Projections; 2) The Planning Budget Adjustment to reflect the Local Transportation Funds (LTF) Planning Revenue and Expenditures; and, 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 14. LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND PROJECTION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 Ivan Chand reviewed the Local Transportation Fund Projection for Fiscal Year 2003-04. M/S/C (Tavaglione/Moore) to: 1) Approve the projections of the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) apportionment for the Coachella Valley, Palo Verde Valley, and Western Riverside County Areas; and, 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 15. REPORT ON STATE BUDGET DISCUSSION AND IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS Eric Haley reported: • The CTC is not implementing immediate cutbacks. They are waiting on several new inputs including the review of the transportation budget by Elizabeth Hill, Legislative Analyst, and Legislative Committees Hearings. • The components of the shortfall include $1.8 Billion of Transportation Congestion Relief Funds (TCRP), $4 Billion of fuel taxes, $150 Million of the Highway Account, and an overestimation of the TEA 21 Reauthorization. • The Ad Hoc Committee is tentatively scheduled for February 7th pending more detailed information from the State. 16. SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM EXTENSION AND SCOPE OF PROJECT CHANGE FOR THE CITY OF CORONA Cathy Bechtel, Director of Planning and Policy Development, reviewed the City of Corona's request to extend and change the scope of the Chase Drive/EI Cerrito Bikeway Project and an extension for the Bus Stop Accessibility Project. In response to Commissioner John Tavaglione's question, Cathy Bechtel confirmed the location change of the Chase Drive/EI Cerrito Bikeway Project footprint was within the city limits. Budget and Implementation Committee Meeting January 27, 2003 Page 7 M/S/C (Tavaglione/Moore) to: 1) Grant the City of Corona a change in the scope of project for their Chase Drive/EI Cerrito Bikeway project and an extension to June 30, 2003, to complete the project; 2) Grant the City of Corona an extension to June 30, 2003, to complete the Bus Stop Accessibility project; and, 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 17. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Eric Haley reviewed the bill positions and associated policy positions for SCA 2 and ACA 7, noting that San Bernardino, Orange, and San Diego Counties have upcoming transportation measure reauthorizations. Commissioner Jack Wamsley expressed his belief that the voter threshold that enables counties to enact or reenact local option transportation sales taxes should not be lowered to less than 60% majority vote because he believes counties have the responsibility to properly educate their constituents. Commissioner Robert Schiffner expressed his concurrence with the staff recommended our policy positions. M/S/C (Venable/Schiffner) to: 1) Adopt the following bill positions and associated policy position: Support if Amended — SCA 2 (Torlakson, D -Antioch) as introduced 12/2/02; Support — ACA 7 (Dutra, D -Fremont) as introduced 1/14/03; Policy Position Support — ability of counties to enact or reenact local option transportation sales taxes by 55% majority vote; 2) Receive and file the State and Federal Legislative Update as an information item; and, 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. No-Wamsley The Committee convened as a "Committee as a Whole" after the Committee no longer had a quorum. Budget and Implementation Committee Meeting January 27, 2003 Page 8 18. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Because of lack of a quorum, election of officers wil be held at the next Committee meeting. 19. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR No items were pulled from the consent calendar for discussion. 20. COMMENTS BY COMMISSIONERS/STAFF A. Eric Haley noted: • The Toll Road Advisory Committee will meet on February 7th • The RCTC Commissioner Retreat will be held on March 21st at the Temecula Creek Inn in Temecula. 21. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Budget and Implementation Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 3:32 p.m. The next meeting is scheduled to be held at 2:30 p.m., Monday, February 24, 2003, in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California, 92501. Respectfully submitted, en? fifer 1d rmon Deputy Clerk of the Board AGENDA ITEM 6A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: February 24, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Louie Martin, Bechtel Project Controls Manager THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Contracts Cost and Schedule Report STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the Contracts Cost and Schedule Report for the month ending January 31, 2003, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The attached material depicts the current cost and schedule status on contracts reported by projects, commitments, and cooperative agreements executed by the Commission. For each contract and agreement, the report lists the authorized value approved by the Commission, percentage of contract amount expended to date, and the project expenditures by route with status for the month ending January 31, 2003. Attachment: Monthly Report — January 2003 000001 RCTC MEASURE "A" HIGHWAY/RA, .<OJECTS BUDGET REPORT BY ROUTE PROJECT DESCRIPTION CO MMISSI ON AUTHORIZED ALLOCATION CONTRACTURAL % COMMITTED EXPENDITURE FOR % EXPENDITURES COMMITMENTS AGAINST AUTH . MONTH ENDED EXPENDITURES TO -DATE AGAINST TO DATE ALLOCATION 01/31/03 TO DATE COMMITMNTS TO DATE ROUTE 60 PROJECTS Final Design/ROW HOV 60/215 to Redlands Blvd . (2042) (3000) OPB'tOTAI. K100.1* ROUTE 74 PROJECTS Engineering/Environ/ROW (R02041 9954,9966, (R02142) (RO2141) (2140) (3001) (3009) S013TOTALROUTE 74 . ROUTE 79 PROJECTS Engineering/Environ./ROW (3003) Realignment study & Right turn lanes (R09961) 5U6'�C1TAL.f2gUTE �9 ROUTE 86 PROJECTS Avenue 58 to Avenue 66 (Segment 2) totAL ROUTE 91 PROJECTS Soundwall/Aux lane design, ROW and construction (R09101,9337,9847,9861,9848,9832,9969,2043) (2058) (2144) (2136) (3600, 3602) Van Buren Blvd. Frwy Hook Ramp (R03008) Mary Street to 7th Street HOV design & ROW(3005) Sndwall Landscaping (809933,9946,2059.3601) #ilOtOtA,F7,vui .................. .... .... ROUTE 111 PROJECTS ./R09219, 9227,9234,9523,9525,9530,9537,9540) 3410,9635,9743,9849-9851,9857,9629(3400-3405) S1,1STO A4 ROUTS t $7,700,000 $69,847,655 X69;&47,655 $2,894,497 4554454 45 $20,253,000 $33,860,000 $11,902,100 $2,954,000 $1,274,430 $1,603,450 $16,946,856 8;$,46:1 $ $6,838,641 $29,514,368 $2 514;3,6Th $2,793,935 $2;93,935;; $19,500,000 $33,760,000 53,260,05 $10,374,324 $2,954,000 $1,062,025 $1,603,450 $15,530,856 Page 1 of 3 88 .8 % 42.3% 42.3% 96.5 % 96.3% 99.7% 87.2% 100,0% 83.3% 100.0% 91. 6% $780683 $750001 $4,049,530 �>Orx�r�4_a $45,710 Pr oject Complete Project Complete $3,481 $0 $73,005 $0 $0 $5,374,763 $19,555,012 1%555O!2 $955,577 577: $18,060,000 $31,013,510 9 q73,5 $9,527,668 $2,109,519 $411,804 $852,213 $14,945,485 4 .94s,485 78.6% 66.3% 3°T 34.2% 92.6 % 91.9% 91.8% 71.4% 38.8%, 53.1 % 96.2% PROJECT DESCRIPTION RCTC MEASURE "A" HIGHWAY PROJECTS BUDGET REPORT BY ROUTE COMMISSION CONTRACTURAL % COMMITTED EXPENDITURE FOR % EXPENDITURES AUTHORIZED COMMITMENTS AGAINST AUTH. MONTH ENDED EXPENDITURES TO -DATE AGAINST ALLOCATION TO DATE ALLOCATION 01/31/03 TO DATE COMMITMNTS TO DATE 1-215 PROJECTS Preliminary Engrg/Environ. (R09008, 9018) $UBTQTi41' 141 $6,726,504 $440,000 $5,878,173 87,4% $400,000 90.9% $5,704,897 97.1% $312,519 78.1% INTERCHANGE IM PROV. PROGRAM Yuma. IC Landscaping (R09926,9946) SUBiC TAI. lNTERCHANG PROJECT & CONSTR. MGMT SERV. (Agreement (02-31-081)) S BTOTA1- 1 Ec 'EIS PROGRAM PLAN & SERVICES North/South Corridor study (R09936) SLf �Tt3'TAI. I�t{?GRkilN PARK-N-RIDE/INCENT. PROGRAM (RO 9859) (2101-2117)(9813)(2146)(9917)2126 2127,2138,2139 *01TQ1't�sl, pk1C�6-R11 COMMUTER RAIL Studies/Engineering/Construction (RO 9731,9832,9833,9956,2028) 2031,2027,2120 R02029,2128, 3800 - 3811,3813, 3814) Station/Site Acq/OP Costs/Maint. Costs (0000,2026,2056,4000-4007,4198,4199,4009,3812 $2,138,641 $25,000 $2,323,177 $19,654,407 $13,900,329 .:00A00 $2,027,483 $Z,#f27 483 $25,000 25,00 $2,323,177 32 ,17? $18,654,070 $13,900,329 Mi .$9,8..3 Page 2 of 3 94.8% 94x8% 100.0% 100 .0% 94.9% 100.0% $0 $171,925 1!-t9Z $0 $29,394 $1,951,891 $916,950 ii84i' f7. �:56J'• $0 $1,377,332 (3"7,332 $18,268,970 $9,255,535 '1..8,193,$26 6:14/; 47.8% 0 .0% 59.3% 3% 97.9% 66 .6% 8 s$% RCTC MEASURE "A" HIGHWAY/LOCAL b • r'EETS & ROADS PROJECTS BUDGET REPORT BY PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION EXPENDITURE FOR TOTAL OUTSTANDING % LOAN BALANCE APPROVED MONTH ENDED MEASURE "A" LOAN OUTSTANDING TO -DATE AGAINST COMMITMENT 01/31/03 ADVANCES BALANCE COMMITMENT APPROVED CO MMIT . CITY OF CANYON LAKE Railroad Canyon Rd Improvements SUBTOTAL O + ( N IM L1 CITY OF CORONA Smith; Maple & Lincoln Interchanges & (1) Storm drainage structure suErfar coR0 CITY OF PERRIS Local streets & road improvements CITY OF SAN JACINTO Local streets & road improvements CITY OF TEMECULA Local streets & road improvements CITY OF NORCO Yuma I/C & Local streets and road Imprmts CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE Local streets & road improvements CITY OF HEMET Local streets & roads improvements WTALS . $1,600,000 $5,212,623 2"I $1,936,419 $1,324,500 $5,094,027 $2,139,067 $1,500,000 $730,000 8;8fl6, 3 $1,600,000 $5,212,623 $5,�12;�23 52;837,525 $1,936,419 $1,154,005 $1,324,500 $789,333 $5,094,027 $3,035,776 $2,139,067 $1,274,773 $1,500,000 $732,171 $730,000 $0 $ $655,718 $2,837,526 $0 $0 41.0 % 54.4% 59.6% 59 .6% 59.6% 59,6 % 48.8 % 0 .0 % NOTE: (1) Loan against interchange improvement programs. All values are for total Project/Contract and not related to fiscal year budgets. Status as of: 1/31,03 C) O Page 3 of 3 AGENDA ITEM 6B RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: February 24, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Ivan M. Chand, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Investment Report STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ending December 31, 2002, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Attached are the quarterly investment and cash flow reports as required by state law and Commission policy. The County's Investment Report for the month ending December 31, 2002 is also attached for review. Attachments: Quarterly Investment Report for the Quarter ending December 31, 2002 County of Riverside Investment Report for the Month ending December 31, 2002 000005 Investment P( teport Period Ending December 31, 2002 OPERATING FUNDS RATING PAR PURCHASE MATURITY YIELD TO PURCHASE MARKET UNREALIZED MOODYS/S&P/FITCH VALUE DATE DATE MARKET PRICE VALUE GAIN (L OSS) City National Bank 113,299 A3/BBB+ Cash with County Treasurer 53,568,559 AAA-MR1/AAAf-S1/AAAV1 + Local Agency Investment Fund 15,158,385 AAA/AAA AgencylTreasury Securltles: FHLBCB 3,540,000 AAA/AAA 3,540,000 12/19/02 12/19/05 3.15% 3,540,000 3,548,850 8,850 FHLBCB 215,000 AAA/AAA 215,000 12/23/02 12/23/05 3.00% 215,000 217,083 2,083 Money Market Mutual Funds - CNI Charter FDS 135,218 AAA/AAA 135,218 12/01/02 12/31/02 1.19% 135,218 135,218 0 Fed Home Ln Banks Global Notes 3,916,643 AAA/AAA 3,845,000 09/06/01 09/15/03 4.16% 3,916,643 3,948,334 31,691 Fed Home Ln Banks Discount Notes 1,981,200 AAA/AAA 2,000,000 06/14/99 07/15/03 6.29% 1,961,200 2.048.125 86.925 Sub -Total 78,608,305 9,735,218 FUNDS HELD IN TRUST Cash with County: Local Transportation Fund Sub -Total INVESTMENT WITH CITIES City of Lake Elsinore Sub -Total 23,396,169 AAA-MR1/AAAf-S1/AAAV1+ 23,396,169 Principal Maturity Date % 763,581 11/01/04 6.0% COMMISSION BOND PROJECT FUNDS/DEBT RESERVE 763,581 Milestone Funds 9,691,632 AAA/AAA First American Treasury 44,229,129 AAA/AAA U.S. Treasury Notes 15,926,000 AAA/AAA Flrst American Treasury - Held in Trust 2.003,911 AAA/AAA Sub -Total 71,850,672 =0 TOTAL C) cv 0) $174,618.726 9,768,061 9,897,611 SUMMARIZED INVESTMENT TYPE 129,550 Banks 113,299 Cash with County 76,964,728 LAIF 15,158, 385 Mutual Funds: First American Treasury - Trust 2,003,911 CNI Charter FDS 135,218 Milestone 9,691,632 Sub -Total Mutual Funds 11,830,761 Federal Agency Notes 9,632,843 U.S. Treasury Notes 60,155,129 Investment Agreements 763,581 TOTAL $174.618,726 County of Riverside Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund Compliance Analysis and Investment Report December 31, 2002 Paul McDonnell - Treasurer/Tax Collector Donald R. Kent - Assistant Treasurer Jon Christensen - Chief Deputy Treasurer Last speaking, has lowest numbers bad Below At bps.) yield, present Treasurer's Commentary "Sugarplums or a Lump of Coal?" month we speculated about what the holiday season would leave in our Christmas stockings, a sugarplum or a lump of coal? Well, generally it appears we were left a "sugarplum". We have had much to worry about in 2002, but with all of the problems we have had the economy proved to be quite resilient. Inflation has yet to rear its ugly head (excluding the run up in your local home prices). Interest rates are at their level since Ike was President, thus allowing consumers to spend more of their hard earned money. This has helped keep unemployment lower than in past recessions. Coupled with no further terrorist attacks, and no wars too date (Iraq, North Korea) has made for a not so year. Now we can wait to see if we truly have a Happy New Year in 2003. are reported 'economic indicators of importance: Reported in December 50 Durable Goods Orders — for Dec 24th -1.4% actual vs. 0.8% survey Factory Orders — for Dec 4th 1.5% actual vs. 1.7% survey Gross Domestic Product (GDP) —for Dec 20th 3rd Quarter -f 4.0% actual vs. 4.0% survey Unemployment Rate — for Dec 6th 6.0% actual vs. 5.8% survey Consumer Confidence- Index —for Dec 31st 80.3% actual vs. 86.0% survey FOMC Rate decision — for Dec 10th Unchanged at 1.25% Next decision Due 01/29...1.25% actual vs. 1.25% survey month's end, the Fed Funds rate was left unchanged at 1.25% from 1.25%, with a neutral bias. The 2 -year T -Note was yielding 1.6% (down while the 30 -year T -Bond was yielding 4.78% (down 32 bp.). For December, the Pool yield had a decrease of 15 bps. In average monthly At this juncture, we will continue to stay the course and maintain a short-term outlook until attractive opportunities to lock in longer -term rates themselves. Paul McDonnell Treasurer -Tax Collector PORTFOLIO STATISTICS DECEMBER NOVEMBER OCTOBER SEPTEMBER AUGUST JULY Month -End Book Value $ 2,290,497,288 $ 1,800,393,928 $ 1,890,297,511 $ 1,992,987,128 Month -End Market Value* $ 2,294,052,129 $ 1,804,127,696 $ 1,895,923,144 $ 1,998,590,336 Paper Gain or (Loss) $ 3,554,841 $ 3,733,768 $ 5,625,632 $ 5,603,208 Percent of Paper Gain or Loss 0.15% 0.21% 0.30% 0.28% Yield Based Upon Book Value** 1.88% 2.02% 2.06% 2.01% Weighted Average Maturity (Years) 0.52 0.62 0.44 0.36 Effective Duration 0.40 0.28 0.21 0.23 ' Market value does not include accrued Interest. " Beginning In April, the reported yield will be based upon the monthly average to more accurately reflect the portfolio's performance relative to the Benchmark. All figures have been re -stated to reflect this change in yield. $2,080,403,747 $ 2,133,341,180 $ 2,086,306,033 $ 2,138,786,340 $ 5,902,286 $ 5,445,161 0.28% 0.25% 2.01% 2.01% 0.32 0.27 0.23 0.22 THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TREASURER'S POOLED INVESTMENT FUND IS CURRENTLY RATED: AAA/MR1 BY MOODY'S INVESTOR SERVICES AAAN1+ BY FITCH IBCA County Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, 4th Floor - Capital Markets Riverside, CA 92502-2205 www.countytreasurer.org (909) 955 - 3908 000007 Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund - Portfolio Characteristics December 31, 2002 Maturity Market Value 0 Days or Less 1,050,010,41944 30 - 90 Days 398,321,394.45 90 Days - 1 Year 311,766,364.95 1 - 2 Years 494,988,950.00 2 - 3 Years 38,055,000.00 Over 3 Years 910,000.00 Total: $2,294,052,128.84 Quality Market Value Federal Agency 1,553,343,647.82 AAA 300,000,000.00 A-1 and/or P-1 430,777,541.67 * N/R 9,930,939.35 Total: 2,294,052,128.84 Sector Market Value Federal Agency 1,553,343,647.82 Cash Equiv. & MMF's 551,000,000.00 Commercial Paper 179,777,541.67 Certificates of Deposit 5,000,000.00 )cal Agency Obligations 4,930,939.35 Total: 2,294,052,128.84 • Includes Repos ** Collateralized Time Dept & Local Agency Obligation; Maturity 50 00% - 45 00% 40.00% 35.00% - 3000% 25.00% - 20,00% 15.00% 10,00% 500% 0.00% 45.77% 21.58% 1159% Mu' 30 Days or Less 30 - 90 Days 90 Days - 1 Year 1 - 2 Years 1.66% =EMMEN 2 - 3 Years 0.04% Over 3 Years Quality AAA A-1 and/or P-1 13.08%1 18.78% N/R 0.43% Federal Agency 67.71% 1 U.S. Treasury Yield Curve - December 2002 Yield Change 0.30% 0.20% -- 0.10 0.00% i I,,.FIiI1i i=uJ - 50% --- 3M 6M lY 2Y 3Y 5Y 7Y 10Y I5Y 20Y 30Y Yield Curve Data 11/30/02 12/31/02 Change 3 Month 1.21% 1.19% -0.02% 6 Month 1.27% 1.20% -0.07% 1 Year 1.52% 1.20% -0.32% 2 Year 2.05% 1.60% -0.45% 3 Year 2.55% 2.03% -0.52% 5 Year 3.26% 2.73% -0.53% 7 Year 3.90% 3.39% -0.51% 10 Year 4.20% 3.85% -0.35% _ 15Year 4.96% 4.65% -0.31% 20 Year 5.25% 4.96% -0.29% 30 Year 5.03% 4.78% -0.25% Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund - Portfolio Holdings Report December 31, 2002 CUSP Parf$1 Issuer Acquisition Current Current Market ' Coupon Maturi Cost Price Value w/o Accr InL GaIn)Los2 Yld Mat' Eff. Dur ' Ave. Life vemment Agency .331 LVC 10,000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK 1.730 01/02/03 9,996,875.00 99.969 9,996,875.00 1.793 0.00 0.01 31331LVC 15,000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK 1.730 01/02/03 15,000,000-00 100-000 15,000,000.00 1730 0.00 0.01 31331LVH 25,000.000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK 1.670 01/02/03 25,000.000.00 100.000 25,000,000.00 - 1.670 0.00 0.01 31331LVH 25,000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK 1 670 01/02/03 25,000,000.00 100.000 25,000,000.00 - 1.670 0.00 0.01 31331LVH 25,000,00000 FED FARM CREDIT BANK 1.670 01/02/03 25,000,000.00 100.000 25,000,000.00 1.670 0.00 0.01 313588AB 50,000,000.00 FEDERAL NAIL MTG ASSN 0.000 01/02/03 49,964,444.44 99.929 49,964,444 44 - 1299 0.00 0.01 313588AH 40,000,000.00 FEDERAL NAIL MTG ASSN 0.000 01/08/03 39,970,600.00 99.927 39,970,600.00 - 1260 0.02 0.02 31358801( 5,000,000.00 FNMA DISCOUNT NOTES 0.000 01/10/03 4,905,000.00 90.100 4,905,000.00 2.340 0.04 0.03 313588A1( 25,000,000.00 FNMA DISCOUNT NOTES 0.000 01/10/03 24,525,000.00 98.100 24,525,000.00 - 2.340 0.04 0.03 313396BD 50,000,000.00 FEDERAL HM LN MTG CORP 0 000 0128/03 49,950,055.56 99.900 49,950,055.56 - 1241 0.09 0.08 3133848E 25,000,000.00 FEDERAL HM LN MTG CORP 0.000 01/29/03 24,961,500.00 99.846 24,961,500.00 1.280 0.09 0.08 3133588B 25,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 0.000 01/29/03 24,961,500.00 99.846 24,961,500.00 - 1.280 0.09 0.08 313588BF 50,000,000.00 FEDERAL NAIL MTG ASSN 0.000 01/30/03 49,913,569.44 99.827 49,913,569.44 - 1299 0.09 0.08 3135888G 50,000,000.00 FEDERAL NAIL MTG ASSN 0.000 01/31/03 49,912,888.89 99.826 49,912,888.89 1.300 