Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout12 December 13, 2006 CommissionRECORDS RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA PLEASE NOTE TIME CHANGE TIME: 9:00 a.m. DATE: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 LOCATION: BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside Commissioners Chairman: Marion Ashley 1 st Vice Chairman: Terry Henderson 2' Vice Chairman: Jeff Stone Bob Buster, County of Riverside John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside Jeff Stone, County of Riverside Roy Wilson, County of Riverside Marion Ashley, County of Riverside Barbara Hanna / Art Welch, City of Banning Roger Berg / Jeff Fox, City of Beaumont Robert Crain / Joseph DeConinck, City of Blythe John Chlebnik / Shenna Moqeet / Bill Davis, City of Calimesa Mary Craton / John Zaitz, City of Canyon Lake Gregory S. Pettis / Charles England, City of Cathedral City Juan M. DeLara / Richard Macknicki, City of Coachella Jeff Miller / Karen Spiegel, City of Corona Hank Hohenstein / Yvonne Parks, City of Desert Hot Springs Robin Lowe / Lori Van Arsdale, City of Hemet Mary Roche / Robert Bernheimer, City of Indian Wells Michael H. Wilson / Gene Gilbert, City of Indio Terry Henderson / Don Adolph, City of La Quinta Bob Magee / Robert L. S.chiffner, City of Lake Elsinore Frank West / Charles White, City of Moreno Valley Rick Gibbs / Douglas McAllister, City of Murrieta Frank Hall / Harvey Sullivan, City of Norco Dick Kelly / Robert Spiegel, City of Palm Desert Ronald Oden / Ginny Foat, City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch / Mark Yarbrough, City of Perris Gordon Moller / Alan Seman, City of Rancho Mirage Steve Adams / Dom Betro, City of Riverside Jim Ayres / Chris Buydos, City of San Jacinto Ron Roberts / Jeff Comerchero, City of Temecula Mike Perovich, Governor's Appointee Eric Haley, Executive Director Anne Mayer, Deputy Executive Director Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director 78899 Comments are welcomed by the Commission. if you wish to provide comments to the Commission, please complete and submit a Testimony Card to the Clerk of the Commission. 11.36.0 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION www.rctc.org . AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 9:00 a.m. Wednesday, December 13, 2006 BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080. Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside In compliance with the Americans . with Disabilities Act and .Government Code Section 54954.2, if special assistance is needed to participate in a Commission meeting, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to meeting, time will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility at the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS - Each individual speaker is limited to speak five (5) continuous minutes or less. The Commission may, either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote of the Commission, waive this five 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 three (3) continuous minutes. Also, the Commission may terminate public comments if such comments become repetitious. Speakers may not yield their .time to others without the consent of .the Chair. Any written documents to be distributed or presented to the Commission shall be submitted to the Clerk of the Board. This policy applies to Public Comments and comments on Agenda Items. 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 forfactual information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda December 13, 2006 Page 2 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - NOVEMBER 8, 2006 6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS The Commission mayadd an item to the Agenda after making a finding that there is a need to take, immediate action on the item and that the item came to the attention of. the Commission subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Commission. If there are less than 2/3 of the Commission members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote. Addeditems will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR Al( 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. 7A. PROPOSED 2007 COMMISSION/COMMITTEES MEETING AND UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULE Overview This item is for, the Commission to 2007 Commission/Committees Meeting and Unmet Public Hearing Schedule. 7B. RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE APPENDIX OF THE INTEREST CODE Overview Pagel adopt its Transit Needs CONFLICT OF • Page 5 This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution' No. 06-024, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation, Commission Amending the Appendix of the Conflict of Interest Code Pursuant to the Political Reform Act of 1974". Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda December 13, 2006 Page 3 7C. FISCAL YEAR 2005/06 COMMISSION AUDIT RESULTS`' 7D. Overview Page 12 This itern is for the Commission to receive and file the FY 2005/06: 1) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report; 2) Local Transportation Fund (LTF) Audited Financial Statements; 3) ' State Transit Assistance Fund (STAF) Audited Financial Statements;'; 4) Compliance Report; 5) Commercial Paper Compliance Report; 6) Audit Results Report; 7) Agreed -Upon Procedures Report related to the Appropriation Limit Calculation; 8) Agreed -Upon Procedures "`Report related ' to the Commuter Assistance Program (CAP) incentives; and 9) Management certifications. . QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Overview'. Page 153 This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the first quarter ended September 30, 2006. 7E. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT Overview . This item is for the Commission to receiveand file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended September 30, 2006. 7F. TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE REGIONAL ARTERIAL PROGRAM QUARTERLY REPORT • Overview Page 157 - Page 171 This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Regional Arterial Program Quarterly Report. . • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda December 13, 2006 Page 4 - 7G. FUND TRANSFER' AGREEMENT FOR OPERATION - OF, A FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL PROGRAM IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY Page 177 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Fund Transfer Agreement No. 07-45-066-00 with the state of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), for the Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program in the amount of $1,4.16,343 in state funding for FY 2006/07; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission: 7H. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT >OF.. TRANSPORTATION ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE GRANT AWARD Page 185 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Applyy for., accept and enter into Agreement" No. 07-67-075-00 with the state of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for $200,000 in grant funds from the Environmental Justice (EJ): Context -Sensitive Transportation Planning Grant Program; 2) Approve Funding Agreement No, 07-67-071-00 with Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA),'Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) for the local funding match of $24,000 in support of the EJ grant; 3) Authorize staff to " release a request for proposals (RFP) to conduct an EJ analysis and community outreach to supplement the Multi -County Goods .Movement, Action Plan (MCGMAP) currently underway; and 4) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda December 13, 2006 Page 5 71. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAMUPDATE• Page 188 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file' the Commuter Rail Program Update as an information item. 7J. TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDIT FOR FISCAL YEARS 2003/04 THROUGH 2005/06 Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 195 1) Approve Agreement - No. 07-26-074-00 with Pacific Municipal Consultants to conduct the triennialperformance audit of the Commission and' seven public transit operators in an amount not to exceed $71,290; 2) Allocate $71,290 in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds to cover the cost of the audits; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 7K. CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE/SOCIAL SERVICES TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE Overview Page 197. This item is for the Commission to: 1) Renew the memberships of Michelle Anglin, Peter Benavidez, Jim Collins, Eunice Lovi, Scott Richardson and Cindy Scheirer to the Citizens' Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee (CAC/SSTAC); and 2) Approve the membership roster for CAC/SSTAC effective January 1, 2007. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda December 13, 2006 Page 6 7L. WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MEASURE A SPECIALIZED TRANSIT PROGRAM: CARE CONNEXXUS, INC AND COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES Page 201 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the request for Measure A Specialized Transit funds available in Western, Riverside County for Care Connexxus, Inc., Agreement No. 07-26-073-00 and Court Appointed Special Advocates, Agreement No. 07-26-072-00, in an aggregate amount not to exceed $181,000 in FY 2006/07 and $205,000 in FY 2007/08; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to ;legal .counsel review, to enter into the agreements ! on= behalf of the Commission.. 7M.. ADVERTISE FOR CONSTRUCTION BIDS ON THE REVEGETATION WORK FOR THE STATE ROUTE- 74 SEGMENT 11` REALIGNMENT PROJECT FROM 0.5 KM EAST OF WASSON, CANYON ROAD TO 7TR STREET IN THE CITY OF PERRIS Overview This item is for the Commission to authorize staff to'i' advertise for construction bids on the revegetation work for the SR-74 Segment II, Realignment from 0.5 km east. of Wasson Canyon Road to 7th Street in the city of Perris. 7N. REPLACEMENT OF THE .BUYER;; OF THE COMMISSION'S MADISON STATION. GROUNDS Page 206 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve. thereplacement of the buyer of the. Madison Station Grounds from the city of Riverside to the city of Riverside Redevelopment Agency. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda December 13. 2006 Page 7 8. ELECTION OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION OFFICERS AND APPOINTMENT OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS Page 207 Overview This item is for: 1) The Commission to conduct an election of officers for 2007 Chair, Vice Chair, and 2"d Vice Chair; 2) The cities of Riverside, Corona, and Moreno Valley to select their representative to the Executive Committee; 3) The cities of Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon Lake, Hemet, Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, 'Norco, Perris, San Jacinto, and Temecula to select their representative to the Executive Committee; and 4) The cities of Blythe, Cathedral City, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Indian Wells, Indio, La Quinta, Palm' Desert, Palm Springs, and Rancho Mirage to select their representative to the Executive Committee. 9. WORK EFFORT OF 10-YEAR DELIVERY PLAN FOR WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MEASURE A FREEWAY PROGRAM Page 209 Overview This is for the Commission to: 1) Receive and file the results of the 'work effort to formulate the 10-Year. Delivery Plan for the Western Riverside County Measure A Highway program; 2) Approve the 10-Year Western County highway priorities, which include the prioritization of freeway investments on projects along the 1-215, I- 15, SR-91 and 1-10 corridors; 3) Authorize staff to utilize the 2006 forecast of Measure A revenues in developing projections for the 10-Year Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan; 4). Direct staff to return to the Commission in 90 days with detailed updates and .reports regarding the Mid County Parkway (MCP) project, the realignment of SR-79, and the Bi-County 1-215 project; and 5) Return to the Commission .with quarterly updates and actions to facilitateand expedite the delivery of highway improvements in Western. Riverside County. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda December 13, 2006 Page 8 10.. 10-YEAR MEASURE A WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY :HIGHWAY'PROGRAM PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS Overview , This is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Corridor Mobility Improvement- Account (CMIA) list and prepare submittal to the California Transportation Commission (CTC); 2) , Direct staff to prepare requests for proposals to pursue '.environmental clearance work leading to the eventual widening and improvement of 1-215, 1-15, SR-91 and.1=10; 3) Adopt as a priority, improvements that would widen 1-215 by at least one lane in each direction between Box Springs Road andtl-l5; 4) Adopt as a priority, the construction of an eastbound truck climbing lane on 1-10.between the San Bernardino County line and I-10; 5) Adopt as a priority, the construction of two lanes in. each direction on SR-91 between the Orange County line and 1-15 that would include the extension of the 91 Express Lanes to 1-15 and`•the addition: of a general purpose lane in each direction along with collector distributor road systems, improved freeway to freeway connections with 1-15 and SR-71, and aneastbound auxiliary lane between SR-241 and, Serfas Club Drive; 6) Adopt as a priority, theconstruction of two high occupancy toll (HOT) lanes in each direction on 1-15 between SR-74 and the San Bernardino County :line andthe addition ofan high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane in each direction from the confluence of 1-15/1-215 and SR-74 along with support for the rapid implementation of the French Valley Parkway interchange; 7) . Seek legislative approval for toll facilities on SR-91 and 1-15; and 8) Return to the Commission with a detailed report and construction staging ,. plan for the widening of SR-91 and 1-15with a special emphasis on HOT and HOV Zane policy considerations and begin discussions with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) regarding operational issues between the 91 Express Lanes and proposed HOT lane facilities in Riverside County. 11. ITEMS PULLED FROM, CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda December 13, 2006 Page 9 12. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE 'DIRECTOR'S REPORT Overview Page 234 This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and the Executive Director to report on attended meetings/conferences and any other items related to Commission activities. • Written Report on the Rail -Volution 2006 Conference from Commissioner Frank West 13. CLOSED SESSION ITEMS A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: EXISTING LITIGATION Pursuant to subdivision (a) of Government Code Section 54956.9 B CONFERENCE WITH 'LEGAL COUNSEL: ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Government Code Section 54956.9 C. • CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Government Code Section 54956.9 D. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR . Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Negotiating Parties: RCTC — Executive Director or Designee Property Owners — See List of Property Owners 14. ADJOURNMENT The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 10:00 a.m., Wednesday, January 10, 2007, Board Room, County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. DETACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD ADDRESS: 1"-A. O Street REPRESENTIN BUSINESS ADDRES Speakers shall complete the following: DATE: i 2 113 SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: O PUBLIC COMMENTS: AGENDA ITEM NO.: /O SUBJECT OF IAS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) AGENDA ITEM: NAME: �t) / / d JJ I �' Z TEL. NO.: J // Odj if Name of Group City Zi Code RCTC/nk (10/03 TEL. NO:: c ac, tkA ‘-‘4"\ RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ROLL CALL December 13, 2006 Absent County of Riverside,=`District County of Riverside, District II County of Riverside, :District III. County of Riverside, District IV County of Riverside, District V City of Banning City of Beaumont City of Blythe City of Calimesa City of Canyon Lake City of Cath`edral;.City City of Coachella City of Corona.' City of Desert Hot Springs City:Of Hemet City of Indian Wells ,City of ndio City of La Quinta 'City of Lake :Elsinore City of Moreno Valley City of Munleta City of Norco City` of Palm Desert. City of Palm Springs City o.f. Perris City of Rancho Mirage City- of Riverside City of San Jacinto City of Temecula:: Governor's Appointee, Caltrans District 8 O RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET DECEMBER 13, 2006 NAME AGENCY E MAIL ADDRESS L,(„,,,,,i---,inv\_0-, '� - (� � f loct h ct it V\c4) , 6111 t- \✓,, clok_Ve4 l 7 ‘ g1A__ 67-ulo �,,�c/4 -- c t".lam jake6 - /,0 / �.1�" tik t C A( ._ �/j LL/J rc-- f,'&yA�5--2-- rna>ee-tio kAL‘er� yr3-7oe'‘ - -z,L i(i/ nn fska(l 25079/ems RG/66.s-p/ Ak,,e-TA 6 4 C pp/`7254./ i/C-f 67,ete•S i'4/ 7 /a y' S� L V-2/ GT �14/47111 1Z4DSO77 � �f d/ .I� _ �� J , , Z Q. Cl re Lu,V.rche; 411 r 14 / r) I ,,,CO .. Ge..i.. t �6.4,A.� �j�J ,//b... °.i/ ... e ./4s Oi c. `_ C p A,ile `de MCi6. vase... .�i i ‹. /'7 ew6 4.5 d V c. �4-,4.1;:1 ,,, /��� �]\ ©11,� �A�A�I�OiJ� --5N) -__)- `/it- A\Aktf ILA• C/2"-‘,/ K�tofac-)z..- ,-+mgiij CItLE,6IUIK CALifriesA i'l? ' e-Yv t .. A1 -. tJ/ L--$„r' /,,, P t 0 'S , 55 sm ��,� e `( ct: .7 �/ l �j !'�6 L �i A % % y //��/J<- !�% 77 f' Y AGENDA ITEM 5 MINUTES RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, November 8, 2006 1. CALL TO ORDER The Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chair Marion Ashley at .10:04 a.m., in the Board Room at the County of . Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At"this time, Chair Ashley led the Commission in a flag salute. 3. ROLL CALL Commissioners/Alternates Present Steve Adams Marion Ashley " Jim Ayres Roger Berg Daryl Busch Bob Buster John Chlebnik Mary Craton ` Rick Gibbs Frank Hall Barbara Hanna Terry Henderson Hank Hohenstein Dick. Kelly Robin Lowe Bob Magee Paul Marchand Jeff Miller Ronald Oden Mike Perovich Ron Roberts Mary Roche Jeff Stone John F. Tavaglione Charles White Michael H. Wilson Roy Wilson Commissioners Absent Robert Crain Juan DeLara Gordon Moller Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes November 8, 2006 Page 2 PUBLIC COMMENTS Garry Grant, Meadowbrook area resident, expressed concern related to signage along SR-74 related to permits and graffiti. Chair. Ashley noted that Riverside County Code Enforcement, is being reorganized and a number of new ordinances have been passed that will address his concern...` R.A. BarneyBarnett, Highgrove area resident, expressed 'support for a Metrolink station in the Highgrove area. He briefly: reviewed al, portion of the, Highgrove Site Alternatives Analysis Executive Summary dated June. 2003 by the . Commission; correspondence from 'Eric Haley, Executive Director dated September 13, 2006, and his proposal. He requested that the Commission and San Bernardino Associated . Governments (SANBAG) cooperatively discuss this project. He provided a map and directions to the Highgrove site. A copy of this document was distributed to the Commissioners. . -' Eric Maley 'replied that the Commission has not directed staff .to engage in any negotiations , for the purchase. of property in the Highgrove area. He: explained ",that the; Executive Summary reflects the state of ;circumstances in 2003, at,. which' time there were neither funds nor policy position to move forward. Environmental work and approvals at the federal level have not come „about at this time andthereforethe Commission; has,not directed any ;. action for staff to move forward, noting no routes or stations sites have been adopted. Earlier studies have shown that up to 75% of the ridership would come from San Bernardino County. The;; Commission: has not received any actions from .any San Bernardino County city .;councils: or SANBAG committing, funds to build a Metrolink station in Highgrove. He stated that a decision at ,this time is premature. Byron Matteson, Grand Terrace residentandformer mayor, also expressed support for a Metrolink station in the Highgrove area and suggested this project, be presented to all of the San Bernardino County city. councils., Jim Miller, Grand Terrace councilmember, expressed support for a Metrolink station in the . Highgrove area and suggested that. the Commission and SANBAG collaborate on goals to reduce traffic congestion. In response to Commissioner John Tavaglione's question, Jim Miller stated that city of Grand Terrace will provide any finances that it can and participate in raising funds. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes November 8, 2006 Page 3 In response to Commissioner Bob Buster's inquiry regarding direct contributions for any. existing Metrolink stations within Riverside County, Eric Haley responded that the city of Corona donated land value in excess of $4 million and explained that in 2003, the Commission took a position advocating that any new stations involve joint financing and use. He stated the Lennar project on Alessandro Boulevard involves the granting of the Commission of over 20 acres. The Commission is not beginning any station at this point given its fiscal issues without a significant contribution from the private or public sector. Commissioner Buster stated .that initially, new train service to Los Angeles and Orange County was not conditioned on any kind of substantial contributions from the, county or cities. He believes the Highgrove area is a regional location and the Commission needs to look beyond the short term as long term shows this is preservation of right-of-way. He stated that there needs to be another corridor to San Bernardino County due to the increasing congestion between Riverside and .San Bernardino Counties. He expressed concern for Eric Haley's position as there has been no policy discussion on the issue.: . Chair Ashleyexpressed support for the idea of a Metrolink station in the Wighgrove area. He added that the Commission cannot solely fund the project . and participation from SANBAG would be necessary. He asked Eric Haley to report on any recent discussions with. SANBAG concerning_ the proposed Highgrove station. Eric Haley reported that three weeks ago he, met in San Bernardino to discuss county line issues where he informally discussed with SANBAG staff about any rail issues and they responded that there were none. He has also informally asked San Bernardino County individuals " in receipt of correspondence regarding a Highgrove .station as to whether they are supportive of engaging a multi -million dollar investment commitment at that location and the answer was no. At the Commission's direction; staff will make . a formal request for a shared commitment- for the cost of building a station in Highgrove and improvements to the Colton crossing: He noted that the Commission is unique with regard to its funding commitment of Metrolink stations. Steve DeBaun, Legal Counsel, explained that the purpose of the public comment period is toreceive comments from the public. Based on the discussion, he recommended that the issue be agendized at a future meeting Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes November 8, 2006 Page 4 for further discussion. He reminded the Commissioners of property owner rights, and to exercise' caution when speaking about specific properties: Edward DeMuth, Grand Terrace resident, expressed support for a Metrolink ' station in the Highgrove, area. Maggie Saunders, Grand Terrace resident, expressed support for a Metrolink station in the Highgrove area; on behalf of her. husband. . Melanie Zimmermann, Highgroveresident, expressed support for a Metrolink station in the Highgrove area and suggested the Commission and SANBAG' board members tour the Highgrove area being discussed. Don Earp, Colton resident, expressed support • for a Metrolink:` station in the Highgrove area. He believes that a Highgrove station would not increase the existing number of ,trains and therefore the Colton crossing is not an issue. Denis 'Kidd, Grand Terrace resident, also expressed support for a Metrolink' station ,in the Highgrove: area and believes, that San Bernardino County will provide financial support. He suggested -that Barriey:Barnett-be invited to. the tour of the Highgrove area. Leticia Pepper; representing the University .Neighborhood Association,, provided a lhandout dated. November 9, 2006, •which outlines ;the availability of, bus, , service from a Highgrove Metrolink ,stationsite to'. University ; of California, Riverside and the Downtown Riverside Metrolink station. A copy of this , document was distributed to the Commissioners. She expressed' support for a Highgrove Metrolink , station 'because of accessibility to ` freeways and major, arterials. Commissioner : Tavaglione stated that the Commission has a regional responsibility with its partners to address the long-term infrastructure needs of the region ..and a responsibility to provide and .maximize funding by'. . creating .inter -jurisdictional and>intra-jurisdictional. partnerships. He expressed support for a Metrolink station in the Highgrove ,area and added that the Commission, has a process . it is required to follow. ` He then 'requested this issue and direction on overall policy, regarding future sites' be 'referred to the Property Committee for discussion. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes November 8, 2006 Page 5 Chair Ashley directed; Eric Haley to formally discuss financial commitments with SANBAG regarding a Metrolink station in the Highgrove area and to agendize this issue to the appropriate committee and report back to the Commission. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — September 15 and October 11,, 2006 M/S/C - (Lowe/Busch) to approve the September 15 and October 11, 2006 minutes. 6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS There were no requests from the public to speak. 7 CONSENT CALENDAR Commissioner Charles: White requested Agenda Item 7G, . Agreements for On -Call Right -of -Way Appraisal Services for Residential, Commercial, Industrial and Agricultural Properties" and Agenda Item 7H, `Agreements for On -Call Right -of -Way Appraisal Review Services" be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion. M/S/C (Henderson/Marchand). to approve the following Consent Calendar items: Abstain on Agenda Item 71: Ashley, Buster, Lowe, Stone, and Tavaglione 7A. INTERFUND.LOAN ACTIVITY REPORT Receive and file the Interfund Loan Activity Report for the first quarter ended September 30, 2006. 7B.. CITY OF LA QU1NTA'S AMENDED BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Approve the city of La Quinta's amended Bicycle Transportation Plan as submitted. 7C. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE Receive and file the Commuter Rail Program Update as an information item. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes November 8, 2006 Page 6 7D. REQUEST. FROM CARE -A -VAN TRANSIT INC. FOR' ' .MEASURE A , SPECIALIZED TRANSIT FUNDSAS CAPITAL , MATCH FOR THE SECTION 5310. PROGRAM 1) Allocate $11,011 to Care -A -Van Transit Inc in Measure . A !Specialized: Transit funds to provide the required;` capital match for the Section 5310 program; 2)" Approve Agreement No: 07-26-054-00 with Care=A-Van Transit Inc: for $11,011 in Measure A 'Specialized 'iTransit funds available in Western Riverside County;.and 3): Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, 'to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 7E. AMENDMENT TO UTILITY AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY FOR -` THE STATE'! ROUTE 74 SEGMENT II WASSON CANYON ROAD TO 7T" STREET 'HIGHWAY ,WIDENING AND REALIGNMENT PROJECT 1') Approve Agreement No: "03-31-046'-01, Amendment No. 1 . to Agreement No. =, 03-31-046, with : Southern California 'Gas - Company for the SR-74 Segment II Wasson Canyon Road to Th Street widening and realignment project for an amount not to exceed $43,062; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the ,agreement on, behalf of the Commission.., 7F. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH;'PSOMAS TO PROVIDE FINAL DESIGN ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE PERRIS MULTIMODAL FACILITY 1') Approve. Agreement No: 04-33-007101, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 04-33-007, with Psonas to iperforrn ;Final "Design Engineering Services for the Perris MultiModal Facility, for a total not to exceed cost of 45241,067, subject to receipt of Federal Transit Administration (FTA) concurrence' of the Project National Environmental Policy 'Act' (NEPA) 'Environmental ' Evaluation; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf, of th'e Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes November 8, 2006 Page 7 71. FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY AGREEMENT 1) Award Agreement No. 07-14-067-00 with Cliff Madison Government Relations for Federal Legislative Advocacy Services; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreementon behalf of the Commission; and 3) Direct staff to review overall, long-term lobbying needs and return to the Commission in early 2007 with a comprehensive plan. 8. PROPOSITIONS 1 A AND 1 B ELECTION RESULT IMPACTS AND NOMINATIONS FOR CORRIDOR MOBILITY IMPROVEMENT ACCOUNT Anne Mayer, Deputy Executive Director, explained the results associated with. Propositions 1A and 1B and the impacts on Commission programs. She discussed the project categories outlined in the Proposition 1 B Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006 handout that was provided to the Commissioners. She then explained that this week_,, the California Transportation Commission_(CT.C) will be adopting guidelines for the Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) and an initial program of projects by March 1, 2007. Project nominations will be due by January 16, 2007. She stated. that staff will return to the Commission at its December 13, 2006 meeting with final recommendations for specific projects. In response to Commissioner Paul Marchand's questions regarding 60/91/215 interchange_ and funding of projects in the Coachella Valley, Anne Mayer responded that the 60/91/215 project is still under construction and will be completed in 2008. She then explained that based on the CMIA guidelines, Coachella Valley corridors are not competitive in these categories. The State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) implementation or STIP augmentation as well as state and local partnerships are opportunities for Coachella Valley to advance its established priority list of projects. Commissioner Steve Adams asked if under the Public Transportation, Goods Movement and Air Quality category, if those funds could be used towards grade separations. Anne Mayer replied that staff expects that grade separations will qualify under this category as they are the core of the goods movement issue. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes November 8, 2006 Page 8 Commissioner Jim. Ayres expressed -support ;for ,the staff recommendation and asked if therewas any consideration given for SR-79. Anne Mayer explained that based on the CMIA guidelines, SR-79 would not be competitive in these categories. In response to . Commissioner Buster's question regarding additional opportunities for coordination of submittals. between Riverside,Orange, San Diego or San Bernardino Counties, Anne Mayer replied that staff is currently coordinating with Orange County Transportation' Authority'(OCTA) staff. She explained that the'CTC has made it clear regarding the need for a regional system -,wide approach.' At Vice -Chair Terry Henderson's request; Anne. Mayer ,provided clarification on thedistribution of the funding for local roads. Commissioner = John Chlebnik stated that he believes the Commission and SANBAG need to work cooperatively to improve 1.10, including Metrolink service eastward towards the desert. Receive and file an oral report on Proposition 1 A and ' 1 B election results and impacts on'Gommission programs; and Approve preliminary recommendations for nominations for the Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) program. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 7G. AGREEMENTS FOR ON -CALL RIGHT-OF-WAY APPRAISAL SERVICES FOR RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL,,' . INDUSTRIAL AND AGRICULTURAL PROPERTIES Min; Saysay, Program Manager, explained that a system' will be establishedto monitor the individual appraisal assignments to ensure that the review appraisal assignments will not be assigned to the same. appraiser to avoid a conflict of interest. • Commissioner Charles White ,recommended that such language ,is incorporate into the staff recommendation. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes November 8, 2006 Page 9 Steve DeBaun stated that with regard to conflict of interest, federal law requires the Commission to have a different review appraiser than the initial. appraiser. M/S/C (White/Marchand) to: - 1) Award Agreement No. 07-72-057-00 with Hennessey & Hennessey LLC; . Agreement No. 07-72-061-00 with Paragon Partners Ltd; Agreement No. 07-31-063-00 with R. P. Laurain & Associates; Agreement No. 07-73-062-00 with Lidgard and Associates, Inc.; and Agreement No. 07-33-064-00. with Valentine Appraisal & Associates to perform On -Call Right -of -Way Appraisal Services (Appraisal Services); 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to `execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission;. 3) Approve an amendment to the FY 2006/07 budget in the amount of $225,000; and 4) Establish a system to monitor the individual appraisal assignments to_- _ ensurethat the review appraisal . assignments will not be assigned to the same appraiser. 7H. AGREEMENTS FOR ON -CALL RIGHT-OF-WAY APPRAISAL REVIEW SERVICES M/S/C (White/Marchand) to: 1) Award Agreement No. 07-33-060-00 with Hennessey & Hennessey LLC; Agreement No. 07-73-058-00 with Paragon Partners Ltd; and Agreement No. 07-31-059-00 with Lidgard and Associates, Inc. to perform On -Call Right -of -Way Appraisal Review Services (Appraisal Review Services); 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; 3) Approve an amendment to the FY 2006/07 budget in the amount of $78,000; and 4) Establish a system to monitor the individual appraisal assignments to ensure that the review appraisal assignments will not be assigned to the same appraiser. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes November 8, 2006 Page 10 10. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'SREPORT Commissioner Chlebnik suggested Barney Barnett be invited to attend the 'tour of the Perris Valley Line project on November 28,, 2006 along with the Commissioners. B. Commissioner' Buster and Chair Ashley' requested that staff schedule an additional Perris Valley Line project tour. Eric Haley: , Announced that the, Commission` Workshop on November 30, 2006, is cancelled; Announced that the Commission Meeting on December 13, 2006' will begin at 9:00 a.m. and is anticipated to adjourn by 1:00 p.m. • Highlighted the November 7t'' election results; and • Introduced Mark Massman, Bechtel Project Manager: ' 11. CLOSED SESSION ITEM CONFERENCE, WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: EXISTING LITIGATION Pursuant to Subdivision (a) of Government Code Section 54956.9 . CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNCEL: ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Subdivision (b) of Governments. Code Section 54956.9 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNCEL: ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Subdivision (c) of Governments' Code 'Section 54956.9 D. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY ° NEGOTIATOR Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 There •were ; no matters for consideration under Agenda Items 11,A, 11 B, 11 C, and 11 D. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes November 8, 2006 Page 11 12. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the meeting adjourned at 11:38 a.m. The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:00 a.m., on Wednesday, December. 13, 2006, at the in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080.Lemon Street, Riverside, California, 92501. Respectfully submitted, 02-)tv".-9-(L. Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board AGENDA ITEM 7A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: December 13, 2006 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT Proposed 2007 Commission/Committee Unmet Transit Needs Public Hearing Schedule Meetings and STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt its 2007 Commission/Committee Meetings and Unmet Transit Needs Public Hearing Schedule. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission has traditionally scheduled its meetings on the 2"d Wednesday of each month. In March of this year, the Commission determined to change its meeting start time to 10:00 a.m. In response to the shift in the Commission's meeting time, the Executive Committee start time was changed to 9:30 a.m. This meeting day and time appears to work with the Commissioners' respective schedules. The Commission also decided in January to review the meeting times and dates of its policy committees; Budget and Implementation, Plans and Programs, and Transit Policy. In response to the Commission's request, staff polled the respective Commissioners to seek feedback on newly proposed meeting days and times. The Budget and Implementation Committee concurred to schedule its meetings on the 4" Monday of each month at 9:30 a.m. The Plans and Programs Committee concurred to schedule its meetings on the 4' Monday of each month at 12:30 p.m. The Transit Policy Committee concurred to schedule its meetings on the 3'd Thursday on a quarterly basis at 10:00 a.m. These dates and times appear to work with the Commissioners' respective schedules. Commissioners should also be aware that there are times when Committee meetings may be cancelled due to lack of substantive agenda items. When this occurs, the Commissioners will be notified. Included in the 2007 Schedule is the: Unmet Transit Needs Public Hearing in Blythe. The Palo Verde Valley Area intends to continue to use a portion of its Local Transportation .Fund (LTF) funds for street and road needs. Therefore, an Unmet Transit Needs Public Hearing must be held. The public hearing is scheduled on Agenda Item 7A Thursday, March1, 2007,` at 2:30 p.m. in the Blythe City Council Chambers. In past years, Commissionersrepresenting cities in the Coachella Valley and the Palo Verde Valley as well as a member of the Citizens' Advisory Committee have participated as the hearing board. Commissioners interested in attending the public hearing should contact Tanya :Love, Program Manager, prior to the public hearing date. Attachment: Proposed 2007 Commission/Committee Meetings Schedule Agenda Item 7A " pallaoueo aq Aew lsn6ny ul sfup.ean ywow 'pea Aepsaupem P2 au} uo play Qae s6ullaew aapwwoo ann.noax3 ay} pue uolsslwwoo ayl y wd Woo 010d 'w'e OE:6 wood pieo8 'w'e 00:01 Z 1 aagwaoaa v wti WOO 010H 'w'e 0�:6 wooth paeo8. " u,'e 00:01 17l aaquaanoN d uatl 000 010t1 lire 0�:6 wool peps .w.e 00:01 01. Jeq�100 H wEl 3u00 010d 'w'e 0�:6 woos peas `w'e 00:01 Z 1 JegweldeS y wtl 1uoo olou 'w'e 0E:6 woou paeo8 .: " w a 00:01 _ 8 lsn6ny d aid luo0' 010t1 lire 0E:6 woof{ paeo8 'w'e 00:01 1 I.Alnr V u-la 11-100 010d .w.e 0�:6 wood pleos " ure 00:0I. EL eunr V wd 4u00 010d lire 0�:6 woof! pieo8 *w" e 00:01 6 AeW d wa 41100 010d " w"e O�:6 woos pieoe .w'e 00:01 11 IlidV y wd 11-100 0101:1 " w.e 08:8 ' woos paeo8 .ure 00:01 tiC 43.1eW b w8 luo0 010t3 'w a 0E:6 wood paeo8 'w'e 00:01 bl A./enugad y wd 1u00 0.108 'ure 0E:6 wood{ pegs 'w'e 00:01 O 1 Annular uop.eaoi eamu wok eAgnoex3 uopeooi uoisslwwoo (Aepseupem) �lea 6uneew 31f1a3HOS JN1133UV LOOZ NOISSIWI1100 NOl1 VLSIOdSNdd1 AiNnOo 301Sd3NY " " " VO '91-11A18 '1aaals Aempeoa8 ylaoNS£Z • weWo louno 410 at.p.Aig . LOOZ L yo.aeW Ae sin yl _ _ d 0£ Zsia 6upeeH ovind speeN l sueal latuun 9ead A9!!eA spa®A Died wel/eoueq aJe Oupeaui gd7e Jequieoep pue wee item, eyl :e,zoN •slseq Apelaenb e -uo �(epsanyl-P g eyl uo- Play aae` aelllwwoo Aallod=llsueal' at.p jo s6up.aeuu` ayl' 14111 a =yoea }o AepuolN 4,b ayl uo play aae aallluawo0 uol.eluawaldwl la6png pue aali wwo0 swea6oad _ 1g sueid ay1 }o s64.1ilaaw ayl. woolj_aouaaa}:uo0 aoou 4,5 .u.e,00:04 8L aag03•00:.:,. _ :woog aouaaaluo0 aoold. vlg _ Y •w•e 00:0 L __.: 64 Alnp _, woos aouaUa1.1.100 JO% v,5 'w`e 00:04 $4-1!add wood aouaaa}uo0 aoold v, ,. •w*e 00:0 L _ 5 l Menace uoneooi ealp,wwoa Aolrod llsueal (Xepsanul) ()lea Bulissini 03113ONVO . 03113ONVO tZ Jagwaoao woou Fueog .u.rd 0£:ZL 'w'e OE:6 9Z iagwenoN wool] paeog .t.ua 0£:Z'I.' 'Ll-1.e OE;6 ZZ iago100 wool] paeo8. 'w'0.0£:Z L 'w'e 0E:6 VZ.-Jegtuaide9 ... woos paeog: w'd 0E Zl :u?`e OE 6 : ,. LZ:1sn6ny woou paeo8 •Lu•d 0£:Z L ` .w e.0E:6 CZ Aln woou pieog-•ard � -- .w.e: gz aunp _ 031130NVO 03113ONVO 8Z AelAl wool] paeog •w d OE:Z L 'w•e 0E:6 £Z Iladb wood paeog •w•d 08:Z 4 -Lire OE:6 9Z ydaelnl wool] paeog ,w•d O£;Z I. 'w'e OE:6 gZ AaenagoA woo8 paeog .w.d OE:Z L w'e OE•6 ZZ Aaenuep uoi soo eel34uruao9 sweaBoad /8 sueid eell1wwoO uogeluawa(dwi •18 le6prng (Xepuom area BuReemi " AGENDA ITEM 7B " " RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: December 13, 2006 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM:. Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board THROUGH: Eric Haley,,Executive Director SUBJECT: Resolution to Amend the Appendix of the Conflict of Interest Code STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 06-024, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Amending the Appendix of the Conflict of Interest Code Pursuant to. the Political Reform Act of 1974". BACKGROUND INFORMATION: As required, the Riverside County Transportation Commission performs a biennial review of its Conflict of Interest Code (Code). For this year, there is a need to amend the appendix to include new positions, revise titles of existing positions, and delete titles of positions that have been abolished. The amended appendix shows the list of positions who manage public investments, and positions to be governed under the Code and their respective disclosure categories. A notice of intention to amend the appendix of the Code was publicly posted and provided to the affected designated employees. After the Commission has adopted the amended appendix, it will be submitted to the Riverside County's Board of Supervisors for approval as it is the code -reviewing body for the Commission. In order to meet the requirements of the Code pursuant to the Political Reform Act of 1974, staff recommends that the Commission adopt Resolution No. 06-024 to make the appropriate changes to the Code. Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 06-024 2) Amended Appendix 3► Notice of Intention Agenda Item 7B RESOLUTION NO. 06-024 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AMENDING THE APPENDIX OF THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE PURSUANT TO THE POLITICAL REFORM ACT OF 1974 WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of California enacted the Political Reform Act of 1974, Government Code Section 81000 et seq (the "Act"), which contains provisions relating to conflicts of interest which potentially affect all officers, employees, and consultants of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the "Commission") and requires all public agencies to adopt and promulgate a conflict of interest code; and WHEREAS, the Commission adopted a Conflict of Interest Code (the "Code") which was amended on December 13, 2000, in compliance with the Act; and WHEREAS, subsequent changed circumstances within the Commission have made it advisable and necessary pursuant to sections 87306 and 87307 of the Act to amend and update the Appendix of the Commission's Code; and WHEREAS, the potential penalties for violation of the provisions of the Act . are substantial and may include criminal and civil liability, as well as equitable relief which could result in the Commission being restrained or prevented from acting in cases where the provisions of the Act may have been violated; and WHEREAS, notice of time and place of a public meeting on, and of consideration by the Commission of, the proposed amended Appendix was provided each affected designated employee and publicly posted for review at the offices of the Commission; and WHEREAS, a public meeting was held upon the proposed amended Appendix at a regular meeting of the Riverside County Transportation Commission on December 13, 2006, at which all present were given an opportunity to be heard on the proposed amended Appendix. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Riverside County Transportation Commission to hereby adopt the proposed the amended Appendix of the Conflict of Interest Code, a copy of which is attached hereto and shall be on file with the Clerk of the Board and available to the public for inspection and copying; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the said amended Appendix shall be submitted to the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors for approval and said Appendix shall become effective 30 days after the Board of Supervisors approves the proposed amended Appendix as submitted. I APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of December 2006. Marion Ashley,Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon, :Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 7 " LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST &. KRIEGER LLP LEGISLATIVE VERSION (SHOWS CHANGES) APPENDIX CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (Amended neeember Qt 200 December 13, 2006) EXHIBIT "A" OFFICIALS WHO MANAGE PUBLIC INVESTMENTS Commission Officials who manage public investments, as defined by 2 Cal. Code of Regs. � .18701(b), are NOT subject to the Commission's. Code, but are subject to the disclosure requirements of the Act. (Government Code Section 87200 et sea.) [Regs. � 18730(b)(3)) These positions are listed here for informational purposes only. It has been determined that the positions listed below are officials who manage public investments3: Members of the Board of the Commission and their Alternates Executive Director Deputy Executive Director Chief Financial Officer Financial Consultants 3 Individuals holding one of the above -listed positions may contact the FPPC for assistance or written advice regarding their filing obligations if they believe that their position has been categorized incorrectly. The FPPC makes the final determination whether a position is covered by � 87200. RVPUBOVALDEZ V 24243.2 8 -20- BBK '`T^vember-2-004November 2006 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP DESIGNATED POSITIONS ' GOVERNED BY THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE 'DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES' DISCLOSURE ' CATEGORIES TITLE OR FUNCTION ASSIGNED Accounting and Human Resources Manager Administrative A alystAssistant Clerk of the Board Director of Administrative Services Public Affairs Director Director of Regional Programs Director.& Public Affairs 1, 2, 6, 7 Planning Director -1 2, 3,;6, 7 General Counsel 1, 2 ProgramManager (ALL) Property AgentAdministrator {Rail Department Manager ' Consultant4 4 6 5 2 5 4, 5 6 3, 6 Consultants shall be included in the list of Designated Employees and shall disclose pursuant to the broadest disclosure:category in this Code subject to the following limitation: The Executive Director may determine in writing that a particular consultant, although a "designated position," is hired to perform a range of duties that are limited in scope and thus is not required to fully comply with the disclosure requirements described in this Section. Such written determination shall include a<description of the consultant's duties and, based upon that description, a statement of the extent of disclosure 'requirements. The Executive Director's determination; is a public record and shall be retained for public inspection in the same manner and location as this Conflict of Interest Code. -21- BBK = bevembim-2004November 2006 RV PUB\DVALDEZ\724243.2 " LAW OMCES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP EXHIBIT "B" DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES The disclosure categories listed below identify the types of investments, business entities, sources of income, including gifts loans. and travel payments or real property which the Designated Employee must disclose for each disclosure category to which he or she is assigned. Category 1: All investments and business positions in business entities, and sources of income that are located in, do business in, or own real property within the jurisdiction of the Commission. Category 2: All interests in real property which is located in whole or in part within, or not more than two (2) miles outside, the jurisdiction of the Commission. Category 3: All investments and business positions in, and sources of income from, business entities that are engaged in land development, construction or the acquisition or sale of real property within the jurisdiction of the Commission. Category 4: All investments and business positions in, and sources of income from, business entities that are banking, savings and loan, or other financial institutions. Category 5: All investments and business positions in, and sources of income from, businessentities that provide services, supplies, materials, machinery, vehicles or equipment of a type purchased or leased by the Commission. Category 6: All investments and business :positions in, and, sources of income from, business entities that provide services, supplies, materials, machinery, vehicles or equipment of a type purchased or leased by the Designated Employee's Department. Category 7: All investments and business positions in, and sources of income from, business entities subject to the regulatory, permit, or licensing authority of the Designated Employee's Department. . R V PUBIDVALDEZ\724243.2 -22- BBK  Nal3eF-2004November 2006 10 NOTICE OF INTENTION TO AMEND THE APPENDIX OF THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the "Commission") intends to amend the Appendix of the Commission's Conflict of Interest Code (the "Code") pursuant to Government Code Section 87306. The Appendix of the Code designates those employees, members, officers, and consultants who are subject to the Commission's Code. The Commission's proposed amendment includes new positions that must be designated, revises the titles of existing positions, deletes a title that has been abolished and revises and clarifies the introductory paragraph to the list of Disclosure Categories. The proposed amended Appendix will be considered by the Board of Commissioners on December 13, 2006, at 9:00 a.m. at Riverside County Board Room, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California. Any interested person may be present and comment at the public meeting or may submit written comments concerning, the proposed amendment. Any comments or inquiries should be directed to the attention of Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board, Riverside County Transportation Commission, 4080 Lemon Street, 3`d Floor, Riverside, CA 92501; (951) 787-7141. Written comments' must be submitted no later than December 13, 2006, at 9:00 a.m. The proposed amended Appendix may be reviewed at, and copies obtained from, the office of the Clerk of the Board. RVPUB1DVALDEZ 724317.1 11 " AGENDA ITEM 7C " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: ., December 13, 2006 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Audit Ad Hoc Committee Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2005/06 Commission Audit Results AUDIT AD HOC COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the FY 2005/06:' 1) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report; 2) Local Transportation Fund (LTF) Audited Financial Statements; 3) State Transit Assistance fund (STAF) Audited Financial Statements; 4) Compliance Report; 5) Commercial Paper Compliance Report; 6) Audit'Re'sults Report; 7) Agreed -Upon Procedures Report related to the Appropriation Limit Calculation; 8) Agreed -Upon Procedures Report related to the Commuter Assistance Program (CAP) incentives; and 9) Management certifications. