HomeMy Public PortalAbout02 February 26, 2024 Budget & Implementation
MEETING AGENDA
Budget and Implementation Committee
Time: 9:30 a.m.
Date: February 26, 2024
Location: BOARD ROOM
County of Riverside Administration Center
4080 Lemon St, First Floor, Riverside, CA 92501
TELECONFERENCE SITES
COUNCIL CHAMBER CONFERENCE ROOM LARGE CONFERENCE ROOM
City of Palm Desert French Valley Airport
73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 37600 Sky Canyon Drive, Murrieta, CA 92563
COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Jeremy Smith, Chair / Jennifer Dain, City of Canyon Lake
Linda Molina, Vice Chair / Wendy Hewitt, City of Calimesa
Lloyd White / Julio Martinez, City of Beaumont
Raymond Gregory / Mark Carnevale, City of Cathedral City
Steven Hernandez / Stephanie Virgen, City of Coachella
Scott Matas / Russell Betts, City of Desert Hot Springs
Bob Magee / Natasha Johnson, City of Lake Elsinore
Ulises Cabrera / Edward Delgado, City of Moreno Valley
Cindy Warren / Lori Stone, City of Murrieta
Jan Harnik / Kathleen Kelly, City of Palm Desert
Lisa Middleton / To Be Appointed, City of Palm Springs
Valerie Vandever / Alonso Ledezma, City of San Jacinto
James Stewart / Jessica Alexander, City of Temecula
Chuck Washington, County of Riverside, District III
Yxstian Gutierrez, County of Riverside, District V
STAFF
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
Aaron Hake, Deputy Executive Director
AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY
Annual Budget Development and Oversight
Competitive Federal and State Grant Programs
Countywide Communications and Outreach Programs
Countywide Strategic Plan
Legislation
Public Communications and Outreach Programs
Short Range Transit Plans
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE
www.rctc.org
AGENDA*
*Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda
9:30 a.m.
Monday, February 26, 2024
BOARD ROOM
County of Riverside Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, First Floor
Riverside, California
TELECONFERENCE SITES
COUNCIL CHAMBER CONFERENCE ROOM LARGE CONFERENCE ROOM
City of Palm Desert French Valley Airport
73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California 37600 Sky Canyon Drive, Murrieta, California
In compliance with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials distributed
72 hours prior to the meeting, which are public records relating to open session agenda items, will be
available for inspection by members of the public prior to the meeting at the Commission office, 4080 Lemon
Street, Third Floor, Riverside, CA, and on the Commission’s website, www.rctc.org.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, Government Code Section 54954.2, and the Federal
Transit Administration Title VI, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141 if special assistance
is needed to participate in a Commission meeting, including accessibility and translation services. Assistance
is provided free of charge. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to the meeting time will assist staff in
assuring reasonable arrangements can be made to provide assistance at the meeting.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS – Each individual speaker is limited to speak three (3) continuous minutes or
less. The Committee may, either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote of the Committee,
waive this three minute time limitation. Depending on the number of items on the Agenda and the
number of speakers, the Chair may, at his/her discretion, reduce the time of each speaker to two (2)
continuous minutes. Also, the Committee may terminate public comments if such comments become
repetitious. In addition, the maximum time for public comment for any individual item or topic is
thirty (30) minutes. Speakers may not yield their time to others without the consent of the Chair.
Any written documents to be distributed or presented to the Committee shall be submitted to the
Clerk of the Board. This policy applies to Public Comments and comments on Agenda Items.
Budget and Implementation Committee
February 26, 2024
Page 2
Under the Brown Act, the Board should not take action on or discuss matters raised during public
comment portion of the agenda which are not listed on the agenda. Board members may refer such
matters to staff for factual information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration.
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 Committee subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda
requires 2/3 vote of the Committee. If there are less than 2/3 of the Committee members present,
adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote. Added items will be placed for discussion
at the end of the agenda.)
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. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – NOVEMBER 27, 2023
Page 1
6B. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS
Page 13
Overview
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission take the following
action(s):
1) Receive and file the sales tax analysis for the Quarter 3, 2023 (3Q 2023).
6C. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Page 22
Overview
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission take the following
action(s):
1) Receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the six months ended
December 2023.
6D. MONTHLY INVESTMENT REPORT
Page 31
Overview
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission take the following
action(s):
1) Receive and file the Monthly Investment Report for the month ended
January 31, 2024.
Budget and Implementation Committee
February 26, 2024
Page 3
6E. QUARTERLY PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT METRICS REPORT, OCTOBER - DECEMBER 2023
Page 34
Overview
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission take the following
action(s):
1) Receive and file the Quarterly Public Engagement Metrics Report for
October - December 2023.
7. PROPOSED POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024/25 BUDGET
Page 40
Overview
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission take the following action(s):
1) Review and approve the proposed Commission Policy Goals and Objectives for the
Fiscal Year (FY) 2024/25 Budget; and
2) Review and approve the Fiscal Accountability Policies for the FY 2024/25 Budget.
8. REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD FOR THE COACHELLA
VALLEY RAIL PROJECT
Page 52
Overview
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission take the following action(s):
1) Approve Reimbursement Agreement No. 24-25-063-00 with Union Pacific Railroad
(UP) for preliminary engineering services for the Coachella Valley Rail Project in an
amount not to exceed $100,000;
2) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve future amendments to
address the anticipated additional scope of work required by UP as the project
progresses for an amount not to exceed $500,000 as may be required for the Project
for a total not to exceed contract of $600,000;
3) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to
execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and
4) Approve a budget adjustment of $20,000 for expenses to be incurred in Fiscal
Year 2023/24.
Budget and Implementation Committee
February 26, 2024
Page 4
9. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
Page 60
Overview
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission take the following action(s):
1) Receive and file a state and federal legislative update; and
2) Adopt the following bill position:
a) AB 2535 (Bonta)—Oppose.
10. ELECTION OF OFFICERS FOR THE BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE
Page 66
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Conduct an election of officers for 2024 – Chair and Vice Chair.
11. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA
12. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
13. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Overview
This item provides the opportunity for brief announcements or comments on items or
matters of general interest.
14. ADJOURNMENT
The next Budget and Implementation Committee meeting is scheduled to be held at
9:30 a.m., March 25, 2024.
AGENDA ITEM 6A
MINUTES
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE
Monday, November 27, 2023
MINUTES
1.CALL TO ORDER
The meeting of the Budget and Implementation Committee was called to order by
Chair Jeremy Smith at 9:30 a.m. in the Board Room at the County of Riverside
Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California 92501 and at
the teleconference sites: Council Chamber Conference Room, City of Palm Desert,
73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California 92260, and the Large Conference Room,
French Valley Airport, 37600 Sky Canyon Dr., Murrieta, California 92563.
2.ROLL CALL
Members/Alternates Present Members Absent
Raymond Gregory** Ulises Cabrera
Yxstian Gutierrez*** Steven Hernandez
Jan Harnik** Alonso Ledezma
Bob Magee Scott Matas
Lisa Middleton** Lloyd White
Linda Molina
Jeremy Smith
Cindy Warren*
James Stewart
Chuck Washington*
*Joined the meeting at French Valley.
**Joined the meeting at Palm Desert.
***Arrived after the meeting was called to order.
3.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Bob Magee led the Budget and Implementation Committee in a flag salute.
4.PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no requests to speak from the public.
1
RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes
November 27, 2023
Page 2
5. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS
There were no additions or revisions to the agenda.
At this time, Commissioner Yxstian Gutierrez joined the meeting.
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.
M/S/C (Molina/Gregory) to approve the following Consent Calendar item(s):
6A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – AUGUST 28, 2023
6B. QUARTERLY PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT METRICS REPORT, JULY - SEPTEMBER 2023
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission take the following
action(s):
1) Receive and file the Quarterly Public Engagement Metrics Report for
July - September 2023.
6C. QUARTERLY REPORTING OF CONTRACT CHANGE ORDERS FOR CONSTRUCTION
CONTRACTS
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission take the following
action(s):
1) Receive and file the Quarterly Report of Contract Change Orders for
Construction Contracts for the three months ended September 30, 2023.
6D. MONTHLY INVESTMENT REPORT
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission take the following
action(s):
1) Receive and file the Monthly Investment Report for the month ended
October 31, 2023.
7. TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROGRAM
David Knudsen, External Affairs Director, presented Traffic Relief Plan Public Engagement
Program and procurement update, highlighting the following areas:
2
RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes
November 27, 2023
Page 3
• Outreach and communication at RCTC
• Transportation needs have grown
o February 2023 Commission Workshop
Reduce traffic congestion
Support multimodal transportation
Reduce the burden of goods and freight movement
Evaluate the 2020 Commission adopted Traffic Relief Plan
o County residents perceive at least some additional funding for
transportation is needed (2023)
o Commission approved 2024 Draft Traffic Relief Plan for public outreach
and engagement (October 2023)
• Three strategic goals of the request for proposals (RFP)
• Public outreach goals
• Maximize return on investment
• Procurement
• AlphaVu outreach approach
• Workplan schedule
David Knudsen noted that Scott Wilkinson, AlphaVu CEO, is here to answer any questions.
M/S/C (Harnik/Warren) for the Committee to recommend the Commission take
the following action(s):
1) Award Agreement No. 24-15-032-00 to AlphaVu for Public Engagement
Program services for an eight-month term, in an amount not to exceed
$986,034; and
2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel
review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission.
8. SENATE BILL 125 FORMULA-BASED FUNDING FOR THE TRANSIT AND INTERCITY RAIL
CAPITAL PROGRAM AND ZERO EMISSION TRANSIT CAPITAL PROGRAM
Lorelle Moe-Luna, Multimodal Services Director, presented the Senate Bill 125 Formula-
Based Funding for the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) and Zero Emission
Transit Capital Program (ZETCP) update, highlighting the following:
• Background
o TIRCP was created by the state in 2014 as a competitive program from
cap-and-trade proceeds. Today, the SB 1 gas tax also contributes to TIRCP
o AB 102 and SB 125 amended the Budget Act of 2023
$4 billion of general fund to TIRCP over 2 years
$910 million of the GGRF and $190 million from the Public
Transportation Act over 4 years
3
RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes
November 27, 2023
Page 4
Created the formula-based TIRCP and ZETCP
o Administered by CalSTA
• Program objectives
o Reduce greenhouse gas emissions
o Expand and improve transit service to increase ridership
o Integrate the rail service of the state’s various rail operations
o Improve transit safety
• Process
o CalSTA established program guidelines
o Eligible projects
Transit/rail operations and capital
Grade separations and rail crossing improvements
o All funding distributed to RTPAs such as RCTC for allocation
o Submit recommendations to CalSTA by Dec 31, 2023
o Recommendations based on RCTC goals, plans, and priorities
• Available funding
• A list of the proposed Zero Emission (ZE) and Transit Capital Projects by transit
agency
• A Map of transit projects
• Passenger Rail Project Development
• A map of the rail projects
Lorelle Moe-Luna noted there are a few representatives from some of the local agencies
that are here in case there are any technical questions on their specific projects.
Commissioner Cindy Warren asked about the open loop system for debit and credit cards
and what security measures are going to be on those systems.
Lorelle Moe-Luna replied that the open loop payment systems are used with various
transit agencies today. Caltrans is also looking into this further because they are looking
at more of an integrated system and the goal would be to allow passengers to use one
method that is more convenient. She stated in terms of security a lot of them are also in
pilot demonstration programs so that is something that will continue to be looked into as
well.
In response to Commissioner Gutierrez’s question in terms of the TIRCP and the ZETCP if
there will be ongoing funding after those three years, Lorelle More-Luna replied it is four
years, but this is a one-time opportunity.
In response to Commissioner Gutierrez’s clarification for more specifics regarding how
the funding amounts and the projects are identified, Lorelle Moe-Luna replied that RCTC
is required by the guidelines to make sure they consult with all their transit agencies,
which they have. Staff requested a list of projects from all their transit agencies, and they
reviewed their list. The needs in the county are greater than what is available so in this
4
RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes
November 27, 2023
Page 5
first year it is only a portion of what everyone is asking for and are hopeful that in the
next year they can fund more of them. In terms of the other projects such as the grade
separations staff has been in contact with those cities for a while and with the 2017 Grade
Separation Priority Study that staff conducted one of the things staff has always wanted
to do is to try to get as many projects as they can to be construction ready because that
would make them more competitive for other federal funds. Putting more local funds on
those projects is something staff has tried to do, and those cities have already identified
some funding to get those through the pre-construction phases and this will help
complete design and/or can be used for construction.
Commissioner Gutierrez expressed appreciation that it is a great thing especially for that
area and the whole Pass Area.
Commissioner Linda Molina asked what the average construction time frame for a grade
separation project is because there is so much freight travel and it is a problem for people
trying to cross the tracks at the various places.
Anne Mayer replied sometimes, and used the Sunset Grade Separation project as an
example as it went through a lot of challenges in the early stages, but the County of
Riverside took over the project and it started moving quickly at that point. A normal grade
separation project and not a complicated one, probably environmental and design at least
two years and construction another couple of years. RCTC has grade separations like the
Jurupa Valley Grade Separation is currently under construction it has been under
construction for several years and it still has aways to go and McKinley Grade Separation
is very complicated. The Third Street Grade Separation here in Riverside it has been in
the works for years and it will be years more because there is so much right of way to be
acquired. She explained it depends on how complicated it is how much right of way is
needed, but Pennsylvania and Hargrave grade separation projects have started and the
one out on Broadway they should be relatively straight forward. She stated when working
with the railroad just the railroad process alone can take two to three years in order to
get to a construction and maintenance agreement.
M/S/C (Harnik/Molina) for the Committee to recommend the Commission take
the following action(s):
1) Approve the funding recommendations in Attachment 1 for the Senate
Bill 125 (SB 125) Formula-Based Funding for the Transit and Intercity Rail
Capital Program (TIRCP) and Zero Emission Transit Capital Program
(ZETCP) for Fiscal Year 2023/24;
2) Direct staff to prepare and execute funding agreements with the project
sponsors to outline the project schedule and local funding commitments;
3) Authorize the Executive Director to execute the funding agreements with
the project sponsors, pursuant to legal counsel review;
5
RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes
November 27, 2023
Page 6
4) Approve an amendment to the FY 2023/24 budget to receive the first-
year allocations of TIRCP and ZETCP formula funds in the amounts of
$123,382,700 and $14,828,290, respectively; and
5) Approve a FY 2023/24 budget adjustment of $791,214 for expenses
related to the TIRCP and ZETCP formula funds.
9. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS CORRECTIVE ACTION FOR
FEDERAL FORMULA FUNDS
Jillian Guizado, Planning and Programming Director, provided a detailed overview for the
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) corrective action for Federal
Formula Funds and for the 2024 Call for Project Nominations (nomination procedures).
In response to Commissioner James Stewart’s question regarding what are the projects
that will qualify for this program, Jillian Guizado replied basically any project that is
federally eligible could seek funding from the program.
In response to Commissioner Stewart’s clarification if staff will create a criteria of projects
that would fit into that category, Jillian Guizado replied that the nomination procedures
in Attachment 3 is how staff is recommending they proceed. RCTC staff is not able to tell
anybody that they cannot pursue these funds but the intake form, which is the initial
process they are hoping to conduct is intended to inform interested applicants on how
competitive they might be in the process.
Commissioner Stewart asked if SCAG is picking the projects that they are going to fund
and Jillian Guizado replied yes. Commissioner Stewart clarified that RCTC is acting as the
middleman and Jillian Guizado replied yes.
Commissioner Gregory stated this could be quite disruptive to the status quo as far as
funding for these federal funds go. He clarified that any Coachella Valley Association of
Governments (CVAG) project no matter how highly it scores on the CVAG Transportation
Project Prioritization Study (TPPS) the maximum would be scored as a recommended
project. Jillian Guizado replied yes that is staff’s recommendation.
Commissioner Gregory expressed that can be quite disruptive because it sounds like it
does not matter how important some of these projects are they are already going to be
problematic as far as getting the necessary points to be funded to be chosen by SCAG. He
asked if staff or Anne Mayer know how likely the Commission is going to come out in this
both as RCTC and as the subregions of RCTC in the future under this scoring that is being
proposed.
Anne Mayer replied the RCTC Board no longer will have control or discretion over any of
these fund types in terms of how the funding is allocated. There will be no more fair share
proportional population base share between Western County, CVAG, and Palo Verde
6
RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes
November 27, 2023
Page 7
Valley. She explained from an overall county standpoint it would be to the Commission’s
collective advantage to put forward the projects that will compete the best at the SCAG
level. In looking at all the rest of the scoring criteria that SCAG has, an interchange in
almost any jurisdiction is not going to compete well in this program because it probably
will not be able to meet the performance measures in the program and to be able to
compete. The Commission should be putting up their biggest projects such as the
Coachella Valley Rail Project, rail stations, grade separations, and express lanes because
they will compete well. Staff is encouraging their member agencies’ staff to bring forward
the most projects that are going to be the most competitive. She explained when they
set up the structure of 50-point ranking for the measure projects this board has taken
action in the past that the priority for these funding types is the Measure A Highway
Projects and they are fulfilling that board action here. In the next cycle they have Western
County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Projects in that second tier as well
so most of the regular TUMF projects and many of the projects in the TPPS are not going
to compete well in a six-county competition. For the Congestion Mitigation and Air
Quality (CMAQ) funding it cannot be used for an interchange that CMAQ money is meant
for congestion mitigation strategies so it is express lanes and the signal synchronization
in the Coachella Valley and in Western Riverside County could be potential eligible
projects. She expressed this is a very significant change in how federal funding is
distributed with these programs and they will no longer have the flexibility to just move
money around as a project needs. There will probably be member agencies who will for
a variety of different reasons feel that it is important to submit an application even if it is
not particularly going to be competitive and these are expensive applications to submit
as well. This first round they will see how it goes and this is a very small first round in
terms of the pot of money that is available and for the next round their target will be well
over $100 million but those are just targets and they could get nothing. It depends on
the strength of their applications and of their projects.