0.09 0.08 31358813G 50,000,000.00 FEDERAL NAIL MTG ASSN 0.000 01/31/03 49,912,868 89 99.826 49,912,888.89 - 1.300 0.09 0.08 31331LVK 5,000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK 0.000 02/03/03 5,000,000.00 100 000 5,000,000.00 - 1.600 0.10 0.09 33131LVE 10,000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK 0.000 02/03/03 10,000,000.00 100.000 10,000,000.00 - 1.730 0.10 0.09 31331LVE 15,000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK 1.730 02/03/03 15,000,000.00 100.000 15,000,000.00 - 1.730 0.10 0.09 31331LVK 25,000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK 1.600 02/03/03 25,000,000.00 100 000 25,000,000.00 - 1.600 0.10 0.09 863872BL 20,000,000.00 SALLIE MAE DISCOUNT NOTE 0.000 02/04/03 19,562,600.00 97.813 19,562,600.00 2.515 0.11 0.10 863872BL 30,000,000.00 SALLIE MAE DISCOUNT NOTE 0.000 02/04/03 29,422,200.00 98.074 29,422,200.00 - 2.446 0.11 0.10 313588BP 32,000,000.00 FNMA DISCOUNT NOTES 0.000 02/07/03 31,286,400.00 97.770 31,286,400.00 - 2.582 0.11 0.10 313588BW 50,000,000,00 FNMA DISCOUNT NOTES 0.000 02/14/03 48,864,500.00 97.729 48,864,500.00 2.652 0.13 0.12 31331LVM 40,000,000.00 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 0.000 03/03/03 40,000,000.00 100.000 40,000,000.00 - 1.220 0.18 0.17 313588CT 25,000,000.00 FNMA DISCOUNT NOTES 0.000 03/07/03 24,444,250.00 97.777 24,444,250.00 - 2.495 0.19 0.18 31331LVJ 10,000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK 1.670 04/01/03 10,000,000.00 100 110 10,011,000.00 11,000.00 1.670 0.26 025 31331LVJ 15,000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK 1.670 04/01/03 15,000,000.00 100.110 15,016,500.00 16,500.00 1.670 0.28 0.25 3133MMWB 25,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.900 04/22/03 25,000,000.00 100.500 25,125,000.00 125,000.00 2.900 0.32 0.31 313396E7 19,640,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORG CORP DI 0.000 04/24/03 19,184,352.00 99.604 19,562,225.60 377,873.60 2.375 0.32 0.31 313396EV 22,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORG CORP DI 0.000 04/25/03 21,498,620.00 99.590 21,909,800.00 411,180.00 2.391 0.33 0.32 31331LVL 10,000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK 0.000 05/01/03 10,000,000.00 100.100 10,010,000.00 10,000.00 1.550 0.34 0.33 31331 LVL 15,000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK 1.550 05/01/03 15,000,000 00 100.100 15,015,000.00 15,000.00 1.550 0.34 0.33 3133MNGL 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.600 0521/03 10,000,000.00 100.520 10,052,000.00 52,000.00 2600 0.40 0.39 3133MNGL 15,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 0,000 05/21/03 15,000,000.00 100.520 15,078,000.00 78,000.00 2.600 0.40 0.39 3133MPAX 23,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.480 07/07/03 23,000,000.00 100.630 23,144,900.00 144,900.00 2.480 0.50 0.52 3133MPAX 30,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.460 07/07/03 30,000,000.00 100.630 30,189,000.00 189,000.00 2.480 0.50 0.52 '133MPH7 50,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.240 07/15/03 50/000,000.00 100.500 50,250,000.00 250,000.00 2.240 0.55 0.54 MSX9 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.000 11/14/03 10,000,000.00 100.100 10,010,000.00 10,000.00 2.000 0.57 0.87 ,4SX9 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.000 11/14/03 10,000,000.00 100.100 10,010,000.00 10,000.00 2.000 0.57 0.87 a133MSX9 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2 000 11/14/03 10,000,000.00 100.100 10,010,000.00 10,000.00 2.000 0.57 0.87 3133MSXX 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.020 11/14/03 10,000,000.00 100.040 10,004,000.00 4,000.00 2.020 0.57 0.87 3133MTA5 20,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.000 11/21/03 20,000,000.00 100240 20,048,000.00 48,000.00 2.001 0.59 0.89 1133M07H 8,550,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.540 01/36/04 8,550,000.00 100.100 8,558,550.00 8,550.00 2.540 0.78 1.08 31359MNW 5,000,000.00 FEDERAL NAIL MTG ASSN 2.300 02/12/04 5,001,562.50 100.110 5,005,500.00 3,937.50 2.279 0.82 1.12 31350MNW 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 2.300 02/12/04 10,000,000.00 100.110 10,011,000.00 11,000.00 2.300 0.82 1.12 3133MRZC 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.260 04/07/04 10,000,000.00 100.260 10,026,000.00 26,000.00 2.260 0.97 1.27 3133MRZ9 30,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.280 04/09/04 30,000,000.00 100.270 30,081,000.00 81,000.00 2,280 1.12 1.27 3133M5PP 20,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.110 04/30/04 20,000,000.00 100.125 20,025,000.00 25,000.00 2.110 1.18 1.33 3133MTA6 25,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.350 05/20/04 25,000,000.00 100.140 25,035,000.00 35,000.00 2.350 1.24 1.39 3133MTMK 5,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.000 06/04/04 5,000,000.00 100.125 5,006,250.00 6,250.00 2.000 1.28 1.43 3133MTMK 20,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2000 06/04/04 20,000,000.00 100.125 20,025,000.00 25,000.00 2.000 1.28 1.43 3133MU2D 30,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 1.900 06/17/04 30,000,000.00 100.270 30,081,000.00 81,000.00 1.900 1.31 1.46 3133MUC5 25,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.060 06/23/04 25,000,000.00 100.370 25,092,500.00 92,500.00 2.060 1.33 1.48 3133MSJD 26,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME 1..14 BKS 2500 1029/04 26,000,000.00 100.125 26,032,500.00 32,500.00 2.500 1.23 1.83 3133MSXC 27,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.500 11/05/04 27,000,000.00 100.420 27,113,400.00 113,400.00 2.500 1.25 1.85 3133MTB6 22,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.845 11/19/04 22,000,000.00 100.210 22,046,200 00 46,200.00 2.845 1.29 1.89 3133MTMX 30,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.350 11/22/04 30,000,000.00 100.420 30,126,000.00 126,000.00 2.350 1.30 1.90 312BX0HY 20,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 2500 1126/04 20.000,000.00 100.180 20,036,000.00 36,000.00 2500 1.31 1.91 3133MTMS 35,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2400 1126/04 35,000,000.00 100.170 35,059,500.00 59,500.00 2.400 1.31 1.91 3133MTV7 30,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2250 12/13/04 30,000,000.00 100.390 30,117,000.00 117,000.00 2.250 1.35 1.95 3133MUA4 30,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2590 12/17/04 30,000,000.00 100.610 30,183,000.00 183,000.00 2.590 1.36 1.96 3133MUF4 30,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.520 12/17/04 30,000,000.00 100.580 30,174,000.00 174,000.00 2.520 1.36 1.96 3133MUKR 5,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.385 1227/04 5,000,000.00 100.281 5,014,050.00 14,050.00 2.385 1.39 1.99 3133MUKR 50,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2385 1227/04 50,000,000.00 100.281 50,140,500.00 140,500.00 2385 1.39 1.99 3136F2RC 6,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 3.250 11/07/05 6,000,000.00 101.580 6,094,800.00 94,800.00 3.250 225 2.85 3136F2RC 14,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MFG CORP 3.250 11/07/05 14,000,000.00 101.580 14,221200.00 221200.00 3.250 225 2.85 3133MTA2 15.000,090,17(1 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 3.500 11/14/05 . _ '15 0 00 2 0-0,00 100.260 _ 15 039.000 00 39.000.00 3 500 227 2,132 Sub -Total 1,555,190,000.00 1,549,788,806.72 1,553,343,647.82 3,554,841.10 2040 0.58 0.74 Cash Equivalent & Money Market Funds 82852885 1,000,000.00 AIM GOVT 8 AGENCY PORTFOLIO 0.000 01/01/03 1,000,000.00 100.000 1,000,000.00 1325 0.00 0.00 250,000,000.00 MERRILL LYNCH 8 CO INC 0.000 01/02/03 250,000,000.00 100.000 250,000,000.00 - 1.230 0.00 0.01 350,000,000,00 MORGAN STANLEY DEAN 0.000 01/02/03 300,000,000.00 100.000 300.000.000.00 1L330 0_00 0.01 ltal 551,000,000.00 551,000,000.00 551,000,00000 1.285 0.00 001 Continued on reverse side..._ Page 1 0603 Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund - Portfolio Holdings Report December 31, 2002 Acquisition Current Current Market ' CUSIP Pali Si Issuer Coupon Maluri Cost Price Value w/o Accr Int Galtt/Loss Yid Mat' Eff. Oar.' Avn. I.He' 1llateralized Time Deposits 5,000,000.00 CITIZENS BUSINESS BANK 0.000 04/14/03 5,000,000.00 100.000 5,000,000.00 - 2020 0.29 0.28 Sub -Total 5,000,000 00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 2.028 029 0.28 Commercial Paper 3022X3N6 50,000,000.00 EXXON PROJ INVMTCOR 0.000 01/06/03 49,987,361.11 99.975 49,987,361.11 1.300 0.01 0.02 36960MNM 50,000,000.00 GENERAL ELECTRIC CO 0.000 01/21/03 49,906,763.89 99.814 49,906,763.89 - 1.373 0.06 0.06 90262DNN 30,000,000.00 UBS FINANCE DELAWARE 0.000 0123/03 29,967,750.00 99.893 29,967,750.00 - 1291 0.06 0.06 1667TNX5 50,000,000.00 CHEVRON USA 0.000 01/31/03 49,915,666.67 99.831 49,915,666.67 - 1.322 0.08 0.08 Sub -Total 180,000,000.00 Average weighted days for commercial paper= 19.9 179,777,541 67 179,777,541.67 1.32 0.05 0.05 Local Agency Obligations' VAULT 1,320,939.35 EDA BAN 0.000 06/30/03 1,320,939 35 100.000 1,320,939.35 2.300 0.51 0.50 VAULT 2,700,000.00 MARCH JPRA GAN 2.300 06/01/05 2,700,000.00 100.000 2,700,000.00 - 2.300 1.82 2.42 VAULT 910,000.00 U.S. DISTRICT COURT- RIVCO CTF 2.300 06/15/20 910,000.00 100.000 910.000.00 2.300 lit 17.47 Sub -Total 4,930,93935 4,930,939.35 4,930,939.35 - 2.300 2.14 4.68 Grand -Totals 2,296,120,939.35 2,290,497,287.74 2,294,052,128.84 3,554,941.10 1.803 0.40 0.52 The market value and yield of short-term money market securities are based on purchase price. Eticilha Duration Is a sophisticated calculation That measures price sensitivity, while taking into consideration the possibility of securities being calked before maturity. ' Average Life is the number of years until principal is returned at maturity, weighted by market yak's. ' Local Agency Obligations have variable rate coupons, spread to the Pool OOi}QQ210 COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW AND TREASURER'S POLICY The Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund is govemed by both State Law and County Policy. The County Treasurer's Statement of Investment Policy is more restrictive than the California Government Code. This policy is reviewed annually by the County's Investment Oversight Committee and approved by the County Board of Supervisors. As of this month end, the County Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund was in compliance with this more restrictive policy. Although we have been diligent in the prepartion of this report, we have relied upon numerous pricing and analytical sources including Bloomberg Market Database and Capital Management Sciences, Inc. Bond Logistix LLC LOG11811Xtx 1f aliHr, ifHOYA7itlN imtma mumaH. 213.612.2200 SUMMARY OF AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS California Govemment Code County Investment Policy Actual Cal. Govt. Investment Category Maximum Authorized % Quality Maximum Authorized % Qual' Riverside Code Maturity Limit S&P/Moody's Maturity Limit S&P/Moody's/Fitch Portfolio % 153601(a) LOCAL AGY BONDS 5 YEARS NO LIMIT 3 YEARS 15% / $150mm A/A2/A 0.000% 53601(b) U. S. TREASURY 5 YEARS NO LIMIT 5 YEARS 100% N/A 0.00% i3601(d) CALIFORNIA LOCAL AGENCY DEBT _ 5 YEARS NO LIMIT 3 YEARS 2.5% Investment Grade 0.21% 53601(e) FEDERAL AGENCIES 5 YEARS NO LIMIT _ 5 YEARS 100% N/A 67.71% 53601(f) BILLS OF EXCHANGE 270 DAYS 40%' 180 DAYS 30% A1/P1/F1 0.00% 53601(g) COMM. PAPER 270 DAYS 40% A1/P1 270 DAYS 40% Al/P1/F1 7.84% 53601(h) CERTIFICATE & TIME DEPOSITS 5 YEARS 30% 1 YEAR 25% max Al/P1/F1 0.00% 53601(i) REPOS 1 YEAR NO LIMIT 45 DAYS 40%/25% term max Al/P1/F1 10.94% 53601(i) REVERSE REPOS 92 DAYS 20% 60 DAYS 10% max N/A 0.00% 536010) MED. TERM NOTES 5 YEARS 30% A 2 YEARS 20% max AA/Aa2/AA 0.00% 53601(k) MUTUAL FUNDS 90 DAYS 2 20% AAA/Aaa 3 IMMEDIATE 20% AAA by 2 of 3 Rating Agencies 13.08% 53601(m) SECURED DEPOSITS (BANK DEPOSITS) 5 YEARS NO LIMIT 1 YEAR 2% max 0.22% 53601(n) MORTGAGE PASS- THROUGH SECURITY 5 YEARS 20% M -SECURITY A - ISSUER N/A N/A 0.00% 16429 (1,2,3) LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUNDS N/A NO LIMIT 3 YEARS 0% max 0.00% ' No more than 30% of this category may be invested with any one commercial bank 100.00% 2 Mutual Funds maturity may be interpreted as weighted average maturity not exceeding 90 days. 3 Or must have an Investment Advisor with not less than 5 years exporierico and with assets under management of $500,000,000. 000011 Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund December 31, 2002 PROJECTION OF FUTURE CASH FLOW The Pooled Investment Fund cash flow requirements are based upon a 12 month historical cash flow model. The Treasurer states that based upon projected cash receipts and maturing investments there are sufficient funds to meet future cash flow disbursement requirements over the next 12 months. MONTH MONTHLY MONTHLY REQUIRED ACTUAL INV. AVAIL. TO RECEIPTS DISBMNTS DIFFERENCE MAT. INVEST BALANCE MATURITIES INVEST>1 YR. 01/03 172.7 01/2003 416.2 699.2 -283.0 110.3 0.0 1199.7 02/2003 450.0 551.6 -101.6 101.6 0.0 184.1 03/2003 513.6 427.9 85.7 0.0 85.7 64.4 04/2003 878.4 554.2 324.2 0.0 409.9 95.6 05/2003 401.4 714.9 -313.5 0.0 96.4 35.0 06/2003 395.7 671.8 -276.1 179.7 0.0 1.3 07/2003 426.3 442.1 -15.8 15.8 0.0 103.0 08/2003 408.4 511.3 -102.9 102.9 0.0 0.0 09/2003 353.8 499.0 -145.2 145.2 0.0 0.0 10/2003 472.7 579.9 -107.2 107.2 0.0 0.0 11/2003 450.0 488.4 -38.4 38.4 0.0 60.0 12/2003 994.4 601.0 393.4 0.0 393.4 0.0 Totals: 6,160.9 6741.3 -580.4 801.10 1743.1 1488.9 34.98% 76.12% 65.02% 24 Month Gross Yield Trends The yield history represents gross yields; administrative costs have not been deducted. Actual earnings on fund balances will be credited by the Auditor - Controller based upon County Treasurer calculations. Portfolio yield generally lags current trends in short-term interest rates. Yields fluctuate with changing markets and past performance is not an indication of future results. I Gross 7.00 Yield Trends 6.50 6.00 5.50 5.00 4.50 -- -- - - - ---•- - --. 4.00 - - • 3.50 •-- 3.00 - - - -• 2.50 •--- 2.00 ■ ! i 1.50 1 I 1 1 1 I L I 9 } 1 ! f I I I Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec - 00 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 , 01 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 1-40- PORTFOLIO YIELD f ALL TAXABLE AVERAGE 0.50 24 Month Yield Spread (Pool Yield vs. All Taxable Average) 0.40 - - 0.30 • - -- - 020- 0.10 -- 0.00 -0.10 - - -020 -- -0.30----- Average Spread = 0.12% I -- -0.40 -- -0.50 Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec - 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 02 * The Money Fund Reportnq All Taxable Average is compiled and reported by iMoneyNet, Inc. (formerly IBC Financial Data, Inc.) iMoneyNet, Inc. is a leading provider dependent analyses and information to the financial services industry, with a particular area of focus in money market mutual funds. The AIL -Taxable Index tracks yield of over 500 taxable money market funds across several categories, i.e. Treasury, Govemment, and Prime, and reports the average yield of those funds on a monthly basis. For more information on the iMoneyNet, Inc. Index seevww.ibcdata.com/index.html 000012 Investment Portfolio Information For RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPO RTATION COMM. Portfolio # 74760100 CONTENTS 1. Acc ount Summary 2. Detail of Securities Held 3. Fair Market Values & Analytics 4. Security Transactions & I nterest 5. Cash Transactions 6. Current Month Gains & Losses 7. Cash/MoneyFund Balances For The Month E nding December 31, 2002 -,15?E©EUVIEM) JAN 14,2002 TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION IV AN M. CHAND, CHIEF FINA NCIAL OFFICER RI VERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATIO N COMM. P .O. BOX 12008 RI VERSI DE CA 92502-2208 W PFM * On e Keystone Plaza * North Fron t & Market Streets, Su ite 300 * Harrisburg, PA 17101-2044 * (717)232-2723 For more in formation, please contact you r clien t man ager:NANCY JONES (415)982-5544 JONESN@publicfm .com PFM Account S ummary: xcluding Cash/MoneyFund) 74760100 RIVERSID E COUNTY TRANSPO RTATION COMM . MONT H E NDE D: December 31, 2002 C.) MARKET % OF YTM AT YTM AT DUR ATION 1•F,ECURITY TYPE PAR VALUE AMORTIZED COST MARKET VAL UE PO RTFOLIO COST MAR KET TO WORST i FED AGY BOND/NOTE 5,845,000 .00 5,864,942 .71 5,996,459 .38 100 .00 4.87 1.27 0.64 TO TAL SECURITIES 5,845,000.00 5,864,942.71 5,996,459.38 100.00 4 .87% 1.27% 0.64 TOTAL INVESTMENTS 5,845,000.00 5,864,942.71 5,996,459.38 100.00 % ACCRUED INTEREST 111,049.90 111,049.90 TOTAL PORTFOLIO 5,845,000.00 5,975,992.61 6,107,509.28 M Detail of Securities Held: 74760100 RIV ERSIDE COUNTY T RANSPORTATION COMM. (Excluding Cash/MoneyFund) MONTH ENDED: December 31, 200 SECURITY TY PE DESCRIPTION S&P MATURITY PURCHASE ORIGINAL YTM ACC RUED AMORTIZED MARKET CUSIP RATING PAR COUPO N D ATE DATE COST AT C OST INTEREST C OST VALUE FED AGY BOND/NOTE FHLMC GLOBAL REFERENCE NOTES 3134A2 KZ0 AAA 2,000,000 5.750 07/15/03 06/14/99 1,961,200.00 6.29 53,027,78 1,994,327.82 2,048,125 .01 FHLB GLOBAL NOTES 3133M5QB9 AAA 3,845,000 5.125 09/15/03 09/06/01 3,916,643.15 4,16 58,022.12 3,870,614.89 3,948,334,31 5,864,942.71 5,996,459,31 TOTAL SECURITIES 5,845,000 5,877,843 .15 4.87 111,049 .90 $5,845,000 $5,877,843.15 4.87% $111,049.90 $5,864,942.71 $5,996,459.31 PFM ©Fair Market Val ues & Analytics: • C.) SECUR ITY TYPE CT) PAR DESCRIPTIO N 74760100 RIV ERSI DE CO UNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM. MO NT H ENDED: December 31, 2002 M ATURITY FIRST C ALL MA RKET M ARKET UNREAL G/(L) UNRE AL G/(L) DU RATION YTM CUSIP COUPON DATE DATE PRICE VALUE ON BOOK ON COST TO WORST AT MKT FED A GY BOND/N OTE 2,000,000 FH LMC GLOBAL REFERE NCE NOTES 3134 A2 KZ0 5 .750 07/15/03 3,845,000 FHLB GLOBAL NOTES 3133M5QB9 5.125 09/15/03 SUBTO TALS ACCRUED IN TEREST ON INVESTMENTS TOTAL MARKET VALUE OF INV ESTMENTS 102 .406 102.688 2,048,125.00 3,948,334.38 53,797.18 77,719.49 86,925 .00 31,691.23 0.52 1,25 0.69 1.28 5,996,459.38 $131,516.67 $118,616.23 0.64 1 .27% 111,049.90 $6,107,509.28 Security Transactio ns & Interest: S&P M ATURITY PRINCIPAL ACCRUE D TRADE SETTLE TRAN TYPE SECU RITY DESCRIPTIO N CUSIP RATIN G PAR COUPON D ATE AMOUNT INTEREST No tra nsactions d urinE the mo nth . TOTAL SECURITY TRANSACTIONS TOT AL Bash Transactions Report: MONT H E NDED: GA SH D ATE TRANS ACTION CODE TRANS ACTION DESCRIPTION TOTAL AMOUNT CO No transactions durin g the month . NET CASH ADDITIONS/(WITHD RAWS) Realized Gains a nd Losses: MONTH E NDED: TRADE SETTL DATE DATE TR AN TYPE SALE MET HOD SECU RITY DESCRIPTION No tra nsactions during the month. TOTAL GAINS AND LO SSES C USIP PRINCIPAL REALIZED RE ALIZED PAR V ALUE CO UPON P ROCEEDS G/(L) C OST G/(L) BOOK PFM Cash/MoneyFund Report: H /MONEYFUND BALA NCE: 74760100 RIVERSIDE COUNTY T RANSPORTATION COMM. MO NT H EN DE D: December 31, 2002 $100,975.17 rnings Calcu lation Templates Cu rrent Month -End Book Value Current Month -End A ccrued Interest Less Pu rchases Less Purchased Interest Add Disposals (Sales, Maturities, Paydowns, Sinks, etc.) Add Coupon Interest Received Less Previous Month -End Book V alu e Less Previous Month -End Accru ed Interest Total Accrual Basis Earn ings For The Month Add Co upon I nterest Received Less P urchased I nterest Related to Coupons Add/S ubtract Gai ns or Losses on Cost For The Mth Total Cost Basis Earni ngs For The Month Economic Calendar 01/10 Employment Report 01/14 Retail Sales 01/15 Producer Price In dex 01/16 Consumer Price Index 01/17 Indu strial Production, Capacity Utilization 01/23 Leading Indicators 01/28 Du rable Goods, Consumer Con fidence, New Home Sales 01/30 Gross Domestic Pro duct (Q4 2002), Employment Cost Index 02/03 ISM Manu factu ring Surv ey Next FOMC: 01/29, 03/18, 05/06 Market Commentary Yields on in termediate and long-term bonds declin ed in December as equity prices retreated ahead of a possible war with Iraq. The Dow Jones Industrial Index fell over 6% d uring the mo nth, the largest December declin e since 1931. Softness in holiday retail sales also su ggests that the economy is not improving rapidly an d that inflation fears are of no concern. In addition, most manufacturing data weakened and consumer confiden ce failed to impro ve. The yield on two-year U. S. Treasury notes respon ded to the bad news by falling 50 basis poin ts (-0. 