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In April 2003, McGladrey & Pullen LLP (McGladrey) .was selected to perform an audit of the Commission's basic financial statements included in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), the LTF, the STAF, and federal awards. Additionally; it was requested to perform 'agreed -upon procedures related to the annual Appropriations Limit Calculation and the CAP incentives.: The audits and agreed -upon procedures for the fiscal year ended June 30, '2006 have been completed and all reports have been issued by McGladrey. The Commission's CAFR consists of three sections: ' introductory, financial, and statistical. While the introductory and statistical sections were not audited by McGladrey, the basic financial statements included in the financial section were audited by McGladrey & Pullen. The Commission received an unqualified opinion on its basic financial statements from McGladrey & Pullen, which is the highest form of assurance. Limited procedures were performed related to the required Agenda Item 7C 12 supplementary information, including Management's Discussion and Analysis; such information ,was not audited. The other supplementary ;information was subject to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements, and, ` in the opinion of the auditors, it is fairly stated in relation to the basic financial statements. • ;1 The basic financial statements, reflect the new reporting model ,as, required by GASB Statement No. 34; this is the fifth consecutive year under the new reporting . model. The basic financial statements include ,,government -wide financial statements and fund financial statements. Additionally, Managementis Discussion and . Analysis 'is required and provides a narrative overview and analysis ;of the Commission's financial activities for the fiscal year. Financial highlights include net assets of approximately'S477 million at June 30, 2006, representing an increase of approximately $143 million from the prior year, and governmental fundsfund balances of approximately $453 million at June 30, 2006, representing anincrease of approximately $117 million from the prior year. , The audit reports related to the separately issued financial statements of the LTF and the STAF also reflect unqualified opinions from. McGladrey & Pullen. These financial statements are required . to be issued separately under the Transportation Development Act (TDA); however, the LTF and .STAF financial position and, operations: are -also included in the fund financial statements in- the CAFR. These reports noted no matters considered to be a material', weakness in internal control and no instances of noncompliance, The Compliance Report, often referred to as the Single, Audit Report,; includes the reports on compliance and internal control over financial reporting and, over federal awards. These reports noted no matters considered to be material weaknesses in internal control and no instances of noncompliance. As a result of the establishment of the commercial paper program in March 2005, the bank reirribursement agreement requires a report from the ,auditor regarding compliance with certain ,covenants. The report issued by the auditorsindicated that nothing came to their attention that caused them to believe that ,.the Commission failed to comply with these covenants. A management letter- usually includes recommendations for improvements and operational efficiencies .related to internal control and other matters ;,noted during the audit. McGladrey did not, have any recommendations or comments on other matters, and, therefore, it did not, issue a management letter. Agenda Item 7C , 13 " The Appropriations Limit Calculation and CAP reports are based on specific procedures agreed to by the Commission and other agencies. For the Appropriations Limit Calculation, theauditors noted no exceptions or findings related to the procedures performed. Professional auditing standards require the auditors to communicate to the audit committee, or an equivalent group, to ensure that it is provided with additional information regarding the scope and results of the audit that may assist the group in overseeing management's financial reporting and disclosure process. Such required communications were discussed with the Ad Hoc Committee in a presentation by McGladrey.' As part of the development of the Commission's Accountability Program that commenced " following the June .30, 2005 audit, the directors have completed certifications relating to financial reporting and operational disclosures. Attachments: 1) 2006 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (final report will be distributed when available) 2) 2006 Local Transportation Fund Financial and Compliance Report 3) 2006 State Transit Assistance Fund Financial and Compliance Report. 4) 2006 Compliance Report 5) 2006 Commercial Paper Compliance Report 6) 2006 Communications to the Audit Ad Hoc Committee 7): 2006 Agreed -Upon Procedures Report on Appropriations Limit Calculation 8) 2006 Agreed -Upon Procedures Report on Commuter Assistance Program Incentives 9) 2006 Executive Director and Chief Financial Officer Certification 10) 2006 Directors' Certification Agenda Item 7C 14 " Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside County, Califomia Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2006 Submitted By: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial officer 15. " Contents Introductory Section, Letter of Transmittal Organizational Chart List of Principal Officials Certificates of Achievement Financial Section Independent Auditor's Report Management's Discussion and Analysis Basic Financial Statements Govermnent-wide Financial Statements Statement of Net Assets 13 Statement of Activities Fund Financial Statements Balance Sheet  Govemmental Funds 15 Reconciliation of the Balance Sheet of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Net Assets 16 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances --Governmental Funds 17 Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Activities Statement of Fiduciary Net Assets Notes to Financial Statements Required Supplementary Information Budgetary Comparison Schedules General Fund and Major Special Revenue Funds 39 Notes to Required Supplementary Information 40 Other Supplementary Information NonmajorGovernmental Funds 41 Combining balance Sheet 42 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances 43 Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances --Budget and Actual: Nonmajor Special Revenue Funds 44 Capital Projects and Debt Service Funds 45 Schedule of Expenditures for Local Streets and Roads by Geographic Area  All Special Revenue Funds 46 Schedule of Expenditures for Transit and Specialized Transportation try Geographic Area and Source  AN Special Revenue Funds 47 Schedule of Changes in Assets and Liabilities  Local Projects Agency Fund 48 14 i8- 19 20 16 Contents, Continued Statistical Section Statistical Section Overview Net Assets by Component Changes in Net Assets , Fund Balances of Governmental Funds Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds Sources of County of Riverside. Taxable Sales by Business Type Direct and Overlapping Sales Tax Rates Principal Taxable Sales Generation by City Measure A Sales Tax Revenues by Program and Geographic Area Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type Computation of Legal Debt Margin Pledged Revenue Coverage Demographic and Economic Statistics for the County of Riverside Employment Statistics by Industry for the County of Riverside Full-time Equivalent Employees by Function/Program Operating Indicators Capital Asset Statistics by Program . 17 49 50 51 53 54 55 56 57 56 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 October 20, 2006 To the Riverside County Transportation Commission Commissioners and Citizens of the ,County of Riverside: Letter of Transmittal State law requires that the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission or RCTC) publish within six months of the close of each fiscal year a complete set of financial statements presented in conformity with accounting: principles generally accepted in the United States (GAAP) and audited in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards by independent certified public accountants. Pursuant to that requirement, we hereby issue the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) of the Commission for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006. Management assumes full responsibility for the completeness and reliability of all of the information presented in this report, based upon the Commission's comprehensive framework of intemal controls established for this purpose. Because the cost of Internal control should not exceed anticipated benefits, the objective is to provide reasonable, rather than absolute,, assurance that the financial statements are free of any material misstatements. McGiadrey A: Pullen, LLP, has issued an unqualified opinion on the Commission's financial statements for the year ended June 30, 2006. The independent auditor's report is located at the front of the financial section of this report Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) immediately follows the independent auditor's report and provides a - narrative introduction, overview, and analysis of the basic financial statements. MDBA complement this letter of transmittal and should be read in corijunction with it. Profile of the Government The Commission was established by state law in 1977 to oversee the funding and coordination of all public transportation services within the county of Riverside (County). The Commission's.mission is to assume a leadership role in improving motility in Riverside County and to maximize the cost effectiveness of transportation dollars in the County. The goveming body is the Board of Commissioners (Board), which consists of all five members of the County Board of Supenrisors, one elected official from each of the County's 24 cities, and one non -voting member appointed by the Govemor. The Commission is responsible for setting policies, establishing priorities, and coordinating activities among the County's various transportation operators and agencies. The Commission also programs and/or reviews the allocation of federal, state, and local funds for highway, transit, rail, non -motorized travel (bicycle and pedestrian), and other transportation activities. The Commission also serves as the tax authority and implementation agency for the voter -approved Measure A Transportation Improvement Program. Measure A was approved by the County's electorate in 1988-and imposes a half -cent sales tax for 20 years, beginning in 1989, to fund a specific program of transportation improvements (1989 Measure A). In November 2002 Riversidetounty's voters approved a 30-year extension of Measure A through 2039 (2009 Measure A). The Commission is also legally responsible for allocating Transportatice Development Act (MA) funds, the major source of funds for transit in the County: The TDA provides two.major sources of funding: Local Transportation Funds, which are derived from a one -quarter cent state sales tax, and State Transit Assistance, which is derived from the statewide sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuel. i 18 Additionally, the Commission provides motorist aid services designed to expedite traffic flow. These services include the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE), a program that provides call box service for motorists, and the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP), a roving tow truck service to assist motorists with disabled vehicles on the main highways of the County during peak rush hour traffic periods. These services are provided at no charge to motorists and are funded through a $1 surcharge on vehicle registrations. The Commission is financially accountable for SAFE, a legally separate entity which is blended within the Commission's financial statements: Finally, the Commission has been designated as the Congestion Management'Agency (CN A) for the County. As the CMA, the Commission coordinates with local jurisdictions in the establishment of congestion mitigation procedures for the County's roadway system. The Commission is required to adopt a budget prior to the beginning of each fiscal year. The annual budget, which includes:afi funds except for the Local Transportation Fund special revenue fund, serves as 'foundation for the Commission's financial planning and control regarding staffing, operations, and capital plans. The budget is prepared by fund (financial responsibility unit), department, and function. Management has the discretion to transfer: budgeted amounts within the financial responsibility unit according to function. During the fiscal year, all budget amendments ;. requiring Board approval are presented to the Board for consideration and adoption. Local Economy Riverside County continues to experience significant growth due to population increase, makable and <affordable housing receive to nearby coastal counties, and a more diversified base and growing share of the; regional economy. This growth in the County's economic activity has been evidenced by increasing taxable sates,' resulting in the highest levels of:sales tax revenues to the Commission's history. In fiscal year (FY) 2005/06, Measure A sales tax revenues in the County increased' approximately 13% over the prior year. This reflects a solidlocaleconomy that continues • to grow, largely;as;a result of County's continuing ability to draw jobs, residents, and affordable housing away the Los Angeles, Orange and San Diego county areas. New housing prices, while reflecting slower growth than in recent years, are continuing to rise and industrial vacancies are;coniinuing to decfine,•as the Inland Empire (Riverside and San Bemardino counties) continues to expand its warehousing arid support role to the greater Los Angeles economy. The availability of affordable space for both residents and businesses along with improved access to employment centers in Los Angeles and Orange counties are the primary reasons for expansion. In terror of employment, the County continues to add jobs in various sectors and pay levels. Regardless of recent trends, the. County faces fomridable outgoing challenges in terms of providing needed infrastructure to support a growing population and 'an expanding economy. The state of California (State) and national economy remain in a slaw growth period due to a:softening housing market. The outlook for FY 2006/07 seems to be more resilient wkh a moderate growth of sates and jobs in the County, but perhaps note levels as significant as in prior years: Accordingly, Commission staff has conservatively iprojected ;satesitaxes revenues to increase 6% in its FY 2006/07 budget Long-term Financial Planning Proactive Bnanciat planning is a, critical element• for the success of the `Commission as k builds for the future. Continually reviewing revenues and projecting expenditures ensures that the Commission's expectations are realistic and goals are achievable. Scarce resources, especially at the state and federal level;'can be directed to projects of regional significance or, with additional funding, project priorities Cal be expanded to address unfunded project requirements or developing needs. During FY 2005/06, the Commission 'embarked on three major projects to determine the Commission's 'strategic direction through 2019. First, k updated its projection 'of Measure A revenues through 2039. it also commenced an assessment of the delivery status of, the 1989 Measure A highwayprogram and the development of a 10-Year Delivery Plan for the first ten years of the 2009 Measure A through 2019. It is expected that these iwo efforts will identify a significant gap between available, conventional funding and project needs. Accordingly, the Commission initiated a, strategic pubic/private partnership effort to assess potential publiclprivate financing projects that might bridge a significant portion of the funding gap. The Commission has: taken a number of creative steps b move projects forward. The process of review by the Commission will continue on an annual basis to ensure that steady progress is made toward project completion and that changes in direction made possible by increased revenues or innovative approaches such as.pubfictpmraie partnerships are quickly implemented, INSERT COUNTY MAP, Major Initiatives Capital Project Delivery and Implementation The Capital Project Development and Delivery Department is responsible for major highway, regional arterial; and rail capital projects from initial environmental study through preliminary engineering, final design, right of way acquisition, and construction. This past year was one of significant accomplishments for the Commission as progress was made on a number of major projects. Difficult funding decisions were made on millions of dollars in transportation projects to expand freeways, improve mobility on streets and roads, and improve rail passenger facilities. Highways.. The Commission's most ambitious highway. transportation project, which commencedconstruction In early 2004, brings major improvements to the State Route (SR) 601SR-91/Interstate (1) 215 interchange, including direct connectors, truck lanes, sourdwalls, and new and widened bridges to improve the efficiency of this interchange. A cooperative project with the California Departrnern of Transportation (Caltrans). the interchange reconstruction is expected to be completed in 2008. White the reconstruction of the SR-MISR-9111-215 interchange is a 1989 Measure A project, it is financed primarily from State Transportation Improvement. Program (STIP) dollars. In 2003 funding for these improvements became uncertain as a result of the State's budget woes and dependence on STIP dollars to balance its general fund budget. To ensure the timely commencement of construction, the Commission loaned the State $31.3 million in Measure A dollars under an AB 3090 process following approval by the Califomia Transportation Commission (CTC) in September 2003. This advancement of local dollars was reimbursed by the CTC in August 2006. 20 The AB 3090 process was utilized again this year to ensure construction commencement of two significant projects As'a result: of theCommission.and the CTCs approval to allocate federal; Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality ; Program (CMAQ) dollars and advance $8.9.million in Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee ('TUMF) funding, construction commenced in April 2006 for a high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane and a general purpose lane in each direction of SR-60 from 1-15 to Valley Way. During FY 2005/06, the Commission approved a $3.1 million advance of TUMF: and $13.5 million utilization of the commercial paper program to cover cost increases for improvements on the Green River Road interchange at SR-91. This project will improve ramps and widen the bridge that currently spans SR91, resulting in increased capacity at this interchange for Corona residents. Construction is expectedto. commence in February 2007. These advancements of TUMF local dollars to the State wgl be repaid with a future State funding commitment on TUMF regional projects. gn y p Elsinore and Perris, A significant achievement was the recently completed construction on SR-74 between Lake thanks to funding from the 1989 Measure A program. This former two-lane road is now a"four lane highway with medians, improved drainage, and safety features. . Another Measure A effort that is benefiting motorists is improvements to SR 111 in the Coachella: Valley. Improvements have been completed in a number of cites in the past year including three projects in the city of Palm Desert As is the case with all arterial improvements in the Coachella Valley, the funthng for the project and project ; development is a cooperative effort between the Commission, the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG), and affected cities: Commuter Rail. Since.1993 the Commission has held title to and managed the 38-mile San Jacinto Branch Line (SJBL) and several adjacent properties in anticipation of offering Metrolink commuter rail service to a wider area of the County, initially inducting Moreno Valley and Perris and ultimately to Hemet/San Jacinto and down to Temecula. The Commission released a Draft Environmental Assessment for the expansion of commuter rail service along the SJBL in 2004 and has held a series of pubic meetings to encourage public input into the environmental clearance process. These meetings and related marketing efforts have also raised the level of awareness and public support for the project, which is now referred to as the Perris Valley Line. During FY 2005/06, a New Starts application; draft was submltted to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) for review as part of the process to obtain a federal project rating related to eligl ility for future federal funding; a rating is expected by December 2006. The Senate's version of the FY 2006/07 federal appropriations bill, which includes transportation, has a $3 million earmark for the Perris Valley Line project and is.pending approval, which is expected by the end of 2006; the 2006 STIP also allocated $30 million to the project New commuter rail service on the Perris Valley Line is anticipated to commence by 2010. An ongoing concem"for Metrolink passengers is the need for additional parking capacity at the Commission's" .- stations. During the summer of 2006, the Commission began construction to add 300 pairing spaces to' the. Riverside Downtown Station ,on the east side of the trades, which provides more capacity as well as ,easier access for passengers to trains on the Inland Empire -Orange County Line (1E0C). Future'.plarts also call for more parking spaces and a new parking structure at the North Main Corona Station. With; the continued growth of patronage, commuter rail's challenges for the future include:securing state or federal allocations for more passenger coaches and for additional train storage and maintenance facilities. TUMF Funding" Playing a Bigger Role In the Coachella Valley, a TUMF program was established shortly after the passage of the 1989 Measure A. The program n3quires developers to pay a fee on new development to fund arterial improvements. Cities are required to participate in the program or forfeit Measure A local dolmas to CVAG which oversees the arterial program and has been successful in funding a number of important arterial projects. " Withthe passage of the 2009 Measure A, a=TUMF program with participation; requirements similar to that in the Coachella Valley is now in place in western Riverside County (Westem County). As provided for iri the 2009 Measure iv 21 • " " A, the first $400 million in TUMF funding is to be allocated to the Commission to be split evenly between new corridors and regional arterials. Since the Measure A extension is not fully effective until 2009, the C,ommission and the Westem Riverside COUrldi of Governments (WRCOG), as administrator of the TUMF program, reached an agreement to split TUMF revenues evenly until 2009. While both tire Commission and WRCOG were cited as possible administrators, it was agreed that WRCOG would administer this program. An implementation committee formed of representatives from both the Commission and WRCOG will meet in late 2006 to consider adjusting the $400 million figure upward to reflect increased TUMF fees. In fiscal 2005, the Commission took its first steps to allocate its share of Western County TUMF revenues with allccations for the development of the Mid County Paikway and the SR-79 realignment and b project development for 24 regional arterial projects throughout Westem County. Since the inception of the program, the Commission has programmed more than $96 million in TUrvIF funding and has approved for funding a series of projects that approximates $180 million. Rai Development, Operations and Support The County's participation in commuter rail service began with the 1989 Measure A. Riverside County voters were the first to specify commuterrail service in Southern California EIS a priority trensportation improvement project The subsequent passage of similar measures in adjoining counties and the passage of state.vide rail infrastructure bonds in 1990 provided enough capital funding to build the initial system.. As one of five furufing partners in the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), which operates the Metrohnk commuter rail service, the Commission is engaged in a continual exercise of consensus buikfing with its partners. Now consisting of seven lines, serving origins and destinations in six counties, the system carries an average of 41,000 passengers each weekday. The Commission owns and operates five stations served by the three Metmlink !tiles operating through the County. D Riverside liI70 (1993): Originates in the Downtown Riverside station and stops at the Pedby station before proceeding through Ontario, Pomona, Industry, and Montebello to Los Angeles Union Stationn. Ridership has ) remained steady with approximately 4,600 daily riders. �' lEOC Line (1995): Begins in nearby San Bernardino with stops in the Downtovm Riverside, La Sierra, North Main Corona, and West Corona stations before entering Orange County with stops in Anaheim, Orange, Santa Ana, Tustin,Irvine, Laguna Niguel/Mission Viejo, and San Juan Capistrano. De.scrilred as the first suburb -to -suburb commuter rail service in the nation, the 1E0C line has experienced increased patronage with an average daily ridership that exceeds 4,500. > 91 Line (2002): Provides another alternative to commute from Riverside to Los Angeles with stops in Riverside, Orange, and Los Angeles counties. Patronage on the line continues to increase resulting in an average daily ridership that exceeds 2,400. Ridership increases exceering 20% on both the 1E0C and 91 Lines in the past year reflect confidence in Metrolink services and a reaction to higher fuel prices. In addition to regular weekday service, the Commission is partnering with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and San Bernardino Associated Govemments (SANBAG) to provide weekend service along the 1E0C. Three round trip trains onSturday and two round trips on Sunday now serve as another link between Orange and Riverside counties and provide an effective transportation alternative for weekend travel. . In order to increase transit ridership and to bolster local housing options and economic development, the Commission is evaluating joint development and transit -oriented devebprnent opportunities at its commuter rail stations which hace land available for development. During FY 2005/06 requests for qualifications were released for potential projects at the La Sierra and Downtown Riverside stations. - v 22 Planning for the Future' In terms of future progress, the Commissionhas' given its unanimous support to the Riverside'; County integrated Project and 'its', transportation component,' the Community Environmental Transportation Acceptability` Process, (CETAP). As a stakeholder driven planning process, CETAP has benefited from the guidance of abroad spectrum of citizens'. The County and the Comvnission are working together in a first -of -its kind endeavor to provide for new transportation options and land use planning to support the economic 'growth of the CourIty'while providing for preservation of open. space and protection for endangered species.,. GETAP addresses the impact', of future population and economic growth on the existing ;transportation system by identifying and establishing new; transportation corridors and arterial system improvements. The corridor options to be considered will include raft, bus,` transit; and•highway modes and will beconsslered.through the careful study,of future growth patterns. All work will be done in cooperation with federaland state mandated environmental and open space conservation'efforts. The Commission's CETAP focuses on four new transportation corridors: two located within the County and two that would link Riverside County with the neighboring counties of Orange and San Beman:firro. A summary of the status for three of the projects and a related project with significant planning efforts underway follows: Internal north/south transportation corridor between Winchester and Ternecula: As a result of the Tier environmental work completed, the Commission now can protect right of way for the fuhue widening of'1-15 ands!-215 in tine south County area as well as a future French Valley. Parkwajr oonnedien from Winchester Road to 1-15. ➢ East-West Corridor Alternative adjacent to 'Cajdco Road and Ramona Since 2904,' the "Commission, County,local cities, and resource govemrnent have agencies from the shale and federal participated in a'cooperative planning effort for the proposed internal corridor named the lid County Parkway. During'FY 2005/06 this project was a major focus for ttie Commission, and 'a series of public meetings were held in the project area along with the maintenance of website devoted solely to tire project and the development and periods public distribution of newsletters regarding the project. The Commission ' is currently pursuing a project -level environmental document for this new 32-mile freeway -level facility. ➢ SR-79 Realignment affecting; the Hemet and San Jacinto cwnmunities: This 2009 Measure A project is related,` to the sdevelopment of the proposed corridors'. Federal, resource agencies' approval has been granted to proceed with the environmental process to determine an`alignment for a more efficient highway with greater capacity. The design phase is expected to commence by 2010. ' t ➢. ' New transportation corridors and alternatives between Riverside and Orange counties: ;'During FY 2005/06 the Commission completed,a Major' Investment Study in cooperation with the OCTArand Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA) to evaluate potential projects The locally preferred strategy dnchudes a combination of improvements to SR-91, a parallel corridor bolt along or on top of SR-91 between SR-241 and 1-15'and a brand new corridor between Riverside and Orange counties that could involve atunnelor_ ' series 'of'tunnels; To advance the new corridor concept, the Commission along with OCTA and TCA have: formed the Riverside Orange Corridor Authority, which is governed bra joint powers agreement The first ' task for this cooperative arrangement is" to Conduct geological tests in the Cleveland National Forest to ' deter the'feasti3lity of a tunnel structure:. The overall effort has also garnered a financial boost with'a $15 million Congressional Earmark in the federal transportation' bill approved in August 2005. Commuter Assistance Program The Commission's Commuter Assistance Program provides a variety of ride'share services both to employers and commuters. Through voluntary participation, commuters and employers receive a direct benefit from their sales tax dollars, and the entireregion benefits from reduced traffic congestion and improved air quality as a result of trip elimination or use of alternative means of transportation. The Commission's; continued success in serving commuters vi 23 " and employers within the County resulted in SANBAG's renewal of its contract with the Commission, for the tenth . year, to provide a sister commuter assistance program for San Bernardino County residents. This unique bi-county partnership allows for greater cost efficiency in program delivery and consistency of program application for all Inland Empire. participants. . The cornerstone of the Commuter Assistance Program continues to be the Advantage Rideshare Program, a short: berm incentive project, which otters $2 per day for each day new ridesharers use an alternate mode of transportation in a three-month period. Long-term ridesharers.are recognized and rewarded for their continuing commitment to use altemate modes of transportation to and from work through the Club Ride Program: The Commuter Assistance Program worked with over 350 employers representing over 1,000.worksites in providing commuter benefits to employees during FY 2005/06,.resulting in a 17% increase in employer participation and attracting; approximately 1,000 drive alone commuters to use the Advantage Rideshare program. Additionally, Club tide membership increased.72% in FY 2005/06 with membership peaking at 3,901. Another core activity of the Commission's rideshare activities is the'operation of the Commuter Exchange, a 40' mobile resource center that participrates, at various events including employer transportation fairs, community activities, and elementary schools -The Commuter. Exchange includes a service for third and fourth grade classes in Western County called Education on the Road, a rollkhg transportation field trip designed with imaginative, interactive exhibits and activities for all ages. It guides students and teachers through a structured teaming experience to start thinking early about how to reduce balk congestion and clean the air before they start driving, which is expected to payoff with future dean air dividends. In FY 2005/06, a new 40' mobile: education vehicle to replace the aging, existing unit was under construction utifizing a heavy duty commercialtransit bus chassis and compressednatural gas dean air technology. The completed vehide was unveiled to the Commissioners in September2006. While the old vehicle made approximately 25 site visits in FY 2005/06, the new vehicle is expected to make at least 30site vislts during the next fiscal year. The enhancement of the www:commutesmarkinfo regional ridesharing website this past year was a. significant accomplishment for the Commission, which has taken the lead and operates the site on behalf of the five -county partnership that includes the transportation agencies in Los Angeles, Ventura, Orange; and San Bernardino counties. Website enhancements included increased traffic map coverage, employer service, and Guaranteed Ride Home pages. The website recorded over 10 million hits for FY 2005/06, representing an increase of over 3 million hits from the previous fiscal year. To further promote the benefits of ridesharing, the. Commission remained active in partnering opportunities with Inland Empire media outlets such as the continuation and expansion of a local radio campaign with KFRG and an employer ad campaign with the Business Press. These campaigns were particularly successful during Inland Empire Rideshare Week, resulting in several cross promotional opportunities. Specialized Transit The Commission has maintained a bng-term commitment to assist in the mobility of those with specialized transit needs. Through its Specialized Transit Program, the Commission has provided millions of dollars to publb and nonprofit transit operators to assist in the provision of special transit services to improve the mobility of seniors and " persons with dimities. Doing FY 2005/06, the nonprofit operators provided approximately 37,500 Measure A trips. Along with support of traditional dial -a -ride services, the Commission supports, innovative programs providing transit assistance in hard -to -serve rural areas or for riders having very special transit needs. Two programs that receive a significant share of Measure A transit funding are the Transportation Reimbursement and Information Project (TRIP) and the Transportation. Access Program (TAP), The TRIP program reimburses car trips matte on behalf of seniors and persons wpih disabilities, and the TAP,program provides subsidized: transit tickets that are distributed by social service agencies to clients who are truly needy and require access to medical appointments, job interviews, or other needed services. During FY 2005/06, the TRIP program reimbursed approximately.33,500 car trips, and the TAP program provided more than 49,900 transit tickets. 24 vii Motorist Assistance Programs In cooperation with the Cafifomia Highway Patrol (CHP) and Caltrans, the Commission, in its capacity as the SAFE; assists motorists who experience accidents, mechanical breakdowns, or other unforeseen problems by'provkfing access to cellular cal boxes along the County's major highways. The Commission's system inches 979 call boxes serving more than 650 miles;of highways. The cal box programisfunded bran annual $1 surcharge added to vehicle : registrations. Each . cad box is : a batbary-powered, solar -charged • roadside terminal containing -a microprocessor and cellular telephone.':Spadng between call boxes ranges from one-half mile in high traffic areas to two miles in remote areas of the County. Call boxes are installed on the three interstates, U.S. Route 95 and the 14 state routes located withiw the County as,wel as park and ride lots and'comniuter rail stations. The phones are programmed to calla private call answer center, and the call box operator responds to the call by routing emergency calls to the CHP for appropriate services 0.e., ambulance, tow; truck; fire, or police unit) orproviding:a direct connection to routine service through auto dubs or other private tow and service providers. Call box operators answered approximately:15,400 calls during FY 2005/06. In an effort to relieve congestion and reduce;polution, the Commission 'provides an additional motorist assistance program with the FSP. The FSP program is a special team of 15 tow trucks traveling along portionsof SR-60;.SR-91, -15, and 1-215;within the County during peak, weekday commuter hours to assist drivers when their vehicles break down or experience other mechanical problems. The purpose of the FSP is to remove disabled vehicles from the freeway as'quickly as possible to help keep freeway traffic moving during rush hour periods. Services provided are free to the motorist and include changing a flat tire, providing one gallon of fuel, taping radiator hoses, or towing the vehicle off the freeway to designatedlocations where the motorist can make other arrangements for repair: The FSP' is funded by the Riverside County SAFE and the State: During FY 2005/06, the . FSP provided assistance to approximately 31,800 motorists: Another effort augments existing. FSP service with additional tow t ucks',in construction areas as another means of construction -related oongestionmifigation during peak commuter hours. This is currently taking place on SR=91 and SR-6011-215 to mitigate congestion during construction on the SR-601SR-91/1-215 interchange. • Awards and Acknowledgeme* The Government Finance Officers; Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) awarded a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to the Commission for' its' CAFR for the fiscal year ended Junto 30, 2005 This was the 13th' straight year the Commission has received this prestigious national award; which recognizes conformance with the highest standards for preparation of state and local govemnent finandal reports. In order to be awarded a Certificate of Achievement, a government unit must publish an easily 'readable and efficiently 'organized CAFR conforming to program standards. Such CAFR must satisfy both GAAP':and applicable legal requirements. The 2005 report was also awarded the ,Certificate .of Achievement for Outstanding Financial Reporting by the California Society of Mt nicipa Finance Officers (CSMFO). This was the second financial reporting award received from the CSMFO. These awards for financial reporting excellence are valid for a period of one year only. As a result of the Commission's participation in the GFOA program, the Commission is no longer eligibM to participate in the CSMFO program based on recent CSMFO information. We believe our current report continues to conform to the GFOA program's requirements, and we are submitting it to the GFOA for consideration for another certificate. The CAFR each yearis a collaborative effort by Commission staff and its independent auditors. The undersigned are grateful to all staff for their willingness to expend the effort necessary to ensure the financial information contained herein is informative and completedwithin established deadf nes. Special thanks must be extended to the Commission's auditors,' Finance staff; and the Director of Public "Affairs for the time, effort, and commitment so vital for the final completion of the CAFR. 25 viii In dosing, without the leadership and the support of the Board, preparation of this report would not have been possible. Its prudent management must be credited for the strength of the Commission's fiscal condition, and its vision ensures that the Riverside County Transportation Commission will be on the move planning for and building a better future. Very truly yours, ERIC A HALEY Executive Director 26 ix THERESIA TREVIRO Chief Financial Officer £Z ated uo watunbop aaSpnq mold wto uopsz►ue810 ltasui Name and Position Riverside County Transportation Commission List of Principal Officials As of June 30, 2006 Board of Commissioners Title Marion Ashley Chairman (Commission) Terry Henderson 1a Vice Chair (Commission), Chair (Transit Policy Committee) Jeff Stone 2^r Vice Chairman (Commission), Chairman (Budget Implementation Committee) Barbara Hanna Vice Chair (Budget & Implementation Committee) Roger Berg Member Robert Crain Member John Chlebnik Member Mary Craton Member Gregory S. Pettis Member Juan M. DeLara Member Jeff Miller Member Alex Bias Member Robin Lowe Member Mary Roche Vice Chair (Plans & Programs Committee) Michael H. Wilson Member Bob Magee Member Frank West Vice Chairman (Transit Policy Committee) Rids Gibbs Member Frank Hall Member Dick Kelly Member Ronald Oden Member Daryl Busch Chairman -plans & Programs Committee) Ron Meepos Member Steve Adams Member Jim Ayres Member Ron Roberts Member Bob Buster Member John F. Tavaglione Member Roy Wilson Member Mike Perovich Governor's Appointee Management Staff Eric A. Haley, Executive Director Anne Mayer, Deputy Executive Director Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director Cathy Bechtel, Director of Project Delivery John Standitord, Director of Public Affairs Theresia Trevifio; Chief Financial Officer Stephanie Wiggins, Director of Regional Programs 233 Agency County of Riverside, District 5 City of La Quinta & County. of Riverside, District 3 • City of Banning City of Beaumont City of Blythe City of Cal mesa City of Canyon Lake City of Cathedral City City of Coadiella City of Corona City of Desert Hot Springs City of Hemet City of Indian Wells City of Indio City of Lake Elsinore City of Moreno Valley City of Munieta City of Norco City of Palm Desert City of Palm Springs City of Perris City of Rancho Mirage. City of Riverside City of San Jacinto City of Temecula County of Riverside, District 1 County of Riverside, District 2 County of Riverside, District 4 Ca!trans District IA " Insert gfoa award 29 Ai " Insert CSMFO Award 30 This page Intentionally left blank. 31 McGladrey& Pullen • Certified Mk Accountants Independent Auditor's Report Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, California We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund and the aggregate remaining fund info nation of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the Commission) as of and for the year ended June 30, 2006, which collectively comprise the Commission's basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Commission's management. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United. States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits .contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to :obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinions. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present tairiy, in all material respects, the respective financial position of the govemmental activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the Commission as of June 30, 2006, and the respective changes in financial position for the year then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.' In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated October 20, 2006 on our consideration of the Commission's internal control over financial reporting and our test of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of intemal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the intemal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That, report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be considered in assessing the results ofour audit. The managements discussion and analysis and budgetary comparison information, as listed in the table of contents, are not a required part of the basic financial statements but are supplementary infomration required by the accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. We have applied certain limited procedures, which consisted principally of inquiries of management regarding the methods of measurement and presentation of the required supplementary information. However, we did not audit the information and express no opinion on it. McGfadrey 8 Pullen, LIP is a member firm of RSM 6Rernational, anaffiliation ofseparate and independentlegal edges. 32 Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the Commission's basic financial statements. The combining and individual nonmajor fund financial statements and other schedules, listed in the table of contents as supplementary information, are presented, for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and,"in our opinion, is fairy stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The accompanying introductory and statistical sections, as listed in the table of contents, are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. This information has not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, accordingly, we express no opinion on them. Riverside,Califomia October 20, 2006 33 2 " Riverside County Transportation Commission Management's Discussion and Analysis Year Ended June 30, 2006 As management of the. riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission), we offer readers of the Commission's financial statements ,this narrative overview and analysis of the Commission's financial activities for the " fiscal year ended June 30, 2006. We encourage readers to consider the information on financial performance presented here in conjunction with the transmittal letter on pages i-ix and the Commission's financial statements which begin on page 13. Financial Highlights Total net assets of the Commission were $477,183,421 and consisted of invested capital assets, net of related debt, of $137,129,082; restricted net assets of $442,129,220; and.unrestricted net asset (deficit) of ($102,074,881). The, unrestrided net asset (deficit) results primarily from the recording of the debt issued for Measure A highway, local street and road, and regional arterial projects for which title vests with the State of California Department of Transportation. (Caltrans) or local jurisdictions. Accordingly, the Commission does not .have sufficient current resources on hard to cover current and long-term liabilities; however, future Measure A' sales taxes are pledged to cover Measure A debt service payments when made. " Net assets increased $142,727.562 during fiscal 2006. The increase was prima* attributable to an M% increase in Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (fUMF) revenues attributable to the Community Environmemnal Transportation Acceptabildy Process (CETAP) and regional arterialsprograms; a 13% increase in Measure A sales tax revenues, a'17% increase in Transportation' Development Act sales taxes; a $5 9 ninon gain on the sale of capital assets, and a 126% increase in invesbnent earnings. The increases' in TUMF and sales taxes were primarily attributableto the strong economic growth in the county of - Riverside (County) related to affordable housing, creation of jobs, and increase in population: Investment eamings increased as a result of the increase in interest rates. " Total capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation, were $153,241,191 at June 30, 2006, representing`a decrease of $3,783,419, or 2%, from June 30; 2005. The decrease in capital assets was primarily related to the sale of the Pierce Street property offset by the purchase of land for the State Route (SR) 79 realignment project and the Md County Parkway, a proposed corridor. " The.Commesion's governmental funds reported combined ending .fund balances of $453,429,213, an increase of $116,793,916 compared to fiscal 2005. ` Approximately 79% of the governmental fund balances represent amounts available for the Measure A program, including debt service and funding from the issuance of commem ial paper, and'TUMF program. Overview of the Financial Statements This discussion and analysis are intended to serve as an introductionto the Commission's basic financial statements, which are comprised of three canponerds consisting of government -wide financial statements, fund financial statements, and notes to the financial statements. This report also contains required supplementary information and other supplementary information in addition to the basic financial statements. 