Commissioner Gregory stated he is not pleased but he appreciates the transparency and
that RCTC has always strived to make sure the applications that are put forward are ones
that will score the best and if there is a way to fix some of the lower scored ones that they
try to do that. It appears as Anne Mayer mentioned this is going to be a little bit difficult
to try to work with that especially for CVAG projects and the same for Western Riverside
Council of Governments (WRCOG) projects but also Riverside County projects just in
general are potentially going to have a hard time competing now with the other
transportation commission’s projects.
Anne Mayer expressed in talking about transparency, they cannot have their own internal
formulas, they cannot recommend that decisions get made to fulfill past practice, because
if SCAG does that there is a potential this region could lose its ability to allocate federal
formula dollars. It is important especially in the first couple of rounds because Caltrans
and the federal government will be monitoring this new process to see how it is working
and to make sure it is compliant as they will conduct audits. Also, it is important in this
round and in the next one to make sure they are staying true to the work that the team
7
RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes
November 27, 2023
Page 8
did. She clarified with Jillian Guizado as to where they put the federal projects that need
additional funding. Jillian Guizado replied that they ended up taking that out in favor of
putting in CVAG TPPS and the WRCOG TUMF projects.
Anne Mayer noted to Commissioner Gregory that the only projects ahead of the TPPS
projects as well as the WRCOG TUMF projects are the Western County Highway Projects,
which is the next Interstate 15 express lane project which will likely compete well on a
regional basis.
Commissioner Molina stated she wanted to ask how badly this is going to hurt Riverside
County but per Anne Mayer comments she explained what was not going to happen and
she expressed this is going to have a very serious effect on Riverside County.
Commissioner Bob Magee stated Jillian Guizado commented about the tribal
governments and asked if staff anticipates any of their tribal partners submitting
something here.
Jillian Guizado replied she does not; they have a plan to do outreach but with their tribal
governments all throughout Southern California and that there is a conflict with Caltrans
and the federal government where in order to receive funding through the state even if
it were federal funding through the state, they would have to waive their sovereign
immunity and tribal governments have not been willing to do that. She believes there is
an effort in California to work through that, so they do not continue to be disadvantaged
in that way, but she does not expect that issue to be resolved when this moves forward.
Commissioner Magee asked at its June 2024 Commission meeting will staff have the list
of SCAG’s recommendations for the entire commission. Jillian Guizado replied she
probably will not have it turned around by the June Commission meeting but if they have
a July Commission meeting, she can absolutely report back on the outcome. She can work
with Lisa Mobley, Clerk of the Board, to distribute the SCAG agenda to all the
Commissioners.
Anne Mayer thanked Jillian Guizado for all her work on this for the past two years and she
thanked SCAG as this had the potential to be something that completely went out of any
of the transportation commission’s control in terms of being able to weigh in on the
process. She noted SCAG Executive Director Kome Ajise made it very clear that he knew
how important these funding sources were to every single one of the counties. She
explained a strong and small working group was put together with one representative
from each of the transportation commissions. Jillian Guizado has been their
representative and she, her colleagues at the other transportation commissions, and
SCAG have done a phenomenal job in coming up with a process that meets the federal
and state requirements and at the same time acknowledges the county transportation
commissions are the regional transportation planning agencies and have a critical role in
getting these projects delivered.
8
RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes
November 27, 2023
Page 9
M/S/C (Harnik/Stewart) for the Committee to recommend the Commission take
the following action(s):
1) Approve the RCTC Procedures for the Southern California Association of
Governments (SCAG) 2024 Call for Project Nominations (nomination
procedures);
2) Authorize the Executive Director to submit to SCAG the project
nomination list based on the nomination procedures;
3) Approve Agreement No. 24-66-041-00, a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) with SCAG; and
4) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel
review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission.
At this time, Yxstian Gutierrez left the meeting.
10. RIVERSIDE COUNTY ZERO-EMISSION BUS ROLLOUT PLANS AND FUNDING AND
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
Eric DeHate, Transit Manager, stated he is joined by the Commission’s consultant from
the Center for Transportation and the Environment (CTE) Niki Rinaldi El-Abd, Lead
Managing Consultant. Eric DeHate then presented an update for the Riverside County
Zero-Emission Bus (ZEB) Rollout Plans and Funding and Implementation Strategy
(Project), highlighting the following:
• Background information
o California Air Resources Board (CARB) Innovative Clean Transit (ICT)
Regulation was adopted in December of 2018
o The small transit operators approached staff to conduct ZEB Rollout Plans
on their behalf to meet June 30, 2023, deadline
o In April 2022, the Commission awarded a contract to CTE to complete this
effort
o Primary focus of the project
ICT ZEB Rollout Plans
Countywide cost analysis
Niki Rinaldi El-Abd presented the CTE analysis, highlighting the following:
• About CTE
• CARB ICT Regulation
o 100 percent ZEB fleet by 2040 is not a mandate, but a goal
o There is a purchasing rule: Starting January 1, 2026-2028, 25% ZEB
percentage of total new bus purchases; by January 1, 2029, 100% ZEB
percentage of total new bus purchases
9
RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes
November 27, 2023
Page 10
o Small CA Transit Agencies (<100 buses) are required to submit a board-
approved ZEB Rollout Plan by July 1, 2023
o Large agencies submitted their Rollout Plans in July 2020
• Bus styles operated in the County: 24’/27’ cutaway bus and 35’/40’ bus
• Analysis overview
o Baseline fleet and procurement schedules collected from agencies
o Transition scenarios developed based on assessed block feasibility and ICT
purchasing requirements
o Annual fleet, fuel, maintenance and facilities costs were estimated from
state contract pricing and industry averages
Tax and inflation (PPI, Caltrans index, EIA and CPI) were also applied
o Resulting transition costs were presented to each agency’s staff and board
and a ZEB transition scenario was selected
• Technology selection: BEB Fleet – city of Banning; Mixed Fleet – cities of
Beaumont, Corona, and Riverside; FCEB Fleet – Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency
• Facility assessments
o Facility site visits conducted in July 2023
o Confirmed infrastructure estimates included in ICT Rollout Plan
o Recommended redundancy and resiliency components
• Cost analysis for implementation
o Total added costs for ZE transition (including solar and resilience
measures): $608,267,000
At this time, Eric DeHate presented the countywide analysis, highlighting the following:
• Countywide funding gap analysis
• Next steps
He noted they also have some staff from each of the transit operators if the
Commissioners has any questions about the ICT Rollout Plans.
M/S/C (Gregory/Harnik) for the Committee to recommend the Commission take
the following action(s):
1) Receive and file an update on the Riverside County Zero-Emission Bus
(ZEB) Rollout Plans and Funding and Implementation Strategy (Project);
2) Direct staff to review existing transit funding policies and continue to
work with the transit operators to strategize and leverage revenue
sources to support the transition to zero-emission; and
3) Award sole source Agreement No. 24-62-042-00 with Center for
Transportation and the Environment (CTE) for ongoing plan updates and
zero-emission technical assistance for a three-year term in the amount
of 150,000, plus a contingency of $15,000, for a total amount not to
exceed $165,000.
10
RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes
November 27, 2023
Page 11
11. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
Andrew Sall, Senior Management Analyst, presented the Commission’s proposed 2024
State and Federal Legislative Platform.
M/S/C (Stewart/Molina) for the Committee to recommend the Commission take
the following action(s):
1) Adopt the Commission’s 2024 State and Federal Legislative Platform; and
2) Receive and file a state and federal legislative update.
12. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA
There were no items pulled from the consent calendar.
13. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
Anne Mayer announced:
• Earlier on the agenda they heard the item related public outreach and
communication related to the draft Traffic Relief Plan. The Traffic Relief Plan has
been up on the RCTC website for a couple of weeks, and it was interesting how
quickly RCTC started receiving comments, including some constructive feedback
from the public. Staff has had several Commissioners already ask for staff to come
out to a city council meeting or a workshop to present the draft Traffic Relief Plan
for their fellow council members and their communities. She noted any other
Commissioners that are interested in a presentation to let staff know.
• The 15/91 Express Lanes Connector Event is being held on December 6 @ 10:00
a.m. at the North Main Corona Commuter Rail station. She expressed appreciation
to Jennifer Crosson, Toll Operations Director, and David Thomas, Toll Project
Delivery Director, and their incredible teams along with Myers-Rados team who
got that connector open on November 21 in time for holiday travel.
• The California Transportation Commission will be in Riverside on December 6-7.
There is a Mobility 21 Reception in the lobby starting @ 5:00 p.m. on December 6
if anyone is interested in attending and has not RSVP’d to let staff know.
• There was a very hefty agenda at its Budget and Implementation Committee and
this afternoon with the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects
Committee so the December 13 Commission meeting may go longer than usual.
14. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
There were no comments from the Commissioners.
11
RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes
November 27, 2023
Page 12
15. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business for consideration by the Budget and Implementation
Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 10:35 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lisa Mobley
Administrative Services
Director/Clerk of the Board
12
AGENDA ITEM 6B
Agenda Item 6B
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: February 26, 2024
TO: Budget and Implementation Committee
FROM: Matt Wallace, Deputy Director of Financial Administration
THROUGH: Sergio Vidal, Chief Financial Officer
SUBJECT: Quarterly Sales Tax Analysis
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission to take the following action(s):
1) Receive and file the sales tax analysis for the Quarter 3, 2023 (3Q 2023).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
At its May 2023 meeting, the Commission awarded an agreement with MuniServices, an Avenu
Insights and Analytics Company (MuniServices), for quarterly sales tax reporting services plus
additional fees contingent on additional sales tax revenues generated from the transactions and
use tax (sales tax) audit services. The services performed under this agreement pertain to only
the Measure A sales tax revenues.
Since the commencement of these services, MuniServices submitted audits, which reported
findings and submitted to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA), for
review and determination of errors in sales tax reporting related to 1,657 businesses. Through
2Q 2023, the CDTFA approved $17,251,462 of cumulative sales tax revenues recovered for the
Commission. If CDTFA concurs with the error(s) for the remaining claims, the Commission will
receive additional revenues; however, the magnitude of the value of the remaining findings was
not available. It is important to note that while the recoveries of additional revenues will be
tangible, it will not be sufficient to alter the overall trend of sales tax revenues.
MuniServices provided the Commission with the Quarterly Sales Tax Digest Summary report for
3Q 2023. Most of the 3Q 2023 Measure A sales tax revenues were received in the third quarter
of calendar year 2023, during September 2023 through November 2023, due to a lag in the sales
tax calendar. The summary section of the 3Q 2023 report is attached and includes an overview
of California’s economic outlook, local results, historical cash collections analysis by quarter, top
25 sales/use tax contributors, historical sales tax amounts, annual sales tax by business category,
and five-year economic trend (general retail).
Taxable transactions for the top 25 contributors in Riverside County generated 26.47 percent of
taxable sales for the benchmark year ended 3Q 2023, slightly more than the benchmark year
13
Agenda Item 6B
ended 3Q 2022 at 26.22 percent. The top 100 tax contributors generated 40.42 percent for the
benchmark year ended 3Q 2023, more than the 39.73 percent for the benchmark year ended
3Q 2022.
In the Economic Category Analysis below, three of the six categories experienced new highs in
the 3Q 2023 benchmark year compared to the prior eight benchmark years.
An analysis of sales tax performance through 3Q 2023 is attached and illustrates consistent cycles
for sales tax performance for most of the economic categories since 3Q 2018, apart from
COVID-19 impacts for some categories.
For the top 10 economic segments (miscellaneous retail, auto sales – new, restaurants,
department stores, building materials – wholesale, service stations, food markets, heavy
industry, apparel stores and building materials – retail) during the past eight benchmark year
quarters, sales tax reached a new high point in 3Q 2023 for five out of ten categories. The
economic segments represent 73.07 percent of the total sales tax receipts. For the remaining
21 economic segments representing 26.93 percent of total sales tax receipts, 7 economic
segments representing 9.53 percent of total sales tax receipts reached new high points in the
benchmark year 3Q 2023.
In the Economic Segment Analysis below, miscellaneous retail, which includes online retailers, is
RCTC’s largest economic segment, followed by auto sales – new and restaurants. Since the
benchmark year 3Q 2016, each of these segments has realized significant sales tax growth.
Miscellaneous retail has increased 155 percent, auto sales – new has increased 58 percent, and
the restaurant segment has increased 57 percent when comparing benchmark year 3Q 2016 to
benchmark year 3Q 2023. The increase related to online sales is largely a result of the recent
legislation to tax online sales along with general consumer spending shifting from brick and
mortars to online.
As noted, auto sales-new and restaurants have also experienced increases since 3Q 2016 due to
general price increases (inflation) and improved consumer demand.
% of Total / % Change RCTC State Wide Orange County Riverside
County S.F. Bay Area Sacramento
Valley Central Valley South Coast North Coast
General Retail 28.5 / -1.0 28.3 / 0.6 27.1 / 0.4 34.4 / 0.5 23.6 / -4.0 28.5 / 0.5 37.0 / 0.8 26.9 / 2.2 27.1 / 2.6
Food Products 16.6 / 2.2 21.0 / 2.7 20.6 / 0.4 17.8 / 0.5 23.0 / 4.0 16.6 / 2.2 14.7 / 2.8 22.9 / 3.1 18.2 / 1.4
Transportation 23.3 / -5.2 23.9 / -3.8 25.6 / 1.3 23.8 / -3.5 19.9 / -5.2 26.6 / -5.9 22.8 / -3.2 24.9 / -2.5 28.9 / -7.2
Construction 10.9 / -1.9 9.8 / -4.3 8.2 / -2.6 12.6 / -2.1 10.5 / -7.2 12.5 / -9.1 10.0 / -5.3 8.8 / -1.6 14.6 / -4.7
Business to Business 16.2 / 6.4 16.0 / -4.2 17.6 / -3.8 10.9 / 3.1 21.7 / -5.8 14.7 / 0.3 14.8 / -3.4 15.6 / -4.5 10.2 / -9.6
Miscellaneous 4.6 / 8.8 1.0 / -0.5 1.0 / 11.2 0.6 / -2.5 1.3 / 3.3 1.1 / 1.8 0.7 / -6.9 1.1 / -0.4 1.0 / 11.0
Total 100.0 / -0.1 100.0 / -1.3 100.0 / -0.3 100 / -0.6 100.0 / -3.2 100.0 / -2.3 100.0 / -1.2 100.0 / -0.3 100.0 / -2.9
General Retail: Apparel Stores, Department Stores, Furniture/Appliances, Drug Stores, Recreation Products, Florist/Nursery, and Misc. Retail
Food Products: Restaurants, Food Markets, Liquor Stores, and Food Processing Equipment
Construction: Building Materials Retail and Building Materials Wholesale
Transportation: Auto Parts/Repair, Auto Sales - New, Auto Sales - Used, Service Stations, and Misc. Vehicle Sales
Business to Business: Office Equip., Electronic Equip., Business Services, Energy Sales, Chemical Products, Heavy Industry, Light Industry, Leasing,
Biotechnology, I.T. Infrastructure, and Green Energy
Miscellaneous: Health & Government, Miscellaneous Other, and Closed Account Adjustments
ECONOMIC CATEGORY ANALYSIS
14
Agenda Item 6B
Information regarding sales tax comparison by city and change in economic segments
(two highest gains and two highest declines) for 3Q 2023 to 3Q 2022 is attached.
Staff will monitor sales tax receipts and other available economic data to determine the need for
any adjustments to the revenue projections. Staff will utilize the forecast scenarios with the
complete report and receipt trends in assessing such projections.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This is an information item. There is no fiscal impact.
Attachments:
1) Sales Tax Digest Summary 3Q 2023
2) Sales Tax Performance Analysis by Quarter 3Q 2023
3) Quarterly Sales Tax Comparison by City for 3Q 2023 to 3Q 2022
RCTC State Wide Orange County Riverside
County S.F. Bay Area Sacramento
Valley Central Valley South Coast North Coast
Largest Segment Miscellaneous
Retail Restaurants Restaurants Miscellaneous
Retail Restaurants Miscellaneous
Retail
Miscellaneous
Retail Restaurants Restaurants
% of Total / % Change 11.7 / 0.9 15.1 / 5.1 15.3 / 3.4 17.1 / 2.4 17.0 / 6.2 11.7 / 10.5 14.8 / 11.0 16.9 / 5.3 11.5 / 1.4
2nd Largest Segment Auto Sales -
New
Auto Sales -
New
Auto Sales -
New Restaurants Auto Sales -
New Restaurants Department
Stores
Auto Sales -
New
Auto Sales -
New
% of Total / % Change 11.3 / -2.4 11.5 / -0.3 14.8 / 6.0 11.4 / 4.8 9.6 / -2.7 11.3 / 3.1 10.9 / -1.9 12.8 / 0.4 11.4 / 0.9
3rd Largest Segment Restaurants Miscellaneous
Retail
Miscellaneous
Retail
Auto Sales -
New
Department
Stores
Auto Sales -
New Restaurants Miscellaneous
Retail
Department
Stores
% of Total / % Change 10.6 / 3.8 9.9 / 9.4 9.1 / 8.3 11.0 / 0.9 7.7 / -2.9 11.3 / -1.1 9.8 / 4.8 8.6 / 14.9 10.8 / 20.0
ECONOMIC SEGMENT ANALYSIS
15
Riverside County Transportation Commission
Sales Tax Digest Summary
Collections through December 2023
Sales through September 2023 (2023Q3)
www.avenuinsights.com (800)800‐8181 Page 1
CALIFORNIA’S ECONOMIC OUTLOOK
California sales tax receipts decreased by 3.2% over the same quarter from the previous year, with
Northern California reporting a 4.5% decrease compared to a 2.3% decrease for Southern California.