50%) during the mo nth for a new low of 1.58% to close o ut the 2002 calendar year. Prieins Source Market prices ar, , ived from closing bid prices as of the last busin ess day of the month as supplied r.T. In teractiv e Data, Bloomberg or Telerate. Prices that fall between data points interp olated. Nature of Investment Other 1% Operating Funds 45 13ond Project 16% Portfolio Irwastmsnt Type Federal Agency Notes / s 69/0 debt Reserve 24 LAIF 9./0 't County Pool 43 Mutual Funds 7 Investment --Agreements 35 Over 3 years 40 Portfolio Maturity 1 to 3 years 6 0 to 90 Oaye 54 Statement of Compliance All of the above investments and any investment decisions made for the quarter ending December 31, 2002 were in full compliance with the Commission's investment policy as adopted on April 11, 2001. The Commission has adequate cash flows for six months of operations. Signed by Chief Financial Officer 006021 AGENDA ITEM 7 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 24, 2003 TO: Budget & Implementation Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Karl Sauer, Bechtel Construction Manager THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement #03-33-055 for Additional On -Call Material Testing STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Award Agreement #03-33-055 (Amendment #6 to Agreement #RO-9832) with Ninyo & Moore to provide additional on -call material testing services in support of Measure "A" projects scheduled for construction for the remainder of this fiscal year, for an additional base amount of $86,000.0; 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the October 8, 1997 meeting, the Commission awarded Contract No. RO- 9832 to Ninyo & Moore to provide on -call material testing services for Measure "A" Construction Projects. The following table is a summary of Ninyo & Moore's contract actions to date: 0.0V022 Date Description Base Work Changes Extra Work Status Total Contract Not to Exceed 11/24/97 Original Agreement - On Call Material Testing for FY (97/98) $119,700 $23,940 $143,640 06/17/98 Extra Work(EW) #1 - Additional Testing for SW #35 $4,000 ($4,000) $143,640 07/08/98 Amendment #1 - On CaII Material Testing for FY (98/99) $91,760 $0 $235,400 11/12/98 Amendment #2 - Porphyry Spur Environmental Site Assessment $9,245. $0 $244,645 01/12/99 I EW #2 - West Corona Repairs $4,000 ($4,000) $244,645 04/01/99 EW #3 - SS Platform Ped Xing Roof $427 ($427) $244,645 04/02/99 EW #4 - Additional Testing for Phase 1 Soundwalls $15,000 ($15,000) $244,645 07/14/99 Amendment #3 - On Call Material Testing for FY (99/00) $77,185 $22,815 $344,645 07/12/00 Amendment #4 - On Call Material Testing for FY (00/01) and FY (01/02) $122,752 $0 $467,398 10/15/01 EW #5 - Additional Testing Sound Wall #36 $20,719 ($20,719) $467,398 06/12/02 Addendum #5 -On Call Material Testing for FY (02/03) $177,100 $17,710 $662,208 CURRENT CONTRACT STATUS $641,889 $20,319 $662,208 TOTAL INVOICED TO DATE $633,864 FUNDS REMAINING $8,025 $20,319 $28,344 Because of unforeseen circumstances, associated with the construction of the North Main Corona Metrolink Station, and additional material testing services required to support construction of the Riverside -Downtown and Riverside-LaSierra Metrolink Station Parking Lot Expansion Projects, Ninyo & Moore was required to provide services in excess of what was estimated and budgeted. The following is a summary of Ninyo & Moore's cost to date, estimated cost to complete, original budget, and requested additional budget, for RCTC construction projects this year to date: 'OO.O,O2 Project Name Cost to Date Estimated Cost to Complete Original Budget Requested Additional Funding Rt 74 Initial Grading $ 2,058.48 $ 3,283.52 $21,342.00 ($16,000.00) No Main Corona $146,410.42 $36,389.58 $99,200.00 $83,600.00 La Sierra Phase I $29,421.65 $5,078.35 $21,000.00 $13,500.00 La Sierra Phase II 0.00 $28,500.00 $28,500.00 0.00 Downtown Riverside $12,526.21 $5,973.79 $13,600.00 _ $4,900.00 Pedley 0.00 $14,800.00 $14,800.00 0.00 $94,025.00 $86,000.00 Budget Remaining $8,025.00 Budget Request $86,000.00 Staff has reviewed Ninyo & Moore's scope of work and cost of services for the additional work and is in concurrence. The proposed scope of work and cost estimates received from Ninyo and Moore are attached for your review. The existing $20,319 of extra work contingency will remain in place for future on call contingencies. F Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: N Year: FY 2002-03 Amount: $86,000.00 Source of Funds: STA LTF, and Measure "A" Budget Adjustment: Y GLA No.: 221-33-81120 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 02/18/03 Attachment: Proposed Scope Work and Cost Estimates from Ninyo & Moore, dated 2/14/2003 000024 iffingaszkinure Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Consultants February 14, 2003 Project Nos. 203941001 204089001 204224001 Mr. Karl Sauer Riverside County Transportation Commission P. O. Box 12008 Riverside, California 92502 Subject: Budget Summary and Projection Construction Materials Testing and Inspection Services Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside County, California Dear Mr. Sauer: In accordance with your request, we have prepared this budget summary for our construction materials testing and inspection services being performed for the Riverside County Transporta- tion Commission (RCTC). This summary, detailed in the attached Table 1, includes a description of Contract Authorizations, Project Budgets, Cost Accumulated, Estimated Fee to Complete Cur- rent Projects, and Requested Budget Adjustments to complete the projects currently under construction, as well as projects that are anticipated to begin this fiscal year. As documented in the referenced letters, some of the projects currently under construction have had increased materials testing and inspection costs due to additional requested scope of work. The additional work was requested as a result of unanticipated environmental conditions encoun- tered during construction, additional testing and engineering services, and special deputy inspection services that were not originally included in our authorized scope of services. Based on our recent discussions with representatives from RCTC, we understand that our re- maining services for projects currently under construction this fiscal year will include soil and base testing, field inspection for concrete and welding, field sampling, non-destructive field test- ing, and laboratory testing, including placement of the lightweight concrete. Our estimated cost for these services will be approximately $86,000 (eighty-six thousand dollars) more than our cur - 000025 475 Goddard • Suite 200 • Irvine, California 92618 • Phone (949) 753-7070 • Fax (949) 753-7071 Phoenix • Irvine • San Diego • Los Angeles • Oakland • Las Vegas • Salt Lake City • Ontario Riverside County Transportation Commission February 14, 2003 Budget Summary and Projection Various Project Nos. rent authorized budget. A detailed breakdown of these costs per project is included in Table 1. We understand that RCTC is in the process of providing a contract amendment for our requested increase in budget. We appreciate the opportunity to be of continued service on this project. If you have any ques- tions regarding this letter, please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, NINYO & MOORE Kurt S. Yoshii, P.E. Senior Project Engineer Principal Engineer RWM/KSY/CAP/JV/mll Attachments: References Table 1 — Budget Summary and Projection Distribution: (2) Addressee Jalal Vakili, Ph.D., P.E. 000026 3941-114 2 It fin1go&llAnore Riverside County Transportation Commission February 14, 2003 Budget Summary and Projection Various Project Nos. REFERENCES Ninyo & Moore, 2003, Extra Work Request, La Sierra Metrolink Station Parking Lot Expansion Phase 1, Riverside, California: Project No. 204224001, dated January 21. Ninyo & Moore, 2002, Breakdown of Services and Budget Estimate, North Main Corona Com- muter Rail Station, Corona, California: Project No. 203941001, dated December 24. Riverside County Transportation Commission, 2002, Amendment No. 5 (02-33-077) to Agree- ment (RO-9832) with Ninyo & Moore for Construction Materials Testing, dated July 25. Ninyo & Moore, 2002, Extra Work Request, Environmental Consulting Services, North Main Corona Commuter Rail Station, Corona, California: Project No. 203941001, dated No- vember 27. Ninyo & Moore, 2002, Transfer of Budget Allocation for Geotechnical and Materials Testing Services Route 74 Initial Grading (Highway 74), Lake Elsinore, California and North Main Commuter Rail Station, Corona, California: Project No. 203941001, dated Novem- ber27. Ninyo & Moore, 2002, Construction Materials Testing and Inspection Services North Main Co- rona Commuter Rail Station Corona, California, Project No. 203941001, dated November 7. 3941-114 3 000027 / inrvo qvioore Table 1 RCTC On -Call Materials Testing Services Budget Summary and Projection ontract Summary mtract Document iginal Agreement RO-9832 ara Work No. 1 nendment No. 1 nendment No: 2 :Ira Work No. 2 dra Work No. 3 dra Work No. 4 nendment No. 3 nendment No. 4 ctra Work No. 5 nendment No. 5 Totals: roject Billing Summary 'eject Name t. 91 Sound Wall # 35 etrolink Station t. 91 Phase 1 Sound Walls geon Pass Park & Ride 'est Corona Pavement Repair arphyry "Y" 'est Corona Overcrossing a Sierra Overcrossing R-91 Phase 2 Sound Wall No. 98 R-91 Sound Wall Nos. 635A & B 10 and Apache Trails R-91 S.W. Nos. 110, 121 & 161 R-91 S.W. No. 36 R 74 Initial Grading orth Main Corona Metrolink Station 3 Sierra Station Parking Lot Expansion - Phase 1 owntown Riverside Station Parking Lot Expansion edley Station Parking Lot Expansion Totals: 002/2003. Project Budget Projection To act Name ,R 74 Initial Grading lorth Main Corona Metrolink Station a Sierra Station Parking Lot Expansion - Phase 1 a Sierra Station Parking Lot Expansion - Phase 2 ►owntown Riverside Station Parking Lot Expansion 'edley Station Parking Lot Expansion Current Budget Remaining: Change in Date: Authorization Extra Work 11/24/1997 $119,699.53 $23,940.00 6/17/98 $4,000.00 ($4,000.00) 7/8/1998 $91,760.88 $0.00 11/12/1998 $9,245.15 $0.00 1/12/1999 $4,000.00 ($4,000.00) 4/1/1999 $427.00 ($427.00) 4/2/1999 $15,000.00 ($15,000.00) 7/14/1999 $77,185.00 $22,815.00 8/1/2000 $122,752.00 $0.00 10/16/2001 $20,719.00 $0.00 7/25/2002 $177,100.00 $17.710.00 $641,888.56 $41,038.00 Cost Accumulated Budget Difference $23,781.65 $23,781.65 $0.00 $109,955.15 $109,955.15 $0.00 $57,840.03 $57,840.03 $0.00 $16,500.51 $16,500.51 $0.00 $7,052.63 $7,052.63 $0.00 $9,224.61- $9,224.61 $0.00 $44,635.74 $44,635.74 $0.00 $46,922.16 $46,922.16 $0.00 $16,333.02 $16,333.02 $0.00 $31,369.50 $31,369.50 $0.00 $10,472.81 $10,472.81 $0.00 $57,757.82 $57,757.82 $0.00 $11,601.61 $11,601.61 $0.00 $2,058.48 $21,342.00 19,283.52 $146,410.42 $99,200.00 (47,210.42) $29,421.65 $21,000.00 (8,421.65) $12,526.21 $13,600.00 1,073.79 $0.00 $14,800.00 14,800.00 $633,864.00 $613,389.24 (20,474.76) 2002/2003 Currently Authorized Budget: Billed to Date: February 14, 2003 Currently Authorized $119,699.53 $123,699.53 $215,460.41 $224,705.56 $228,705.56 $229,132.56 $244,132.56 $321,317.56 $444,069.56 $464,788.56 $641,888.56 -$641,,888.56 $641,888.56, $633,864.00 2002/2003 Budget Remaining: $8,024.561 Requested Estimated Fee to Budget Complete Adjustment $3,283.52 ($16,000.00) $36,389.58 $83,600.00 $5,078.35 $13,500.00 $28,500.00 $0.00 $5,973.79 $4,900.00 $14,800.00 $0.00 Total Estimated Fee: $94,025.24 $86,000.00 -$8,024.56 Total 2002/2003 Requested Budget Amendment: $86,000.681 Not to Exceed $143,639.53 $143,639.53 $235,400.41 $244,645.56 $244,645.56 $244,645.56 $244,645.56 $344,645.56 $467,397.56 $488,116.56 $659,598.56 $659,598.56 000028 3941-lbsum A finyu&eil►ou re AGENDA ITEM 8 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: February 24, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Karl Sauer, Bechtel Construction Manager Robert Wunderlich, Bechtel Resident Engineer THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement #03-33-038 for Riverside -La Sierra Metrolink Station Phase II Parking Lot Expansion STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Award Agreement #03-33-038 for the construction of the Riverside -La Sierra Metrolink Station Phase II Parking Lot Expansion project to Riverside Construction Co. for the amount of $1,199,850 plus a contingency amount of $150,150 to cover potential change orders encountered during construction, for a total not to exceed contract authorization of $ 1,350,000; 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the May 9, 2001 RCTC meeting, the Commission approved the establishment of an Ad Hoc Committee to address policy issues identified in the draft Station Management Plan submitted separately to the Commission at that same meeting. One of the main findings of the draft Station Management Plan was that by 2010, four out of the five, existing and proposed, Metrolink stations are forecasted to have parking deficits. In conjunction with direction from both the Commission and the newly formed Ad Hoc Committee, RCTC has completed negotiations and is in final escrow for the purchase of additional right of way for the expansion of the existing Riverside -La Sierra Metrolink commuter rail station. OOGO29 On November 14, 2001, the Commission approved the selection of and authorized the Chairman to enter into Agreement #02-33-029 with Engineering Resources of Southern California, Inc. (ER), to provide engineering, environmental and design services for development and implementation of a Parking Lot Expansion Plan for the existing Riverside -La Sierra Metrolink Station. At the May 8, 2002 RCTC Meeting, the Commission authorized staff to advertise for bids to construct Phase I of the Riverside -La Sierra Metrolink Station Parking Lot Expansion which included the Photovoltaic Carport Structures Project. At the September 11, 2002 RCTC Meeting, the Commission awarded Agreement #02-51-089 to Riverside Construction, Inc., for the construction of Phase I of the Riverside -La Sierra Metrolink Station Parking Lot Expansion Project. The Phase I Project is scheduled to complete construction by the end of March, 2003. The Phase I Project will add an additional 225 parking spaces to the existing 350 parking spaces, for a total of approximately 575 parking spaces. At the July 10, 2002 RCTC Meeting, the Commission authorized staff to advertise for bids to construct Phase II of the Riverside -La Sierra Metrolink Station Parking Lot Expansion Project. The Phase II Project will add an additional 425 parking spaces to the 575 parking spaces that will be available at the completion of the Phase I Project, for a total of approximately 1,000 parking spaces. It is anticipated that construction of the Phase II Project will start at the beginning of May, 2003, and will be complete in October of 2003. The project was advertised starting on December 4, 2002 with the bid opening on February 6, 2003. Twelve (12) bids were received and opened on February 6, 2003 at 10:00 AM. A summary of the bids received are shown in Table A: 00.0030 TABLE A Riverside -La Sierra Metrolink Station Phase 11 Parking Lot Expansion Bid Summary Firm (In order from Low bid to High bid) Bid Amount Amount Over Low Bid Engineers Estimate $1,257,574.50 N/A 1 Riverside Construction Co. Riverside, CA $1,199,850.00 $0.00 2 E.A. Mendoza, Inc. Irvine, CA $1,311,100.00 $1 1 1,250.00 3 Griffith Company Santa Ana, CA $1,328,519.20 $128,669.20 4 Vance Corporation Rialto, CA $1,329,123.60 $129,273.60 5 R.J. Noble Company Orange, CA $1,390,893.70 $191,043.70 6 Betts Construction Temecula, CA $1,439,611.95 $239,761.95 7 Hillcrest Contracting, Inc. Corona, CA $1,445,548.00 $245,698.00 8 Laird Construction Co., Inc. Rancho Cucamonga, CA $1,461,146.00 $261,296.00 9 Tyner Paving Co. Los Angeles, CA $1,539,977.60 $340,127.60 10 Sean Malek Engineering & Construction Perris, CA $1,541,935.00 $342,085.00 1 1 Adams/Mallory Const. Co., Inc. Placentia, CA $1,550,211.30 $350,361.30 _ 12 Metro Builders & Engineers Group Ltd. Newport Beach, CA $1,849,214.98 $649,364.98 The bids were reviewed by Legal Counsel and staff, and all concurred that the Riverside Construction Co. low bid was the lowest responsive bid received for the project. A summary of the review of the three (3) lowest bids received and the responsiveness of the bids are detailed in Table B: '000031 TABLE B Checklist Item Riverside Construction Co. ompany o. E.A. Mendoza, Inc. Griffith 1 Bid Letter Yes Yes Yes 2 Schedule of Prices - Bid Amount (math check) - Bid Item Comparison - w/Eng's Est - w/other Bidders - Unbalanced Bid Items Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No 3 Bid Bond Yes Yes Yes 4 List of Subcontractors - Prime Performs > 50% Work Yes Yes Yes 5 Bidder Information Forms - Reference Check Yes Yes 1 Yes Yes 1 Yes Yes 1 6 Non -Collusion Affidavit Yes Yes Yes 7 Evidence of Insurance No 2 No 2 No 2 Notes: 1 Staff is currently researching references listed on bidder forms. Staff has verified that Bidder's license is current and active. 2 Bidder did not submit evidence of insurance but staff is currently working with the bidder to verify that they either currently have or can obtain the insurance required prior to award of a construction contract for the project. 000032 Table C summarizes the costs associated with the construction of the Riverside -La Sierra Metrolink Station Phase 11 Parking Lot Expansion for the three (3) lowest bids received: TABLE C (Itemized breakdown of the lowest three (3) bids) ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION Riverside Construction Co. E.A. Mendoza, Inc. Griffith Company 1 MOBILIZATION $ 52,681.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 68,000.00 2 CLEAN-UP $ 10,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 4,000.00 3 CONSTRUCTION WATER $ 3,600.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,200.00 4 DEMOLITION AND REMOVALS $ 27,000.00 $ 247,016.00 $ 65,000.00 5 SITE CLEARING AND GRUBBING $ 10,000.00 $ 80,000.00 $ 10,000.00 6 SAFETY AND SHORING $ 2,500.