34 3 Governmenf-wide Financial Statements The government -wide financial statements . are designed to provide- readers with a broad overview of the Commission's finances, in a manner similar to a private -sector business. The statement of net assets presents information on all of the Commission's assets and liabilities, with the difference between assets and liabilities reported as net assets. Over time, increases or decreases in net assets may serve as a useful, indicator of whether the financial position of the Commission is improving or deteriorating. The statement of activities presents information showing how the Commission's net assets changed during the fiscal year. All changes in net assets are reported as, soon as the underlying event giving rise to the change occurs, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. The govemment wide financial statements, report the functions of the Commission that are principally supported by sales taxes and intergovernmental revenues, or governmental activities. The governmentalactivities .of the Commission include general government, the Measure A program, CETAP,'regional arterials, commuter rail; transit and specialized transportation services, planning and programming, bicycle and ,pedestrian projects, motorist services, and property management. Measure A program services are divided within the three regions of the County; namely 4Vestem;County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley. The government -wide financial statements include only the Commission .and its blended component unit The govemment-wide financial statements can be found on pages 13-14 of this report Fund Financial Statements A fund is a grouping of related accounts, that is used to maintain control over. resources that have been segregated for specific activities or objectives. Fund accounting is used to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance - related legal requirements: All of the ,Commission's funds can be divided into two categories: governmental funds andfiduciaryfunds. Governmental funds are used to account for essentially the same functions reported as governmental activities in the govemment-wide financial statements; however, governmental fund financial statements focus on near -term inflows and outflows of spendable resources and: on balances of spendable resources available at the end of the fiscal .year. Such information may: be useful in evaluating a government's near -term finandng requirements. Since the focus of governmental funds is narrower than that of the government -wide financial statements, it is useful to compare the information presented for;govemmentm funds with similar information presented for governmental activities in the govemment-wide financial; statements: As a result readers may better understand the long -tern impact of the government's near -term 'financing decisions. Both the governmental fund balance: sheet and related statement of revenues; -expenditures and changes in fund : bad provide a reconciliation to facilitate this comparison between governmental funds and I. Pa go governmental activities. The Commission -maintains 12 individual governmental funds. Information is: presented separatelyin the governmental fund- balance sheet and in the related statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in furl balances Jor the Commission's major governmental funds comprised of the General fund; Measure A Western County, Measure A Coachella Valley, Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee, and, Local Transportation Fund Special Revenue funds; Commercial Paper. Capital ;Projectsfund; and Debt Service fund. Data from the other five governmental funds are combined into a single, aggregated presentation., Individual fund data'thr each of these nonmajor governmental funds is provided in the form of combining statements in the other supplementary information section.- 35 4 The Commission adopts an annual appropriated budget for the General fund, all Special: Revenue funds except for the local Transportation Fund, all. Capital Projects funds,and the Debt Service fund. Budgetary comparison schedules have been provided for the General fund and major Special Revenue funds as required supplementary information and for the nonmajor Special Revenue funds and the Capital Projects and Debt Service fundsas other supplementary information to demonstrate compliance with these budgets. The governmental fund financial statements, including the reconcliation between the fund financial statements and the govemment-ride financial statements, can be found on pages 15-18 of this report " Fiduciary funds are used to account for resources hell for the benefit of parties outside the Commission. Fiduciary funds are not reflected in the :government -wide financial statements; as the resources of those funds are not available to the; Commission to support the Commission's own programs. The fiduciary funds are accounted for using the accrual basis of accounting. The fiduciary fund financial statements can be found on page 19 of this report. Notes to the linancfat Statements The ,notes provide additionalinformation that is essential to a full understanding of the data provided in the govemment-wide and fund financial statements. The notes to the financial statements can be found on pages 20-38 of this report Otherinfommtion Other information is in addition th the basic financial statements and accompanying notes to the financial statements. This report also presents certain required supplementary information concerning the Commission's budgetary; results for the General fund and major Special Revenue funds with appropriated budgets. Required supplementary information can be found on pages 39-40 of this report The combining statements referred to earlier relating to nonmajor govemmental funds are presented immediately following the required supplementary information. Other supplementary information includes budgetary results for the nonmajor Special Revenue funds, all Capital Projects funds, and the Debt Service fund as well as schedules of expenditures for local streets and roads, expenditures for transit and specialized transportation, and changes in assets and liabilities for the agency fund. This other supplementary information can be found on pages 41-48 of this report. Government -wide Financial Analysis , As noted previcaly, net assets may serve over as a useful indicator of a government's financial position. At June 30, 2006, time Commission's assets exceeded liabilities by $477,183,421, a $142,727,562 increase from June 30, 2005. Our analysis below focuses of the net assets and changes in net assets of the Commission's governmental activities. Net Assets Approximately 29%, compared to 40% in 2005, of the Commission's net assets reflect its investrnent in capital assets (i.e., construction in progress; land and improvements; rail operating easements; rail stations; and office furniture, equipment and automobiles); less any related debt used to acquire those assets, primarily related to rail and land, that is still outstanding. The Commission uses these capital assets b) provide transportation and commuter rail transit services to the nasidents and business community of the County. The increase of $3,903,554 in net assets invested in captaal assets, net of related debt, from governmental activities resulted primarily from the acquisition of land for the SR-79 and Mid County Parkway projects as well as the reduction in the related debt 5 36 The most significant portion of the Commission's net assets represents resources subject to external restrictions on how they may be used. Restricted net assets from governmental activities represented approximately 93% and 97% of the total net assets at June 30 2006 and 2005, respectively. Restricted net assets from governmental activities increased $116,624,597 primarily as a result of the, TUMF program and an increase in sales taxes.' Unrestricted net assets represent the portion of net assets that can be used to finance day-to-day�operations without constraints established" by debt covenants,. enabling legislation, or other legal requirements. Unrestricted net assets from governmental activities changed from a'$124,274,292 deficit at June 30, 2005 to a $102,074381 defict at June 30, 2006. This deficit results primarily from the impact of recording of the Commission's long-term debt issued for Measure'A highway, local street and road, and regional arterial projects. While a'Significant portion of the debt has been incurred to build these projects which are capital assets, upon completion: these projects, are transferred'to Caltrans or the local jurisdiction.. Accordingly, these Projects are not assets of the 'Comm fission that offset the long term debt in the statement of net assets. t The following is condensed financial data related to net assets at June 30, 2006 and June 30, 2005: Net Assets - u Current and other assets Capital assets not being depreciated Capital assets being depredated, net of accumulated depredation Total assets Long-term obligations r Other liabilities Total liabilities Net assets: ` Invested in capital assets, net of related debt 137,129,082 133,225,528 Restricted 442,129,220 325,504,623. Unrestricted (102,074,881) (124,274,292) " Total net assets $ 477,183,421 $ 334,455,859 Changes in Net Assets The Commission's total program and general revenues were $359,234,351,.while the;total cost of all programs was $216,506,789. Total revenues increased by 21%, and the total cost of all programs increased by,9%. Approximately 42% of the costs of the Carnmission's programs were paid by those who directly benefited from the programs or by other governments that subsidized` certain programs with grants and contributions. Sales taxes ultimately financed a significant portion of the programs'het costs. Governmental activities, "increased the Commission's net assets by $142,727,562, and condeesed financial data related to the change in net assets is presented in the table below. Key elements of this increase ,are as follows: June 30, •2005 $ 480,333,688 ; $ 374,795,535 108,611,432 110,704,637 44,629,759 • "46,319,973. - 633,574,879 531,820,145 129,379,069 158,976,227' 27,012,389 38,3138,059 156,391,458 '" 197,364,286' ■ . Charges for services decreased'$102,593, or 18%, due to a reduction in reimbursable expenses for property management services; •; Operating ,grants and contributions increased 25% as a result of the collection of TUMF fees in a strong housing; market offset by a decrease in federal and state reimbursements for major highway projects:, Captal grants and contrbutions increased 14% as a result of federal; arid state reimbursements for rail capital projects; • Measure A sales tax revenues greased $18,315,067, or 13%, due to the strong local economy affected by increased, population and jobs as well as available and affordable housing: 6 " : Transportation Development Act (TDA) sales taxes increased $13108,679, or 17%, due to the strong local economy; . " Investment eamings increased 126% as a resuk of higher cash and investment balances and rising rates " Other miscellaneous revenue decreased $668,356 as a result of the substantial completion of the SR-74 water pipeline relocation project for which local agency reimbursements were received, " Gain on sale of capital assets relates to the sale of surplus rail property; " General government expenses increased $732,385, or 18%, due to fees relating to the commercial paper program, services rendered for hum resourcesconsulting, and costs associated with the recruitment' for six new staff positions; Changes in Net Assets Revenues Program revenues: Charges for services - $ 472,018 $ 574,611 Operating grants and contributions 90,389,018 72,202430 Capital grants and contributions 997,362 . 877,665 General revenues: Measure A sales taxes 157,236,314 138,921,247 Transportation Development Act {TDA) sales taxes 90,927,244 77,818,565 Unrestricted investment earnings 11,639,575 5,146,325 Other miscellaneous revenue 1,698,024 2,366,380 Gain on sale of capital assets 5,874,796 123,054 Total revenues 359,234,351 298,030,277 Year Ended June 30, 2006 June.30, 2005 Expenses General government Bicycle and pedestrian facilities CETAP Commuter assistance Commuter rail Highways Local streets and roads Motorist assistance Planning and programming Property management Regional arterials Transit and specialized transportation ., Interest expense Total expenses Increase in net assets Net assets at beginning of year Net assets at end of year 4,848,292 848,959 3,549,683 2,888,451 11,350,220 36,226,705 60,389,876 2,280,646 5,976,647 ' 622,498 17,164,803. 62,527,276 7,832,733 4,115,907 1,021,637 4,147,758 2,599,448 8,907,828 35,362,793 53,333,169 2,191,061 4,328,038 580,224 17,621,505 55,905,814 8,348,928 216,506,789 198,464,110 142,727,562 99,566,167 334,455,859 234,889,692 $ 477,183,421 $ 334,465,859 " Bicyce and pedestrian facilities expenses decreased $172,678, or 17%, due to a decrease in " CETAP expenses decreased $598,075, or 14%, due to land acquisition activities; " Commuter assistance expenses increased $289,003, or 11%, due to media ads for rideshare " Commuter rail expenses increased $2,442,392, or 27%, primarily due to increases in opera contn'but ions to SCRRA; 38 7 claims; awareness; ling and capital " Local streets and roads expenses increased. $7,056,707, or 13%, as such payments to local jurisdictions are directly affected by the increase in sales taxes; " - Planning and programming expenses increased $1,648,609, or 38%, primarily for publicpmrate partnership efforts; and ., Transit and specialized transportation expenses increased $6,624,462, or 12%, due to increased allocations for public transit bus and raft operations. The following graph depicts,program expenses for the Commission's governmental activities for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006: i;o00,000 000,000 .000,000. $55,000,000 $50.000.000 $45,000,000 $40.000,0o0 $3.y5��,000/��0,.n0��.0f0000 $30,000,000�� $25,000,000 . $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5.000,0 0 The graph below presents the program and general revenues by source for tile Commission's govemmental activities for the fiscal year ended, June 30, 2006: Financial Analysis of the Commission's Funds As. of June 30, 2006, the Commission's governmental funds reported combined ending fund ,balances of $453A29,213, an Increase of $116,793,916 compared to 2005. Approximately 2%, or $7,760,272 of this total amount constitutes unreserved fund balance which is -available for spending at the Commission's discretion. Approximately 74% of the unreserved fund balance has been designated for bicycle and pedestrian projects and for motorist assistance. The remainder of the fund balance is reserved to indicate that it is not evadable for new spending because of the following commitments; • $2,167,565 in TDA funds that have been allocated to cities within the County for bicycle and pedestrian Projects', • $73,874,995 for new CETAP corridors in Westem County; • $12,104,732 for commuter assistance activities such as the ridesharing program, the park -and -ride program, and several other incentives for commuters to use alternative modes of transportation; • $55,912,106 for commuter rail projects including the Perris Valley Line extension which is expected to be completed in 2010; • $26,918,447 related to debt service that is to be paid over the next three years; • $107,357,700 for highway projects to be completed over the remainder of the 1989 Measure A; • $5,179,074 in loans receivable from cities for funds that were loaned' to the cities to enable- them to construct and maintain roads and to be repaid from their future Measure A local street and roads funding; • $238,253 for local streets and roads programs that are returned to the cities' within the County for maintenance of their roads and locai arterials; • • $2,108,392 in the General fund evadable for planning and programming of the Local Transportation Fund Program: • $996,604 in prepaid amounts for various expenditures; • $2,184,478 in property management funds that were generated from highway and rail properties that will be usedfor those programs; • $3,544,875 for regional arterials in the Coachella Valley and $64,944,320 for regional arterials in Western County; - • $8,872,169for specialized transportation projects funded through the end of the 1989 Measure A; and • $79,265,231 in TDA funds available to the commuter rail and bus transit operators in County. The following tablepresents the changes in fund balances for the governmental funds for the fiscal'yeers ended June 30, 2006 and 2005: Fund Balances General fund Year Ended June 30 2006 2005 • % Change $ 9,230,059 $ 8,520,480 8% Special Revenue major funds: Measure A Westem County 163,804,847 134,743,081 22% Measure A Coachella Valley 11,701,231 8,357,088 40% Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee 138,819,315 63,614,159 118% Local Transportation Fund 76,701,979 57,575,836 33% Commercial Paper Capital Projects fund $ 12,058,828 $ 25,463,638 (53)% Debt Service fund 30,459,736 29,981,473 2% Nonmajor goverrunental funds 10,653,220 8,379,542 27% 9 40 Key elements for the thanges in fund balances are as follows: • • The 22% increase in the Measure A Western County Special Revenue fund CCM be attributed to the increased sales taxes from a strong local economy as wen as increased'interest revenues, • The 40% increase in the Measure A Coachella Valley Special Revenue fund can be attributed to the increased sales taxes; ' • The 118% increase in the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Special Revenue fund can be attributed to the increase in TUMF fees collected relating bp a strong housing market in' Wester County; and • The 33% increase in the Local Transportation Fund can be attributed to increased sales tams; • • The 53% decrease in the Commercial Paper Capital Projects' fund can be attribubsd to the use of commercial paper proceeds for the advance funding of 2009 Measure'A projects; • The 27% increase in the nonmajor governmental funds can be attributed to increased sales taxes. ' • General Fund Budgetary Highlights Differences between the original budget and the final amended budget for the General fund resulted in a $2799,598 increase in appropriations and were related to the following changes: • • $48,300 in increases for various administration activities; • $834,100 in increases to the commuter rail program for increased transit capital contribution and professional services relating to the Commission's commuter rail stations; • $532,200 in increases for various planning and programming services; " • • • $394,600 in increases to property management activities related to support services for the development of a property inventory database, identification of unauthorized encroachments, and appraisals and special • projects; • $17,400 in decreases to transit and specialized transportation for adjustments to variousplanning and programming services; • $236,100 in increases for arbitrage rebate tax due based on a calculation petfOrmed; • $712,200 in increases bp intergovernmental distributions related to increased sales tax revenues; and • $59,500 in increases to capital outlay.for the redesign of office systems and an additioriel computer server to accommodate three new staff positions. • r Budget increases were budgeted from available fund balance and new revenues. During the year, revenues exceeded budgetary estimates and expenditures were less than budgetary estimates, thus eliminating the need to draw upon existing fund balance. Capital Assets and Debt Administration Capita! Assets As of June 30, 2006, the Commission had $153,241,191, net of accumulated depreciation, invested in a broad range of capital assets including construction in progress; land and land improvements; rail operating easements and stations; and office furniture, equipment, and automobiles. The total decrease in the Commission's total capital assets, net for FY 2005/06 was 2%. Major capital asset additions during 2006 included land purchases for the SR-79 realignment and Mid County Parkway Projects. During 2006, the Commission sold parcels of land related to the commuter rail Nog -rant with a book value of $5,485,760 for apprwrimately $11,360,600. 10 41 • • " The table below is a comparative summary of the Commission's capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation:; Capital Assess not being depreciated: Land and land improvements Rai operating easements. Constriction in progress Total capital assets not being depreciated Capital Assets being depreciated, net of accumulated depreciation: Rail stations Office fumtiure, equipment, and automobiles Totalcapital assets, net of accumulated depredation Total capital assets June 30, 2006 June 30, 2005 67,309,709 $ 70,497;323 39,484,143 39,484143 1,817,580 723;171 108,611432 ' 110704,637 44,463,567 46,100,756 166,192 219,217,` 44,629,759 46,319 973 $ ` 153,241,191' $ 157,024,610 More detailed information about the Commission's capital assets is presented in Note 4 to the financial statements. Debt Administration As of June 30, 2006, the Commission had $95,695,000 in outstanding sates tax revenue bonds compared to $124,335,000 at June 30, 2005. The Commission maintains an overall `AA' rating from Standard & Poor's (S&P) and an `Aa2" rating from Moody's Investors Service (Moody's). In September 2006 S&P upgraded the Commission's rating to AA+ based on a revision to S&P's U.S. pubec fmance special tax criteria. The sales tax revenue bonds are among the highest -rated transportation bonds in the nation. The current debt limitation for the Commission is $525,000,000, which Ls significantly in excess of the Commission's outstanding general obligation debt In March 2005 the Commission established a $185,000,000 commercial paper program to provide advance funding for 2009 Measure A capital. projects. The commercial paper notes are rated `Ai+" by S&P and `131` by Moody's. As of June 30, 2006, the Commission had $30,005,000 in outstanding commercial paper notes.. The commercial paper notes are expected to be refinanced with the issuance of long-term debt secured by sales taxes from the 2009 Measure A; which has a $500,000,000 debt limitation on outstanding debt: ' Additional information on the Commission's long -terra debt can be found in Note 6 to the financial statements. Economic Factors and Other Factors - During its March 2006 Commission meeting, the Commission adopted guiding principles for use in the preparation of the FY 2006/07 Budget These principles have been incorporated in goals of the Commission and will be updated annually in response to the ever -changing social, poetical, and economic environment. The principles are a business planning tool designed .to assist the Commission in implementing its strategic goals and objectives and lays the foundation for future financial planning for the annual budget process. The Commission adopted the FY 2006/07 annual budget on June' 14, 2006. This $404,444,400 balanced budget includes $85,500,000 for the Mid County Parkway preeminary engineering/environmental and right of way acquisition; $25,560,000 for the SR-79 realignment study and right of way acquisition; $43,511,400 to support various city and County highway construction projects; $10,075,000 for the Perris Valley Line Metrolink extension project engineering and right of way acquisition; $40,025,000 for MSHCP land acquisition in Westem County and Coachella Valley; and 827,601,000 for various Westem County TUMF regonal arterial projects. . Leading economic indicators show that the local' economy will continue to be solid, primarily as a result of continued . positive treads in affordable new and existing housing, the population growth, and the continued creation of new jobs 42 11 in the Inland FJnpina compared to neighboring coastal areas. Locally, job growth and taxable sales are forecasted to continue to increase. These factors were considered in preparing the Commission's budget for the 2007 fiscal year. There are obvious variables in terms of project financing available from federal and state funds. There is conthuing uncertaintyrelated to the fiscal condition of the State. of California and the impact on transportation, including the future viability of the State;Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). Several significant projects in Riverside County may delayed for an indeterminable period if the`STIP program is curtailed. The Commission is studying innovative financing alternatives such as: public/private partnerships and federal` financingprograms to support the delivery of 2009 Measure A projects. Contacting tire Management This firtanciiat report is designed to provide a general overview of the Commission's finances for all those with an interest in the govemment's finances and to show the Commission's: accountability forthe money , it receives. Questions concerning any of the information provided in this report or requests for additional inbrmation should be addressed to the Chief Financial Officer, Finance Department at the Riverside County Transportation Commission, 4080 Lemon Street, 3'" Floor, P.O. Box,12008, Riverside, California 92502-2208. Bask Financial, Statements 44 Riverside County Transportation Commission Statement of Net Assets June 30, 2006 Gi remmental Activ9ies Assets Cash and kwestments $ 329,889,210 Receivables Accounts 88,815,635 Advances to other governments 31,324,000 Loans 4,904,073 Interest 3,044,436 Prepaid expenses and other assets 1254,890 Restricted invesbnents held by trustee 21,101,444 Capital assets not being depredated 108,611,432' Capitalassets being depreciated, net of accumulated depreciation 44,629,759 Total assets 633,574,879 Liabilities Accounts payable 26,019,559 Accrued interest 556,635 Other liabilities 436,195 Long-term liabilities: Due within one year 31,405,357 Due In more than one year 97,973,712 Total liabilities 156,391,458 • Net assets Invested in capital assets, net of related debt 137,129,M Restricted for. Bicycle and pedestrian facilities 2,167,565 CETAP 73,874,995 Commuter assistance 12,171,909 Commuter rail 55,913,503 Debt service 30,459,736 1-$9h►'raYs 106,3813,923 Local streets and roads 238,253 Planning and programming 2,111,182 Property management 2,1134,559 Regional arterials 68,48,3,195 Transit aril specialized transportation 88,137,400 Unrestricted (deficit) (102,074,881) Total net assets $ 477,183,421 See notes to financial statements 45 13 3 FundionsfErogrsms Primary Government Governmental Activities: Generaigovernment . S 044792 ".5 1,407 -i - - S -...Llicysleand pedesldanWadies 848,959 Riverside County Transportation Commission • Statement of Activiles Year Ended June 30, 2006 Commuter assistance , Commuter rail EliglwaYs Local sheets and roads Motoristasststance - Planning and programming - Propedymanagement • Regional arterials Transit and spadat¢aa transportation mteiest expense • Total governmental activities 3,549,683 - 42,614,191 2,8E8,451 1,313,090 11,350,220 382 179,748 36,22%705 50 (t,109,438) 6%389,876 - - 2.260J646 ' 3,037.889 5,976,647 1,707,778 622.498 445,313 17,164,833 42,614,192 62527,276 24,866 31.568 . 7,832,733 - 216,506,789 i 472,018 . $ 90,389,018 i General Revenues: Measure A sales lams Tong:cita0en Development Act sales taxes Unrnseicted investment earnings Other miscellaneous revenue Gain on sale of capdal assets Total general revenues Change in net assets - Net assets at beginning of year • Net assets al end of year . 46 14 (046.885) (648969) 39064,508 (1,575261) (10,172,728) (37.338,093) (80,389,676) -757,243 (4,268,808) (177,185) 25,449,389 (62478.842) (7.832,733) (124,646,391) 157,238,314 90,927,244 11,639,575 1,698,024 5.674,796 267,375,953 142,727,562 334,455,859 477,183,421 • Bt 911'91wIM9 RF9999 9198699 99$ 966'19179P t. 719'9PL'It 3 991'WAS -1. 992'06S71 S 61916L'9e.'.. S: SL91191.96.S 6Z1.19916 3 909'009191.1 999'119'01 S 999991911 Poi Po 9991111111191 91L7Z9161 OZZ79971 99916179. ,: 929.0076-. 616101'91 "SlE1619191. t9rt0eli 199'909'£9l 650'0S2'6 . 99991196 WV(9191 0991102 . 0611101 996e901999911 £80'910'9 S801101, . . - SON °MAWft atl991pawEol'Palw6ri0 eos'19L - - 6OL'ISL yu91ygpaE9w9oRS9pp199Ru61p0 :aouamnn -_ 009191.19 9297011 SOL10972 990116 S61Y391 9gRP9d9v94899119PW9 P99999911 S66711 B9 OLS9h699 919'tH's ssusus R9o'bey 909'986 1021 6WIZ - S99Y9 9111/13 9099949911R969d ZSnotY - Z6EYOIY 9Nu9199A0d Pu969R9Md , SSZVSZ PAU - - 61819 090726 Mu Pe 819e49 R991 ` 910'6Lt5 - .69r 199Y _ seL' a% - atenR9voee9l O S759706 90t'L01 U9'L9071 • SOt'11C1 L6116019 91esuppm L9111819 . L14'9161Z 99We91WO 109718'99 - - 6L999971 £ts'LPOY 699+Mmauso " Zees%'t1 2e1901x1 • 9999RP9e Ammo sealant S66'419's2 - - d81.90 S991917 S997917 99PpPe1991pw9919V969049 , At PPS 99w9pq puns - S9LYS1'88 061'060'1 01.611:9 • 00016 0291617 060719'S 69916611 909'119'1 • 909901911491 ' 0£91Z9 9711 190'Z 099 9e9799 998191 91611196619190 000169 - 0001LS 999o1:94R mot 19919eDY sups'' 990'965 919 161'009 699'9 11£'PLS 1PN90 u4R91960 BS911012 - S SC6161 S S ZWIES S 000'S6 S 9967607 S 996'6761 S 99109671 S • 019'L9P't S epaled%MOW cr :gow 1 .. 9e1919199 Pund Sue 949/6911 . 966't8ray 3 Zulu's', S 9961199/9 S 9CL'06611 S• 6L8'9829L -S 9L9919691 S 6Z1'99E'91. 3 909'WS'E91 S S99'16911 S . Mom RRI ►P/901'12 9U101 . .699'9e8'OL - - venni 190011919e90969119991R118 - - 909146 • 49S'Lt • 8111Z • 999Y9 9u119 - 999eIWeAla pRdud . 000119 \_'- 0009A9 - 9WM19V10 M9a91mMV 985369'1 0Z - 93Y099 999'l99 19991m9Mus04 No SC11101 993'19 999'49 899Y9 - 619119 . 996116 OZ9'l9 91.6'1L1'1 - 09110 119111811 _ 0001fult 0P0499't9. M9om9m+06mP9ASawnw 'AA 9S9i 19Naga 9SS2 169'12111 ' Z9N90O'96. 616'1911 16t'9C6'M' 96P'90rt � .. 111119oew 79R9eRw8 Oli'8ar= 9 e9Z'U99 $ SZl'L96'9 $ 99l'Lt9Y1 3 ' 99L'98619 S sule9YOt S L99'009'L S 169'osoltl S 9Z9'169Y S 99NU99M91 Rye 90q 411919' RI9l saws mass e9391e41 P99d 99d MOM 699190 Rump 1MtibtOMae0 11190 MAO 991691,9999911 90096996 MRW990 =WM A939999R lewd Ipa-I 9999Rn - r99w9011' Vswami AWO RWo!9mo0 •uoppledwell 9nw99y minds wund u961/1 ' 901Z'OS 9u9i - 9999S R9w9n19om9 -loam awn 9919919 M 999999699414999391:9119alt1 " Riverside County Transportation Commisslon Reconciliation of the Balance Sheet of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Net Assets June 30, 2006 Total fund balances - Bovemmenthl funds (page 16) Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of net assets (page 13) are different because:, Capital assets, less reed accumulated depreciation. used In governmental activities are not financial resources and therefore are not reported In the funds. Other long-term assets are not available to pay for cisreni-pe iod expenditures and, therefore, are deferred in funds. Interest payable on bonds oulstandng is not due and payable In the current period and therefore is not reported in the funds. Debt issuance costs are not current financial resources and therefore are not reported in the governmental funds. tong -term liabilities are not due and payable in thecarrent period and therefore are not reported in the funds: Those liabilities consist of. Compensated absences Camel tease obligation . Contracts payable ' Bonds payable Commordal paper notes payable Net adjustment Net assets of governmental activities (page 13) See notes to financfat'sfelements 18 (553,478) (25:591) (3,100,000) (94695.000) 130,005,,000) (129,379,0 askumowows q oaouer9 6w'ans» t:: oLZieAbt. 1. 96L'OWS'S $ SAYSSOtsaltine t sielnt94t i ttttoL'II t 03309331. t 6W'OOts ! MotmwMMmts$ 46L'SW'9Ce MILO SLY MU seetir'SZ 9Fs'ssieS esL'tle'W wiass'9 ttOtttt'm oBY0L5'9 0c414,0313315e91333oLemns 930.6L933 3L9t/Z3 'mean CLt9'alttl) . t? ut'61 991.'93t3L VOWS WL99012 SLSIOL wel9Fo wM1 Ft mpstI 9 VMS's) LOl 91M343 (30/333S'L) (151'eeS'ti) %P9CL 0331•3e0Oemael Mtla FI01 tesolvs'te) (009'isz) te) • - - - - 11011)6B't) (LOL'91e'SZ) VIM ins sso st Wd65''n - /MYR (3L0'310'93 - - 03t'333 - • visapuet1 9tt1 - - ssVoss'li S90S3e31e1333331030F9 - - :(awn) some 3.3333E MiW 09E481'101 It9'Utt . ciott9'es) (Ltt'roY'Ct) trOm1rel. 961'9ot5L L11333t1I Lle'O9O'1/ taleC(t ee/wrutto .. (M(3F)ono lama* io(t.{MFrtt) wog 9SL'SCL'LiZ 81.1 Et oatiW9E ltf'OEttl Etna Z31333'3i. vita alt inliYSL OWUV; ewiapueaM noel 130.3301. tO32331I we1t91P19F1eawM�V61Ri1 S6Yterse 9151 ou'Wt'ss MUD CIeSRt *Ms Reg F131 9974C2 sena +R Rto+eeggM -siolut'[ 99 O32139'9 919'C33 WWI McMM 914'699343 133'1. 0060/9'93 • - - tos'a w*upcf . MetA9t pea • tlet10'903......, tl•ttr't 19E131i1. CCL3)39117 13I39Stt =Inez .. w9'0W'st 0391t1'01 � � twwdod wpl ettast9 Wart _ .eseass L9.. sena Matt late ia933d133e 33313peds we mum 613e'L9061 WW1 03333E'01 - *OSA133333i BOW - �• 9e1229 MtutNeeuW OMOwd 93030 L9ie99 W/319/L tx'999'l Otlua•1OwdRl bmugd . 911b9i'Z. (*nen _ • 33aww331330P13 easy 'W 90Yt80'l tw • t31.16e9$3 ValltlL4t eree+NReege Meal 964tt0'I£ 199'L/9tl anal on 'not! smomew tW'OLS'Ot - Mina e09'99t'L ew MinW100 WWI � m'Wet wlMppeMwmtwO mast 'am cr) 6133•eee 437e3t1 . 33133311•33l33303d mepkla V aumok IS1919Y EOM - teo'9V COOStL Watt eo9emFpp Fps 890W't Otto 000211 eR'me MO 990133 Lailestl lC owl MVO 'Oe St't • left LiL'WZ - ISC'LeL ewFae FoFee)wd ' WWI torn r - .tLe'o09't %pm Sue elms 331a93033wp es$303$aw3 911'8907SE OW'Ow'OI AS'6e8't 8a8'9L8 9[B'Bef'BL WiL9B'18 L06291'03 192429'61I. 1t09W'31 mown girl Kt*/ "teeth 910'OE1'l iWtoi CL1484 moo emrEssol natal (atom uwetaewWPM ;SEMI MACS LL9'et6't BO'U69 SOYCOt't 336W3 1L36E3 2309913 139933 1333e3 Wl'WCt 61.8110Y1 KOS e$VS D'1 !RUB' l FMw 10$100 11 We$2i59 est.ezL't9 eej wweaiut oun uaigua tuetl Dotes sz t 13L'W9'9 t • t t 609'6L9'3L t t SEteAL'ff t 61S'WO'91I 9 1W'esiZ t enmeips mot , ePeM 330+19 Rttlwd 9und oil 6303A LmntO MOUND IMOIR11M40 IVO vasiss ee9etwdwwL ueptei9R NeetNeO terms MPeaR1 Magid Pal t9OM Y9mleti ruDww "MO ptwte+ew0 1,e9R -Selft • ( 39334.e4ets WOC'Ot tmp PIM PPS trend IRueulu+w9-++aupt8 rend IttrdeuYJ w+t twltlpuedt-d'semisoft is rMen1R4 soMMwWn eNre++edrvt4 Penn .vNw6 Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues; Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances of Govemmental Funds to the Statement of Activities For the YearEnded June 30, 2006 Net change In fund balances - Total governmental funds (page 17) Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of activities (page.14) are different because: Governmental funds report capital outlays as expenditures. However in the statement of activities, the cost of those assets is allocated over their estimated useful lives and reported as depreciation expertise. The adjustinent combines the net (Menges of the following amounts: Capital outlay Depreciation expense Sale of capital assets Net adjustments Revenues in the statement of activities that do not provide current financial resources are not reported as revenues in the funds. The issuance of long-term debt (e.g., bonds) provides current financial resources to govmmental funds, while the repayment of the principal of tong -tern debt consumes the current financial resources of governmental funds. Neither transaction; however, has arty effect on net assets. Also, governmental funds report the effect of issuance costspremiums, discounts, and simtiar dams when debt is first issued, whereas these amounts are deferred and amortized in the statement of actir ties. The adjusbnent combines the net changes of the fopovr ng amounts:. Principal payments for sates tax revenue bonds and capital leases Amortization and write -Off of cost of issuance ,Change inaccrued interest Highway expenditure related to contract payable Net adjustments Some expenses reported in the statement of activi es do not require the use of current financial;resources and therefore are not reported as experdihues in governmental funds. The adjustment combines the net change of compensated absences Change In net assets of governmental activities (page 14) 50 18 $ i 116,793,916 3,905,738 (2,203,397) (5,485,760). (3,783,419) 190,435, 28,669,418 (152,872) 82,344 1,000,000 29,598,890 Riverside County Transportation Commission Statement of Fiduciary Net Assets June 30, 2006 Assets Interest receivable Restricted investments held by trustee Total assets . Local Projects Agency Fund 3,507 976,050 979,557 Liabilities Due to other governments . $ 979,557 See notes to financial statements 51 19 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2006 Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies Reporting entity: The Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission) was formed in 1976 under Division-12 (commencing' with Section 130000) of the California Pubic Utilities Code. The Commission is a special district govemed by a 30-member board of commissioners (Board) consisting of one representative from each city in the county, all five county supervisors, and a nonvoting state representative. The Commission provides short-range transportation planning and programming for Riverside County (County); which includes the administration of the. Local Transportation Fund-(LTF) and the. State Transit Assistance(STA) programs created under the Transportation Development Act (TDA) by the State of California (State). The LTF is administered by the Commission on behalf of the County. The purpose of this program is to allocate funds for public transportation needs, local streets and roads, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and multimodal transportation terminals. The STA program atiocates funds for: public transportation purposes to those geographic areas with special public transportation needs, which cannot be met otherwise. On November 8, 1988, the Commission was empowered .by the voters of the County, under Ordinance No. 88-1 (1989 Measure A), to collect ,a,one-half of one percent sales tax for the purpose of improving the transportation .: system of the County. Measure A was enacted, impart, pursuant to the provisions of Division;25 (commenting with Section 240000) of the California Public Utilities Code and Section 7252.22 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. On November 12, 2002 Riverside County's voters approved a 30-year renewal of Measure A under Ordinance No. 02-001;:(2009;Measure ,A). The voter action ensures the: replacement of the 1989 Measure °A program when if expires in 2009 with a new 30 year Ingram that will continue finding improvements until June 2039. . In connection with the 2009 Measure A program, the County and cities in the Westem County: area implemented a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) programto fund a regional .arterial system to handle the traffic demands in the Westem County area as a result of future development. Under the 2009 Measure A program, the Commission shalt receive the first $400 million of TUMF revenuesto fund .the regional arterial projects and new Community Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) corridors included in the 2009 Measure: A Transportation Improvement Plan. As aresult of the commencement of the TUMF program prior to the 2009 Measure A program, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Commission and the Westem Riverside Council of - Governments (WRCOG), administrator of the TUMF program, was executed regarding the allocation of TUMF revenues until the 2009 Measure A program is effective. Under the MOU, the Commission is to receive 48.1% of the TUMF revenues after a set -aside for WRCOG administration costs, and the balance is allocated to, local arterial projects (48.1%) administered by WRCOG and public transit (3.8%). As required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (GAAP), the basic financial statements include all funds of the Commission including those of the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE), a component unit, for which the Commission is considered financiallyaarountable. SAFE was created under Chapter 14 (commencing with Section 2550) of Division 3 of the Cafdomia Streets and Highways Code and Sections 2421.5 and 9250.1 of the Vehicle Code. SAFE receives monies from fees levied on registered vehicles to be used to implement and maintain an emergency motorist aid system, as specified, on portions M the California Freeway and Expressway System in the County. The governing body of SAFE is substantially identical to that of the Commission and is responsible for approval of SAFE's budget. SAFE is presented as a special revenue fund. Separate financial statements are not issued for SAFE. There are many other governmental agencies, including the County of Riverside, providing services within the area served by the Commission. These other governmental agencies have independently elected governing boards and consequently are not under the direction of the Commission. Financial information for these agencies is not included in the accompanying financial statements. 52 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2006 Note 1 Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, Continued Basis; of presentation: The Commission's basic financial: statements -consistof government -wide -financial statements,: including a statement of net assets and a statement of activities, and fund financial °statements which provide a more detailed level of financial information. Govemment-wide statements: The statement of net assets and the statement of activities report information on all of the nonfuluciary activities of the Commission. For the most part; the effect of interfund adivity has been removed from these statements: These statements report govemmental activities, which normally are supported by taxes and intergovernmental revenues. The Commission does not have any business4ype activities, which rely to'a significant extent on charges and fees for support: The statement of activities demonstrates the degree:to which the program expenses of a given function are offset by program revenues. Program expenses include direct expenses, which are deariy'identifiabte with'a specific function, and allocated indirect expenses. Program revenues include 1) charges to customers or applicants who purchase, use, or, directly' benefit from goods, services, or privileges provided' by a given ; function and 2) grants and contributions that are restricted to meeting the: operational or capital requirements' of a particular function. Taxes and other intemally dedicated resources, which are properly not included whom program revenues, are reported instead as'general revenues. . Fund;, financial statements: The fund' financial statements provide ; infomration..about the Cenimrssion's' funds, including its fiduciary funds, though. the latter are excluded from the government -wide financial statements. Separate financial statements are provided for govemmental and fiduciary funds. The emphasis of fund financial statements is on major governmental funds, each displayed' in a separate column. All remaining governmental funds are aggregated and reported as nonmajor funds_ The Commission reports the following major govemmental funds: General Funth The General Fund is the general operating fund of the Commission and accounts for financial resources not required to be accounted for another fund. Measure AWestern' County '`Special 'Revenue Fund: This fund accounts for the-mvenues`,from sales taxes which are restricted toexpenditures for Western County programs and activities. ` Measure A Coachella' Valley Special Revenue Fund: This fund accounts" for the revenues from sales taxes which are restricted to expenditures for Coachella Valley programs arid activities. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Fund: This special revenue fund accounts for TUMF revenues, which. are restricted to expenditures for Western County regional arterial and CETAP projects. Local Transportation Fund: This special revenue fund accounts for the'one`-quarter percent of the state sales , tax collected within the County under TDA for planning and programming, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and transit operations including the Commission's commuter rail operations. Commercial Paper Capital Projects Fund: This fund records proceeds from the issuance of commercial paper notes and the use of these proceeds .to advance right of way and' mitigation land acgigsition and project' development for capital projects included in the 2009 Measure A. , Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2006 Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, Continued Debt Service Fund: This fund accounts for the resources accumulated and payments made .for principal and interest on the sales tax revenue bonds. Additionally, the Commission reports the following fund type Local Projects Agency Fund: This; fiduciary fund accounts for proceeds from a subordinate debt issue for various cities' local street and road projects. Measurement focus and basis of accounting: The govemment wide fmandal statements are reported using the economic resources measurement. focus andthe accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recorded when earned, and expenses are recorded when a lability is incurred, regardless of the: timing: of related cash flows. Grants and similar items are recognized as revenue as soon as all eligibility requirements imposed by the provider have been met. Governmental kind financial statements are reported. using the current financial resources measurement focus and the modified accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recognized as soon as they are both measurable and available. Revenues are considered to be available when they are collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to pay labifties of the current period. For this purpose, the Commission considers revenues to be available if they are collected within:180 .days of the end of the current fiscal period. Expenditures generally are recorded when a liability is incurred; however, principal and interest expenditures on long-term debt as well as compensated absences and claims and judgments are recorded only when payment is due. Those revenues susceptible to accrual include sales taxes collected and held by the State at year-end on behalf of the Commission, TUMF, intergovernmental revenues, interest revenue, and vehicle registration user fees. In applying the susceptible -to -accrual concept to intergovernmental revenues, there are essentially two: types of revenues. In one, moneys must be expended on :the specific purpose or project before any amounts will be -paid to the Commission; therefore, revenues are recognized based upon expenditures incurred. In the other, moneys are virtually unrestricted and are usually revocable only for failure to comply with prescribedcompliance requirements. These resources are reflected as revenues at the time of receipt or earlier if the susceptible -to -accrual criteria are met The fiduciary fund financial statements, which consist solely of agency funds, have no measurementfocus and, are reported using the accrual basis of accounting. Cash and investments: The Commission maintains cash and investments in accordance with an investment policy adopted initially by the Board on September 13, 1995, and most recently amended March 8, 2006. The investment policy compfres with, or is more restrictive than, applicable_ state statutes. Investments of bond and commercial paper proceeds as permitted by the applicable bond documents are maintained by U.S. Bank as custodial bank, and the eamings for each bard and commercial paper issue are accounted for separately. Cash from other Commission revenue sources is commingled for investment purposes, with investment earnings allocated to the different accounts based on average monthly ddlar account balances. The Commission's investment policy authorizes investments in U.S. Treasury runes and bonds, federal agency notes, repurchase agreements, corporate bonds, commerdal paper, banker's: acceptances, money market mutual funds, the Riverside County Pooled Investment Fund (RCPIF), the State of California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), and certificates of deposit Other investments permitted by the Cafifornia Govemment Code (Code) are pemdtted but only with prior Board authorization, except for securities that could result in zero interest accrual if held • to maturity that are ineligible. tA1F is regulated by: Code Section 16429 and is under the management of the State 22 54 . Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to financial Statements June 30, 2006 Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, Continued Treasurer with oversight provided by theLocalAgency Investment Advisory Board. 