Receipts for the RCTC decreased by 3.1% over the same periods.
Real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) increased at an annual rate of 3.0% in the third quarter of 2023. U.S.
inflation decreased to 3.6% in October of 2023 compared to 7.7% the same month a year ago.
California's headline inflation decreased to 3.6% year over year as of August of 2023, down from 7.5% in
August of 2022. (DIR, BEA, BLS, October Finance Bulletin)
The U.S. unemployment rate increased slightly to 3.8% in September of 2023. California's
unemployment rate decreased to 4.7% in September of 2023, 0.3 percentage point higher than March
of 2023 rate of 4.4%. (BLS, October Finance Bulletin)
U.S. personal income increased by 4.8% for the third quarter of 2023, compared to same quarter
previous year. Compensation of employees increased by 5.4% while personal current taxes decreased by
11.4% from the previous period, resulting in a net gain of 7.6% in disposable income. The increase of
disposable income generated a 33.1% increase in US personal savings for the third quarter of 2023,
compared to same quarter previous year. (BEA)
LOCAL RESULTS
Net Cash Receipts Analysis
Local Collections $68,692,320
Less: Cost of Administration $(584,040)
Net 3Q2023 Receipts $68,108,280
Net 3Q2022 Receipts $70,317,461
Actual Percentage Change ‐3.1%
Business Activity Performance Analysis
Local Collections – Economic Basis 3Q2023 $68,039,000
Local Collections – Economic Basis 3Q2022 $73,728,386
Quarter over Quarter Change ‐$1,486,243
Quarter over Quarter Percentage Change ‐2.1%
Avenu Insights & Analytics’ On‐Going Audit Results
Total Recovered Since Inception $17,251,462
Attachment 1
16
RCTC
www.avenuinsights.com (800) 800‐8181 Page 2
$‐
$100
$200
$300
$400
$500
$600
$700
$800
$62,000
$64,000
$66,000
$68,000
$70,000
$72,000
$74,000
$76,000
$78,000
2Q2021 3Q2021 4Q2021 1Q2022 2Q2022 3Q2022 4Q2022 1Q2023 2Q2023 3Q2023
(in thousands of $)
Net Receipts CDTFA Admin Fees Due
HISTORICAL CASH COLLECTIONS ANALYSIS BY QUARTER
TOP 25 SALES/USE TAX CONTRIBUTORS
The following list identifies RCTC’s Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors. The list is in alphabetical order
and represents sales from October 2022 to September of 2023. The Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors
generate 26.5% of RCTC’s total sales and use tax revenue.
* ”‐ EC” added to the end of business names represents electronic commerce.
7‐ELEVEN FOOD STORES MCDONALD'S RESTAURANTS
AMAZON.COM – EC PILOT TRAVEL CENTER
AMAZON.COM SERVICES – EC RALPH'S GROCERY COMPANY
ARCO AM/PM MINI MARTS ROSS STORES
BEST BUY STORES SAM'S CLUB
CARMAX AUTO SUPERSTORES SHELL SERVICE STATIONS
CED LIGHTING SOLUTIONS STATER BROS MARKETS
CHEVRON SERVICE STATIONS TARGET STORES
CIRCLE K FOOD STORES TESLA
COSTCO WHOLESALE TRINA SOLAR
DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES VERIZON WIRELESS
HOME DEPOT WAL MART STORES
LOWE’S HOME CENTERS
17
RCTC
www.avenuinsights.com (800) 800‐8181 Page 3
$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
$35,000
$40,000
3Q2023
High
Low
75,238
77,021
80,010
81,876
81,676
81,862
82,251
81,890
81,075
81,107
35,547
38,450
41,385
43,922
45,318
45,907
46,727
47,336
47,299
47,371
56,414
60,227
63,536
66,676
68,857
69,473
69,888
69,440
67,457
66,411
27,033
27,765
28,573
29,747
30,320
31,683
32,553
31,657
30,824
30,949
37,256
37,885
38,714
40,166
41,659
43,295
45,116
46,210
47,205
46,224
8,700
8,966
9,176
9,265
9,332
9,275
9,310
9,390
9,766
9,754
(10,000)$ 40,000 $ 90,000 $ 140,000 $ 190,000 $ 240,000
2Q2021
3Q2021
4Q2021
1Q2022
2Q2022
3Q2022
4Q2022
1Q2023
2Q2023
3Q2023
(in thousands of $)
General Retail Food Products Transportation Construction Business To Business Miscellaneous
HISTORICAL SALES TAX AMOUNTS
ANNUAL SALES TAX BY BUSINESS CATEGORY
The following chart shows the sales tax level from annual sales through September of 2023, the
highs, and the lows for the top ten segments over the last two years in thousands of $.
18
RCTC
www.avenuinsights.com (800) 800‐8181 Page 4
$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
1Q
2
0
1
9
2Q
2
0
1
9
3Q
2
0
1
9
4Q
2
0
1
9
1Q
2
0
2
0
2Q
2
0
2
0
3Q
2
0
2
0
4Q
2
0
2
0
1Q
2
0
2
1
2Q
2
0
2
1
3Q
2
0
2
1
4Q
2
0
2
1
1Q
2
0
2
2
2Q
2
0
2
2
3Q
2
0
2
2
3Q
2
0
2
2
4Q
2
0
2
2
1Q
2
0
2
3
2Q
2
0
2
3
3Q
2
0
2
3
(in thousands of $)
FIVE‐YEAR ECONOMIC TREND: General Retail
19
RCTC: Sales Tax Performance Analysis by Quarter
TOTAL
Confidential Economic
TOTAL
2023Q3 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆
$68,039,000 ‐2.1%‐$1,486,243 ‐0.1%‐$236,105
GENERAL RETAIL
2023Q3 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆
$18,533,695 ‐0.2%‐$30,331 ‐1.0%‐$842,306
27.2%
FOOD PRODUCTS
2023Q3 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆
$10,999,728 0.7% $76,281 2.2% $1,030,482
% of Total: 16.2%
TRANSPORTATION
2023Q3 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆
$16,481,516 ‐5.7%‐$1,001,692 ‐5.2%‐$3,644,117
% of Total: 24.2%
CONSTRUCTION
2023Q3 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆
$8,403,096 1.3% $109,189 ‐1.9%‐$609,916
% of Total: 12.4%
BUSINESS TO BUSINESS
2023Q3 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆
$10,512,555 ‐7.1%‐$798,153 6.4% $2,778,695
% of Total: 15.5%
Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3
TOTAL CATEGORY
% of 2023Q3 Total:
QoQ = 23Q3 / 22Q3 YoY = YE 23Q3 / YE 22Q3
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
$30,000,000
$0
$10,000,000
$20,000,000
$30,000,000
$40,000,000
$50,000,000
$60,000,000
$70,000,000
$80,000,000
$90,000,000
Avenu Insights & Analytics
Attachment 2
20
RCTC: Quarterly Comparison of 2022Q3 and 2023Q3 (July through September Sales)
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Re
t
a
i
l
Fo
o
d
Pr
o
d
u
c
t
s
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Bu
s
i
n
e
s
s
To
Bu
s
M
i
s
c
e
l
l
a
n
e
o
u
s
Jul ‐ Sep 2023
(2023Q3)
Jul ‐ Sep 2022
(2022Q3)% Chg Gain Gain Decline Decline
BANNING 7.5% 1.6%‐2.4% 2.4% 34.8%‐23.2%801,332 784,028 2.2%Electronic Equipment Apparel Stores Misc. Vehicle Sales Auto Sales ‐ Used
BEAUMONT 2.5% 0.2%‐7.9%‐7.0%‐24.3%‐19.4%5,763,452 5,739,790 0.4%Miscellaneous Retail Electronic Equipment Heavy Industry Service Stations
BLYTHE ‐10.7% 2.7% 0.9%‐16.6% 4.4% 74.5%395,732 401,379 ‐1.4%Auto Sales ‐ New Restaurants Service Stations Bldg.Matls‐Whsle
CALIMESA 2.9% 5.6%‐3.7% 5.8%‐25.2%‐61.9%356,092 360,893 ‐1.3%Florist/Nursery Restaurants Miscellaneous Retail Light Industry
CANYON LAKE 42.5%‐8.7%‐0.2%‐65.7% 50.7% 8.7%82,374 79,853 3.2%Miscellaneous Retail Recreation Products Restaurants Service Stations
CATHEDRAL CITY ‐6.1%‐4.0% 0.7%‐15.2%‐4.3% 6.0%2,809,523 2,849,390 ‐1.4%Auto Sales ‐ New Office Equipment Service Stations Misc. Vehicle Sales
COACHELLA ‐14.4% 7.2%‐0.5%‐5.6% 12.8% 9.5%1,165,457 1,157,752 0.7%Light Industry Restaurants Drug Stores Florist/Nursery
CORONA 44.6% 0.2%‐8.4% 9.6%‐3.3%‐28.9%13,335,064 12,296,542 8.4%Miscellaneous Retail Bldg.Matls‐Whsle Service Stations Auto Sales ‐ New
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ‐5.2% 4.5%‐5.4%‐8.0%‐21.6% 57.5%9,953,105 10,580,799 ‐5.9%Restaurants Heavy Industry Leasing Miscellaneous Retail
DESERT HOT SPRINGS ‐3.7% 4.5%‐5.2% 14.4% 1.5%‐0.8%496,105 501,372 ‐1.1%Bldg.Matls‐Whsle Restaurants Service Stations Bldg.Matls‐Retail
EASTVALE 7.5% 2.7% 0.4% 3.9%‐21.2%‐17.9%10,649,249 10,020,714 6.3%Miscellaneous Retail Restaurants Department Stores Office Equipment
HEMET 1.5% 2.3%‐17.1%‐2.4% 1.5% 35.4%3,495,500 3,791,808 ‐7.8%Restaurants Florist/Nursery Auto Sales ‐ New Service Stations
INDIAN WELLS ‐10.3% 5.3% 0.0%‐23.1%‐32.8% 361.6%160,385 155,895 2.9%Restaurants Miscellaneous Other Miscellaneous Retail Bldg.Matls‐Whsle
INDIO 7.7% 2.6% 3.6%‐8.6% 0.8%‐42.1%3,621,200 3,568,084 1.5%Auto Sales ‐ New Heavy Industry Bldg.Matls‐Whsle Food Markets
JURUPA VALLEY ‐12.9% 3.5%‐6.3%‐7.1%‐0.1%‐44.9%4,595,004 4,870,901 ‐5.7%Light Industry Restaurants Service Stations Department Stores
LA QUINTA 0.4%‐0.3%‐2.1%‐2.0%‐15.6% 5.3%2,112,911 2,133,162 ‐0.9%Apparel Stores Liquor Stores Furniture/Appliance Business Services
LAKE ELSINORE ‐8.5% 2.1%‐4.7%‐10.4% 34.7% 40.0%3,192,730 3,252,413 ‐1.8%Heavy Industry Restaurants Department Stores Drug Stores
MENIFEE ‐0.4% 3.5%‐2.3% 178.1% 0.5% 7.9%3,279,506 2,704,444 21.3%Bldg.Matls‐Whsle Restaurants Heavy Industry Bldg.Matls‐Retail
MORENO VALLEY ‐13.8% 3.4%‐7.6%‐8.9% 14.4% 37.5%7,355,241 7,919,109 ‐7.1%Heavy Industry Restaurants Miscellaneous Retail Auto Sales ‐ New
MURRIETA 15.5% 2.2%‐12.0%‐2.2%‐10.1%‐22.6%5,741,159 5,737,586 0.1%Department Stores Restaurants Auto Sales ‐ Used Auto Sales ‐ New
NORCO ‐0.1% 1.1%‐13.1% 6.9%‐2.1% 7.7%2,342,246 2,508,649 ‐6.6%Florist/Nursery Bldg.Matls‐Whsle Auto Sales ‐ Used Service Stations
PALM DESERT ‐8.6% 0.9%‐9.1%‐5.8% 30.6%‐2.0%4,339,560 4,559,612 ‐4.8%Office Equipment Restaurants Furniture/Appliance Miscellaneous Retail
PALM SPRINGS 0.4%‐17.3%‐9.8%‐8.4%‐23.7% 30.0%3,243,301 3,653,967 ‐11.2%Apparel Stores Business Services Restaurants Auto Sales ‐ New
PERRIS ‐11.4%‐0.4%‐7.9%‐1.8%‐5.6%‐47.2%6,134,221 6,562,925 ‐6.5%Department Stores Business Services Miscellaneous Retail Light Industry
RANCHO MIRAGE ‐9.3% 3.8%‐21.5%‐10.3%‐8.6%‐8.4%1,238,737 1,361,669 ‐9.0%Restaurants Health & Government Auto Sales ‐ New Bldg.Matls‐Whsle
RIVERSIDE ‐1.5%‐0.5% 7.6%‐3.7%‐4.5%‐4.1%19,833,423 19,638,858 1.0%Auto Sales ‐ New Heavy Industry Leasing Electronic Equipment
SAN JACINTO 20.0%‐0.3%‐17.2%‐14.1%‐5.6% 7.0%1,041,080 1,031,267 1.0%Department Stores Restaurants Service Stations Food Markets
TEMECULA ‐8.7% 0.2%‐4.4%‐13.3% 1.2%‐14.8%10,172,388 10,650,879 ‐4.5%Light Industry Electronic Equipment Department Stores Furniture/Appliance
WILDOMAR 15.5%‐0.5%‐4.8%‐38.2% 162.6% 9.2%711,295 690,703 3.0%Heavy Industry Drug Stores Bldg.Matls‐Whsle Service Stations
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
Non‐Confidential MuniServices / Avenu Insights & Analytics
Attachment 3
21
AGENDA ITEM 6C
Agenda Item 6C
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: February 26, 2024
TO: Budget and Implementation Committee
FROM: Michele Cisneros, Deputy Director of Finance
THROUGH: Sergio Vidal, Chief Financial Officer
SUBJECT: Quarterly Financial Statements
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission take the following action(s):
1) Receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the six months ended
December 2023.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
During the first six months of the fiscal year, staff monitored the revenues and expenditures of
the Commission. The attached financial statements present the revenues and expenditures for
the first six months of the fiscal year. Period closing accrual adjustments are not included for
revenues earned but not billed and expenditures incurred for goods and services received but
not yet invoiced, as such adjustments are normally made during the year-end closing process.
The operating statement shows the Measure A and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) sales tax
revenues for the first quarter at 32 percent of the budget. This is a result of Governmental
Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 33, Accounting and Financial Reporting for
nonexchange Transactions. GASB Statement No. 33 requires sales tax revenues to be accrued
for the period in which they are collected at the point of destination or sale, as applicable. The
California Department of Tax and Fee Administration collects the sales tax funds and remits these
funds to the Commission after the reporting period for the businesses. This creates a two-month
lag in the receipt of revenues by the Commission. Accordingly, these financial statements reflect
the revenues related to collections thru October 2023.
On a cash basis, the Measure A and LTF sales tax receipts are 3.78 percent and 2.31 lower percent,
respectively, then the same period last fiscal year. State Transit Assistance revenues, including
State of Good Repair for the second quarter of Fiscal Year 2023/24, are expected to be received
in the third quarter of FY 2023/24. Staff will continue to monitor the trends in the sales taxes
and report to the Commission any necessary adjustments in revenue projections.
22
Agenda Item 6C
Federal, state, and local reimbursements are generally on a reimbursement basis. The
Commission will receive these revenues as eligible project costs are incurred and invoiced to the
respective agencies. The negative revenue amounts for state reimbursements reflect the
reversal of the FY 2022/23 accrued revenues at the beginning of FY 2023/24 in excess of amounts
billed through the second quarter. Reimbursement invoices for expenditures for the second
quarter will be prepared and submitted in the third quarter.
During the FY 2023/24 budget process, the Commission estimated the Transportation Uniform
Mitigation Fee (TUMF) revenues at $30 million passed through from Western Riverside Council
of Governments. Through the second quarter of FY 2023/24, the Commission received TUMF
revenues through October 2023 of $13.2 million. The Commission expects to receive November
and December TUMF revenues in the third quarter. The $1 million TUMF zone reimbursement
budget reflects the Interstate 10 Highland Springs Avenue Interchange project and eligible
expenditures will be invoiced as incurred.
The RCTC 91 Express Lanes and 15 Express Lanes toll revenues, penalties, and fees are at $42.5
million and $20.8 million, respectively, totaling $63.3 million for the second quarter of
FY 2023/24. The operating statement shows toll revenues, penalties, and fees at 65 percent of
the budget. This reflects periodic toll rate changes made based on traffic volumes according to
the approved toll policy on the RCTC 91 Express Lanes. Staff will continue to monitor the toll
transactions and/or trips and non-toll revenues.
The operating statement shows other revenues at 98 percent of the $723,500 budget and reflects
property management lease revenues.
During the FY 2023/24 budget process, the Commission estimated investment income at
$13,242,700 due to current market conditions. The operating statement shows investment
income, which includes net unrealized investment gains and losses at $19.4 million.
