Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout01 January 27, 2003 Budget & Implementation0629'78 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA TIME: 2:30 p.m. DATE: Monday, January 27, 2003 LOCATION: Board Chambers County Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, 1st Floor Riverside, CA 92501 RECORDS ***COMMITTEE MEMBERS*** Chris Carlson-Buydos, Chair / Jim Conner, City of San Jacinto Art Welch / Jan Wages, 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 / Sarah DeGrandi, 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 Il�`,5(e‘ ®� RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION 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, January 27, 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 (October 28, 2002) 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 January 27, 2003 Page 2 This item is for the Committee to: 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. 6B. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Overview This item is for the Committee to: Pg. 5 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 Overview This item is for the Committee to: Pg. 10 1) Receive and file the Single Signature Authority Report for the months of October, November and December 2002, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 6D. HIGHWAY AND COMMUTER RAIL CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM UPDATE Pg. 12 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the attached 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 Pg. 14 Overview This item is for the Committee to: Budget and Implementation Committee Agenda January 27, 2003 Page 3 1) Award Agreement No. 03-33-035 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 to New Age Communications for the amount of $199,800.98 plus a contingency amount of $40,199.02 to cover potential change orders encountered during construction, for a total contract amount of $240,000.00; 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel Review, to execute the standard construction agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 8. AMEND AGREEMENT NO 02-33-063 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CCTV SECURITY SYSTEM AT THE RIVERSIDE -LA SIERRA AND WEST CORONA METROLINK STATIONS Pg. 25 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Amend Agreement No. 02-33-063 with Lynch Communication, Inc., to increase the contract contingency amount 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 Pg. 27 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve entering into a Shared Funding Agreement No. 03-31-054 with the County of Riverside for the construction of right turn lanes on Gilman Springs Road to State Route 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. Budget and Implementation Committee Agenda January 27, 2003 Page 4 10. ADVERTISE BIDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE SR -60 HOV PROJECT IN MORENO VALLEY Pg. 35 Overview This item is for the Committee 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 High Occupancy Vehicle (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 lowest, responsive bidder, and 5) Forward to the Commission for final action. 11. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR SURVEY AND MATERIAL TESTING ON -CALL SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF FUTURE MEASURE "A" HIGHWAY AND COMMUTER RAIL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS Pg. 38 Overview This item is for the Committee 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. Budget and Implementation Committee Agenda January 27, 2003 Page 5 12. BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve Budget Adjustments for several categories, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 13. MID -YEAR REVENUE PROJECTIONS Overview This item is for the Committee to: Pg. 41 Pg. 43 1) Approve the Mid -Year Revenue Projections; 2) Approve 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 FY 2003-04 Overview This item is for the Committee to: Pg. 46 1) Approve the projections of the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) apportionment for the Coachella Valley, Palo Verde Valley and Western Riverside, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 15. REPORT ON STATE BUDGET DISCUSSIONS AND IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS Pg. 48 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive the oral report on State Budget discussions and impact on transportation programs, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. Budget and Implementation Committee Agenda January 27, 2003 Page 6 16. SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM EXTENSION FOR THE CITY OF CORONA Pg. 49 Overview This item is for the Committee 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 Overview This item is for the Committee to: Pg. 53 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. 18. ELECTION OF OFFICERS 19. 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. 20. ADJOURNMENT Budget and Implementation Committee Agenda January 27, 2003 Page 7 The next Budget and Implementation and Committee meeting is scheduled to be held at 2:30 p.m., Monday, February 24, 2003, at the Board Chambers of the County Administrative Center at 4080 Lemon Street, 1St Floor, Riverside. MINUTES RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE Monday, October 28, 2002 MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the Budget and Implementation Committee was called to order by Chairperson Chris Buydos at 2:30 p.m., in the Conference Room at University Village, Room 207, 1201 University Avenue, Riverside, California, 92507. 2. ROLL CALL Members/Alternates Present Members Absent Chris Buydos John Chlebnik John Hunt Anneal Moore Gregory Pettis Ron Roberts Robert Schiffner Placido Valdivia Jim Venable Robert Crain Juan DeLara G. Dana Hobart John Pena Mike Wilson 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no requests from the public to speak. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — June 24, 2002 and August 26, 2002 M/S/C (Pettis/Moore) to approve the June 24, 2002 and the August 26, 2002 "Committee as a Whole" minutes as written. 5. ADDITIONS AND REVISIONS Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director, noted additional information for Agenda Item 8, "Agreement No. 03-33-009 for the Construction of an Emergency Platform Extension at the Pedley Metrolink Station". Budget and Implementation Committee Meeting October 28, 2002 Page 2 6. CONSENT CALENDAR M/S/C (Pettis/Venable) 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 September 30, 2002; and, 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 6B. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT 1) Receive and file the Single Signature Authority Report for the months ending July, August, and September 2002; and, 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 6C. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 1) Receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the period ending September 30, 2002; and, 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 7. HIGHWAY AND COMMUTER RAIL CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM UPDATE Hideo Sugita provided a brief update to the Committee on projects under the Highway and Commuter Rail Construction Program. M/S/C (Pettis/Hunt) to: 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. 8. AGREEMENT NO. 03-33-009 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN EMERGENCY PLATFORM EXTENSION AT THE PEDLEY METROLINK STATION Hideo Sugita reviewed the cost and scope of services for Agreement No. 03-33-009 with Granitex Construction for the construction of an emergency platform extension at the Pedley Metrolink Station. Budget and Implementation Committee Meeting October 28, 2002 Page 3 M/S/C (Hunt/Pettis) to: 1) Award Agreement No. 03-33-009 for the construction of an emergency platform extension at the Pedley Metrolink Station to Granitex Construction, Inc. for the amount of $381,919.02 plus a contingency amount of $38,080.98 to cover potential change orders encountered during construction, for a toal contract authorization of $420,000.00; 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. 9. AGREEMENT NO. 03-31-033 WITH DMJM + HARRIS FOR ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE STATE ROUTE 60 HOV PROJECT FINAL PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES (PS&E) Hideo Sugita reviewed the cost and scope of services for Agreement No, 03-31-033 with DMJM + Harris to provide engineering design services for the SR 60 HOV Project Final PS&E. M/S/C (Venable/Hunt) to: 1) Award Agreement No. 03-31-033 (Amendment No. 9 to Agreement No. RO-2042) to DMJM + Harris to provide engineering design services for the SR 60 HOV Project Final PS&E for an additional base amount of $116, 515; 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. COST ALLOCATION PLAN Ivan Chand, Chief Financial Officer, stated that the Commission can recover from Federal and State agencies direct costs of a project as well as allow local governments to recover indirect costs based upon an approved Cost Allocation Plan (CAP). Staff has contracted with Revenue and Costs Specialist to prepare a CAP for the Commission and staff intends to submit the CAP to Federal and State agencies for their approval so that the Commission can recover indirect costs currently funded by Measure "A". Budget and Implementation Committee Meeting October 28, 2002 Page 4 Eric Haley, Executive Director, added that while this Plan will not generate new money, it will provide a more precise calculation of Federal, State, and Local overhead. It will give a more clear view of costs and free up more Measure "A" funds, which are flexible, and substitute State and Federal funds, which have greater restraints. Commissioner Ameal Moore requested clarification of the indirect cost rate. Ivan Chand explained how the rate was derived and noted that staff compared this percentage with SanBAG, yielding similar values. Eric Haley noted that a number of one-time indirect costs inflated this rate including costs incurred during the transition of the RCTC offices, the Measure "A" renewal, and the audit. M/S/C (Pettis/Schiffner) to: 1) Receive and file the Cost Allocation Plan; and, 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 11. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 03-013, "RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ESTABLISHING THE COMMISSION'S ANNUAL APPROPRIATION LIMIT" Ivan Chand stated that the approval of Resolution 03-013 will establish the Commission's Annual Appropriation Limit. M/S/C (Pettis/Moore) to: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 03-013, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing the Commission's Annual Appropriation Limit"; and, 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 12. FUND TRANSFER AGREEMENT NO. 03-45-034 BETWEEN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FOR THE OPERATION OF A FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL PROGRAM ON STATE ROUTE 91 IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY Jerry Rivera, Program Manager, reviewed the agreement for the operation of the Freeway Service Patrol Program on SR 91 with Caltrans. Budget and Implementation Committee Meeting October 28, 2002 Page 5 M/S/C (Schiffner/Chlebnik) to: 1) Approve the Fund Transfer Agreement between the State of California Department of Transportation and the Riverside County Transportation Commission for the Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol program in the amount of $ 1,080,400 in State funding for FY 2002-03; 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. 