'Oversightof the RCPIF 'is conducted by the County Treasury Oversight Committee. All investments, except for those related to bond reserve funds, are subject to a maximum maturity of five years unless specific direction to exceed the limit is given by the Board. Local Transportation Fund moneys are legally required to be deposited in the RCPIF. The RCPIF and the tAIF are carried at fair value based on the value of each participating dollar as provided by the RCPIF and LAW, respectively. The fair value of the Commission's position in the RCPIF and LAIF'is the same as the value of the pool shares: Investments ill U.S. govemment and agency securities are carried at fair value based on quoted marketprices. Money market mutual funds are Carried at fair value based on each fund's share price. ` { Bank balances are secured by the pledging of a pool of eligible securities to collateralize the Commission's deposits with the bank in accordance with the Code. Accounts receivable: Accounts receivable consist primarily of Measure A and LTF sales tax revenues from the State Board of Equalization on all taxable sales within the County of Riverside, California through June 30 2006. Interfund transactions:' During the course of operations, numerous transactions occur be vween individual funds involving goods provided or services rendered. There are also transfers of revenues from funds authorized to receive the revenue to funds authorized to expend it Outstanding interfund balances are reported as due from/to other funds; internal financing balances are reported as advances toff om other funds. . Restricted investments held by trustee: Restricted investments held by trustee represent' unexpended bond proceeds, interest, earnings thereon, and reserve amounts' of sales tax revenue bonds. Underthe related bond resolutions and indentures; any remaining - bond• proceeds are 'restricted for the use of future construction improvements to the respective projects: for debt or for reserve requirements fn.accordance with applicable debt covenants. Capital assets: Capital assets consisting of land and land improvements; 'construction 'in progress; rail easements; rail stations; andtoffice fumiture, equipment, and vehicles are reported in governmental ac6vitiesin the government - wide financial statements. Capital assets are defined by the Commission as assets with an initial, individual cost of more than $5,000 and an estimated useful life in excess of three years. Such assets are recorded at historical costs or estimaied historical costs if purchased or constnicted Donated; capital' assets are^recorded at estimated fair value at the date of donation. Highway construction and certain purchases of right of way property, for which title vests with Caltrans, are included in highway program expenditures. infrastructure` consisting primarily of highway canstnxtion; and right of way acquisition is not recorded as a capital asset, because the Commission does not have title to such assets or rights of Way. The costs of normal maintenance' and repairs that do not add to the value of the asset or materially odend'the life of the asset are not capitalized. Rail stations, furniture and equipment and vehicles of the primary government are depreciated using the straight-line method over the following, estimated useful fives: 55 • Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2006 Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, Continued Asset Type Rail stations Office furniture and equipment Vehides Useful Life 10 th 30 years 3 to 5 years 5 years Compensated absences: Vacation leave in govemmental funds that is due and payable at year-end is reported as an expenditure and a liabilfiy of the General fund. Eamed'vacation leave that is not currently due is reported as a long-term fiability in the government -wide financial statements. Sick leave is ,recorded as an expenditure in the General fund when taken by the employee: Employees with continuous five years of service have the option of being paid for sick leave accumulated in excess. of 240 hours at a rate of 50% (i.e., one hour's: pay for every two hours in excess of 240). Any sick •leave it excess of 240 hours is accrued at fiscal year end, and a liability is reported in the govemment-wide financial statements. Sick leave that is due and payable at year-endis reported as an expenditure and a fund liability of the General fund. Risk management: The Commission is exposed to various risks of loss, related to torts; theft of, damage to, or destruction of assets; and errors or omissions. The Commission protects itself against such losses by;a balanced program of risk retention, risk transfers, and the purchase of commercial insurance. Loss exposures retained by the Commission are treated as normal expenditures and indude any loss contingency not covered by the Commission's purchased insurance policies. Construction projects and rail properties are protected through.a combination of commercial insurance, insurance required of Commission consultants, and a self-insurance fund established by the Southem Calitomiaa Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA). Settled claims have not exceeded insurance coverage in any of the past three fiscal years: Fund equity: In the fund finandal statements, governmental funds report reservations of fund balance for amounts that are not available for appropriation or are legally restricted by outside parties for use for a specific purpose. Designations of fund balance represent tentative management plans and are subject to change. Net assets: In the government -wide financial statements, net assets represent the difference between assets and liabilities and are classified into three categories: Invested in capital assets, net of related debt consists of capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation, reduced by the outstanding balances of arty borrowings used for the acquisition, construction, or improvement of those assets and excludes unspent deb proceeds. Restricted net assets represent the net assets that are not accessible for general use because their use is subject to restrictions enforceable by third parties. Unrestricted net assets represent those net assets that are available for general use. When both restricted and unrestricted resources are available for use, it is the Commission's poky to use restricted . resources first and then unrestricted resources, as they are needed. Administration expenditures: The Commission's staff arui'resources are used in the performance of: its responsibilities relating to the activities of the Commission and its component unit Accordingly, the Commission altocates salaries and benefits to each applicable fund on the basis of actual hours spent by activity, and other indirect overhead is allocated based on managernenrs budgetary estimates. Administrative salaries and benefits of $1,243,697 allocated to Measure A were less than 1%of revenues as required by law. 24 56 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2006 Note 2. Cash and investments Cash and investments at June 30, 2006 consist of thefollowing: Unrestricted . Cash Cash at bank $115,888 Petty cash; 1,018 RCPIF RCPIF specific investments LAIF Investments with fiscal agents or custodians Total cash and: investments $116,906 Investments 268,194,775 24,757,130 3,125,428 33,694,971 $329,772,304 As of June 30, 2006, the Commission had the following investments: I Investment Total $ ` 115,888. 1,018 268,194,775 24,757,130 3,125,428 Total.' 115,888 1,018 268,194,775 24,757,130 3125,428 33,694,971 22,077,494 55,772,465 • $ 329,889,210. Maturities $ 22,077,494 $ 351,966,704 Fair Value CN1;Charter Govemment mutual fund Federal Home Loan Bank Federal Home Loan Bank Federal Home Loan Bank'. Federal Home Loan Bank Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation FederalNational Mortgage Association Federal National Mortgage Association Federal National Mortgage Association First American Govemment Obligations mutual fund First American Treasury mutual fund General Electric Capital Corporation Investment Agreement LAIF RCPIF RCPIF Federal Farm Credit Bank RCPIF Federal Home Loan Bank RCPIF Federal Home Loan Bank RCPIF federal Home Loan Benk RCPIF Federal Home Loan Bank RCPIF Federal Home Loan Bank RCPIF Federal National Mortgage Association US Treasury Notes UBS Financial LLC Commercial Paper Total investments 32 days average March 2, 2007 June 20,2007 February 6, 2008 August'17. 2007 August 15, 2006 January 26,2007 January 18, 2008 November 9, 2007 8 days average 8 days average December 10, 2007 June 1, 2009 165 days average 274 days average February 15, 2007 August 18, 2006 . March 13, 2007 April 27, 2007 June 29, 2007 November 15, 2006 ' October 25, 2006 December31, 2007 July 6; 2006 133,239 1,940,250 ' 1964;380 1,980,620: 1 �7 500 2492,200 969,900 1,983,120 2,218,365' 12,310,219, 6,479,729 1,011,300 15,597,765' 3,125,428 268,194,775 2,962,500 2,000,000 4,982,800 2,964,390 2,955,000 3,975,440 4,917,000 1,976,180 2,747,698 $ 351,849,798 Custodial credit risk: Custodial credit risk for deposits is the risk that; in the event of the failure of a depository financial institution, a government. will not, be able to recoverits deposits or will not be able to recover collateral securities that are in the possession of an. outside party. The custodial credit risk for knrestmenti is the risk that, in the evert of the failure of the cormterparty (e.g., broker -dealer) to a transaction; a governmentWill not be able to recover the value of its investment or collateral securities that are in the possession of another, parry. The 57 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to FinancialStatements June 30, 2006 Note 2. Cash and Investments, Continued Commission's investment policy requires, that a third party hank trust department: hold all securities owned by the Commission. All trades are settled on a delivery versus payment basis through the Commission's safekeeping agent The Commission has deposits with a bank balance of $250,000 with a financial institution; bank balances over $250,000 are swept daily into a money market account Of the hank Nance, $100,000 is federally insured and the balance is collateralized in accordance with the Code; however, the collateralized securities are not held in the name of the Commission. Interest rate risk: The Commission's investment policy follows the Code as it relates to limits on investment ._ maturities as a means of managing exposure to fair value losses arising from increasing interest rates. Credit risk: As of June 30, 2006, the Commission's investment in the RCPIF was rated AaalMR1 by. Moody's Investors Service (Moody's) and AAAN1+ by Fitch. Ratings (Fitch). The investments in Federal Home Loan Bank, Federal Hone Loan Mortgage Corporation; Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA), Federal farm Credit Bank, U.S. Treasury notes, General. Electric Capital Corporation, First American Treasury > and First American Govemment Obligations mutual funds, and CNI Charter Government mutual fund were rated AAA by both Moody's and Standard & Poor's (S&P), except for a FNMA discount note which is rated A-1+ by S&P. A short-term. investment in UBS Financial LLC is rated P-1 by Moody's and A-1+ by S&P. The investment agreement and I AIF are not rated. The Commission's investment policy only requires credit quality ratings .for repurchase agreements, U.S. corporate debt, commercial paper, bankers acceptances and certificates of deposit Concentration of credit risk: The Commission places a limit of 10% on to amount of investment holdings with any one non -governmental issuer. More than 5 percent of the Commission's investments are in the RCPIF and Federal Home Loan. Bank. These investments are 76% and 7%, respectively, of the Commission's investments. The . investments in the Commercial Paper Capital Projects fund are unexpended commercial paper note proceeds invested in the First American Government Obligations mutual fund. The investments in the Measure A Westem County Capital Projects fund are unexpended bond proceeds invested in the First American Treasury mutual fund for project funds as required by the bond agreements. The _investments in the Debt. Service fund are sinking fund payments and reserve funds invested in First American Treasury funds and U.S.'Treasury notes for interest and principal as required by the bond agreements. The investments in the Local Projects Agency Fund are unexpended bond proceeds invested In the First American Treasury mutual fund for project funds for various cities as required by the bond agreements. Note 3: Receivables Advances to other governments: On November 3, 2003, the Commission entered into a cooperative agreement with the State to provide for improvements to State highways within the County. Per the terns of this agreement, the Commission advanced the State $31,324,000 of Measure A funds in accordance with Assembly Bill 3090 and provided an adctitional $2,591,000 in Commission matching share requirements through Congestion Leigation and Air Quality. and Regional Surface Transportation Program funds to finance a portion of the total eligible improvement constriction costs related to a major interchange project. The State .has noresponsibility to reimburse the Commission for the advance of $31,324,000 until such time an annual legislative appropriation occurs, a State Budget Authority exists to fund those eligible improvement reimbursements, ,the California Transportation Commission allocates .fumds to the improvements, and the Commission has satisfied any and all other necessaryi requirements. The. Commission received reimbursement from the State in August 2006. Loans: Under the Commission's financing guidelines for local jurisdictions, the Commission has entered into Advance Funding Agreements with a number of local cities. The cities have pledged their future share of Measure A 26 58 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2006 Note 3. Receivables, Continued local streets 'andjroads revenues in accordance .with repayment amounts specified in each city's agreement,: All loans are due on or, before june 30, 2009. Outstanding advances to all dties.7etlected as Mans receivables at June 30, 2006, are summarized below: " City of Canyon Lake City of Corona City of Norco City of Perris City of San Jacinto City of Temecula Total loans receivable . $ 314,789 1,484,789 632811 572,860 391,833 1,506,991 ; $ 4,904,073 Loan commitments: In May 2006 the Commission approved an advance loan 'funded by the -Measure A'Western County Special Revenue fund to the *of Hemet for $2,000,000: The city of Hemet pledged its share of FY 2006f07 Measure A local streets!and roads revenues, and repayment is due on or before September 30, 2007. No amount was advanced to the city of Hemet as of June 30, 2006. The Commission has approved advance loans, which are to be funded by commercialpaper note proceeds, to the cities of Hemet,` Indio, and' Blythe!and the'Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG} in the amounts of $3,000,000, $4,000,000, $1,500,000, and $43,300,000, respectively: The cities. have pledged their share of 2009 Measure A local streets'. and roads revenues, and CVAG has pledged its share of 2009 Measure.A highway and regional road revenue allocations in accordance with repayment terms specified in each agreement for actual advances. These loans are due on or before September 1, 2019. No amounts were advanced to the cities or CVAG . as of June 30, 2006: Note 4. Capital Assets' Capital•assets activity for the year ended June 30, 2006 was as follows: Balance Additions! . July 1, 2005 Transfers Governmental activities • Capital assets not being depreciated: Land and land improvements Construction in progress . Rail operating easements Total capital assets not being depreciated Capital assets being depreciated: Railtations Office fumrfture, equipment and vehicles' Total capital assets being' depreciated Less accumulated depreciation for: Rail stations Office furniture, equipment and vehicles Total accumulated depredation Total capital asset being depreciated, net; Governmental activities capital assets, net Retirements/ Balance Transfers I "June 30, 2006 '- $ 70,497,323 $ 2,298,146, $ (5,485,760) ,'. $ 67,309,709 723,171 1,097,517 (3,108) 1,817,580 39,484,143 _ - — 39,484,143 110,704,637 3,395,663 (5,4.58,868).,' 108,611,432 60,780,784 818,502' 61,599,286 464,296 — 61,245,080 75,294 " (26,407) 867,389 539,590 (26,407) 62,112,469 (14,680,028) (2,101,485) (599,285): (101,912) (15,279,313) (Z203,397) 46,319,973 (1,663,807) $157,024,610 $ .1,731,856 = $ 59 27 (16,781,513) (701,197) — . (17,482,710) (26,407) •,y 44,629,759 5,515;275) i $153,241,191 • ' Riverside;County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2006 Note 4. Capital Assets, Continued Depreciation expense was charged to functions/programs of the Commission's governmental activities during the year ended June 30, 2006 as follows: General govemment Commuter rail Commuter assistance Total depreciation expense Note 5. Interfund Transactions $ 96,813 2,101,485 5,099 $ 2,203,397 Advances to/from Other Funds: In March 2005, the Measure A Western County Special Revenue fund's commuter assistance program advanced$275,000 to the Measure A Westem County Special Revenue fund's highway program to fund a local match for a highway project The advance is payable on July 1, 2009. In April 2003, the Measure A VVestem County Special Revenue fund's highway program advanced $300,000 to the Measure A Western County local streets and roads program to fund repairs and improvements to a local road. The advance was paid on July 1, 2006. Due fromito Other Funds: The composition of balances related to due from other funds and due to other funds at June 30, 2006 is as follows: Receivable Fund Payable Fund Amount Explanation General fund Meastire A Western County $ 292,259 Reitursement for fringe benefits Special Revenue fund General fund, General fund General hind General fund General fund Measure A Westem County Special Frevenue fund Measure A Westem County . Special Revenue fund Nonmajor 'Governmental fund Measure A Westem County Special Revenue fund Measure A Coachella Valley Special Revenue fund TUMF Spedal. Revenue fund Nonmajor Governmental fund Commercial Paper Capital Projectsfund - • TUMF Special Revenue Fund Nonmajor Governmental fund Convnercial Paper Capital Projects fund 236,058 Reimbursement for arbitrage rebate 8,342 Reimbursement for fringe benefits 70,431 Reimbursement for fringe boleti& 73,550 Reimbursement for fringe benefits 398 Reimbursement for staff and legal costs 330,000 Reimbursement to Measure A for TUMF project advance 520,538 Reimbursement to Measure'A for various rail projects 20 Rehnbursement for staff and legal costs Total due fromito other funds $ 1,531,596 . 28 60 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2006 Note 5. Interfund Transactions, Continued Interfund Transfers: During 2006, interfund transfers were as follows::., Transfers Out General fund Measure A Western County Special Revenue fund Measure A Western County Special Revenue fund Measure A Coachella Valley Special Revenue fund .:. Measure A Coachella Valley Special Revenue fund Debt Service fund Nonmajor Governmental fund Transfers In General fund Debt Service fund General fund Debt Service fund Nonmajor Governmental fund Nonmajor Governmental fund Nonmajor Governmental fund Total transfers Note'6. Long-term Obligations The following is a summary of the changes in long-term obligations for the year ended June 30, 2006: 7,89E1,377 Debt service related to highways and regional arterials for Coachella Valley Transfer of restricted investment balances ,I 80 : Transfer of restricted invesbnent balances. 262,800 Call box program aug nentatfon of^heeway service patrol operations Amount $ 6,092 Explanation Reimbursement for fringe benefits 26,113,649 Debt service related to highways and commuter rail for Western County . 236,058 Reimbursement for arbitrage rebate 27 Bonds payable Commercial papernotes Capital lease obligation Contract payable Compensated absences Total long-term obligations' Balance July,1, 2005 Additions $ 124,335,000 $ 30,005,000 55,009 4,100,000 481,218 319,406 $ 158,976,227 $ 319,406 Reductions $ (28,640,000) . (29,418) (1.000,000) (247,146) " $ (29,916,564) Balance Due %Malin June 30, 2006 i, One Year $ 95,695,000'1 $ 30,200,000 . 30,005,000' 25,5914 25,591 3,100,000: .1,000,000 • 553,478, 179,766 $ 129,379,069" $ 31,405,357 Bonds payable; Under the, provisions of the 1989 Measure A, as amended by; Ordinance No. 92-1 (Measure AA), the Commission has the ;authority to, issue bonds subject to a bond debt limitation of $525,000,000. Under the provisions of the 2009 Measure A, the Commission has the authority to issue bonds subject to a bond debt limitation of $500,000,000. The following is summary of bonds issued and secured by Measure A revenues: Amount 'Outstanding 2000 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limfted Tax Bonds), Series A; In July 2000, the Commission issued serial bonds in the principal amount of $35,825,000 to fund various major, highway projects. Net proceeds amounted to $35,934,149, inclusive of premium of $109,148 and net of accrued interest. The bonds mature in annual installments of $2,975,000 to $4,785.000 on Various dates through June 1; 2009 with interest rates ranging from 4.25% to 5.25%. The Commission posted a suretybond in lieu of crash reserve in the amount of $3,582,500. $ 13,680,000 - 29 Riverside County, Transportation Commission Notes to Flnandal.Statements June 30, 2006 . Note 6. Long-term Obligations, Continued 1997 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A: In August 1997, the Commission issued serial bonds in the principal amount of.$47,910,000 to retire outstanding commensal paper notes of $41,200,000 and to fund various major highway projects. Net proceeds amounted to $48,055,659,inclusive of premium of $263,196 and net of accrued interest The bonds mature in annual installments of $2,490,000'tc $5,115,000 on various dates through June 1, 2009 vrith interest' rates ranging from 17% to 5.25%. The Commission posted a surety bond in fieu of cash reserve in the amount of $4,791,000. Portions of the bonds are subject to early redemption; at the option of the Commission beginning June 1, 2007. 1997 Junior Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds), Series B: In August 1997, the Commission issued subordinated serial bonds in the, principal amount of $13,245,000 to retire . - outstanding commercial paper notes of $2,800,000 and to fund various beat streets and roads projects. Net proceeds amounted to $13,223,717, inclusive of premium of $11,016 and net of accrued interest. The bonds mature in annual installments of $745,000 to $1,405,000 on various dates through Jose 1, 2009 with interest rates ranging from 3.75% to'5.0%. The Commission posted a surety bond in lieu of cash reserve in the amount of $1,324,500. Portions of the bonds are subject to early redemption, at the option of the Commission beginning June 1, 2007. 1996 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds); Series Ai In January 1996, the Commission issued serial bonds in the principal amount of $61,765,000 to refund a<portion of the 1991 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A. Net proceeds amounted to $66,252,576,;inclusive of premium of $4,487,576 and net of aaxued interest The bonds mature in annual instalfinents of $45,000 to $10,030,000 on various dales through June 1, 2009 with interest rates ranging from 3.75% to 6.0%. The Commission posted a surety bond of $3,251,625 in lieu of a portion of the required reserve amount of $4,485,000: The proceeds from the refunding bonds and a forward float contract provided_ by a major bank were placed in an irrevocable escrow fund consisting of United States Treasury Obligations. ' At June 30, 2006, there were no refunded sales tax bonds outstanding. 1993 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A: In January 1993, the Commission issued serial bonds in the principal amount of $136,610,000 to finance certain highway and rail projects and Coachella Valley regional arterial projects. Net proceeds after original discount amounted to $135,448,305. The bonds mature .in annual installments and require sinking fund payments of . $5,910,000 to $12,295,000 on various dates through June 1, 2009 with interest rates ranging from 4.625% to 6.0%. The required reserve amount is,$14,150,796. Annual debt service requirements to maturity for bonds payable are as follows: Years Endinn June 30 2007 2008 2009 Total debt service • 62 Principal interest $ 30,200,000 31,865,000 33,630,000 $ 95,695,000 $ 5,274,945 3,608,120 1,843,358 $ 10,726,423 Amount Outstanding 14,650,000 28,425,000 34,915,000 $ 95,695,000 Total $ 35,474,945 35,473,120 35,473,358 $ 106,421,423 30 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2006 Note 6. Long-term Obligations, Continued Commercial paper notes payable: The Commission has authorized the issuance of tax-exempt commercial paper notes in an amount not to exceed $100,000,000 for the primary purpose of financing costs of certain highway and commuter rail projects under the 1989 Measure A. As of June 30, 2006, the; Commission had no outstanding commercial paper, notes related to the 1989 Measure A In February 2005, the Commission authorized the issuance of tax-exemptcommercial paper notes; in an amount not to exceed $200,000,000 for,'the primary purpose of financing right of way and rritigation land acquisition and project development costs of capital projects under the 2009 Measure A. In April 2005, the Commission issued commercial paper notes of $30,005,000. The commercial paper moths are expected to berefinanced with sales tax revenue bonds in or prior to fiscal 2009. The source of revenue to repay the commercial paper notes and any: subsequent" long-term debt refinancing is the 2009 Measure A sales tax. Interest is payable on the respective, maturity' dates of the commercial paper notes; whichts up to 270:days from the date of issuance. The mardmum allowable interest rate on the commercial paper;notes is 12%, with issuance rates at June 30, 2006 ranging from 3.3% to 3 58%. As a requirement for the issuance of the commercialpaper notes, the Commission entered into a $1900 000,000 irrevocable direct (haw letter of credit and reimbursement agreement with a financial institution as credit and'liquidity support for the commercial paper rates. Funds maybe drawn under the letter of credit to pay debt service on the commercial paper notes', in the event that the commercial paper dealers are unable to market 'commercial paper notes at the maturity dates of the outstanding commercial paper notes. Amounts drawn on the letter of credit are not due until expiration of the letter of credit in March 2010. Accordingly, the commercialpaper notes are classified as long-term debt in the Commission's financial statements. The Commission did not draw on this letterof: credo authorization during•the year ended June 30, 2006, norwere there any amounts outstanding under this letter of credit agreement at June 30, 2006: Capital lease obligation: The Commission has entered into a lease agreement for financing the acquisition of office equipment. This lease agreement qualifies as a capital lease for accounting purposes and, therefore, has been recorded at the present,value of its future minimum lease payments. The office equipment yak* of $139,243 is recorded as a capital asset in the governmental activities. Total future minimum lease obligations and the net present value of these minimum lease payments as of June 30, 2006 are follows: Total minimum lease payments for year ending June 30, 2007 Less amount representing interest Present value of minimum lease payments Total $ 26,142 (551), $ 25,591 Contract payable: In December 2003, the Commission entered into an,agreernent with ;CVAG and the .city of Rancho Mirage to reimburse CVAG$6,100,000 from Measure A Coachella Valley highway moneys for costs pad to the city of Rancho Afiirage related to a completed slate highway project Under the agreement, .the Commission will pay CVAG over a six -year period: As of June 30, 2006, the annual contract payments are as follows: 31 • Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, nos Note 6. Long-term Obligations, Continued Years Ending June 30 2007 2008 2009 Total contract payments Total $ 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,100,000 $3,100,000, Arbitrage Rebate: The Tax Reform Act of,1986 instituted certain arbitrage restrictions with respect to the issuance of tax-exempt bonds after August 31,1986. In general, arbitrage regulations deal with the investment of all tax-exempt bond proceeds at an interest yield greater than the interest yield paid to. bondholders: Failure to follow the arbitrage regulations could result in all interest paid to bondholders retroactively rendered taxable. In accordance with the arbitrage regulations, if excess earnings were calculated; 90% of the amount calculated would be due to the Internal Revenue Service at the end of each five-year period. The remaining 10% would be recorded as a liability and paid after all bonds had been redeemed. During the current year, the Commission performed calculations of excess investment eamings on several of the bond financings. A liability of $236,058, which has been. included in accounts payable for the General fund, resulted from one of thecalculations for the various issues and was paid in July 2006. Note 7. Net Assets and Reserved and Designated Fund Balances Net Assets: The govenment-wide statement of net assets reports $442,129,220 of restricted assets; of which $215,514,436 is restricted by enabling legislation. Measure A: Measure A sales tax revenues are allocated to the three defined geographic areas of Riverside County, consisting of Western County, Coachella Valley, and "Palo Verde Valley in proportion to the funds generated within those areas: Revenues must then be allocated to the programs of the geographic areas according to percentages as . defined by Measure A and are legally restricted for applicable program expenditures. Bond and commercial paper note proceeds are allocatedto the geographic areas based on the estimated uses. Accordingly, the related fund balances are reserved as follows: Highways, commuter rail, and accounts and loans receivable: Funds for state highways are to be used for project oasts including engineering, right of way acquisitions, and construction. Such funds are intended to supplement existing federal and state resources. Commuter rail projects anticipate the use of existing rail lines, and funds are used for costs related to planning, capital improvements, right of way purchase, andlor use -rights agreements. Amounts advanced to the State and to certain cities under funding agreements are reflected in fund balance as reserved for advances to other governments and loans receivable, respectively. Debt service: Certain bond proceeds have been used to make required sinking fund payments in the. Debt Service fund as required by the bond agreements. Amounts held by the trustee equal to the maximum annual. debt service are recorded in the Debt Service fund. Local streets and roads: Funds are expended by local jurisdictions for the construction, repair, and, maintenance of local streets and roads. The County and local cities are required to supplement those expenditures with other previously dedicated revenue sources to maintain road improvements. Monies are disbursed to the jurisdictions which comply with the requirement to maintain the same level of funding for streets and roads as existed just prior to the passage of the 1989 Measure A and which annually submit a five-year capital improvement plan. 32 64 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to financial Statements June 30, 2006 Note 7. Reserved and Designated Fund Balances, Continued Regional arterials: Funds .for regional arterials are used to implement the planned regional arterial system, as defined, by CVAG, in the Coachella Valley. Funds are matched by Traffic Uniform Mitigation Feerevenues generated in the Coachella Valley. Commuter assistance and specialized transportation: Funds for specialized transportation are used to promote and subsidize commuter assistance programs such as ridesharing and tefecommuting and to 'guarantee reduced transit fares, expand: existing transit services, and implement new transit services, for seniors and persons with disabilities. Additionally, CVAG has elected to use a portion of the Coachella Valley local streets' and roads funds to provide additional funding for busreplacement or other transit programs that will improve air quality. . Transportation' Uniform Mitigation Fee: TUMF revenues of $400 million to be 'received by the Commission are, to be used for new CETAP corridors and the regional arterial system in Western County and are reserved as follows: CETAP: Funds for the development of newtransportation corridors are used to provide congestion relief and mobility within the County and between the County and its neighboring Orange and San Bernardino counties. Funds will be matched by revenues of $370 million generated from the 2009 Measure A. Regional arterials: Funds forregional arterials are used to implement the planned regional] arterial system, as defined in the 2009 Measure A, in the Western County. Funds will be matched by revenues of $300 mullion generated from the 2009 Measure A. Transportation: Development Act: Reserves for the Local Transportation Fund represent the ,unclaimed apportionments relates to claims for transk programs, the rmexpired allocations available for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, prepaid transit allocation, and earned but not received revenues: Expired allocations of:$731,709 related to bicycle and pedestrian projects are unreserved and designated in the Local Transportation Fund: Reserves for the State Transit Assistance represent the unclaimed apportionments related to claims for transit The TDA reserves at June 30, 2006 are as follows: Local Transportation State Transit Fund Assistance Total Bicycle and pedestrian facilities $. 2,167,565 $ — $ 2,167,565 Transit and specklized transportation Western County: Bus transit: City of Banning $ $ 64,708 $ 64,708 City of Beaumont 760,500 214,577 975,077 City of Corona 102,000 243,600 345,600 Riverside Transit Agency 6,2139,671 1,242,410 7,532,081 . Apportioned? and unaitocated. 24,354,611 "`1,852,883 26,207,194 Commuter rail: • Riverside County Transportation Commission Z577,84,5 — 2577,845 Apportioned and unallocated 19,616,908 1,298,456 20,915,364 Total Western County' 53,701,535 ' 4,916,634 58,618,169 33 65 Ftiverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2006 . Note 7. Reserved and Designated Fund Balances, Continued Local Transportation Fund State Transit Assistance Total Coachella Valley: SunLine Transit Agency 2,655,949 — 2,655,949 Apportioned and unallocated 4,219,668 478,611 4698279 Total Coachella Valley 6,875,617 478,611 7,354,228 Palo Verde Valley Bus Transit: Palo Verde Valey Transit 11,109 11,109 Apportioned and unallocated 821,004 67,281 888,285 Total Palo Verde Valley 832,113 67,281, ' 899,394 Unapportioned carryover 12,393440 — 12,393,440 ' Total transit and specialized transportation $ 73,802,705 $, 5,462,526 $ 79,265,231 Commuter rail: Reserves represent TDA monies in the General fund to be used for commuter rail operations. Planning and programming: Reserves represent TDA monies in the General fund to be used for planning and programming services. Property management: Reserves represent highway and rail lease moniesto be used: for the management of. Commission properties. Prepaid amounts: Reserves represent amounts related to prepaid" expenditures that are not available for appropriation. motorists on County roads. Note 8. Commitments and Contingencies Operating lease: The Commission has entered into an operating lease agreement for office facilities. The terrn of the tease is for a period of ten years expiring on October 30, 2012 and may extended for two additional five-year terms. Rental expenditures for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006 were $327,065. The total minimum rental commitment at June 30, 2006 is due as follows: Motorist assistance: The Commission has designated unexpended 'funds in the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies and Freeway Service Patrol Special Revenue funds of $4 257,768 and $756,315, respectively, to assist 34 66 Riverside. County Transportation Commission Rotes to Financial Statements June 30, 2006 Note 8. Commitments and Contingencies, Continued Year Ending June 30 Anoint 2007 $ 332,625 2008 338,279 2009 344,030 2010 349,879 2011 355,826 2012-2013 361,876 Total minimum rental commitment Forward delivery agreement: The Commission has entered into debt service fund forward delivery agreements with the trustee for the 1993 and 1998 sales tax revenue, bonds and a German banking instihrtion'. The agreements require the bank to deliver and the trustee to purchase U.S. Treasury obligations for the 1993 and 1996 sales revenue bonds debt service reserve funds. Under the agreements, the bank will pay an annual fee to be deposited in the reserve funds equal to 6.00% of the amounts required to be in these reserve funds, which required amounts aggregate $15,926,000. The purpose for these agreements is to assure the. Commission that the yield on each reserve fund is not less than the related bond yield. $ 2,082,515. Real property and project agreements: Measure A has entered into other agreements in the ordinary course of business with companies and other governmental agencies for the acquisition of seal property as well as the, engineering and construction of certain highway and commuter rail projects. Litigation: Certain. claimsinvolving -disputed construction costs have arisen in the, ordinary, course of business. Additionally, the Commission is a defendant in lawsuits. Although the outcome of these matters is not presently determinable, management does not expect that the resolution of these matters will have a material adverse impact on the financial condition of the Commission. Local Transportation. Fund and State Transit Assistance Fund: The Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and the Sunline,Transit Agency, (collectively, the Agencies), major transit providers: for the County of Riverside; obtained available lease financing for taus acquisitions through the proceeds from certificates of participation; issued by the Califomia Transit Finance Corporation (Corporation) for each agency. Local Transportation Funds and State Transit Assistance Funds, to the extent of the Agencies' eligible share, along with other federal and state funds were pledged as support for the Agencies' lease payments to the Corporation. For the year ended Jane, 30, ,2006, 'there was no State Transit Assistance Fund revenue expended for lease payments; however, Local Transportation Fund revenue of $412,675 was expended for lease payments by RTA. Project Funding Advances. In January 2006, the Commission authorize the TUMF Special Revenue fund to advance $3,114,600 to the State to replace state and federal funding for the State Route (SR). 91/Green River interchange project In December 2004, the Commission authorized the TUMF Special Revenue fund to advance $13,046,000 to the State to replace state and federal funding for the SR-60 widening project from Interstate 15 to Valley Way. The final agreement with the State resulted in a reduction of the Commission's commitment to $8,881,000. As of June 30, 2006, $1,112,171 had been advanced to the State from the TUMF Special Revenue fund for the SR- 60 widening project; there were no advances related to the SR-91 interchange project. The advances are to be repaid in the form of a commitment of future State funding on TUMF projects, and, accordingly, the advances of $1,112,171 during the year ended June 30, 2006 were recorded as expenditures of the,TUANF Special Revenue fund. 35 67 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2006 Note 9. Joint Agreements Joint Venture The Commission is one of five members of the. Southern Califormia Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), a joint powers authority created in June 1992. The SCRRA's board consists of one member from the Ventura County Transportation Commission; two eachfrom the Orange County Transportation Authority, -the San Bernardino :Associated Govemments, and the Commission; and four members from the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. The SCRRA is responsible for implementing and operating a regional commuter rail system (Metrolink) in five southern California counties. As a menter of SCRRA, the Commission makes capital and; operating contributions for its pro rata share of rail lines servicing the County. The Commission expended $5,502,490 during 2006 for its share of Metrofink,capital and operating costs. As of June 30, 2006, cumulative capital contributions were $26,584,557. Other funds for rail service are contributed to the SCRRA by State from state rail bonds on behalf of the Commission. Separate financial statements are prepared by and available from the SCRRA, which is located at 700 N. Flower Street, 26w Floor, Los Angeles, California 90017. Cooperative Agreement In May 2006 the Commission entered into a cooperative agreement, Riverside Orange Corridor Authority, with OCTA and the Transportation 'Corridor Agenciesto jointly exercise the common powers of the parties to manage geotechnical studies regarding the Riverside Orange Corridor. The Commission is the recipient and administering entity of federal and state funds as may necessary to accomplish this work, and the three agencies will share in meeting the local agency ntamhing requirements. As of June 30, 2006, the Commission was not required to make any contributions. Note'10. Employees' Pension Plans Public Employees' Retirement System The Commission contracts with the State of California Public EmploYees' Retirement System (PERS) to provide its employees retirement as well as death and retirement disability benefits, which are paid by the PERS under a cost sharing multiple -employer plan. Copies of the PERS' annual financial report maybe obtained from its executive office located at 400 P Street, Sacramento, California 95814. Through the June 30, 2003 valuation, the PERS plan was an agent multiple -employer retirement plan. ,Effective July 1, 2003, due to the Commission having less than 100 active members, the Commission's. PERS plan was converted from an agent multiple-empoyer plan (former plan) to a cost sharing multiple -employer. plan. The toner plan is an aggregationof single employer plans, where separate accounts are maintained for each employer and contributions by the employer benefit only the employees of the employer. Under this plan, separate actuarial valuations are performed for each employer, and the results are attributed to and accounted br by the employer. The cost sharing multiple -employer plan is a poofahg arrangement whereby risks, rewards, and benefit costs are shared and not attributed individually to any single employer. Periodic employer pension expense can be significantly different between the plan types. The change to the pooling arrangement was initially effective for the Commission's required contribution rate during the fish year ended .June 30, 2006. At the time of joining the risk pool under the cost -sharing multiple-empbyer plan, a side fund (the amount that the Commission would owe PERS if it exfted'the plan) was created to account for the difference between ;the funded status of the pool and the funded status of the Conrntssion's plan. As, of the .June 30, 2004 valuation (most current valuation available), the estimated amount of the side fund fiability was $1,674,689. 36 68 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2006 Note 10. £mployees' Pension Plans, Continued All permanent Commission employees are eligible to participate in the System. Employees attaining the age of 55 with five years of: credited Califomia service (service) are eligible for normal retirement and are entitled to a monthly benefit of 2.7% of their final compensation for each year of service. Final compensation is defined as the highest annual salary eamed. Retirement may begin at age 50 with a reduced benefit rate._ The plan alsolcredits employees for unused sick leave. Upon separation from the plan prior to retirement, members' accumulated c:ontr butions are refundable with interest credited through the date of separation: The Commission pays the employees' required contribution of 8% of regular;eamings. New employees hired after. November 28, 2002 are responsible for 1% of the 8% required contribution. The Commission is required to contribute , the remaining amounts necessary to fund the benefits of its members, using the actuarially determined rate, which was 21`.739% for the fiscal year ended June 30 2006. Three-year trend information for PERS: Annual Required_ Fiscal Year Contribution Ended June 30 (ARC) 2006 $ 679856 2005 491,316 2004 407,677 Percentage of ARC Net Pension Contributed' . Obligation. 100%. _ $ 100%' — 100% _ 401(a) plan: The Commission offers its employees a 401(a) defined contribution plan referred to as the Money Purchase Plan & Trust (Plan), which covers all permanent full-time employees: Employees are fully vested in the Plan after fire years. The Plan, which is administered by the International .City/County Management Association (ICMA), requires the Commission to `make a contribution of 7.5% of the employees' earnings for the Plan year. Fiduciary responsibility and reporting of the Plan assets rests with ICMA. The Commission has the authority to amend the contribution requirements. Total payroll for covered employees for the current year was $2,196,240. The ` Commission's contributions to the Plan were $167,495 for the year ended June 30, 2006. Note 11. Postretirement Health Care Per Resolution of the Board, the Commission` provides postretirement Health benefits for eigible'refirees and their dependents at retirement. For employees hired prior to July 12, 2000, retirees must have no less'ihan five years of System service. For empbyees hired on or after July 1.2, 2000, retirees must have a minimum of 10 years of System service and no less than !Eve years of Commission service in order to receive postretiremeM health benefits in accordance with the System. Currently; seven retirees meet these eligibitity requirements and are receiving benefits. The Commission contributes $600 per month toward premiums for retiree health insurance that is coordinated with Medicare and other benefits provided by federal and state law, when avatiable,,to the extent it 'reduces the cost of insurance premiums. Expenditures for post -retirement health care benefits are funded .on,a pay-as-you-go basis. Expenditures of $3,7,897 wens incurred for post -retirement health care costs for the year ended June 30, 2006. As indicated in Note 14, the GASB issued Statement No 45 to address the accaanting and disclosure treatment for this., type' of plan. Effective with the fiscal year ending June 30, 2008, the Commission will be required to recognize post retirement health care costs on an accrual basis over period approximating t he;employees' years of. service and to provide information about actuarial accrued liabitities associated with these benefits and whether and to what extent progress is being made in funding the plan: 69 37 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2006 Note 12. Measure A Conformance Requirements Measure A requires that the sales taxes collected may only be used for transportation purposes including administration and the construction, capital acquisition, maintenance, and operation of streets, roads, highways including state highways, and public transit systems and for related purposes. These purposes include expenditures for planning, environmental reviews, engineering and design costs, and related right of way acquisition. Note 13. Subsequent Events As a means to achieve a greater level of interest rate stability in connection with an anticipated variable rate debt refinancing of the Commission's commercial paper programin 2009, the Commission entered .into two forward - starting interest rate swaps in August 2006 for a total notional amount of $185,000,000. The counterparty for the first swap ($100,000,000 notional amount) is Bank of America, N.A., and the counterparty for the second swap ($85,000,000 notional amount) is Lehman Brothers Derivative Products Inc. Under the swap agreements which become effective in October 2009, the Commission will pay the caunterparties a fixed rate of 3.679% for twenty years, the expected term of the variable rate debt to be issued in 2009; the counterparties will pay the Commission a floating rate equal to 67% of the one -month London Interbank Offer Rate (LIBOR). The interest rate swaps are, among other things, subject to credit, basis, and termination risk. The credit and termination risks have been mitigated with collateral posting requirements by the counterparty in the event of a ratings downgrade below a specified threshold. Upon issuance of the variable rate debt in 2009, basis risk is expected to be mitigated with a variable rate paid to bond holders that approximates the 67% of one -month LIBOR to be received from the counterpa ties. Accordingly, the interest rate swaps effectively create synthetic fixed rate debt for the Commission. The swap policy adopted by the Board requires tie Commission to calculate the fair termination values of its swaps at least semi-annually. The calculation of the fair termination value takes into consideration the•prevailkhg interest rate environment, the specific terms and conditions of a given transaction, and any upfront payments that were received, if any. Fair valuations of termination values are realized only if the swaps were to be terminated at the valuation date, and only the Commission retains the right to optionally terminate most of the transactions. Note 14. Pronouncements Issued, Not Yet Effective The GASB issued a pronouncement prior to June 30, 2006 that has an effective date that may impact future financial presentations. Management has not currently determined what, if any, impact implementation of the following statements may have on the financial statements of the Commission. • GASB Statement No. 45, Accounting and Financial -Reporting by Employers for Postemploymenf Benefits Other Than Pensions. 3 70 Required Supplementary Information 71 8C ' 04.4mmrp1, 999uuugtldnP1r1t., tofu 490 91CY10'861 t 11240L31 S - 1110041:91 4 - 490•06Z1 t matP pop .irmapq mi 6M'►Ws, BBO�Sf! r— 1t0'EYLYSL 00ttal PP410 UPON m+1004R0904H 90909Lit ! 091'912'9L; IOOIYN'2) 4 (*Mtn) 9 Weal s aiL1st's. IOtI'SCA 9 sot '16l ! ILLZtris t stem's: tooYett) t loot9t!'o0 S set%vL t eL9tot Wrist�tNY 9S team WryP APPPP 1000110 • 004191'6 C09'491'6 If)_ f101'98t'e) Iwr'esia) (oovsforD *OW' i O9t'ess10 (oonartL) (osclia s) 4901C2 91091Z - (eeen1 pomp 11498889P10 Pm1 - 009901 - - (099'91.9) fo09's18) ft) Gale/t) (o0Ys8el) lotttse'0 saa'ss2'l (e0!'ents) (oOeYet'LZI txt'tss'is) toll ten) • mouePwl (000'000'00 - oalotott oso'Oocrot - - - (009919) - ON'110 0o991e 09VPZ OS rat • ul suou - - 91001111 099'09911 - - .g11e manta BIBS 9109e1 sawn e'ptigy9181Dt) 09019(68 991912'41 toott1t'el1 Woe until LN'el9't. us' Zti'tl sonnet ossse09 Z2921e81 /iron.* sti91t9N .000,11'91 9E8'000 asti1 ItlVestl .94Y1191 tedpPpdN Olpu0) uem NOW& m WN4Wol Wag 113.01N'LS Z6t19011. =teen, 0009LL'09 Woos 09YOLYeZ °tints& ooC'SN'9t tN'N29t I(YLet91 sot'CstYZI Dos '4S9'1ri est'tws oonto1I 0stE tt9l 1/1019'91 14991109091PPI . - DNYI 019191 00911Z 0070tt P1111.1 11119 020'901 911101 MVP411090 LSs'its 1002001 929'6081 0011811 N0909!4190prauuAw74994 L41 C10992 . 