The expenditures/expenses and other financing sources/uses categories are in line overall with
the expectations with the following exceptions:
• Salaries and benefits are under budget primarily due to unfilled positions for an
Accounting Technician, IT Administrator, and Senior Capital Projects Manager;
• Professional services are under budget primarily due to unused budget authority for
general legal services; financial advisory services; audit services; rail operations and
development activities; and highway, commuter assistance, specialized transportation,
and regional conservation other professional services;
• Support costs are under budget due to unused budget authority for rail station
maintenance and repairs; express lanes operations and maintenance; call box
maintenance and repairs; advertising; and software and computer maintenance and
repairs;
23
Agenda Item 6C
• Program operations are under budget due to unused budget authority for rail station
security; toll operations; motorist and commuter assistance program operations; and
highway and rail program management;
• The status of significant Commission capital projects (engineering, construction, design-
build, and right of way/land) with budget amounts exceeding $5 million is discussed
within Attachment 1;
• Operating and capital disbursements are made as claims are submitted to the
Commission by transit operators;
• Special studies unused budget authority is related to feasibility studies;
• Local street and roads expenditures are related to Measure A sales tax revenues. These
financial statements reflect the turnback payments thru October 2023;
• Regional arterial expenditures represent expenditures for the highway and regional
arterial program administered by the Coachella Valley Association of Governments
(CVAG). CVAG requests reimbursements from the Commission based on available funds
and sufficient budget authority;
• Debt service principal payments are made annually on June 1, while debt service interest
payments are made semiannually on December 1 and June 1. In accordance with the
applicable accounting standards related to the Enterprise funds, both the RCTC 91 and 15
Express Lanes Enterprise funds record accrued and compounded interest on its related
debt such as the RCTC 91 Express Lanes 2021 Toll Refunding Bonds and
2013 Toll Revenue Bonds, Series B capital appreciation bonds for the 91 Project as well as
the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan for the
15 Express Lanes project. Therefore, $3.5 million of the $14.6 million interest cost
through the second quarter will not be paid in the current year for the RCTC 91 and
15 Express Lanes Enterprise funds and therefore, not included in the FY 2023/24 budget;
• Capital outlay expenditures are under budget due to unused budget authority for office
improvements, property improvements for station rehabilitation, toll operations
equipment, and Commission network, hardware, and software improvements;
• Depreciation is recorded as part of the accrual adjustments in the RCTC 91 and
15 Express Lanes Enterprise funds accounting records; however, depreciation is
considered a non-cash transaction and not included in the FY 2023/24 budget; and
• Transfers in and out include the second quarter administrative cost allocation process,
Measure A Sales Tax Bonds debt funding, and LTF disbursements for planning and
programming activities.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This is an information item. There is no fiscal impact.
Attachments:
1) Quarterly Project Status – December 2023
2) Quarterly Financial Statements – December 2023
24
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
QUARTERLY PROJECT STATUS
2nd QUARTER
FOR SIX MONTHS ENDED 12/31/2023
Project Description
FY 2023/24
through 2nd
Quarter
Budget
Expenditures
through 2nd
Quarter
Actuals
Project Status
91 Express Lanes (P009103 & P009104)
These projects provide repair and rehabilitation of SR-91 general
purpose and express lanes, as well as the implementation of a new
back-office system. The FY2023/24 budget amount is $8,516,200.
$5,210,850 $3,271,328 The under run of the FY 2023/24 budget at the second
quarter is due to lower than anticipated expended costs for
Phase 2 corridor improvements and associated project
construction ($1.1 million), construction management ($0.1
million) and back-office system implementation ($0.8 million).
I-15 Express Lanes Southern Extension (P003044)
The project will add express lanes between SR-74 and Cajalco
Road. The estimated project cost is $544 million with the Project
Approval and Environmental Document (PA/ED) phase of work
funded by federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)
funds and Measure A. The FY 2023/24 budget amount is
$16,803,200.
4,901,700 1,372,761 The under run of the FY 2023/24 budget at the second
quarter is due to lower than anticipated expended costs for
the preliminary engineering and environmental document
contract ($2.6 million), program management, staff labor,
legal, and other professional services ($1.0 million).
15/91 Express Lanes Connector (P003039)
The 15/91 Express Lane Connector (ELC) project constructs an
express lanes median direct connector from southbound I-15 to
westbound SR-91 and from eastbound SR-91 to northbound I-15 in
the city of Corona. The project also adds tolled express lanes in each
direction of I-15 from the 15/91 ELC to Hidden Valley Parkway; adds
a tolled express lane in each direction of SR-91 from east of Lincoln
Avenue to the 15/91 ELC; extends the tolled express lane along
eastbound SR-91 from I-15 to west of Promenade Avenue; and
extends an eastbound auxiliary lane along SR-91 from west of I-15
to west of Promenade Avenue. The project also includes the addition
of a toll collection system infrastructure along I-15 and SR-91. The
estimated project cost is $270 million and the project is partially
funded by state funds allocated under Senate Bill (SB) 132
legislation. The connector is expected to open to traffic in 2023. The
FY 2023/24 budget amount is $36,914,000.
17,995,300 12,392,561 The under run of the FY 2023/24 budget at the second
quarter is due to delayed invoicing from the design builder
($4.7 million) and lower than anticipated expended costs from
the project construction management contract ($0.8 million),
and toll marketing ($0.4 million).
ATTACHMENT 1
25
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
QUARTERLY PROJECT STATUS
2nd QUARTER
FOR SIX MONTHS ENDED 12/31/2023
Project Description
FY 2023/24
through 2nd
Quarter
Budget
Expenditures
through 2nd
Quarter
Actuals
Project Status
Mid County Parkway (MCP) (P002302, P002317, P002320,
P002324, & P002328)
The environmental document for a new corridor from I-215 to SR-79
was approved in April 2015. The first design package is under
construction. Construction of this new facility will be completed over
many years as funding becomes available; the total project cost is
estimated at $1.3 to $2.1 billion. The FY 2023/24 budget amount
is $ $29,874,700.
5,552,700 3,216,607 The under run of the FY 2023/24 budget at the second
quarter is primarily due to the following for each project:
• MCP: The minimal under run is due to right of way (ROW)
acquisition and ROW support ($0.07 million).
• MCP I-215/Placentia Interchange: The over run for this
project was due to the ROW acquisitions ($0.8 million)
and construction ($0.2 million).
• MCP Mitigation: The first year of plant establishment was
completed at the beginning of the third quarter in FY
2020/21 and the under run in the second quarter of FY
2023/24 was due to mitigation property monitoring ($1.5
million).
• MCP2 and MCP3: The Commission approved the shift
from MCP2 to MCP3 at the May 2022 Commission
meeting. The under run was due to unused ROW
acquisition/support services on MCP2 ($0.07 million) and
final design on MCP3 ($1.0 million).
71/91 Connector Project (P003021)
The project includes ROW acquisition, utility relocation, and
environmental revalidation work for improvements to the 71/91
connector. The estimated project cost is $118 million. The FY
2023/24 budget amount is $66,221,900.
27,615,950 19,412,144 The under run of the FY 2023/24 budget at the second
quarter is due to construction ($6.8 million), construction
management ($0.7 million), less than anticipated costs for
ROW acquisitions ($0.3 million) and program management
($0.3 million).
Smart Freeways (P003051)
The project includes environmental clearance, design, and
commence construction of a pilot project to install a smart freeway
system on northbound I-15 in the city of Temecula. The FY 2023/24
budget amount is $16,180,000.
2,080,000 223,807 The under run of the FY 2023/24 budget at the second
quarter is due to FY 2022/23 accrual reversal, delayed
invoicing from the preliminary design firm ($0.1 million),
engineering & environmental support services ($0.7 million),
and lower than expected costs for construction management
($0.8 million). Construction is not scheduled to commence
until the second half of FY 2023/24.
26
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
QUARTERLY PROJECT STATUS
2nd QUARTER
FOR SIX MONTHS ENDED 12/31/2023
Project Description
FY 2023/24
through 2nd
Quarter
Budget
Expenditures
through 2nd
Quarter
Actuals
Project Status
Santa Ana River Trail Extension (SART) (P007201 & P007202)
The Commission provides support to the Riverside County Regional
Park and Open Space District (District) for the projects under a
cooperative planning and development agreement. The District is
the lead agency for environmental compliance for NEPA and CEQA,
and the Commission is responsible for project oversight and
approval, final design, and construction. The projects are a joint
effort with several public and private agencies including the county
of Orange and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The
District is responsible for 100% of costs. The FY 2023/24 budget
amount is $6,756,700.
2,796,000 399,639 The under run of the FY 2023/24 budget at the second
quarter is due to final design ($0.2 million) and preliminary
engineering ($0.09 million) for SART 1. Additionally, the
underrun in SART 2 is due to ROW acquisition and support
($1.6 million) and final design ($0.2 million).
Moreno Valley-March Field station upgrade (P004026)
The project will remove and replace approximately 2.5 miles of
existing rail and wood ties with new rail and concrete ties, remove /
replace / regrade track ballast, improve track drainage, install new
track signals and Positive Train Control system, connect to existing
signals and communication systems, build a new second passenger
loading platform, extend the existing passenger loading platform to
current Metrolink station standards, and perform other
improvements necessary to bring the tracks into compliance with
Metrolink standards. The FY 2023/24 budget amount is $
18,398,900.
8,299,450 6,933,607 The under run of the FY 2023/24 budget at the second
quarter is primarily due to construction support ($1.5 million)
that is offset by the slight overrun in construction and
construction management ($0.2 million).
This list discusses the significant capital projects (i.e., total budgeted costs in excess of $5 million) and related status. Capital project expenditures are generally affected
by lags in invoices submitted by contractors and consultants, as well as issues encountered during certain phases of the projects. The capital projects budgets tend to be
based on aggressive project schedules.
27
Revenues
Sales tax 473,394,500$ 149,417,627$ 323,976,873$ 32%
Federal reimbursements 92,672,300 32,964,672 59,707,628 36%
State reimbursements 83,141,100 10,372,018 72,769,082 12%
Local reimbursements 30,075,000 5,460,867 24,614,133 18%
Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee 31,000,000 13,646,969 17,353,031 44%
Tolls, penalties, and fees 97,989,000 63,324,422 34,664,578 65%
Other revenues 723,500 706,612 16,888 98%
Investment income 13,242,700 19,438,809 (6,196,109)147%
Total revenues 822,238,100 295,331,997 526,906,103 36%
Expenditures/Expenses
Salaries and benefits 17,563,900 7,249,308 10,314,592 41%
Professional and support
Professional services 24,786,900 4,957,684 19,829,216 20%
Support costs 21,676,800 8,101,173 13,575,627 37%
Total Professional and support costs 46,463,700 13,058,857 33,404,843 28%
Projects and operations
Program operations 49,584,200 10,240,237 39,343,963 21%
Engineering 34,591,600 4,829,299 29,762,301 14%
Construction 272,316,900 29,625,155 242,691,745 11%
Design Build 40,510,200 11,308,776 29,201,424 28%
Right of way/land 45,974,200 6,758,354 39,215,846 15%
Operating and capital disbursements 252,871,300 96,355,493 156,515,807 38%
Special studies 14,890,000 448,745 14,441,255 3%
Local streets and roads 84,545,100 27,258,523 57,286,577 32%
Regional arterials 30,000,000 9,352,252 20,647,748 31%
Total projects and operations 825,283,500 196,176,833 629,106,667 24%
Debt service
Principal 32,635,000 - 32,635,000 N/A
Interest 58,781,200 32,926,797 25,854,403 56%
Total debt service 91,416,200 32,926,797 58,489,403 36%
Capital outlay 7,842,200 2,491,360 5,350,840 32%
Depreciation - 9,449,546 (9,449,546) N/A
Total Expenditures/Expenses 988,569,500 261,352,701 727,216,799 26%
Excess revenues over (under) expenditures/expenses (166,331,400) 33,979,296 (200,310,696) -20%
Other financing sources/(uses)
Transfer in 212,463,600 73,821,624 138,641,976 35%
Transfer out (212,463,600) (73,821,624) (138,641,976)35%
Total financing sources/(uses)- - - N/A
Net change in fund balances (166,331,400) 33,979,296 200,310,696 -20%
Fund balance July 1, 2023 1,382,220,300 1,200,727,959 (181,492,341) 87%
Fund balance December 31, 2023 1,215,888,900$ 1,234,707,255$ 18,818,355$ 102%
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
QUARTERLY BUDGET TO ACTUAL
FY 2023/24
BUDGET
2ND QUARTER
ACTUAL
PERCENT
UTILIZATION
REMAINING
BALANCE
FOR SIX MONTHS ENDED 12/31/2023
2ND QUARTER
ATTACHMENT 2
28
STATE OF GOOD REPAIR OTHER AGENCY
PROJECTS
REGIONAL
CONSERVATION SB132
Revenues
Sales tax -$ -$ 72,632,078$ 17,447,180$ 347,121$ 49,797,659$ 7,690,734$ 1,502,854$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Federal reimbursements 3,342,538 - 28,216,068 - - - - - - - - - -
State reimbursements 1,048,413 1,781,267 7,772,655 - - - - (41,014) (189,302) - - - -
Local reimbursements 24 1,225 1,442,676 - - - - - - - 299,493 3,717,450 -
Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee - - - - - - - - 13,646,969 - - - -
Tolls, penalties, and fees - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Other revenues 15 - 354,357 - - - - - 9,000 - - - 292,750
Investment income 343,093 118,061 4,155,954 1,104,951 - 2,881,020 1,626,194 120,142 1,687,053 20,620 5,689 7,688 310,639
Total revenues 4,734,083 1,900,553 114,573,787 18,552,132 347,121 52,678,680 9,316,928 1,581,982 15,153,720 20,620 305,182 3,725,138 603,389
Expenditures/Expenses
Salaries and benefits 3,232,544 50,744 1,355,131 1,464 - - - - 68,177 20,314 40,036 1,468,259 201,710
Professional and support
Professional services 1,366,001 44,235 1,404,544 3,679 - - 7,360 98,520 114,181 19,741 2,359 1,298,468 40,498
Support costs 2,224,068 46,504 1,440,389 - - - - - 326 4,901 (13) 296,493 2,378
Total Professional and support costs 3,590,069 90,739 2,844,934 3,679 - - 7,360 98,520 114,507 24,641 2,345 1,594,961 42,876
Projects and operations
Program operations 11,076 1,729,013 4,722,366 - - - - - 74,244 4,102 58,963 21,564 153,159
Engineering - - 3,174,428 - - - - - 170,877 - 257,433 - 1,226,561
Construction - - 28,349,420 - - - - - (450,106) - - - (249,815)
Design Build - - (500,433) - - - - - - - - - 10,870,538
Right of way/land - - 6,165,631 - - - - - 41,978 - 41,499 361,908 147,339
Operating and capital disbursements 16,574,482 - 1,545,275 2,758,333 - 75,842,815 (355,561) (9,852) - - - - -
Special studies 448,745 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Local streets and roads - - 20,889,789 6,028,113 340,621 - - - - - - - -
Regional arterials - - - 9,352,252 - - - - - - - - -
Total projects and operations 17,034,303 1,729,013 64,346,476 18,138,699 340,621 75,842,815 (355,561) (9,852) (163,008) 4,102 357,895 383,472 12,147,781
Debt service
Principal - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Interest - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Total debt service - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Capital outlay 69,446 369 2,421,545 - - - - - - - - - -
Depreciation - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Total Expenditures/Expenses 23,926,362 1,870,864 70,968,085 18,143,842 340,621 75,842,815 (348,201) 88,668 19,675 49,057 400,276 3,446,692 12,392,367
Excess revenues over (under) (19,192,279) 29,689 43,605,702 408,290 6,500 (23,164,136) 9,665,129 1,493,313 15,134,044 (28,437) (95,094) 278,446 (11,788,978)
Other financing sources/(uses)
Transfer in 23,477,245 - 3,318,838 - - - - - 25,257 - - - 12,392,561
Transfer out (493,800) (131,300) (37,132,876) (286,800) (18,900) (18,241,645) (35,200) (9,800) (51,200) (8,500) - (618,000) -
Total financing sources/(uses)22,983,445 (131,300) (33,814,038) (286,800) (18,900) (18,241,645) (35,200) (9,800) (25,943) (8,500) - (618,000) 12,392,561
Net change in fund balances 3,791,166 (101,611) 9,791,664 121,490 (12,400) (41,405,781) 9,629,929 1,483,513 15,108,101 (36,937) (95,094) (339,554) 603,583
Fund balance July 1, 2023 37,100,151 13,328,700 438,154,128 96,210,303 - 336,576,925 142,158,549 12,661,636 148,270,737 2,257,390 28,174 (2,362) 1,003,665
Fund balance December 31, 2023 40,891,317$ 13,227,089$ 447,945,792$ 96,331,793$ (12,400)$ 295,171,144$ 151,788,478$ 14,145,149$ 163,378,838$ 2,220,453$ (66,920)$ (341,916)$ 1,607,248$
GENERAL FUND WESTERN COUNTY COACHELLA VALLEY STATE TRANSIT
ASSISTANCE
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION
FUND
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
QUARTERLY BUDGET TO ACTUAL BY FUND
2ND QUARTER
FOR SIX MONTHS ENDED 12/31/2023
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
PALO VERDE
VALLEY
COACHELLA
VALLEY RAIL
FSP/
SAFE
MEASURE A SALES TAX
TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM
MITIGATION FEE (TUMF)
29
Revenues
Sales tax
Federal reimbursements
State reimbursements
Local reimbursements
Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
Tolls, penalties, and fees
Other revenues
Investment income
Total revenues
Expenditures/Expenses
Salaries and benefits
Professional and support
Professional services
Support costs
Total Professional and support costs
Projects and operations
Program operations
Engineering
Construction
Design Build
Right of way/land
Operating and capital disbursements
Special studies
Local streets and roads
Regional arterials
Total projects and operations
Debt service
Principal
Interest
Total debt service
Capital outlay
Depreciation
Total Expenditures/Expenses
Excess revenues over (under)
Other financing sources/(uses)
Transfer in
Transfer out
Total financing sources/(uses)
Net change in fund balances
Fund balance July 1, 2023
Fund balance December 31, 2023
15 EXPRESS LANES 91 EXPRESS LANES
-$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 149,417,627$
- - - - 1,406,066 32,964,672
- - - - - 10,372,018
- - - - - 5,460,867
- - - - - 13,646,969
20,794,552 42,529,870 - - - 63,324,422
50,491 - - - - 706,612
2,185,870 3,559,912 402,696 461,420 447,806 19,438,809
23,030,912 46,089,782 402,696 461,420 1,853,872 295,331,997
239,464 571,465 - - - 7,249,308
183,213 374,885 - - - 4,957,684
1,754,020 2,332,108 - - - 8,101,173
1,937,233 2,706,994 - - - 13,058,857
2,192,588 1,273,163 - - - 10,240,237
- - - - - 4,829,299
- 1,975,657 - - - 29,625,155
- 938,672 - - - 11,308,776
- - - - - 6,758,354
- - - - - 96,355,493
- - - - - 448,745
- - - - - 27,258,523
- - - - - 9,352,252
2,192,588 4,187,491 - - - 196,176,833
- - - - - -
2,159,660 12,477,118 - - 18,290,019 32,926,797
2,159,660 12,477,118 - - 18,290,019 32,926,797
- - - - - 2,491,360
6,235,532 3,214,014 - - - 9,449,546
12,764,477 23,157,082 - - 18,290,019 261,352,701
10,266,436 22,932,700 402,696 461,420 (16,436,147) 33,979,296
204 - - - 34,607,519 73,821,624
(201,500) (13,273,061) - (1,912,976) (1,406,066) (73,821,624)
(201,296) (13,273,061) - (1,912,976) 33,201,453 -
10,065,140 9,659,639 402,696 (1,451,556) 16,765,306 33,979,296
262,717,804 (333,152,076) 13,392,732 18,149,828 11,871,675 1,200,727,959
272,782,944$ (323,492,437)$ 13,795,428$ 16,698,272$ 28,636,981$ 1,234,707,255$
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
QUARTERLY BUDGET TO ACTUAL BY FUND
2ND QUARTER
FOR SIX MONTHS ENDED 12/31/2023
ENTERPRISE FUND
COMMERCIAL
PAPER
SALES TAX
BONDS
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS
COMBINED TOTALDEBT SERVICE
30
AGENDA ITEM 6D
Agenda Item 6D
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: February 26, 2024
TO: Budget and Implementation Committee
FROM: Megan Kavand, Senior Financial Analyst
THROUGH: Sergio Vidal, Chief Financial Officer
SUBJECT: Monthly Investment Report
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission take the following action(s):
1) Receive and file the Monthly Investment Report for the month ended January 31, 2024.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Commission’s investment reports have generally reflected investments primarily
concentrated in the Riverside County Pooled Investment Fund as well as investments in mutual
funds for sales tax revenue bonds debt service payments.