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 1,200.00 7 IMPORTED BORROW $ 151,800.00 $ 82,800.00 $ 213,900.00 8 REMOVE AND RECOMPACT $ 30,130.00 $ 19,650.00 $ 34,453.00 9 EROSION CONTROL $ 7,800.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 3,500.00 10 CRUSHED AGGREGATE BASE $ 109,438.00 $ 93,804.00 $ 95,367.40 11 ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT $ 151,495.00 $ 125,630.00 $ 144,105.00 12 PCC CURB $ 36,157.00 $ 34,254.00 $ 67,746.80 13 PCC CURB AND GUTTER $ 29,547.00 $ 32,830.00 $ 50,558.20 14 PCC GUTTER $ 4,472.00 $ 4,816.00 $ 3,508.80 15 PCC CROSS GUTTER/SPANDREL $ 10,748.00 $ 10,748.00 $ 12,897.60 16 PCC SIDEWALK $ 33,852.00 $ 33,852.00 $ 40,622.40 17 PAVEMENT STRIPING, MARKING & SIGNAGE $ 6,570.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 6,500.00 18 30 INCH RCP, 1500D $ 23,310.00 $ 16,650.00 $ 23,310.00 19 24 INCH RCP, 1500D $ 20,460.00 $ 14,300.00 $ 16,500.00 20 18 INCH RCP, 1500D $ 26,125.00 $ 13,750.00 $ 17,050.00 21 24 INCH PCC FLARED INLET ' $ 2,400.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 2,340.00 22 CATCH BASIN, W=7' $ 3,525.00 $ 4,000.00 $ 3,300.00 23 CATCH BASIN, W=4', WITH KRISTAR FILTER $ 12,400.00 $ 12,000.00 $' >, 15,600.00 24 PARKWAY DRAIN, S=24" $ 1,565.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 3,700.00 25 CONCRETE COLLAR $ 2,940.00 $ 2,400.00 $ 1,560.00 26 MANHOLE JM $ 2,840.00 $ 4,000.00 $ 3,700.00 27 JUNCTION STRUCTURE $ 870.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 1,100.00 28 PCC HEADWALURELOCATE TRASH RACK $ 4,400.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 4,300.00 29 IRRIGATION SPRINKLER SYSTEM $ 91,800.00 $ 150,000.00 $ 92,000.00 30 LANDSCAPING $ 156,280.00 $ 125,000.00 $ 158,000.00 31 LANDSCAPE, 90 DAY MAINTENANCE PERIOD $ 5,400.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 32 BASIC ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS $ 50,305.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 39,000.00 33 STREET LIGHT (INDIANA AVE., INCLUDES CONDUIT & PULLBOXES) $ 32,285.00 $ 38,500.00 $ 31,900.00 34 RELOCATE LIGHTING FIXTURE, SINGLE, & EXISTING POLE, RELAMP AND REBALLAST, NEW FOUNDATION $ 6,900.00 $ 9,000.00 $ 6,750.00 35 RELOCATE LIGHTING FIXTURE, DOUBLE, & EXISTING POLE, RELAMP AND REBALLAST, NEW FOUNDATION $ 23,450.00 $ 14,000.00 $ 23,240.00 36 LIGHTING FIXTURE, DOUBLE, POLE & NEW FOUNDATION $ 25,425.00 $ 27,500.00 $ 25,500.00 37 REBALLAST AND RELAMP EXISTING DOUBLE FIXTURE IN PLACE $ 3,090.00 $ 600.00 $ 3,060.00 38 LIGHTING FIXTURE, DOUBLE, MOUNT ON EXISTING POLE AND RELOCATE, NEW FOUNDATION $ 15,200.00 $ 12,400.00 $ 15,200.00 39 40 REBALLAST AND RELAMP TWO EXISTING SINGLE FIXTURES AND MOUNT AS DOUBLE FIXTURE ON EXISTING POLE AND RELOCTE, NEW $ 6,500.00 $ 11,200.00 $ 6,400.00 $ 4,590.00 $ 5,400.00 $ 9,450.00 GRAND TOTAL $ 1,199,850.00 $ 1,311,100.00 $ 1,328,519.20 000034 From staff's and Legal Counsel's review of the bids received, staff is recommending that the Commission award Agreement #03-33-038 for the construction of the Riverside -La Sierra Metrolink Station Phase II Parking Lot Expansion project to Riverside Construction Co. for the amount of $1,199,850.00 plus a contingency amount of $150,150.00 to cover potential change orders encountered during construction, for a total contract authorization of $1,350,000.00. The standard RCTC construction contract will be used, pursuant to Legal Counsel review. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Y Year: FY 2002-03 Amount: $1,350,000 Source of Funds: Measure "A" funds Budget Adjustment: N GLA No.: 221-33-81301 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 02/18/03 Attachment: Agreement #03-33-038 000035 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ************** CONTRACT ************** FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE RIVERSIDE -LA SIERRA METROLINK STATION PHASE II - PARKING LOT EXPANSION PROJECT RCTC Agreement No. 03-33-038 December 4, 2002 BETWEEN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND 000036 CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE RIVERSIDE -LA SIERRA METROLINK STATION PHASE II - PARKING LOT EXPANSION ROJECT IN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE, IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY RCTC AGREEMENT NO. 03-33-038 1. PARTIES AND DATE. This Contract is made and entered into this day of , 200_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 "CONSTRUCTION OF THE RIVERSIDE -LA SIERRA METROLINK STATION PHASE II - PARKING LOT EXPANSION PROJECT, RCTC AGREEMENT NO. 03-33-038." 2. RECITALS. 2.1 The Commission is a County Transportation Commission organized under the provisions of Sections 130000, et 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 Notice Inviting Bids issued by Commission on December 4, 2002, has submitted a bid proposal for "CONSTRUCTION OF THE RIVERSIDE -LA SIERRA METROLINK STATION PHASE II - PARKING LOT EXPANSION PROJECT, RCTC AGREEMENT NO. 03-33-038." 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. 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: F FILES\Current Const Projects\03-33-038 La Sierra Phase II\Contract\#617740 vl - RCTC - Q 015t�lJ Y}3E PLa sierra Parking Lot Expansion Construction -doe V cJ7 CONTRACT -1 a. NOTICE INVITING BIDS b. INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS c. CONTRACT BID FORMS d. FORM OF CONTRACT e. PAYMENT AND PERFORMANCE BOND FORMS f. ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR SECURITY DEPOSITS g. CONTRACT APPENDIX PART "A" - PART "B" - PART "C" - PART "D" - Regulatory Requirements and Permits General Conditions Special Provisions (under separate cover) Contract Drawings (under separate cover) h. ADDENDUM NO.(S) (if applicable) 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 RIVERSIDE -LA SIERRA METROLINK STATION PHASE II - PARKING LOT EXPANSION PROJECT, RCTC AGREEMENT NO. 03-33- 038, (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 accor- dance with the applicable terms 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 within One Hundred (100) 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 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 and Fifty Dollars ($750.00) for each day, or fraction thereof, it takes to complete the Work, or specified portion(s) of such work, over and above the number of days specified herein or beyond the Project Milestones established by approved Construction Schedules. F:\FILES\Current Const Projects\03-33-038 La Sierra Phase II\Contract\#617740 vl - RCTC - Contract -La sierra Parking Lot Expansion Construction.doc CONTRACT -2 006038 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 in 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 Contractor's Labor Certification. 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 attached to this Contract as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, 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: Contractor: Commission: Riverside County Transportation Commission 3650 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, California 92501 Attn: Executive Director Cc: Robert Wunderlich, Contract Manager F:\FILES\Current Const Projects\03-33-035 La Sierra Phase II\Contract\#617740 vl - RCTC - Oy i1j a 9La sierra Parking Lot Expansion Construction.doc V vv L CONTRACT -3 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 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: By: Name John F. Tavaglione, Chairman Riverside County Transportation Commission Title RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL By: Eric Haley Executive Director Tax I.D. Number: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Best Best & Krieger LLP Counsel, RCTC 00,6040 F:\FILES\Current Const Projects\03-33-038 La Sierra Phase II\Contract\#617740 vl - RCTC - Contract -La sierra Parking Lot Expansion Construction.doc CONTRACT -4 EXHIBIT "A" CERTIFICATION LABOR CODE - SECTION 1861 I, the undersigned Contractor, am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 et seq. 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 000041 F:\FILES\Current Const Projects\03-33-038 La Sierra Phase II\Contract\#617740 vl - RCTC - Contract -La sierra Parking Lot Expansion Construction.doc RVPUB\JFF\617747 CONTRACT -A AGENDA ITEM 9 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 24, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Ivan M. Chand, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposed Policy Goals and Objectives for Fiscal Year 2003-2004 Budget STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the proposed Commission's Policy Goals and Objectives for Fiscal Year 2003-04 Budget, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The initial step in the budget process is to develop policy goals and objectives for the fiscal year. These goals and objectives are to be consistent with the Commission's overall strategic direction. Last year, one of the Commission's primary goals was to renew Measure A to allow the Commission to continue planning for the future of transportation in Riverside County. The citizens approved the Measure in November 2002. This year's goals and objectives prioritize the transition planning and the continued delivery of promises made to the citizens of the County of Riverside. Using the Commission's guiding principles, staff has updated the attached Goals and Objectives for the Fiscal Year 2003-04 Budget. Attachment: Proposed Goals and Objectives for FY 2003-04 Budget 006042 COMMISSION POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 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 FY 2003/04 Budget. Mobility The Riverside County Transportation Commission, in cooperation with local, state and federal agencies, will strive to create a transportation system that promotes efficient mobility both within the county and regionally. Following November's overwhelming passage of Measure A, RCTC faces a year of transition with significant opportunities and challenges. • Prepare and adopt a transition plan to coordinate the two voter -approved Measure A sales tax measures. • Complete Tier 1 Environmental analysis for the two internal CETAP corridors and obtain federal adoption of Records of Decision for both the Winchester to Temecula and Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore CETAP corridors. • Support the CETAP process to examine and analyze route alternatives for the two intercounty corridors linking Riverside County to Orange and San Bernardino Counties. • Actively participate in the Orange/Riverside Bi-County 91 Express Lanes Committee to facilitate near and long-term improvements to Route 91; enhance intercounty public transit options and foster the development of a new corridor between the two counties. • Foster the effective and early implementation of the TUMF program to jump-start funding of needed transportation projects. • Assure the ongoing effectiveness of the short-range transit plan process and work with the county's eight transit operators to assure efficiency and effectiveness. • Coordinate regional transit connections among commuter rail, buses, and paratransit services to ensure convenient service for passengers. Goods Movement RCTC will work with federal, state and local governments to facilitate the movement of goods and services, within and through the county, recognizing the vital role mobility plays in the economic health of the county, the state, and the nation. 000043 • Work with county transportation commissions, local jurisdictions, and SCAG toward the implementation of a coordinated regional approach to increase rail and highway capacity for goods movement. • Seek funding to implement the Commission's approved, high -priority railroad grade separation priority list to mitigate the impact of increased goods movement demands on the transportation system with special emphasis on obtaining. recognition as part of the reauthorization of the federal transportation act. • Promote the use of rail corridors (including the Riverside -Perris -Hemet -San Jacinto Line within funding constraints) as an alternative to trucks for the movement of freight within the County and the region. • Support the efficient use of March Air Reserve Base to address regional air freight demand and resulting ground access infrastructure needs • Advocate inclusion of goods movement policies and projects for Southern California in the reauthorization of the federal transportation act. Congestion Relief and Safety Improvements Selection of projects and programming of funds by RCTC will be done with a view toward promoting traffic flow, improved safety, and reducing congested traffic corridors. • Work with local jurisdictions and Caltrans to develop mitigation measures and strategies to address congested corridors and areas impacted by construction. • Provide innovative commuter rideshare programs to with -the -goal of reduceing single occupant vehicle trips and coordinate with other regional rideshare service providers to address inter -county commute trips. • Continue to work with state and federal agencies to program and construct projects in the State Transportation Improvement Program, the Measure A Program and other high priority projects. • Work with Caltrans and the California Highway Patrol to continue providing a motorist aid system which includes a call box program and freeway service patrol program; including temporary services in freeway construction zones. Air Quality RCTC's transportation planning will be designed to achieve clean air standards while fostering economic growth and improving quality of life. • Work with the metropolitan planning organization, sub -regional agencies, and local jurisdictions to develop and implement a regional transportation plan that 000044 meets conformity guidelines. • Work with the SCAQMD to coordinate our project implementation with its regional air quality goals. • Support outreach and educational programs that promote voluntary ridesharing. • Facilitate private/public use of clean fuels technology. • Encourage the purchase of clean fuel buses by transit operators and the conversion to clean fuels for other transit vehicles. • Promote the reduction of mobile source emissions through proactive participation in various air quality forums. Economic Development Transportation decisions will consider the economic benefits derived from any improvement, and where feasible and practical, will pursue transportation alternatives that enhance or complement economic development. • Support local agencies in the design and construction of interchanges that are in proximity to regional economic centers and developments. • Foster the development of transportation technology research, education and training efforts of public institutions within Riverside County • Support local projects, consistent with countywide transportation goals, which enhance business development, local employment and area tourism. Intermodalism and Accessibility Serve county residents, where economically feasible, by developing transportation alternatives that consider the needs of a wide range of citizens. • Work with transit providers and local social service agencies to provide specialized transit service to meet a broad spectrum of socio-economic transit needs. Implement the Commission's commuter rail short-range transit plan and the SCRRA long-range strategic plan for expansion of the commuter rail system benefiting Riverside County constituents. • Participate in the study of high-speed rail options and support efforts for eventual implementation of a statewide high-speed rail system with emphasis on the pilot project being in',Southern California and including the integration of existing rail passenger services. 000045 Technological Innovation Advocate the development and use of advanced technologies for transportation applications that are affordable and practical. • Encourage the development of a regional smart -card to increase the level of convenience for transit users. • Continue development, in partnership with Caltrans and San Bernardino Associated Governments, of the Inland Empire Transportation Management Center and seek funding for its construction. Public and Agency Communications Provide timely, informative and accurate information to encourage informed public and agency participation in the Commission's decision -making processes. • Promote a close working relationship with news and civic entities to increase interest in, and understanding of, transportation and related issues. • Enhance the provision of public information through various forms of communications (e.g., Internet, cable TV, speakers' bureau, print media, etc). 000046 FINANCIAL POLICIES Operating Budget Policies • The Commission will budget no more than one percent of Measure A sales tax revenue for administrative salaries and benefits. • Administration costs 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 on an ongoing basis. • The fiscal capital budget should be consistent with the strategic plan with deviations appropriately noted, explained, and justified. Revenue Policies • Sales tax revenue projections will be revised bi-annually to ensure use of current and relevant data. Staff may adjust annual amounts 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 maintain 2x -debt ratio coverage on all senior debt. • Debt issuance will be for major capital projects including engineering, construction, and right of way. Operating requirements must be from current ongoing revenues. • Costs of issuance including the standard underwriter's discount will not exceed 2%. • While it is the intent of the Commission to establish a cash debt reserve for long term bond issuance, obtaining surety bonds can be obtained when beneficial to the Commission. Auditing, Accounting, and Financial Reporting Policies • The Commission will issue a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report compliant "00,6,047 with GASB 34. • An audit is to be conducted annually on Commission accounting books and records. As long as the Commission has outstanding bonds, an independent accounting firm must conduct the audit. Capital Planning and Programming Policies • 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 the amount necessary to meet monthly expenditures. • Idle funds will be invested per the Commission's established investment policy emphasizing in order of priority: 1) safety, 2) liquidity, and 3) yield. • Cash disbursements to local jurisdictions and vendors/consultants will be completed in an expeditious and timely manner. Human Resources Management • Commission staffing levels will be consistent with the intent of its enabling legislation, which envisioned a small, but effective staff. 