13. AMENDMENT TO FISCAL YEAR 2002 MEASURE "A" CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FOR THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Jerry Rivera presented the City of Palm Springs' request to amend their Plan for local streets and roads. M/S/C (Venable/Schiffner) to: 1) Approve the amendment to the FY 02 Measure "A" Capital Improvement Plans for Local Streets and Roads for the City of Palm Springs; and, 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 14. SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM EXTENSION FOR THE CITY OF MURRIETA Jerry Rivera briefly reviewed the SB 821 extension request from the City of Murrieta to complete the Washington Avenue Sidewalk Project. Commissioner Ron Roberts asked if there is a limit to the amount of time and number of extension a city could be granted to complete a project. Eric Haley responded that many projects encounter delays and each extension request is carefully reviewed. He noted that the current practice does not impose any time or extension limits. Marilyn Williams, Director of Regional Programs and Public Affairs, indicated that the Technical Advisory Committee has reviewed this issue and determined that because most cities incur project delays that the current practice would be continued. Commissioner John Hunt expressed his belief that extension should be limited and deadlines imposed. Budget and Implementation Committee Meeting October 28, 2002 Page 6 Chairperson Buydos asked for the status of the funds if an extension is not granted. Jerry Rivera responded that the funds would become available for the next call for projects and interest is accrued on the funds Commissioner Robert Schiffner said that if the Commission is not adversely affected by the extensions, he does not see the benefit of limiting them. He believes the cities are delivering projects as quickly as possible because they are aware that the longer a project is extended, the lesser use they receive for their funds. Commissioner Jim Venable asked for the average time to complete a project, including the number of extensions. Jerry Rivera responded that projects are typically completed the following fiscal year requiring only one extension. However, extensions have been granted resulting in as long as three years for project completion. Commissioner John Chlebnik recommended a type of "Use It or Lose It" policy. Hank Mohle, Traffic Engineer, City of Murrieta, expressed his appreciation for the Commission's consideration and provided a detailed explanation of the project delays and completion schedule. M/S/C (Schiffner/Roberts) to: 1) Grant the City of Murrieta a twelve-month extension to June 30, 2003 to complete the Washington Avenue Sidewalk Project; 2) Recommend the, Technical Advisory Committee review the SB 821 Project Extension Policy; and, 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 15. APPROVAL OF CITY OF TEMECULA'S MULTI -USE TRAILS AND BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN Jerry Rivera provided a brief overview of the City of Temecula's Multi -Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan. M/S/C (Venable/Hunt) to: 1) Approve the City of Temecula's Multi -Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan dated January 2002; and, 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. Budget and Implementation Committee Meeting October 28, 2002 Page 7 16. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR No items were pulled from the consent calendar for discussion. 17. COMMENTS BY COMMISSIONERS/STAFF A. Eric Haley noted that the Commission staff completed the move into the new County of Riverside Administrative Center Annex. B. Chairperson Buydos noted the new RCTC Website is fully functional with a wealth of project information. 18. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Budget and Implementation Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 3:10 p.m. The next meeting is scheduled for 2:30 p.m., Monday, November 25, 2002, in the Conference Room, University Village, 1201 University Avenue, Room 207, Riverside, California, 92507. Respectfully submitted, E)clik,N} _-k_ N an_ w.o,— Jennifer Harmon Deputy Clerk of the Board AGENDA ITEM 6A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: January 27, 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 December 31, 2002, 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 December 31, 2002. Attachment: Monthly Report - December 2002 000001 RCTC MEASURE "A" HIGHWAY/RAIL PROJECTS BUDGET REPORT BY ROUTE PROJECT DESCRIPTION ROUTE 60 PROJECTS Final Design/ROW HOV 60/215 to Redlands Blvd . (2042) (3000) 1,16104 i (3010 00 .:.: ROUTE 74 PROJECTS Engineering/Environ/ROW (R02041 9954,9966, (R02142) (R02141) (2140) (3001) (3009) #1.0 0-4 000 74 ROUTE 79 PROJECTS Engineering/Environ./ROW (3003) Realignment study & Right turn lanes (R09961) SUBTOTALRrU 7 ROUTE 86 PROJECTS Avenue 58 to Avenue 66 (Segment 2) SUBTOTAL:ROUTE ROUTE 91 PROJECTS Soundwall/Aux lane design, ROW and construction (R09101,9337,9647,9861,9848,9832, 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 (R09933,9946,2059.3601) 5:... ROUTE 111 PROJECTS (R09219, 9227,9234,9523,9525,9530,9537,9540) 3410,9635,9743,9849-9851,9857,9629 (3400-3405) C1) O rte:; CO MMISSION CONTRACTURAL % COMMITTED EXPENDITURE FOR % EXPENDITURES AUTHORIZED COM MITMENTS AGAINST AUTH . MONTH ENDED EXPENDITURES TO -DATE AGAINST ALLOCATION TO DATE ALLOCATION 12/31/02 TO DATE COMMITMNTS TO DATE $7,700,000 r xoo 000 $69,847,655 $69;847;555 $2,894,497 $2;884;497: $20,253,000 $33,860,000 $11,902,100 $2,954,000 $1,274,430 $1,603,450 $�7 73398t> $16,946,856 $5,338,641 38641 $29,514,368 +514 365 $2,793,935 793;935 $19,500,000 $33,760,000 3,260,0 $10,374,324 $2,954,000 $1,062,025 $1,603,450 15;893;7:9:; $15,530,856 15;530;856 Page 1 of 3 69 .3% 42 .3% 394 96.5 % 96.3% 99.7% 87.2% 100.0% 83.3% 100.0% 91.6% $512,027 S12;UZ7 $2,978,860 2,9788E $25,126 25;126;; Project Complete Project Complete $7,215 $0 $91,820 $10,339 1Q974 $0 $4,594,080 $15,505,482 5;505,482 $909,867 $18,060,000 $31,013,510 I'tf735'tD $9,524,187 $2,109,519 $338,799 $14,945,485 86 .1 % 86,1% 52.5% 52:5% 32.6% 92.6% 91.9 % 91.8% 71.4% 31.9% 53.1% 96 .2% RCTC MEASURE "A" HIGHWAY PROJECTS BUDGET REPORT BY ROUTE C: C.4 CD PROJECT DESCRIPTION COMMISSION CONTRACTURAL % COMMITTED EXPENDITURE FOR % EXPENDITURES AUTHORIZED COM MITMENTS AGAINSTAUTH . MONTH ENDED EXPENDITURES TO -DATE AGAINST ALLOCATION TO DATE ALLOCATION 12/31/02 TO DATE COMMITMNTS TO DATE I-215 PROJECTS Preliminary Engrg/Environ. (R09008, 9018) $U$T07AL I Z1 INTERCHANGE IMPROV. PROGRAM Yuma IC Landscaping (R09926,9946) 00:0 {Al l00RGFIAf ± PROJECT & CONSTR. MGMT SERV. (Agreement (02-31-081)) SUB QTAL BECH1*:. PROGRAM PLAN & SERVICES North/South Corridor study (R09936) su F1tt PARK-N-RIDE/INCENT. PROGRAM (RO 9859) (2101-2117) (9813) (2146) (9917) 2126 2127,2138,2139 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 NIMU1` 4L $6,726,504 0.704 $440,000 $2,138,641 $25,000 $2,323,177 328 '17?' $17,218,070 $13,900,329 2i0. 0•70 $5,878,173 487$1.74 $400,000 moo $2,027,483 E137�4i33 $25,000 $2,323,177 2:7: $16,745,518 $13,900,329 0A45, 16v/3'j;279 87.4% 90 .9% 94 .8 % 100.0% 100 .0% a 97.3% 100.0% $0 $130,397 0; $0 $102,718 't O2 x'19: $3,233,992 $5,704,897 $ 4;897 $312,519 $797,197 $0 0 $1,347,938 '1 �4793i3 $16,317,079 $8,338,585 ?x4 ? 55 664 97.1 % 78.1 % 0 39.3% 39.3% 0.0% 58.0% 97.4% 60.0% 0�0 Page 2of3 RCTC MEASURE "A" HIGHWAY/L OCAL STREETS & ROADS PROJECTS BUDGET REPORT BY PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION CITY OF CANYON LAKE Railroad Canyon Rd Improvements SUB** CANYON CITY OF CORONA Smith, Maple & Lincoln Interchanges & (1) Storm drainage structure ;U Tom co 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 TAf; EXPENDITURE FOR TOTAL OUTSTANDING % LOAN BALANCE APPROVED MONTH ENDED MEASURE "A" LOAN OUTSTANDING TO -DATE AGAINST COMMIT MENT 12/31/02 ADVANCES BALANCE COMMITMENT APPROVED CO MMIT . $1,600,000 ��iiDOa;E1Q $5,212,623 55Z'12;623 $1,936,419 $1,324,500 $5,094,027 $2,139,067 $1,500,000 $730,000 06i $1,600,000 .600)O00 $5,212,623 ,21 2,6 $1,936,419 $1,324,500 $5,094,027 $2,139,067 $1,500,000 $730,000 13 efl6 63.6 NOTE: (1) Loan against interchange improvement programs. All values are for total Project/Contract and not related to fiscal year budgets. $665,282 $2,871,168 71;;168 $1,167,102 $798,291 $3,070,230 $1,289,241 $763,581 $0 661,31 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 41 .6% 55.1% 60.3% 60 .3 % 60.3% 60 .3 % 50.9% 0.0% 52 .4% Status as of: 12/31/02 Page 3 of 3 AGENDA ITEM 6B RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: January 27, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Ivan M. Chand, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Financial Statements STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the quarter ending December 31, 2002, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: During the first six months of the fiscal year, staff has closely monitored the revenues and expenditures of the Commission. The attached financial statements show the revenues and expenditures incurred in the first six months of the year. Administration expenditures are in line as budgeted. The Commission has experienced significant increase in Legal Services as the Commission is defending itself in the "No on LA" lawsuit. Staff will be submitting a budget adjustment to increase the budget in this category. The Salaries and Benefits category is under budget due to the vacancies created by the departure of the Public Information Officer. With the return of the P10, this category will incur those costs during the rest of the year. Other Administrative expenditures are on target for the year. Debt Service is paid in December and June. Staff expects to incur all Debt Service expenditures as budgeted. Intergovernmental expenditures are incurred early in the year and, as such, staff expects the expenditures to remain within the budget. Expenditures in the Program/Projects are below budget, however, these expenditures are related to progress on projects and staff expects that these funds will be spent as projects are completed. The exception is the STA program. Distributions were made for balances on reserve from prior years. This resulted in the expenditures being over budget. Staff is submitting a budget adjustment to accommodate this increase. The funds to be used to cover this increase are prior year funds from the reserved fund balance. 00 The revenues are consistent with expectations and reflect the mid year revenue change in projections. Staff is tracking Sales Tax revenue on a monthly basis and the Sales Tax revenues are 8% higher than the same time last year. Due to a change in Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) requirements, governments are required to enter a receivable entry at the end of the year for taxes that will be received in the next fiscal year that were collected in the prior fiscal year. As a result of this estimate, the Budget to Actual numbers show less than 50% collection of Sales Tax revenue. Federal, State and Local Government revenues are on a reimbursement basis and funds will be received upon completion of the work. Other revenues and interest are consistent with expectation set forth in the budget. Listed below is the Capital related projects and their status: Highway Engineering/Right of way Route 60 - Incorporation of additional agency design criteria. Route 74 - Completion of Phase 11 was delayed due to resolution of environmental and permitting issues. Route 79 - Decision on proceeding with construction of right turn lanes on Gilman Springs Road was made and design is proceeding. Route 91 - HOV project from Mary Street to 7th St. - completion of pre - award audit of the design consultant delayed the start of preliminary engineering. Route 1 1 1 - Design activities for the Palm Desert projects were delayed due to drainage redesign requirements and completion of permit processing. Highway Construction • Route 60 - Scope increase and additional right of way requirements have delayed construction start now forecasted for 7/1/03. • Route 74 - Finalizing of environmental issues and permitting delayed the start of construction work on Segment 1 which is now in progress. • Route 79 - Right turn lanes on Gilman Springs Rd. awaiting completion of design. • Route 1 1 1 - The Monroe to Rubidoux project in the City of Indio is complete and receipt of final invoices for incurred expenditures are pending. Rail Engineering/Right of Way • North Main Corona Station Parking Structure - Delay in pre -award audit qualification of design consultant. • La Sierra Parking Lot Expansion Phase 11 - Awaiting property acquisition to be finalized and City Permits to be issued. Rail Construction • La Sierra Parking Lot Expansion, Phase II - Construction is forecasted for A ril 003. 