As a result of significant project financings such as the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement
Project (91 Project or 91 CIP) and the Interstate 15 Express Lanes Project (I-15 ELP), the
Commission engaged MetLife Investment Management, LLC, formerly Logan Circle Partners, L.P.
(MetLife), as the investment manager for the bond proceeds and other required funds.
Additionally, the Commission engaged Payden & Rygel Investment Management (Payden &
Rygel) to make specific investments for Commission operating funds. The Commission approved
initial agreements with the investment managers in May 2013 following a competitive
procurement and has extended the agreements through the annual recurring contracts process.
MetLife invested the debt proceeds and subsequent other required contributions for the 91
Project and I-15 ELP in separate accounts of the Short-Term Actively Managed Program (STAMP).
The Commission completed the 91 Project financing in 2013, the I-15 ELP and 91 Project
completion financing (2017 Financing) in July 2017 and the 2021 91 Project refinancing
(2021 Financing) in October 2021. Consistent with financing expectations, the Commission
expended all 91 Project debt proceeds and equity contributions, except for the toll revenue
bonds debt service reserve, and subsequent to commencement of operations, established other
required accounts. The Commission continues to expend the 2017 Financing bond proceeds on
the I-15 ELP and funded required reserve accounts.
The monthly investment report for January 2024, as required by state law and Commission policy,
reflects the investment activities resulting from the 91 Project, 2017 Financing, 2021 Financing
31
Agenda Item 6D
and available operating cash. As of January 31, 2024, the Commission’s cash and investments
were comprised of the following:
CASH AND INVESTMENTS PORTFOLIO AMOUNTS 1
Operating $ 948,686,855
Trust 297,792,540
Commission-managed 223,167,488
STAMP for 91 CIP 59,814,163
STAMP for 2017 Financing 15,999,130
Total $ 1,545,460,176
Note: 1 Unreconciled and unaudited
As of January 31, 2024, the Commission’s cash and investments are in compliance with both the
Commission’s investment policy adopted on October 11, 2023, and permitted investments
described in the indenture for the Commission’s sales tax revenue bonds and the master
indentures for the Commission’s toll revenue bonds. Additionally, the Commission has adequate
cash flows for the next six months.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This is an information item. There is no fiscal impact.
Attachment: Investment Portfolio Report
32
Riverside County Transportation Commission
Investment Portfolio Report
Period Ended: January 31, 2024
STATEMENT
BALANCE 1 FINANCIAL
INSTUTION STATEMENTS
RATING
MOODYS /
S&P
COUPON
RATE
PAR
VALUE
PURCHASE
DATE
MATURITY
DATE
YIELD TO
MATURITY
PURCHASE
COST
MARKET
VALUE
UNREALIZED
GAIN (LOSS)
OPERATING FUNDS
City National Bank Deposits 11,608,778 City National Bank Available upon request A3/BBB+N/A N/A
County Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund 937,078,077 County Treasurer Available upon request
Subtotal Operating Funds 948,686,855
FUNDS HELD IN TRUST
County Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund:
Local Transportation Fund 297,792,540 County Treasurer Available upon request
Subtotal Funds Held in Trust 297,792,540
COMMISSION MANAGED PORTFOLIO
US Bank Payden & Rygel Operating 56,291,822 US Bank Available upon request
First American Government Obligation Fund 166,875,666 US Bank Available upon request N/A N/A N/A
Subtotal Commission Managed Portfolio 223,167,488
STAMP PORTFOLIO for 91 CIP
2013 Series A & Series B Reserve Fund 13,031,833 US Bank Available upon request
2021 Series B Reserve Fund 38,923,953 US Bank Available upon request
2021 Series C Reserve Fund 7,858,377 US Bank Available upon request
Subtotal STAMP Portfolio - 91 CIP 59,814,163
STAMP PORTFOLIO for 2017 Financing
Ramp Up Fund 15,999,130 US Bank Available upon request
Subtotal STAMP Portfolio - 2017 Financing 15,999,130
TOTAL All Cash and Investments 1,545,460,176$
Notes:
1 Unreconciled and unaudited
Available upon request
Available upon request
Available upon request
Available upon request
Available upon request
Available upon request
Available upon request
$-
$100,000,000
$200,000,000
$300,000,000
$400,000,000
$500,000,000
$600,000,000
$700,000,000
$800,000,000
$900,000,000
$1,000,000,000
STAMP Portfolio for 91 CIP Reserve - 0.84%
STAMP Portfolio for 91 CIP Residual Fund - 2.52%
STAMP Portfolio for 91 CIP TIFIA Reserve Fund - 0.51%
STAMP Portfolio for 2017 Financing I15 ELP Project Revenue Fund
- 0%
STAMP Portfolio for 2017 Financing Ramp Up Fund - 1.04%
Commission Managed Portfolio - 14.44%
Trust Funds - 19.27%
Operating Funds - 61.39%
Nature of Investments Mutual Funds,
10.80%
County
Pool/Cash,
80.65%
Fixed Income ,
8.55%
33
AGENDA ITEM 6E
Agenda Item 6E
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: February 26, 2024
TO: Budget and Implementation Committee
FROM: Jonathan Marin, Senior Management Analyst
THROUGH: David Knudsen, External Affairs Director
SUBJECT: Quarterly Public Engagement Metrics Report, October - December 2023
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission to take the following action(s):
1) Receive and file the Quarterly Public Engagement Metrics Report for
October - December 2023.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Public Affairs staff continues to measure a wide range of public engagement activities to
prepare the Quarterly Public Engagement Metrics Report for the Commission. Activities include
social media interactions, website visits, public sentiment, and other forms of engagement
originating from the Commission’s various digital communication channels. Through these
channels, staff continuously highlight the Commission’s successes, project deliveries and
updates, significant milestones, partnerships, programs, and investments made through
Measure A.
The quarterly reports are a data-driven approach to monitor the Commission’s progress toward
public engagement goals, its efforts’ effectiveness, and provide transparency into how the
Commission is using its resources to engage with the public. This report covers the fourth quarter
of 2023, from October to December.
The metrics provided are compared against the previous quarter, which can produce varying
results based on the activity level in any one quarter.
This quarter’s report includes three sets of data:
1) Metrics for RCTC’s overall public engagement activities including public sentiment on
social media; social media followers, engagement, and reach; email notifications; website
use and access; and top pages visited.
2) Metrics for RCTC’s 15/91 Express Lanes Connector Project including email activity, text
messages, website sessions, and social media followers. The 15/91 Express Lanes
34
Agenda Item 6E
Connector opened on November 21, 2023. Construction closures are no longer nightly.
This will be the last metrics reporting for this project.
3) Metrics for RCTC’s 71/91 Interchange Project including email activity, website sessions,
and social media following.
RCTC Overall Public Engagement
1) Social Media
a. Public sentiment during the fourth quarter was positive overall. Posts highlighting
the IE Commuter program, completion of the Clinton Keith Project in southwest
Riverside County, and Traffic Relief Plan presentations to city councils contributed
to increased levels of positive engagement experienced during this quarter.
b. Facebook: A modest increase of 0.1% in followers occurred during the fourth
quarter – increasing to 13,502 from 13,491. Engagement (likes, comments, video
views, and shares) increased 61%, totaling 39,267 compared to 24,613 in the third
quarter. Posts reached 330,304 unique users (followers and non-followers),
representing a 19% increase from the previous quarter’s mark of 227,261.
c. X (formerly known as Twitter): Followers on the platform grew slightly from 1,745
to 1,772 – a 2% increase. Engagement decreased 47%, from 975 to 520, while
impressions decreased by 43%, from 19,337 to 10,923.
d. Instagram: The platform experienced a 3% growth in followers, increasing to
3,843 compared to the previous quarter’s mark of 3,796. Engagement during the
fourth quarter grew by 45%, from 7,966 to 11,585. Content on this platform
reached 296,973 users – representing an increase of 66% compared to last
quarter’s 179,160.
e. The strong increase in engagement and reach from quarter-to-quarter was due to
the high-profile 71/91 Interchange Project closures that took place during this
fourth quarter.
2) The Point E-Newsletter: Producing engaging and high-quality content for RCTC’s official
blog, The Point, continues to be a priority. The monthly email newsletter features news
stories about the Commission’s successes, project milestones, and local transportation
programs. During the fourth quarter of 2023, newsletter subscribers grew from 6,191 to
6,685 – an 8% increase. 43% of the newsletter subscribers opened The Point email, and
4.7% clicked on the email links to read more. The open rate for the newsletter continues
to outperform the industry (government) average of 34%.
3) Website
a. Website sessions were down slightly during this quarter, from 124,781 to 123,330
- a 1% decrease. 100,078 unique users visited the website, a decrease of 9%,
compared to the previous quarter’s mark of 111,025.
b. Direct website visits (typing in rctc.org) made up 57% of total sessions, while
visitors using a search engine accounted for 26%. Paid search Google Ads were
responsible for 7% of all website visits during this quarter. Referrals from external
35
Agenda Item 6E
sites, such as the Go511 and The Press-Enterprise websites, made up 5% of total
visits. Social media links drove 4% of website traffic and email links were
responsible for 1%.
c. Website access by desktop comprised most of the web traffic at 64%, while mobile
(phones and tablets) made up the remaining 36%.
d. The 71/91 Interchange Project closures webpage was the most visited during the
fourth quarter, followed by the 71/91 Interchange Project construction updates
page, then the homepage (rctc.org).
15/91 Express Lanes Connector Public Engagement
1) Emails: Subscribers during the past quarter totaled 3,135, a decrease from the previous
quarter’s total of 3,152. The project team has received 34 emails to date.
2) Texts: A total of 727 people registered to receive text message updates, representing a
38% increase from the previous quarter.
3) Webpage: 6,140 visits to the project page occurred during the third quarter, totaling
48,426 visits to date.
4) Social Media: Followers on the project’s Facebook page increased to 3,392, an increase
from the previous quarter’s total of 3,365. X (formerly known as Twitter) followers grew
from 448 to 474. Instagram followers increased from 971 to 982 followers.
71/91 Interchange Project Public Engagement
1) Emails: Email sign-ups during the fourth quarter totaled 2,903, representing a 16%
increase in subscribers. The project team received 17 inquiries.
2) Texts: 1,527 people registered to receive text message updates of the project – a 38%
increase from the previous quarter.
3) Webpage: 34,643 visits to the project, construction update, and closures webpages
occurred during the fourth quarter.
4) Social Media: Facebook page followers totaled 1,413 compared to the third quarter’s
1,195 - a 18% increase. Instagram followers increased by 13%, from 1,748 to 1,982.
Followers on X (formerly known as Twitter) grew by 25% from 135 to 161.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This is an informational item. There is no fiscal impact.
Attachments:
1) RCTC Overall Public Engagement Metrics
2) 15/91 Express Lanes Connector Construction Public Engagement Metrics
3) 71/91 Interchange Construction Public Engagement Metrics
36
Top Pages Visited
1
2
3
Desktop vs Mobile Users
64%36%Desktop Mobile
Facebook X
formerly known as Twitter
Instagram
Top Channels
+8%
Overall Social Media Sentiment Eblasts Web
Public Engagement Metrics: Q4 October - December 2023
Social Media
Differences
Organic and paid search web trafc increased during the
quarter as a result of the 71/91 Interchange Project
closures. Referrals from external websites, such as
FasTrak, Go511, and Press Enterprise, also increased.