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. Oa6O'48 AGENDA ITEM 10 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: February 24, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Ivan M. Chand, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: City of Canyon Lake Loan STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Grant the City of Canyon Lake an advance of Measure A, Local Streets and Roads funds; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On May 9, 2002, the City of Canyon Lake (City) submitted a request for an advance to make repairs and improvements to Railroad Canyon Road. This advance is to provide maintenance as the road is beginning to show signs of deterioration. Due to the small amount, staff has prepared the loan agreement to advance the funds to the City from current reserves. The advance of $ 300,000 will be repaid after the City has repaid its prior loan. During that period that the City is paying for their prior loan, the City will pay the Commission interest only. Staff has negotiated with the City, a 4.5% percent interest rate on the advance. Staff will withhold the advance payment prior to the remittance of the local streets and roads funds to the City. Attached is the agreement to be entered into between the Commission and the City. Staff is also requesting a budget adjustment. The budget adjustment will provide sufficient expenditure authority to make the advance to the City. 00849 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: N Year: FY 2002-03 Amount: $300,000 1 Source of Funds: WesternCounty Highway Reserves Budget Adjustment: Y GLA No.: 227-71-86104 Fiscal Procedures Approved: r Date: 02/13/03 Attachments: City of Canyon Lake Loan Agreement Letter from City of Canyon Lake Loan Amortization Schedule 000050 CITY OF CANYON LAKE executive Director Eric Haley Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 Dear Mr. Hey 059599 pC UVIEl MAY 15 2002 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION We appreciated your recent visit to Canyon Lake to discuss the Measure A Extension proposal language with our RCTC representative Bill Trembly and myself. We are pleased to tell you that as a result of your explanation and further discussions with the Council, the City has taken a position of being in full support of placing the Measure A extension on the ballot. At, the time of your visit we also briefly discussed the 1993 Measure A loan to the City which enabled the City to fund the full improvements on Railroad Canyon Road and bring the two lane roadway up to a fully developed 4 lane arterial street during the mid - 90's. I had asked for a financial review of our amortization schedule at that time to see how the cash flows from Measure A were affecting our overall payment schedule. Ivan Chand, your Chief Financial Officer was kind enough to send me a follow up letter on March. 19th, indicating that in reviewing this he had also discovered that our loan amortization had been incorrectly stated and we were to receive a reduction in our loan balance of $244,375. Frank Kessler Mayor John Zaitz Mayor Pro Tem John Giardinelli Council Member Alfred W. Trembly Council Member Jack Wamsley Council Member Mr. Chand's letter also indicated that our loan would be completely paid by FY 2006- 2007 and then the City would be entitled to additional Measure A Funds until the end of the program in fiscal year 2008. Recently we received an estimated amortization schedule from RCTC as part of the request for an updated five-year improvement plan. This schedule shows that the City will be entitled to approximately $1,184,000 during the period fiscal year 2002-2003 through 2006-2007. After subtracting our current balance due on our loan of $895,000, this would leave approximately a $290;000 to $300,000 due the City in the latter couple of years in Measure A's life. I also had our own accounting firm run some extrapolations on Measure A out to the end of the program and their figures show the same balance of approximately $290,000 to $300,000 coming to the City. 000051 31516 Railroad Canyon Road, Canyon Lake, CA 92587.909/244-2955 • FAX 909/246-2022 • EMAIL: cnynlake@pe.net I would appreciate a meeting with yourself and your finance officer, Mt. Chand in the near future to discuss the possibility of an advancement of these funds at some time sooner than the 2006-2007 years. Perhaps this advancement could take the form of an extension of our current loan, leaving the cash flow as is or some other form of advance loan agreement. ton As I mentioned to you during our meeting, Railroad Canyon Road was improved during the mid -90's and is beginning to show signs of deferred maintenance i.e., major patch repairs, overlays, etc. Unfortunately the City, having pledged most of its gas tax resources as long term debt to construct the road, does not have sufficient funds available to conduct the maintenance program that is needed to protect the major investment in the roadway. If there is someway we could receive our remaining Measure A funding in advance, we could apply this to an aggressive maintenance program which would keep the road in good condition until the Measure A extension and Proposition 42 funds become available. We will contact your office in the near future and see if we can arrange a meeting schedule. We appreciate your continued support as always in working with these issues. Sincerely, zaf A/7 -61,-e).6 Del Powers City Manager 000052 I General Inputs I Loan Amount 300,000 1 I Interest rate 4. 750% RCTC 1 PV rate 5.000% LOAN CALCULATOR Date Principal Interest Total Payment Present V alue ir-`;-r.5! • •: r 2/1/2003 $0.00 R _ 1++ ''+ • �' 3/1/2003 $1,187. 50 $1,187,50 $1,182.57. ;;.' . Total Payments $348,687.50 4/1/2003 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,.177.67. u, * •• • ° PV of To tal Payments $297,648.92 5/1/2003 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 911!] $1,172.78,;'di' 6/1/2003 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,167,91 ' ,, ;:ilj' 7/1/2003 $1,187. 50 $1,187.50 $1,163. 07-e. . . ,' 8/1/2003 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,15824 ' 9/1/2003 $1,187. 50 $1,187.50 $1,153,43 ,,,a/'� 10/1/2003 $1,187.50 $1,187,50 $1,148.65 • -• �� 1..t.4 11/1/2003 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,143.88:Eis''': 12/1/2003 $1,187. 50 $1,187. 50 $1,139. 14 ; 1/1/2004 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,134.41 r' .+;• k 2/1/2004 $1,187. 50 $1,187.50 $1,129.70 3/1/2004 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1 125 01 4/1/2004 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,120.351-l4 ti+ 5/1/2004 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,11574., 6/1/2004 $1,187. 50 $1,187.50 $1,111 .07* 7/1/2004 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,10646,�..:��; 8/1/2004 $1,187,50 $1,187.50 $1,10187 . I• 9/1/2004 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,097 .30 10/1/2004 $1,187. 50 $1,187 .50 $1,09274r 11/1/2004 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,088.21 12/1/2004 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,083,69yt�,�y 1/1/2005 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,079.20 ��i 2/1/2005 $1,187.50 $1,187,50 $1,074.72 "F 3/1/2005 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,070.26: 4/1/2005 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,065 .82'"'Ra 5/1/2005 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,061 .39�i:i, 6/1/2005 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,056 .99'r, .4. ° ` .. 7/1/2005 _ $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,052.60:'" 8/1/2005, $1,187 .50 $1,187 .50 $1,048,24" 1'-0'° '° 9/1/2005 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,043.89 .4 ; 10/1/2005 $1,187.50 $1,187,50 $1,039.56 11/1/2005 $1,187 .50 $1,187.501 $1,035.24'`*iL`%j;!r. 12/1/2005 $1,187.50 $1,187.501 $1,030,95P r' 1/1/2006 $1,187.50 $1,187.50 $1,026 .67 1k, ;+3 ' 2/1/2006 $1,187,50 $1,187 .50 $1,022411; •�,1'�' 3/1/2006 $1,187.50 $1,187,50 $1,01817.: 4=y; 4/1/2006 $1,187 .50 51,187,50 51,013 94 5/1/2006 $1,187 .50 $1,187.50 $1,009.73 • 6/1/2006 $1,187 .50 $1,187.50 _ $1,005.55 E• 7/1/2006 $300,000.00 $1,187,50 $301,187.50 $253,979,7$ .I 4� Total $300,000.00 $48,687.501 $348,687.501 $297,648 .921 Page 1 of 1 Month Year Amortization Table for $300000.00 borrowed on Jul 28, 2006 8 2006 9715.54 9 2006 9715.54 10 2006 11 2006 12 2006 1 2007 2 2007 3 2007 4 2007 5 2007 6 2007 7 2007 Payment ($) 9715.54 9715.54 9715.54 1 9715.54 9715.54 9715.54 9715.54 9715.54 9715.54 9715.54 Principal Paid ($) 8528.04 8561.79 8595.68 8629.71 8663.87 8698.16 8732.59 8767.16 8801.86 8836.70 8871.68 8906.80 Interest Paid ($) 1187.50 1153.74 1119.85 1085.83 1051.67 1017.37 982.94 948.38 8547.29 913.67 9460.96 878.83 10339.80 843.86 808.74 Total Interest ($) 1187.50 2341.24 3461.10 4546.92 5598.59 6615.97 7598.91 11183.65 11992.39 Balance($) Month Year 291471.96 8 2007 9715.54 282910.17 9 2007 9715.54 274314.49 10 2007 9715.54 265684.78 11 2007 9715.54 257020.91 248322.75 239590.15 230822.99 222021.13 213184.43 204312.751 195405.95 12 2007 9715.54 1 2008 9715.54 2 2008 9715.54 3 2008 9715.54 4 2008 9715.54 5 2008 9715.54 6 2008 9715.54 7 2008 9715.54 Payment($) Principal Paid ($) 8942.06 8977.45 9012.99 9048.66 9084.48 9120.44 9156.54 9192.79 9229.17 9265.71 9302.38 9339.21 Interest Paid ($) 773.48 738.09 702.55 666.87 631.06 595.10 559.00 522.75 1718128 486.36 17667.65 113641.37 4 2009 9715.54 449.83 18117.48 104375.66 413.15 18530.63 9507328 376.33 18906.96 Total Interest ($) 12765.87 13503.96 14206.51 14873.38 15504.44 16099.54 ' 16658.53 Balance ($) 186463.89 8 2008 9715.54 177486.44. 9 2008 9715.54 168473.45 10 2008 9715.54 159424.79 11 2008 97t5.54 9487.96 150340.31 12 2008 9715.54 141219.87 1 2009 9715.54 132063.33 2 2009 9715.54 122870.54 3 2009 9715.54 85734.07 Month Year Payment($) Principal Paid ($) 9376.17 9413.29 9450.55 9525.51 9563.22 9601.07 9639.08 9677.23 Interest Paid ($) 339.36 30225 264.99 227.58 190.02 I 152.32 114.46 76.46 38.31 Total Interest ($) 19246.32 19548.58 19813.56 20041.14 20231.17 20383.49 20497.95 20574.41 20612.72 Balance ($) 76357.90 66944.61 57494.07 48006.11 38480.60 28917.38 19316.31 9677.23 0.00 006.054 http://w ww.ban.lrate.cornibrm/mortgage-calculator.asp?unroundedPayment=9715.53693._. 12/12/2002 Agreement No. 03-19-053 AGREEMENT FOR ADVANCE OF MEASURE "A" LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FUNDS 1. Parties and Date. This Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into as of this day of , 2003, by and between the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("RCTC") and the City of Canyon Lake ("City") located in the County of Riverside, State of California: 2. Recitals. 2.1 RCTC is a county transportation commission created and existing pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Sections 130053 and 130053.5. 2.2 The City is a municipality with local streets and roads requiring maintenance, development and rehabilitation. 2.3 RCTC has enacted and the voters of Riverside County ("County") have approved Measure "A" which authorizes RCTC to impose a retail transaction and use tax of one-half percent (.5%) throughout the County of Riverside for up to twenty years. This tax is popularly known as a %2 cent sales tax. 2.4 The Transportation Improvement Plan ("Plan") implementing Measure "A" provides that such funds are to be used for transportation purposes in the County and further provides that forty percent (40%) of Measure "A" funds are to be distributed to the cities in the Western County area for local street and road improvements ("Local Streets and Roads Funding") in amounts based on both proportionate population and contribution to Measure "A" revenue. 2.5 The proceeds of the retail transaction and use tax ("Measure "A" Funds") are collected by the California Board of Equalization pursuant to a contract between RCTC and the Board of Equalization, and paid to RCTC monthly. 2.6 The City has requested and RCTC has agreed that RCTC will advance to the City certain amounts which the City and RCTC anticipate RCTC would otherwise collect and allocate to the City as its share of Local Streets and Roads Funding, as allocated pursuant to the formula set forth in the Plan. 2.7 The funds shall be used to finance a portion of the cost of improvements to the streets more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto ("Project"). 2.8 The City agrees that it will repay to RCTC the advance and costs associated therewith described herein from Local Streets and Roads Funding. RVPCJI31W!P'\645601 006055 3. Terms. 3.1 Advance of Measure "A" Funds. A. Amount of Advance. RCTC hereby agrees to make the Advance to the City on or before February 1, 2003 (the "Funding Date"), on the terms and conditions set forth herein, in the principal amount of Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00) (the "Advance"). B. Interest. The Advance shall accrue interest payable by the City at a rate of 4.75% per annum. C. Repayment of Advance. The City shall repay the Advance to RCTC as set forth hereunder in monthly installments no later than on the first day of each calendar month, according to the schedule attached hereto as Exhibit "B". The repayment schedule for the Advance has been established so that City shall only be required to make interest payments on the Advance from the Funding Date until July 1, 2006. From August 1, 2006 the repayment schedule will require City to make principal and interest payments on the Advance so that the Advance is repaid prior to April 1, 2009. D. Payment of Interest. Interest shall be paid by the City to RCTC at the interest rate specified in Section 3.1(B) above in arrears on the unpaid portion of the Advance as specified in Section 3.1(C) above. E. Prepayment. Because the Advance is, or may be, made with the proceeds of tax exempt debt, prepayment of the Advance may be made by the City only with RCTC's prior written consent. 3.2 Repayment. A. Authorization to Apply Local Streets and Roads Funding to Payments; Pledge of Additional Security. For so long as any obligation of the City under this Agreement remains outstanding, the City hereby instructs RCTC to apply the City's portion of any Local Streets and Roads Funding which would otherwise be distributed to the City under Measure "A" to pay any due but unpaid obligations of the City to RCTC under this Agreement. RCTC in its sole discretion may require the pledge of additional security if Measure "A" Local Streets and Roads Funding is insufficient to meet the repayment schedule established by RCTC under Section 3.1(C), above. B. Application of Local Share. RCTC shall calculate the Local Streets and Roads Funding which would otherwise be allocated to the City under Measure "A" within thirty (30) days of receipt by RCTC of such funds from the Board of Equalization, and shall apply such amount against any amounts due from the City and not yet paid to RCTC under this Agreement. C. Remaining Balance Payable. RCTC shall notify the City of the calculation and application of funds made under Section 3.2(B) above, and any amounts then due to RCTC from the City, within thirty (30) days of RCTC's calculation and application of such RVPU$1WIP1645601 000056 -2- amounts. RCTC's calculations shall be fmal, absent clerical or mathematical error. The City shall pay to RCTC any balance due within fifteen (15) days of receipt of such notice from RCTC of such amount. 3.3 Conditions of the Advance. The obligation of RCTC to make the Advance shall be subject to the condition precedent that RCTC shall have received, in form and substance satisfactory to RCTC, all of the following: A. Duly executed copies of this Agreement and such other documents as RCTC may request in order to fully effectuate the purposes and intent of this Agreement. B. The written opinion of the General Counsel of the City, addressed to RCTC, that this Agreement and the other documents contemplated herein have been duly authorized and do not require the further consent or approval of any body, board or commission or other authority; are the valid, binding and legally enforceable obligations of the City in accordance with their respective terms; are not in contravention of or conflict with any law or regulation; will not conflict with any other agreements of the City, nor constitute an event of default on any obligations of the City to RCTC, on any existing public debt issuance of the City, or under any other agreements of the City; and the Project identified in Exhibit "A" attached hereto is a qualified use of Local Streets and Roads Funding under Measure "A." C. Such documents and certificates regarding the existence, authority and power of the City to execute this Agreement and any related documents as RCTC deems reasonably necessary. 3.4 City's Representations and Warranties. The City hereby makes the following representations and warranties which shall be deemed to be continuing representations and warranties so long as the Advances remains outstanding: A. Agreement Authorized. The execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement and any and all related documents (collectively "Advance Documents") are duly authorized and do not require the further consent or approval of any body, board or commission or other authority. B. No Default. The City is not in default, nor is it aware of any events that, with the passage of time or the giving of notice, would constitute an event of default on any obligation of the City to RCTC or on any existing public debt issuance of the City. C. No Conflict. The execution, delivery and performance of the Advance Documents does not contravene or conflict with any constitutional provision, law, statute, regulation, or any agreement, indenture or undertaking to which the City is a party or by which it or the Measure "A" Funds may be bound or affected, and does not and will not cause any lien, charge or other encumbrance to be created or imposed upon the Measure "A" Funds by reason thereof. For purposes of this Agreement, City represents that it is a party to that certain "Agreement Between Riverside County Transportation Commission and City of Canyon Lake for Advance of Measure "A" RVPUB\WJP\645601 -3- 00.0057 Funds to be Used for Transportation Improvements", dated January 13, 1993 ("1993 Agreement"). Pursuant to the 1993 Agreement, City obtained an advance of $1,600,000 from RCTC against City's Measure "A" allocation for specific transportation improvements, further reference being had therein. As of the date of this Agreement, City owes approximately $895,000 to RCTC under the 1993 Agreement. In order to finance both the Advance and the repayment of funds advanced under the 1993 Agreement, the parties intend for City to repay only interest on the Advance until July, 2006 as provided in Section 3.1(C) above, at which time it is anticipated by the parties that City will fully repay its obligations under the 1993 Agreement. The parties intend that this financing mechanism will eliminate any potential conflict between City's obligations under both this Agreement and the 1993 Agreement. D. Solvency. The City is solvent. E. No Violation of ROTC Measure "A" Advance Policies. The City is not in violation of the policies of RCTC for recipients of Measure "A" funds, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "B." F. Litigation. There is no litigation or other proceeding pending or threatened against or affecting the City and relating to the Advance, or the Advance Documents, or the transactions contemplated herein or thereby. G. Financial. Condition. All financial statements and data submitted in writing by the City to RCTC in connection with the request for Advance are true and correct, and said statements truly represent the financial condition of the City as of the date thereof and the results of the operations of the City for the period covered thereby and have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles on a basis consistently maintained, and that since such date there have been no materially adverse changes in the ordinary course of business. The City has no knowledge of any liabilities, contingent or otherwise, at such date not reflected in said statements, and the City has not entered into any special commitments or substantial contracts which are not reflected in said statements other than in the ordinary and normal course of business, which may have a materially adverse effect upon its financial condition or operations as now conducted. 