090'992 01PCS 18HIM1BBPPPl Zt 9901ZZ 001'91Z 111 O9818 PO/ • 41 99111 1001 /01'I ' - Pulp aswawa trYttt'l9 2Ct19911. ooitt£'tt 000Woo otf/0t attires ottent'e2 OOCorn ►19YK'e8 L90•01991 901'910V21 009110'021 . Llrtt•el 9991141'n stag oo6ZEttl ' a atm Rol NW 810'991'6 008'19L: OutYBlt 91r91.1 LZO'Heit m1111 0010111 BC9ZC IZ3991 Malt 00111Z uopgl99119e4PIM.* Pa41w1 /99101'91 eWiti'H oo0Yi9Y9 calm% tan 904.Oss'Ol OOSITC'Ol 000Z19'II - gaygspuq88a .•- nee& PAM 90201 00L'ISP ivataleelNu Aulead - - Ke'NZ't 110991 009'9111 00t'61I't Ouwuulotl Pm 09W4d' Pew MVOStl ott•2tl'Cl QOC'esZ'tl Nt'Ltl t6H'HOL'sf oot'Lto9t (Worn • itaa PnlINIP 41221. LBL'1lt Llt'BO9't WisLi oaten SdtCM sttYtOiZ 0909t'es (Nte6Z9 • - slam* Latin' ttiotla oat'snYti oaatt'91 dieter BOGY92'L 00E1%1 coreitL mu lti0mo • - • Woe ZtftNZ 0094C9t oorraKt eonvimmruNo �. Lintel Ce9'ett'C _ tonal Watt - - - dr13o tee919 etl'tel't se4'BILY OteLLOY tie'9tZ SWOPS st0'LetY tottLt't odor ees'ilt wrest 991'096 . ZL1102 19S'LCL 0991601. 909'410'1 °t tt ILItN'L ►LYLet'L ants% 1110091101011 FPl APO BBBM 89910 1110191194019114104 91991N9 pismauso 1111P411 PP wan 0114044911111.1 Immo . 11104 ut143 • settees, Weals ooeses'N oorret'tt ta9'Btit 1oe'2st'01 ootteYLB NIZLt'ss Vis'LtYes) te2YL6tit 009'PPP' oartn'tet flNtetti t20't4t91 sts'9Zo•9t *stunt ttnuwlP01 . - - ' (99l) st0'oft't ooYott't torect3 LoYs01 Watt arts' title; torsos torso 1100 s lts tontot o0ettl'l 000tte't as'e8 L2YNZ ooe'm 008'1t1 210t91 011191 COt'rtlZ OOftit't atm trrtzt • r90LCN ' te0't6Z PsItt4 Isee'iet'ssl LeIZ/oi solute milt:vet two artle4'l ocelt9'i °Weal Mu1WuolAeNum • tislar'sf stelass OOO9t9'91 Ot0'92e'4t - Red imam pwoWn 0449604 - $ - 9 - t • 9 Was S tsttent s toolit'ss s Ooobali s 6N92LL 9 stste091t t too•tet'lot t tensile S. (tstlist t intuit t 9tt'res'4l ! 00L9/911. ! - toraNPt ONO* PuPr mOPte. ' Peone *Peet PP?r P4110e PBPue *peen) Pemr moons 188pne (Npeeela men Peons POone Pt1Nd PW P11840 1411P0d Pub. P10890 BplPed Pub P111840 WPM Pub P OPO PIP/8 Pub PIPS Pula mepllg Pub meone Peb 491*44481eA _ 1ppANNtRA PP 1e11110 - PAPP/1914 Ni uowep9luuoAmn aoP iadeuul LBIPIIeIPWeop r uaenp N1ueo0 uttmeeiyemtws Poop enema PPedg ION* 894e Pemri nel 1peni e0uusa PPeds 1Wg1 WB PPM • PuPr Pus PBPue PPP onnd u1NONy9 PN BunrPuede3'NmwmN m 00I4 •410S MIVIAA100B 00•M ARA • Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Required Supplementary Information 'June 30, 2006 Budgetary Data In February of each year, department heads begin the process of compiling budget data for the upcoming fiscal year. Budget numbers along with supporting documentation are provided to the Chief Financial Officer by March 15. That budget data is compiled and presented to the Executive Director for review and approval and is submitted to the Budget and Implementation Committee at its April meeting. After review by the Budget and Implementation Committee, the proposed budget is scheduled for preliminary review and comment as well as public hearing at the Commission's May meeting. The final budget for the new fiscal year is then adopted by motion of the Board of Commissioners (Board) no later than June 15 of the current year. This appropriated budget covers substantially all Commission expenditures by financial responsibility unit (i.e., General and Measure A special revenue) by fund, except for the Local Transportation Fund as a budget is not legally required for this fund. The Measure A Special Revenue fronds for the three county areas (Western, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley) are adopted as a single budget All appropriated amounts are as originally adopted or as amended by the Commission. Unexpended appropriations lapse at year-end. All budgets are adopted on a Isis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. As adopted by the Board, expenditure activities of the funds with adopted budgets are controlled at the: budgetary unit, which is the financial responsibility level, for each function (Le., administration, programs, intergovernmental distributions, and capital outlay). These functions provide the legal level of budgetary control (i.e., .the level at which expenditures cannot gally exceed the appropriated amount). Management has the discretion to transfer the budgeted amounts within the financial responsibility unit according to function: Supplemental budget appropriations were necessary during the year. 40 73 Other Supplementary Information . 74 Riverside County Transportation Commission Nonmajor Governmental Funds Description Special Revenue Funds Measure A Palo Verde Valley: This fund is used to account for the revenues from sales taxes which are restricted to expenditures for Palo Verde Valley programs and activities. Freeway Service Patrol: This fund is used to record the revenues received for the purpose of implementing a freeway service patrol for motorists. Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies: This fund is used to record the revenues received from Department of Motor Vehicle user registration fees for the purpose` of implementing an emergency call box system for motorists. State Transit Assistance: This fund is used to account for revenues from sales taxes on gasoline restricted for transit projects. Capital Projects Fund Measure A Western County: This fund is used to account for sales tax revenue bond proceeds used for Westem County highway projects. 41 75 i Assets Cash and Investments Receivables: Accounts Interest Due from other funds Prepaid expenditures Restricted Investments held by trustee _Total assets rn:• Liabilities and fund balances Liabilities: Accounts payable Due to other funds Other liabilities Total liabilities Fund balances: Reserved for, Highways Local streets and roads Prepaid amounts Transit and specialized transportation Unreserved: Designated for motorist assistance Total fund balances Total liabilities and fund balances Riverside County Transportallommission Combining Balance Sheet • Nonmajor Governmental Funds June 30, 2006 Special Revenue Measure A Palo Verde Valley Freeway Service Patrol Service • Authority for Freeway Emergencies State Transit Assistance_ Capital Projects Measure A Total Western County Nonmajor • Capital Governmental Total Projects Funds $. _ 51,318 $ 226,632 $ 215,328 751,854 657 2,853 11_ 9,438 $ 267,303 $ 990,788 $ 215,329 $ 184,876. 38,792 1,367 4,007,929 $ 4,523,439 $ 8,809,318.' 343,777 1,417,777 2,728,736, 35,503 41,848 80,861 9 20 8,096 17,534 4,395,314 $ 5,983,064 $ 11,636,469 93,730 34,758 962 • $ 493,935- 520,538 594,088 2,329 1,931 $ 8,811,249 • 2,728,736 397 81,258 20 17,534 104,775 104,775 107,103 $ 11,743,572 493,935 594,088 2,329 215,329225,035: 51,974 129,450 520,538 1,090,352 • • 51,974 9,438 8,096 17,534 5,462,526 5,462,526 756,315 4,257,768 5,014,083 1,090,352 107,103 107,103 51,974 17,534 5,462,626 5,014,083. 51,974 765,753 $, 267,303 $. 990,788 $ 4,265,864 5,462,526 10,546,117. 107,103 10,653,220 4,395,314 : -$ 5,983,064` $ 11,636,469 $ 107,103 $ 11,743,572 42 Riverside County Transportation Commission Combining 6telement of Reverses, Exprimhdes, and Changes In Fu•nd Bilancee NorssejorGovemmentpl Funds .Tear Wed.: me 30.20011 Spada! Revenue Capkat.Projects "Tatal hteasmeA Freeway Service State Meawsek NonnrJor 'Palo Verde ; -Service Authority for. ' Transit Western County •GoverrneMal Valley Patrol - Freeway Errergerwka Assistance �` Total Capital Projects Funds • Sales tams . ,S 1691284 .',S - $ - $ 5.792,360 ':.S 6.80%744 S i,. •',,.S 66133.744 '. Intergovernmental 1.408,840 34 . .: - 1,408,874 1,400.874 - Interest . ' 2.828 • 9340 120,109 131,303. 263.578 0446 - 270,024 Vehicle mgistraGonuser lees - '" - %629687 1,629,087 - - 1,629,087 20 - 18.941 18,951 - - 18,961 Total re+enues . _ : 1,094,210 1418,2130 1.769,171 i 5,623,663. , 10,264,244 BA46 10,210.690 EmenAlures Current Salaries and tsrre9s 40,425 .34,350 74805 - 74.805 General legal motes :- 2731 2,589 5320 - 5.320 Protessbna1servkes 18.792 16,099 34.891 - 34,891 Ogeefe`ase -. - - 8,504 -"' 7293 - 15,797 _ - 15,797 OBmr - 22,870 - 19,640 - 42670 - 42,470 ToMi administrate to :, .. 83.322 79661 173,283 1 � - �' 14283 Programs: local ages and roads Motorist assistance . Transit and specialized transportation . Totalprogiams . Debt serifob e .. PmKipal .Interest ' Total debt service Capga outlay TotalesDendkres Excess (dencirniy) of revellers over (nodal emendlems Odrerenami gsarces(uses): Transfers bi Transfers and Taalogier Gnawing saurces(nscs) . 1,091,605 1,559.114 1,091,605 1,559314 1,1191605 721.532 _ 2,286646 . 4.367,463 _ - 4,387.463 721,532 4,387,410 7,759,714 1,091,605 -4.387,463 7,759,714 I; 765 1,421 1421 '. 51 44 95 .P5 816 _ 700 - 1,516 ,k - - 1.516 1,403 1,203 - . 2,608 2,606 _1,091.605 .. 1.654.655 803,396 4,387j463 s.. 7.937,119 ! - 7,937,119. 2,605" : 1236,455). 964.775 ' 1,519,700 ':. ' 2267,125 6,446'' 2273,571 282,800 . . 9626001 03528001 262,800 -(2152,800) 10r 262.907 - (252.800) 107 107 Net change in ford balances 2,605 26,345 701975 " 5,536,200 2,267,125 . ;; . 6,553 2273,670 Fund balancer al beginning of year t 49.369 730408 . 3,663689' ':': 362 326 8.270992 1013.550 ; 8,379.542 '. Fund baboons at end al year S 51,974 :. S 765.753S .: 4,265,864 S 5.462526: S1040117 S' ;; 107.103. S 10.653,220 77 921179t1 S WOT► t eet'sBt ! tla'te ! - mu(p PAPemM90PAd ' 9LC'9Zsf t19'E991 eirT.6“ 8956► umtp Ou0m18S0 PeeoueleC0u0d toolts'l S OOY9CS'L (Btetl t (001'1L9'll t L9t'196Y s . toriOt (20Visz'LI t 6tl'SlOt) t 4ti'sot t S9t'OL I90e'a11) t nL t, 90t'L s SOOT 00C1 s 006 t swan poole0uar) Y9i) ``009Y92) (00o'LCC} D0e'i9t 009Y9i 000ttZ Ow) name 0upuerynyp An 'i97J (oo9T9i) I000'tSa - - Pp 9mpuwl 001712 00919L 000'65Z wkiagol. .(ran) mart 9uptoupwp0 stroll oorocol (PITS) (001'Lt9'l) semis"' 4L/WS (i096109 (001Y90 . Stem (s4P'96L) (001'iot) (tirts'i) sal. min 00t1 000'l e9mpwsstesOwn) ADMeremlr p(bwpyep) sera 1t011/0l [9T/tt't 001.190'0 00t/14C [hill'. _ sores tle'e)St t9r{9L't 024P9t otrial metal -Raton sotto OOtiso'L 000ttil o00'6L0'1 9904'PAdn Pp! ISLY tot'',- isiet , t94T 2lrt t0►L Stt'o - OM - - tsPm01110e9 • ,1- 00/ -10/ 101, C 94t ell 819 Stll*9 WS FPI • tt It St L 19 Lf 29 - w9IRw • t 999 Ln 1st z 091 Lk 191 - liePwtd alit% COt'19tY DOs19s4 '009iLfet L IWI. ZCCLZL t+t'LIo1 009'Lo1T 9ot'si tl VacsL osolts'l DOo'e9Vi 48ttt S09'leTc e00'ett1 OOOt103 sumecud lwel Low' C9t'L99't ott'Lse's Otieli'C - ootowtooet pomp* put ;poi . .: LRtse'l Ztittt _ ►ol'L ill 00011Y - 9trS2 `-►11'64T1 OWIVI 000ns1 - mlQt1twlelwPl) :. - .. nets SOS'le0'l COOTC)'{ 000110t tpmlpw np9tp0vl 099'94 IWIIL item torso Sall Me Litz LL OMii1 - AA09wu!mPe19i01 - SL9'S 000.91 - 41t'02 t1132 este can 001ti HON wbp No% ter[ Lott - Care tort test 09L'6 09/'e 9I9e1 KW fel ee091 Stilt eletZ ten Mai Stitt t11'li Pgeupuepwldd • (toll sort elf stLT tot tea seat 189'L mom IOUPmo • ttri OONtt, tiOlt BOW Ina SZtbt LLI'to welt - swomIwo swoon shortiRsoloord 44000 (tent) 919Y.8'9 Zs4'1981-oo[tn't-"09919i &Slot'izit9Yl' litttt'i Style - ost'Blsl Ot0'tts'L wrote% (Doted - OLZ'too't ooecti'l OOt'ozol • 1401 - ion MO'S 0001 1096'06Z) 9t 030%6Z DO9'OGC •. • LtOSOZ L90Viel. 000'0'1:': 000.0291. • tottr toeitc ..... o0seo oo0tt tests soot' 1Lc69 Itlb9 too' IU Ott'6 Sett SZ9'ot 9ts't 0z9't - Ott% Mel • - - tt Pt - 0t9tet CtttOo'l °Drool 00z't00'L •. (Z81'LCL) t Gantt's t Ls9Yltt t Wiest t • s • t • t • t • t • t • t • t (919'00 t t98'1009 t• °Oaf1'1 t 000'610'1 t (wwtetd wept' I100041 POP09 1u000910 Mtn, PIPS 400000 fupetep) 10111011 100908 POPS (ee4100011) PON PePIIe 10E4913 e8pl0d Puld P0100 upped Puli ' 10010110 *4100d Po)! P41+0 0A911001 Pull 1•01000 *Pet Pull 191409 mould - P0P00 Pm bl 190009 PulA 101.09e001PA 49'mePPPA VIMSouilmA 1006001o12A mvw9PerAmu/01M wpualbaug kenvaivni10pe0PVmoms I021,1d•00,00 dmme4 ileum 00mAGlad V9lMeeN 900t tC'NT P0P08 m9A 91/904 e0wn011Ptpe0$ /00,00W-P1014, PAP0P09 em9e0e8 Pend ul 44000113 Pm mmllP000x3 we0000)1109101,00,8 e0109pAir0 000101e00011o1900000P10Agf i mumRai aao em)r,tn oolstorbi SPA lousy p0mmuxw81W4 SoM*g9B e0mmeed l 29L'814109 S careen!. S COL'LOt £019610"" S69'etto1C .091'001. Una) s oven 091169 s 991 f69 S xa'9£L'el S.(t14001g0 (92r1/144 s (009'teo'L) "s. iLe9'eSl f. £99'9 60V19 - S-o0Z'l9. f (iCj'in't) 9110'ef OOZ'f9/'Sf OOi199Sf (�' 004 ) 0 (att'tta'L1 960'6101£. OOL'£ee'se' oores/'9E • 00/000/9 00000019 t000100'00 (000'000'00 • 999'009'99 -990'90in; LOl L01 L0L LOl tta'sst'l (f99t£9'es) (OOL'6et'te) (OOL'fstlit) niest 99 (zts.to►'.e4 ter( (NIL) ((Al n g) (toles) ' sris OOL'L9 COS'ts I17) rerun 09- 006'09(910 00z'£91'S£ :s9f'Lzr'9s_ LZe'OES'4L. 9991991L 0oolu Zs (07.) OZZtettf OOr'f9/'S£ 00Z'ese'9e • tom/ selves 006'99e1 000'000'1. , 000t0i•- 900.(01 (06 OZVE19'9 OOZ'SYB'9:. 0OZ'ttf'9 h90'0£a watts 006'69'tt 000'G0s. Ooolnis SZ 000'0/9'12 C00'019'9Z . r09169'Ls tritL'11 99L'92L'OL 000'2/9'01 £69YZa'L Etrat't etll69 LEIN 000'09L'1 (ea) ea s(s'ssas a69'Z9sti 'C09'989'19 C00'ents ess$Z1'Z • 969Yt/'Z (160's6r) L60'96t (setts?)-set'est 191r1) 61'9en - Lf9'6ef't (101.169 - ()AMA 601'204 609'SZ9 - meStE 006 if t1511s) - 9aa'9 oor IA 00Z'L9 L£1'9Sr3 S L£91961. f:,.00t1f9 $ -ODi►69 - $ 606'609 $ "609'9E9 _$. 0099LE S Den tf -f tI9L'af) f s l f 00619„ $ (ee9e0e1e) Pn1OY y0209 1e0909 (sMaBaN) _ 110PY _.. - _ 1e02013 . _ _ ;aim .. (eHPOeN) PsieY _ WW1 - Merl -' en020e1 MITI leu!6pp. e0411e0d. Puii leel6pp +MPad , ' PO4 ROM 10017043isali — *P^81sui _ . - 7espn9loll _ - Jaded Ppueu00 - Aunoo WepeMY alnemw SOS: bS ounp Pep03 JssA - spunioOWoSNIopPee 10*MIstldeJ'1e0pY Po P0Pn9 maven pund u! Woo pue mmgpuedx31202ewd;a elnPeuaS • uol„Iewep uomodeosslAunop oppiony - - - Puna( nWeS meL P puete eeeuePA Puni ieeAtOOuwPAp 3e Seoul ePA Peni eee01e0PuO41e0unP3et4 .. (men) eelnoe emoung ALSO r1001 - NO volaunl. el SMOJeil . (manl sea002 &O eJR2p .. 0eptol ono mow° to(LovePWO) neon - . :. semp)wdn Mel a7902eP22P Ppl eovedsal)dieno - Paulin pdPWd :puss pep tum6ad PLOT 114192 Su!OouuOerd WB Squeak! PedpR geepe Pall dY130 ueSeaa!tewPQ 1401 - sselvee PBaPmWld sedum Peel ISM* ' :e0010 uPPY 22000093 wows Mal PAM ssnueeay e- Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Expenditures for Local Streets and Roads by Geographic Area = All Special Revenue Funds Year Ended June 30, 2008 Westem County: Cily of Banning $ 804,431 Cay of Beaumont - 540,279 City of Caknesa 203,733 City of Canyon Lake 269,759 City of Corona 5,349,140 City of Hemet 2,147,281 City of Lake Elsinore 1,225,427 CRr of Moreno Valley 4,658,854 City of Murrieta 2,611,20(3 City of Norco 976,824 City of Penis 1,373,109 Cay of Riverside 9,871,053 City of San Jacinto 745,999 C1y of Temecula 3,775,8,19 Riverside County 11,155,651 Other 1,336 45,709,934 Coachella Vey: City of Cathedral City 1,774,947 City of Coachella • 527,999 City of Desert Hot Springs 404,033 City of Indian Wells 243,257 City of Indio 1,696,281 City of Palm Desert • 2,800,718 -Cay of Palm Springs 1,987,470 City of Rancho Mirage 952,958 Riverside County . 1,902252 Coachella Valley Association of Governments 1,296,935 Other 1,274 Palo Verde Valley: City of Blythe . Riverside County Other Total local streets and roads expendkures 80 13,588,124 846,997 244,387 221 1,091,605 $ 60,389,663 Rhersire County Transportation Commssion Schedule of Expenditures for Transit and Specialized Transportation by Geographic Area and Source - Ad Special Revenue Funds Year Ended June 30, 2006 Sales Taxes Local State Transportation Transtt " Meas'ureA. fund Assistance Total Western County: Beaumont Unified School District $ 29,024 $ $ : $ . 29,024 BAndnessSupport Services, Inc. 65,342 65,342 Care -A -Van 210,000 210,000 Can: Commis 130;000 13Q000 City of Banning 974,937 974,937 City ofCorona 1,128,133 55,000: .1.183,133 . City of Norco 17,843 17,843 City of Riverside 2,353,409 101,000 ' 2,454,409 Exceed, Inc. 91.600 91,600 Diversified Paratransit Inc: 11,410 - 11,410 Friends of the Moreno Valley Senior Citizens 56,680 56,680 Inland Aids Project 95,425 95,425 Partnership 10 Preserve Independent Living for Seniors and Persona wail Disabilities 340,698 - . 340,698 Riverside County Transportation Commission 7,115,002 350,000 7,465,002 Riverside Transit Agency (1,203) 27,711,931 1,717,186 29,427.914 TransTrack 114,750 114,750 Volunteer Center of Greater Riverside 91,010 91,019 Whiteside Manor, Inc. 17,845 17,845 Other 83,353 83,353 Coachella Valley: SunLine Transit Agency TransTrack Palo Verde Vary: Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency TransTrack . Other Total transit and speddized transportation axpendthms - 47 81' 1,239,027 39,398,162 2223,186 42,860,375 3,764.919 12,821,503 2070,872 18,657,294 19,125 19,125 . 3,764,919 `. 12 840,628 `2,070,872 18,676,419 694,131 93,240 787,371 19,125 19,125 • 713,256 93,240 806,496 165 165 $ 5,003,946 $ 52,952,1)46 $';4,387,463 $ 62.343.455 Rlvemide County Transportation Common Statement of Changes In Assets and LhduG6ea -Local Propels Agency Fund Year Ended June 30, 2006 Balance Balance July 1, 2005 Additions Deductions June 30, 2006 Assets Interest receivable $ 1,841 5 3,507 $ 1,841 $ 3507 Restrktedinvestments held byhustee 943,608 34,285 1,841 976,050 iota! assets $ 945,447 $ 37,792 5. 3,662 $ 979,557 Liataites Due to other governments $ 945,447 $ 35,951 $ 1,841 $ 979,557 48 82 This page intentionally left blank. Riverside County Transportation Commission Statistical Section Overview This part of the Riverside County Transportation Commission's comprehensive annual financial report presents detailed. information as a context for understanding what the information in the financial statements, note disclosures; and required supplementary information says about the Commission's overall financial health. Financial Trends: These schedules contain trend information to help the reader understand how the government's financial performance and well-being have changed over time. The schedules include: Net Assets By Component Changes in Net Assets Fund Balances of Governmental Funds Changes in Fund Balances of Govemmental Funds Revenue Capacity: These schedules contain information to help the reader assess the government's most significant local revenue source, the Measure A sales tax. These schedules include: Sources of County of Riverside Taxable Sales by Business Type Direct and Overlapping Sales Tax Rates Principal Taxable Sales Generation by City Measure A Sales Tax Revenues by Program and Geographic Area Debt Capacity: These schedules present information to help the reader assess the affordability of the government's current levels of outstanding debt and the government's ability to issue additional debt in the future. These schedules include: Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type Computation of Legal Debt Margin Pledged Revenue Coverage , Demographic and Economic Information: These schedules offer demographic and economic indicators to help the reader understand the environment within which the government's financial activitiestake place. These schedules include: Demographic and Economic Statistics for the County of Riverside Employment Statistics by Industry for the County of Riverside Operating Information: These schedules contain service and inirastrucfure data to help the reader understand how the information in the government's financial report relates to the services the government provides and the activities it performs. These schedules include: Full-time Equivalent Employees by Function/Program Operating Indicators Capital Asset Statistics by Program 49 84 This page intentionally left blank. 85 " Riverside County Transportation Commission Net Assets by Component Last Five Fiscal Years (Accrual Basis) Fiscal Year 2004 2003 2002 Governmental activities: Invested in capimi assets net of related debt $ 137,129,082 $ 133,225,528 S $ 104,716,712 Q $ 128,247,454 ' $ 130,051,343" Restricted 442,129,220 325.604,623 232,719,198 2 154,913,051 ' (44,501,093) Unrestricted. (102,074981) (124,274,292) (121,829,477) 2 (174,443,9,16) ' , 5,985,213. Total govemmemal activities net assets $ 477,183,421 $ 334,455,859 $ 215,606,433 $ 108,716,559 $ 91,535,463 GASB 34 was implemented July 1, 2001. Prior years' information is not available. Source: Finance Department r Beginning net assets in 2003 were restated as a result of corrections to capflal assets and revenue recognition, resulting In a net decrease of $20,492,947. Addtionsly, certain rents of beginning net assets were reclassified to conform to the presentation in 2003 financial statement Prior year amamLs. in this presentation have net been revised to reflect these changes. P The Local Transportation Furl, previously reported as a fiduciary :fund, was rsdass7ied as a special revenue fund in the 2004 Wrendal statements, resulting In an increase to beginning net assets of $34,295,645. Additionally, certain components of beginning net assets were reclassified to conform to the presentation in the 2004 financial statements. Prior year amounts in this presentation have not been revised to reflect these charges. 7 The beginning balance of invested in capital assets, net of related debt, was restated due to a correction In the accounting for certain rail caplet assets In the. 2005 financial statements, resulting in an increase of $19,283,259. prior year amounts in this presentation have not been revised to reflect these changes. Net Assets by Component $700,000,000 $800,000,000 $500,000,000 $400,000,000 $300,000,000. $200,000,000 $100,000,000 $-. $(100,000,000) $(200,000,000) $(300,000.000) O Unrestricted i Restricted Q' Invested in capital assets, 86 ibtpenses Governmental act/vides: General govenunent eicyde and pedestrian projects CEMP - Commuter assistance Commuter red Rtithwatiti , Local streets and roads Motorist assistance . Planning and prtgrarnming Properly management Regional arterials Transit and specialized transportation Interest expense Total governmental adivkies expenses Program Revenues Governmental activities: Changes for services Commuter assistance • Commubr rail Property management Rgtheatis • Planning and programming Other , Operaing grants and contribudons Capital grants and. contributions . Total governmental adhtille program revenues ' Net Revenues(Expenses) 1 Governmental activities Genera! Revenues Governrnerdal activities: Measure A sales taxes Transportation Development Act sales taxes Vehkle registralion fees Wester:tad bwestrnent earnings, Other miscellaneous revenue . GaFn on sale of capital assels • Total govetrimental activities general revenues Changes in Net Assets . . • Govrennwartal activities a " Riverside County Transportation Commission Changes tiv Net Assets Last Fke Fiscal Years (Accrual Basis) Fiscal Year, Ended June 30 • 2808 2005 2004 • 2003 r $ 4,848,292 $ 4,115,907 $ 3,909,942 $ 4,307,544 $ 5.407,800 , 848,959 1,021,637 ' • ,. 927,138 ' ' _ 3,549,683 4,147,758 608,8112 2 , 2080451 2,599,448 2059,732 2,318033 ' 2,088,746 ' .. 11,350,220 8,907,828 - 8,702,803 5,659,863 ' . 14,772,034 36226,705 35,362,793 , 35,456.330 29,812,0113 27,850.447 . , 60,389,876 53,333,169 . 46,200968 40,256,484, ; 36,541,323 2,2130,646 2,191,061 1,978,380 1,843,012 . 2,559,409 5,976,647 4,328,038 , ' ' 4,287096 2,978,044 5,890,377 622,498 seo,224 . 338,353 154,582 ' `. -145,158 17,164,803 17,621,505 13,996.300 ' 8,428,021 11,720,342 62,527,276 55,905,814 • 53,411,921 ' , 9,913,504 „ 8080,284 . 7,832,733 8,348,928 11,736,129 . 10.381,790 . 3 216,506,789 198,484,110 184,522,574 116052,945 115.655,920 382 445,313 50 26,273 9(1,3119,018 007362 91,858398 (124,848,391) 157,236.314 90,927,244 11,639,575 1590024 5,874,796 257,375003 $ 142,727562 GAS8 34 was implemented July t, 2001. Prior Years' information is not evadable. SWIM. Finance Department • .1 ' The Local T•arrepunation Rind, previoesk reported as a fiduciai fund, was reclassified as e special revenue fund in 60'2004 financial salemerde resulting bi an increase In sales tax revenues as wel as bicycle and pedestrian fates and lransltand specialized rensportadon expenditures. Prior year amonnts in this , presentation have not been revised to rebel thesichanges. , . 2 The Trait:Mooted= ibrromr hritgaborifee pregrain was Implemented in fiscal 2004, resuldng In a new Wen n iatil1i8 for mrnen,ditures related le the CETAP 'and regional arterials programs: 3 Interest expense ci $12,242,557 In 2002 was descried within each respect% program. ,„ • • Federal and stale reimbursements were dawdled as Charges for services in feed 2002 but were deviated as operating er Genital grants and contidadons in subsequent years. - 573,864 948,532 1,568,840 2564 148,349 394,924 3,794,148 547,075 395.305 213.31i . 2,928573 3.507.520 4 24,972 55,255 4,498 7,293 72,202.430 61,412,882 ' 10,4814860 4,748,603 877,685 , 1,183,922 21,190027 . 73.654.705 63,787,577 33241,152 18,550,975 (124,809,404) (120,754,997) (82,811,793) (99.104945) 138,9211,247 120,564,890 105,782,595 95,7'37,287 77,818,565 • 69.133,102 ' 7,488.638 6,876,856 - - 128efi55 5.146,325 3,115,2,32 4,932,021 r 5,942,480 2,366,380 536,002 2282,582 4,888,250 224,375,571 193.349228 $ 99,566,167 3 72,594229 120,485,838 $ 37,674.043 114,793328 $ 15,1388,383 51 , 87 Riverside County Transportation Commission Changes in Net Assets (Continued) Last Five Rani Years (Accrual Basis) $250,000,000 $200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000,000 $50,000,000 5- 2003 Expenses by Function m 2005 2004 2003 2002 El Interest expense a Transit -and specialtied transportation o Regionalarterials - °Propertymanagement ' Planning and programming . o Motorist assistance ® Local streets and roads ° Highways "Commuter rail °Commuter assistance CICETAP @Bi[ycle and pedestrian projects El General 400,000,000 350,000,000 300,000,000 250.000,000 200,000,000 150,000,000 100,000,000 50.000.000 Revenues by Source 1 wig T' 2003 2002 ■ Gain on sale of capital . assets Daher miscellaneous revenue ® Unrestricted investment earnings °Vehicleregistration fees "Transportation Development Act sales taxes OMeasure A sales taxes ° Capital grants and. contributions ® Operating grants and contributions "Charges for services 52 88 penweay alpun} RNsunua06 seW06d0 ..spun) erwenss prpsels ,oi moaw'pauese%ut. 3Punry laluswwsno6 Ansa iroG pe,uesa un;pun) ieU'eue0p demessd;auni Poetise B?IIIINI 084E OZpS 06ES 09E$ DEES ODES OLZS O4LS OM 093 091.S OLLS ''OBS 09S -OeS to ,`?y , s t 900Z ` ' i l � '' x�r f�'i rt' ,.'S .k~ YX w'Sii` 1 Y o " Yr �y ia'I }�3.. it L� Yp-' ��� F '.T1'� ' ;; �d.tAid Lids, r { J' a u, Y .<4 4"Y r„R- x Yi1�1Ff I `.�'�It.Yla,9.•, tz, r.4 r f"t i.: fSRV1 I i• CUMu �"• .;rt;.sO.�Jc�IIIA6DilL00Z ZOOZ H t. 9 v v� y M 7'' Lr'' 'f `�' "s, 1� alL3llliW1Y�d . ��x 'aut�e�1�372 �i1i Y'91 j�DDD{�. jx:310--a' itcri a9lr"�9x.'Y` ._ t 9661. L• 661. `k�%Ii 16..4241 8pUni I WUKU W BAOD JO'�1.111P111 pad '9Y8'96Z'4£S 0 mem W of eupoSaq w eseemul us W eumnssi'stuswgels lapusug YOOZ eLp u! pury'snuenv mods a vs psursorAu Sint 'pun) L,elonpg s to pouode ksngnoxt'Ftinj uosepodeusrl Isa01041 , tuearyade0 eaueuu alanog rn coo 906'4E116 $ .OLB'ess'e6 S. us's'Vas $ 946'Z4/'es4;.,-.S ' .saesis'ZSi S . 86$191V1. S 9Se9£1'661. 8 Z61ZZ0'86Z S- L1 01471ZE- $ 4S116L'444 S ". sPo^1161u6mwena6•1e4W0611401 LS93VW/ . Lt9'9Le'L SOE'e96'L - 69L'Ol4'9"..: gaol : 16901.S'S ; 99I'SZZ'£ 0E0'00 E8L'S89'Y'. ESL Min;anuenesptpedS ._ all pquadw'peuesetun S Orsini? $ av'SZ Cie S eli'ZEO'OOl S Istbel'S41 $ OELb19Zst $ es$1301sq $ • isl'ea'£EZ $ .9Z0'sWas S-' t9E'E9i'9E4 S p6m6669 . - - - :apun,1p4ueuwwnoelel$0IN ti1'969b -S -99Z'e99'S $ L9S'4E6'e S 4P9'BL-S 0041/6S'S • S . L1'1'�'9 S L62'i$L$ S ►LI�L S 0414bZSII $ B90bEZ'0 $ OuMleJeueele101 COL./Sit S06'069Z 639'9Z£'Z isotei 't tOs'LLL , • 068199 - 66e9Si-. .191'ISS'l. SYS'Strt. "091%4LOZ- �_ � .seme6vun . e096£11 $ •09Z'9£0'i $ 6£6'L09'1. S S41£8.$ S 96Z`4I91, -S LZt'YeS'S $ E6t.RV'S • $ ;E7.0'29'S 3. LS9'406'9 $ etS'9lZ'L.. S Pemesed a661 6161• -• - .6661 000Z. • .1•006 .6006 E60Z.. - POOL 9006 100Z se•A lnNj (spelt !Iwo,/ POMP* ens),lsoslj skyey" spoil ppseunuen0s9 p sauna punj uoiegwwao uageuodsusil NunoO spiuenni Pa'P ads Pa PAMPA eeaWet tel W asd le <pkls � t9 414e9ere10440u444$9441e41e PAdTPa WIG+ 4004444ul PIAtupd 144e'4 MY 44104+010 141444 4YD e eeetOatdTRPRa PM?* m Pe4414144d4414444 swat taaalawe 41Mew '1WiPap4P4aMa414 emAuatOadey MORI aaaPi aaWYedaPul ellt vellum ems :wpm Maltase pa wy wpquaes1ep te memo atA apdes p®uda scaska ies fi pnetnti1e1a4au gneMPAN LueMau'atramrs IeptIMi00tall 4Pin 'Wm Methaee pe0eeW+eM'8WAealgatt Polodt.pnwM'M! taeaatlttt4 Rea1e01, IOatdatea eeulej Memos , 'OW t YW t Yet t- VON t YM %0'Cf %5'94 %6'Lt %8'91 %051. mmgputda Padetueu . p e6aaetttd t p *Ames ee 7ge0 IZ91'48410 944E/'L94'44 t We'eWt S 999'119'6 S 60r9961» 9 41E069'B, 1 46919690 E goe99'Z9 1 lW'Pft't6 $ %Vests"' t soots; lN4'Ovals pN ` 1969'91C9' 9989I99L Wa9LYYE1199'912,9) 11i6ZS9 09'LW)i6.i- 9SotE.ISW'ISPY(-0tt1lb9) 969alt6 66E99029 9404011 00Y11130 6141689EBrt9EaE aabOCul (en st9'1f91d0LC) (eeo1'9SN CE1t)lt 00690f![ BIltLS'lS 18o�t - 9-tak4tW a- {{LIZYl9 COMM peen)teares b+ptat apo pat • 003tOrCe sWepA�aapauuaaawel . votec'tl mWeT6A69O40 tag :paaN ee0aM 14atngtaL9P 901.e PL le6s966'E91 £444641 f5LY1.9'0 090/St t081991 (9'999690 eve fares 0:699919 anti" sot auaiRaAxt(tlpa)aet tea ssits(RoseaYt9) ape* 909'9nso" 90L'LO9Y5l hf9'lP.'W tELiLYbO- BBPOSL@Il a9f'LOL'IZ{ f0E'6l1'I9l 008tf8'rK lSB'9S9'9FL 99(-6i�1� teetlPadia Npl �L9t5 099190E wLEit etC'OS L0Cf9 {rP'Ws O12'9is OOOb et 6Lt l8/'OBL-Aepmr4alj 960Y0f 00090E tOCase 608btC .18C'LE9-981'90B ht2'!A9 Wlb9C 8ZL901. NO'L80't antpngpap Rritaet+atd44 • llL'BZL - ... BYI'ECt tLCOBS'L 990'99Z taetp !i['rE151 E9C'Y99Y1 i90'96Ptt LBt'9B6'It 99f'OfS'L{ 998'ButL sec' at' 68L'telb PLt'001g 840bL8't - paAIN fl9'l'LO'LI tlYO¢Bb9 901'6t9'Lt - lDl'6LS'Bi - IYB'BLttL eWSeaYZ t9Pbel'sL WLSLcbL E10'BtL. 'LL B4h'698'AZ IedpMd . .. ,cao@pepa0 LLO'larf ret'Sers Sr6'LZ t 9at'Ltr'r - SS9'WPO 18E'OWb - 4PbL6b , yLS4N't5 n9r7659 9Li'R9t9 . iwnamurd wLlRPtd9 pualNtl 50r5itbL. OLSW'S . L�iac's termer) t6914VoL 9o1YEt'8 S94YIf'9 , OOfbWb 901't[ttt M6t9V6t aP!A'iePueloM A9t51t L6Y/OL WEb6S - tLY099 aeries 4L1a116RBW Aufdad NS't It 869'601 t9tb95 SYO'9mk eee'nlY L6B'hBL'S at9bisY 6l6'L£SE OL94L9b 999'rWh OtPuLmOldpa aPaek ZW'lIL'L fl4'a45t 6S'808'i B1L'L91't 9e0'S90t 60/b69'l LlD'c19'{ O9fbtS{ l80't6iL 9f9'O92t eaepaee alaeN Wt'6fili L9Y'WE'SZ LEB'tii/i tY4YLilt 696beelc Eirb20'9C O/fb9L'Ot 99B'WL'9r' 69t'fEtYS 9LB'6R119 spay PA maeataO01 Et9'B02'02 9t6b1T'tl LKC19Y[ 9Z9'lL0'9 atbro'ot ha'658'{t E�'WebL 91['F£4'E6 'BlB'OrCeE 9LBbL0'LE tl+atlg4l tBB'S5i9 9tt4ft'tt ta/cMPe 896Yefb Z66'NL'L i0Lt9E'9 i0a'SrE'� L015tObt IBY'WS'L IS817Ls'Ot ti+waaaj 9WlOL't pfyZ4t'} 6t8YDr'l Z0,90% tinsel BILbZO'L. LL1bBL2 f96'f1B'L - Btek94'L z9E�Y aoueaaeO taatnuOp . • - t iBeb09 099'WB'8 EB9'6/S'f dY130 BC4'Q6 LW lZO'4 ogreNEN uapaepad ReePA4P aaeaefd Wait t{tt{tt WB'Lret alebr9t 009'R92 9W'L2t5 0610024'4 L94E9YE L4V/74a 541191 u4NPW 6-0' tualledee nC699Y8 9{P� [Li99tte re9'9c690t ll cerrc'tct 898'941'EV COPS' LW CIL'ILt'BPS 91.1'691'c9E mama Pal 6PL 2f7— tLeWs KS'lt17-- ZE IR% 61'W0-7 OSLbe9b 9914111 "Mae La0'91� 1 OW +I'L Woad' iatte0'L , itt'401. • MAW' Wan %Veal tat'L6£'t ' WWI 60.r061 e94taea 0'ein eetM+ipM eppa 9t99' 609 =SOY Wean dew* • LuttBb tZPt � ceseet'9 * ZfS's{tb � 9 VPS 9LS'SW'it a641 WV'S LPtY9tb 9404425 0411944 601'9825 wont 63959t4i tut/Az antra Wtt.&h RAaWWaa9al4 • t SCUM IEE'SEt'86 ELCbiM wd urneOpoi mown 4411444 atl 14/44 1 4 LLE'009'OL E 930b8031 9 roe lisle t 09t01196 1 9,99eo'LOl S 66ti96'L{4 E , LEeagle" t ZL89Ei94t 9 669'c9{bR S am vaR9 PRIMO!! Leal teal a00t NOP LOOP t001 TOOL 900E 100E sempeem (flea level' Pe91Pe11) exalt puy uaLpT1 alma IeMaatateop mope pulpit! ae0ueyo 161Maatep eelPtAdaptl Mint) ORMAN • %OTT %OS'S %0$'0 uPP nenb310 P•lsPB MIS 'smog . %OS'S %OS'0 %OTC %0S1) %0S1).. 44050 %On eLet xel Sera 109* L•A9 eoueuP0 y emsPIN 911OnCq S t999fL'L4 S tl£`i16'R S 4S8'04t'£t S 946'9L0'9L S SL1'4LEi 690'L LS $09'964't S19'19L' $88'£ZL LLS'LZC ££Z'6t6. 9Z6'ES 88S'L99 686'4LS'Z t L8'099 69['LL9't 19L'9C9 906'18L SE RES SES'6L6 DOVES LZ9'969 8L6'9L9 $81.'06L 6L6'1.6$.1 SC£'6ZIA LO'LZ> $ V9£`6L4 _ 695'S48'Z S9f'A9t'£ PREI S'S Z6L'91.9 SSO'969 £0£'LUI. R$9'001't SOZ'£96't 9L9'4911 ZZ9'£99 SW008 &WEN etl'LO6 E68'un 499YL0't E6812£ ZLB'L9E 46S'144 999'0£0'I tZ6'L1.1.1 4LZ'£EZ'L 8007S 1.9L'84 LSB'ZS Z£ou 6Z9'89L d49'AZA 046'069 £OZ'4(101. t£Z'91341. S66'01.91 Senn' L 1.99'9481. Soven . S•;,, f9L'864 $ SO6'S64 S664 9664 1661 8664 Ble6113'91. S SSS'LQ'8t S 466164'61. $ %LULU S e4t'LCZ'SZ'S IttLf6'f ZLL'SZZ'4 LCL'99£1, £eV9L9'S 6E8'6L4'S Z1.071.1'1. C60'601.t 129'494'1 9t4169 • B301.64'1. SLE'41.9'Z SEC/VC SZS'ESS'£ 1.S1.199'£ , 644180 C69`961'4 CSL'8ZE't 949'64Z't O4Z'9CS'L E9Z'SSA't Revue' OZO'SSVI' LC8'1Z01. L4£'9LVI. 149'96S1 SL9'LtS Cann ' 640'46S t901$9 4SSUS 8009£1. L$V1941 Slr69V.t ZE9'£t1'1 Si£'LS OSZVS 6S4'99 YL9'19 469'698 Z£Z'Of6 111'1.96 zsc'SZO't BSE'LLZ't 6L6'61£1. 904%051 4ZZ'649'1. Sf1'Z90'Z 9£YStrZ 940'694'Z I•L6'tL9'Z S ` QRS'9CS $ 96Z'S$9, .. $ 880)1.9 _ S - StO'9eL S 6364 000e LOOZ . ZOO (spuesnagl uU imam.repuele3 eel Iasi edRl sseuleng Rq sells enexel epls+eM1! 10 RLunop 10 sewnos uopequll roo uonspodsueiL, Bruno emereem sPPno>agto IPt retal . • eneouseesek weld Pus epRarolow.Peq'e94e 1 suoPS1S BOORS Stuewerdun Wei Pus elepepew Sump% seoue8dde pue 6unlsuuq ewOH 0 MuNP/6uPe3 se,Oas mnbl e612red 110.1012 pooA enrols -',Met mop egpusqueuw.mem Resole tweedy 049`046'L SZ1'99 U5'610'1 SEtIlleI S£C'9Z0'f 91Z'L98 `` S t POSE Fiscal Year Riverside County Transportation Commission Direct and Overlapping Sales Tax Rates Last Ten Fiscal Years Measure A Direct County of Rate Riverside 2006 0.50% 7.75% 2005 0.50% 7.75% 2004 0.50% 7.75% 2003 0.50% 7.75% 2002 0.50% 7.75% 2001 0.50% 7.75% 2000 0.50% 7.75% 1999 0.50% 7.75% 1998 0.50% 7.75% 1997 0.50% 7.75% Source: Commission Finance Department and California State Board of Equalization. The Measure A sales tax rate may be changed only with the approval of 2/3 of the voters. 92 Weald. County Transportation gpminiesion • Principal Taxable Sales Generation by City emertYear and Nine Years Ago. 2904 1995 Taxable Sales Percentage of Taxable Sales Peaanitageof 6n910110411014 Rank Total 0nMaisands! Reek Total CityofRiverside $ .4.603.769 1 - 182% $ 2,140,450.. 1- `...311.7% City orCcrona 2911,471 . 3 11.5% 990353 3- 9.6% City of Temecula 2.421940 4 9.6% 844922 5 6.2% CiyorPenn Desert 1,433,296, 5 5.7% 682.490 4 6.6% Cly of Morena Valley -. 1,125,487 6 4.5% 594,067 - 6 5.8% Ciyof Hemel 896,825. ' 7 as% 406032 -8 19% ayolCathedral gy 887,982 13 3.5% 3913,978 s as% -CBydMmiala ', 885,682' 9- 3.5% - 183,959 14 1.8% . Myra Petra Springs 747,391 10 3.0% 413,594 J .. 4.0% C2lyofkrdlo 737,344 .. 11 2.9% 291,149 102.8% City of La Quint 684,039 12 2.3% 121,428 17 - 1.2% CllyofNorco 503,573 13 2.0% 181.616 15 1.8% City ofLake Ekkrae 478.762..' 14 1.9% 230,228 11 2,2% City ot.Rancho Mirage 466,823 15 1.6% 213.068 12. 2.1% City ofPerris , 464,250' 16 1.8% 2013232 13 2.0%. City of Coachella - ' 208,854 17 0.814 82,761 19 0.8% CityofBannirg 206,424 - 18 - 0.8% 132,206 16 1.3% City of Blythe. • 141,122 19 0.6% 101,834 18 1.096' City of Beaumont 131,783 20 0.5% - 58,527 21 0.6% City°Man/adnb 108,391 21 0.4% 60,578 20 0.6% City of Demi Hot Springs 82055 22 0.3% 50,033 22 - 0.5% City of Indian Welk 73,806 - 23 0.3%- 49,222 - 23 City of Cabman 40,742 24 an 20,709 24 ' 0.2% City of Canyon Lake 16,462 25 0.1% 6,982 25 0.1% Inmpaakd 20,158,374 79.9% 0262,407 80:1% Unincorporated - 5,078,774 - 2 20.1% 2,058,211 2 19.9% Carew/kW $ 25,237,148' 1C0.0% $ 10,320,618 103.0% S 300,956,499 Callon/fa S'. 460,096,48 . Source Cabbala Bata Goad &Equall/atico for the nakndaryeer Indicated. 95,000,000 $4,500,000 $4 000 000 $3,500.000; $3,000,000 32.500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 sl,000,000 $500,000 S Taxable Sales by City s- a1CVO r i.131 1 :::.. &NEL k ' rJf'-LrM] ,- YYI t f2Jf.� W' Y '....la' ,;-!-11,`L. •v: :t c, Qa_ ��,� �a��a�a�d� ",¢" is ` a � c>~' a `A �+as a a ` �aa �'a c as ,a ` 6+eFt a°3 -x- 2004 -a-1995 57 Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Sates Tax Revenues by Program and Geographic Area Year Ended June 30. 2008 Special Revalue Funds General Western Coachella Palo Fund County - Valley Vemie Total Administration $ 3,090,000 $ - $ $ $ 3,090,000 Commuter assistance - Z856,787 2,856,787 189 44,309687 5,817,515 50,127,202 Commuter rail 18,539,636 - 18,539,636 Local streets and roams 45,708,598 13,574,202 1,091,384 60,374,1M Regional arterials - 15,513,374 - 15,513,374 Specialized transportation 2,856,787 3.878,344 - 6,735,131 p$ 3,090,0)0 $ 114,271,495 $ 38.783,435 61,091,384 $ 157,236,314 Source: Finance Department Geographic Distribution by Area Palo Verde General Fund 1% $85,0C10,000 560.000.003 eSe555M5,,,0,,,00.,,,:000 /5/,,,,,.000' 545.000.000 $40.000.01X1 S35.00�/10.00110 ryI1 325,000.000 S20.000,000 - E15400.0e0 $10.000.000 $5,000,000 a• Sates Tax Revenues by Program and Geographic Area err• • rip Administreeon Commuter assistance' Afe tt��1Yj.J.' ' MIME ei MEM 1 OMAR 33PRIlit Carotene ram Local salmis and Regional Spodefaeu wads arterials :trsnaportaaon' ®Palo Verde alCoacheOa Valley °Western County °General Fund 94 kenusr to se uogelndod .to} soueu19 }o lueugiedep e1e1S e1111091e9 Poe 0£ etIOE Pope issA posit eyl a01 POP :6ulpuelslno.1(4 luswpedsa eaueuld :seoinoS 9L'941 996'6LE'i [10'999'10Z lOL'90£ 91£'09£'10Z L661 L9'LL1 Let WVt 949'LLnn L90'99Z 19L11,0'LPZ ` 9661 E1'991 LO£'EL4'l 9£L'£ZO'OEZ Z9£'0ZL . - • E9£'£09'6ZZ 6661 9L'6£l 016'ZZ9'l cum'699'iiz 9LZ'lLl 9Z9'9LL'lLZ 000Z ZZ'014 0/9'609'l 9L9'999'9ZZ 1£4'111 LWl49'9ZZ 100Z 99'ZZL 9LZ'449'1, OZZ'Z4010Z06039 OCL'£96'LOZ i00i 903701 9Z9'90L't 69£'Z94'LLL onto' 619'Z9E'LLl £OOZ OZ'99 09L'922I. Ze0'9Inn Z90'£e 000'OOL'9 • 000'999'L91. 400Z Will 000'LL9'I• 600'99'19I, 600'99 000'00L'4 000'900'0C 000'999'4Z1, 900Z 96'99 $ 0££'996'1 L69`9Z91Z1 $ l69`9Z $ $ 000'001'9 $ 000'900'0E $ 000'969'96 $ ' 900Z slide° uollalndod seg!^M Jed idea epleienRl: le;uewwan00 }o Alsno0 lelol mewl Rho egisAed sloN elgetreld Med . epuog ®nusnati _... _ ballet* lelawwein • xelseleS seamy leµiewwenoeS sneA leosld usi isel edrll R9.*Oa Bulpuelsinp }o sollea uolsslwwoo uoneuodsutti Aunoo eplsiesm JesA 111411c101) 0; 010000:10 10015mays! PY2001400 NwN map remig COOS , 200Z 000Z : ,',..a.i7.,;.W.: 7.i.t.;. .. i.116. :.41;.= ..'. .r. r."T:i.g'::::,...i: 7, fitei414 g...14.4,»:i 7.4 WARN Pi7.."' u 0:7-?,:,,tf A ;J :;•:.i.-.,z'.074 4...-'i,k 1 1 :. ''. ' ...1,'` ..:7.' : - : .' - :. : .:4:.i,. . , • mit) .ON enueuttuo tl tunseepi -$ 000'000'003 000'000'00LS 000'000'00CS 000'000'0014 000.000'00SS 000'000'009S Su011400 01 0100000001000 10 lun0LLY P*11104100 111011 0:10P IF40/ El e e tv )z '',...%7 4,4 .t,"1 114E4 Fi Yid IF MY, 5F;i4 000'000'003 000 000 OCRS 000'000'00M 000'000'004S 000'000'00S* 000'ooneas 9-38 03tiouttu0 Aq POpuomut 'pg. •oN analog) v ammo • 200Z JeqUi'd tit SAM OOP 40feW cm PUI Paola* WA 0010 'oN 0010011110 10000/0Pts003010P Sulddetwo 00 ale We* AgUIP3C011 VOMMUIWOO 84 C4 OgPedt PLie SSOUBUINO 0%00 eiliPlied Se 41000 SAW 044 Wald* GAY 00.04100P 0.004100=0 041 $ 00000000a enelltd :NAGS %0'0 %DV %FS- %VP 000'000'009 S 000'030'009 S 000166'69Y S 000.968'60 000.010.09 000500'0e 000'000'009 s 000'000'909 s poo'corecios s 000'coo'clos s 96329- 1102- %IT Lk %US- %C9L- %RS,. %0 %WO- %0' %S'tt• t£181.9126 S etra6 Lit 96Z t SLC !Ain't t StrattrYAL S °rem= t Lti OS- S 000 591. 0,20 t COO 999 OOP S 000 90C Me I 94'02 LOZ 3t0 CE EDS 82 SZ9 OIL 2 Lit ltS SR Oft ES6'10Z OlgISS cionevist 000'92'431. 000119'913 000'000'939 S 000'000'939 t 000'060'939 t 000'000'939 f 000'000'93s t 000'000135 S 000'000'Se9 t 000'000'25 t 000'000'539 S 00n00'4z9 s /861 0561.. 005; 000t 100t 300e WOL 9003 • sem 9003 1119A ROMA 0+00A 100011 u01. 1001 10081011 0900109r1 i0 000.10d0,00 1040.0100000 0011010xlmukt t10000 0PIK0AIN 000110013 10601 cS100P10% 1401001400 1109 MP al %Mtge ;pm tummy P00P011100 1109190010101 1111010 '0N 0000010/0 Y 04010N 10001000101193P 40 % 14100,4009 letel twl 100P 0101000!Ige pepPtunaw Malin NM V1091010.1. 148 001/001P0 Sq P0P0K00 Iv '0N 000000110 Y 01001101I' • • • Kt 1£9'90Z'SZ 0£'Z 1£SIOV9Z Lt1' tat 149'11071, yM L41'999'LS L661,. 4l'Z LL13t9'6Z l94'494 000'94L 4Z'Z 969'990Z Z90'OOn' - 4t9'59l'Sl % ='6 =96919 0661 . l£'Z 19L'9ZVOE 046'£99 000'916 Zta LLE'19(1'6Z L1.974£71 SOLI/.L'9l %L9'OL 9Z9'96VOL. 666t L97 60E'LZ9'0E ZtV919 000'996 19'Z E60'450'6Z 9136'649'11 LOl'419'Ll %E9'91 Z£L'E69'0) 000Z K2 0te600'SE LLO'096 000'066 L97 66t'6£9'££ 49E'OSO'Zt 66B'994'll %la 4E9'49i`69 LOOZ 99'Z 969'949'9£ Zl4'044 000'0E0'1 La 994'SLO'6E S4S'9£0'lt 6C6'9ED'EZ %ZS'S 069'0006 ZOOZ 69'l 9L4'6491E SZ61BE 000'9L0't ZO'£ £99'910'6E E90'9L61 064'960'4Z %7,6'9 L04'L147% EOOZ Z£'£ LteLL4'SE L age 000'0Z1.'1. . 94'£ 196'900'K l96'4E9'9 000bL1.'SZ • %14'41 ZZL'ZE9'Llt 400Z 6L'£ 0E5'994'SE LEZ70E 0000Ll't 96'£ 46Z'£101,E 66Z'E96'L 000'0£0'9Z %SE'4t 996'9l91t£l SOOZ L£'4 OZZ'E96'SE $ L99'0SZ $ 000'0721 $ 99'4 ten o'6E 4E9'Z6S'9 $: 000'OZ4'LZ $ %9£'9l 67,090Z'S9L $ 900Z oltetl a6wenoo emmag isaie4ul uen tedpupd uen opey aolnNS - ledlouPel bleu to le ?Anew. .. JeA trell eolnreS taea [Mel eteulP ucluS etemiogns eBuienoa tge0 uen JON'S WM JOINS 1d148Y xel ael sales tgea lelol uen»lues Joluos letol sales y anseew y eAnseeig top " Riverside County Transportation Commission Demographic and Economic Statistics for the County of Riverside Last Ten Calendar Years Calendar Year: Population' 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999' 1998 1997 1996 1995 Sources: 1,776,780 1,705,625 1,644,275 1,609,370 1,522,910 1,473,307 1,441,237 1,379,956 1,381,868 1,393,500 Personal Income Per Capita (thousands)2 Personal hicome $ 49,443,185 45,016,790 42,010,066 39,974,556 37,014,951 34,088,221 32,089,788 29,298,607 27,565,014 26,210,618 $ 27,827 26,393 25,549 24,839 24,305 23,137 22,265 21,232 19,948 18,809 ' California State Department of Finance as of January L 2 U.S. Department of Commence Bureau of Economic Analysis 3 Riverside County Economic Development Agency 62 " 98 Unemployment Rate3 5.8% 6.3% 6.3% 5.5% . 5.4% 5.5% 6.7% 7.6% 8.4% 9.5% Riverside County Transportation Commission Employment Statistics by Industry for the County of Riverside Calendar Year 2000 and Nine Years Prior % of Total , Industry Type 20001 Employment 1991 Farm 13,928 2.1% 12,034 2.5% Agricultural services, forestry, fishing and other 20,848 3.1% 18,522 3.9% Mining 897 0.1% 1,324 0.3% Construction 62,604 9.5% 39,080 1 8.3% ManufacWring 57,806 8.7% 37,185 7.9% Transportation and public utilities 20,694 3.1% 15,823 3.3% Wholesale trade 21,811 3.3% 15,230 3.2% Retail trade 119,023 18.0% 86,360 •18.2% Finance, insurance, and real estate 50,670 7.6% 33,590 7.1 % Services 197,896 29.9% 140,429 29.7% Federal govemment, &Ilan 6,740 1.0% 5,410 1.1 % Military 3,028 0.5% 7,004 1.5% Stale government 11,703 1.8% ... 7,035 1.5% Local government 74,756 11.3% 54,203 11.5% Total employment 662,404 100.0% 473,729 100.0% :%of Total Employment Source: U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis Year epresents most recent data avadabte. 99 9'91 Z'Ll 9'ZZ 0'ZZ 0'9Z O'9Z 0'9Z 0'9Z 0'9Z Z'OE 9'1 91 Z'Z 0'1 9'0 6'0 6'0 11 0'Z 0'E L' 1 9'1 0' l 91 0' 1 0' 1 01. 9'0 8'0 9'0 4'1 V1 9'0 01 9'1 91 Z'Z 9'Z lZ l'Z 9'0 9'0 Z'Z 6'0 Z'l in Z1. El 41 E'Z 9'1 Z1 6'0 9'0 9'0 L'0 L'0 l'l 01. L'l 9'1 9'1 L'E .0'Z S'Z S'Z 4Z 07 9'1 IT 9'4. 9'E 0'9 0'£ 6'E 9'E 9'E L'E VS 0'9 8'9 L'S 0'9 L'll Z'El E'E1 0'E1 9'Z1 LZl Z'Z1 • 1661 8661 6661 000Z 100Z ZOOZ £DOZ 400E SOOZ 900Z QC eunp Io cry 9199A Ltd 01491 u silkudluopounA /q seelloidw3 puelenlnb3 awp-llnd uolsspuwoo uolleyodsuaal Rluno3 eplaaeeRI • Alameda° eoueuld :eoroos sWelenlnba ewpicc lelol kiwis° pug wewdolenep peford 19100 eouelsisse sumo: eommiese Jelnwwop uoueeuodsueur►reusq pezgeaedg - waura8euew 1iletlad &mam a.% pue Buuueld uopeuspeupe pue seowas esureffeueW' uinBcidryoppunA BS£ e.FO = ZL9 G�S 481. -940 L WrL S4 4 009 Z8E 49 4£b 801 S ►r8 01. 4 � 413411841111 L84�— 884 Lam^ 9�. 981 1— 98� g W £� L9 9 991'04ZYZ Z94'Z84'0Z 1es'LZC'LZ 141'9LtY£ 901'Stl et &OenZ .0104'988'8 9L9'L9Y9 essen Yt 10L'16L'S 'C99'LL8'8 _ _ rowan -- 8s9'Lll'OL 4 940'0111. S e6Z'L48'L �f 116'FZ6'S f 948'41 01 SPO'SB YIN f -11Z9Z41 99L BB 081.9�8Z B T- 88Z.BF— L 488 � 4 898'86C'18 169'4Ft'Ot -499'SZO'Z. 814'0E096 Ob8'09Z'04 998'90L'94 881'888489 SOL'CC4'8 099'944'8 Zlt'4SZ't S49'CLBYZ - �bLZ'BS6�lL 4- kb9'BSb'BL f 9Z8'990'01 - . 481'09Vz f 818'018'96; FZ8 994 B l L '86r1.88'L 919'886'09 009'096'01 CZ9'491'Z. '910e'440'1e s • :. stuntigue0xe w818o1d tem. 801141eRse IansW W Due 1R11w1 P0240189' spew pue mans Ill 8I81/8118 P0OISON 91.1ninww00, 86en818141 •:... 149111notl0 wweoid V 601989W • 9104104 I ONA 181.w0o1 Pw18.M8V - :1101B018 448 8044B 1W =Mull 00118110810411 911'91 908'81- - Z8412 8499Z Z96'9Z 984'LZ 48919 -' 'Z49'LC 988'1F 1089480M089Ls+.148d L9 014119180ep148A -.. 2•IDNIe P64d bweS 48/n891! G0901uu00 ' Ot tt. .ZL ZL CL 81 .- -4l 84- 4 � : - � 1" , 880'9Z 18199 - OB!'S9 991'44 - OCL'LC 40tr'BZ 8letZ 948'81 064'91 - remoo Imo w0p spew elRS bZt'L - szL 1 814). C98 980'1 080'1 seal. 890'l 646` :40ugeis141sIgwW ll 8 B OL8 OL 8 8 9 8Z quell s6uswe3 wNwwoO - tlM - - VM -vM VM vM - WN V/N KS'S 8LF'Z8 08L'LL Peonpwd sdu. aewgepii VM VPN tlM.' vM _VIN V/N £tZ'L 8Z8 LOB - ffi►'L ego euot1dew; Viv41890IN-989t Bv880001 00F'Z . 000'Z 000.Z _' - tO8'l - _.._S00'Z za,e 0981 4881 LBBY , LOB'C .- I/KUM MN 001'J .. - ':eo0eteseB JPP1WWOQ 4l vM WN V/N 6 01 B Ol . 8 - 144 1emaltuw611148 P8m14Psd9 - :u0peu0de1e1M11u81t P8218P809 %8'91 %S'1L %trial 140'401 %Z'L9 WII l8 968'94 %e'89 9499S %L'B► ... 149'94 - - - KM 7031 %C'92 %SOP 941'14 %BIN, %SIR ... 'eta 8PNIGNN vow .igM001408881 WN vBJ - V/N ' WN VM . OK - - MN 004'1 - 948'1 COL'Z - - 18818 890'1- ran. 414'9 9981. 19LY Sz8'Z. seL'£. L19'S .. 4C9;4 _ 891'4' 88110031 89L'4 190'4 SOY, 11S'9 ` . LL9'4 03Y4 1.6e4 Vit't 999► — OL£'4 : - swim/MINN . • - - ' Neut 1eP1wWo0 u0 81188de/OAR ARP ene PO Weds 4ZL'► 8Z9'9 LI.VS Pee 69L'L 69S'L� BL8'B - Z£S'8 'ltcs t68'it Om LeP1181M " .:-._ - - -'. Auo9w8d0,1141ueNww00• 41 . V/N VM V/N .V/N 169134 161'84 %0'BC %4'09 %S'LZ %8'Lb "%LW %8'09 Z681 '-8881 _ S66L OOOZ - .. ,100Z PO OC ounr sV w11/ 180ud 90118r1 u10901114 ST Wed0 sotssiww001O98t1Odson A1no01Plattl O 99 t l l L t L I. I l t elolleM gueyox3 ielnwwo0 :eouetstesyielnww00 9'401. 910t 9'40l 91,01, 9'401 9'401 9101 9'4ot 9'40t 9'4ol sluaweseeLelreenwwooIOeepl 4 4 4 4 4 4 9 9 9 9 peOeuew pus peumo suoltels llet Jeutwwop .p.tielnwwoo L661. 9661 6661 000Z LOOZ ZOOZ EOOZ 400Z 900Z 900Z OE amp ao sy sun posed uel lse I ww0oid 6q =owns ieesv lesde3 uolsslwwoouonspodsumilApanooeplsrengg ' • This page intentionally left blank: 103 ATTACHMENT 2 Local Transportation Fund of the County of ::Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Financial and Compliance Report Year Ended June 30, 2006 McGladrey&Pullen . Certified PublicAccountants McGlediey & Peen, UP Is a member firm of RSM Irdernagonel, an &libation of separate and independent legal ankles. 104 Contents Independent Auditor's Report on the Financial Statements and Supplementary Information 1 and 2 Financial Statements Balance Sheet 3 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Change in Fund Balance 4 Notes to Financial Statements 5 and 6 Supplementary Information Schedule of Allocations and Disbursements 7 Schedule of Unclaimed Apportionments (Articles 4 and 8) 8 Schedule of Unclaimed Apportionments (Article 3) g Independent Auditor's Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards 105 10 " " McGladrey& Pullen Certd'ied Public Accountants Independent Auditor's Report on the Financial Statements and Supplementary Information Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, Califomia We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside, as administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2006, as listed in the table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Commission's management.: Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Govemment Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General ,of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. As discussed in Note 1, the financial statements present only the Local Transportation Fund and do not purport to, and do not, present fairly the financial position of the Commission or the County of Riverside, Calfomia, as of June 30, 2006, and the respective changes in its financial position, where applicable, for the year then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside, as administered by the Commission, as of June 30, 2006, and the respective changes in financial position, where applicable, thereof for the year then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated October 20, 2006 on our consideration of the Commission's internal control over financial reporting and our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of intemal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the intemal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be considered in assessing the results of our audit. .McGladrey 8 Pullen, UP is a ntenber firm of R&M International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. 1 106 The Local Transportation Fund of the County of. Riverside has not presented. a Managements Discussion and Analysis required by Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 34 that the GASB has determined is necessary to supplement, although not required to be a part of, financial statements. Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the financial, statements taken as a whole. The schedules listed in the table of contents as supplementary: information are presented for purposes of. additional analysis and are not a required part of the financial statements of the Local Transportation Fund. Such information has been subjected to the auditing,, procedures applied in the audit of the financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly presented in all material respects in relation to the financial statements takenas a whole. Riverside, Califomia October 20, 2006 " Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Balance Sheet June 30, 2006 Assets Cash and investments with County Treasurer $ 61,995,766 Accounts receivable 14,187394 Interest receivable 613,819 Total assets $ 76,796,979. Liabilities and Fund Balance Liabilities Accounts payable Total liabilities 95,000 95,000 Fund balance Reserved: Unapportioned carryover 12,393,440 Rail and bus transit and local streets and roads apportionments 61,409,265 Bicycle and pedestrian projects 2,167,565 Unreserved and designated for bicycles and pedestrians 731,709 Total fund balance 76,701,979 Total liabilities and fund balance $ 76,796,979 See Notes to Financial Statements. Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Change in Fund Balance Year Ended June 30, 2006 Revenues: Sales taxes Other reimbursements Interest Total revenues i Expenditures: Disbursements to claimants Excess of revenues over expenditures Fund balance at beginning of year Fund balance at end of year See Notes to Financial Statements. 1 9 `74,673,605 24,866 1,700,405'„ 76,398,876 _,57,272,733' 19,126,143 57,575,836 76,701,979 Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements Note 1. Nature of Operations and Significant Accounting Policies The Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission), in its capacity as the transportation planning. agency for the County of Riverside, Califomia;(County), is responsible for administering funds provided through the Local Transportation Fund (Fund), which was created inaccordancewith the provisions of the Transportation Development Act of 1971. The significant revenue to the Fund is derived from one-fourth of one percent of the seven` and one quarter percent statewide sales tax collected in the County by the State Board of Equalization. The accounting policies of the Commission conform to accounting principles generally accepted in the United States as applicable to govemmental units. A summary of the Commission's significant accounting policies is as follows: Presentation: The accompanying financial statements of the Fund are intended to present the financial position and the changes in financial position of only that portion of the govemmental activities of the Commission that is attributable to the transactions of the. Local Transportation Fund of the Commission. They do not purport to; and do not, present fairly the financial position of the Commission as of June 30, 2006 and the changes in .its financial position, where applicable, for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Basis of accounting: The modified accrual ;basis of accounting is followed in the Fund. Under the modified accrual basisof accounting, expenditures. are recorded when they are expected to be liquidatedwith expendable available resources, and revenue is recorded when it becomes both measurable and available. 'Measurable' means the amount of the transaction can be determined, and °available° means collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to be used to pay liabilities of the current period. Funding: There is a three -step process for obtaining funds from the Fund: apportionment, allocation and payment. Annually, the Commission determines each area's share of the anticipated Fund. This share is the area apportionment. Once funds are apportioned to a, given area, they are typically available only for allocation to claimants in that area. Allocation is the discretionary action by the Commission which designates funds for a specific claimant for a specific purpose. Payment is authorized by disbursement instructions issued by the Commission. Expenditures: Expenditures represent disbursements to the Commission, Southern California Association of Governments, cities, the County of Riverside and transit operators that have met the claimant eligibility requirements to receive Fund monies per various Public Utilities Code Sections. All disbursements are to be used for transportation purposes. Disbursements for subsequent year, allocations are recorded as prepaid allocations. Note 2. Cash and Investments with County Treasurer The funds in the County Treasury are pooled with those of other entities in the County and invested in accordance with the County's investment policy. These pooled funds are carried at fair value. Fair value is based on quoted market prices and/or direct bids, when needed, from government dealers on some variable or floating rate items. Moneys in the Fund, are legally required to be deposited in the County Treasury pool. An Investment Oversight Committee has been established by the County, which: acts as a regulator of the pool. Additional information regarding this pooled investment, including risk and maturity, may be obtained from the Commission's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. 110 Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission ' Notes to Financial Statements Note 3. Fund Balance Reserves for .the 'Fund represent the unclaimed apportionments related to claims for transit programs, the, unexpired . allocations available for bicycle and pedestrian projects, prepaid transit allocations, earned but not received revenues for transportation: programs, and unapportioned carryover. Expired allocations' related to bicycle and pedestrian projects are unreserved and designated: At June 30, 2006, amounts held in are allocated as follows: i Rail and Bus Transit and Local Streets and Roads Apportionments: Westem County: , Commuter rail: Allocated and unclaimed Apportioned and unallocated " Bus transit: City of Beaumont `City of Corona Riverside Transit Agency (RTA)' Apportioned and unallocated Total rail and bus transit -.Westem County Coachella Valleyapportioned and unallocated Allocated and unclaimed Apportioned and unallocated. Total bus transit - Coachella Valley Palo Verde Valley: Allocated and unclaimed - Transit Apportioned and unallocated for transit and local streets and roads 821,004 Total bustransit and local streets and roads - Palo Verde Valley 832,113 Total for rail and bus transit and local streets and roads apportionments $ 61,409,265 Bicycle and pedestrian projects; Reserved for allocated amounts $ 2,167,565 . Unreserved and designated for unallocated amounts 731,709 Total for bicycle 'and pedestrian projects, :$ 2,899,274 2,577,845 19,616,908 760,500 ' •102,000 6,289,671 24,354,614 53,701,535 2,655,949 4,219,668 6,875,617 Reserved for unapporhonedcarryover Note 4. Commitments 11,109 $ 12,393,440 The RTA_and the Surtine Transit Agency (collectively, the. Agencies),' major transit providers for the County, obtained available lease!firiancing for bus acquisitions through the proceeds from certificates of participation. issued by the California Transit Finance Corporation (Corporation) for each' agency. Locattransportation;funds, to the extent of the Agencies' eligible share, along with other federal and state funds were' pledged as support for the Agencies' lease payments to the: Corporation. For the year ended June 30, 2006, Local Transportation Fund revenue of $412,675 was expended for lease payments by RTA. 6 111 Supplementary Information 112 Local Transportation fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Allocations and Disbursements Year Ended June 30, 2006 Expenditures: City of Banning City of Beaumont City of Blythe City of Cathedral City City of Coachella City of Corona City of Desert Hot Springs City of Hemet City of Indio City of Lake Elsinore City of La Quints City of Moreno Valley City of Murrieta City of Palm Desert . City of Palm Springs City of Perris City of Riverside City of San Jacinto City of Temecula County of Riverside Auditor/Controller Road Department Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency Commission Riverside Transit Agency . SCAG SunLine Transit Agency Traristrack Systems, LLC Total SB 821 Article 3 Article 4 Allocations Disbursements Allocations $ 202,500 „$ 202,500 $ 999,644 736,481. 174,131 81,392 (741) 42,000 149,000 22,791 147,341 44,000 68,650 88,090 185,000 65,343 50,000 72,897 72,897 120,000 60,000 347,322 270,312 145,000 60,825;: 62,991 40,000 687,750 141,000 Disbursements $ 974,937 $ • $ • 1,230,132 1,128,132 2,353,409 2,353,409 694,131 - 694,131 7,115,005 7,115,005 28,337,784 . 27,711,929 15,477,452 12,821,503 < ` 153,000 153,000' $ 2,744,032 $ 848,959 .$ 57,097,038 _ 5E952,046 $ Article Article 3 Planning, Programming and Administrative ' Totals Unclaimed Allocations Disbursements Allocations= Disbursements -- Allocations Disbursements Amount $ $ $ 1,202,144 736,481 174,131 81,392 42,000 1,379,132 22,791 147,341 44,000 68,650 88,090 185,000 55,343 50,000 72,897 120,000 2,700,731 145,000 60,825 12,000 .12,000 - 12,000 687,750 694,131 3,343,428 3,343,42.8 10,458,433 28,337,784 116,300 116,300 116,300 15,477,452 - • --'-153,000' $ 3,471,728, $ 3,471,728 S. 63 312 798 $ 1,177,437 $ 24,707 736,481 174,131 (741) 82,133 42,000 1,128,132 251,000 22,791 147,341 44,000 68,650 62,991 25,099 40,000 145,000 55,343 50,000 72,897 60,000 60,000 2,623,721 77,01a 145,000 60,825 12,000 141,000 546,750 694,131 10,458,433 27,71,1,929 625,855 116,300 12,821,503 2,655,949 153,000 8 57,272,733 8 6,040,065 " Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Unclaimed Apportionments (Articles 4 and 8) Year Ended June 30, 2006 Fiscal Year 2005/2006 Apportionment Total Unclaimed Amounts Unclaimed Unclaimed Amount Amount Unclaimed Interest Apportionment Claimed Apportionment Apportionment Claimed Retumed Apportionment Allocation June 30, 2006 Westem County: - Rail $ 12,752,492 $ 7,136,976 $ 5,615,516 $ 15,990,940 $ (2,846) -$ - $ 15,993,786 .$ 585,451 $ 22,194,753 Bus. 45,213,380 31,698,031 13,515,349 17,440,219 566,001 239,640 17,113,858 877,575 31,506,782 Coachella Valley 15,471,132 11,790,328 " 3,680,804 4,119,112 1,050,300 3,068,812 126,001 6,875,617 Palo Verde Valley:. Transit 724,025 713,256 10,769 340 11,109 Unallocated 493,690 493,690 302,828 - 302,828 24,486 821,004 Total transportation 74,654,719 51,338,591 23,316,128 37,853,099 1,613,455 239,640 36,479,284 1,613,853 61,409,265 Auditor/Controller 12,000 12,000 Commission administration 700,000 700,000 Commission planning 2,643,428 2,643,428 SCAG planning 116,300 116,300 Prior Fiscal Year Total administration and planning 3,471,728 3,471,728 Total apportionments ��$ 78,126,447 $ 54,810,319 $ 23,316,128 $ _37,853,099 $ 1,613,455 239,640 5 36,479,284 3 1613,853 5 61.409,265 Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Unclaimed Apportionments (Article 3). Year Ended June 30, 2006 Bicycle and pedestrian projects Unclaimed Apportionment July 1, 2005 Apportionment $ 1,968,830$ 1,692,851 115 Unclaimed Interest Apportionment Disbursements_ Allocations June 30, 2006 1 $ 86,552 $ 2,899,274 McGladrey& Pullen Certified Public Accountants Independent Auditor's Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and .Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, California We, have audited the financial statements of Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside, as administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2006, and have issued our report thereon dated October 20, 2006. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Internal Control Over Financial Reporting In planning and performing our audit, we considered the Commission's intemal control over financial reporting in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements and not to provide assurance on the intemal control over financial reporting. Our consideration of the internal control over financial reporting would not necessarily disclose all matters in the intemal control over financial reporting that might be material weaknesses. A material weakness is a reportable condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the intemal control components does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that misstatements caused by error or fraud in amounts that would be material in relation to the financial statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. We noted no matters involving the intemal control over financial reporting and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses. Compliance and Other Matters As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the Commission's financial statements are free of material misstatement; we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. This included those provisions of laws and regulations identified in. the Transportation Development Act of 1971, as amended, and corresponding regulations of the Caffornia Govemment Code. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit and, accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. This report is intended solely for the information and use of management of the Commission, the Board of Commissioners and the Department of Transportation of the State of Califomia, and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than those specified parties. /��`K. «� Riverside, Califomia October 20, 2006 McGladrey 8 Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. ATTACHMENT 3 • State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Financial and Compliance Report Year Ended June 30, 2006 McGladrey& Pullen Certified Public Accountants McGladrey 8 Pullen, LLP is a member rum of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entdies. 117 Contents Independent Auditors Report on the Financial Statements and Supplementary Information 1 and 2 Financial Statements Balance Sheet 3 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Change in Fund Balance 4 Notes to Financial Statements 5-6 Supplementary Information Schedule of Allocations and Disbursements Approved During the Year 7 Independent Auditor's Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed, in Accordance with Government Auditing. Standards 8 :118 McGladrey& Pullen Certified Public Accountants Independent Auditoes Report on the Financial Statements and Supplementary Information Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, Califomia We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside, as administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2006, as listed in the table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Commission's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting. principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. As discussed in Note 1, the financial statements present only the State Transit Assistance Fund and do not purport to, and do not, present fairly the financial position of the Commission or the County of Riverside, California, as of June 30, 2006, and the respective changes in its financial position, where applicable, for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the financial. statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside, as administered by the Commission, as of June 30, 2006, and the respective changes in financial position, where applicable, thereof for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. 1n accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated October 20, 2006 on our consideration of the Commission's intemal control over financial reporting and our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of intemal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the intemal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Govemment Auditing Standards and should be considered in assessing the results of our audit. The State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside has not presented a Management's Discussion and Analysis required by Governmental Accounting Standards. Board (GASB) Statement No. 34 that the GASB has determined is necessary to supplement, although not required to be a part of, the financial statements. • McGladrey &Pullen, IlP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation or separate and independent legal entities. 119 ®' Our audit was conducted for the purpose offorming an opinion on the financial statements taken as a whole. The Schedule of Allocations and Disbursements Approved During the year. listed in the table of contents as supplementary information is presented for purposes of additional analysis and is not a required part of the financial statements of the State Transit Assistance Fund. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly presented in all material respects in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole. Riverside, Califomia October 20, 2006 State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission • Balance Sheet June 30, 2006 • Assets Cash and investments State allocation receivable intereareceivable Total assets Liabilities and Fund Balance Uabilitie5 Due to other Commission funds Total liabilities Fund Balance Reserved for allocations available for programming Reserved for unclaimed allocations Total fund balance Total liabilities and fund balance See Notes to Financial Statements. 1z1 $ 4,523,439 1,417,777 - 41,848 5,983,064 520,538 520,538 3,697,231 1,765,295 5,462,526 $ 5,983,064 State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Change in Fund Balance Year, Ended, June 30, 2006 Revenues: Sales taxes $ . 5,792,360; Interest : 131,303 Total revenues 5,923,663 Expenditures: Disbursements to claimants 4,387,463 Excess of revenues over expenditures 1,536,200 Fund balance at beginning of year 3,926,326 Fund balance at end of year $ 5,462,526- See Notes to Financial Statements. 1 2 State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements Note 1. Nature of Operations and Significant Accounting Policies The Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission), in :its capacity as the transportation planning agency for the County of Riverside, California (County), is responsible for administering funds provided through the State Transit Assistance Program, which was created in 1979 under Chapter 161 (SB 620) of the Califomia statutes to provide a second source of Transportation Development Act funding for the development of transit systems. The funds are derived from fuel sales tax revenue and are budgeted through legislation and appropriated to the State Controller's Office for allocation to local agencies. The accounting policies of the Commission conform to accounting principles generally accepted in the United States as applicable to govemmental units. A summary of the Commission's significant accounting, policies is as follows:.. Presentation: The accompanying financial statements of the. State Transit Assistance Fund (Fund) are intended to present the financial position and the changes in financial position, of only that portion of the governmental activities of the Commission that is attributable to the transactions of the Fund of the Commission. They do not purport to, and do not, present fairly the financial position of the Commission as of June 30, 2006 and the changes in its financial position, where applicable, for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the. United States. Basis of accounting: The modified accrual basis of accounting is followed in the Fund. Under the modified accrual basis of accounting, expenditures are recorded when they are expected to be liquidated with expendable available resources, and revenue is recorded when it becomes both measurable and available. "Measurable° means the amount of the transaction can be determined, and "available" means collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to be used to pay liabilities of the current period. Allocations to local agencies: State transit assistance funds are allocated to the operators within the County. Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 99313 allocates funds to regional transportation planning agencies based on the ratio of area population to state population. PUC Section 99314 allocates funds to public operators based on their share of fares and local support to other operators in the state. The allocations must be made in a resolution adopted by the Commission: Cash: It is the Commission's policy to deposit all funds received with the County of Riverside Tax Collector -Treasurer for investment until the funds are required for disbursement. Interest income is eamed while these funds are so deposited. Fund balance reservations: The reserve for allocations available for programming represents amounts apportioned but not allocated to claimants. The reserve for unclaimed allocations represents amounts allocated by the Commission and due to claimants but not yet paid. Disbursements to claimants: Disbursements to claimants represent funds disbursed to transit operators that have met the eligibility requirements to receive State Transit Assistance Program funds per PUC Sections 99313 to 99314. All disbursements are to be used for transit purposes. 113 State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements Note 2. Cash and Investments' Cash and investments at lune'30, 2006 consist of the following: Cash and investments with ;County .Treasurer : Cash at bank Investments at bank Total cash and investments 410 4,042,681 1,304 479,454 $ 4,523 439 The fundain the, CountyTreasury:'are pooled with those of other entities in the County and invested in accordance with the County's investment policy. These pooled funds are carried at fair value. Fair value is based on quoted market prices and/or direct bids, when needed, from government dealers on some, variable or floatingrate items. The Commission is a voluntary participant in the pool. An Investment Oversight Committee has been established by the County, which acts as a regulator of the pool. Additional information regarding these investments, including risk and maturity,'may be obtained from the Commission's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. ; Note 3. Fund Balance At June 30, 2006, amounts reserved for unpaid allocations and for apportioned and unallocated amounts are as follows: Reserved for allocations: available for programming: Western County: Commuter rail Bus Coachella Valley Palo Verde Valley Reserved for unclaimed allocations: Westem County: City of Banning City of Beaumont City of Corona Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) Total fund balance Note 4. Commitments The RTA and the SunLine Transit Agency (collectively, the Agencies), major transit providers for the .County, ; obtained available lease financing for bus acquisitions through the proceeds from certificates of !participation issued by the Califomia Transit: Finance Corporation (Corporation) for each agency. State transit assistance funds, to the extent of. the Agencies' eligible share; along with other federal and state funds were pledged as support for the 1,298,456 1,852,883 478,611 ,67,281' 3,697,231 64,708 214,577 243,600 1,242,410 1,765,295 5,462,526 Agencies' lease payments to the Corporation. • For the year ended June 30, 2006, no Fund revenues were expended for lease payments by the Agencies: 114 Supplementary Information 125 State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission. Schedule of Allocations and Disbursements Approved During the Year Year Ended June 30, 2006 Recipient Westem County: City of Banning City of Corona City of Riverside Riverside Transit Agency Commission Commuter Rail Program Total Western County SunLine Transit Agency California Code of Regulations Amount Amount Section No. Allocated Disbursed Reference 64,708 $ - 6731 298,600 55,000 i 6731 101,000 101,000 6731 2,316,931 1,717,186' 6730 350,000 ' 350,000: 6730 3,131,239 2,223,186 1,022,165 2,070,872.`` 6730 Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency 93,240 93,2406730 Other - 165. $ 4,246,644 $ 4,387,463 i i6 McGladrey& Pullen Certified Public Accountants Independent Auditor's Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, California We have audited the' financial statements of the State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside, as administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2006, and have issued our report thereon dated October 20, 2006. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Govemment Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Internal Control Over Financial Reporting In planning and performing our audit, we considered the Commission's internal control over financial reporting in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements and not to provide assurance on the intemal control over financial reporting. Our consideration of the internal control over financial reporting would not necessarily disclose all matters in the intemal control over financial reporting that might be material weaknesses. A material weakness is a reportable condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the intemal control components does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that misstatements caused by error or fraud in amounts that would be material in relation to the financial statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. We noted no matters involving the intemal control over financial reporting and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses. Compliance and Other Matters r As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the Commission's financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. This included those provisions of laws and regulations identified in the Transportation Development Act of 1971, as amended, and corresponding regulations of the Califomia Govemment Code. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit and, accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The result's of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Govemment Auditing Standards. This report is intended solely for the information and use of management. of the Commission, the Board of Commissioners and the Department of Transportation of the State of California, and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than those specified parties. J �sr�GsL, G4� Riverside, Califomia October 20, 2006 McGladrey 8 Pullen, L P is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. 1 17 ATTACHMENT 4 Riverside County Transportation Commission Compliance Reports Year Ended June 30, 2006 McGladrey& Pullen • Certified Public Accountants AkGladrey & Pullen; ue is a member firm ofRSIN International, an affiliation of separate and independentlegal entities. 128 Contents Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Note to schedule of expenditures of federal awards Independent Auditor's Report on: Internal control over financial reporting and on compliance and other matters based on an audit of financial statements performed in accordance with Govemment Auditing Standards Compliance with requirements applicable to its major program and on intemal control over compliance in accordance with OMB Circular A-133 and on the schedule of expenditures of federal awards 4 and'5 Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs 6 and 7 Summary Schedule of Prior Year Audit Findings g 129 Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Year Ended June 30, 2006 Grantor/Pass-through Grantor Program Title U.S. Department of Transportation: Highway Research, Planning and Construction Program Pass -through StateDepartment of Transportation: SR 60 from 1-215 to Redlands HOV Lanes Riverside to Orange County Major Investment Study Pass -through San Bemardino Associated Govemments: Rideshare Programs , Regional Ridematching Pass -through Orange County Transportation Authority Regional Ridematching Pass -through Ventura County Transportation Commission: Regional Ridematching Federal Transit Cluster, Formula Grants: Pass -through Riverside Transit Agency: Perris Multimodal Direct program: N. Main Corona Parking Expansion Total expenditures of federal awards * Denotes major program. See Note to Schedule of Expenditures otFederal Awards. 1�0 Catalog of. Federal Domestic Assistance Number 20.205 20.205 . Pass -through; Entity Identifying Number/ Federal Grant Number Expenditures CMLN-6054;(016) 234,119 STPL-6054 (039) 1,395,989 20.205' A 06-004 / 05-41-556 879,306 20.205- A 06-004 / 0541-556 31,972 20.205 * , 05-41-562 / C 4 0329 62,261 20.205 " M 24-001/MOURS0506 "_ , 21,525 , 2,625,172 20.500 M23-001 20.507 ' CA-90-Y182-00' 112,906 133,787 246,693'' $ 2,871,865 " Riverside County Transportation Commission Note to Schedule of Expenditures of federal Awards Note 1. Basis of Presentation The accompanying Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (the Schedule); presents; the activity of all federal award programs of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission). The Schedule includes federal awards received directly from federal agencies, as well as federal awards passed through other agencies. The Commission's reporting entity is defined in Note 1 to the Commission's basic; financial statements. Because the Schedule presents only a selected portion of the operations of the Commission, it is not intended to, and does not, present the financial position of the Commission. The accompanying Schedule is presented on the modified -accrual basis of accounting. The information inthisSchedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non -Profit Organizations. Therefore, some amounts presented in this Schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the basic financial statements. 1��1 McGladrey& Pullen Certified Public Accountants Independent Auditor's Report on'•Internal 'Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing' Standards i. Board of Commissioners' Riverside County Transportation Commission . Riverside, Califomia • We have . audited the financial statements of the govemmental 'activities, each major fund and the aggregate remaining fund information of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission) as of and for the year ended June 30, 2006, which collectively comprise the Commission's basic financial statements, and have issued our report thereon dated October 20, 2006. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. . Internal Control over Financial Reporting In planning and performing our audit, we considered the Commission's intemal control over financial reporting in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial statements and not to provide assurance on the intemal control over financial reporting. Our consideration of the intemal control over financial reporting would not necessarily disclose all matters in the intemal control over financial reporting that might be material weaknesses. A material weakness is a reportable condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the internal control components does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that misstatements caused by error or fraud in amounts that would be material in relation to the financial statements, being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. We noted .no matters involving the internal control over financial reporting and its, operation, that we consider to be material weaknesses. Compliance and Other Matters As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the Commission's financial statements are free of material misstatement, weperfomled tests of its compfiance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the detemiination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit and, accordingly, we' do not express such an opinion. The results, of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. ' This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Board of Commissioners, management, federal awarding agencies and ,pass -through entities, and is not intended to be and should not be, used by anyone other than those specked: parties. • Riverside, Califomia October 20, 2006 . McGiadrey 8 Pullen; LLP is a member firth of RSM Inlematienal, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. 3 132 McGladrey& Pullen Certified Public Accountants Independent Auditor's. Report on Compliance with Requirements Applicable to Its Major Program and on Internal Control over Compliance in accordance with OMB Circular A-133 and on the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Board of Commissioners Riverside. County Transportation Commission Riverside, Califomia Compliance We have audited the compliance of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission) with the types of compliance requirements described in the U.S. Office of Management and Budget's(OMB) Circular A-133, Compliance Supplement, that are applicable to its major federal program for the year. ended June 30, 2006. The Commission's major federal program is identified in the summary of the auditor's results section of the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs. Compliance with the requirements of laws, regulations, contracts and , grants applicable to its major federal program is the responsibility of the Commission's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Commission's compliance based on our audit. We conducted our audit of compliance in -accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America; the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Govemment Auditing Standards,' issued_ by the Comptroller General of the United States; and OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and ,ldon- . Profit Organizations. Those standards and OMB Circular A-133 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether noncompliance with the types of compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on the major federal program occurred. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Commission's compliance with those requirements and performing such other. procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. -We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our audit does not provide a legal determination on the Commission's compliance with those • requirements. In our opinion, the Commission complied, in all .material respects, with the requirements referred to above that are applicable to its major federal program for the year ended June 30, 2006. Internal Control over Compliance The management of the Commission is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective intemal control over compliance with requirements of laws, regulations, contracts and grants applicable to federal programs. In planning and performing our audit, we considered the Commission's intemal control over compliance with requirements that could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on compliance and. to test and report on intemal control over compliance in accordance with OMB Circular A-133. . McGladrey &Pullen, LLP is a member fine of RSM International, - an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. 4 133 Our consideration of the internal_ control over compliance would not necessarilydisclose all matters in the internal control that might be material, weaknesses. A material weakness is a reportable condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the internal control components does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that noncompliance with applicable requirements of laws, regulations, contracts and grants caused by error or fraud that would be material in relation to a major federal program being audited may occur and not be detected within a:timely ; period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. We noted no matters involving the internal control overcompliance and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses. Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund ;and the aggregate remaining fund information of the Commission as of and for the year ended June 30, 2006,, which collectively comprise the Commission's basic financial statements, and have issued our report thereon dated October 20, 2006. Our audit was performed for the purpose of forming an opinion on the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards is presented for purposes of additional analysis as required by U.S. OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non -Profit Organizations, and is not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. This report is intended for the information and use of the Board of Commissioners, management, federal awarding. agencies and pass -through entities; and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than those. specified parties:: Riverside, California October 20, 2006 1J4 Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended June 30, 2006 1. Summary of Independent Auditor's Results Financial Statements Type of auditor's report issued: Unqualified Internal control over financial reporting: • Material weakness(es) identified? • Reportable condition(s) identified that are not considered to be material weaknesses? Noncompliance material to financial statements noted? Federal Awards . Internal control over major program: • Material weakness(es) identified? • Reportable condition(s) identified that are not considered to be material weaknesses? Yes Yes Yes None Reported No Yes X None Reported Type of auditor's report issued on compliance for major programs: Unqualified • Any audit findings disclosed that are required to be reported in accordance with Section 510(a) of OMB Circular A-133? Yes Identification of major program: CFDA Number Name of Federal Program 20.205 Highway Research, Planning and Construction Program Dollar threshold used to distinguish between type.A and type B programs: $ 300,000 Auditee qualified as low -risk auditee? 1J5 X Yes No Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs (Continued) Year Ended June 30, 2006 II. Financial Statement Findings A. ` Reportable Conditions None reported. B. Compliance findings None reported. III. Findings and Questioned Costs for Federal Awards A. Reportable Condition None reported. B. Compliance Findings None reported. 116 Riverside County Transportation Commission Summary Schedule of Prior Year Audit Findings Year Ended June 30, 2006 There were no audit findings reported for the year ended June 30, 2005. 117 McGladrey& Pullen Certified Public Accountants Independent Auditor's Report Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, Califomia ATTACHMENT 5 We have audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, the financial statements of the govemmental activities, each major fund and the aggregate remaining fund information of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the Commission). as of and for the year ended June 30, 2006, which collectively comprise the Commission's basic financial statements, and have issued our report thereon, dated October 20, 2006. In connection with our audit, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the Commission failed to comply with the terms, covenants, provisions or conditions of Section 6.2(g) or Section 6.2(1) contained in the Reimbursement Agreement dated March 1, 2005, with Bank of America, N.A., a national banking association organized under the laws of the United States of America, relating to the Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds) Series A and Series B, insofar as they relate to accounting matters. However, our audit was not directed primarily toward obtaining knowledge of such noncompliance. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Board of Commissioners and management of the Commission and Bank of America, N.A., and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified parties. Riverside, Califomia October 20, 2006 McGladrey 8 Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. 138 " McGladrey& Pullen Certified Public Accountants November 14, 2006 To the Audit Ad Hoc Committee of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, Califomia ATTACHMENT 6 This letter is intended to inform the Audit Ad Hoc Committee about significant matters related to the conduct of the annual audit so it can appropriately discharge its oversight responsibility and that we comply with our professional responsibilities to the Audit Ad Hoc Committee. The following summarizes various matters. which must be communicated to you under auditing standards generally accepted in the United States, of America.. The Auditor's Responsibility under Auditing Standards Generally Accepted in the United States of America Our audit of the financial statements of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission) for the year ended June 30, 2006 was conducted in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America; Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; the provisions. of the Single Audit Act, OMB Circular A-133 and OMB's Compliance Supplement; the Transportation Development Act of 1971, as amended; and corresponding regulations of the California Code of Regulations. Those standards, circulars, regulations and the supplement require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether caused by error; fraudulent financial reporting or misappropriation of assets. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management; as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Accordingly, the audit was designed to obtain reasonable, rather than absolute, assurance about the financial statements. We believe our audit accomplished that objective. In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also performed tests of controls over intemal control over financial reporting and tests of compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grant agreements that contribute to the evidence supporting our opinion on the financial statements. However, they. do not provide a basis for opining on the Commission's internal control over financial reporting or on compliance and other matters. Management Judgments and Accounting Estimates Accounting estimates are an integral part of the preparation of financial statements and are based upon management's current judgment. The process used by management encompasses its knowledge and experience about past and current events and certain assumptions about future events. Management has informed us it used all the relevant facts available to it at the time to make the best judgments about accounting estimates and we considered this information in the scope of our audit. Estimates significant to the financial statements include such items as valuation of vacant land acquired and the useful lives of capital assets. The Audit Ad Hoc Committee may wish to monitor throughout the year the process used to compute and record these accounting estimates. _ - McGladrey.& Pullen, UP is a member firm ofRSM International; an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. 139 Riverside County Transportation Commission November 14, 2006 Page 2 Audit Adjustments There were no audit adjustments. made to the original trial balance presented to us to begin our audit:. Uncorrected Misstatements We accumulated. two uncorrected misstatements, which were discussed with management and were determined by management to be immaterial, both individually and in the aggregate, to the opinion units of the financial statements. Therefore, the adjustments to correct these misstatements were not made to the financial uncorrected misstatements are summarized in the accompanying schedule: Accounting Policies and Altemative Treatments Management and: the Audit Ad Hoc Committee have the ultimate responsibility for the appropriateness of the accounting policies used by the Commission. Following is a description of significant accounting policies which were initially implemented during the year. Govemmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No: 42, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Impairment of Capital Assets and foulnsurance Recoveries. GASB Statement No. 46, Net Assets Restricted for Enabling Legislation (An Amendment of GASB Statement No. 34). The GASB has issued certain new pronouncements, which follow, that will/may impact the Commission's accounting policies in the future: GASB, Statement No. 45„Accounting and Financial Reporting by Employers for Postemploymenf Benefits Other Than. Pensions, will be effective for the Commission beginning with its year -ending June 30, 2008. GASB' Statement No. 48, 'Sales and Pledges of Receivables and Future Revenues and Infra -Entity Transfers of Assets and Future -Revenues, will be effective for the Commission beginning with its year ending June 30, 2008. We did not,identify any significant or unusual transactions or significant, accounting policies in controversial,or' emerging areas for which there is a:lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. Other Information in Documents Containing Audited Financial Statements We are not aware: of, any other documents that contain the audited basic financial! statements. If such documents were to be published, we,would have a responsibility to determine that such financial information was not materially inconsistent with the audited statements of the Commission. Disagreements with Management , We encountered no disagreements with management over the application of significant accounting, principles; the . basis for managements judgments on any significant matters, the scope of the audit orsignificant,disclosures to be included in the financial statements, Riverside County Transportation Commission November 13, 2006 Page 3 Consultations with Other Accountants We are not aware of any consultations management had with other accountants about accounting er auditing matters. Major Issues. Discussed with Management Prior to Retention No major issues were discussed with management prior to our retention to perform the aforementioned audit. Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit We did not encounter any difficulties in dealing with management related to the performance of the audit. Closing We will be pleased to respond to any questions you have about the foregoing. We appreciate the opportunity to continue to be of service to Riverside County Transportation Commission. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Audit Ad Hoc Committee, Board of Commissioners, and management, and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified parties. Riverside, Califomia 141 " Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Passed Adjustments As of and for the Year Ended June 30, 2006 We believe that the effects of the uncorrected misstatements aggregated by you and summarized below are immaterial, both individually and in the aggregate, to the opinion units of the basic financial statements. For purposes of this representation, we consider items to be material, regardless of their size, if they involve the misstatements or omission of accounting information that, in light of surrounding circumstances, makes it probable that the judgment of a reasonable person relying on the information would be changed or influenced by the omission or misstatement. Govemment Activities Effect -Increase (Decrease) Description Assets Liabilities Equity Revenue Expenses Current Year Misstatements " Record litigation settlement $ - $ 40 000 $ - $ - $ 40,000 " Understatement of accounts payable 176,517 - - 176,517 $ $ 216,517 - $ $. 216,517 Current year effect of change in net assets (216,517) Effect on ending net assets $ (216,517) Detail by Fund " Measure "A \Western County $ - $ 176,517 $ (176,517) $ - $ 176,517 " SAFE 40,000 (40,000) - 40,000 Total $ - $ 216,517 $ (216,517) $ - $ 216,517 142 " McGladrey& Pullen Certified Public Accountants Independent Accountant's Report on Applying Agreed -upon Procedures Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, California ATTACHMENT 7 We have performed the procedures enumerated below to the accompanying Appropriations Limit Calculation of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the Commission) for the year ended June 30, 2006. These procedures, which were agreed to by the Commission and the League of California Cities (as presented in the publication entitled Agreed -upon Procedures Applied to the Appropriations_ Limitation Prescribed by Article XIII-B of the California Constitution), were performed solely to assist the Commission in meeting the requirements of Section 1.5 of Article XIII-B of the California Constitution. The Commission's management is responsible for the Appropriations Limit Calculation. This agreed -upon procedures engagement was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The sufficiency of these procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in this report. Consequently, we make no representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose. The procedures performed and our findings were as follows: 1. We obtained the completed intemal calculations and compared the limit and annual adjustment factors included in those calculations to the limit and annual adjustment factors that were adopted by a resolution of the Board of Commissioners. We also compared the population and inflation options included in the aforementioned calculations to those that were selected by a recorded vote of the Board of Commissioners. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. 2. For the accompanying Appropriations Limit Calculation, we added line A, last year's limit, to line E, total adjustments and compared the resulting amount to line F, this year's limit. Finding: No exceptions were noted'as a result of our procedures. 3. We compared the current year information presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit Calculation to the supporting calculations described in item 1 above. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. 4. We compared the prior year Appropriations Limit presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit Calculation to the prior year Appropriations Limit adopted by the Board. of Commissioners during the prior year. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. We were not engaged to, and did not; conduct an audit, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion on the accompanying Appropriations Limit Calculation of the Commission. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. No procedures have been performed with respect to the determination of the appropriations limit for the base year, as defined by Article XIII-B of the Califomia Constitution. McGladrey & Pullen, lLP is a member firm of RSM International, .an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. .1 43 This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Board of Commissioners and management of the Commission, and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other thanAhese specked parties. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. Riverside, California October 20, 2006 144 Riverside County Transportation Commission Appropriations Limit Calculation Year Ended June 30, 2006 Amount Source A. Last year's limit $ 224,291,642 B. Adjustment factors: 1. Population change 1.0382 State Finance 2. Per capita change 1.0480 State Finance Total adjustments [(B:1 x B.2)-1.01 0.0880 C. Annual adjustment 19,745,201 (BM) D. Other adjustments: 1. Lost responsibility ( ) 2. Transfer to private ( ) 3. Transfer to fees (-) 4. Assumed responsibility (+) _ Subtotal E. Total adjustments 19,745,201 (C+D) This year's limit $ 244,036,843 (A+E) 145 McGladrey&Pullen Certified Public Accountants Independent Accountant's Report on Applying Agreed -upon Procedures Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission and Board of Directors Inland Transportation Services Riverside, Caliifomia ATTACHMENT 8 We have performed the procedures enumerated .below, which were agreed to by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission) and Inland Transportation Services (ITS), solely to assist the specified parties with respect to the purchase of gift certificates or coupon incentives and the payment of incentives related to the Commuter Assistance Program (Program) administered by ITS for the year ended June 30, 2006. This agreed - upon procedures engagement was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The sufficiency of these procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in this report. Consequently, we make no representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose. As background information for this engagement to perform agreed -upon procedures, we were provided ;with. Resolution No. 03-025, Resolution of the Commission Amending Guidelines for the Administration of the Measure A Funded Commuter Incentive Projects as part of its Program, and Agreement No. 0641-532, Amendment No.5 to the Agreement for Development and Management of Commuter Assistance between ITS and the Commission, entered into as of July 1, 2005. In addition, we. received an explanation of the ITS registration process with the employer and employee from the program manager of ITS: The procedures and related findings are as follows: 1. We obtained a list of all disbursements recorded by the Commission to vendors for the purchase of gift certificates or coupon incentives for the year. ended June 30, 2006 and judgmentally selected a sample of 10 disbursements for selected testing (see Exhibit 1). Our procedures and findings related to Exhibit 1 are as follows: a. We agreed the amount recorded as disbursed by the Commission to canceled checks or warrants without exception. b. We agreed the amount disbursed to the vendor by the Commission to the check request form prepared. by ITS without exception. c. We agreed the amount recorded and the payee to the log of requested gift certificates maintained by ITS without exception. 2. We obtained the "Rideshare Payment" Reports that list recorded disbursements made to recipients by ITS _ for the year ended June 30, 2006 and. judgmentally selected a sample of 10 items for selected testing (see Exhibit 2). Our selected testing and findings related to Exhibit 2 were as follows: a. We obtained the Employer Information Form and Statement of Participation (SOP) for the employer indicating their participation with ITS as a participant. No exceptions were noted. b. We obtained the Employee Enrollment Form indicating the employee is registered with. ITS as a participant. No exceptions were noted. McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM IMemational, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities c. We agreed ITS' disbursement to the employee claim form, noting proper approval of the claim, without exception: d. We recalculated the number of days the employee participated : in each rideshare mode and the incentive earned for each rideshare mode and agreed those totals to the amounts listed on the monthly. incentive claim form without exception. e. We agreed the daily amount of reimbursement per mode of transportation to the amount approved in the SOP without exception. f. We agreed the recorded disbursement amount per the incentive Payment Report to the employer transmittal letter without exception. 3. We compared ITS'total gift certificate inventory balance from gift certificate inventory schedules provided by ITS as of June 30,'2006 to the actual gift certificates maintained by'ITS by judgmentally selecting certain gift . certificates for recounting. No exceptions were noted. The gift certificate inventory balance per the inventory., schedules as'ofJune 30, 2006 is $61,020. We were not engaged to, and did not, conduct an examination, the objectiveof which would be the expression of an opinion on the specified elements, accounts or items thereof related to the program. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we'performed additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Board of Commissioners and management of Riverside County Transportation Commission and the Board of Directors and management of Inland Transportation Services, and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified! parties. , Riverside, Cal'rforni{ia October 24, 2006 147 Riverside County Transportation Commission and Inland Transportation Services (Contractor) Schedule of Selected Purchases of Gift Certificates and Coupons by the Contractor Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2006 Project # Vendor Voucher Date Amount Check # P2101 Vons 12/01/05 - $ 5,000 32328 P2101 Stater Bros. 07/25/05 2,500 31088 P2102 Stater Bros. 05/01/06 15,000 33843 P2102 Vons 01/03/06 15,000 32671 P2102 Vons 07/03/05 20,00030914 P2110 Vons 10/19/05 5,000 32029 P2110 Stater Bros. 10/19/05 5,000 32006 P2111 Stater Bros. 03/06/06 16,000 33254 P2111 Stater Bros. 11/28/05 20,000 32257 P2111 Vons 07/03/05 20,000 30914 Riverside County Transportation Commission and Inland Transportation Services (Contractor) - Scheduie of Selected Employee Incentive Payments Made by the Contractor Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2006 Employee. Initials Employer Name M.M. Loma Linda University Medical Center Stater Bros. M.B. St. Paul Travelers Vons J.M. National RV Inc. Vons M.S. Wal-Mart (Riverside) StaterBros. V.S. Wal-Mart (Hemet) Stater Bros. S.H. , Elsinore Valley,Mun. Water District Home Depot S.J. Walgreens Vons A.P. County of San Bemardino Vons J.P. Environmental Systems Research Ontario Mills W.H. .. , Patton State Hospital Stater Bros. Public Bus 08/26/05 Carpool'; 03/22/06 Bicycle 07/18/05 Carpool 01/19/06 Incentive Commute Disbursement Type Mode Date Amount Carpool 02/09/06 $ 60 Carpool 05/15/06 105 Carpool 05/04/06 100 Carpool 12/16/05 135 Carpool 09/12/05 115 Carpool' 05/22/06 100 65 110' 92 105. c� verside County ransportation Commission November 27, 2006 ATTACHMENT 9 Riverside County Regional Complex 4080 Lemon Srneb 3rd Floor • Riverside, Catsfarnia Mailing Address: Past Office Bar 12008 • Riverside, CahAmia 92502 2208 Phone (951) 787-7141 • Fax (951) 787-7920 • smomerte erg Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, California The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission) for the year ended June 30, 2006 is hereby submitted for your receipt and acceptance: The CAFR is presented in three sections consisting of Introductory, Financial, and Statistical. The Financial Section includes the audited financial statements and other supplementary information and the independent auditor's report onthose financial statements. Management of the Commission is responsible for the financial statements and other information presented in the CAFR. As the Executive Director and Chief Financial Officer of the Commission, we have reviewed the CAFR for the year ended June 30, .2006. Based on our knowledge, the CAFR does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary in .order to make the statements made in the CAFR not misleading with respect to the period covered by the CAFR. Additionally, based on our knowledge, the financial statements and other financial information included in the CAFR fairly present in all material respects'' the financial condition and results of operations of the Commission as of and for the year ended June 30, 2006. . Eric Haley, Executive Director r3 Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer 150 ATTACHMENT 10 Riverside Count) Regional Complex 4080 Lemon Scree; 3nd Floor • Riverside, C.alifornia Mailing Address: Post Offue Box 12008 • Riverside, Confrm& 92502 2208 Phone (951) 787-7141 Fax (951) 787-7920 • wunaretaong November 27, 2006 Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, Califomia In connection with the submission of the Comprehensive AnnualFinancial Report (CAFR) of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission) for the year ended June 30, 2006, as the management and Directors of the Commission, we understand that we are responsible for the operations and activities of the Commission's programs, projects, and administration. Accordingly, we hereby make the following representations based, upon our knowledge. We are responsible for establishing and maintaining controls and procedures related to these operations and activities. We have designed such controls and procedures to ensure that material information is made known to us, particularly during the year ended June 30, 2006. The controls and procedures have been effective for the year ended June 30, 2006 and through the date of this letter. There have been and are no significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls regarding financial reporting for the same period which could adversely affect the Commission's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data. There .have been and are no material weaknesses in internal controls. There have been no significant changes in intemal control or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to June 30, 2006. Management also recognizes its responsibility for fostering a strong ethical climate so that the Commission's affairs are conducted according to the highest standards of personal and organizational conduct. In connection with this responsibility, we are not aware of any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Commission's intemal controls. �/ `✓'� _T Eric Haley, Executive Director Mayer, Deputy Executive Director Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director 151 Cathy Bechtel, Project Delivery Director ohn Standifordublic Affairs Director Theresia Trevino,Chief Financial Officer •lr nie,VViggins, ROT. dnal,Programs Director " AGENDA ITEM 7D " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: December 13, 2006 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Michele Cisneros, Accounting and. Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Financial Statements STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive. and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the first quarter ended September 30, 2006. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: During the first three months of the fiscal year, staff has monitored the revenues and expenditures of the Commission. The first, quarter of the year is primarily directed toward completing end of the year activities. Staff expects most of the categories to present a more realistic outlook by the end of the second quarter. The operating statement shows the sales tax revenues for the first quarter at 10% of the budget. This is a result of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 33. GASB 33 requires sales tax revenue to be accrued for the period in which it is collected at the point of sale. The State Board of Equalization collects the Measure A'funds and remits them 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 for July 2006. On a cash basis, the Measure A and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) sales tax revenues are 10% and 7% higher, respectively, than the same period last fiscal year. Federal, state and local government reimbursements and other revenues are on a reimbursement basis, and the Commission will receive these revenues as the projects are completed and invoiced to the respective agencies. The expenditure categories are in line overall with the expectations of the budget. General administrative expenditures are higher due to a one-time payment in July for the Commission's FY 2006/07 general liability insurance. Office lease and Agenda Item 7D 153 utilities are slightly over as a result of the rent payment due by the 1st of each month. The October rent was paid on September 26, 2006. Rail operations and maintenance expenditures are higher "due to the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) second" quarter operating contribution being disbursed on September 20, 2006. Intergovernmental distributions are expended as one-time LTF payments made at the beginning, of : the fiscal year based on claims submitted by Coachella Valley Association ,,,of Governments (CVAG) and Western" Riverside '' Council of Governments (WRCOG). Capital outlay reportsa negative actual amount. This .resulted from the reversal of the estimated expenditure' accrual made at June 30, 2006 for office improvements made but not yetinvoiced. Staff will continue to ,:monitor the revenues and expenditures an notify the Commission of any unusual events. Attachment: Quarterly Financial Statements — September'2006 Agenda Item 7D 154 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION QUARTERLY BUDGET VS ACTUAL 1ST QUARTER - FOR THREE MONTHS ENDED 9/30/2006 DESCRIPTION Revenues Sales tax Federal, state & local govemment reimbursements Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Other revenues Interest Total revenues Expenditures Administration Salaries & benefits General legal services Professional services Office lease & utilities General administrative expenditures Total administration Programs/projects Salaries & benefits General legal services Professional services General projects Highway engineering Highway construction Highway right of way/land Rail engineering Rail construction Rail right of way TUMF engineering TUMF construction TUMF right of way Local streets & roads Regional arterial Special studies FSP towing Commuter assistance Property management Motorist assistance Rail operations & maintenance STA distributions Specialized transit Planning & programming services . Total programs/projects Intergovernmental distribution Capital outlay Debt service Principal Interest Arbitrage rebate tax Cost of issuance Total debt service Total expenditures Excess of revenues over (under) expenditures Other financing sources/uses. Operating transfer in Operating transfer out , Bond proceeds Payment to escrow agent Total financing sources/uses Net change in fund balances Fund balance July 1, 2006 Fund balance September 30, 2006 BUDGET ACTUAL $ 167,122,400 23,567,000 42,000,000 20,921,300 12,509,000 REMAINING BALANCE PERCENT UTILIZATION $ 16,551,360 $ (150,571,040) - 10% 135,312 '(23,431,688) 1% 10,515,524 (31,484,476) 25% 2,580,168 (18,341,132) - 12% 944,900 (11,564,100) 8% 266,119,700 30,727,264 (235,392,436) 12%- 1,777,700 390,231 1,387,469 22% 174,500 10,555 163,945 6% 1,176,400 125,182 1,051,218 11 % 387,300 110,575 276,725 29% 1,075,200 498,956 576,244 46% 4,591,100 1,135,499 - 3,455,601 25% 2,858,600 669,362 2,189,238 23°% 1,285,300 167,078 1,118,222 13% 5,360,600 328,418 5,032,182 6% 4,224,568 65,781 4,158,787 2% 6.327,000 428,213 5,898,787 7% 39,629,556 483,418 - 39,146,138 1% 25,820,100 4,052,987 21,767,113 16% 7,450,000 93,804 _ 7,356,196 1% 1,741,500 1,610 1,739,890 0% 5,125,600 - 5,125,000 0°% 34,166,000 398,592 33,767,408 1% 21,848,000 - 21,848,000 0% 112,597,000 2,887,664 109,709,336 3% 58,318,300 4,013,305 54,304,995 7% 13,719,400 1,371,194 12,348,206 10% 2,731,414 - 51,555 2,679,859 2% 1,573,000 269,909 1,303,091 17% 4,951,800 356,265 4,595,535 7% 326,300 10,887 315,413 3% 1,872,000 101,663 1,770,337 - 5% 7,454,800 3,089,268 4,365,532 41°% 6,718,700, 1,235,835 5,482,865 18% 7,680,800 1,515,049 6,165,751 20% 82,200 14,521 67,679 18% 373,861,938 21,606,378 352,255,560 6°% 992,800 336,825 655,975 34% 533,000 (29,000) 562,000 -5°% 30,364,400 30,364,400 0% 9,063,606 217,555 8,846,045 2% - 0% 150,000 150,000 - 0°% 39,578,000 217,555 39,360,445 1°% 419,556,838 23,267,257 396,289,581 6% (153,437,138) 7,460,007 160,897,145 5 °% 83,053,100 8,926,541 (74,126,559) 11% 83,053,100 8,926,541 74.126,559 11°% 80,000,000 - (80.000,000) 0% - 0°% 80,000,000 - (80,000,000) 0% (73,437,138) 7,460,007 80,897,145 -10°% 376,727,234 376,727,234 - 100°% $ 303.290,096 $ 384,187,241 $ 80,897,145 127% 155 BIWSEPt 699'99 95696-1 ro — - 929'014 29L'SZL Laos 995'Ot 909'1 l£S'96£ LbZ 181'PSC $ 6Z9'0L26E $ L66'999'L 2E6'20L $ L9Z'9LE'941. $ 11,2'9E29 S B9Z098'L $ 49929 S ES£'SOS'E9L 899'LEL'4 f 916'8E9'OL $ 900Z'OE Ai:Nolen eoueleq puns DCZ 2Z2'92E 9E1'696'OE 9Z8'BSO'ZL EOCLOL SLE'6l8'8EL 9Z9294'S LEVLOL'LL 026'L9 2179'608'£9l Ll9 t— E09 690'OEZ'6 900Z'L Alnp eoueleq punj '100'099'L-EBL'09V8 (BZSLBE'4) 629 Z96'999'2. (seem' L) (£LB'099'E) L99 (666'664) (6Z0'00£) 999'800'1 sa01.e1e0 pun' ul dump Lary SEE LOS'S (GO (8L1'1,L6'll (S45'8ZS'9) sew/Nomos 6uloueu01elai IueBe morose a IuaLded • - speeooA0 puo9 169'9Z69 4661,Z Sl - - 8L2'626'L 990'L991 0029LE - re ielsueil 80029210 LOS'9Z6'9 ZE9'SZ9'9 - - - 805'4Z 0029GE - - ul 22lsue-0Buperatl0 sesn/samnos Bupueuy Am() 200'094'2 •SS9'66Z (b19'we'0) 6Z9 Z96'999'2 (98L'SZZ'L) (961'998'1) 299 LSO'LZO'9 (6Z0'00E) 996900'1 semllpuedxa (Japun)1en0$e111.1eneL ssenx3 LSZ'LAE Et 999'999'9 9l0'!LE 'E - 099'SEZ'1 OE9'L994 EL5'62 991'26L'0 96S 269 8E9'910'S semypuaexe leloL 999'212 SSS'212 999'212 999'22 aewee 19eP 11401 eouenssl yo LsoO xel mega; e6eglglV ISOMUl loelouPd eswes {qe0 (000'BZ) - - (n6'0 (B90'LZ) Aeµn0 n0E* 9Z8'9£E - 09'9E9 ugingplslp lemnuumino0iela 9LE'909'12 ZZ9'Z91.'6 - 9L0'1.2£'E 099 SEZ'L 0E8'196'b ELS'9L 9E9 al 995'86C 9E9'889'E sloafwtllswe,6wd leloi 129 bT— - - - - - 1ZS'41 seolnLea 6ulwwel6wtl g Buluueld 890'9 LS'L - - L40'9Zl'L 200'BBE Lisueq pez6e10a0S SE'S 9EZ'l SEB'SEZ'l - au00ngYlslp V1S 99Z'680'E - S9Z'fi90'E 4oueuelaewgsuo8eiado 0atl £99'101 - E99'10l eouelsleselspaoW 298'Ol - - - L99'OL luawe8euaw AYatlad' 60Z'9SE - - - 59i999 - 60uelslsw lelnww0'j 606'89Z - - - 606'69t 6ulma dSd 999'19 - - 909'CZ - LBL'S2 - Z9CZ salonio: epetlS08 L'LLE'GbsruE'LSOE'£LO'9 lepeyeuo!6ayS£8'906 ESC'41 LLO'SEDEspeNgsles lepVl099'L88'Z - 999'L98'Z Aem 1014iWf11 uo6aNl6edWfll• Z6S'88CZ6S'86E - 6u4esul6udW(1L • Aem1n 146Y 064 OL9'L - OL9'1 - uo9an9suoo 6eN 408'f8 - - - - 608'EB 6uYeaulBua pay L98'Z50'4 E85'5S0'b - • (985'Z) puel)Aem to W6Y Aem4661 Bl6'C99 - - - E66'OnL (929'9691 uoypNlauop Aem481H ElZ'Biv - 6E9'[L - 4Le'OLro - Bu4aeul8ue Aemueliu l9['S9 lb0'E - 1L8'L - 6Z6'09 - syoalatlle,ouaO 9lb'BZE 8C0'LZL 89S SZ - 6l6'ZEL 600'4 199'E9 seoln'es leugs9ayNd 9L0'L9L - EOE'9Z - - - LEL-Lb - 616 SZZ'E6 seoweslel6eu4;saoa0 Z9E'699 - 192'2E LL07 09L 69!Z6L 999'ZZ 319'b14 seieuaq g somas spelad/swekced 1.96'OS 94C8L0'L uom2slulwpe le'ol 660 PZ GS9bL4 swn9puedxe engap6lulwpe leieua0 LbE'S 9EZ'SOL s ieiOngeseelesyy0 6LZ'Z ZZE'es seowas leugsselad EZ9 RE seowas Ie6e1 Ieleue0 ZZ9'9L 604'LLE %swap g somas - u00e-0slulwPtl ' sam9pYatlu3 tilraL'OC 996'69Z NG'92 6Z8 996'9E6'01 9/VOL 5C9'995'2 OOZ'SL L86'6ZZ'DL 899'L4L b8Z'SZb'8 eenuanei lel0l 006'466 996'61,Z Z9L'bL - 6Z8 99b6L6 920'DL E96Z L68 006'f9L L9Z Z—� 4GE'LL {sBla{u1 89L'OBS'Z - - - - - - Zlt'fitro'Z 1 SS9'OSl senuenel'e41p 929'915'01 - KS SO 0L - - - - — (d6101)eed uo0e616IN uooleMUolleUoosuell' zle'sel LOC SEL S sluewes'ngwlw Luewwenoli Roo] g ems leaped 09E'L9991 $ $ - $ • $ • $ - $ ZL9'ZleS'Z S ES£'4/ $ SID'0E9'L $ • - $. 099 E9V9 S xel SOWS 6enueney 1V101 301A83S - WV80011d NOLLOMMSN00 Jinni 3ONVISISSY A311VA A311YA A1N000 3dVS 0N11d NO11d111310 comma* 1830 tl3dtld A1N00o 33d NO11,011114 1ISNVtl1 'V1131400'03 3083A N93183M /dSd 103N3O 1V3I213W1100 N143123M WSOdIN'1 NOI1V180dSNtlN1 31V1S OIVd - tl 39NSV3W 90/0C/6030N3 6111NOW 33NH1 SOd anavnt5 1SL ONOd A9 S1tl01OV A18318Vf10 NOISSIWWOO NOLLVili A1NL10O 301SN3AI21 AGENDA ITEM 7E • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: December 13, 2006 TO: Riverside County Transportation Committee FROM: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Investment Report STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended September 30, 2006. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Attached are the quarterly investment and cash flow reports as required by state law and Commission policy. Riverside County's Investment Report for the month ended September 30, 2006 is also attached for review. Attachments: 1) Quarterly Investment Report for the Quarter Ended September 30, 2006 2) County of Riverside Investment Report for the Month Ended September 30, 2006 Agenda Item 7E 157 Portfolio Invostment Typo a�F r-rooc7izz.oilis Statement of Compliance All of the above investments and any investment decisions made for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 were in full compliance with the Commission's investment policy as adopted on March 8, 2006. The Commission has adequate cash flows for six months of operations. Signed by- Chief Financial Officer 158 be9•t� Zlf S 991408'91 $ 000'o it VIN PIN 000'OOC $ LS0'LL $ SLCSLC 845L'BP$ ZC9•9£8'94$ ZSR - OCLOCL S06 1 Z90 811 1 (010'C1) 048'010'1 0S9'9Z01. (000'S) 000166'1 000.000Z (09V9) 09L'C68'1. - 000'0001 9Z0'4 000'086'1 916'918'1 (00910 00V886.1 4CL•Z66'1. 489'6Z 002T86 901.1,S6 (054%) SZL'CCZ'Z "SLS'Zbrt 06VZ OOS'LLS'l 012'916'1 (0) ZbL'399.Z ZOL'Z99'Z CU 9S'8'4 C£6'9S8'4 134 ass L'C86'4 000'000'S (019'02) 06C1816'2 000'000'C SZ9'886'C SZV886% (01VIM 06$'lL6'2 000'000T (089'61) OZC'096'Z . 000'000T SSOI NIVO 03211'3SW • SMVA 1900 13)11AVW 3401-10101d eweind Wryoda 100004104 41110N000.1u00i a ea pkyodua soma AN m1uuuto0M1I Itl 6 � S98'SZ4'9C0 SLL'0L0'9l 009'010% OOZ'996'1 COS'C68'Zb ObS'ttS'4Z 004'991 T 46E'S9L'940 Z91'91 4 9ZfrOtt9 ZL8'LCVSI Z4L'Z992 1V101 sluoulosAV luawlaenul laded 1e10+ewwo0leloN alaolLoO seliproes Anseal'Sp sopunoes AOua6y lammed spun IenlnW lelol'9ns punuopeOND IuawumnOO ueopewy Wld Iona -pund suo11e81190 Anseal umuewV lvld +OueYO IN0 :spun town Air 10od 4.mo° OiVe9 3dA11N3n1S3AN1 032114)0,01(18 %UP 90/0E/11 $0/9Z/90 tlN %9L'4 %06'4 %00'S %00'S %09'9 %C Z'S %OSP %PST %OS S %OZ'S %99'4 %889 S %Cl'4 %UT 9610'9 %OTC WN %4L'4 VN AllWUVW 010131A 000'9Z6'9 s %0101 %090'S %SLE'C ale% uoono0 90/St/90 90/90/LO 90181490 ae0 AlpnleW 000'009'Z $ 000'DSL'Z S . 000'0004Z $ 411811801 le enxeA led alOollaou0ualaN eoum010210W1Hd atle0eOupowry 01l aemele0 mould son eNOSIIS000o-810N (911-1d) Woe ueol ewaH glom : s811pn ovo ;1600!6#000000900M9SI@IN :eose4ound 900Z'OC aunt popua Aspenp otp suolloesue4 iuoupoewl VIN VIN %000'9 Y/N 6040/90 CO20/00 000'00C $ %09L 4 WN ZPL'Z90'64 $ L020/00 90/17.1C0 000'0561. %9L9'4 L0/0121 90/9020 000'000'1. %0099 90/9020 90/90/Z0 000'000'Z %0983. 80/8141.0 9020/Z0 000'0001 %SZI.'S 20121480 902020 000.000'Z %00017 LO/terel 902020 000'OOOZ 1020'0 20/9Z/10 902020 000'000'1 %DOTI) L0/60/11 .90/91./11 000'09n %09L'4 LO/OZ/90 50/L0/01 000'000'Z %SZ9'C VIN WN 90/8Z/OL 90/8Z/00 000'Wq0�g0(F0'9 M�Y N%OSP te,(A14iiv YOrms 90/C1/CO 000'OUo'S %NO'S L012100 90/91/20 000'000'0 %Mt 90/St/tt 90/9Z/00 000'000'0 %OUT L0/62/90 SO/St/90 000'000'0 %010'4 L0/51.20 SO/5120 000'000T %OOS'C 31V0 AllanitlW 31V0 3SVHO%nd 3MVA W.1 li wVWRoy LuVVYReV WN wVtltlR8y WN 988'SZ9900 $$ 496'$90'n Z8ZY96 MOM 991.'00911 06S'OS4'4l 809'99Z 609'99Z CC9'9ZZ'09 IiANVY/L%n-ooV CCS'9ZZ'09 VVVNyy WYNVV WVNW YVVNVV VYYNYV WVNYY + PV WV/VW YWNW WVNW WVNW 0£8'9S9'b VVVNW [ALTOS 0 WVNW 060'6MZ WV/V V VVVNVV VVVNVV Lit @CC 001'906'1 008'010't 000166'1 094'066'1 000'096't 00Z'896'I. 00L'E86 SZPCCZ'Z 00S'LL6'.l $1,a99'L SZ4'a66'£ sea'i.dsz OZ£'096'Z VIN P01e%10N 000'991'0 WN L*ANWI11:nReV 195'9E9'99Z VIN •999/£V ZPV91 $ 31Yd da6/1-1011d/SA00011 3n1yA sndd NOdn00 0N11V11 oluaaloaMq pun pos011V 1V101 M eo02119o0/opund loa(old pups prows isrul ul PI9H - Pun suo8e8800 /unseal unPOWV ISAd pund uope81190 Iuewweno0 ueoPewy181H luewea6V luewloenul pund suope81100 Anaeal ueououty lali 3AE1383211e30/SONnd 103tOMd ON08 NO1461818100 solllo YIIM IUau9oanul MOMS eyel uo1ue010 40 III 631110 1.111M 1N3WLSSANI 18011 ul PIotl olouni IW0410S pund uopeuodoual lepol :pun luewloenul pelood s, ounseay ArynoO 1sn81 NI 013N 40Nni opund Oupaad01e1o190$ oirloneouou-oluN 91Nd el9elloouou•eloN uuol Pan Woo Is110e0 sumo lelouso slpepenu0u-e10N e11-1d e10eueo-a0N VWNi 0198118ouou-%ION ocuaala% OW1Nd' smoneouou.apN Amami Sr) emenopuou-910N lummox) VWNd el98peo-o1oN (VNINd) Uo11e10osoy 0686uoW IeuooeN looped 819e11e0uou-PUU9 u0p0neauo3 91Hd /epotIO IN0 - spun lenpm wpm Afton e19e8eouou puo8 (00.11Hd) 0+00 e6o0u0W ue0l ewoH lapped sl ! t''^a409speP11,01.0041144 N9e11e0uOu•WON 911-14 ol9eposuou-OloN 91Hi ' omeueouoweln91u80 06e01JoW sllNd 619elleou Ou-010N 811-1d onelleouou•o10ry Nuea 41913 Lund looped :seltunoos AnseallApue8Y (d1V1) Pund luewloenUl loua6v mo0l 'PunIL8w169nu1 P010Od aJanseoul Alunoo onsooeO Auea leuorry NIO 40Nnd ONI1Ve3d0. 9002 alu alce9 'PePu3 P?sd Pock% mloP+cd luewloenul u013 ww00 u0pepOdaleq Alun00 eplaonly • Investment Objectives • Safety of Principal • Liquidity • Public Trust • Maximum Rate of Return County Administrative Center "ACME Economy The Federal Reserve Board of Governors chose to keep the Fed Funds rate at 5.25% at their September meeting, citing weakening economy and moderating, though still high, inflation- With oil prices dropping below.- - $60/barrel (down from the July high of $77) and other commodities following suit, mitigating inflationary pressure, many economists believe that recession or stagflation is a remote possibility and a "soft landing" is imminent This • view holdsthat the economy will slow down, the Fed will cut rates early next year, and we will smoothly transition into thenext business cycle. As a result,_ equity -markets are surging, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average reaching a record high in early October. Those with asense of history can recall the last decade, when "the end of history" or at least the ousiness cycle was an- nounced and an era of unprecedented.prosperity would usher in a Dow of 36,000. There is some dissension in the ranks, however, as others point to, slowdowns in "sensitive" areas of the economy —new car sales, durable goods, construction spending, and capital expenditures by business. More impor- tantly, the stimulative effects of the housing bubble, accounting for 60%of.. GDP growth over the last three years,'are ebbing. No segment of the economy. appears ready to heed Shakespeare's Henry V and step -"unto the breach": heavily -indebted consumers have seen real wages declining and businesses . seem content to reap their record profits- It is no wonder that Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has warned that the end of the housing boom could shave a full percentage point off of GDP growth. - A more sober history lesson comes from Japan, whose real estate - bubble collapse reaped more than a decade of -recession and. stagnation. ; While one can hope for an easy descent, in spite of: recent good fortunes, the economy may have just as much chance of a,"smooth landing as Wile E. Coyote does. l.J/ .Kq %%fGa4(iZe Paul McDonnell Treasurer -Tax Co9ector September 2006 Durable Goods Orders -for September-270) ,S% actual vs..5% survey Grass Domestic Product (GDP) -for Septem- ber28th 2.6% actual vs. 2.9% survey Consumer Confidence- Index -September 26tb 104.5 actual vs.101.0 survey Factory Orders- October4th 0% actual vs. -.2% survey .EmplajmlentShuation-. for October6th.. Unemployment 4.6% actual vs.4.7%survey - Nonfarm payrolls M/M change - 51,000 actual vs.125,000 survey,: Coestiner Price Index- for September1511) .2% actual vs:.3%survey; core CPI .2%actual vs. 2% survey At month's end, the Fed Funds rate was 5.25%, with a data -dependent bias. The 2 year T-Note was .yielding 4.68% (down 9 bps.) while the 10 year T-Note was yielding 4-63% (down .• 10 bps-). • For May the -Pool had an increase of 6 bps. in the -average monthly yield. Portfolio Statistics September . August July June May - - April Month -End Book Value ' iMonth-End Market Value' I.Paper Gain or (Loss) I Percent of Paper Gam or Loss `Yield Based Upon Book Value Weighted Average Maturity (Yrs) :Modified Duration 3,927,455,049 $ 3,981,391,001 l-$ 3,979,186,794 i $ 3,920,848,539 $ 3,971 398,936 $ 3,965,054,247 7$ (s 606,510) $ (9,992,065) $ -0.17%! -0.25% 'Markel values dos not include accrued interest 4.81' 0.88 i 0.70 (14,132,547) $ -0.36%[ 4.751 4.85 0.85l 0.83 0.721 0.75' 4104,307,007 1, $ 4,043'530878 . $ 4,524,361,983 1 4084,159,627 $ ' 4,024,176,242 $ . 4,505,859,884 (20,147,380)1 $ (19,354,636)i $ (18,502,099) 649%!-0.48%1 _-0.41%I 4.461 4.41; 0.790 0 0.76, 077: 4.28 0.72 0.691 THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TREASURER'S POOLED INVESTMENT FUND IS CURRENTLY RATED: Aaa/MR1 BY MOODY'S INVESTOR SERVICES AAA/V1+ BY FITCH RATINGS 160 Portfolio Characteristics SECTOR Federal Agency Cash Equivalent & MMF Commercial Paper. Negotiable'CD's Medium Term Notes Municipal Bonds Certificates of Deposit Local Agency Obligatio. Total Cash Euorval ert & F 2.!3% Market Value 2:673,217,054 as,o0o,000 :630,786,810 450,008;347 29,842,700 27,363,628 2o,oao;000 3,635,000 3;920,848,530 Fe"=rat Agee - MATURITY 30 days or Less 30 - 90 Days 90 Days -1Year 1- 2 Years 2-•3 Years Over 3Years Total M arket Valu 414,157,135.42 762,145,393.21 1,415,119,200.35 777,726,288.80 548,065,521.45 ,1004' o% 3,635,000.00 3,920,848,539 CREDIT QUALITY 1111111111111111111 Federal Agency - Market Value 2,673,217,054 30 days 30-90 90 Days- 1-2 2-3 Over . or Less ' Days .1 Year Years Years' . Years 12 Month Gross Yield Trends. * Treasurer's Institutional, Money Market Index (71MM) is compiled and reported by the Riverside County Treasurer's Capital Markets division. It is a composite index derived ham the average of three muhpbdaon dollar AAA iated Prime (lands that invest In a diversified portion* of GCS. dollar denominated money market Instruments including US. Treasinies, govemmem agencies, bankers' acceptances, oommerciaipaper, certificates at deposits, repurchase agreement; ete) porttulios that the Treasurer tracks. Farther details available upon request. Page 2 161 Market Date 9129/0§" 8/31/00 DJIA 12,679 '11,381 S&P 500 1335.85 1303.82 NASDAQ 2258.43 2183.75 Crude Oil (barrel) ` 62.76 70.26 , Gold (ounce) 604.20 ' 634.20 Prime Rate 8.25% 8.25% . 3-Morrtb LIBOR 5.37% :54975% Fed Fund Futures 5.25% 5.265% (for 9/06) 4 - 9/29/06 8/31/06 "Dill. 3 M 4.872 ' 5.03 '-.1578 6 M 4.996 5.104 -.1086 2 Y 4.683 4.7.75 ' -.0924 5 Y ' 4.578 4.689 -.1110 10 Y 4.628 4.726 -.0982 30 Y '4.762 4.877 148 " Summary of Authorized Investments The Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund was in FULL COMPUANCE with the Treasurer's Statement of Investment Policy. The County's Investment Policy is more restrictive than the California Government Code. This policy is reviewed annually by the County's Investment Oversight Committee and approved by the County Board of Supervisors. California Government Code trues LOCAL AGENCY BONDS' 5YEARS CALIFORNIA LOCAL AGENCY DEBT BILLS OF EXCHANGE CERTIFICATE & TIME DEPOSITS 270 DAYS REVERSE REPOS 92 DAYS CaITRUST SHORT TERM FUND . SECURED BANK DEPOSITS LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUNDS . N/A AutborizedLirrit NO LIMIT NO LIMIT NO LIMIT NO LIMIT QuaMy S&P/ M ocdy's Investment Pou Ala.in.mn Matur- Autnonzed 1 Qica?ty S&P/ �� 7 Limit I Moody's 3 YEARS 15%/ S150MM 180 DAYS " 60 DAYS DAILY LIQUIDITY 1 No more than 30%of this category may be invested with anyone commercial Dank 'Mutual Funds maturity may be Interpreted as weighted average maturity not exceeding 90 days 3Or must have an investment advisor with not less Man 5 years experience and with assets under management of S500,000,000. Projected Cash Flow Actual?ivaride Portfolio Cr: INVESTMENT GRADE 0.09% 10% MAX N/A The Pooled Investment Fund cash Flow requirements are based upon a 12 month historical cash flow model. Based upon projected cash receipts and matu- rating investments, there are sufficient Funds to meet future cash Flow disbursements over the next 12 months. Mon:n r,IccthJy P+Ionthdy Receipts Disbrnt Du Terance " ;d;uired Mat. Invest valance Actca! Inv. ,lan:rities Avail. To Invest, I. Yr, 09/2006 23.2 11/2006 808.7 660.5 148.2 148.2 387.5 01/2007 681.0 1,215.3 (532.3) 298.0 488.3 122.3 O5/2007 635.1 1,172.3 (5372) 255.6 112.8 07/2007 728.3 983.1 (254.8) , 128.8 59.1 09/2007 542.1 67L1 (129.0) 129.0 105.0 Totals 9,807.2 10,277.1 (469.9) 446.7 2,608.9 3,480.3 11.38% 66.43% 88.62% THIS COMPLETES THE REPORT REQUIREMENTS OWLIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE 53646 Page 3 Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund . 3eptember.29. 2006 Month End Portfolio Holdings Report CJSIP PAR CA611- UDOC DEPOSIT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 1,009000.00 CLTR- CALTRUST SHORT TERM FUND 35,000,000.00 CPD- COMMERCIAL PAPER -DISCOUNT COUPON MATURITY BOOK VALUE' 4,000,000.00 35,000,000.00 PRICE M. VALUE' 1,000,000.00 35,000,000.00 YLD GAIN/LOSS MAT' 1 • 4.81 0.08 069 - 5.35 0.08 0.09 • 66981451 24 45,000,000.00 NOVARTIS FIN AI+1151 5.34. 10/022006 44,979.975.00 99.96 '. 44,979.975.00 - 5.34 0.01. 0.01 17307SK43 25,000.000.00 'CITIGROUP 41+/P1/F1+ 74433HKB9 45.000.000.00 PRUDEN 1AL FUNDING 41+/P1 0556NIKK8 0556N1KR3 25,000,000.00 BNP PARIBAS 411171 '523 10104/204n 24698 3(15 56 9959 - 24 898.305 56 ' 524 1021/2006 44,862,450.00 " 99.69 ' 44,862450.00 5.24 .10/19/2006 24,890,833.33 199.56 I 24,59063333 - 5.25 0.01 0.01- - - 5.26 0.03 - 0.03 - 5.26 0.05 006 25,000,000.00 BNP PARIBAS 411P1 524 1025/2006 24.865.000.00 99.48 • 24.869,000.00 - 5.27 0.07 0.07 06737,660 749T7LN37 89233HNK6 25.000.000.00 BARCLAY'S 41+0?LF1+ 25 000000.00 .RABOBANK USA 4I9/P1 20,000.000.00 TOYOTA 41+8T1 ' 526 11/06/2006 24,781,041.67 99.12 24,781,091.67 - 5.30 0.10 0.10 5.36. Ot/032007 24 122 555 56 98.65 24,663500.00 340.944.44 5.51 0.25 0.26 5.18 01719/2007 19.671,933.33 ' 98.42 19,684,600.00 12,666.67 527 029 0.31 4497WINX0' 50,000000 00 ING 41+/1.1 3695963U0 50,000600.00 GE CAPITAL 41+/P1 637,000,000.00 FFCB- FED FARM CREDIT BANN 520 01/312007 49,090,000.00 98.25 • 49126000.00- • 5.16 03/28/2007 48 710 000.00 " 97.46 48129.00069 630,235244.59 630.706609.87 36 000.00 5.30 0.32 • .0.34 . 19.000.00 5.30 047 0.50 551,56528 5.32 0.15 0.16 31331SWC3 31331SFW8 31331SM34 5,000000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BAW1.51619c3M0 5.000.000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK2YrNc6FAoIX 3.76 11/092006 5,000,000.00 100.00 5,000.000.00 3.13 12/012006 5.000.000.00 100.00 5,000,000.00 - 3.76 0.02 0.11 - 3.13 0.17. 0.17 5,000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANN 1.5YMc 313319991 5,000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK2YMc6Mo 3.75 12/052006 5,000.000.00 100.00 - - 5,000,000.00 3.25 12252006 5,000.000.00 100.00 5.000.000.00 - - 375 0.18 - 0.18 - 325 021' 021 313315KJ1 5,000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT.BANK2YMc8Mo1X 327 01/12/2007 5,000,000.00 99.44 " 4,971,900.00 (28,100.00) 327 029 029 31331SMY6 10,000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK2YrI9c3Mo 3.52 01262007 10,00(1000.00 99.44 9.943.BOO .00 (56,200 00) 3.52 - ' 0.33 033 31331SME0 313315YD9 31331SYN7 31331VCV6 5000000.00 FED FARM CREDIT,BANK2.25YMc3M 5,000.000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK2YMc 3.63 04/192607 5.000.000.00 99.09 3.75 0525/2007 5000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT1BANK2YMc 3.82 06/01/2007 5,000,00000 FED FARM CREDIT BANN7.75YMc 31331SR62 10.000.000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK2YrNc3Mo 4996,093.75 99.133 4 954,700.00 a5.300.00 3.63 0.55 0.56 4,951.550.00 5,000,000.00 ' 99-D6- .: 4,953,150.00 4.45 06252007 4,9943700.00 99.44 ' 4,971.900.00 4.15 • 07202W7 10,900,000.00 • 99.19 9918 500.00 44.543.75 79 0.65 0.66 46.850.00 382 0.66 0.67 26.800.00) 4.47 .. 0.73 0.74 81200.00 4.18 0.80 0.81 31331SMO3 31331SMN0 5,000.000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANICL5YMc6Mo 5,000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK2.751119c9M 3.65 08/102007 5,000,000.00 98.72 4,935.950.00 3.70 , - 11/0922007 .. 5.000.000.00 •98.50 •3133194E6 313315X84 7,500.000.00 5,000,000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK2.5YrNc3Mo FED FARM CREDIT BANK3YMc3Mo . (64,050.00) 3.65 0.86 0.86 4,925.000.00 (75.000.004,_3.70 1.08 1.11 4-54 03272008 7,495,312.50 99.22 :: 7,441.425.00' (53,887.50) 4.57 1.46 1.49 4.34 .05119/2008 . 5,000,000.00 n 98.58. 111 4,943.750.00 •(56250.00) '4.34 -1.58" 1.64 313319109 313315R39 313315263 8,000,00000 FED FARM CREDIT BANK 2.4-NC 4.70 05232008 7,' • . i 00 10,000.000.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK3YMc6Mo 10000,600.00 FED FARM CREDIT BANK3YMCIYr 313313992 5,000/94700 FED FARM CREDIT BANK3WWWrlX 245,750,000.00 FHLB - FED HOME LOAN BANK 3113v5SM1 3133X5WC8 5,000.000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2.5YML9Mo 5,PIO 000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2.59161c3Mo • 4.44 07/182008 4.55 08/04/2008 0.000,000.00 9884 9,987,500.00 99-00 7,9624e0.00 33.770.00 4.72 1.58 1.65 9.884.400.00 115,600.00 9,900 000 00 (87.500.00 4.60 1l8 _ 1.85 4.62 09/05/2000 5 000 000.00 . 99.06 245,711,451.17 215 10202006 5,000.000.00 .100.00 4 953,150.00 4.44 1.74' (46,850.00) 4.62 1.88 244,119,978.05 0,551,473.12) .4.13 , 0.88 194 0.91 5.000.000.00 ' .: - 2.15 0.06 0.06 3133XBLP8 5,000 000.OD FED HOME LOAN BANKI.5YR4c3MoSI 3133X9718 ' 3133X6RE8 31Y3X72E4 5.000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 2YMc3Mo 5000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2.5YrNc1Mo 5000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK3YMc3MoSt 3133X9G06. 5,000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 2Y0c1Mo 2.42 . 10272006 3.10 11/08/2006 " 5.000,003.00 100.00 3.06 11/172006 5,0(1) 000.00 100.00 5.000.000.00 000.000.00 • 5,000,000.00 4.00 11202006 4,995,312.50 99.91 4,995.312.50 ' 3.23 .11282006 ' 5.0013,003.00 100.00 + ' 5.000.000.00 . 163. - 2 42 0.08 0.05 306 0.05 0.13 3.1050.14c<0.14 II - 323 008 0.16 •. " Treas'urer's Poc ed Inves(roent Fund September 29, 290,3 Month End Portfolio Holdings Report CUSIP 3133X9GH7 BOCK VALUE` 5.000.000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2YrNc6Mo " 3.09 12/012006 YLD I Avg. PRICE NE VALUE' GAIN/LOSS GMAT' PoI Dur.' Life' 5,000.000.00 100.00 5.00(7.000.00 0.17 0.17" 3133X91423 5,000,000.00 FED FAME LOAN BANK2WNc3MoSlep ., 4.00 12/142006 4,995,000.00 99.90 4,995,000.00 3133XE3H0 5.00000O 00 FED HOME LOAN BANK1YR4c - 3.41 0.21 021 4.70 12292006 5,000,000.00 99.81 4,990,650.00 (9.350.00) 4.70 025 -'025 - 3133X9X96 5,000,690.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2YrNo1Yr '320 12292006 4,995,000,OD 99.50 4,975,000.00 (20,000-00) 3.25 ' 0.25 025 3133X5C09 10000000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2.75YfN46Mo 242 01/052007 10,000,000.00 99.28 9,928,100.00 (71,900.00) 2.42 0.26 027 3133XAAH0 5,000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 2YrNc1Yr1X 3.45 01/102007 5,000,000.00 99.50 4.975.600.00 .-'(25,000.00) 345 '0.28 '028 3133%9YE4 5,000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2YR4c6M0Step 5.00 01/12/2007 5,000.000.00 99.91 4,995,300.00 (4 700.00 3.60 0.29 ' 0.29 ' 3133XAFD4 10,000.000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2Y4441Yr1x 3.50 01/182007 9,981,800.00 99.47 9946 900 00 (34,900.00)- 3.60 0.30 .0.30 31339YKH4 13,000.000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK3.5YrNc3M44/1 3133X95W6 2 400 000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2.25YrNc3Mo 4.OD 01/3012007 12 995 937.50 99.56 12,943,190.00 52,747.50) 2.71 0.34 0.34 318 _. 02/162007 2399,625.00 99.22 2381256.00 18.369.00 3.18 0.38 -0.38 3133X8BE1 5000000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK25Y0J463.4051 4.00 03/09200T'-5,000,000.00 99.66 3133X4FDO 8,215000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK3Yr1,143Mo51ep' 4.902,800.00 (17,200.00) 3.38 0.44 044 4110 03/162007 - 81215,000.00 99.41 8,166,20290 48,797.10) 2.98 0.46 046 3133XD3K5 5.000.000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK1 510Nc3M0 ,. 429 03/212007 5,000,000.00. 99.50 4,975.000 OD 125.000.00) 4.29 0.48 ' 048 5 3133XDH87 10.000.000.07 FED HOME LOAN BANK7.51001c0,40 4.51 04/05/2007 10.000,000.00 99.59 9.959,400.00 40600.00 451 0.51 052 3133XBB53 10,000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BAN142YrNc1Mo {.08 04/092007 9,998,437.50 99.38 9.937.500(00 (60.937.507 4.09 0.52 0.53 3133X85J2 5,000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 3Yr3c1M0 3.26 04/192007 4,995,31250 98.91 4.945,300.00 50,012.50) 3.30 0.55 0.56 3115x3A.56 7,020,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 2.251104c3Mo - 360 04272007 . 7,018,903.13 99.06 6,954,22260 (64,680.53) 3.61 0.57 0.58 ' ill3133X6VD5 5.000 000 00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 3YrNc3M01X 3.19 04/302007 5,000,001.00 98.81 4,940,650.00 (59.350.00) 3.19 0.58 059 3133X6H58 10000,000.00 FED FXME LOAN BANK3YrNc3M0 325 05/112007 10000,000.00 98.81 ' 9,881,300.00 (118,700.001 3.25 0.61 0.62' 3133%6856 0800,00000 FED HOME LOAN BANK3)0Nc1M0 147 05/182007 6.800.000.00 98.91 0725,608.00 74,392.00 3.47 0.63 0,64 3133X9HC7 5,000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BAN142.5YrNc3M0 3,51 06/012007 '... 3. 5000 000 000 98 88 4 943. 943.750.00 " ::���� (56,250.00) 51 0.66 " .... 0.67 3133XA3B1 5,000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2 5YrNc6Mo 3.60 07/132007 5000000.00 98.78 4,939,050.00 3133X8WD0 5=750.000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2.75YrNr3M05 3133XCN09 10,000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BAN1(21014c1MO 3133XGN42 5,000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 1Yr1,146M07X 3133XCQC0 5p00,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 21'rNc3Mo 3133XA028 0155000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 2.510Nc1Yr1 3133XCVT7 5.000.000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2YrNc3Mo1���� 3133XGT/9 '.M 15,000 000.00 ;FED HOME LOAN BANKIYerc6M01X 3133XD673 5,000 000 00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2YrNc3Mo51ep 4.00 07262007 5,749,101.56 4.30 08N22007 10,000,001.00 9928 5.50 0821/2007 5,000000.00 100.09 50 0823/2007 " 5,00000000 99.34 3.75 08242007 815500000 98.75 4.25 09/062007 5.000000.00 99.78 $ 40 ' 09/ 12/2007 15,000001)00 100.03 5,694.282-50 9.928.100.00 5.004.700.00 4067200 00 8 053 062.50 4.989,050.00 15,004.65000 60,950.00 3.6o 0.78 - 0.79 819 3 30 0.82 0.83 (71.900.00) 4.30 0.83 0.04 4 700.00 5.50 039 0 89 32 800.00 4 50 0.89 0.90 101.937.50 3.75 0.89 0.90 10,950.00 4.25 0.92 0.94 4.67 09/142007 3133XDBD2 6001000.0E FED FAME LOAN BANK2YrNc1YrIX 425 09/262007 3133XBBK0 3133XDGC9 3133XBFK6 3133XBM44 3133X9AM2 3134A4VF8 10,000000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2.51Mc3Mo 5.000.000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2WNLI r1X 5.000.000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2.5YrNc6Mo 5000,000 00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 2.5YrNc3Mo 000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 3YNc6Mo 5.000 000 00 FED HOME LOIN BANK 11161c 3133XGNT7 _ 6.455000.01 FEDHOME LOAN BANK1 25Y0447611401X 3133XBVA0 DEESCR PION jCCUFON iv ATCRI'Y 4 26 12/072007 3133XAYA9 . " 10.000.000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 2.75 YrNc1Y 5000000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 2.5YINWAIL 3133X9TND 5.000.000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 3YrN411,40 425 0928/2007 4.50 10022007 4.50 1009/2007 99.03 4,650.00 5.40 0 45 095 5,000,000.00 99.75 4,987,500.00 (12,500.00) 4.54 0.70 0.96 4,988281.25 99.13 4.956250.00 n (32,03125) 4.37 0.98 0.99 10,000.000.00 99.13 9.912.500.00 87,500-00) 4 25 0 99 100 5,000,000 00 99.38 4,968,750.00 31250.00 4.50 1.00 1.04 ffif 5,000,001700. 99. 4967.200.00 4.35 1029/2007 5000.000.00 99.19 4,950400.00 3.40 11/09/2007 5,000,000.00 98.19 4,909.400.00 90.600.00 3.40 1.09 1.11 4.38 _ 11/102007 4,989,950.00 9922 4,900.950.00 (29,000.00) 4.48 1.10 1.13 4.50 1.02 32,800.00 40,600.00 5.38 11282007�� 6,456000.00 99.97 6.452,998.95 , 2,001.05 538 1.14 116 5,000,000.00 99.03 4,951,55000 48450-00 426 1-16 1A9 4.05 12242007 10,000,000-00 98.78 9,878,100.00 121.900.00 4.05 1.21 124 400 12282007 5,000,00000 98.72 4,975,950.00 164. Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund September 29, 2006 Month End Portfolio Holdings Report CUSIP PAR DESCRIPTION 3133XDVA8• 5.000.000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2,25YMc3Mo CCUPO MATURITY 5.00 • 0228/2008 BOOK VALUE' PRICE 5.000.000.00 M. VALUE' YLD Arg. GAIN/LOSS MAT' Mbu,r.' Life' 4,9E15,950.00• (14,050.00) 5.00 1.36 1.41 3133XASMO 10,000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK3YrNc3Mo 4.02 03/14/2008 10,000,000.00 96.54 9.859 400 00 (140,600.00) 4.02 1.43 146 3133XGRV8 5,090,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK1.7 1Yr1X . • 5.35 06/132008 - • 0000000.06 3133XP275 . 5,000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 2YrNclYr 4.00 06/30/2008 99.84 5.000.000.00 90.25 ' 4992,200.00 - 4,912,500.00 . 7,800.04 5.35 1.65 .. 1.71 (87,500.00) 4.00' 1.69 1.75 3133XC7D9 5.000.000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK3YR4c1M0 445 07/08200B . 5,000,000.00 • 98.94 = 4,946,900.00 " (53,100.00) - 445 1.71' 1.78 3133XG4U5 5,000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK2YrNc8Mo1X 5.75 07/172008 3133XCK36 5,000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANKYANc3Mo 4.52. 07282008 5.000.000.00 100.16. 5,007.800.00 •"7.800.00 5.75 0.30 180 • • (50,000.00) 4.52 . 1.77 1.83 3133XCJ20 5,000,000.00FED HOME LOAN BANK3377126Mo • 445 ` 08/012008 5,000,000.00 3 98.88 . '4,943,750,00 (56,250.00) 4.45 ` 1.77 1 84. 3133XGH49 5,000,000.00 •FED HOME LOAN BANK 2YrNc • . 5.13 08/08/2008 4,993,900.00 10022 5.010,950.00 17.050.00 5.19 1.78 , 1.86 3133XGJ70 5.100.000.00' FED HOME LOAN BANK2YiNc3Mo 5.65 08r22r2008 .5,100,000.00 100.06 5,103,213.00 ''3,213.00 5.65 0.15 1.90 3133XCYK3 5000 000 00 FED HOME LOAN BANK3YrNc8Mo 4.69 091092008 4,998 437.50 '' 99.13 4,956,250.00 (427187.50j 4.70 1.88 1.94. 3133XGUJ1 3133XDUN9 5.000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 2YrNc6Mo 5000,000.00 -FED HOME LOAN BANK3YrNclYrIX 5.35 0926/200H 4.999,050.00 ; 99.84 - {. _ 4.992200.00 ' (6,850.00) 5.36 1.92 1.99 5.04 1128/2008 5.000.000.00 99.84 . •!' 4,992,200.00 17000,00) 5.04 204 2.18 3133XEB01 . 0000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK3YrNclYr 5.09 01/122009 5,000,000.00 99.50 • 4.975.000.00 (25,000.00) 5.09 2.17 2.29• 3133XFSN7 3133XFZW9 3133XGBF0 3133XGNF7 31•33XeNJ9 10,000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK3YrN22YAX 5,000000.00 FEb HOME LOAN BANK3YrNc1YOX 5.000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 344C21X 10,000000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK3YrN22371X 5,00,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK 3YB42. - 3133XF13F7 - 5.000,000.00• FED HOME LOAN BANK3YrNc1.5YrIX 3133X1-12M3 ., 5,000,000.00 FED HOME LOAN BANK3YM21.5YOX 910,840,000.00 . FHLC - FHLB'- MORTG. CERT. 5.42 06/302009 10 000 000.0D 101.41 10,040,600.DO • 40,60000 5.42 1.68 2.75 5.75 07/06/2009 5.63 07212009 5,33 09/082009 5.00 09/18/2009 5,000,000.00 10025 ' 5.012500,00 5,000,000.00 .10.000,000.00 00.81 ' 100.34 4.989.200.00 14328 • 040 650.00 10,034,400.00 '5,014,050.00 12.500.00 5.75 0 76 2 77 40 650.00 34,400.00 63 5.33 1.73 1.87 2.81 2.94 24,850.00 5.08 2.79 2,97' 5.32 0928/2009 5,000,000.00 100.03, 0001,550.00' ''1,550.00 5.32 146 3.00 5.30 09/213/20(79 5,000.000.00' 10).00' " 5,000 000 00 3128X3J95 14.000,000.00 FHLB -MORTG:CERT. 3128X4VN8 5,000,000.00 FHLB- MORTG:CERT.1Yrt•1r.3Mo 4.15 11222006 475 1229/2006 910.605.034.85 13.902.000.00 99.30 - . 5.30 1.46 3.00 906,670,421.84 (3,935,413.01). 4.29 0.88 1.10 13.902,000.00 5.13 0.15 0.15 5.000.000.00 99.80 4,993,200.00 1 6,800.00)- 4.75 0.25 0.25 3128X/A27 3128X4EX5 312824se9 25,000,000.00 FHLB- MORFG. CERT .1-NC6M012 .arc 5.00000000 FHLB- MORFG:CERT.1.5Nc6Mo 12 5.000,000.00 FHLB MORTG CERT1.75Y0712 3128XIA76 ' 10000.000.00 FHLB-MORTG'CERT.1-Nc3M0 4.68 01/31/2007 4.10 02/092007 3.63 ' 02/152007 25 000 000.00 99.79 1 4,990,15000 9956 4.997.350.00 99.38 4.969,200.00 24.948 000.00 52000.OD 4.68 • 0.34 0.34 • 4077.950.00 ' 12,200.0D 4.24 0.36 0.36 (28,150 00) 3.66 0.38 0.38 4.80 02202007 10,000,000.00 99.81' i . 9,980,500.00 (19,500.00 4.80 0.39 0.39 3128X4875 312BX2244 10.000.000.00 5.000.000.00 FHLB• MORTG.' CERTA-NC3MOBemrt 4.80 . 02232017 10.000.000.00 99.80 !' - 9,980,000.00 (20,000.00) 4.80 0.40 0.40 FHLB - MORTG! CERT.3YrN21Yr1 XS 3.35 • 03/02/2007 5,000,000.00 9920 , 4,959,950.00 (40,050.00) 2.89 043 0.43 3128X2F42 5,000,000.00 FHLB- MORTG' CERT.3YrNc6MoSte 4.00 03/08/2007 5.000.000.00 99.44 • '4,972.100.00 (27,900.00) 3.01 0.44 044 3128%2404 3128X3AY9 • 3128X4W80 3128X4665 5.000.000.00 FHLB- MORTG' CERT.3YrNclYrSte 5,000,000.00 FHLB - MORTG: CERT. 3YrN23Mo 10,000000.00 -FHLB- MORTG: CERT.13M0-NC37A0 5,000,000.00 FHLB-MORTG!CERT.12YMc6Mol 5,000000.01 FHLBMORTGCERT .1-1YrNc3410 3.00 3.00 04/122007 04/30/2007 5000,60000 98.82. 4,940,800.00' (59,200.00) 2.56 0.53 0.54 5,000.000.00 98.71 9,998,300.00- � s99.93' 4935,550.00 64 450 00 3.00 5.000.000.00 99.89 •` 4,994,550.00, i(5,450007 5.08 0.58 0.59 5.38 06/04/2007 5.000,000.00 ' 100.01 5.000.650.00 '' 650.00 5.38 0.11 068 • 3128X4DG3 - 10.000.000.00 FHLB- MORTG.' CERT2YrN211r 4.05 06282007 ,498585200 99.15 9914,800.00 71052.00 4.12 0.74 0.7 3128X4DY4 3128X4AT8 •3128X4GX3 3128X4J44 5.000,000.00 FHLB- MORTG10ERT.2YM26Mo 4,00 _07/13/2007 5,000.00000 5,000000.00 99.07 4 953 700.00 46300,00 4.00 FHLB MORTG: CERT225Yr1121Yr 4.00 08/102007 5,00000000 FHLB- MORTG.' CERT.2YrNclYr 5,000.000.00 FHLB- MORTG. CERT.1.5YrN461710 4.40 08222007 5.02 08242007 5.000,000.00 5.000.000.00 99.02 99.27 5,010,000.00 99.79 4.950950.00 4,963,,400.00 ! 4,989.550.00 49,050.00 600.00 4.00 4.40 0.78 0.79 0.84 0116 0.89 0.90 10 450.00 5.02 0.89 0.90 ' IPJf93 orb " Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund September 29, 2006 Month End Portfolio Holdings Report CUSIR 3128X4KE0 PAR DESCRIPTION 5.000.000.00 FHLB- MORTG. CERT.2Y4Jc6Mo COUPON IATURiTY 4.50-09/27/200T BOON VALUE RICE 5,000,000.00 99.47 AI. VALUE' GAINULOS3 4,973,500.00. YLD I T _ (26.500.00) 4.00 .1 D 0.95 0.99 3128X4RL7 5,000,000.00 FHLB-MORTG CERT2YrNc6Mu1X 4.71 10/112007 5,000,000.00 99.58 4,970900.00 (21,100.00) 4.71 1.00 1.03 3128X4PK1 5,000,000.00 FHLB- MORTG. CERT2Nc6Mo -. 4.15 10119/2007 .5,000,000.00 99.66 4,983,150.00- - (18,850.00)-. 