Subscribers
6,685
Average
Open
43%
Average
Click
4.7%
123,330
Number of
Sessions
-1%100,078
Number of
Unique Users
-9%
Reach
330,304
Followers
13,502
Engagement
39,627
Impressions
10,923
Followers
1,772
Engagement
520
Reach
296,973
Followers
3,843
Engagement
11,585
-43%
+2%
-47%
+66%
+1%
+45%
+19%
+0.1%
+61%
71/91 Interchange Project - Closures
71/91 Interchange Project - Construction Updates
Home Page
10/6: Positive engagement on post about IE Commuter
10/25: Positive sentiment highlighting Clinton Keith Project completion
12/15: Posts featuring Trafc Relief Plan presentations to city councils
produced postive sentiment
Direct (57%)
Organic (26%)
Paid Search (7%)
Email (1%)
External Referral (5%)
Social (4%)
1.00
.50
0
-.50
-1.00 Direct
57%Organic
26%10/7 10/17 10/27 11/6 11/16 11/26 12/6 12/16 12/26
ATTACHMENT 1
37
October - December 2023
15/91 Express Lanes Connector Project
Quarterly “At-a-Glance” Metrics Report
Apr
-
J
u
n
2
0
2
1
Nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
F
o
l
l
o
w
e
r
s
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
To
t
a
l
W
e
b
s
i
t
e
v
i
s
i
t
s
t
o
D
a
t
e
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
S
i
g
n
-
U
p
s
Nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
E
m
a
i
l
s
t
o
D
a
t
e
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
Apr
-
J
u
n
2
0
2
1
Apr
-
J
u
n
2
0
2
1
155
3
Email & Text Alert Sign-Ups
Website Sessions
Emails to Project Team
Social Media Followers
Apr
-
J
u
n
2
0
2
1
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
2,825
5,714
68
2,778
293
600
Facebook Followers Twitter FollowersInstagram Followers
Email Sign-Ups Text Sign-Ups
161 173 230
2,809
7
14
8,834
2,798
301
628
2,736
3,006
323
689
340
761
Jul -
S
e
p
t
2
0
2
1
Oct
-
D
e
c
2
0
2
1
Jan
-
M
a
r
2
0
2
2
Jul -
S
e
p
t
2
0
2
1
Oct
-
D
e
c
2
0
2
1
Jan
-
M
a
r
2
0
2
2
Jul -
S
e
p
t
2
0
2
1
Oct
-
D
e
c
2
0
2
1
Jan
-
M
a
r
2
0
2
2
Jul -
S
e
p
t
2
0
2
1
Oct
-
D
e
c
2
0
2
1
Jan
-
M
a
r
2
0
2
2
2,489
12,418
2,538
18
17,526
2,767
266
19
Apr
-
J
u
n
2
0
2
2
22,038
3,221
359
805
Apr
-
J
u
n
2
0
2
2
3,059
327
Apr
-
J
u
n
2
0
2
2
Jul -
S
e
p
2
0
2
2
19
Jul -
S
e
p
2
0
2
2
26,063
Apr
-
J
u
n
2
0
2
2
Jul -
S
e
p
2
0
2
2
3,239
381
846
Jul -
S
e
p
2
0
2
2
3,320 3,563
361
Oct
-
D
e
c
2
0
2
2
19
Oct-
D
e
c
2
0
2
2
29,857
Oct
-
D
e
c
2
0
2
2
3,263
386
861
Oct
-
D
e
c
2
0
2
2
Jan
-
M
a
r
2
0
2
3
Apr
-
J
u
n
e
2
0
2
3
July
-
S
e
p
2
0
2
3
Oct
-
D
e
c
2
0
2
3
436 509 525
31
Jan
-
M
a
r
2
0
2
3
Apr
-
J
u
n
e
2
0
2
3
July
-
S
e
p
2
0
2
3
Oct
-
D
e
c
2
0
2
3
Jan
-
M
a
r
2
0
2
3
33,927
38,104
405
905
431
925
Jan
-
M
a
r
2
0
2
3
3,312 3,351
3,098
32
Apr
-
J
u
n
e
2
0
2
3
July
-
S
e
p
2
0
2
3
Oct
-
D
e
c
2
0
2
3
Apr
-
J
u
n
e
2
0
2
3
July
-
S
e
p
2
0
2
3
Oct
-
D
e
c
2
0
2
3
3,152 3,135
34 34
42,286
3,365 3,392
448
971
474
982
48,426
727
ATTACHMENT 2
38
October - December 2023
71/91 Interchange ProjectQuarterly “At-a-Glance” Metrics Report
Nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
F
o
l
l
o
w
e
r
s
0
500
1000
1500
2000
Tot
a
l
W
e
b
s
i
t
e
v
i
s
i
t
s
t
o
D
a
t
e
0
5
10
15
20
Nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
S
i
g
n
-
U
p
s
Nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
E
m
a
i
l
s
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
Jan
-
M
a
r
2
0
2
3
Apr
-
J
u
n
e
2
0
2
3
July
-
S
e
p
t
2
0
2
3
Oct
-
D
e
c
2
0
2
3
Jan
-
M
a
r
2
0
2
3
Email & Text Alert Sign-Ups
Website Sessions
Emails to Project Team
Social Media Follwers
Jan
-
M
a
r
2
0
2
3
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
5,426
1,254
17 17
949
Instagram Followers Twitter FollowersFacebook Followers
798
42
2,169
Apr
-
J
u
n
e
2
0
2
3
July
-
S
e
p
t
2
0
2
3
Oct
-
D
e
c
2
0
2
3
Apr
-
J
u
n
e
2
0
2
3
July
-
S
e
p
t
2
0
2
3
Oct
-
D
e
c
2
0
2
3
Jan
-
M
a
r
2
0
2
3
Apr
-
J
u
n
e
2
0
2
3
July
-
S
e
p
t
2
0
2
3
Oct
-
D
e
c
2
0
2
3
8
35,835
1,592
1,025
108 135
Includes project, construction update, and closures pages
Email Sign-Ups Text Sign-Ups
402 509
2,508
1,101 1,527
9
1,748
1,195
161
1,413
45,633
80,276
2,903
1,982
ATTACHMNENT 3
39
AGENDA ITEM 7
Agenda Item 7
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: February 26, 2024
TO: Budget and Implementation Committee
FROM: Sergio Vidal, Chief Financial Officer
THROUGH: Aaron Hake, Deputy Executive Director
SUBJECT: Proposed Policy Goals and Objectives for Fiscal Year 2024/25 Budget
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission to take the following action(s):
1) Review and approve the proposed Commission Policy Goals and Objectives for the Fiscal
Year (FY) 2024/25 Budget; and
2) Review and approve the Fiscal Accountability Policies for the FY 2024/25 Budget.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The initial step in the budget process is to develop policy goals and objectives for the upcoming
fiscal year consistent with the Commission’s overall strategic direction. Furthermore, the
adoption of the Commission Policy Goals and Objectives (Goals) along with the Fiscal
Accountability Policies (Policies) for the annual fiscal year budget provides an opportunity to
match the Commission’s spending priorities in a manner that implements commitments made to
the citizens of the County of Riverside in the Measure A Expenditure Plan along with fulfilling
other Commission responsibilities. The Commission FY 2024/25 Goals and Policies also reflects
feedback received from the recent Commission workshop held in January 2024, along with minor
administrative changes from the prior year’s approved FY 2023/24 Goals and Policies.
The Commission is driven by four core objectives for the people of Riverside County and the
transportation system upon, which they rely:
• Quality of life;
• Operational excellence;
• Connecting the economy; and
• Responsible partner
Summary of the changes by objectives are as follows:
• Quality of life
o Administrative changes
• Operational Excellence
40
Agenda Item 7
o Administrative changes
• Connecting the Economy
o Administrative changes
• Responsible Partner
o RCTC will seek to form partnerships with public and private stakeholders
ensuring support for projects, relief from regulatory restrictions, and
developing solutions for shared challenges
Furthermore, based on the above-referenced objectives, the following short-term objectives
were added for the upcoming fiscal year:
• Continue final design for SR-60/Portrero Blvd. Interchange project
• Continue communicating current and future financial performance for RCTC
issued debt financings ensuring strong ratings
Additionally, the fiscal accountability policies that promote fiduciary responsibility and
organizational excellence are summarized in six categories:
• Financial planning;
• Revenues;
• Expenditures/expenses;
• Debt management;
• Cash management; and
• Accounting and financial reporting.
The Commission Policy Goals and Objectives will be linked to the individual department goals and
objectives included within the FY 2024/25 Budget, and the Fiscal Accountability Policies will guide
the development and monitoring of the FY 2024/25 Budget.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact related to the approval of the Commission Policy Goals and Objectives
and the Fiscal Accountability Policies for the FY 2024/25 Budget. The fiscal impact will be
determined upon adoption of the FY 2024/25 Budget during the upcoming June 2024
Commission meeting.
Attachments:
1) Proposed Commission Policy Goals and Objectives – FY 2024/25
2) Fiscal Accountability Policies - FY 2024/25
41
POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
As approved at its March 13, 2024 meeting, the Commission is driven by four core mission statements and underlying
goals for the residents of Riverside County and the transportation system upon which they rely:
QUALITY OF LIFE
RCTC is focused on improving life for the people of Riverside County and empowering them to live life at their pace.
Choice RCTC empowers the residents of Riverside County to choose how to safely get to
where they are going.
Environmental Stewardship
RCTC protects and preserves the County’s environment for its residents as theMobilityRCTC provides access, equity, and choice in transportation; RCTC is a multimodal
mobility partner.
Equity RCTC supports transportation services and projects that address inequities,
especially those in rural, low income, and disadvantaged communities.
Access RCTC projects and programs are the connection to employment, housing, schools,
community institutions, parks, medical facilities, and shopping in the region, and
should be equitably accessible to all communities served.
Goods Movement RCTC facilitates the funding and delivery of projects that mitigate the impact of
increased goods movement flow through Riverside County and advocates for a
reasonable balance between the need to maintain the supply chain and to protect
public health. RCTC identifies solutions to reduce truck congestion and community
impacts from the flow of goods from nearby ports.
Public Engagement RCTC is committed to engaging Riverside County residents through ongoing two-
way public communication and outreach.
OPERATIONAL EXCELLENCE
RCTC is a responsible and conservative steward of taxpayer dollars.
State of Good Repair RCTC invests in road safety and maintenance in its residents’ neighborhoods as well
as sustainable practices to maintain its stations and facilities.
Promises Fulfilled Projects are completed on-time, on-budget; RCTC delivers on its promises as a
steward of Riverside County residents’ investment.
Efficiency RCTC operates in an efficient and cost-effective manner.
Innovation RCTC seeks to implement innovative transportation solutions.
Information RCTC seeks to provide information to the public that is transparent and easily
accessible; ensures customers receive prompt, dependable, and quality service.
FY 2024/25 BUDGET 1
ATTACHMENT 1
42
CONNECTING THE ECONOMY
RCTC is a driver of economic growth in Riverside County.
Workforce Mobility RCTC improves the economy by creating a robust workforce-to-workplace system;
RCTC fosters workforce development by improving transportation access from
housing to employment and education centers.
Population Growth Since 1976, RCTC has been responsible for connecting the County’s economy as the
County’s population has quadrupled from 550,000 to nearly 2.5 million today. RCTC
is sensitive to each geographic area’s unique needs.
Economic Impact RCTC has invested over $4.8 billion in the County’s economy in both Measure A and
toll revenues, which has a multiplier impact in terms of jobs and economic
opportunity throughout Riverside County.
RESPONSIBLE PARTNER
RCTC partners with local, tribal, regional, and state governments to deliver transportation projects and programs.
Streets and Roads RCTC has invested over $1.5 billion in local priorities for maintaining streets and
roads and fixing potholes.
Transit RCTC partners with transit operators to provide residents mobility choices, flexibility,
intercity and intercounty connectivity, and access—especially during a post-pandemic
recovery.
Active Transportation Facilities RCTC continually improves its stations for better bicycle and pedestrian access and
partners with agencies within the County to promote active transportation
alternatives, including the building of regional trails and bicycle and pedestrian
facilities in accordance with local general plans and active transportation plans.
Grants RCTC is a steward of state and federal grants to leverage Measure A dollars and
improve mobility for our communities.
Local Measure A Value RCTC invests Measure A dollars into projects and programs that benefit local
communities throughout the County.
Partnerships RCTC strives to form collaborative partnerships with key stakeholders in both the
public and private sector to ensure support for projects and programs, relief from
regulations, and to find solutions for shared challenges.
Staff used these core mission statements and goals to prepare this budget and develop the following short-term
objectives to further guide the planning for the FY 2024/25 budget.
CAPITAL PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND DELIVERY
• Continue preliminary engineering, design, right of way acquisition, and/or construction of projects included in the
Western County Highway Delivery Plan and development of those projects that improve operations of Metrolink
commuter rail service.
• Continue to support operations planning and design of projects led by other agencies.
• Continue as lead agency for partner agency projects, continue preliminary engineering of the I-10/Highland Springs
Avenue Interchange project, continue environmental clearance, design, and construction efforts for the Santa Ana
River Trail, continue final design and eventual construction for SR-60/Potrero Boulevard Interchange Phase II Project,
commence design of the I-15 Franklin interchange project, and commence development of Project Study Reports for
I-15 Wildomar Trail and I-15 Bundy Canyon Road interchanges.
• Consider opportunities to implement technology-based strategies, or Smart Freeway projects, to manage traffic,
reduce congestion and pollution, increase safety, and improve the quality of commutes. Continue implementation of
the Smart Freeway project on I-15 in Temecula.
• Maintain and enhance communication and collaboration with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
to improve the Commission’s ability to deliver critical projects.
2 Riverside County Transportation Commission43
• Collaborate with local jurisdictions to implement Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) regional arterial
program projects and facilitate the delivery of eligible arterial improvements in western Riverside County (Western
County).
• Continue active engagement in state and federal efforts to streamline and modernize the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to improve the Commission’s ability to deliver
critical projects.
OPERATIONS
• Efficiently operate the 91 and 15 Express Lanes and achieve high customer satisfaction through reduction in
congestion, mobility improvements, and management of demand.
• Efficiently and cost effectively operate the nine Commission owned and operated commuter rail stations and 91/
Perris Valley Line (PVL) rail corridor to ensure reliable high quality commuter rail service.
• Efficiently provide motorist assistance services so that motorists can conveniently travel and use transportation
facilities as safely as possible.
REGIONAL PROGRAMS
• Proactively engage state and federal legislators and agencies to advance principles identified in the adopted
Legislative Platform to ensure that the Commission receives due consideration for transportation projects and
funding to key regional needs and mobility choice.
• Monitor transit trends and the associated economic, social, and public health factors that impact ridership and create
barriers to transit growth.
• Continue to subsidize reliable and cost-effective Metrolink commuter rail service to and from Riverside County; the
Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) is the operator of Metrolink.
• Provide continued leadership in the planning and development for the Coachella Valley Rail Corridor Service (CV
Rail).
• Support innovative programs that provide transit assistance in rural areas as well as for riders with special transit
needs.
• Promote cost controls and operating efficiency for transit operators.
• Maintain effective partnerships among commuters, employers, and government to increase the efficiency of our
transportation system by encouraging and promoting telework and motorized and non-motorized transportation
alternatives such as vanpools.
MANAGEMENT SERVICES
• Maintain close communication with Commissioners and educate policy makers on all issues of importance to the
Commission including Measure A and Key Commission Funding Sources.
• Develop and execute a communication, public information, and community engagement strategy for the purposes
of education, partnership building, information sharing, and customer service.
• Maintain administrative program delivery costs below the policy threshold of 4% of Measure A revenues; the FY
2024/25 Management Services budget is X.XX% of Measure A revenues.
• Maintain administrative salaries and benefits at less than 1% of Measure A revenues; the FY 2024/25 administrative
salaries and benefits is X.XX% of Measure A revenues.
• Maintain prudent cash reserves to provide for unplanned expenditures or economic downturns.
• Continue communicating current and anticipated financial performance for RCTC issued debt financings ensuring
the corresponding rating is achieved and issued by the applicable rating agencies.
• Establish and maintain revenues and related reserves generated from toll operations to be available for debt service
in accordance with toll supported debt agreements, maintenance, repair and rehabilitation, administration,
operations, and capital projects within the corridor.
FY 2024/25 BUDGET 344
LINKING COMMISSION AND DEPARTMENTAL MISSION STATEMENTS
The following matrix (Table 1) illustrates the linkage of the Commission’s core mission statements described in this
section to the individual departmental mission statements included in each department’s section.
TABLE 1 – RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COMMISSION AND DEPARTMENTAL MISSION STATEMENTS
Department Quality of Life Operational
Excellence
Connecting the
Economy
Responsible
Partner
Management Services
Executive Management X X X X
Administration X
External Affairs X X X X
Finance X
Regional Programs
Planning and Programming X X X X
Rail Maintenance and Operations X X X X
Public and Specialized Transit X X X X
Commuter Assistance X X X X
Motorist Assistance X X X X
Regional Conservation X X X X
Capital Project Development and Delivery X X X X
Toll Operations X X X X
4 Riverside County Transportation Commission45
FINANCIAL OVERVIEW
FISCAL ACCOUNTABILITY POLICIES
As the steward of local, state, and federal resources, RCTC maintains financial policies that promote fiduciary
responsibility and organizational excellence.
FINANCIAL PLANNING
Balanced Budget RCTC adopts an annual budget in which recurring operating and capital
expenditures and other financing uses are equal to or less than identified /
recurring revenues and other financing sources including available fund balances.
Administration Allocations from local and state sources and toll operations fund administrative
costs, including salaries and benefits.
• Administrative salaries and benefits cannot exceed 1% of Measure A sales tax
revenues.
• Administrative costs will not exceed 4% of Measure A sales tax revenues
(inclusive of the 1% salary limitation).
Retirement Benefits RCTC contributes 100% of the annual requirement related to its proportionate
share of the unfunded accrued actuarial liability (UAL) and for postretirement
Capital Projects Multi-year capital projects are consistent with the strategic plan and budgeted
each fiscal year, based on best available estimates.
Reserves RCTC establishes and maintains reserves in accordance with Measure A and TDA
policies as well as existing financing agreements.
REVENUES
Sales Tax RCTC prepares annual and mid-year revenue projections incorporating current and
relevant data; staff may adjust amounts during the budget process to reflect
current economic trends.
Tolls RCTC-adopted policies establish congestion pricing to optimize throughput on toll
facilities while generating revenue to meet all financial commitments related to:
• Debt issued to construct or repair any portion of the toll facility, payment of
debt service, and satisfaction of other covenants and obligations related to
indebtedness of the toll facility, including applicable reserves;
• Development, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, improvement,
reconstruction, administration, and operation of the toll facilities, including toll
collection and enforcement and applicable reserves; and
• Projects within the corridor that generated the revenue.
Funding Sources RCTC leverages local funding sources to maximize federal and state funding of
Sale of Properties RCTC returns proceeds from the disposition of excess properties to the programs
that provided the funding sources for the property acquisition.
36 Riverside County Transportation Commission
ATTACHMENT 2
46
EXPENDITURES/EXPENSES
Priorities RCTC annually reviews established priorities for planning and programming of
capital projects annually.
Accountability RCTC compares actual expenditures/expenses to the budget on at least a
quarterly basis and appropriately explains, and justifies significant deviations.
Procurement RCTC ensures competitive, transparent, objective, and fair procurement selection
processes in accordance with policies adopted on February 10, 2021.
Capital and Intangible Assets On a government-wide basis, RCTC records capital and intangible assets at
historical costs, estimated historical costs if purchased or constructed, or
estimated fair value at date of donation. RCTC maintains such assets in a state of
good repair and safeguards them from misuse and misappropriation.
• RCTC does not capitalize infrastructure, which title will be vested with Caltrans
or another governmental agency.
• RCTC depreciates capital and amortizes intangible assets over the estimated
useful life or service concession term.
DEBT MANAGEMENT
Debt Limitation Outstanding sales tax revenue debt cannot exceed $975 million, in accordance
with Measure K approved by a majority of the voters in November 2010; RCTC
can issue toll-supported debt for specific highway projects based on amounts
authorized by the Commission.
Management RCTC maintains and updates the Debt Management Policy, as adopted on March
11, 2020, and Interest Rate Swap Policy, as adopted July 12, 2006, for matters
related to sales tax revenue and toll-supported indebtedness.
Coverage RCTC maintains a minimum debt service coverage ratio of 2.0x on all senior sales
tax revenue debt and 1.3x on all toll-supported debt.