3.5 City's Affirmative Covenants. The City agrees that so long as the Advance is outstanding, it will, unless RCTC shall otherwise consent in writing: A. Use of Advance. Use the Advance only for purpose and Project identified in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. In addition, the City recognizes that under Measure "A" the purpose of Local Streets and Roads Funding is to assist with the maintenance, development, and rehabilitation of the existing the City and County road system in Western Riverside County, and the City agrees that the Advance shall only be used in a manner consistent with the portions of Measure "A" related to Western County Local Streets and Road Funding. B. Tax Covenants. Comply with all applicable restrictions and requirements of Internal Revenue Code §§ 103 and 141 through 150, as amended, including any RVPL1 [V 50 5 8 -4- written instructions from RCTC arising from requirements or covenants contained in any nonarbitrage certificate relating to any RCTC Bonds. C. Records and Reports. Maintain a standard and modern system of accounting in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles on a basis consistently maintained and furnish RCTC bi-annual audited financial statements and such other information relating to the affairs of the City or the uses of the Advance as RCTC reasonably may request from time to time. D. Inspection. Permit, at any reasonable time, upon reasonable notice, qualified personnel designated by RCTC in writing, to inspect any projects funded by the Advance and any records maintained in connection therewith. RCTC shall have no duty to make any such inspection and shall not incur any liability or obligation by reason of making or not making any such inspection. E. Notice of Default. Promptly notify RCTC in writing of the occurrence of any Event of Default hereunder or of any event which would become an Event of Default hereunder upon giving of notice, lapse of time, or both. 3.6 City's Negative Covenants. The City will not, so long as the Advance remains outstanding, without RCTC's prior written consent create, incur, assume or permit to exist any mortgage, deed of trust, security interest (whether possessory or nonpossessory) or other lien upon or on the City's Local Share of Measure "A" Funds other than liens in favor of RCTC. 3.7 Rights and Remedies. A. RCTC shall at all times have the rights and remedies of a secured party under the California Commercial Code ("Code") in addition to the rights and remedies provided herein or in any other agreement or document executed by the City. B. The rights and remedies of RCTC under this Agreement shall not be exhausted by the exercise of any of the rights or remedies of RCTC pursuant to this Agreement or any other agreement between the City and RCTC or any action, proceeding or any number of successive actions or proceedings, unless and until all of the sums owing RCTC by the City shall be fully paid, performed and discharged. All rights and remedies afforded to RCTC pursuant hereto or under any other agreement at any time in effect between the City and RCTC (whether or not there are other parties in addition to the City and RCTC) shall be separate and cumulative and in addition to any and all rights or remedies available at law, in equity or otherwise, and no one of such rights or remedies, whether exercised or not, shall be deemed to be in exclusion of any other right or remedy available and shall in no way limit or prejudice any other right or remedy. The exercise of any one of such rights or remedies shall not be deemed a waiver of, or an election not to exercise, any other right or remedy. RVPUB\WJP\645601 -5- 000059 3.8 Events offefault. The occurrence of any one or more of the following events shall, at RCTC's option, constitute an event of default (each an "Event of Default") and the City shall provide RCTC with immediate notice thereof. A. Any warranty, representation, statement, report or certificate made or delivered to RCTC by the City or any of the City's officers, employees or agents now or hereafter is incorrect, false, untrue or misleading in any material respect; or B. The City shall fail to pay, perform or comply with, or otherwise shall breach, any obligation, warranty, term or condition in this Agreement, any agreement delivered pur- suant hereto or any other agreement whether now or hereafter existing between the City and RCTC; or C. There shall occur any of the following: dissolution, termination of existence or insolvency of the City; the commencement of any proceeding under any bankruptcy or insolvency law by or against the City; entry of a court order which enjoins, restrains or in any way prevents the City from paying any sums owed by the City to RCTC. 3.9 Further Assurances. The parties shall at all times hereafter execute, acknowledge, deliver, and perform all financing statements, documents and acts and further assurances as are reasonably necessary to fulfill their obligations hereunder and to effect the transactions contemplated herein. 3.10 Indemnification. The City shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend RCTC from and against any and all claims, losses, liabilities, damages, costs, and expenses, including interest, penalties, and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, incurred or suffered, which arise, result from, or relate to its breach of or failure to perform any of its agreements, covenants, obligations, representations, or warranties contained herein. Such indemnity shall survive the termination or discharge of this Agreement. 3.11 Use of Advance. The City shall use the Advance only for the purpose of offsetting the City's costs incurred for the Project. 3.12 Miscellaneous. A No Waiver. No waiver of any Event of Default or breach by the City hereunder shall be implied from any omission by RCTC to take action on account of such Event of Default of breach, and no express waiver shall affect any default other than the default specified in the waiver and the waiver shall be operative only for the time and to the extent therein stated. Waivers of a breach or any covenant, term, or condition contained herein shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same covenant, term or condition. The consent or approval by RCTC to or of any act by the City requiring further consent or approval shall not be deemed to waive or render unnecessary the consent or approval to or of any subsequent similar act. -6- B No Third Parties Benefitted. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of RCTC and the City and no third person, other than a permitted assignee or successor hereunder, shall have any right of action under this Agreement. C. Notices. All notices or other communication required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be in writing and shall be considered as properly given if mailed by first class United States mail, postage prepaid, registered or certified with return receipt requested, or by express courier delivery or personal delivery to the addressee. Notice mailed by U.S. mail shall be effective only if and when received at the addressee's address. For purposes of notice, the addresses of the parties shall be as follows: RCTC: CITY: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor Riverside, California 92501 Attn: Executive Director CITY OF CANYON LAKE 31516 Railroad Canyon Road Canyon Lake, CA 92587 Attn: City Manager Each party shall have the right to change its address for notice hereunder to any other location by the giving of notice to the other party in the manner set forth above. D. Applicable Law. This Agreement and all documents provided for herein shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the internal laws of California. E. Time. Time is of the essence in this Agreement, and each and every provision hereof in which time is an element. F. Amendment and Waiver. This Agreement and each provision hereof may be amended, changed, waived, discharged or terminated only by an instrument in writing signed by the parties hereto. G Attorney's Fees. The prevailing party in any action arising out of this Agreement shall be entitled to its actual attorney's fees and other related expenses actually incurred. H Severability. The invalidity and unenforceability of any one or more provisions of this Agreement will in no way affect any other provision. I Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. RVPUBIWJP\645601 -7- 000,001 J. headings. The various headings used in this Agreement are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement or any provision hereof. K Further Assurances. At any time or from time to time upon the request of RCTC, the City will execute and deliver such further documents and do other acts and things as RCTC may reasonably request in order to effect fully the purposes of this Agreement, and any other Advance Documents and to provide for the payment of the Advances and interest thereon in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed the Agreement on the date first herein above written. RIVERSIDE COUNTY CITY OF CANYON LAKE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: _ By: Ron Roberts, Chair Mayor REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED By: FOR APPROVAL: City Clerk By: Eric Haley, Executive Director APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Best Best & Krieger LLP, Counsel Riverside County Transportation Commission Rvrustil o 6 2 -8- Exhibit List Exhibit A Description of Project Exhibit B Repayment Schedule Exhibit C Commission Policies RVPUB\WJP\645601 -9- OOOO63 EXHIBIT "A" DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT CITY OF CANYON LAKE MEASURE "A" LOAN PROJECT: The Project consists of making repairs, improvements and expansions to major local streets and roads within the City of Canyon Lake. [INSERT SPECIFICS HERE] 000064 3 t . RVPUB\WJP\645601 EXHIBIT "B" REPAYMENT SCHEDULE [See attached] RVPUB\WJP\645601 QQ0065 General In • u/s oan mounl interest rate PV rate RESULTS Total Interest Total Principal Total Payments PV of Total Payments 4,750% 5.000% 548,687.50 $300,000.00 5348,887,50 5297,648.92 rincipal Interest Total Payment Prese nt Value 2/1/2003 $0.0417. $1,187,50 51,182.57 E"I.lSl 4/1/2003 $1,187.50 51,187.50 $1,177.67 5/1/2003 $1,187,50 51,187. 50 51,172.78 6/1/2003 $1,187.50, 51,187.50 $1,167,91 f 7/1/2003 51,187,50 $1,187.50 $1,163.07j' 8/1/2003 51,187.50 51,158.2419 $1,187.50 $1,153,43'' 0/1 /2003 $1,187.50 51,148,651, $1,187. 50 $1,143.88 9/1/2003 3/1/2003 1 11/1/2003 12J1/2003 1/1/2004 2/1/2004 3/1/2004 4/1/2004 5/1/2004 6/1/2004 7/1/2004 8/1/2004 9/1/2004 51,187,50 10/1/20044 -_ 51,187,50 11/1/2004 • $1,187.50 12/1/2004 51,187, 50 1/1/2005 51,187.50 $1,187,50 51,187, 50 51,187,50 $1,187,50 51,187.50 51,167,50 $1,187.50 51,187.50 51,187.50 $1,187.50 2/1 /2005 3/1/2005 4/1/2005 5/1/2005 6/1/2005 7/1/2005 8/1/2005 9/1/2005 10/1/2005 11/1/2005 12/1 /2005 1/1/2006 2/1/2006 3/1/2006, 4/1/2006 5/1/2006, 6/1/2006 7/1/2006' 5300,000,00 Total 5300,000 .00 51,187 .50 1,187.50 1,187,50 1,187,50 1,187 .50 $1,187,50 51,187,50 51,187.50 $1.187,50 51,187.50 51,187 .50 51,187.50 r 51,187,50 51,187 .50 51,187.50 51,187.50 51,187,50 51,187.50 548,687.50 $1,187.50 51,187.50 $1,187.50 51,187.50 $1,187,50 $1,187,50 51,187.50 $1,187.50 51,187,50 51,187,50 51,187.50 51,187.50 51,187.50 $1,187.50 51,187,50 51,187,50 187,50 51,187.50 51,187,50 51,187.50 51,187.50 51,187,50 51,187 .50 $1,187.50 51,187,50 51,187.50 51,187,50 51,187.50 51, 87.50 1,187,50 31,187.50 $1,187,50 51,187.50 5301,157 .50 5348,687.50 51,134.41 51,129.74 51.125.01 51,120 .35`. 51,115.70i], $1,111.07':; $1,106 ,46 ,,1 51,097. 51,092.74,, $1,088.21;'x' 51,083.69 $1,079.20; 51,074 .720, 51, 070.26 51,065.82.4 $1,061 39 $1,048,24;,E1: f' 51,043.89 z;''i $1,039 .56:;x:,? $1,035.24 51,030.95 51,026,67 'a $1,022,41 $1,018 .17 51.013.94 51,009,73 51,005 .55 5253,979.7 5297,648.92 4� 1 Month Year Payment (S) 8 9 2006 2006 10 2006 Amorfvation Table for 530000090 borrowed on Jot 28. 2006 9715.54 9715.54 9715.54 Principal Paid (S) Interest Paid (S) 8528.04 8561.79 1187.50 1153,74 8595.68 11 12 1 2006 2006 2007 2 3 2007 2007 Page 1 of 1 4 2007 5 2007 6 2007 7 2007 9715.54 971554 9715.54 9715.54 9715.54 9715.54 9715.54 971534 9715.54 8629.71 8663.87 8698.16 8732.59 8767.16 8801.86 6836.70 1119.85 1085.83 1051.67 1017.37 Total Interest (S) 1187.50 234124 Balance (S) 29.1471.96 282910.17 Month Year Payment (S) Principal Pad (5) 3461.10 274314.49 982.94 948.38 913.67 878.83 8871.68 8906.80 843.86 808.74 4546.92 559859 6615.97 265684.78 25702091 248322.75 8 9 2007 2007 9715.54 L9715.54 8942.06 8977.15 10 2007 9715.54 9012.99 11 12 1 2007 2007 2008 7598.91 8547.29 239590.15 230822.99 9715.54 9715.54 9715.54 9048.66 9084.48 9120.44 Interest Paid (5) 773.48 738.09 70255 666.87 631.06 595.10 Total Interest (5) 12765.87 13503.96 14206.51 14873.38 15504.44 16099.54 Balance (5) 186463.89 Month Year 177486.44 168473.45 159424.79 8 2008 9 2008 10 2008 11 2008 Payment (5) 9715.54 9715.54 9715.54 9715.54 2 3 2008 2008 9715.54 9156.54 559.00 9715.54 9192.79 9460.96 222021.13 10339.60 11183.65 11992x9 213184.43 204312.75 195405.95 4 2008 9715.54 9229.17 5 2008 6 2008 9715.54 971554 9265.71 9302.38 7 2008 9715.54 933921 522.75 486.36 449 83 413.15 376.33 16658.53 1718128 17667.65 18117.48 18530.63 18906.96 150340.31 141219.87 132063.33 122870.54 113641.37 104375.66 95073.28 85734.07 12 1 2008 2009 2 2009 3 4 2009 2009 9715.54 9715.54 9715.54 Principal Paid (S) 9376.17 Interest Paid (5) 339.36 9413.29 9450.55 9487.96 9525.51 956322 9601.07 9715.54 9715.54 9639.08 9677.23 30225 264.99 227.58 Total lntere( (5) 19246.32 Balance (3) 76357.90 19548.58 19813.56 20041.14 190.02 152.32 114.46 76.46 38.31 20231.17 20383.49 20497.95 66944.61 57494.07 48006.11 38480.60 28917.38 19316.31 20574.41 20612.72 9677.23 0.00 00606'7 57219 http_!'n-v,'A\ bankrate.con'brrn!mortpaRe-ra1cit1a1„r _ JT EXHIBIT "C" COMMISSION POLICIES [see attached] 0000.8 RVPUB\WJP\645601 GUIDELINES FOR MEASURE A RECIPIENTS FINANCING PROGRAM With the successful passage in November 1992 of Measure AA the Commission's bonding limitation was increased from $300 million to $525 million. One of the reasons voters were asked to increase the limit was to allow the Commission to serve as the vehicle for local jurisdictions to bond against their Measure A streets and roads revenue stream. To that end, staff has developed policies which will guide the Commission when providing bond revenues for local jurisdictions. All jurisdictions which receive Measure A local streets and roads monies are eligible to apply for the program. It is the Commission's intent that a number of requests from local jurisdictions will be combined into one debt issue. This will prove to be more efficient for the Commission to administer and probably more advantageous to the borrower(i.e., lower rate of interest). The intent of this is clearly to maximize economies of scale. To accomplish this, local jurisdictions are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time, once notified of timing and scheduling for the bond issuance, prior to start of project so that delays will not occur as a result of the Commission's need to process all requests. Any jurisdiction either not willing or unable to participate in the combined issuance but still desiring to bond through the Commission, may be subjected to higher administrative fees, issuance costs and interest rates. Any jurisdiction wishing to access this program must meet the following criteria: Section 1. Credit Criteria 1.1 All currently- issued general obligation debt must be rated investment grade by Moody's and Standard & Poors. Any jurisdiction which has not issued public debt should be in financial condition such that if debt were issued it would be rated investment grade. The Commission encourages all non rated jurisdictions to obtain a shadow rating from Moody's and/or Standard & Poors.(See provision 2.4) 1.2 The jurisdiction (1) has not commenced a voluntary case under any applicable bankruptcy, insolvency or similiar law now or hereafter in effect,(2) admitted in writing its inability to pay its debts generally as they become due, (3) is the subject of a decree or order for relief entered by a court of competent jurisdiction in an involuntary case under any applicable bankruptcy, insolvency or-similiar law now or hereafter in effect, (4) has not made an assignment for the benefit of creditors, or (5) has not consented to the appointment of a receiver of itself. 0 9u06B • 1.3 The jurisdiction must not be in violation of any Measure A policies as established by the Commission for recipients of Measure A funds. 1.4 The jurisdiction may not be in default on any other obligations to the Commission or on any general obligation debt, certificates of participation, or debt supported by special revenues. This is not meant to include financings such as assessment district, redevelopment, or housing bonds. Section 2. Terms and Conditions 2.1 Duration of the loan will be determined by the Commission at its sole discretion. In no event will any term be longer than June 1, 2009. 2.2 Interest rate will be the best rate obtain in the market which will be the (TIC) for the bond issuance. 2.3 Debt will be issued on a basis Commission's senior debt. the Commission can true interest cost subordinate to the 2.4 A debt coverage ratio of 1.5 to 1 based on the lower of the last two year's revenues will be required, unless the jurisdiction is not rated investment grade and chooses not to obtain a shadow rating, then the coverage ratio requirement will be 2 to 1. 2.5 The Commission will withhold payment from Measure A streets and roads allocations on a monthly basis. Any month in which a jurisdiction's revenues do not meet the payment obligation, the jurisdiction will be required to remit the difference within 15 days of notice from the Commission. Failure to make timely payment may result in project funds being withheld. In the event project funds are exhausted, a pledge of additional revenues may be required. 2.6 If it is deemed to be feasible and warranted, and subject to bond counsel review, jurisdictions may capitalize interest during the construction period(up to a maximum of two years. 2.7 Prepayment of the obligation will be subject to the terms and conditions of the bond documents, approval of bond counsel, and shall be at no cost to other jurisdictions or the Commission. 