000006 Staff will continue to monitor the revenues and expenditures and notify the Commission of any unusual events. Attachments: Quarterly Financial Statements for period ending December 31, 2002 000007 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION QUARTERLY BUDGET VS ACTUAL 2ND QUARTER FOR PERIOD ENDING 12/31/02 DESCRIPTION Revenues Sales tax Federal, state & local government Other revenues Interest Total revenues Expenditures Administration Salaries & benefits General legal services Professional services Office lease & utilities General administrative expenses Total administration Programs/projects Salaries & benefits General legal services Professional services General projects Highway engineering Highway construction Highway ROW Rail engineering Rail construction Rail ROW Local street & roads Regional arterial Special studies FSP towing Commuter assistance Property management Motorist assistance Rail operations & maintenance STA distributions Specialized transit Planning & programming Total programs/projects Intergovern distribution Capital outlay Debt service Principal Interest Total debt service Total expenditures Other financing sources/uses Operating transfer in Operating transfer out Bond proceeds Payment to escrow agent Cost of issuance Total financing sources/uses Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund balance July 1, 2002 Fund balance December 31, 2002 7users/prepnnvmciquanerfies/dec 2002 BUDGET ACTUAL REMAINING BALANCE $ 101,048,500 $ 48,999,940 $ 52,048,560 31,232,000 4,598,581 26,633,419 6,554,900 3,023,074 3,531,826 3,965,000 1,997,279 1,967,721 142,800,400 58,618,875 84,181,525 1,214,000 496,451 717,549 45,000 57,579 (12,579) 1,457,000 794,519 662,481 328,000 178,011 149,989 829,300 409,190 420,110 3,873,300 1,935,750 1,937,550 PERCENT UTILIZATION 48% 15% 46% 50% 41% 41% 128% 55% 54% 49% 50% 1,314,200 531,875 782,325 40% 568,000 237,466 330,534 42% 1,485,600 266,547 1,219,053 18% 2,317,100 607,031 1,710,069 26% 4,343,515 1,487,545 2,855,970 34% 15,921,000 722,401 15,198,599 5% 14,760,000 6,032,819 8,727,181 41% 2,643,798 279,185 2,364,613 11% 17,727,200 8,632,715 9,094,485 49% 6,453,000 11,627 6,441,374 0% 34,446,000 19,145,812 15,300,188 56% 7,957,900 4,377,860 3,580,040 55% 2,843,000 530,533 2,312,467 19% 1,113,000 428,133 684,867 38% 2,074,000 544,306 1,529,694 26% 85,700 14,952 70,748 17% 728,700 231,535 497,165 32% 4,335,500 2,206,561 2,128,939 51% 2,907,000 3,990,052 (1,083,052) 137% 3,677,000 1,959,117 1,717,883 53% 44,100 6,581 37,519 15% 127,745,313 52,244,653 75,500,660 41% 728,000 594,316 133,684 82% 412,000 264,716 147,284 64% 24,888,000 64,418 24,823,582 0% 10,663,000 5,262,174 5,400,826 49% 35,551,000 5,326,592 30,224,408 15% 168,309,613 60,366,026 107,943,587 36% 55,454,600 32,245,414 23,209,186 58% 55,454,600 32,245,414 23,209,186 58% 0% 0% 0% 0% (25,509,213) (1,747,152) (27,256,364) 93% 108,238,377 164,666,412 56,428,035 152% $ 82,729,164 $ 162,919,261 $ 80,190,097 197% 000008 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COM MISSION QUARTERLY ACTUAL BY FUND 2ND QUARTER FOR PERIOD ENDING 12/31102 DESCRIPTION PALO STATE WESTERN GENERAL FSP/ WESTERN VERDE COACHELLA TRANSIT CVAG COUNTY DEBT COMBINED FUND SAFE COUNTY VALLEY VALLEY ASSISTANCE CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION SERVICE TOTAL Revenues Sales tax $ 6,009,517 $ - $ 31,524,809 $ 390,985 $ 11,074,629 $ $ - $ - $ $ 48,999,940 Federal, state & local govemm ent 583,582 479,565 3,535,434 - - - 4,598,581 Other revenues 214,617 1,683 1,912,366 - 227,898 666,509 - 3,023,074 Inte rest 3,419 16,117 472,133 46 1,598 12,805 1,025,545 465,616 1,997,279 Total revenues 6,811,136 497,365 37,4 .44,743 391,031 11,304,125 679,314 1,025,545 465,616 58,618,875 Expenditures Administration Salaries & benefits 468,215 28,236 496,451 Gene ral legal se rv ices 54,125 3,455 57,579 Professional services 770,201 24,318 - 794,519 Office lease & utilities 167,330 10,681 - 178,011 General administrative expenses 384,626 24,564 409,190 Total administration 1,844,497 91,253 1,935,750 Programs/projects Salaries & benefits 341,205 49,688 138,974 2,008 531,875 General legal services 53,572 2,198 180,001 1,696 - 237,466 Professional service s 119,363 11,988 135,133 - 63 266,547 General projects - - 599,049 7,982 607,031 Highway engineering 1,484,532 3,013 1,487,545 Highway constru ction 722,401 - 722,401 Highway ROW 6,032,819 6,032,819 Rat engineering 279,185 279,185 Rail construction 8,632,715 8,632,715 Rail ROW 11,627 - - 11,627 Local street & roads - 14,295,623 443,724 4,406,465 19,145,812 Regional arterial - - - 4,377,860 4,377,860 Special studies 391,981 - 138,553 - 530,533 FSP towing 428,133 - 428,133 Commuter assistance - - 544,306 544,306 Property ma nagement 14,952 - - 14,952 Moto rist assistance - 231,535 231,535 Rail operations & maintenance 2,206,561 - • 2,206,561 STA distributions - - - 3,990,052 3,990,052 Specialized transit - 465,117 1,494,000 - 1,959,117 Planning & programming services 6,581 6,581 Total programs/projects 3,134,214 723,542 33,660,034 443,724 10,293,024 3,990,114 52,244,653 Intergovem distribu tion 594,316 - - 594,318 Capital outlay 249,131 15,902 (317) - - 264,716 Debt service Principal - 64,418 64,418 Interest 75,092 - 5,187,082 5,262,174 Total debt service 75,092 5,251,500 5,326,592 Total expenditures 5,822,158 830,697 33,734,809 443,724 10,293,024 3,990,114 5,251,500 60,366,026 Other financing so urce s/uses Opera ting transfer in 240,600 4,396,142 27 - - - 27,608,645 32,245,414 Operating transfer out 588,300 240,600 13,123,978 3,948,560 27 14,343,950 - 32,245,414 Bond proceeds - - - - - Payment to escrow agent Cost of Issuance To tal financing source s/uses 588,300 8,727,836 3,948,533 27 14,343,950 (27,608,645) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses 400678 (333,332) (5,017,902) (52,693). (2,937,431) (3,310,800) (27) (13,318,405) ., 22,822,761 (1,7471152) Fund bala nce July 1, 2002 6,480,013 2,953,519 60,383,032 99,449 6,070 965 4,560 529 27 45,938,914 38,179,974 164,668,412 Fund balance December 31, 2002 $ 6,880,691 $ 2,620,187 $ 55,365,130 $ 46,756 $ 3,133,534 $ 1,249,729 $ - $ 32,620,499 $ 61,002,735 $ 162,919,261 r,i ,.Np,.o inuma of.ne,u. rdK 2002 AGENDA ITEM 6C RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: January 27, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Ivan M. Chand, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Single Signature Authority Report BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the Single Signature Authority Report for the months of October, November and December 2002, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The attached report details all contracts that have been executed through the months of October, November and December 2002, under the Single Signature Authority granted to the Executive Director by the Commission. The remaining unused capacity is $391,255. Attachment: Single Signature Authority Report as of December 30, 2002 0000.L0 SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2002 C; CG CONSULTANT AMOUNT AVAILABLE July 1, 2002 Volt Edge UNIUI NAL KtMAININU DESCRIPTION CONTRACT EXPENDED CONTRACT OF SERVICES AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT Repairs, replacements and Maintenance at D owntown Station Inland Mailing Services C ommuter As sista nce Ride Guides PSI Inc. AMOUNT USED Duplicates of Videos Fo otage pursuant to May 2002 Agreement AMOUNT REMAINING THROUGH June 30, 2003 Donna Polmounter Prepared by M ichele Cisneros Reviewed by $ 500,000 .00 16,145 .00 16,142 .00 15,000.00 0.00 25,000.00 108,745.00 $ 391,255 .00 f:\users\preprint\dp\sinsig03 1,335.54 40,155.05 $ 40,155.05 3.00 15,000 .00 23,664.46 68,589 .95 $ 351,099.95 AGENDA ITEM 6D RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: January 27, 2003 TO: Budget & Implementation Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Program Manager Karl Sauer, Bechtel Construction Manager THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Highway and Commuter Rail Construction Program Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the attached Highway & Commuter Rail Construction Program Update as an information item, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND The following is a summary of the status of all RCTC Contracts which are either: 1. Currently in construction; 2. Advertised for receipt of Construction Bids; or 3. In final design, and will be ready to advertise for receipt of Construction Bids within the next six (6) months. The attached RCTC Project Construction Status summary sheet outlines the status of the referenced project as of January 22, 2003. All underlined dates are actual dates and all bold dates are forecasted dates. 0000 Ri verside County Transportation Commission Project Construction Status Project C ontractor Advertise Open Bids Award Start Const, Finish C onst Projects un der Constructi on Adams/Mallory Construction Placentia, CA Lynch Communication, Inc . Riverside, CA Riverside Const Co., Inc . Riverside, CA L.D . Anderson, Inc. Bloomington, CA Riverside Const Co., Inc . Riverside, CA Granitex Const. Co. , Inc. Costs Mesa, CA To be determined To be determined To be determined To be determined 15 -Apr -02 6 -Jun -02 12 -Jun -02 5 -Jul -02 22 -Nov -02 1. North Corona Main Station Operational Station Complete 2. West Corona & LaSierra CCTV Security System 3. Route 74, Segment I 4. Do wntown Riverside Parking Lot Expansion 5. Riverside - LaSierra Parking Expansion - Phase I Projec ts Rec ently Awarded 15 -Apr -02 4 -Jun -02 12 -Jun -02 22 -Jul -02 25 -Jul -03 28 -Feb -03 29 -S ep -03 14 -Feb -03 21 -Mar -03 16 -May -03 27 -Jun -03 3 -Oct -03 July -05 31 -May -05 20 -May -02 2 -Jul -02 10 -Jul -02 16 -Sep -02 10 -Jun -02 8 -Jul -02 10 -Jul -02 8 -Oct -02 10 -Jun -02 15-Aud-02 11 -S ep -02 21 -Oct -02 16 -Sep -02 17 -Oct -02 13 -Nov -02 10 -Feb -03 7 -Apr -03 5 -May -03 July -03 20 -Oct -03 1. Pedley Emergency Platform Exte nsion Projects Advertised for Construc tio n Bids 4 -Dec -02 16 -Jan -03 12 -Feb -03 12 - Mar -03 14 -May -03 10 -Sep -03 1. Pedley CCTV Security System 2. Riverside - LaSierra Parking Expansion - Phase II Projec ts in Final Design 4 -Dec -02 6 -Feb -03 14 -Apr -03 21 -A ug -03 3 -Mar -03 14 -Jul -03 1. Route 60, Moreno Valley HOV M edian Widening 2. Route 74, Segment II AGENDA ITEM 7 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: January 27, 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 No. 03-33-035 for Construction of a CCTV Security System at the Existing Pedley Metrolink Commuter Rail Station STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Award Agreement No. 03-33-035 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 to New Age Communications for the amount of $199,800.98 plus a contingency amount of $40,199.02 to cover potential change orders encountered during construction, for a total contract amount of $240,000.00; 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the standard construction agreement on behalf of the Commission, and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In 1999, with the completion of the South Side Platform/ Pedestrian 0vercrossing Project, the Riverside -Downtown Metrolink station was retrofitted with a Closed - Circuit Television (CCTV) Security System. The improvements to the Riverside - Downtown Station included a master monitoring console that would receive the images from the other Riverside County Metrolink stations. This would allow a single person to be able to monitor each of the stations CCTV systems from one location. The Commission has also authorized the retrofitting of both the Riverside -La Sierra and West Corona Metrolink stations with a CCTV Security System. By providing 24 hour monitoring and video recording and centralizing the security system, RCTC will have the option of reducing the number of guard hours at the stations when passenger service and passenger vehicles are not present. 