Issuance RCTC issues debt for major capital projects including engineering, right of way,
construction, and design-build; RCTC will not finance operating requirements
except for initial toll operations. Costs of issuance, including the standard
underwriter’s discount, do not exceed 2% unless specifically authorized.
Maturity All sales tax revenue debt matures prior to the termination of 2009 Measure A on
June 30, 2039; all toll-supported debt matures prior to the expiration of toll facility
agreements.
CASH MANAGEMENT
Management RCTC invests funds in order of priority (safety, liquidity, and yield) in accordance
with the Investment Policy, adopted on October 11, 2023 or debt agreements.
Receipts Where possible, RCTC encourages receipt of funds by wire or electronic funds
transfer to its accounts.
Payments RCTC remits cash disbursements to local jurisdictions and vendors/consultants in a
timely manner.
Operating Balances RCTC maintains amounts in the bank operating account at the amount necessary
to meet monthly expenditures/expenses.
FY 2024/25 BUDGET 3747
ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL REPORTING
Accounting System RCTC maintains an ERP system that integrates project and toll operations
accounting needs and improves accounting efficiency.
Reporting RCTC issues an annual financial report; separate financial reports for the LTF, STA,
Proposition 1B Rehabilitation and Security Project Accounts, SB 1 SGR Program,
Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP), and toll operations; and the
State Controller’s Transportation Planning Agency Financial Transactions Report
and Government Compensation in California Report.
Audits An independent accounting firm conducts an annual audit of the Commission’s
accounting books and records; RCTC obtains audits of Measure A and TDA
funding recipients for compliance and other matters in a timely manner.
FUNCTIONAL MANAGEMENT
Unlike many governments that provide direct services to the public, the Commission’s overall responsibility is to manage
transportation planning and funding for the County. As a result, its budget in terms of dollars, is comprised primarily of
capital-related programs and projects; the operating component of the budget is related to toll operations, multimodal
programs (transit planning, rail operations, and commuter and motorist assistance services), and regional conservation.
Management services, consisting of executive management, administration, external affairs, and finance, provide
support to both capital and operating programs and projects. Chart 9 depicts the organization of the Commission’s
oversight and management functions.
CHART 9 – FUNCTIONAL ORGANIZATION CHART FY 2024/25
38 Riverside County Transportation Commission48
Chart 10 illustrates the relationship between the Commission’s functional management or departments and the
Commission’s fund structure.
CHART 10 – RELATIONSHIP OF FUNCTIONAL MANAGEMENT AND FUND STRUCTURE
Functional Management/Department General Fund
Special
Revenue Fund
Capital Projects
Fund
Debt Service
Fund Enterprise Fund
Management Services
Executive Management X
Administration X
External Affairs X
Finance X X X
Regional Programs
Planning and Programming Services X X
Rail Maintenance and Operations X X
Public and Specialized Transit X X
Commuter Assistance X
Motorist Assistance X
Regional Conservation X
Capital Projects Development and Delivery X X X
Toll Operations X
BUDGET PROCESS
The budget is the primary performance tool used to measure and control accountability of public agencies for taxpayer
dollars. The budget communicates to all stakeholders (i.e., elected officials, regional agencies, and citizens) how the
investment they made will be put to use by providing detailed information on the specifics of resource allocation and
uses. The Commission monitors progress on a monthly basis, and it makes revisions and updates as necessary to reflect
changing dynamics and accommodate unplanned requests. This results in a budget document that is useful and
meaningful as a benchmark against which to evaluate government accomplishments and/or challenges and to assess
compliance with fiscal accountability.
The budget process consists of six primary tasks conducted in phases throughout the fiscal year. Chart 11 illustrates the
budget process for the development of the FY 2024/25 budget and monitoring of the FY 2023/24 budget. Each task is
summarized below.
CHART 11 – BUDGET PROCESS
2023 2024
ID TASK NAME DURATION J A S O N D J F M A M J
1 Short Term Strategic Direction Phase 140 Days
2 Resource Identification and Allocation Phase 200 Days
3 Needs Assessment Phase 120 Days
4 Development and Review Phase 150 Days
5 Adoption and Implementation Phase 60 Days
6 Budget Roles and Responsibilities 365 Days
FY 2024/25 BUDGET 3949
SHORT-TERM STRATEGIC DIRECTION PHASE
The first phase of the budget process is to determine the direction of the Commission in the short-term and to integrate
this with the Commission’s long-term goals and objectives, including the Western County Delivery Plan as updated and
discussed in the Capital Project Development and Delivery department section. Annually, a workshop is held for the
Board to evaluate and determine where the Commission plans to be and what it desires to accomplish over the next five
to 10 years. The Commission held a workshop in January 2024 . Priorities identified by Commissioners include but not
limited to the following: Need to update the Traffic Relief Plan and identify a method towards funding recognized
projects and initiatives; prioritize traffic/congestion/bottlenecks/projects/goods movement related projects; match
growth with capacity and utilize it more effectively; form strategic partnerships with key stakeholders; develop job
creation and retention ideas; and educate the public on existing transportation options. Annual reviews allow for timely
responsiveness to any significant political, legislative, or economic developments that may occur locally, statewide, or
nationally. Staff then adjusts its course based on the long-term strategic direction of the policy makers.
Staff convenes in early January to both assess actual results compared to the current year budget, and map changes in
strategy for the ensuing fiscal year. Additionally, staff reviews and, if necessary, updates Commission goals and
departmental mission statements. Those goals, upon review by the Board, become the Commission’s short-term
strategic direction.
RESOURCE IDENTIFICATION AND ALLOCATION PHASE
Simultaneous with the short-term strategic direction phase, staff focuses on available funding sources and estimated
carryover amounts from the current year. The Commission analyzes its fund balances, the excess of fund assets over fund
liabilities, for available appropriation in the following fiscal year. Resource identification occurs throughout the year, but
it is finalized in the upcoming fiscal year budget. In connection with the long-term strategic planning process, the
Commission determines borrowing needs, but it adjusts such amounts in the annual budget to reflect current
information.
NEEDS ASSESSMENT PHASE
Staff and consultants evaluate projects and studies for consideration in the next year. Project priority and sequencing set
in the long-term strategic plan are the top candidates for budget submission. However, priorities may have changed due
to economic necessities or political realities, resulting in rescheduling projects by acceleration or postponement. The
Commission may add new projects or delete existing priorities.
DEVELOPMENT AND REVIEW PHASE
Using all the data and information gathered from the previously mentioned stages, department managers submit their
desired budgets to the Finance Department. Finance staff compiles the information, along with staff and overhead
allocations, into a preliminary or draft budget. After review by the Executive Director and inclusion of the desired
changes, staff presents the draft budget to the Board for input.
ADOPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION PHASE
Staff submits the proposed budget to the Commission no later than its June meeting, and the Commission conducts a
public hearing to allow for public comment on the proposed budget. The Commission may choose, after the public
hearing, to adopt the budget or to request additional information and/or changes to the budget. The budget, including
the salary schedule, must be adopted no later than June 15 of each year. Upon adoption by the Commission, staff enters
the budget into the ERP system effective July 1 for the next fiscal year.
BUDGET ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Involvement in the budget permeates all staffing levels at the Commission, as presented in the staff organization chart in
Appendix B, from clerical support staff to policy makers. Each program manager develops a detailed line-item budget
that consists of the operating and/or capital components and submits those budgets, by program, to the department
director for review and concurrence. While all departments have operating components, Rail station operations and
maintenance and Toll Operations represent the Commission’s primary operation functions that consider long-range
planning. Details on these operations are included in the Rail and Toll Operations department sections, respectively. The
department managers submit their budgets to the Chief Financial Officer by mid-March, and the Finance Department
compiles the department budgets. Both the capital and operating budgets are combined into the draft budget for the
entire Commission. The Chief Financial Officer and Executive Director review the entire budget for overall consistency
with both the short- and long-term strategic direction of the Commission, appropriateness of funding sources for the
identified projects and programs, and reasonableness of the operating and capital budget expenditures/expenses.
40 Riverside County Transportation Commission50
Expenditure/expense activities of the funds are controlled at the budgetary unit, which is the financial responsibility level
(General, Measure A, Motorist Assistance, LTF, STA, TUMF, Other Agency Projects, Regional Conservation, Capital
Projects, Debt Service Funds, and Enterprise Fund) for each function (i.e., administration, operations, programs,
intergovernmental distributions, debt service, capital outlay, and other financing uses). These functions provide the legal
level of budgetary control (i.e., the level at which expenditures/expenses cannot legally exceed the appropriated
amount).
Budget-to-actual reports are available to program managers and directors on a real-time basis through the ERP system
for informational and management purposes, including identification and evaluation of any significant budget variations.
During the fiscal year, management has the discretion to transfer budgeted amounts within the fiscal responsibility unit
according to function or may provide support for supplemental budget appropriations requests, including reallocating
budget authority between/across all Commission fund types if the overall authorized Commission approved budget
authority is not increased. Supplemental budget appropriation requests that increase approved budget authority
amounts, require the authorization of the Commission. The Commission may act at any monthly meeting to amend the
budget. In some years, the Finance Department may compile miscellaneous requests and submit a budget
appropriations adjustment at mid-year to the Commission for approval. Those budget amendments approved by the
Commission are incorporated into the budget, as they occur, and are reflected in the annual financial report in the final
budget amounts reported in the budgetary schedules.
FY 2024/25 BUDGET 4151
PROPOSED POLICY GOALS AND RELATED FISCAL POLICIES FOR FY 2024/25
Sergio Vidal, Chief Financial Officer
Budget and Implementation Committee Meeting
February 26, 2024
1
Budget Development
FY 2024/25 BUDGET
2
Commission Goals and Policies
•Core goals and
objectives
•Guiding fiscal
policies
Department Goals and Objectives
•Specific to
department or
program
•Correlate to
core goals and
objectives
Budget Development and Adoption
•Public hearings
open in May
•Adopt budget
by June 15
Commission Goals and Fiscal Policies
Commission Goals and Objectives
FY 2024/25 BUDGET
3
Quality of Life
•Choice
•Environmental
Stewardship
•Mobility
•Equity
•Access
•Goods
Movement
Operational
Excellence
•State of Good
Repair
•Promises
Fulfilled
•Efficiency
•Innovation
•Information
Connecting the
Economy
•Workforce
Mobility
•Population
Growth
•Economic
Impact
Responsible
Partner
•Streets and
Roads
•Transit
•Active
Transportation
•Grants
•Local Measure
A Value
Commission Goals and Fiscal Policies
Commission Goals and Objectives –
Updated for FY 2024/25
FY 2024/25 BUDGET
4
Quality of Life
•Administrative
Changes
Operational
Excellence
•Administrative
Changes
Connecting the
Economy
•Administrative
Changes
Responsible
Partner
•RCTC strives to
form
collaborative
partnerships with
key stakeholders
to ensure support
for projects and
programs, relief
from regulations
and to find
solutions for
shared
challenges
Commission Goals and Fiscal Policies
Short-Term Objectives
FY 2024/25 BUDGET
5
Capital
Project
Development
and Delivery
Operations Regional
Programs
Management
Services
FY 2024/25
Budget
Commission Goals and Fiscal Policies
Commission Goals and Fiscal Policies
Guiding Fiscal Policies
FY 2024/25 BUDGET
6
Financial planning
Revenues
Expenditures/expenses
Debt management
Cash management
Accounting and reporting
Commission Goals and Fiscal Policies
Next Steps
FY 2024/25 BUDGET
7
Final Budget
June 12 –Commission closes public hearing and adopts budget
Draft Proposed Budget
April 22 –B&I reviews Executive Summary May 8 –Commission opens public hearing and
reviews Executive Summary
Development of Budget
Departmental budgets, including linkage to
Commission goals and objectives
Compilation and review of budgets consistent with
fiscal policies
AGENDA ITEM 8
Agenda Item 8
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: February 26, 2024
TO: Budget and Implementation Committee
FROM: David Lewis, Capital Projects Manager
THROUGH: Erik Galloway, Projects Delivery Director
SUBJECT: Reimbursement Agreement with Union Pacific Railroad for the Coachella
Valley Rail Project
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission take the following action(s):
1) Approve Reimbursement Agreement No. 24-25-063-00 with Union Pacific Railroad (UP)
for preliminary engineering services for the Coachella Valley Rail Project in an amount not
to exceed $100,000;
2) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve future amendments to address
the anticipated additional scope of work required by UP as the project progresses for an
amount not to exceed $500,000 as may be required for the Project for a total not to
exceed contract of $600,000;
3) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute
the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and
4) Approve a budget adjustment of $20,000 for expenses to be incurred in Fiscal
Year 2023/24.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Project Scope
The Coachella Valley – San Gorgonio Pass Corridor Program, also called the CV Rail Project, is a
proposed 144-mile intercity passenger rail service starting from Los Angeles Union station and
ending in the city of Coachella, pending final station selection. The proposed rail service
potentially include construction of a third main track for the length, 77.5 miles, of the corridor in
Riverside County, including a new connecting track between rail subdivisions, and five new rail
stations and 1 existing rail station. The proposed rail service in this section will be operated over
tracks primarily owned by UP. A draft reimbursement agreement has been developed between
UP and RCTC for reimbursement of preliminary engineering services performed by UP as a part
of the proposed project.
52
Agenda Item 8
Project Status
The Tier 1 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) / Environmental Impact Study (EIS) was completed
and adopted by the Commission on July 13, 2022, and the Tier 2 project level environmental
analysis is planned to begin this year. The Tier 1 EIR/EIS evaluated at a broad level of build
alternatives and their potential cultural and environmental impacts. The Tier 2 project level
environmental analysis will include refined engineering design, additional public involvement,
site specific quantitative analysis of environmental effects as well as identify any site-specific
avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures. Staff is anticipating releasing a Request for
Proposals (RFP) for the Tier 2 EIR/EIS later this year.
DISCUSSION
The proposed reimbursement agreement between UP and RCTC would allow UP staff and
consultants to review design and environmental technical studies along with allowing access to
conduct the necessary field studies needed for the project. This reimbursement agreement
specifies an initial estimated cost of $100,000 for this work to be completed by UP. Staff
anticipates that UP will exceed the proposed amount as the work progresses and foresees UP
eventually exceeding estimated costs prior to receiving formal RCTC authorization. To ensure UP
is not delayed in their reviews and participation in the project due to RCTC approval processes
for additional funding, staff proposes to include an additional $500,000 that will only be
authorized in future amendments subject to legal counsel and Executive Director approval. The
additional funding will allow staff to pivot quickly if issues arise as the consultant team
commences the detailed Tier II tasks and UP could potentially require additional resources to
review the Tier II environmental deliverables and design packages. This work includes but is not
limited to field diagnostics, inspections, plan, specification and construction review, project
design, preparation of project estimates, meetings, and travel time. At this time, the draft
reimbursement agreement is under review by legal counsel. The agreement will not be executed
until legal counsel approval is received.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Commission approved an allocation of State Transit Assistance (STA) Funds for the
FY 2023/24 Short-Range Transit Plan. Staff anticipates that approximately $20,000 will be utilized
in FY 2023/24. The remaining $580,000 will be included in future budgets.
53
Agenda Item 8
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget: No Year: FY 2023/24
FY 2024/2025+ Amount: $20,000
$580,000
Source of Funds: STA Funds $20,000 Budget Adjustment: Yes
GL/Project Accounting No.: 004203 81101 00000 0000 245 25 81101
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
Date: 02/15/2024
Attachment: Draft Agreement No. 24-25-063-00
54
DRA
F
T
1
UPRR REMS
Project 794465
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING SERVICES
Effective Date:
Estimate: $100,000.00
THIS REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT (Agreement) is made and entered into as of the
Effective Date, by and between UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, a Delaware
corporation (Railroad), and RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
(Agency).
RECITALS
A. Agency desires to initiate the project more particularly described on Exhibit A
attached hereto (the Project).
B. The Project will affect Railroad's track and right of way at or near the Project area
more particularly described on Exhibit A.
C. Railroad agrees to collaborate with Agency on the conceptualization and
development of the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
AGREEMENT
1. NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows:
2. Railroad, and/or its representatives, at Agency's sole cost and expense, agrees to
perform (or shall cause a third-party consultant to perform on Railroad's behalf) the preliminary
engineering services work described on Exhibit B attached hereto (PE Work). Agency
acknowledges and agrees that: (a) Railroad's review of any Project designs, plans and/or
specifications, as part of the PE Work, is limited exclusively to potential impacts on existing and
future Railroad facilities and operations; (b) Railroad makes no representations or warranties as
to the validity, accuracy, legal compliance or completeness of the PE Work; and (c) Agency's
reliance on the PE Work is at Agency's own risk.
3. Notwithstanding the Estimate (Estimate), Agency agrees to reimburse Railroad
and/or Railroad's third-party consultant, as applicable, for one hundred percent (100%) of all
actual costs and expenses incurred for the PE Work. During the performance of the PE Work,
Railroad will provide (and/or will cause its third-party consultant to provide) progressive billing to
Agency based on actual costs in connection with the PE Work. Within sixty (60) days after
completion of the PE Work, Railroad will submit (and/or will cause its third-party consultant to
submit) a final billing to Agency for any balance owed for the PE Work. Agency shall pay Railroad
(and/or its third-party consultant, as applicable) within thirty (30) days after Agency's receipt of
any progressive and final bills submitted for the PE Work. Bills will be submitted to the Agency
using the contact information provided on Exhibit C. Agency's obligation hereunder to reimburse
Railroad (and/or its third-party consultant, as applicable) for the PE Work shall apply regardless
if Agency declines to proceed with the Project or Railroad elects not to approve the Project.