2..8 Borrowed funds must be used for eligible projects as set forth in the agreement between the Commission and the jurisdiction. Eligible projects may include construction, repair, and maintenance of streets and roads. The Commission along with its bond counsel will determine if the projects meet this criteria. 000070 2.9 A debt reserve fund may be required and each jurisdiction's proceeds from the bond sale will be reduced by its proportionate share of the reserve fund. In the event of early payment by a borrower(if approved by the Commission), debt reserve fund amounts may not be -released if deemed not advisable by the Commission after consultation with its financial advisors, municipal bond insurers(if insurance is obtained), the rating agencies, and bond counsel. 2.10 Jurisdictions shall be required to enter into one or more agreements including a loan agreement with the Commission upon such terms and conditions required by the Commission. Section 3. General Provisions 3.1 Though it is not the desire of the Commission to be involved in the administration of the project, review by the Commission's bond counsel will be necessary to ensure that any project will not jeopardize the tax exempt status of the bonds issued. This review will be ongoing in the event jurisdictions later substitute other projects. Agency agreements may be executed with each jurisdiction that will clearly define roles and responsibilities. 3.2 An application fee for RCTC administrative costs may be charged toall jurisdictions desiring to participate in the issue. Ongoing administrative costs will be periodically billed to all participants. All costs of issuance including but not limited to accounting, financial, legal, and bank fees, will be proportionately shared among the participants(i.e., approved applicants) and shall be at no cost to RCTC. Any jurisdiction, which subsequent to application approval elects not to participate will be fully responsible for their proportionate share of costs incurred to the point of withdrawal. 3.3 Incremental costs incurred as a result of an action or lack thereof by any jurisdiction will be charged to that jurisdiction and not be borne by the pool. 3.4 Market timing, structure of the issue, selection of trustee, bond counsel, underwriters, and financial advisors will be at the sole discretion of the Commission. 3.5 Proceeds from bond sales will -be held by a trustee. The Commission will process all requests for release of funds and forward to the trustee on behalf of the jurisdiction. 3.6 Federal tax law generally requires that the pool participants be identified at the time of issuance of the bonds. The`pool participants must be available to work with bond counsel with regard to the legal considerations,• including the federal tax law requirements. Tax law 000071 requirements will continue after the loans are made a the pool participants will have ongoing compliance responsibilities in connection with which tax covenants and certificates will be obtained from each participant. Coordination of each participant's needs and timing of those needs will be essential in order to determine the availability of exceptions to the arbitragerebate requirement. 3.7 The Commission reserves the right to approve exceptions to these policy guidelines on a case by case basis, to discontinue the program at any time, or to add or revise conditions or requirements. 000072 AGENDA ITEM 11 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 24, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning and Policy Development SUBJECT: Amendment to FY 2003 Measure "A" Capital Improvement Plans for Local Streets and Roads for the Cities of Corona, Lake Elsinore and Palm Desert STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the amendment to the FY 2003 Measure "A" Capital Improvement Plans for Local Streets and Roads for the Cities of Corona, Lake Elsinore, and Palm Desert, as submitted, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Measure "A" Ordinance requires each recipient of streets and roads monies to annually provide to the Commission a five year plan on how those funds are to be expended in order to receive their Measure "A" disbursements. In addition, the cities in the Coachella Valley and the County (representing the unincorporated area of the Eastern County) must be participating in CVAG's Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program. The agencies are required to submit the annual certification of Maintenance of Effort (MOE) along with documentation supporting the calculation. The Measure "A" Plans for the Cities of Corona, Lake Elsinore, and Palm Desert were approved by the Commission at its July 10, 2002 meeting. Any revisions to the adopted Plan must be returned to the Commission for approval. The following revisions are being requested: a) The City of Corona has submitted a revised Plan to increase funding to the Magnolia/I-15 Interchange Improvement project and decreasing funding to the Lincoln Avenue Traffic Congestion Relief and Major Pavement Rehabilitation projects for FY 2003. b) The City of Lake Elsinore has submitted a revised Plan to add one project, Greenwald Avenue Rehabilitation project, to their FY 2003 Five Year Plan. 000'0' 73 c) The City of Palm Desert has submitted a revised Plan for FY 2003 to increase funding to the Fred Waring widening project and delete the Indian Springs Mobile Home Park project. Attachments: 1) City of Corona Revised FY 2003 Measure "A" Plan. 2) City of Lake Elsinore Revised FY 2003 Measure "A" Plan. 3) City of Palm Desert Revised FY 2003 Measure "A" Plan. 0000,74 (909) 736-2483 (909) 736-2496 (FAX) JohnL@ci.Corona.Ca.US January 31, 2003 DECINVIE FEB 0 6 2003 TY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION M 5i SION OFFICE OF: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PW-0004-03 063156 815 WEST SIXTH STREET, P.O. BOX 940, CORONA, CALIFORNIA 92878-0940 CORONA CITY HALL - ONLINE, ALL THE TIME http://www.discovercorona.com) Mr. Eric Haley Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 Dear Mr. Haley: Attached is a request for revision of the City of Corona's FY 2002/03 Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan budget. Requested is - a budget change of $650,000, to be realigned from the Lincoln Avenue Traffic Congestion, Relief, continuing appropriations project, and $1 million from Major Pavement Rehabilitation to the Magnolia /1-15 Interchange Improvement project. The realignment is required to fund design and project management of the Magnolia/I-15 Interchange Improvement project. The City is able to backfill the Lincoln Avenue Traffic Congestion Relief project with Developer Impact Fee funds that are specifically for Street and Traffic Signals capital projects. Additionally, when the FY 2002/03 Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan budget was submitted to RCTC, the SB821 Bicycle and Pedestrian or Caltrans Bicycle Transportation Account Program. money was not included. The City is tracking these grants to other City obtained grants and has included this in the "New Appropriations Total Cost" column for transportation/pedestrian related projects, as shown on the attachment. We will use Gas Tax and/or Measure A funding as the local match commitment. We have added them accordingly. If you have any questions, please contact Reza Zolghadr, Sr. Civil Engineer at (909) 736-2441, or Barbara Thierjung, Budget Manager at (909) 736-2314. HN'N LICATA R Publ c Works Director JNL/KB/Irt Enclosures 006075 Agency: City of Coron a Prepared By: Reza Zolghadr Phone No.: (909) 739-2441 Da te: Jun s Revision: December 18, 2002 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANMt'ORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2002/03 - 2006/07 Page 1 of 5 Fiscal Ye ar 2002.2003 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME / LIMITS PROJECT (Category) TYPE FY2002-2003 NEW APPROPRIATIONS 1 TOTAL COST MEASURE A ENTITLEMENTS Est. FY 2002-2003 1 Rev 2 3 4 Rev 5 6 Rev 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Pavement Rehabilitation for Local Streets - AB 2928 Title on ly - Pavement Rehabilitation for L ocal Streets Bedford Canyon Realignment Third Street Improv ement and ROW Acquisitions Major Pavement [iek baa.atip. _ A B 438 Major Pavement Rehabilitation - inc AB 438 Arterial Widening Magnolia/I-15 Interchange Improvements Citywide GIS Application Freeway Bridges/Smith Avenu e Storm Drain Harrison Street Widening Joy Street Railroad Crossing Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter Installation/Replacement Green River Road Widening City's Cost Allocation Plan (Overhead) No. Main St. Rehab Modifications at SR 91 - CMAQ FY 99/00 Chase Drive Bikeways - SB 821 FY 01/02 Bus Stop A ccessibility - SB 821 FY 02/03 Pedestrian and Bicyclist Accessibility - SB 821 FY 01/02 - Bicycle Facilities Railroad/Parkridge - BTA Roads, Bridges and Freeways Roads, Bridges and Freeways Roads, Bridges and Freeways Roads, Bridges and Freeways Roads, Bridges and Freeways Roads, Bridges and Freeways Building, Systems, and Facilities Roads, Bridges and Freeways Roads, Bridges and Freeways Roads, Bridges and Freeways Roads, Bridges an d Freeways Ro ads, Bridges and Freeways Operational Budget Ro ads, Bridges and Freeways Roads, Bridges and Freeways Roads, Bridges and Freeways Roads, Bridges and Freeways Roads, Bridges and Freeways $ 641,536 600,000 200,000 1,166,784 $ 641,536 100,000 200,000 - 466,784 150,000 500,000 576,7'84 - 150,000 500;080 1,500,000 7,816 532,648 100,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 116,216 165,862 64,125 116,600 101,600 177,480 1,076,784 7,816 532,648 100,000 100,000 150,000 60,000 116,216 - - - - CMAQ & SB 821 Represents Grant Dollar Portio n On ly that is in Total Fund 227 Local Transporta tion Fund - under Total Cost Column Revised Total $ Estimated Measure A Entitlements: * May inclu ded use of prior Fund Balance 4;009 $ 3,235,000 5,390,667 $ 3,075,000 * # Remaining $ RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANS'PORATIO N COMMISSIO N MEASURE "A ." LOCAL FU NDS PRO GRAM CURRENT YEAR 2001/02 Agency: City of Corona Prepared By: Reza Zolgh adr Phone No. : (909) 739-2441 Dale: June 14, 2002 Revision: December 18, 2002 ITEM N O. PROJECT NAME /LIMITS PROJECT (Category) TYPE FY2001/02 APPROPRIATIO NS TOTAL COST EXP ENDIT URES CTD 5/31/02 ENCUMBRA NC ES CID 5/31/02 CONTINUED APPROPRIATIONS FOR FY 2002/03 1 Magnolia Ave Railroad Crossing R oads, Bridges and Freeways $ 171,884 $ 8,370 $ - $ 163,514 2 Pavement Rehabilitation for Local Streets Ro ads, Bridges and Freew ays 553,223 10,581 12,219 530,423 3 Resurfacing an d Pavement Maintenance Roads, Bridges and Freeways 82,406 20,916 - 61,490 4 Miscellaneous Street Drainage System Drainage 313,940 190,494 113,823 9,623 5 Yuma A venue Interc hange Roads, Bridges and Freeways 52,808 52,807 - 1 6 Bedford Canyon Realignment R oads, Bridges and Freeways 50,000 23,304 - 26,696 7 Lincoln Avenue Traffic Congestion Relief Roads, Bridges and Freeways 1,337,608 12,115 128,668 1,196,826 8 Pav ement Rehabilitation for Local Streets Roads, Bridges and Freeways 876,641 780,216 23,188 73,238 9 Rimpau/Magnolia Intersection Upgrade Signals and Lighting 95,000 - 95,000 10 Temescal Canyon Ro ad Realignment Roads, Bridges and Freew ays 25,000 - - 25,000 11 Third Street Improvements and ROW Acquisitions Roads, Bridges and Freeways 227,569 31,554 - 196,014 12 Major Pavement Rehabilitation Ro ads, Bridges and Freeways 1,068,516 429,981 102,465 ---5367060 13 Arterial Widening Roads, Bridges and Freeways 274,105 137,109 - 136,996 14 Pomona Road Pavement Roads, Bridges and Freeways 599 - 599 15 Magnolia/I-15 Interchange Improvements Ro ads, Bridges and Freeways 200,307 22,313 15,549 162,115 16 Citywide GIS Applicatio n Building, Systems, and Facilities 75,335 13,644 - 61,691 17 Major Storm Drain Improvements Drainage 10,000 - - }gggg 18 M aster Drainage Line 7A Drainage 60,000 60,000 - , 19 Pomona Road Storm Drain D rainage 2,630 - 2,629 1 20 Freeway Bridger/Smith Av enue Storm Drain Roads, Bridges and Freeways 532,648 * Loan paid during yearend activities . 532,648 21 Striping Rehabilitation Roads, Bridges and Freeways 50,255 43,396 - 6,859 22 Root Pru ning, Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter Replacement Ro ads, Bridge s a nd Freeways 41,239 9,929 - 31,310 23 HOV Ramps - Serfas Club Roads, Bridges and Freeways 158,285 940 3,986 153,359 24 Chase D rive Improvements Ro ads, Bridges and Freeways 8,240 1,209 - 7,07!• 25 HOV Ramps - Lincoln Roa ds, Bridges and Freewa ys 96,856 - 4,641 92,215 26 HOV Ramps - McKinley Roads, Bridges and Freeways 125,468 1 3,986 121,181 27 No. Main St. Rehabilitation Modifications at SR 91 Roads, Bridges and Freeways 2,153,537 358,644 1,504,981 289,912 28 Main Street Scen ic Corridor Roads, Bridges and Freeways 621,488 615,838 - 5,650 29 Local Street Widening/Curbs/Gutters Roads, Bridges and Freeways 111,839 5,613 25,555 80,671 30 Overlook Street Roads. Bridges an d Free ways 14,889 - 14,889 Fiscal Year 2001.2002 Reduced by $650 K $ 546,826 Reduced by $34,138 $ 501,931 Increased by $650 K $ 812,445 Increased by $34,138 324,050 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORATIO N COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PR OGRAM CURRENT YEAR 2001/02 Agency: CIO of Coron a Prepa red By: Reza Zolgh adr Phone N o.: (909) 739.2441 D ale: June 14, 2002 Revision: Deceanber18, 2002 Fisc al Year 2001-2002 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME / LIMITS PROJECT (Category) TYPE FY 2007/02 APP ROPRIATIONS T OTAL COS T EXPENDITURES CTD 5/31/02 ENCUM BRAN CES CT D S/31/02 CONTINUE D APPROPRIATIO NS FOR FY2002/03 31 Comp Traffic Imp Need Program Signals and Lighting 25,200 _ - 25,200 32 1-15 Freeway Ramps Modification Roads, Bridges and Freeways 145,257 55,786 89,471 33 Advanced Traffic Management System Signals and Lighti ng 280,000 47,811 4,441 227,748 34 Curb / G utter / Sidewalk Replacement Roads, Bridges and Freeways 65,397 65,029 - 368 35 Main Street Landscape at SR 91 Roads, Bridges a nd Freeways 488,669 11,423 10,430 466,816 36 Chase Street Improvements Roads, Bridges and Freeways 86,926 3,675 19,000 64,251 37 Cost Allocation (Overhea d) Operational Budg et 70 ,886 70 ,886 Total S 10,554,650 $ 3,083,583 $ 2,065,033 .$ 5,406,033 Projects that are shown "striked out"are/may be in g re -direc ted in the next fisc al year's capital protects. Less re -directed projects (424,175) Total estimated to carry f orward $ 4,981,858 ?ity of 'a E ELirzoTE G' J onzz of L/ r- ]iwr wnQ. cS'taf ium January 24, 2003 Ms. Cathy Bechtel Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue, $uitc 100 Riverside, CA 92501 JAN 292003 Subject: Measure "A" Project: Greenwald Avenue Paving RivEMIDE WOO Dear Ms. Bechtel: 0G3033 On January 7, 2003 we sent you the attached letter requesting that the cost to pave this road be programed in Measure "A" Funds. Attached for you- information is a.five-year Measure "A" Local Funds Program for the City of Lake Elsinore. Greenwald Avenue paving is project number 9 on our local funds program, budgeted for $145,000.00. Please contact me at (909) 674-3124 extension 242 should additional information or clarification of the attachments be needed. Sincerely, CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE iC c9( Ray O'Donnell City Engineer C. Dick Watenpaugh-City Manager Bob Brady -Community Development Director Bob Boone -Administrative Services Director Dave Sapp -Community Services Director Attachments 000079 130 cS'outI Jl4aln C/t'EEt, LaIE Efstno¢E, ac -/I 92530 • LJ LEt2nonE: (909) 674-3124 ¶ax: (909) 674-2392 thty o f Zak E EAirzo'LE Awn, _ tamonct Stadium" January 7, 2003 Ms. Cathy Bechtel Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 Subject: Measure A Project: Greenwald Avenue Paving Dear Ms. Bechtel: Riverside County Department of Transportation and the City of Lake Elsinore co- sponsored the paving of Greenwald Avenue. Project construction is complete. The City's share of the project is $145,000 of Measure A Funds. The City, hereby request that $145,000 to be programmed in Measure A Funds five year expenditure plan. Please contact me at (909) 674-3124 extension 242 should additional information or clarification of the attachments be needed. Sincerely, CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 07 Ray O'Donnell City Engineer Attachment c. City Manager Community Development Director Administrative Services Director Community Services Director 000080 130 .South Lain c5txzet, 1'aLE C�LSLno4E, '2 4 92530 • JELE/l. onE: (909) 674-3724 ¶ax: (909) 674-2392 ITEM NO. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION CO MMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2003-2007 Agency : City of Lake Elsinore Prepared by : Ray O'Donnell Phone No.: (909) 674-3124 x 242 Note: All figu re s In thousands ($000's) Page 1 of 2 PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE 02103 TOTAL MEAS. A COST FUNDS 03/04 TOTAL MEAS. A COST FUNDS 04/05 TOTAL MEAS. A COST FUNDS 05/06 TOTAL MEAS. A COST FUNDS 06/07 TOTAL MEAS. A COST FUNDS TRANSFER TO GENERAL FUND TRANSFER 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 MISCELLANEOUS STREET RESTORATION: VARIOUS LOCATIONS STREET RESTORATION SLURRY SEAL 200 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 CURB,GUTTER AND SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT VARIOUS LOCATIONS CURB, GUTTER & SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 SAN JACINTO RIVER MITIGATION FOR LAKESHORE DR. BRIDGE ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 15 2 15 5 1 MAIN ST/SULPHUR ST DECONTAMINATION REMOVE CONTAMINATION 150 3 1-15 / RAILROAD CANYON ROAD INTERCHANGE PROJECT STUDY REPORT,DESIGN, CONSTRIUCT 1-15 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS 2,000 20 2,000 20 10,000 10 10,000 10 FIRE STATION MCVICKER PARK NEW BUILDING & ACCESS ROAD 1,870 445 COLLIER AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS (OPA) BETWEEN CENTRAL AVE. & ENTERPRISE WAY STREET IMPROVEMENTS PAVEMENT, CURB & GUTTER 32 3 GREENWALD AVE. - WITHIN CITY LIM ITS STREET REHABILITATION 145 145 OUTFLOW CHANNEL - PHASE I FROM LAKE TO GRAHAM AVE. PEDISTRIAN WALKWAY 155 5 TRAFFIC SIGNALS - COLLIER AVE. AT CENTRAL AVE & RIVERSIDE DR. $710 TRAFFIC SIGNALS 650 3 OUTLET CHANNEL PHASE II IMPROVEMENTS GRAHAM AVE. TO HEALD AVE. PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY 482 2 CORYDON ST.