000014 In December of 1999, the Commission awarded Contract No. RO-9952, to PB Farradyne, Inc. to perform a Phase I Communications Study to develop the most cost effective means to provide a CCTV Security System at the Pedley Metrolink Station and a data link to connect the Pedley CCTV Security System to the main security system located at the Riverside -Downtown Metrolink Station. The results of the Phase I Communications Study produced by PB Farradyne was that the most economical way to connect the Pedley Metrolink Station CCTV Security System to the Riverside -Downtown monitoring facility was via a telephone T1 connection. RCTC staff concurred with this finding and in July 2001, staff recommended and the Commission authorized the Executive Director to amend Contract No. RO-9952 with PB Farradyne to proceed with the development of Final Engineering Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E) for a CCTV Security System at the Pedley Metrolink Station, based on the findings of the Phase I Communications Study. The project was advertised starting on December 4, 2002 with the bid opening on January 16, 2002. Three (3) bids were received and opened on January 16, 2002 at 2:00 pm. A summary of the bids received are shown in Table A: TABLE A Construction of a CCTV Security System at the Pedley Metrolink Station Bid Summary Firm (In order from Low bid to High bid) Bid Amount Amount Over Low Bid Engineers Estimate $263,158.75 N/A 1 New Age Communications Ontario, CA $199,800.98 $0.00 2 Moore Electrical Contracting Inc. Corona, CA $258,955.00 $59,154.02 3 Steiny & Company, Inc. Los Angeles, CA $268,871.56 $69,070.58 The bids were reviewed by Legal Counsel and Staff, and all concurred that New Age Communications' 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: 00 ti I` TABLE B Checklist Item New Age Communication Moore Electrical Contracting Inc. Steiny & Company, Inc. 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 1 Yes Yes 4 List of Subcontractors - Prime Performs >50% Work Yes Yes Yes 5 Bidder Information Forms - Reference Check Yes Yes 2 Yes Yes 2 Yes Yes2 6 Non -Collusion Affidavit Yes Yes Yes 7 Evidence of Insurance No 3 No 3 No3 Note: Cashiers Check for $20,000 (exceeds 10% of the bid amount) is attached to the bid. 2 Staff is currently researching references listed on bidder forms. Staff has verified that Bidder's license is current and active. 006016 3 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. Table C summarizes the costs associated with the Construction of the CCTV Security Monitoring System at the Pedley Metrolink Station for the three (3) lowest bids received: TABLE C (Itemized breakdown of the lowest three (3) bids) ITEM No. ITEM DESCRIPTION New Age Communication Moore Electrical Contracting Inc. Steiny & Company, Inc. 1 Mobilization & DeMobilization $4,800.00 $12,000.00 $17,366.81 2 Construct Closed Circuit Televison System (CCTV) at the existing Pedley Station. $54,200.00 $75,000.00 $181,692.21 3 Construct Data Link from the Pedley Station to the Downtown Riverside Metrolink Station $22,310.00 $59,500.00 $6,916.76 4 Construct Video monitoring and recording facilities for the Pedley Station, at the Downtown Metrolink Station $76,050.98 $69,000.00 $13,007.71 5 Builder's All Risk Insurance $1,500.00 $1,165.00 $1,717.05 6 Railroad Protective Liability Insurance $1,400.00 $2,750.00 $8,631.02 7 UPRR Flagging $39,540.00 $39,540.00 $39,540.00 GRAND TOTAL $199,540.98 $258,955.00 $268,871.56 Based on the bid review process, Staff is recommending that the Commission award Agreement No. 03-33-035 for the construction of a CCTV Security System at the existing Pedley Metrolink Commuter Rail Station that includes a data link to the monitoring facilities at the existing Riverside -Downtown Metrolink Commuter Rail Station to New Age Communications for the amount of $199,800.98, plus a contingency amount of $40,199.02 to cover potential change orders encountered during construction, for a total not to exceed amount of $240,000.00. The standard RCTC construction contract will be used, pursuant to Legal Counsel review. 000017 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Y Year: FY2002-03 Amount: $240,000 Source of Funds: CMAQ & Measure "A" Budget Adjustment: N GLA No.: 221 33 81301 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 1/17/03 OOU0:10 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ************** CONTRACT ************** FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION SYSTEM AT THE EXISTING PEDLEY METROLINK COMMUTER RAIL STATION, A DATA LINK TO AND MONITORING FACILITIES AT THE EXISTING DOWNTOWN RIVERSIDE METROLINK COMMUTER RAIL STATION RCTC Agreement No. 03-33-035 FEDERAL AID PROJECT NO. CML-6054(024) December 4, 2002 BETWEEN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND :0060.9 CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION SYSTEM AT THE EXISTING PEDLEY METROLINK COMMUTER RAIL STATION, A DATA LINK TO AND MONITORING FACILITIES AT THE EXISTING DOWNTOWN RIVERSIDE METROLINK COMMUTER RAIL STATION RCTC Agreement No. 03-33-035 1. PARTIES AND DATE. This Contract is made and entered into this day of , 2002, 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 a Closed Circuit Television System at the Existing Pedley Metrolink Commuter Rail Station, a Data Link to and Monitoring Facilities at the Existing Downtown Riverside Metrolink Commuter Rail Station, RCTC Agreement No. 03-33-035." 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; Contractor, in response to a Invitation for Bids issued by Commission on December 4, 2002, has submitted a bid proposal for "Construction of a Closed Circuit Television System at the Existing Pedley Metrolink Commuter Rail Station, a Data Link to and Monitoring Facilities at the Existing Downtown Riverside Metrolink Commuter Rail Station, RCTC Agreement No. 03-33-035." 2.2 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; 2.3 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, CONTRACT -1 F_\FILES\Current Const Projects\03-33-035 Pedley CCTV\Contract\v1 RCTC - Pedley CCTV - Contract between RCTC and .doc 000020 all of which, including all addendum thereto, are by this reference incorporated herein and made a part of this Contract: a. NOTICE INVITING BIDS b. INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS c. CONTRACT BID FORMS d. PAYMENT AND PERFORMANCE BOND FORMS e. ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR SECURITY DEPOSITS (optional) f. CONTRACT APPENDIX PART "A" - Permits PART "B" - General Conditions PART "C" - Special Provisions PART "D" - Contract Drawings PART "E" - Contract Compliance Provisions/DBE Requirements PART "F" - Federal Minimum Wage Requirements PART "G" - Federal Requirements for Federal Aid Construction Contracts g. 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 a Closed Circuit Television System at the Existing Pedley Metrolink Commuter Rail Station, a Data Link to and Monitoring Facilities at the Existing Downtown Riverside Metrolink Commuter Rail Station, RCTC Agreement No. 03-33-035, including all structures and facilities described in the above referenced Contract Documents (the "Work"). Notwithstanding anything else in the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall complete the Work for a total of ($ ), as specified in the bid proposal and pricing schedules submitted by the Contractor in response to the above referenced Notice Inviting Bids. Such amount shall be subject to adjustment in accordance with the applicable 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 Sixty Working Days (60) 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 CONTRACT -2 F:\FILES\Current Const Projects\03-33-035 Pedley CCTV\Contract\vl RCTC - Pedley CCTV - Contract between RCTC and .doc OOOO'- z 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. 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 enclosed with this Contract, and shall be executed simultaneously with this Contract. 3.6 Attorneys' Fees. If either party commences an action against the other party arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing party reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit. 3.7 Successors. The parties do for themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns agree to the full performance of all of the provisions contained in this Contract. Contractor may not either voluntarily or by action of law, assign any obligation assumed by Contractor hereunder without the prior written consent of Commission. 3.8 Notices. All notices hereunder and communications regarding interpretation of the terms of the Contract or changes thereto shall be provided by the mailing thereof by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid and addressed as follows: CONTRACT -3 F(:\FILES\Current Const Projects\03-33-035 Pedley CCTV\Contract\vl RCTC - Pedley CCTV - Contract between RCTC and .doc :000►22 Contractor: Commission: [INSERT NAME, Riverside County Transportation Commission ADDRESS AND CONTACT P.O. Box 12008 PERSON] Riverside, California 92502-2208 Attn: Executive Director With Copy to: Robert Wunderlich Contract Manager 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 [TITLE] Riverside County Transportation Commission Tax I.D. Number: RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL By: Eric Haley Executive Director APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Best Best & Krieger LLP Counsel, RCTC CONTRACT -4 F:\FILES\Current Const Projects\03-33-035 Pedley CCTV\Contract\vl RCTC - Pedley CCTV - Contract between RCTC and .doc U th) 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 CONTRACT -5 F:`9I�iW=4a �st Projects\03-33-035 Pedley CCTV\Contract\v1 RCTC - Pedley CCTV - Contract between RCTC and .doc tlJ AGENDA ITEM 8 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: January 27, 2003 TO: Budget & Implementation Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Karl Sauer, Bechtel Construction Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Amend Agreement No. 02-33-063 for the Construction of the CCTV Security System at the Riverside -La Sierra and West Corona Metrolink Stations STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Amend Agreement No. 02-33-063 with Lynch Communication, Inc., to increase the contract contingency amount 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. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In 1999, with the completion of the South Side Platform/ Pedestrian Overcrossing Project, the Riverside -Downtown Metrolink station was retrofitted with a Closed - Circuit Television (CCTV) Security System. The improvements to the Riverside - Downtown Station included a master monitoring console that would receive the images from the other Riverside County Metrolink stations. This would allow a single person to be able to monitor each of the stations CCTV systems from one location. By providing 24 hour monitoring and video recording and centralizing the security system, RCTC will enhance the security currently provided by the station guards and have the option of reducing the number of guard hours at the stations when Metrolink service and parking are not present. At the February 13, 2002 Commission meeting, the Commission authorized the retrofitting of both the Riverside -La Sierra and West Corona Metrolink stations with a CCTV Security System. This allowed staff to advertise for bids to construct the CCTV Security Systems at the Riverside -La Sierra and West Corona Metrolink Commuter Rail Stations. 00002:S The project was advertised starting on April 15, 2002, with the Bid Opening on June 4, 2002. The bids were reviewed by Legal Counsel and staff, and on June 12, 2002, the Commission awarded Agreement No. 02-33-063, to Lynch Communication, Inc., for the amount of $139,900.00 plus a contingency of $40,100.00, for a total not to exceed amount of $180,000.00. The effective date for the Notice to Proceed was July 22, 2002 with work beginning at the Riverside - Downtown Metrolink Station. During construction of the CCTV Project, four major changes occurred that impacted project delivery. First, the conduit between the West Corona station and State Route 91, where the connection to the Caltrans fiber optic lines occurs, was plugged with roots. Second, there appeared to be a problem with the technology that would allow both the Riverside -La Sierra and West Corona signals on the same Caltrans fiber. Third, the conduit linking the Riverside -Downtown Station to the Caltrans fiber system that was planned to be available to the contractor was delayed because that element of work was planned to be constructed with the Riverside -Downtown parking expansion project that is just now nearing completion. Fourth, there were several utilities that were not on the City of Riverside utility maps that were in conflict with the routing of the conduit from the Riverside Downtown station to the Caltrans fiber optic lines. Staff has worked with the contractor to resolve each of the above problems that were not anticipated when the contract was awarded; however, the Contractor has expended additional resources that were not included in the bid package in order to complete the work. It is currently forecasted that the additional CCTV Project work will exceed the present contingency by approximately $30,000.00. In order to successfully negotiate the closure of these issues with the contractor, Staff is requesting that additional project contingency be made available. Staff is recommending that the Commission increase the contingency of RCTC Agreement No. 02-33-063, 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-LaSierra and West Corona Metrolink Stations and connection to the Downtown Riverside Metrolink Station. The total not to exceed contract amount will increase from $180,000 to $210,000. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Y Year: FY 2002-03 Amount: $30,000 Source of Funds: CMAQ & Measure "A" Budget Adjustment: N GLA No.: 221 33 81301 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 1/17/03 UUUO: AGENDA ITEM 9 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: January 27, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Gustavo Quintero, Bechtel Project Coordinator THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement No. 03-31-054 with the County of Riverside to Construct Right Turn Lanes on Gilman Springs Road to State Route 79 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve entering into a Shared Funding Agreement No. 03-31-054 with the County of Riverside for the construction of right turn lanes on Gilman Springs Road to State Route 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. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the October 1996 RCTC meeting, the Commission directed staff to prepare a Plans, Specifications & Estimates (PSE) package for the installation of a median barrier in Lamb Canyon between Gilman Springs Road and the County Land Fill Road. As part of this approval, the Commission directed Staff to investigate the possibility of constructing right turn lanes on Gilman Springs Road to provide for a safer access to State Route 79. The Commission committed a not to exceed amount of $100,000 for the construction of these right turn lanes at Gilman Springs Road. Staff has been working with the County of Riverside to find a way that this project can be delivered for the stipulated amount. Presently, the County of Riverside has several projects on Gilman Springs Road. The portion of the project adjacent to the junction with State Route 79 will shortly go to construction. Staff has discussed that project with the County and they have agreed to construct the right turn lanes along with their Gilman Springs Road improvements. RCTC will provide the County a not to exceed dollar amount to construct the right turn lanes of $100,000. RCTC has contracted with an engineering design firm and has completed a PS&E package for the improvements of right turn lanes at Gilman Springs Road.— RCTC, 0000`!" has submitted a copy of the design plans of this project to the County of Riverside for County's review and approval. Upon approval of the design plans for the project by the County and Caltrans, the County has agreed to construct the project as the second segment of the County's "Gilman Springs Road Southerly of Bridge Street to State Highway 79 Project". Staff now recommends that the Commission enter into a shared funding agreement with the County of Riverside. RCTC and the County have agreed to share the construction costs incurred as part of the right turn lanes at Gilman Springs Road and that RCTC's share of the total construction costs for this project will not exceed $ 100,000. The County will be responsible for the balance for the total construction cost of the project including any construction managements costs associated with the project delivery. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Y Year: FY 2002-03 Amount: $ 100,000 Source of Funds: Measure "A" Budget Adjustment: N GLA No.: 222 31 81301 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 1/17/03 Attachment: Draft Share Funding Agreement No. 03-31-054 000028 DRAFT Agreement No. 03-31-054 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE SHARE FUNDING AGREEMENT This Share Funding Agreement ("Agreement") is made this day of , 2003 ("Effective Date"), by and between the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("RCTC") and the County of Riverside (the "County"). RCTC and the County are hereinafter sometimes referred to individually as "Party" and collectively as "Parties." RECITALS A. RCTC has contracted with an engineering contractor for design services (including, but not limited to, Final Plans, Specifications and Estimate) for the following improvements at Route 79/Gilman Springs Road: (1) Widen westbound Gilman Springs Road to provide an exclusive right - turn lane onto northbound Route 79 entrance ramp; (2) Widen eastbound Gilman Springs Road to provide an exclusive right turn lane onto southbound Route 79 entrance ramp (also known as Sanderson Avenue); (3) Modification of drainage systems, ramp lighting, etc. (Collectively, the "Project"). B. RCTC has submitted the design plans for the Project to the County for the County's approval of such design plans. C. Upon approval by the County of the design plans for the Project, the County has agreed to construct the Project as the second segment of the County's Gilman Springs Road Southerly of Bridge Street to SH79 project. D. RCTC shall pay for 100% of the design costs associated with the Project. 0000>9 E. RCTC and the County wish, to share in the costs of construction of the Project and the Parties agree to share such costs pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows: TERMS 1.0 Design by RCTC's Contractor. RCTC shall pay for 100% of the design costs of the Project. 2.0 Construction by County. Upon approval by the County of the design plans for the Project, the County agrees to construct the Project as the second segment of the County's Gilman Springs Road Southerly of Bridge Street to SH79 project. The Project shall be constructed in accordance with the approved design plans. 3.0 Reimbursement of Share of Construction Cost. 3.1 Construction Cost. RCTC and the County agree to share the construction costs incurred pursuant to the Project. RCTC's share of the total construction costs for the Project is $ 100,000. The County shall pay for the balance of the total construction costs for the Project. 3.2 Reimbursement. RCTC shall reimburse the County for its share of construction costs (up to $ 100,000 pursuant to Section 3.1 above) within 30 days of a presentation of an invoice as follows: (A) The invoice shall be signed by a responsible agent of the County and prepared on the County's letterhead, compiled on the basis of the actual cost and expense incurred. (B) The final billing shall be in the form of an itemized statement of the total costs charged pursuant to this Agreement, and less any amounts covered by previous progress billings. Once the County has received $ 100,000 in reimbursements from RCTC for construction costs for the Project, RCTC shall have no further obligations under this Agreement. 4.0 Project Cancellation Procedure. If the County's Construction Project is cancelled or modified so as to eliminate the necessity of work by the County, the 0000'0 County will notify RCTC in writing within a reasonable period of time and the County reserves the right to terminate this Agreement by Amendment. The Amendment shall provide mutually acceptable terms and conditions for terminating the Agreement. 5.0 Amendment, Modification, or Supplement. The Parties agree to review and abide by the provisions of this Agreement. Should the Parties believe that an amendment, modification, or supplement is necessary to this Agreement, the Parties agree to confer and cooperate in good faith to make the necessary amendment, modification, or supplement. No amendment, modification, or supplement to this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing and signed by the Parties. Any valid amendment, modification, or supplement to this Agreement shall have no effect on any other provision of this Agreement, including all indemnity requirements. 6.0 Indemnification by RCTC. RCTC shall indemnify and hold the County, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers free and harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liabilities, losses, obligations, judgments, or damages, including but not limited to property damage, bodily injury or death, or any other element of damage of any kind or nature, arising out of or incident to any negligent act or omission by RCTC, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers pursuant to this Agreement made by RCTC, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, or volunteers. Indemnification by RCTC includes, without limitation, the payment of all penalties, fines, judgments, awards, decrees, attorneys' fees, and related costs or expenses, and the reimbursement of the County, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and/or volunteers for all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them. RCTC's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by the County, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, or volunteers. 