55
DRA
F
T
2
4. Agency acknowledges and agrees that Railroad may withhold its approval for the
Project for any reason in its sole discretion, including without limitation, impacts to Railroad's
safety, facilities or operations. If Railroad approves the Project, Railroad will continue to work with
Agency to develop final plans and specifications and prepare material and force cost estimates
for any Project related work performed by Railroad.
5. If the Project is approved by Railroad, Railroad shall prepare and forward to
Agency a Construction and Maintenance Agreement (C&M Agreement) which shall provide the
terms and conditions for the construction and ongoing maintenance of the Project. Unless
otherwise expressly set forth in the C&M Agreement, the construction and maintenance of the
Project shall be at no cost to Railroad. No construction work on the Project affecting Railroad's
property or operations shall commence until the C&M Agreement is finalized and executed by
Agency and Railroad.
6. Neither party shall assign this Agreement without the prior written consent of the
other party, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed.
7. No amendment or variation of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless
made in writing and signed by the parties.
8. This Agreement sets forth the entire agreement between the parties regarding the
Project and PE Work. To the extent that any terms or provisions of this Agreement regarding the
PE Work are inconsistent with the terms or provisions set forth in any existing agreement related
to the Project, such terms and provisions shall be deemed superseded by this Agreement to the
extent of such inconsistency.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Agreement as of the
Effective Date.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY,
a Delaware Corporation
Signature Signature
Kenneth Tom
Printed Name Printed Name
Manager I, Engineering – Public Projects
Title Title
56
DRA
F
T
Exhibit A
Project Description and Location
Project Description
Riverside County Transportation Commission proposes to evaluate the feasibility of conducting
passenger service within Railroad's existing corridor at the location referred to below.
Location
Yuma Subdivision
Milepost
540-620
57
DRA
F
T
Exhibit B
Scope of Project Services
Scope of work includes, but is not limited to the following
Field diagnostic(s) and inspections
Plan, specification and construction review
Project design
Preparation of Project estimate for force account or other work performed by the
Railroad
Meetings and travel
58
DRA
F
T
Exhibit C
Billing Contact Information
Name Erik Galloway
Title Project Delivery Director
Address 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, CA, 90504
Work Phone (951) 757-4015
Cell Phone
Email egalloway@rctc.org
Agency
Project No.
59
COACHELLA VALLEY RAIL PROJECT
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT -UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD
1
Budget and Implementation Committee
February 26, 2024
David Lewis, Capital Projects Manager
CV Rail Project Project Background
2
New intercity rail service through the Coachella valley – San Gorgonio Pass beginning
at Los Angeles Union Station and ending in the Coachella Valley
Provide safe, environmentally friendly, reliable, and time-competitive passenger
rail transportation in a corridor with limited transportation options
Ease growing highway congestion in an area with increasing truck and automobile
traffic
Meet the projected demand for future transportation and mobility along this
growing corridor, which includes the Inland Empire, one of California’s fastest
growing regions
The Tier 1 EIR/EIS alternative analysis screening identified approximately 77.5 miles of
new track to be constructed within Union’s Pacific’s Yuma subdivision in the eastern
section of the proposed corridor
CV Rail Project Project Location
3
CV Rail Project
Reimbursement Agreement
4
Allows Union Pacific and their consultants to provide preliminary engineering
services
Services will include the following:
Field Diagnostics and Inspections
Access for environmental surveys
Environmental Documents and Technical studies review
Preliminary Design reviews
Plan, Specification, and Construction review
Preparation of project estimates
Attendance and participation at project meetings
CV Rail Project
Reimbursement Agreement
5
$100,000 estimated cost specified by UP in the reimbursement agreement
UP indicated they are likely to exceed this amount as work progresses without prior
notification and consent
Requesting an additional $500,000 for future amendments
Allow staff to pivot quickly when issues arise or when UP submits a large invoice
Avoid delays in reviews and coordination with UP
CV Rail Project
Recommendations
6
1)Approve Reimbursement Agreement No.24-25-063-00 with Union Pacific
Railroad (UP)for preliminary engineering services for the Coachella Valley Rail
Project in an amount not to exceed $100,000;
2)Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve future amendments
to address the anticipated additional scope of work required by UP as the
project progresses for an amount not to exceed $500,000 as may be required
for the Project for a total not to exceed contract of $600,000;
3)Authorize the Chair or Executive Director,pursuant to legal counsel review,to
execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission;and
4)Approve a budget adjustment of $20,000 for expenses to be incurred in Fiscal
Year 2023/24.
QUESTIONS
7
AGENDA ITEM 9
Agenda Item 9
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: February 26, 2024
TO: Budget and Implementation Committee
FROM: Andrew Sall, Senior Management Analyst, Legislative Affairs
Tyler Madary, Legislative Affairs Manager
THROUGH: David Knudsen, External Affairs Director
SUBJECT: State and Federal Legislative Update
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to recommend the Commission to take the following action(s):
1) Receive and file a state and federal legislative update; and
2) Adopt the following bill position:
a) AB 2535 (Bonta)—Oppose.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State Update
California State Legislature Update
The second year of the 2023-2024 Legislative Session is in full swing as legislators consider policy
proposals and begin to hold hearings on the FY 2024-2025 Budget. Two-year bills originally
introduced in 2023 were required to pass out of their house of origin by January 31. One bill that
failed passage includes Assembly Bill 1525 by Assemblymember Mia Bonta (Oakland), which was
opposed by RCTC on April 11, 2023, as it sought to drastically shift how a majority of state
transportation funds are expended and narrow the location and type of projects eligible for
funding. Additionally, legislators faced a deadline to introduce any new bills by February 16. Staff
continue to monitor bill proposals for opportunities to support, oppose, and provide feedback
on legislation pertinent to the Commission’s transportation priorities, including lessening the
impact that vehicle miles traveled (VMT) policies have on the planning, funding, and delivery of
vital mobility improvements in Riverside County and across the state.
On February 8, newly elected Senate Speaker Pro Tempore Mike McGuire (Healdsburg)
announced new Senate leadership and committee assignments. Senator David Cortese
(San Jose) was appointed Chair of the Senate Transportation Committee, replacing Senator
Lena Gonzalez (Long Beach), who was appointed Senate Majority Leader. Senator Aisha Wahab
(Hayward) was named the Chair of Senate Budget Subcommittee 5 on Corrections, Public Safety,
Judiciary and Transportation. Notably, Senator Anna Caballero (Salinas) was appointed as Chair
60
Agenda Item 9
of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Senator Caballero represents a Central Valley district
and has a history of advocating against one-size-fits-all applications of VMT policies.
Regional Advocacy Meetings
On January 26, Executive Director Anne Mayer participated in a discussion hosted by Senator
Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh in Beaumont to discuss regional infrastructure priorities. The panel included
a discussion on regional transportation challenges, investments, and opportunities to improve
mobility for residents across Riverside County.
Separately, over recent weeks and months RCTC staff have conducted several meetings with
district office staff from Riverside County’s state legislative delegation. In addition to meeting
with Senator Kelly Seyarto (Murrieta), meetings were held with staff from the offices of
Assemblymembers Bill Essayli (Corona), Eduardo Garcia (Coachella), Corey Jackson (Moreno
Valley), Kate Sanchez (Rancho Santa Margarita), and Greg Wallis (Bermuda Dunes), as well as
Senator Steve Padilla (Chula Vista) to provide updates on the draft Traffic Relief Plan and
legislative priorities for RCTC and the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority
(RCA).
Assembly Bill 1957 (Wilson) – Support via Platform
On February 15, RCTC took a support position on Assembly Bill 1957 by Assemblymember
Lori Wilson (Suisun City), per the Commission’s adopted 2024 State and Federal Legislative
Platform. AB 1957 would remove the sunset date on a pilot program allowing for counties to
utilize the best value procurement process for construction projects in excess of $1 million. The
current pilot program is utilized only in the counties of Alameda, Los Angeles, Monterey,
Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Yuba, and Assembly
Bill 1957 removes this restriction.
Extending this program indefinitely will enable the County of Riverside to continue to benefit
from utilizing the best value procurement process for construction projects.
Supporting this legislation is consistent with the Commission’s adopted 2024 State and Federal
Legislative Platform, including:
Innovation
• Support implementation and expansion of state and federal initiatives to expedite
and advance innovative transportation policies, programs, and technologies.
Project Delivery Streamlining
• Support the availability of project delivery tools such as the design-build and
progressive design-build project delivery methods, construction manager/general
contractor (CM/GC, or construction manager at-risk) project delivery method, and
public-private partnerships to the Commission, the state, federal agencies, and
61
Agenda Item 9
other infrastructure agencies. Oppose efforts to add barriers to effective
implementation of such tools.
Alignment of Responsibilities
• Support policies that provide decision-making authority and flexibility to agencies
bearing financial risk for projects. Oppose policies that place unfunded mandates
and other undue burdens and restrictions on agencies that bear financial risk for
projects.
Assembly Bill 2535 (Bonta) Staff Recommendation – Oppose
RCTC staff recommend that the Commission oppose Assembly Bill 2535 by Assemblymember
Mia Bonta (Oakland). AB 2535 would prohibit the California Transportation Commission (CTC)
from allocating funding under the Trade Corridor Enhancement Program (TCEP) established
under Senate Bill 1 in 2017 towards projects that add a general-purpose lane to a highway or
expand highway capacity in communities with high levels of pollution.
Additionally, the bill proposes that the CTC may only allocate TCEP funding towards expanding a
highway’s footprint if the project completed project-level environmental review, ensures smooth
and free-flowing truck traffic on limited-access rights-of-way, deploys zero-emission freight
technology, and completes an analysis of cumulative pollution burdens and potential adverse
cumulative impacts caused by the project, along with a mitigation plan.
Furthermore, the bill requires that at least 50 percent of TCEP funding be allocated to
investments in zero-emission freight infrastructure.
While RCTC continues to support a regionally equitable, environmentally responsible, and multi-
modal approach to transportation, as well as incentives to advance zero-emission vehicle
adoption, Assembly Bill 2535 constitutes a rewrite of the TCEP program. If enacted, the bill would
limit the discretion of the California Transportation Commission and could harm RCTC’s
competitiveness for vital trade corridor improvements in the region.
Opposing this legislation is consistent with the Commission’s adopted 2024 State and Federal
Legislative Platform, including:
Equity and Fairness
• State and federal funding should be distributed equitably to Riverside County. This
includes core formula funding as well as supplemental distributions.
Projects
• Oppose policies that inhibit the efficient, timely delivery of such projects.
62
Agenda Item 9
Funding
• Support maintaining the legislative intent behind Senate Bill 1 (Statutes 2017) and
historic base program funding, by:
o Opposing efforts to tie distribution of transportation funding to ancillary
policy matters, such as housing.
o Opposing efforts to deviate from legislative intent and existing statute.
o Ensuring program guidelines are as broad as possible with respect to
mode, to the extent appropriate while adhering to legislative intent.
Federal Update
Fiscal Year 2024 Appropriations discussions continue between the House and Senate. As
previously reported, Congress approved an additional Continuing Resolution to keep the
government open at existing funding levels on January 18. Congress has a new deadline of
March 1 to pass budget legislation related to Agriculture, Energy-Water, Military Construction-
Veterans Affairs, and Transportation-Housing and Urban Development, and must pass all other
appropriations legislation by March 8.
As discussions to finalize and approve funding for Fiscal Year 2024 continue, staff await details
regarding Fiscal Year 2025 appropriations, which includes the Community Project Funding
(CPF)/Congressionally Directed Spending (CDS) process, otherwise known as earmarks. While
application and funding guidelines for CPF/CDS requests are typically released in February, this
information is likely to be released in early March following President Biden’s budget proposal.
Staff anticipate a shortened timeline to prepare and submit CPF/CDS applications and are
preparing accordingly.
As noted above, staff have been conducting meetings with district office staff with elected
officials, which includes Riverside County’s federal elected representatives. Meetings were held
with staff from the Offices of Senator Alex Padilla and Laphonza Butler, as well as the Office of
Representative Raul Ruiz to discuss the draft Traffic Relief Plan and legislative priorities for RCTC
and RCA.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This is a policy and information item. There is no fiscal impact.
Attachment: Legislative Matrix – March 2024
63
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - POSITIONS ON STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION – MARCH 2024
Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption
AB 6 (Friedman) This bill provides significant new oversight to the California Air Resources
Board in the approval process of a metropolitan planning organization’s
Sustainable Communities Strategy and the methodology used to
estimate greenhouse gas emissions. These new burdensome
requirements will likely result in significant delays to transportation
projects.
Passed the Assembly,
referred to the Senate
Transportation and
Environmental Quality
Committees on June 14,
2023.
Two-year bill.
September 15, 2023
Oppose Based on Platform 5/24/2023
AB 7 (Friedman) This bill requires the California State Transportation Agency, California
Department of Transportation, and California Transportation
Commission to consider specific goals as part of their processes for
project development, selection, and implementation. AB 7 may impact
the allocation of billions of dollars in state transportation funding,
infringing on RCTC’s ability to deliver critically needed transportation
infrastructure in Riverside County.
Ordered to the inactive file.
Two-year bill.
September 11, 2023
Oppose Based on Platform 5/25/2023
AB 558 (Arambula) This bill restructures the Fresno County Transportation Authority (FCTA)
by increasing its board membership from nine to thirteen members. This
restructuring is done without the consensus and support from regional
stakeholders and sets a concerning precedent for RCTC and other
regional transportation agencies that rely upon a collaborative process
to be effective.
Additionally, the bill was amended on April 18 to subject a county
transportation expenditure plan prepared by the Fresno County
Transportation Authority (FCTA) to the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act.
Failed deadline.
January 31, 2024
Oppose Based on Platform 4/10/2023
AB 1385 (Garcia) This bill would raise RCTC’s maximum tax rate authority from 1% to 1.5%. Approved by the Governor.
October 8, 2023
Support 3/8/2023
AB 1525 (Bonta) This bill significantly narrows the location and types of projects eligible to
receive state transportation funding by requiring 60% of funds to be
allocated to priority populations.
Failed deadline.
January 31, 2024
Oppose Based on Platform 4/11/2023
64
Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption AB 1957 (Wilson) This bill removes the sunset date on a pilot program allowing for specified
counties to utilize the best value procurement process for construction
projects in excess of $1 million. The bill additionally expands the program
to all counties.
Referred to the Assembly
Local Government
Committee.
February 12, 2024
Support Based on Platform
2/15/2024
SB 617 (Newman) This bill, until January 1, 2029, would authorize a transit district,
municipal operator, consolidated agency, joint powers authority,
regional transportation agency, or local or regional agency, as described,
to use the progressive design-build process for up to 10 public works
projects in excess of $5 million for each project. The bill would specify
that the authority to use the progressive design-build process.
Approved by the Governor.
October 4, 2023
Support Based on Platform
4/5/2023
65
AGENDA ITEM 10
Agenda Item 10
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: February 26, 2024
TO: Budget and Implementation Committee
FROM: Lisa Mobley, Administrative Services Director/Clerk of the Board
THROUGH: Aaron Hake, Deputy Executive Director
SUBJECT: Election of Officers for the Budget and Implementation Committee
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Conduct an election of officers for 2024 – Chair and Vice Chair.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The election of officers for the full Commission and its Committees are held on an annual basis.
Commissioners Jeremy Smith (Chair) and Linda Molina (Vice Chair) were elected as the Budget
and Implementation Committee’s officers in January 2023. Once the election for 2023 is
conducted, the new Chair and Vice Chair will immediately assume the positions.
Past Chairs of the Budget and Implementation Committee are as follows:
2023 – Jeremy Smith, City of Canyon Lake
2022 – Raymond Gregory, City of Cathedral City
2021 – Lloyd White, City of Beaumont
2020 – Lloyd White, City of Beaumont
2019 – Linda Krupa, City of Hemet
2018 – Rusty Bailey, City of Riverside
2017 – Jan Harnik, City of Palm Desert
2016 – Bob Magee, City of Lake Elsinore
2015 – Bob Magee, City of Lake Elsinore
2014 – Douglas Hanson, City Indian Wells
2013 – Ella Zanowic, City of Calimesa
2012 – Rick Gibbs, City of Murrieta
2011 – Scott Matas, City of Desert Hot Springs
2010 – Greg Pettis, City of Cathedral City
2009 – Mary Craton, City of Canyon Lake
2008 – Steve Adams, City of Riverside
2007 – Rick Gibbs, City of Murrieta
66
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE
ROLL CALL
FEBRUARY 26, 2024
Present Absent
County of Riverside, District III X
County of Riverside, District V X
City of Beaumont X
City of Calimesa X
City of Canyon Lake X
City of Cathedral City X
City of Coachella X
City of Desert Hot Springs X
City of Lake Elsinore X
City of Moreno Valley X
City of Murrieta X
City of Palm Desert X
City of Palm Springs X
City of San Jacinto X
City of Temecula X
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE
COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET
FEBRUARY 26, 2024
NAME
AGENCY
E_MAIL ADDRESS
Jriti.ert 'icnbti-ei
c7)L TS- 0):4-t( ClanCi
-2-0 `l 2) W tkL 1-- _
-z 1)rYc0 /v -r
Vic) D€_'( -(moo
Dt.-'%2Q 6 f/q-1-t-t(
ttvf,-+iain G-441 rz_
P_Ivcc. b.c,-
c - --1 - (it cs
De r- - • -Q1,-,hp
. 4 P ' UM' ' L
CJ n7 _- -71'
k
' RCey /)(i 6irvey
tituj(2 I c ; ,