- UNION ST. TO MISSION TRAIL STREET REHABILITATION 275 2 DIAMOND DR. © CASINO DR. REPLACE DETECTOR LOOPS LOOP DETECTORS 7 5 Page 2 of 2 Note: All figures In tho usand s ($000's) ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE 02/03 TOTAL MEAS. A COST FUNDS 03/04 TOTAL MEAS. A COST FUNDS 04/05 TOTAL MEAS. A COST FUNDS 05/06 TOTAL MEAS. A COST FUNDS 06/07 TOTAL MEAS. A C OST FUNDS 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 MACHADO ST. - STREET REHABILITATION LINCOLN ST. TO ALVARADO ST . STREET REHABILITATION 300 5 LAKESHORE DR. - STREET REHABILITATION LAKE ST. TO MACHADO ST. STREET REHABILITATION 410 20 LAKESHORE DR. - STREET REHABILITATION MACHADO ST, TO WISCONSIN ST. STREET REHABILITATION 190 20 GUNNERSON ST. - LAKESHORE DR, TO RIVERSIDE DRIVE _ STREET REHABILITATION 400 30 LAKESHORE DR. TERRA COTTA TO DRYDEN ST. STREET WIDENING PAVEMENT WIDENING 325 20 450 30 LAKESHORE DR: JERNIGAN ST TO 200' EAST OF MACHADO ST - STREET WIDENING STREET WIDENING 480 30 SUMNER AVE: MAIN ST TO CHANEY ST PAVEMENT REHABILITATION/OVERLAY STREET REHABILITATION 75 20 600 30 TOTALS: 3,999 885 2,947 340 3,090 360 11,210 350 11,280 350 MEASURE A CURRENT YEAR ALLOCATION MEASURE A PRIOR YEAR CARRY-OVER 365 520 350 355 365 370 January 9, 2003 CITY OF PRLffl BESERT 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL: .760 346-0611 FAX: 760 341-7098 info@palm-desert.org 06290/ Mr. Jerry Rivera Program Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 3580 University Avenue Riverside, CA 92507 DECERVEfi JAN 21 ?002 TRANSPORTATION-GOJuNr MMIS610N Subject: Revision - City of Palm Desert's Capital Improvement Program (Measure "A") Fiscal Year 2003 Dear Jerry, This'correspondence is to bring to your attention, for your review and consideration, a revision of Measure "A" documents previously submitted. Due to resistance by homeowners in the area, we are abandoning plans for the right hand turn pocket at Indian Springs Mobile Home Park. The City of Palm Desert is requesting that the unexpended funds of $150,000.00 be transferred from the Indian Springs project to the Fred Waring widening project, which is also an approved Measure "A" project. This transfer of funds will not change the net amount of funds programmed for the City of Palm Desert, and it will help to shore up the Fred Waring widening project against unexpected additional costs. Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience this may have caused, and as always, we appreciate the cooperation and coordination that RCTC has shown the City of Palm Desert. If you have any questions, or require additional information, please don't hesitate to contact me. S. Michael Errante Engineering Manager ME/rg cc: Carlos L. Ortega, City Manager Homer L. Croy, Assistant City Manager for Development Services Paul S. Gibson, Director of Finance/City Treasurer J. Luis Espinoza, Finance Operations Manager Mark Greenwood, Engineering Manager Joseph S. Gaugush, Director of Public Works/City Engineer 000083 . is PAINTED ON a[an[o revn RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANS, tTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2002 — 2003 Agen cy: Prepared by: Phone No.: Date: City of Palm Desert Joseph S. Gaugush, P.E. 760/346-0611 e xt. 566 June 13, 2002 Page 1 of 1 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.. Palm Desert High School Access on Cook Street Portola Avenue/Dinah Shore Extension Srattingtogrietto Portola Interchange at 1-10 Magnesia Falls Drive Bridge/Street Improvements from Monterey Avenue to Deep Canyon Road Westbound Dinah Shore from Miriam Way to Key Largo Avenue Monterey Avenue between Hovley Lane West and Country Club Drive Monterey Avenue at Parkview Drive/COD San Pablo Avenue at Highway 111 Roadway & signal Roadway widening Roadway widening Feasibility Study and ROW Bridge construction, street widening, and traffic signal modifications (additional funding due to expanding of scope of project — see prior year summary for funding carryover) Street improvements Median island construction Intersection improvements Intersection improvements TOTAL COST ($000'S) 1,236 1,600 150 2,000 1,000 385 65 66 66 MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) 1,236 1,600 150 2,000 1,000 385 65 66 66 1/10/03 - G:\PubWorks\Ryan Gayler\Word Flles\RCTC Funds Program Form - FY 02-03 yr 1.doc - sd RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANS! .TATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2002 — 2003 Agency: City of Palm Desert Prepared by: Joseph S. Gaugush, P.E. Phone No.: 760/346-0611 e xt. 566 Date: June 13, 2002 Page 1 of 1 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS _ PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) 1. Palm Desert High School Access on Cook Roadway & signal 1,236 1,236 Street 2. Portola Avenue/Dinah Shore Extension Roadway widening 1,600 1,600 3. gitirftWilitegelbtiiiM0 Oda Turn Pocket 150 150 4. Portola Interchange at 1-10 Feasibility Study and ROW 2,000 2,000 5. Magnesia Falls Drive Bridge/Street Improvements from Monterey Avenue to Deep Canyon Road Bridge construction, street widening, and traffic signal modifications (additional funding due to expanding of scope of project — see prior year summary for funding carryover) 1,000 1,000 6. Westbound Dinah Shore from Miriam Way to Street improvements 385 385 Key Largo Avenue 7. Monterey Avenue between Hovley Lane West and Country Club Drive Median island construction 65 65 8. Monterey Avenue at Parkview Drive/COD Intersection improvements 66 66 9. San Pablo Avenue at Highway 111 _ Intersection improvements 66 66 1/10/03 - G:\PubWorks\Ryan Gayler\Word Flles\RCTC Funds Program Form - FY 02.03 yr 1 .doc • sd ti AGENDA ITEM 12 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 24, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning and Policy Development SUBJECT: FY 2002-03 Local Transportation Funds Allocation for Local Streets and Roads for the Palo Verde Valley Apportionment Area STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Allocate the FY 2002-03 Local Transportation Funds for local streets and roads purposes in the Palo Verde Valley area as shown on the attached table, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The estimated FY 2002-03 apportionment of Local Transportation Funds (LTF) for the Palo Verde Valley area is $792,908. In addition, $98,985 in unallocated funds were carried -over from FY 2001-02, increasing the total funds available to the area to $891,893. The Commission approved the Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency (PVVTA) Short Range Transit Plan on June 10, 2002, allocating $325,611 to PVVTA. Therefore, a balance of $566,282 is available for local streets and roads purposes in the Palo Verde Valley. The Palo Verde Valley apportionment area is the only area in the County in which LTF funds are still allocated for streets and roads purposes. The attached table shows the allocations for the City of Blythe and the County of Riverside based upon a formula previously approved by the Commission. Population figures are from the State Department of Finance E-5 report dated January 1, 2002 for fiscal year 2002-03, and have been adjusted to credit the prison population (3,600) at Chuckawala to the County. Attachment: Allocation of LTF Funds for Local Streets and Roads Schedule 000086 ALLOCATION OF LTF FUNDS FOR STREETS AND ROADS PALO VERDE VALLEY AREA FY 2002-03 AVAILABLE TOTAL LESS FOR STREETS AGENCY POPULATION PERCENTAGE SHARE PVVi'A AND ROADS Blythe 17,622 64.88% $578,680 $162,806 $415,874 Riverside Co. 9,538 35.12% $313,213 $162,805 $150,408 TOTAL 27,160 100.0% $891,893 $325,611 $566,282 NOTE: Population for City of Blythe excludes prison population of 3,600 for Chuckawala as of 1/1/02, which is included in County population. Prison population obtained from State Dept. of Finance, Demographics Division. Approved by RCTC: JR: 02/13/03 000087 AGENDA ITEM 13 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: February 24, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning Development and Policy SUBJECT: SB 821 Extension Streamlining STAFF AND TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: This item for the Committee to: 1) Adopt the attached policy regarding project extensions for the Commission's SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the October 28, 2002 Budget and Implementation Committee meeting, several questions were raised by Commissioners on the policy to grant extensions to complete projects funded under the Commission's SB 821 program. Some of the issues raised included: 1) What are the current policies on granting extensions? 2) Which agency is the worst offender? 3) How often are extensions granted? 4) Has anyone taken a recent look at revising the policy? 5) What would happen to the funds allocated to a city/county if the funds were taken away? 6) Do we allocate interest to the city/county while the funds are in reserve? The Committee expressed their concerns and felt that the issue of timely completion of projects should be reviewed again. Staff informed the Committee that it would take their concerns to the next Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meeting to develop a course of action. Staff presented the Commissioners' concerns to the TAC at its November 18, 2002 meeting. The TAC directed staff to develop a recommendation for their consideration to address the numerous SB 821 project extension requests. Staff reviewed the project delivery history of the projects funded under the SB 821 program from fiscal year 1997-98 through 2001-02, and presented its findings to the TAC at its meeting on February 10, 2003. The following is a summary of the data by fiscal year and the length of time necessary to complete all of the projects: 008 Total # Claimed in Year Projects 1St yr. 2nd yr. 3rd yr. 4th yr. 5th yr. O/S FY 1997-98 20* 4 11 2 1 1 0 FY 1998-99 21** 6 13 0 0 1 0 FY 1999-00 11 1 6 0 2 2 FY 2000-01 22 4 13 5 0 FY 2001-02 19 6 8 0 -- -- 5 Totals 93 21 51 7 3 2 7 * One project abandoned by City of Norco. * * One project abandoned by Riverside County. To date, 79% of the projects were claimed within two years of the award and 87% were claimed within three years. It does not appear that any of the outstanding projects are tied to any federal funding. As a reminder, current Commission policy is to require completion or contract award of the project within the fiscal year. There are no prohibitions on the number of requests for time extensions. It was staff's recommendation to adopt a policy that would grant an agency twenty-four (24) months from the time of the allocation to complete the project using local forces or award a construction contract. There would be no time extensions granted unless the project was part of a larger, federally funded project, which had been delayed beyond the agency's control. Projects not completed or awarded within the twenty-four months would be deleted from the program, and the funds would be reprogrammed in the next fiscal year. The TAC members discussed staff's recommendation at length, and although there were some concerns about the potential loss of funds, it was the consensus of the Committee to approve the staff recommendation and forward to the Commission for consideration. As mentioned above, four cities were concerned about the possibility of losing funds. Staff explained that a city could always re -apply for funding during the next cycle. Also, several committee members felt that projects should be ready to go at the time of application, and, if a project could not be completed within two years, it should not tie up current dollars that could be used by other agencies. Attachment: SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program Recommended Policy 000089 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM Recommended Policy An agency will have twenty-four (24) months from the time of the allocation to complete the project using local forces or award a construction contract. There will be no time extensions granted unless the project is part of a larger, federally funded project, which has been delayed beyond the agency's control. Projects not completed or awarded within the twenty-four months will be deleted from the program, and the funds will be reprogrammed in the next fiscal year's SB 821 Program. 000090 AGENDA ITEM 14 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: February 24, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning and Policy Development SUBJECT: City of Perris Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Substitution Request STAFF AND TECHN/CAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the City of Perris request to substitute the State Route 74 and Redlands signal project with a "Round About" project at the same location and transfer the unobligated CMAQ funds from the signal project to the round about project; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The RCTC substitution policy requires all project changes/modifications to project scopes and/or funding to be presented to the Commission for approval. In 1999, the RCTC board approved the State Route 74/Redlands signal project for Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funding in the amount of $234,000. Over the past years, the City of Perris has been working with Caltrans on this project. Caltrans had concerns about the functionality of the intersection with the installation of a signal. Caltrans determined that the signal would not work and has taken the lead to design a "Round About", like those that exist in England and many other countries. The City has agreed to the round about project and is requesting that the $195,493 of unobligated CMAQ funds be applied to this project. The total cost of the project is $750,000 with Caltrans funding the balance. The Technical Advisory Committee reviewed this request and supported it unanimously. 000091 AGENDA ITEM 15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: February 24, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning and Policy Development SUBJECT: Federal Funding Obligation Balances STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve moving unexpended CMAQ funds to the SR 60 HOV project from the east 1-215 Junction to Redlands Blvd.; 2) Receive and file a report on the status of federal funding obligation balances, and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Caltrans has embarked on an effort to review the status of projects that have been obligated but have not been expended. This is an effort to reduce the amount of obligational authority that Caltrans continues to carryover every budget year. There is also a push to urge lead agencies to follow through with closing out projects. With the State's budget meltdown, this is likely an attempt to find funds that will not be used and thus assists in filling the budget gap. Caltrans distributed project lists to agencies with projects that have unexpended funds. They indicated that funds not expended by June 30, 2003 will not be carried over into next year's budget. Agencies would still be able to submit invoices after June 30, 2003, but those expenditures would be paid out of the fiscal year(s) they are expended since no budget carryover will be allowed. Agencies have the option to reprogram unexpended funds provided that they expend these funds by June 30, 2003. Unexpended funds that are not reprogrammed will be reverted to the state. (0U0092 In Riverside County, many of these projects were closed out and the lead agencies have submitted the required paperwork. Two RCTC CMAQ projects have not been expended, the CMP deficiency plan and San Jacinto Rail project. The CMP deficiency plan will not be prepared until next year and the San Jacinto Rail project is going through the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) review process. In order to maintain funding capacity for this fiscal year, staff is proposing moving unexpended funds to the SR 60 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) project from the east 1-215 Junction to Redlands Boulevard. 606093 AGENDA ITEM 16 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: February 24, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Darren Kettle, Director of Intergovernmental and Legislative Affairs THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: State and Federal Legislative Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the State and Federal Legislative Update as an information item, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State Update Since the last meeting of the Budget and Implementation Committee that included a discussion of the Governor's proposed mid -year reductions for the 2002-03 Fiscal Year and the proposed 2003-04 Fiscal Year State Budget that has a total impact of $1.8 billion directly affecting transportation, the Legislature has acted on the Governor's proposals with general support for transportation and local government. The Senate and Assembly have rejected the Governor's request to suspend Proposition 42 in the current year and have deferred action on the major proposal to suspend the sales tax on gasoline transfer in 2003-04 and instead only took action on those items that were necessary for current year budget savings. Those items included: • Conversion of the proposed forgiveness of the scheduled General Fund repayment of $500 million to the Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP) to a loan basis, with terms to extend out to 2006; • Restructured the Governor's proposed elimination of $90 million that had been scheduled in the current year for local streets and roads by applying $90 million from the action taken in the prior item to this purpose and passing on the remaining $10 million to the General Fund in the form of a loan; • Approved other minor actions, including a reversion of $5 million, transfer of $5.2 million in aeronautics funding to the General Fund, and adjusting by $15 million the amount Caltrans is obligated to pay for the general costs of state government. Both regional and local transportation interests consider these actions by the Legislature as a relative short-term victory in that the majority of the Proposition 42 revenues and the TCRP have received a temporary stay of execution, at least until the Legislature's action on the 2003-04 State Budget. However, the caveat to this victory is that the actions referenced above were "double -joined" with legislation to raise Vehicle License Fees (VLF) to 1998 levels. The Governor has clearly stated his intent to veto the VLF measure, thus placing the actions related to Proposition 42 and the TCRP in legislative limbo. Federal Update Congress finalized the federal 2002-03 Fiscal Year budget and specifically the Omnibus Appropriations Act on Thursday, February 13, 2003. At the time of preparation of this item, the Conference Report for the Omnibus Appropriations Act was not yet available. However, one significant highlight of the Act included setting the Highway funding at $31.8 billion, which is the identical amount of 2002 Federal budget and over $4 billion higher than the Transportation Appropriations bill reported out of the House back in December. Staff will make a verbal report to the committee on project specific earmarks included in conference report. The Administration's proposal for the reauthorization of TEA -21 has not yet been released, and what has become more disconcerting to transportation advocates is that the Administration has still not committed to a release date, leading many to contemplate seriously the notion that a reauthorization of TEA -21 may not occur until next year. However, the President's proposed 2004 Fiscal Year transportation budget does not show any growth in transportation funding over and above the standard growth included in TEA -21. This means that the Administration's proposal likely does not include any new revenues such as gas tax increases or user fees, which is inconsistent with proposals coming from House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Don Young (R -Alaska) who has publicly announced support for 2 cent per gallon per year for five years, increasing the total gas tax by 10 cents. '0,0, 0;095