7.0 Indemnification by the County. The County shall indemnify and hold RCTC, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers free and harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liabilities, losses, obligations, judgments, or damages, including but not limited to property damage, bodily injury or death, or any other element of damage of any kind or nature, arising out of or incident to any negligent act or omission by the County, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers pursuant to this Agreement made by the County, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, or volunteers. Indemnification by the County includes, without limitation, the payment of all penalties, fines, judgments, awards, decrees, attorneys' fees, and related costs or expenses, and the reimbursement of RCTC, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and/or volunteers for all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them. The County's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by RCTC, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, or volunteers. 000031 8.0 Notices. Notification under this Agreement, except for written notices required or authorized herein, may be made by telephone or such other means as mutually agreed to among the Parties. Any written notice required or authorized under this Agreement shall be delivered in person or sent by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, as specified below: To County: George Johnson, Director of Transportation 4080 Lemon Street, Eighth Floor P.O. Box 1090 Riverside, CA 92502-1090 To RCTC: Eric Haley, Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside County Regional Complex 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Any Party, may, by notice to the other Party, change the designation or address of the person so specified as the one to receive notice pursuant to this Agreement. 9.0 Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California. Any lawsuit brought in connection with this Agreement shall be brought in the appropriate court in the County of Riverside, California. 10.0 Attorneys' Fees and Costs. If any legal action or other proceeding is brought in connection with this Agreement, the successful or prevailing Party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and other related costs, in addition to any other relief to which the Party is entitled. 1 1.0 Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement and the Parties agree to execute all documents and proceed with due diligence to complete all covenants and conditions. 12.0 Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original and which collectively shall constitute one instrument. 13.0 Invalidity; Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is declared invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall constitute in full force and effect. 14.0 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement between the Parties and supersedes any prior oral or written statements or tju t between the Parties. 15.0 Signature Clause. The signatories hereto represent that they have been appropriately authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Party for whom they sign. [SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE] 00003 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement was executed on the date first written above. RIVERSIDE COUNTY COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: By: Ron Roberts, Chairperson John F. Tavaglione, Chairperson Reviewed and Recommended for Approval: Attest: By: Eric Haley Executive Director Approved as to Form: By: Best Best & Krieger LLP General Counsel By: Name Title 000034 AGENDA ITEM 10 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: January 27, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Karl Sauer, Bechtel Construction Manager Gustavo Quintero, Bechtel Project Coordinator THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Advertise Bids for Construction of the SR -60 HOV Project in Moreno Valley STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee 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 High Occupancy Vehicle (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. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the July 1999 RCTC meeting, the Commission approved moving forward with the delivery of the State Route 60 HOV median -widening project. This Measure "A" HOV widening project is largely funded with CMAQ funds. The project is located between the east junction of Interstate 215 with State Route 60 in the City of Riverside and Redlands Boulevard in the City of Moreno Valley. Design: At the February 9, 2000 RCTC meeting, the Commission awarded a final design contract agreement for the subject project to Holmes & Narver Infrastructure now DMJM + Harris. During the December 12, 2001 Commission meeting, the 001U`0 3 Commission approved the Design Cooperative Agreement No. 8-1 173 for the design work to be performed on the State Route 60 HOV Project. We anticipate that the final design package will be to Caltrans for final sign -off by the end of January 2003. Environmental Clearance: The SR -60 HOV Project was determined to be Categorically Exempt under Class 1 of the State CEQA guidelines and Categorically Excluded under NEPA. The Categorical Exemption/Categorical Exclusion (CE/CE) Determination for the project was originally completed on August 12, 1993. An updated CE/CE Determination, a CE Re -Evaluation and supporting technical studies were prepared and processed in conjunction with a Supplemental Project Report for environmental clearance of the proposed project. The updated CE/CE Determination for the project was approved and environmentally cleared on May 23, 2002. Right of Way: Acquisition of the right of way for the project is currently underway. The right of way that is necessary for the project is required so that sound walls may be constructed to mitigate for the expected increase in noise generated from the traffic using the new HOV lanes. It is currently estimated that 125 temporary construction easements, 5 permanent easements and 23 fee takes will be required to construct the sound walls for the project. We anticipate that the final right of way certification will be completed by the end of February 2003. Funding: Funding for the project is $33,405,880 of Congestion Management Air Quality (CMAQ) matched with $6,000,000 of Measure "A". To retain the CMAQ federal funding for this project, a Program Supplement Agreement must be entered into by RCTC and Caltrans. The Program Supplement amends the Agency -State Agreement for Federal -Aid Projects No. 08-6054 to specifically describe the costs and special conditions that apply to the construction of the SR -60 HOV Project in Moreno Valley. Construction: At the December 11, 2002 Commission meeting, RCTC approved entering into Construction Cooperative Agreement 03-31-036 (State agreement # 8-1209). After the PS&E for the project is completed and approved by Caltrans and the right of way has been certified as available for construction, a Request for Authorization to Proceed with Construction will be submitted to the Caltrans Office of Local Assistance. The Program Supplement Agreement can than be finalized by RCTC and Caltrans. The subsequent Authorization to Proceed and Obligation of Federal Funds will be the basis 000036 for the financial responsibilities to be outlined in the Program Supplement. This action is being brought forward to the Committee at this time in an effort to have funds obligated prior to the federal expiration date of June 30, 2003. The Engineer's Estimate for the construction of the SR -60 HOV Project in Moreno Valley, is in the range of approximately $35,000,000 to $37,000,000. There is no new funding or budget request included with this action. 000037 AGENDA ITEM 11 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: January 27, 2003 TO: Budget & Implementation Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Karl Sauer, Bechtel Construction Manager THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Request for Proposal for Survey and Material Services in Support of Future Measure "A" Commuter Rail Construction Projects Testing On -Call Highway and STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee 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. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In August of 1997 the Commission directed staff to advertise a Request for Proposal (RFP) for consultant services to provide Survey and Material Testing On - Call Services in support of Measure "A" Highway and Commuter Rail Construction Projects which were scheduled to go to construction at the start of 1998. Staff followed through with the Commission's direction, placing advertisements for RFP's for Survey and Material Testing Services. Selection committee's were formed, the submitted RFP's were evaluated, shortlists of the highest ranked qualified firms were selected, the shortlisted forms were interviewed and ranked by the respective selection committee, staff negotiated contracts with the respective highest ranked firms, and recommendations for contract award were forwarded to the Commission. In October of 1997 the Commission awarded the following: On -Call Material Testing Contract #RO-9832 Ninyo & Moore 00038 On -Call Surveying Services #RO-9833 County of Riverside Over the past five (5) years, the Commission has amended Ninyo & Moore's and the County of Riverside's Contract to provide Material Testing and Surveying Services, respectively, for the following Measure "A" Construction Projects: • Southside Platform and Ped Overcrossing at the Riverside Downtown Station • Pigeon Pass Park and Ride Lot on State Route 60 • State Route 91 Soundwall #35 between Van Buren and Tyler • State Route 91 Phase I Soundwalls between Magnolia to Mary • Pedestrian Crossing at the Riverside La Sierra Metrolink Station • Pedestrian Crossing at the Riverside West Corona Metrolink Station • State Route 91 Soundwall #98 • State Route 91 Soundwall #635 • State Route 91 Soundwall #110, #121, & #161 • State Route 91 Soundwall #36 • North Main Corona Metrolink Station • Riverside La Sierra Metrolink Station Parking Lot Expansion Projects • Downtown Riverside Metrolink Station Parking Lot Expansion Project • Pedley Metrolink Station Emergency Platform Extension Project Both Ninyo & Moore and the County of Riverside have provided the respective requested services, for the above referenced projects, in a professional, timely, and cost effective manner. Because it has been over five (5) years since the Commission selected and awarded contracts for Material Testing and Surveying Services, staff is recommending that the Commission direct staff to initiate a new selection process to provide Survey and Material Testing On -Call Services to support construction of the following new Measure "A" Highway and Commuter Rail Construction Projects: • Downtown Riverside Metrolink Station Southside Parking Lot Project • San Jacinto Branchline Metrolink Rail & Station Improvement Projects The tentative schedule for the selection process is as follows: 0 Advertise Request for Proposals February 17, 2003 Request for Proposals Submittal Deadline March 20, 2003 Shortlist Top Three Firms April 4, 2003 Interview Top Three Firms April 17, 2003 Committee Recommendation to Commission May 14, 2003 Staff is proposing to form a selection team that includes Caltrans, the County of Riverside, the City of Riverside, the City of Moreno Valley, the City of Perris, and RCTC/Bechtel staff. The results of the selection panel will be brought to the Commission for review and recommendation for a contract award. 000040 AGENDA ITEM 12 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: January 27, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Ivan M. Chand, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Budget Adjustments STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve Budget Adjustments for several categories, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Adjustment 1 - Administrative Legal Services The Commission has experienced an increase in legal services due to the NO on LA lawsuit and several administrative agreements. To accommodate these increases, Staff is requesting an increase in the legal services budget. The amount requested is $55,000 which will be funded from current resources and unreserved fund balance. Adjustment 2 - STA Distributions Last fiscal year, Rail was approved a STA allocation for La Sierra Station Parking Expansion. The amount was claimed this fiscal year and was not included in this year's budget as it was expected to be paid last year. Since it was not paid last year, the funds were reserved for Rail and those reserved funds will be used as the resource for this expenditure. The amount requested is $1,000,000 which will be funded by reserved fund balance. Adjustment 3 - Rail Station & Legal Expenses On November 13, 2002, the Commission approved and amendment in the Short Range Transit Plan for $100,000 from LTF funds for rail station and legal expenses. This budget adjustment adjusts the expenditure budget to allow Rail to expend these funds. The amount requested is an increase in the expenditure budget for Rail Station and Legal fees for $100,000 with LTF funds used as the resource. 000041 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: N Year: FY 2002-03 Amount: $1,155,000 Source of Funds: Measure A and LTF Funds Budget Adjustment: Y GLA No.: S-12-65101 $55,000 Increase 241-62-86102 $1,000,000 Increase 103-25-65101 $40,000 Increase 103-25-73312 $60,000 Increase Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 01/17/03 00004 AGENDA ITEM 13 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: January 27, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Ivan M. Chand, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Mid -Year Revenue Projections STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the Mid -Year Revenue Projections; 2) Approve the Planning Budget Adjustment to reflect the Local Transportation Funds (LTF) Planning Revenue and Expenditures, and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the start of the fiscal year, staff made projections regarding the revenues received from Measure A and LTF funds. Staff has been tracking these revenues on a monthly basis. Current trends indicate that Measure A and LTF revenues are 8% higher than prior fiscal year. The local economy of the Inland Empire and especially Riverside County has continued to do better than the rest of the State of California and better than the national economy. This growth is attributable to the growth in population and housing boom. These two variables are the primary reason for the growth in Sales Tax revenue. Both Riverside and San Bernardino counties have experienced double digit growth in the last calendar quarter. The local economists are not projecting a recession for Southern California; however, they continue to project a slowdown from the exorbitant growth of the past couple of years. They continue to project moderate growth in Riverside County. Based on this economic data, the events during the last three months and the monthly tracking data, Staff is recommending that the Commission increase the current year revenue projections by 2.5%. This increase is moderate and sustainable. Now that the year-end LTF audit is complete, Staff has revised the original projection to include the carry over that is now available to the transit agencies and local governments. Attached is the worksheet to show the revised breakdowns. Staff has projected a similar increase in revenue for LTF and the revised spreadsheet shows the 000043 changes. Upon approval of this item, Staff will provide this updated information to the necessary transit and local governments. Attachment: Mid -Year Revenue Projections 000041 RIVERSIDE COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND 2002-2003 APPORTIONMENT Estimated Carryover (Unapportioned) Est. Receipts TOTAL Auditor RCTC Administration RCTC Planning (3%) SCAG Planning BALANCE SB 821 (2%) BALANCE AVAILABLE Western Coachella Valley Palo Verde Valley Population 1,240,834 340,576 27.160 1,608,570 Population % of Total 77. 14% 21.17% 1. 69% 100.00% NOTES: Estimate for Planning Purposes, subject to change 01/21/03 Budget FY 2002-2003 Orig. Proj. $0 $46,613,000 $46,613,000 $12,000 $600,000 $1,398,390 $101,000 $44,501,610 $890,032 $43,611,578 Budget FY 2002-2003 Apportionment $33,641,513 9,233,702 736,362 $43,611,578 Budget FY 2002-2003 Revised Pr oj . Increase $2,357,685 $ 47,778,325.00 $50,136,010 $12,000 $600,000 $1,504,080 $101,000 $47,918,930 $958,379 $46,960,551 $3,348,973 Budget FY 2002-2003 Rev. Appotionment Increase $36,224,876 9,942,767 792,908 $46,960,551 $2,583,363 709,065 56, 546 $3,348,973 AGENDA ITEM 14 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: January 27, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Ivan M. Chand, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Local Transportation Fund Projection for FY 2003-04 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the projections of the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) apportionment for the Coachella Valley, Palo Verde Valley and Western Riverside, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Local Transportation Fund projection consists of revenues generated from a quarter cent of the statewide sales tax. These LTF funds are principally used to fund transit requirements within the County. The Transportation Development Act legislation, that created LTF, requires the County Auditor Controller to annually estimate the amount of revenues expected to be generated from the sales tax. That estimate then becomes the basis for geographic apportionment and claimant allocation. While the County is the taxing authority and maintains custodial responsibility over the LTF revenues, the Commission by statute, is charged with administration of the LTF funding process. The practice has therefore been for Commission staff to develop the revenue estimate and then submit it to the County Auditor Controller for concurrence. Once the Commission and the County have agreed on a revenue amount, staff prepares the statutorily required apportionment. Apportionment is the process that assigns revenues to the three major geographic areas (as defined by TDA law) within the County. They are Coachella Valley, Palo Verde Valley and Western Riverside. The revenues are divided based on their respective populations. The apportionment occurs after off -the -top allocations for administration (distributed to the County, Commission and SCAG) and set -asides for planning activities (3%) and bicycle and pedestrian projects (2%). Attached is the Fiscal Year 2003-2004 LTF apportionment based on a revenue estimate of $49,689,000. The County has reviewed the estimate and concurs with it. The estimates are based on revenues to date projected to the end of the year and then inflated 4.0%. Attachment: Local Transportation Fund Projection for FY 2003-04 000046 RIVERSIDE COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND 2003-2004 APPORTIONMENT Budget FY 2003-2004 Estimated Carryover (Unapportioned) Est. Receipts TOTAL Auditor RCTC Administration RCTC Planning (3% ) SCAG Planning BALANCE SB 821 (2%) BALANCE AVAILABLE Western Coachella Valley Palo Verde Valley Populatio n 1,270,036 346,797 27,508 1,644,341 $0 $49,689,458 $49,689,458 $12,000 $600,000 $1,490,684 $101,000 $47,485,774 $949,715 $46,536,059 Budget Population FY 2003-2004 % of Total Apportionment 7T24% $35,942,952 21.09% $9,814,610 1. 67% $778,497 100.00% $46,536,059 NOTES: Estimate for Planning Purposes, subject to change 1/21/2003 AGENDA ITEM 15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: January 27, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Report on State Budget Discussions and Impact on Transportation Programs STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive the oral report on State Budget discussions and impact on transportation programs, and 2) Forward to the Commission for final actions. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: There are continuing discussions on the issues and potential impacts of the state budget shortfall on transportation projects. Executive Director Haley was included in several meetings (January 7th and January 10th) in Sacramento with California Transportation Commission (CTC) executive staff. This item is being written as a placeholder the day before a special CTC Funding Issues Workshop held on January 17th in Sacramento. Staff will attend the workshop and will provide an oral report at the January 27th Budget and Implementation Committee meeting on the issues, direction and outcomes (if any) of the on -going budget impact discussions. 000048 AGENDA ITEM 16 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: January 27, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning and Policy Development SUBJECT: SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program Extension for the City of Corona STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee 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. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City of Corona was allocated $193,600 in FY 1999-2000 SB 821 funds for construction of the Phase I and Phase II of the Chase Drive/EI Cerrito bikeway project. Phase II of the project has been completed; however, only a portion of Phase I is complete. Phase I has not been completed because it is part of a larger Public Works project and the developer funding has been delayed indefinitely. The delayed project's scope was to raise and adjust the Chase Drive street grades, upon which the remaining portion of the Class I bikeway was to be constructed. The City is proposing not to build this portion of the bikeway as it will significantly increase the project costs due to the additional grading. Instead, the City is requesting to build 5.0 miles of Class II bike lanes to provide the continuation of bikeway facilities built along Chase Drive at California Avenue. The City is also requesting an extension to June 30, 2003 to complete the project. The City of Corona was also allocated $116,600 in FY 2001-02 SB 821 funds for the construction of missing sidewalks and ADA ramps in the vicinity of its Corona Cruiser bus stops. However, the Corona Cruiser bus routes were significantly revised effective July 1, 2002 and, therefore, the project was not completed. The City had to revise the list of streets where missing sidewalks and ADA ramps 000049 would be installed leading to the new bus stops. The City is also requesting an extension to June 30, 2003 to complete the project. Attachment: Letter from City of Corona 000050 G 2644 OFFICE OF: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (WV) 13o-LL,SZ} (909) 817-5730 (FAX) viren.shah@ci.corona.ca.us (E -ma 1) December 23, 2002 PWT-061 815 WEST SIXTH STREET, P.O. BOX 940, CORONA, CALIFORNIA 91718-0940 CORONA CITY HALL - ONLINE, ALL THE TIME (http://discovercorona.com) Jerry Rivera, Program Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3`d Floor P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 nG©f�OdL� DEC 2 � 2ooz RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SUB: CITY OF CORONA SB 821 PROJECTS: REQUEST FOR REVISONS AND TIME EXTENSION City of Corona is requesting approval for proposed revisions to two of the SB 821 funded projects in progress: 1) FY 99/00 Chase Drive/EI Cerrito Bikeway Project: Portions of Phase I and entire Phase II of this project are complete. Of $242,000 of the total project cost, $146,272.40 is expended towards completion of a portion of Phase I and entire Phase II; with a remaining project cost balance of $ 95,727.60. Portion of Phase I could not be completed due to a larger Public Works Project with City and Developer funding has been delayed indefinitely. This delayed project's scope was to raise and adjust the Chase Drive street grades, upon which the remaining portion of the class I bikeway was to be constructed. City is proposing not to build this portion as it will significantly increase the project costs as additional grading cost will impact the total costs significantly. City of Corona requests that the following location change and time extension be approved for this project. A) Scope/Location Change: City is proposing that with the remaining Project Cost balance of $95,727.60, following 5.0 miles of Class II bike lanes be built that will provide continuation of bikeway facilities built along Chase Drive at California Avenue. Class II Bike Lanes at: California Avenue from Ontario Avenue to Foothill Parkway Foothill Parkway from Califomia Avenue to Lincoln Avenue Lincoln Avenue from Foothill Parkway to Ontario Avenue Mangular Avenue from MWD Easement Bike path to Ontario Avenue. B) Time Extension: Approve time extension to June 30, 2003 to complete the proposed 5.0 miles of Class II bike lanes for FY 99/00 Chase Dr/EI Cerrito Rd Bikeway Project. 00005 2) FY 01/02 Bus Stop Accessibility Project: The scope this project was to build missing sidewalks and ADA ramps in the vicinity of Corona Cruiser bus stops. However, Corona Cruiser bus s routes were significantly revised effective July 1, 2002 and therefore, the proposed scope of this project needs to be revised in conjunction with the revised bus route and new bus stops. City of Corona requests that the following location change and time extension be approved for this project. A) Location Change: Following are the streets where missing sidewalks and ADA ramps will be installed along the following streets, leading to the new Corona Cruiser bus stops: Sherman Avenue Eighth Street Seventh Street Ninth Street E Street D Street Pleasant view Street Lincoln Avenue Fifth Street Sixth Street Tenth Street Circle City Drive Pine Street Park Street Old Temescal Street Califomia Avenue Cedar Street Merrill Street Filbert Street Vicentia Avenue Rimpau Avenue B) Time Extension: Approve time extension to June 30, 2003 to complete the above mentioned work for FY 01/02 Bus Stop Accessibility Project. Please note that these approvals will enable the City of Corona to execute these SB 821 projects in a most cost effective way. If you have questions or concems, please call me at (909) 736 2235. Sincerely, 11A/4.A4 dvt, Viren Shah, P.E. Transportation Engineer 000052 AGENDA ITEM 17 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: January 27, 2003 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Darren M. 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) 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. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State Update The 2003-04 State Legislative session began December 2, 2002 under the cloud of California's most catastrophic budget crisis in State history. While the Governor has submitted a 2003-04 fiscal year budget to the State Legislature that identifies a $34.6 billion budget deficit, Elizabeth Hill, the State's "independent" Legislative Analyst announced on January 15, 2003 that the LAO's analysis identifies a deficit estimated at $26 + billion. Regardless of the final budget deficit number, addressing California's financial crisis will be priority number one for the State Legislature and will consume a tremendous amount of the Legislature's energy through 2003. The State budget crisis not withstanding, the first day to introduce bills for the 2003-04 Legislative session was December 2, 2002 with a handful of bills being introduced in the first six weeks of the session. Two bills with relevance to transportation are listed below with staff recommended positions. .U00053 SCA 2 (Torlakson, D -Antioch) — This measure is a Senate Constitutional Amendment that would place before California voters the ability to adopt a local option sales tax for transportation projects with a minimum of 25% of the revenues for smart -growth planning and development with a simple majority (50% + 1) vote. Staff recommends: SUPPORT IF AMENDED. The staff analysis is attached. ACA 7 (Dutra, D -Fremont) — This measure is an Assembly Constitutional Amendment that would place before California voters the ability to adopt local option sales tax for transportation with a super -majority vote of 55% voter approval: SUPPORT. The staff analysis is attached. Federal Update Congress has not yet acted to finalize the federal 2002-03 fiscal year budget and specifically have not yet finished work on the 2003 Transportation Appropriations Act. The Congress approved its sixth continuing resolution (CR) to keep the federal government running through January 31', 2003 and has done so at the 2002 budget levels. Of particular interest to RCTC and SANBAG is the House version of the Transportation appropriations bill that includes project funding earmarks totaling $12.7 million in San Bernardino County and $7.5 million in Riverside County. Congressional leadership is now contemplating a plan that would call for the Senate to pass an omnibus package that would include the remaining 11 appropriations bill, including transportation, that would then be "conferenced" with a House package before the end of January. The Administration's proposal for the reauthorization of TEA -21 is expected to be unveiled in late January/early February. The Administration has given little to no indication of any new programs or initiatives that might be included in their proposal. On the House side, House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Don Young (R -Alaska) has officially endorse the concept of a two -cent per gallon per year for five years (a total of $.10 per gallon increase) gas tax increase that would fund the country's growing transportation needs. Attachments: ACA 7 — Bill Analysis SCA 2 — Bill Analysis 06054 Date of Analysis: January 15, 2002 Bill Number/Author: SCA 2 (Tom Torlakson, D -Antioch) As Introduced December 2, 2002 Subject: Senate Constitutional Amendment to set a simple majority vote requirement for local transportation sales tax measures. Status: Introduced December 2, 2002 Summary: The California Constitution conditions the imposition of a special tax, such as transportation sales tax measures like Measure A or I by a city, county, or special district upon the approval of 2/3of the voters of the city, county, or special district voting on that tax. SCA 2 authorizes a local government agency or a regional transportation agency, with the approval of a 50%+1 simple majority of its voters voting on the measure, to impose a special tax, that it is otherwise authorized to impose, if the tax is imposed exclusively to fund transportation projects and services and smart growth planning. As a Senate Constitutional Amendment this bill must be approved by 2/3 of the membership of each house and approved by the voters of the State of California. Staff Comments: SCA 2 is a constitutional amendment that if approved by the legislature and California voters would reduce the super majority 2/3 -vote requirement for approval of transportation sales taxes to a simple majority. The November 2002 elections were an indicator of just how difficult it is to attain the 2/3rd super -majority vote requirement. Riverside County was the only county of five to pass a transportation sales tax measure under the 2/3rd voter requirement with a yes vote of 69.07%. The transportation sales tax measures in the counties of Fresno (53.7%), Madera (50.7%), Merced (61.31%), and Solano (59.8%) all failed to meet the 2/3rd voter requirement. There is growing concern amongst southern California transportation industry experts that a super majority vote is likely unattainable and for that reason a lower voter threshold may be necessary to have any hope of passage of future transportation sales tax measures such as Measure I in San Bernardino County. SCA 2 also requires local sales tax measures approved under this constitutional provision would be required to set -aside 25% of the revenues for "smart -growth" planning and development. The requirement that 25% of revenues be used for something other than transportation programs, limits local control and specifically the ability to fund transportation projects deemed most necessary by a county transportation commission 66605 and a county's voters. Staff recommends support for SCA 2 be conditioned upon an amendment to remove the 25% smart growth funding requirement. Finally, SCA 2 as introduced is only applicable to cities, counties, and regional transportation agencies as defined. County Transportation Commissions, such as SANBAG, are currently not included as authorized agencies under SCA 2. Staff understands that this was a technical oversight and that the author intends to include CTCs in the future. Staff Recommendation: SUPPORT IF AMENDED Proposed Amendments • Voter approval threshold amended to 55% • Eliminate 25% of revenues to Smart Growth Planning requirement • Include County Transportation Commissions as authorized agencies for such measures. • 004 )56 Date of Analysis: January 15, 2002 Bill Number/Author: ACA 7 (John Dutra, D -Fremont) As Introduced January 14, 2003 Subject: Assembly Constitutional Amendment to set a 55% super - majority vote requirement for local transportation sales tax measures. Status: Introduced January 14, 2003 Summary: The California Constitution conditions the imposition of a special tax, such as transportation sales tax measures like Measure A or I by a city, county, or special district upon the approval of 2/3 of the voters of the city, county, or special district voting 011 that tax. ACA 7 authorizes a local government agency or a regional transportation agency, with the approval of a 55% super -majority of voters voting on the measure, to impose a special tax, that it is otherwise authorized to impose, if the tax is imposed exclusively to fund transportation projects and services. As an Assembly Constitutional Amendment this bill must be approved by 2/3 of the membership of each house and approved by the voters of the State of California. Staff Comments: ACA 7 is a constitutional amendment that if approved by the legislature and California voters would reduce the super majority 2/3 -vote requirement for approval of transportation sales taxes to a simple majority. The November 2002 elections were an indicator of just how difficult it is to attain the 2/3rd super -majority vote requirement. Riverside County was the only county of five to pass a transportation sales tax measure under the 2/3rd voter requirement with a yes vote of 69.07%. The transportation sales tax measures in the counties of Fresno (53.7%), Madera (50.7%), Merced (61.31%), and Solano (59.8%) all failed to meet the 2/3rd voter requirement. There is growing concern amongst southern California transportation industry experts that a super majority vote is likely unattainable and for that reason a lower voter threshold may be necessary to have any hope of passage of future transportation sales tax measures such as Measure I in San Bernardino County. Staff Recommendation: SUPPORT 000057