4.15 1.021.06' " 3128X4UK5 5,000,000.00 FHLB-MORTG CERT.2YrNc61.10 3128%4%016 10,000,00000 FHLB- MORTG. CERT2Y04c6Mo1X 3128X4Y88 3128144079 3728%4T76 5.000.000.00 FHLB- MORTG. CE1137.1.75NC3M0 5.07 12/05/2007 5,000,000.00 99.75 4,987,650.00 (12,350.00) 5.00 1.15 1.18 500 011182008 10 000 000.00 99.92 9.992400.00 (7,600.00) 5.00 127 1.30 5.30 01/31/2008 5,000.000.00 99.97 - 4,998000.00 1.400.00) 5.30 1.04 1.34 5,000,00000 FHLB- MORTG. CERT2YrNc1YrIX 5,000,000.00 FHLB- MORTG. CER7.2YrNc1Yr1X 3128X36H1 10000000.00 FHLB- MORTG. CERT.3YrNc6Mo 5.10 03/14/2008 4.995.300.00 99.85 4,992,600.00 (0700.00) -5.15 1.42 1.46 ' 5.25 03/28/2008 5,000,000.00 99.96 '4,998,150.00 3128X42D2 10.000.000.00 FHLB- MORTG. CER721YrNWMo 3128X46L0 5,(00,000.00 FFo_B- MORTG. CERT.2Y44c6Mo 3128X4AJ0 ' 5000,000.00 FHLB- MORTG. CERT.3YMc3MoSte (1,850.00) 5.25 1.46 1150 4.18 0328/2008 10,000,000.00 98.80 9.879,500.00 (120,500.00) 4.18 1.47 -1.50 5-34 05/07/2099 10,000,000.00 99.93 - 9,992,70E100 (7,300.00) 5.34 1.52 1.61 5.38 05/152008 4,995 000-00 100.02 5,001.100.00 6.100.00 5.43 0.13 1.63 475' 05116/2008 5.003,000.00 99.84 4,991,850.00 8,150.00 4.86 0.62 1.63 3128X47H8 10 000.000 00 FHLB- MORTG. CERT.2YNc1Yr1X 5.38 05/22/2008 9,9953/3000 100.06 3728X4VS7 10,000,000-09 FHLB- MORTG. CERT2.5YrNc6Mo1 10 006 r 00 ' 5.00 06/162008 10,000,000.00 100.01 10,000.600.00 10.700.00' 5.40' r.63 1.65 600.00 " 5.00 1.64 1.71 3128X4DW8 3128X4HK0 5,00000000 FHLB- MORTG. CERT.3Y1100MoSte 5,000.000.00 FHLB- MORTG. CERT.3Y4.1c1YriX 4.50 07/11/2008 5.000,000.00 98.71 4,935,350.00 64,650-CC 4-67 1.72 1.78 4.63 08HSJ2008 - 4,939,20000 99.36 4,968,000.00 28.800.013, 528 1.81 1.88 3128X4G54 10000000.00 FHLB- MORTG. CERT.2.5YrNc6Mo1 5.05 0822/2008 10.000.000.00 /00.11 10,011,200.00 11,200.00 5.05 1.83 1.90 3128X4NG2 5.000 000 00 FHLB- MORTG. CERT.3YINc6Mo " 31204579 3128X4UV 3128X4VG3 5,000,000.00 FHLB- MORTG. CERT. 3-NC11X 5,000000 00 5.000.000.00 FHLB - MORTG CERT.3YrNc1YrIX 4.75 09/29/2008 '5,000,000.00 99.25 4,962,550.00 ' (37,450.00) 4.67 1.93 200 .. 4.90 11433/2008 4,978,300.00 99.53 4,976,650.00 350.00 5.07 1.98 2.09 FHLB " MORTG. CERT.3YrNc1Yrt% 3128X4VG3 3128X4VP3 3128X4WY3 3128X4C41 3128X4C41 10.000,000.00 FHLB- MORTG. CERT.3YrNc1Yr1X' 5,000,00000 FHLB MORTG_ CERT 3YM41Yr1X( 10.000.000.60 FHLB MORTG. CERT 3YR4c1Yr1x 10,000.000.00 FHLB- MORTG. CERT.3YrN41YrIX 4,685,000--00 FHLB MORTG CERT.3YrNc1YrIX 5.13 1128/2008 5.000,000.00 99.85 4.992,550.00 (7,450.00) 5.13 2.04 2.18 .. 505 12/082008 5000,,000.00 99.85 - 4,992600.00 - (7,400.00) 5.05 2.07 2.19 5.05 12/08/2008 10,000,000.00 99.85 098520000 14.800.00 5.05 2.07 2.19 5.05 12/152008 5.000.000.00 99.81 4.990,650.00 -.., 9,350.00 5.05 209 2.21 5.10 12292CO8 10,000,006.00 99.87 9988500.00 13500.00 5.10 2.13 225 5.0D 02/23/2009 1000O,00000 99.70 9,970,30000 5.00 02232009 - 4,676,215.63 99.70 4,671.085.55 (29,700.00) 5.00 - 2.28 2.40 (5130.08) 5.07 2.28 240 3128344087 5000000.00 FHLB- MORTG. CERT3NC11X 5.25 03/162009 5.000.000.00 99.86 4.993,000.00 7000.00 '5.25 2.34 '2.46 . 3126X5AC2 10.000000.00 FHLB- MORTG. CERT.3YrNc6Mo1X .. 5.60 06032009 10,000,000.00 10004 10004,400.00 FNMA 703,965,000.W _ FED NAT MORTG ASSOC. 3136F6FT1 703,421,748.88 4.400.00 5.60 0.17 2.68 701.377.935.55 (2043,813.33) 4.74. 1.09 129 5.000.000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC2Y0443Mo 31359114YE7 5,000,030.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC2YrNc1Yr1X 31359MG98 31359MJ20 31359MK51 3136F7LT2 31359MZK2 3136F7KR7 3136F7PE1 3136F70M2 31359MF65 31 359MF65 31359MG49 5 000,000 00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOG7.51(rNaMo 3.00 10/19/2006 - 5,000,000.00 100.00 5,000,000.00 " NEVERMEIM 3-00 " 0.06 0.06 4.15 - 07/13'2007 5,000,000.00 99.19 4,959,400.00 40,600.00 4.15 0.78 - 0.79 5.05 08/09/2007 5,000.000.00 99.81 4,990,650.00 9,350.00) 5.05 0.85 0.86 5.000.000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC1.5Y84c - 5,000000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASBOC.1.5YrNc6Mo 5,000000,00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC2YrNc3MM 5.000.000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC2YrNclYr1X 9000.000,00 FED NAT MORTG ACeGD.225Y04c3/4 5,000,0(0.00 FED NAT IAORTG ASSOC2YrNc1Yr1X 4 7 4,980,99894 99-75 4 " : ,500-00 520 09/28/2007 500000000 10006 500315000 475 7025/2007 5.000,000W 3<99.53 4,976,550.01 6,501.06 5.27 0.90 0.91 3,15000 5.20 0.99 1.00 23,45000 4 75 .04 1.07 4.90 1128/2007 5000000.00 99_75 4 50000 12,500.00 4.90 7.13 - 1.16. 4A0 12/28/2007 8,997.187.50 9903 8,912790.00 84,397.50 4.42 1.22 125 4.88 12/282007 5000,000.00 99.72 4,985,950.00 (14050.00)�� 4.881.21 125: 8,00000000 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC2Yr14c6M0 500 01/182008 8,000.000.00 99.72 7,9R,520.(0 22,480.00 5.00 1.27 1.30 5.000.000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC.2YrNc1YrIX 4.75 02/01/2008 4,995,250-00 99,56 4,978.150.00 17,100.00 4.80 1.30 1.34 5,000000.00 FED NAT MORTG A.CsrY-2Y04c1YrIX 4.75 02/012008 4.995,286.18 99.56 4.978.150.00 17. 36.18 4.80 1.30 1.34 1000000000 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC2YrNc11;r1X 500 02272008 10.000,00000 99.81 9,981,300.011 (18,70000) 5.00 1.38 141 166.. Treasurer's PcDled Investment Fund September 29, 2006 Month End Portfolio Holdings Report CL15IP 3136F72H3 3136F72ED PAR DESCRIPTION COUPON 5,000,000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC.2Y314c1Yr " 0.000000.00 FED NAT MCRTG ASSOC2YM1c6Mo 3136FTXR3 - 20 000 000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC .2-1YrNc6Mo • 5.35 • 05/082008 BOOK VALLE' r"RICE 5.000.000.00 100.03 M, VALUE' YLD calre/LO5s I MAT' 5,001.550.00' :1 1',550.00 5.35. 0.60 1.61 5.3605121/2008 10,000,000.00 1100.03. 10,003,100.00 :: 3,100.00 5.36 0.14 1.64 529> '05130/2008 "19,99587500' 'i 99.911'. 19.962200.00 (15,675.00) ..530 1.Ss 1.67 31359MU27 5,000000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC2YrNc1YrIX 5.70. 07/1712008 5000000.00 100.31 " 5,015650.00 ' 15,650.00 5.70 0.79 .1.80. ' .. 3136F7532 15,000,000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSIY•.2Ymclvrt% 550' 08N4/2008 .15000,000.00 "t00.16, 15.023.400.00 .23,400.00 5.50 - 086 1.88 3136F7MK0 5000,000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC.3YrI4c1YrtX 5.00' 11/142008 3136F7PP6 3136F7PP6: 000,000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC.3YrNclYrIX 5,000,00000 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC.3YrNc1YOX 5.10 12/192008 4.997.65625 99.97 4,996.450.00 ' 793.75 5.02 2.01 2.13 ' 5000.000.00 99.88 c 4,993.750.00 .(6,250.00) 5.10 2.10 222 5.10 12/192008 5,000,000.0D ' 99.88 4,993,750.00 1(6,250.00) 510' 210 2.22 3136F70E0 20.000,000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC.3Yr1Yr1X . 7 5,05 '12129/2008 20.000.000.00 100.19 ., 20,037600.00 ',37600.00 .5.05 " ' 2.13 3136F7M38. . 10,000,000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC.2.5YrNc6Mo 31359ME74 5.000,000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC.3YrNc1YOX 3135914F24 . 5,000,000.00 FED NAT MCRTG AASOC.3YrNc6Mo 581 5.00 01/052009 01/232009 10.000,000.00 100.13 10,012,500.00 :12.500.00 5,81h.. 027. 227 5,000,000.00 99.72 4,985,950.00 (14,050.00) 5,00. 2.20 232 ' 508 0112712009 4,997250.00 99.59 .'..4,979.70000 17,550.00 5,10' 2.21 -2.33 313647sz6 5,000 000 00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC .3-N/3010 525 .' 02/17/2009 5,000,090.00 99.72 4,985,950.00 (14450.00 5.25 2.26 2.38 31359MJ79 -5,000,000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC.3YrNc/Yrt% ' - 530 03120/2009 ' 5,000.0)&00 99.91 4,995,300.00 3136F7X51' --5,000,0130.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC.3YrNc6Mo '5.50 '04202009 4,996,875.00 99.94 -4,996,900.00 3136E7223 5,000,000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC.3YrNc3Mo 5.70"05/182009 - 5,000 000 00 100.00 4000,000.00 1 700.00 5.30 _ 2.35 2.48 25.00 5.52 2.37 2.56 - - 5.70 .0.14 2.64 3136F7ZK6 - 10,000,000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC.3YrNc6MoIX 545 05202009 10.000,ON 00 10003 10 003,100 00 ,• 3.100.00 5.45 - 0.14 2.64 3136F7C39 10,000000.00 FED WIT MORTG ASSOC3YrNc3Mo 5.75 06/052009 .10001000.00 100.00 10,000,000.00 - 5.75 0.01 268 3136E7E37 5,00000000 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC3YrNc1YrtX 5.63 06/29/2009 •5,000,000.00 100.19 ' 5,009,400.00 ' 1 9,400.00 5.63. . 0.74 2.75 3136F7N45 10,000,000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC.3YrNc6MoIX 580 071102009 10,000,000.60 100.13 10.012,500.00 02,500.00 5.80 028 2.78 ' 3136E7699 . 6,805,000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOG3YrN42Yr1X 5.40 0826/2009 6,805,000.00 100.44 6,834,805.90 .29.805.90 5.40 1.83 291 3136F72R7 10.000.000.00 FED NAT MORTG ASSOC 3YrNc2YrIX 505,287,000.00 FNMD- FNMA DISCOUNT NOTES - 5.25 09129/2009 10000000.00 100.19 - 10 018 800.0D '38,800.00 .5.25 1.93 504,679,495.9? (403,640.41) 5.10 1.26 1.94 313589R47• ' 42000,000.00 FNMA DISCOUNT NOTES 313589'86 25,000,000.00 FNMA DISCOUNT NOTES 505,083,136.31 527 1120/2006 45 995 479.44 97.86- '> 1 531- 12/20/2006 24,384.187.50 97.54 45,995,479.94 - 5.39, 0.17 0.17 24 384 16150 I - 5.44 023 023 31A5684C4 4,750,000.00 • FNMA DISCOUNT NOTES • 311586454 ' 25 000 000.00 FNMA DISCOUNT NOTES 313588BW4 - 30.000,000.00 FNMA DISCOUNT NOTES 302,890,00000 FRMC- FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORG CORP D 20,000.00000 LAO- LOCAL AGENCY OBLIGATIONS i 5.15' 01/172007. 4,645,994.00 `i 98.50 5.13 , 011172007 24,529.750.00 9850 4,678.750.00 24,625.000.00 .32.756.00 527 0.30 0.30 95,250.00 5.23 0.30 0.30 5.14, 02114/2007 29.241.555.00 ' 9911 ': "29,43100000 191,445.00 528- 0.38 0.38 295,859,15825 482223. .62b,064.b6 5.33 028 028 19,561,910.00 :'-19.682,000.00 - 120,090.00 527 , 032 032 800,00000 US DISTRICT COURTHOUSE 3435,000.00 MMF- MONEY MARKET FUNC 50,000,000.00 MTNO-MED TERM NOTES'. 529' 06/15/2020 800000.00 "i 100.00 I' 030000.00 , 343500020 - 1"- 3415000.00 50.000,000.00 600,000.00 74977EMR1-10,000,000.00 RABOBANK Aaa/AAA/AAA 36962GZZ0 5,000,000.00 GE CAP CORP A00/AAA/AAA ; 30,000,000.00 MUN)- MUNICIPAL BOND: 4565679ED 7981472HO 130911E55 1,000,00000 - 5.36. 9A2 1371 5.34 5.84 • 7.54 526 - . '0.08 009 5.14 05131/2007 -10.000.000.OD 99.66 1: 9.966.400.00 33.600.00 5.14 0.65 0.6/ 4.25 .0i/152008 4,954 550.00 96,89 ' .: 29,900,950.90 INDUSTRY CA URBANDEVAGYAaa/AAA 1 3.05 ' 05/01/2007 1,560,000.00 SAN JOSE REVE RF B AAA/A8a 2.000.000.00 CSCDA AAA : I 4.07. 081012007 4944,350.00 (10,200.00) 4.74 ' 126 29442,700.00 (58250.00) 4.90 0.76 Analannangir 985,270.00 '• 98.77' 1r'.. 987.660.00 1 2.390.00 3.86 0.58 1,560249 0 99.08 1.545.601.20 14.648.40 4.06 0.83 0.84 .> 4.12` 08/01/2007 2.000.320.00 99.12 ' „1,982,340.00 (17,99000) 4.11 ' 0.83 0.84 , 27,455,000.00 NCO - NEGOTIABLE CD 1 67,. 27.432266.60 27363.627.70 /73,636.901' 197 0.33 033 • Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund September 29, 2006 Month End Portfolio Holdings Report 1111® DESCRIPTION 0556M28E1 50,000,000.00- BNP PARIBAS A1+/P1/F1+ COUPON MATURITY 5.47 10(30/2006 BOOK VALUE' PRICE 50,000 851 89 100.00 M. VALUE' 50,000,851.89 YLD GAIN/LOSS MAT' M DJ 5.47 0.08 0.09 78010FPD6 50,000,000.00 RBS GREENWICH A7-WW1+ 40411A033 50,000,000.00 HBOS TREAS SRVCS 41HP1 521: 11/08/2006 .50,000.000.00 100.00 50,000,00000 5.43 ' 120612006 50,000,845.32 100.00 - 5.21 0.10 0.11 6.43. 0.18 019 902631(A21 50,000,000 00 UBS AG STAMFORD 41+/P1/F1+. 5.34 01/17/2007 : 50,001.650.98 100.00 50,001,650.00 (0.98) 5.34 0.28 0.30 450,000.000.00 TCD-TIME DEPOSITS 450,003,348.19 450,003,34721 (0.98) 5.35 0.16 0.17 10,000,000.00 CITIZENS BUSINESS BANK 20,000,000.00 T111415 3,942,542,000.00 1. The Market value and el. of shortie. money mailed securities ane eased en purchase Price. 2. Average Life ie are maroer of years until principal is return. et nwNrity, weight. by marketwue_ 3. Local Agency Obfyaboe have variable rat m.o. spread to Pod. e. Mobfied Duration. Tee percentage price change of a aecmry M agiven change The higher Me modifier, 0w..of a secwgy. Me higher pre risk. 5.18 03/15/2007 10,000,000.00 ;100.00- 10,000,000.00 - 5.18 0.44 0.46 168o . 20,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 5.08 023 0.24 3,927,455,048.84 3.920,848,539M (6,606,509.61) 4.87 0.70 0.88 County Administrative Center 4080 LemonStreet, 4th Floor = Capital Markets Riverside, CA 92502-2205 capitaimarkets@co.riverside.ca.us www.countytreasurer.org (951) 955-3967 169 " Federal Agency 100� Market Value Federal Agency $29,784,778 Tota I $29,784,778 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE September 2006 Portfolio Statistics September August July Month -End Book Value $ 29,857,258 $ 29,857,258 $ 24,857,258 1 Month -End Market Value' $ 29,784,778 $ 29,763,238 ' $ 24,725,023 I Paper Gain or(Loss) $ (72,480)1$ (94,020)i$ (132,235)1 Percent of Paper Gam or Loss -0.24%1 -0.31%I -0.53%1 Yield Based Upon Book Value 4.59 4.59j 4.2:71 Weighted Average Maturity (Yrs) 0.49 0.571 0.48 Modified Duration 0.371 ' 0.561 0.49, *Markel values does rwt include accrued inKresl 30 days or Less Market Value 4,858,833 90 Days - 1 Year 20,927,520 1 - 2 Years 2-3Years . Over 3 Years Total 29,784,778 Month End Portfolio Holdings Report CUSIP PAR DESCRIPTION FFCB - FED FARM CREDIT BANK 3,19,9000.00 FMB - FED HOME LOAN BANK COUPON MATURITY BOOK VALUEl 3,000,00000 PRICE M. VALUE` GAIN/LOSS YLD MAT M Our Avg" Life` 2,980,320.00 (10A80.00) 0.38 0.38 3133%0039 3,000,00000 FED HOME LOAN BAN(1.75YrNceMul 3133XG9842 7,000.00000 R7DFC E LOAN BAN0YrNc6Mo 4,000,000.00 FRMC - FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORO CORP DI 5,000,000.00 30,000,000.00 4.1250 4/27/2007 3000,000.00 9931 2,979,39000 5.3750 8e2812007 7,00000000 10003 7,002,170.00 1- The Market value and yield of vmn-term money market secures are based an pnntbsed price. 2. Average Life is the number of years unit p ncgel is returned et maturity. weighted by nrerhet value. 3- Muddied Duration The percentage once charge of a secuty/u a given charge in yield The hgher the modified duration of a secuity, the higher the risk. 4,858,833.13 29,857,25837 (20,810.00) 2,17000 4.13 5.38 0.57 0.41 0.58 0.91 4,858,833.33 4.98 0.07 0.07 29,704,77E3T _ 172,480.00) 4,59 0.37 049 County Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, 4th Floor - Capital Markets Riverside, CA 92502-2205 www.countytreasurer.org (11 655-3967 " AGENDA ITEM 7F " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: December 13, 2006 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Regional Arterial Program Quarterly Report STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Regional Arterial Program Quarterly Report. BACKGROUND INFORMATION. - At the request of the Commission, staff is providing quarterly progress reports on the TUMF Regional Arterial program. The Commission approved 23 projects in Western Riverside County resulting in $50.145 million of programmed TUMF funds. The project sponsors are required to enter into formal agreements with the Commission for each individual project outlining the work to be performed, phase, funding amount, etc. To date, there are a total of 18 agreements executed, two in progress, and the remaining three ,project agreements are expected to be complete by the end of FY 2006/07. The total amounts by year of TUMF Regional Arterial funds programmed and under agreement are as follows: Fiscal Year Funding FY 2005/06 $ 9.330 million FY 2006/07 $27.400 million FY 2007/08 $ 3.503 million FY 2008/09 $ 2.000 million FY 2009/10 $ 0.000 million Total $42.233 million The remaining balance of programmed funds awaiting agreements is $7.912 million. Project descriptions and detailed programming information is included in the attached report. Agenda Item 7F . 171 The Western Riverside ,Council of Governments' 2005 TUMF Nexus study identified adjustments to project costs. These adjustments are being reflected in the agreements and through amendments to existing agreements. Attachment: TUMF Regional Arterial Funds, Programmed - December 2006 Agenda Item 7F 172 Riverside County Transportation Commission -: - TUMF Regional Arterial Funds Programmed - December 2006 TUMF Regional Arterials Fonds Programmed By RCTC - Arterials Project Phases: Arterial Project Details Date Programmed 9/8/2004 9/8/2004 9/8/2004 9/8/2004 9/8/2004 9/8/2004 Lead Agency Corona Corona Corona Lake Elsinore Moreno Valley Moreno Valley Project 11Ne Green River Road Project Foothill Parkway - Westerly Extension El Cerrito Rd/ 1-15 Interchange Capacity Improvements Railroad Canyon Road/ 1-15 Interchange Improvements Perris Boulevard Widening Penis Boulevard Widening Project Limits Dominguez Ranch Road to SR 91 Pose° Grande to Lincoln Avenu- Bedford Canyon Road to the 1- 15 Northbound Ramps Interstate 15 to Canyon Hills Road Ramona Expressway to Cactus Avenue Ironwood Avenue toManzanita Avenue Project Schedule and Funding Programmed ( $'s n millions) Note: Amounts In Gre havebeen re• uested but of • o-rammed _ Phase PA&ED _ PS&E R/W Cons FY 2005/06 Year Total: $ PA&ED PS&E R/W Cons Cons FY 2006/07 $ 4.242 $.. ? - 2.000 $- 2.000 YearIolal $ 0.120 $ PA&ED' PS&E` R/W Cons Year Totall;$ - $ PA&ED PS&E _ R/W_ Cons FY 2007/08 0:300 Year Total: $ - $ 0389 $ PA&ED PS&E ' R/W Cons Year Total • $ $ 0.134 $ 0.336 FY 2008/09 FY 2009/10 Phase Total $ . 4.242 21.282 1.625.' 0.300 6.000 .............. $ 7.200 $ 13.500' 0.389 0.871 1 955 7.710 $. 10.925 $ 2.837 AGREEMENT STATUS SIGNED Amendment pending SIGNED 'EXPECTED Jan'07 SIGNED SIGNED Paget of 4 173 T 8 10 12 13 Arterial Project Details Date Programmed 12/8/2004 ll/9/2005 4/12/2006 9/8/2004 9/8/20o4 2/I1/2004• 9/8/2004 .lead Agency Riverside County Transportation • Department Riverside Riverside Riverside " Riverside County Transportation Department. Riverside County Transportation Department. Riverside County." " Transportation Department Project Title Reche Cyn/ Reche.Vista Van Buren Widening. Van Buren Widening Van Buren Blvd - 91 Freeway Interchange • Bundy Canyon Road/Scott Road' Improvement State Route 79 Improvement . Project Van Buren Bridge Boulevard_ Widening and - Bridge Replacement Project Limits - Heacock St, to SB Co. Line Andrew to Garfield.,. Santa Ana River to Jackson St Van. Buren Blvd at tne.91 Freeway Interchnage Bundy Canyon Road from I-15. Mumeta. Road, Scott Road from MumetaRood .to 1-215 Widen State Route 79 to four (4) lanes from Thompson Road (south limit) to Domenigoni P_arkway,(north limit)_, - On Van Buren Blvd from Clay. Street.(north limit-. approx..1000 feet north of the Santa Ana River to approx. 1200 feetsouth of the Santa Ana River. .Project Schedule and Funding Programmed (,$'skinmillions) Note: Amounts In Gre have: been re•uested butnot•ro• rammed'd".. Phase. PA&ED PS&E R/W Cans ; FY 2005/06 FY 2006/07 Year Total `$ 0.407 PS&E` R/W Cons Yeer raid $ PA&ED PS&E R/W Cons Year Total ;$ PA&ED PS&E R/W Cons Year Total $ PA&ED PS&E R/W Cons 0.712 1.003:: $ 0.845' FY 2007/08 0.845 $ $ 2.000 2.000 $ Year Tokill :$ 0712 $_ - PA&ED PS&E ' "R/W Cons 1.000' $ 1.000 Year Total $ 2.000 $ . PA&ED PS&E R/W Cans Tear Total $ $ 4.860 FY 2008/09. FY 2009/10 $0.000 15000 $0 070 $0.000 Phase Total $:- 0.409 1.003 :-- 1.003 0.815 0.845 2.000 K000 $ `10.000 $ 0717 $ ' 15.000` 4.860 AGREEMENT STATUS In Process SIGNED Amendment pending - SIGNED SIGNED SIGNED SIGNED In'Proces.s Page 2 of 4 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Arterial Project Details Date Programmed 9/8/2004 • 9/8/2004 9/8/2004 9/8/2004 9/8/2004 9/8/2004 Lead Agency Riverside County Transportation Department Riverside County Transportation Department Riverside County Transportation Department Riverside County Transportation Department Riverside County Transportation Department Riverside County Transportation Department• San JOcinto Project Title Van Buren Widening - Washington Street t0 Wood Road - Project Development Eastern Bypass Project Development Potrero Boulevard Project Development New Interchange on 1-15 at Schlelsman Road Clink) Keith Rd/ 1- 15 1C Improvement Project New IC of the Eastern Bypass/ I- 15 Ramona Expressway Widening (TUMF Priority) Project Limits On Van Buren Blvd between Washington Street and Wood Road In the Woodcrest area Eastern Bypass from Auld Road to 1.15 Potrero Blvd. from San Timoteo Canyon Road/ Oak Valley Pkwy to SR 79 New IC along 1-15 between the existing Limonite Ave IC and Sixth St IC In the Mira Loma region. The proposed IC at Schleisman Rd will be approx 1,31 miles s/o Limonite Ave. Clinton Keith/I-15 Interchange Eastern Bypass/I-15 Sanderson Avenue (Hwy 79j to westerly city limits Project Schedule and Funding Programmed( $'s,In millions) Note: Amounts in Gre have been re• nested but not• o• rammed. Phase PA&ED PS&E R/W FY 2005/06 0.226 Cons Year Total Cons FY 2007/08 0.546 FY 2006/07 0.226 $ $ 1.00D Year Total $ 1.000 $ 1.000.-.' PA&ED PS&E R/W Cons R/W - Cons Total Year $ PA&ED PS&E R/W Cons Year Total. $ PA&ED PS&E R/W Cons 2.000' 2.000 $ $ 0.750 Year Total $ 0.500 $ PA&ED PS&E RM. Cons $ 0.040 0.750 $ . 0.750, $ $ 0.160 $ 3.000 Yea alai $ . 0.040 $ 3.160 FY 2008/09 ',. . ow 1000 $ $ 2.000 0:750 $ 2.000 FY 2009/10 $0 000 $24250 $0.000 Phase Total $ 0.772 3.000 $ 3.000 2.000 0.650 2.000 4.250 20.000 $ 27.000 $ 13.500 2.000 0040 0.160 3.000 $ 3.200 AGREEMENT STATUS SIGNED Amendment pending SIGNED SIGNED SIGNED SIGNED Page 3 of 4 175- 21 22 23 24 PA&ED Cons 3.678 1.300 $ 4.352 $ $ 3.723 4.170 $ 10.417 9.090 YearTotal $. 9.330 $ 27.400 $ 1.753 $ 2.000` 3.503 $ 2.000 $0.000 $ ` 42.233 PA&ED PS&E R/W Cons $ 4.087 $ 1.300 $ 4.472 YearTotal $ $ 4.246 $ 6.170 $ 10.417 $' ' 13.950- $ 1.750 $ 1.753 9.859 $ ' 34.783 1$ 3.503 2.000 $ 2.000 $0.000 $ $ $ $ 10.083 17 223 14.889 13.950 S 50.145' Arterial Project Details Date Programmed 9/8/2004 9/6/2004 9/8/2004 9/8/2004 Lead Agency San Jacinto • Temecula Temecula Temecula Project Title Extension of Ramona Expressway (Gap Closure) Western Bypass Corridor Alignment Study French Valley Pkwy/ 1-15. - Overcrossing and IC I.15/SR79 South Ultimate - Interchange Project. Limits Seventh Street in San Jacinto to Cedar Avenue unincorporated territory - RiversideCounty Approximately, from I-15/ SR 79. South Interchange Ina. northerly direction to the proposed I-15/ French Valley Interchange On 1-.15, approx 0.9S kmnorth of Winchester Rd (SR79) IC and 2,43 km s/o the l-15/ 1-215 (unction Intersection.of 1-15 and SR-79 South Project Schedule and Funding Programmed j S's In millions) Note: Amounts. In:Gr havelmenr-•uestedbutnol'•rosrammed:. Phase FY 2005/06 FY-2006/07 0.900:; 'FY2007/08 FY 2008/09 Year Total $ 0.500 $" 0.900 $ 4.500 $ PA&ED PS&E RI W Year Total $ PA&ED PS&E R/W Cons Yea' Tufo! $ PA&ED PS&E R/W Cons $ 4.352 Year Total $ 0.700 2.000 5.517 -FY2009/10- $0 000 , Phase Total $ 0.200 $_ _-. 0.300 0.900 4500 $ 5.900 0.700:. $ 7.517 $ $ 0.010 4.352 $1 0.010 $ 5.900 $ $235000 $0 000 2 nr10 5.517 20.000 27.517 0.010 4.352 5.900 $• 10.262 AGREEMENT STATUS SIGNED SIGNED SIGNED - SIGNED TOTAL FUNDING_ UNDER AGREEMENT TOTAL TUMF REGIONAL FUNDS PROGRAMMED pbb 11/22/06 AGENDA ITEM 7G • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: December 13, 2006 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT Fund Transfer Agreement for Operation of a Freeway Service Patrol'. Program in Riverside County STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Fund Transfer Agreement No. 07-45-066-00 with the state of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for the Riverside County :Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program in the amount of $1,416,343 in state funding for FY 2006/07; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Riverside County FSP program has been in operation for over thirteen years and provides roving tow truck service on five beats on SR-91, 1-215/SR-60, and 1-15 during the morning and afternoon;, commute hours. The. FSP program is funded by the state of California (80%) and local SAFE fees (20%). Funds are allocated to participating agencies through a formula based on population, urban freeway lane miles, and levels of congestion. The agreement for FY 2006/07 provides for continued state funding in the amount of $1,416,343 and requires a local match of $354,086. This is an increase of $240,410 in state funds over the funding level for FY 2005/06. The Commission's FY 2006/07 budget for the Motorist Assistance program includes $1,175,900 in state funding and $376,200 in local matching funds. The additional state funds are not being requested at this time. Staff, along with the California Highway Patrol (CHP) and Caltrans, will review the hours of operation and service level to determine if any additional service or a new beat is warranted. Any state funds not claimed in the current fiscal year may be carried over and claimed in FY 2007/08. Agenda Item 7G 177 Annually, the program provides approximately 32,800 assists to stranded motorists alongRiverside County freeways:. The Commission contracts with three tow truck operators to provide 13 tow trucks to patrol these routes Monday through Friday ! . during the peak commute hours, 5:30 a.m. to 8:30 ' a.m. ' and 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m The program's day to day field supervision is handled by the CHP. Financial. Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: , FY 2006/07- Amount: $1,416,343 Source of Funds: State, of California Budget Ad ustment:. No GLA No.: 201-45-41505 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \pte/tcdc; C Date: 11/27/2006 Attachment: FSPi Program Fund Transfer Agreement No. 07-45-066-00 Agenda Item 7G 178 " " FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL PROGRAM FUND TRANSFER AGREEMENT (Non Federal) Agreement No. FSP07-6054(050) Project No. FSP07-6054(050) Agreement No. 07-45-066-00 Location: 08-R I V-Va r-RCTC EA: 08-924992L THIS. AGREEMENT, effective on July 1, 2006, is between the State of California, acting by and through the Department of Transportation, hereinafter referred to as STATE,; and the Riverside County Transportation Commission, a public agency, hereinafter referred to as "ADMINISTERING AGENCY.� WHEREAS, Streets and Highways Code'(S&HC) Section 2560 et seg.' authorizes STATE and administering agencies to develop and implement a Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program on traffic -congested urban freeways throughout the state; and WHEREAS, STATE has distributed available State Highway Account funds to administering agencies participatingin the FSP Program in accordance with S&HC Section 2562;' and WHEREAS, ADMINISTERING AGENCY,, has applied to STATE and has been selected to receive funds from the : FSP Program .for the purpose of Freeway Service Patrol for FY 2006-2007, hereinafter referred to as "PROJECT; and WHEREAS, proposed PROJECT funding is as follows: Total ,Cost State Funds Local funds $1,770,429.00 $1,416,343.00 $354,086 00 ; and WHEREAS, STATE is required to enter into an agreement with ADMINISTERING AGENCY to delineate the respective responsibilities of the parties relative to prosecution of said PROJECT; and WHEREAS, STATE and ADMINISTERING AGENCY mutually desire to cooperate and jointly participate in the FSP program and desire to specify herein the terms and conditions under which the FSP program is to be conducted; and WHEREAS, ADMINISTERING AGENCY has approved entering into this Agreement under authority of Resolution No. approved : by ADMINISTERING AGENCY on , a copy of which is attached. For Caltrans Use Only I hereby Certify upon my own personal knowledge that budgeted funds are available for this encumbrance I fl Chapters Statutes! Item % Accounting Officer 'Fiscal Year' Program 1 Date 1 $ 1,416,343.00 s BC 1 Category [Fund Source i $ 47 1 2006 1 2660-102-042 12006/2007 1 20.30.010.6001 C 1262040 1114-042-T 11,416,343.00 I i. I I I I i I Page 1 of 6 179 Non -Fed FSP NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: SECTION I 1. To define orspecify, in cooperation with ADMINISTERING AGENCY, the limits of the State Highway segments to be served by the FSP as well as the nature and;, amount of the FSP dedicated equipment, if any, that is to be funded under the FSP program. ' 2. To pay ADMINISTERING AGENCY the, STATE's share, in amount not to exceed $1,416,343.00; of eligible participating PROJECT costs. 3. To Deposit with ADMINISTERING AGENCY, upon. ADMINISTERING AGENCY's award of a contract for PROJECT servicesand receipt of an original and two signed copies of an invoice in the proper form, including ,identification of this Agreement Number and Project Number, from ADMINISTERING AGENCY, the amount of $226,614.88_ This initial deposit' represents STATE's share of the estimated costs- for the initial two months of PROJECT. Thereafter-, to make reimbursements to ADMINISTERING AGENCY as promptly as state fiscal procedures will permit, but not more often than monthly in arrears, upon receipt of an original and two signed copies of invoices in the proper form covering actual allowable costs incurred for;; the prior sequential month's:period of the Progress Payment Invoice (The initial deposit will be calculated at,16% of the STATE's total share.). 4_ When conducting ,an audit of the costs claimed by ADMINISTERING !.AGENCY under the, IP provisions of this Agreement, STATE will rely to the maximum extent possible on any prior audit of ADMINISTERING AGENCY performed pursuant to the provisions of state and federal laws. In the absence of such an audit, work of other auditors will be relied upon to the extent that work is, acceptable to STATE when planning: and conducting additional audits. SECTION II. ADMINISTERING AGENCY AGREES: 1. To commit and contribute matching funds from ADMINISTERING AGENCY resources, which shall be an amountnotless than 25 percent of the amount provided by STATE from the State Highway Account. 2. The 'ADMINISTERING, AGENCY's detailed PROJECT. Cost Proposal!, which' identifies all anticipated direct and indirect PROJECT costs which ADMINISTERING AGENCY may invoice STATE for reimbursement under this Agreement is attached hereto and made an express part of this Agreement.. The detailed` PROJECT Cost Proposal reflects the provisions and/or regulations of Section III, Anicle'8, of this Agreement.. 3. To use all state funds paid hereunder only for those transportation related PROJECT purposes that conform to Article XIX of the California State Constitution. , Page 2 of6 18 4. STATE funds provided to ADMINISTERING AGENCY under this Agreement shall not be used for administrative purposes by ADMINISTERING AGENCY. _ 5. To develop, in cooperation with STATE, advertise, award and administer PROJECT contract(s) in accordance with ADMINISTERING AGENCY competitive procurement procedures. 6. Upon award of a contract for PROJECT, to prepare and submit to STATE an original and two signed copies of invoicing for STATE's.initial deposit specified in Section I, Article 3. Thereafter, to prepare and submit to STATE an original and two signed copies of progress invoicing for STATE's share of actual expenditures for allowable PROJECT costs. 7. Said invoicing :shall _ evidence the expenditure of ADMINISTERING AGENCY's PROJECT participation in paying not less than 20% of all allowable PROJECT costs and shah contain ;the information described in; Chapter 5 of the Local Assistance Procedures Manual and shall be mailed to the Department of Transportation, Accounting: Service Center, MS 33, Local Program Accounting Branch, P.O. Box 942874, Sacramento CA, 94274-0001. - 8. Within:60 days after completion of PROJECT work to be reimbursed under this Agreement, to prepare a final invoice reporting all actual eligible costs expended', including all costs ;paid by ADMINISTERING AGENCY and submit that signed invoice, along with any refund. due STATE, to the District Local Assistance Engineer. Backup information submitted with said final invoice shall include all FSP operational contract invoices paid by ADMINISTERING AGENCY to contracted operators included in expenditures billed for to STATE under this Agreement. 9. COST PRINCIPLES A) ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees to comply with, and require all project sponsors to comply with, Office of Management and Budget Circular A-87, , Cost Principles for State and Local Government, and 49 CFR, Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments. B) ADMINISTERING AGENCY will assure that its Fund recipients will be obligated to agree that (1) Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, 48 CFR, Federal Acquisition Regulations ,System, Chapter 1, Part 31, et seq., shall be used to determine the atlowability of individual PROJECT. cost items and (2) those parties shall, comply with .Federal administrative procedures in accordance with 49 CFR, Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments. Every sub -recipient receiving Funds as a contractor or subcontractor under this Agreement shall comply with Federal administrative procedures in accordance with 49 CFR, Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments. C): Any Fund expenditures for costs for which ADMINISTERING AGENCY has receivedpayment or credit that are determined by subsequent audit to be unallowable under Office of Management and Budget Circular A-87, 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 31 or 49 CFR, Part 18, are subject to repayment by ADMINISTERING AGENCY to STATE. Should ADMINISTERING AGENCY fail to reimburse Fund moneys due STATE within 30 days of demand, or within such other period as may be agreed in writing between the Parties hereto, STATE is authorized to intercept and withhold future payments due ADMINISTERING AGENCY from STATE or any third -parry source, including, but not limited to, the State Treasurer, the State Controller and the California Transportation Commission. Page 3 of181 Non -Fed FSP 10. THIRD PARTY CONTRACTING A) ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall not award a construction contract over $10,000 or other contracts over $25,O00 [excluding_ professional senrice:contracts ;of the type which are required to be procured in, accordancewith Government Code Sections 4525 (d), (e) and; (f)J on the basis of a noncompetitive negotiation for work to be performed using, Funds without theprior written approval of STATE. I b) Any :subcontract or agreement: entered into by ADMINISTERING, AGENCY as a result of disbursing Funds received pursuant to this Agreement shall contain all of the fiscal, provisions of this Agreement; ,and .shall mandate that travel and per diem reimbursements and third -party contract reimbursements to subcontractors will be allowable as project costs only after those costs are incurred and paid for by the subcontractors.. _ C) In addition to .the above, the preaward requirements of third party contractor/consultants:, with ADMINISTERING AGENCY should be consistent with Local Program Procedures as published by STATE.' . 11: ACCOUNTING SYSTEM .ADMINISTERING AGENCY, its contractors and subcontractors shall establish and maintain an accounting system and records that properly accumulate and segregate Fund expenditures by line item. The accounting system of ADMINISTERING AGENCY, its 'contractors and all subcontractors shall conform to Generally Accepted: Accounting. Principles1GAAP), enable the determination of incurred costs at interim points of completion, and provide'' support for reimbursement payment vouchers or invoices. 12. RIGHT TO AUDIT For the purpose'of.determinin compliance with this Agreement and'other matters connected with 9 pl� g the performance of ADMINISTERING AGENCY's contracts with third. parties, ADMINISTERING AGENCY, ADMINISTERING AGENCY's contractors and subcontractors and STATE shall each maintain and make available for inspection all books, documents; papers, accounting records; and . other evidence pertaining to the performance of such contracts,; including, but not :limited to the costs of administering those various contracts.' All of the 'above referenced parties shall make such materials available at their, respective offices at all reasonable times' for threelearsfrom the date of final payment' of Funds to ADMINISTERING AGENCY. STATE,' the 'Califomia, State Auditor, or any duly authorized representative of STATE : or the United States 'Department of Transportation, shall each have4 access :to any books, records; and documents that are pertinent for audits, examinations,` excerpts, and transactions, and ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall furnish copies thereof if requested. Page 4 of 6 . 182 13. TRAVEL AND SUBSISTENCE • Payments; to only ADMINISTERING AGENCY for travel and subsistence expenses of ADMINISTERING. AGENCY forces and its subcontractors claimed for reimbursement or applied as local match credit shall not exceed rates authorized to: be paid; exempt non -represented State employees under current State Department of Personnel Administration ;(DPA) rules. If the rates invoiced are in excess ,of those authorized DPA rates, then, ADMINISTERING AGENCY is responsible for the cost difference and any overpayments shall be reimbursed to STATE on demand: • • 14. SINGLE AUDIT ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees to include all state (Funds) and federal funded projects in the schedule of projects to be examined in ADMINISTERING AGENCY's annual audit and in the schedule of projects to be examined under its single audit prepared in accordance with Office of Management and Budget Circular A-133. SECTION ill IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED: 1. All obligations of STATE under the terms of this Agreement are subject to the appropriation of resources by the .Legislature and 'the encumbrance of :funds under this Agreement. Funding and reimbursement is available only: upon the passage of the State Budget Act containing these STATE funds. The starting date of eligible reimbursable activities shall be July 1, 2006. 2. All obligations of ADMINISTERING AGENCY under the terms of this Agreement are subject to authorization and allocation of resources by ADMINISTERING AGENCY. 3: ADMINISTERING AGENCY and STATE shall jointly define the initial FSP .program as well as the appropriate level of FSP funding recommendations and scope . of service and equipment required to provide and manage the FSP program. No changes shall, be made in these unless mutually agreed to in writing by the parties to this Agreement. . 4: Nothing in the provisions of this Agreement is intended to create duties or obligations to or rights in third parties not parties to this Agreement or affect the legal liability of either party to this Agreement by imposing any standard of care with respect to the maintenance of State highways different from the standard of care imposed by law. 5. Neither STATE nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage or liability occurring or arising by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by ADMINISTERING AGENCY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to ADMINISTERING AGENCY under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Govemment Code Section 895.4, ADMINISTERING AGENCY shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless the State of California, its officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by ADMINISTERING AGENCY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to ADMINISTERING AGENCY, under this Agreement. Page 5 of 6 Non -Fed FSP 183 6. Neither ADMINISTERING AGENCY nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage or liability occurring or arising by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated :to STATEunder =this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government' Code Section 895.4, STATE shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless ADMINISTERING AGENCY, its officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Govemment Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to STATE under this Agreement. 7 ADMINISTERING AGENCY will maintain an inventory of all non expendable : PROJECT equipment, defined as having a• useful life of at least two years and an acquisition cost of $500 or more; paid for with PROJECT funds. At the conclusion of this Agreement, ADMINISTERING AGENCY may either keep such equipment and credit STATE its share of equipment's fair market value or sell such equipment at .the best price obtainable at a public or private sale (in accordance with established STATE procedures) .and reimburse STATE .its proportional share of the safe 1. price. 81 ADMINISTERING AGENCY and its sub -contractors will comply with all applicable` Federal and State laws and regulations, including but not limited to, Office of Management and Budget Circular A-97, Cost Principles for State and Local Governments (49 CFR, Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments). nts). 9. In the event that ADMINISTERING AGENCY fails to operate the PROJECT commenced and reimbursed under this Agreement in accordance with the termsof this Agreement or fails to comply with applicable Federal and State laws and regulations, STATE reserves: the ;right to terminate funding for PROJECT, or portions thereof, upon written notice to ADMINISTERING AGENCY. . 10. This Agreement shall terminate on June 30, 2008. However, the non -expendable equipment, and liability clauses shall remain in effect until terminated :or modified in' writing by mutual agreement. STATE OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION. Department of Transportation By: By: Office of Project Implementation, South Title: Division of Local Assistance Date: Page 6 of 6 Non -Fed FSP 184 •! AGENDA ITEM 7H RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: December 13, 2006 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Edda Rosso, Program Manager Stephanie Wiggins, Regional Programs. Director THROUGH: Eric Haley;Executive Director SUBJECT: State of California Department of Transportation Environmental Justice Grant Award - STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Apply for, accept and enter into Agreement No. 07-67-075-00 with the state of California Department of Transportation (Ca!trans) for $200,000 in grant funds from the Environmental Justice (EJ}: Context -Sensitive Transportation Planning Grant Program; 2) Approve Funding Agreement No. 07-67-071-00 with Los. Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA), Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) for the local funding match of $24,000 in support of the EJ grant; 3) Authorize staff to release a request for proposals (RFP) to conduct an EJ analysis and community outreach to supplement the Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan (MCGMAP) currently underway; and 4) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its January 2005 meeting, the Commission approved participation in the development of a MCGMAP in order to form a consensus for an implementation plan for the region in partnership with the transportation commissions of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Ventura, and San Diego. This effort, which is scheduled for completion March 2007, will model goods movement growth trends, identify possible public -private partnerships, and highlight near- to long-term strategies, as well as develop a list of potential projects to be funded. To build upon this collaborative effort, the MCGMAP agencies submitted a proposal, Agenda Item 7H 185 "Creating Balance Between Goods Movement and Burdens on Local Communities", requesting grant assistance to supplement the regional goods movement study , effort. This summer, the Ca[trans Division of Transportation Planning awarded the MCGMAP agencies $200,000 in EJ grant funds to conduct targeted community ' outreach and EJ analysis to support the MCGMAP currently in development. The . proposed funding Agreement No. 07-67-075-00 is required with the Caltrans to receive the grant award. The grant has a 12% local match requirement of $24,000, of vvhich, $6,000 is the Commission's share.. The proposed funding , Agreement No. 07-67-071-00 is required to document the local match to the Caltrans. The study will target representative communities within each county in the goods movement study area and establish a series of community forums to obtain feedback on potential strategies that may lessen the irnpacts of goods movement activities on minority and low-income communities. The study, will take approximately 12 months to complete and be administered by Commission staff with active cooperation and input from each 11/16GMAF" staff representative regarding direct public outreach in each respective county. The study will likely inclilide the following work elements: Identify representative target communities within each county in the goods movement study area; Analyze potential environmental justice impacts resulting, from goods movement activities and investments; • Establish local community feedback groups and obtain feedback; • Identify best practices and develop potential strategies. to avoid or reduce potential impacts and maximize opportunities; and , • 'Develop and finalize a Strategic Report and Guidebook for Communities. The results of the effort will be incorporated into the goods movement planning effort to foster community involvement early on in the 'planning process while facilitating the building of positive community relationships, as the goods movement effort advances. The result will be a set of strategies that can be,'used in the planning and development of goods movement projects and by local agencies and community organizations in reducing potential burdens of goods movement on local communities. The Commission ,will seek consultant assistance to perforrn this work over a 12 month period with a budget not to exceed $224,000. Source of funding identified for the study is $200,000 from the grant, $18,000 from the other MCGMAP Agenda Item 7H 186 • _ _ . agencies and $6,000 from Commission through Local Transportation Funds (LTF). The anticipated schedule for retention of a consultant firm is as follows: December 13, 2006 January 22, 2007 February 5, 2007 March 14, 2007 Release of Request for Proposal Deadline for Receipt of Proposals Interviews of Short -Listed Firms Award of Agreement by Commission Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: No Year: FY 2006/07 Amount: $ 56,000 Source of Funds: Caltrans Planning Grant — EJ , tTF (ROTC Share), Other Local Agencies Budget Adjustment: Yes GLA No.: 106-67-41509 P2404-40 $50,000 State Revenues - Other 106-67-41203 P2404-40 $ 6,000 Local Other Revenues 106-67-65520 P2404-40 $56,000 Professional Services, Fiscal Procedures Approved: \1,44.,4,14,1rz 1, Date:. 11/27/2006 Agenda Item 7H 187 AGENDA ITEM 71 " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: December 13, 2006 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Henry Nickel, 'Staff Analyst THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Commuter Rail Program Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the. Commission to receive and file the Commuter: Rail Program Update as an information item. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: IEOC Weekend Service Daily passenger trips on the new year-round IEOC Metrolink weekend service have remained consistent since October. This expanded service provides both an extension to our existing services for transit dependent riders and existing commuter passengers as well as a viable alternative to driving into ,Orange County,. introducing entirely new users to the Metrolink system. Cumulative Passenger Trips IEOC Weekend Service fFirst week of school 28,000 24,000 20,000 16,000 12,000 8,000 4,000 0 16 . " \�-1 To date, the IEOC weekend service has provided 27,698 passenger trips since. commencing July 15 of this year. This constitutes 8,766 additional trips resulting from year-round service compared to last year's 18,932 Summerlink seasonal trips. Growth of the service reflects ongoing marketing efforts coordinated among the Commission, Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG). Agenda Item 71 188 "Holiday Toy Train to Visit Riverside County Stations in December Metrolink's Holiday, Toy Express has been delighting audiences for ten years providing a free, enjoyable, community -based holiday experience for the people who live and work in the :areasserved by Metrolink. This year uvill be no different- as the Holiday Toy Express travels .to' 50 cities throughout the Southland: The,: Holiday Toy Express is a' 450-ton Metrolink train decorated with giant glittering ornaments, animated displays, and more than 50,000 twinkling lights. Date December; 2 December' 10 ' Metrelirik Holiday Toy Express 2006 Schedule' Time 5:20 PM to 5:50 PM 6:05'PM to 6:35 PM Location Pedley Station La Sierra Station The train travels to Metrolink station cities throughout Southern California presenting a free live musical stage show at each stop; after the show kids of all ages have 'the ,opportunity to meet Santa and his friends. Additionally;;the Holiday Toy Express supports the Southern California Firefighters' Spark of Love Toy Drive, which collects and distributes toys ' to needy children encouraging audience members to share the holiday spirit by donating a new unwrapped toy la the show. In addition, the Commission will sponsor events including food and entertainment at each location. Riverside Line n IF 0 It Agenda Item71 Passenger Trips Riverside. Line 5,400 5,000 4,6U0 4,200 3,800 3,400 3,000 2,600 0 t) h , 5 a�o�o . e�0° ��� ��CS° 'a c� J�o`O �J�o`O J�o6 e�o`� i� O P ) P 5 Month 189 " " Daily passenger trips on Metrolink's Riverside line for the month of October averaged 4,960, up 255 (+'5%)" from the month of September. Compared to one year prior, the line averaged an overall daily increase of 272 passenger trips, nearly 6% more than a year ago, October 2005. I 1 Percentage On Time Performance (95% Goal) UP. Track. Work Riverside Line VV 95 90 85 n2, 80 75 70 soh Gyp 6 �6 �6 �6 A6 A6 ADO Oo .  0 O0 Es��0�� ��a�� . Ng ��a�� ,Jp �� Month October on -time performance averaged 97% inbound (-1 % from September) and 99%outbound (+3%from September). The Union Pacific is doing a much better job with dispatching and has been over 97% for the past 3 months." There were 5 delays greater than 5 minutes during the month of October. The following are primary causes: Signals/Track/MOW 2 40% Dispatching 2 40% Mechanical 0 0% Operations 1 20% TOTAL . - Inland Empire -Orange County Line Agenda Item 71 5,000 4,800 4,600 4,400 4,200 4,000 3,800 3,600 Passenger Trips . Inland Empire Orange County Line 199 Month Daily passenger trips on Metrolink's'inland Empire -Orange County (1E0C) line, for the month of October: averaged 4,535, a decreaseof 151 'trips, 3% less than the. month of September. The Line has increased by 298 daily trips or 7% from a year ago October 2005. '100 .95 90 a .. 85 m 80. a 75 70 Oh' oar �o On Time Performance (95%,Goal) Inland Empire Orange County Line O� ro 06 Oor 00 O� Oro 7s. CsO OiD O Ora •sq, 4° lac PQc a\ �,O �O ;•0 5el Month October on -time performanceaveraged95% southbound (+7% from September)' and 95% nortlibound (+9% from September). There were 17.delays 'greater than five minutes during the month of October. The following are primary causes: 91 Line Signals/Track/MOW Dispatching Mechanical Operations TOTAL 3 6 0 8 18% 35% 0% 47 % 2,800 2,600 2,400 H 2,200 c 2,000 u 1,800 1,600 1,400 Agenda Item 71 191 " Daily passenger trips on Metrolink's 91 line for the month of October averaged 2,246, a decrease of 229 trips or a 9% decrease from the month of September. The line averaged an overall increase of 244 (+12%) from a year ago October 2005. 100 m 95 90�� c 85 m 80 a 75 70 On Time Performance (95% Goal) 91 Line ��o 0 ���� ��a�� o ��0e .e" P�� o J�� f Q ��a Po coo O Month October on -time performance averaged 94% inbound (-4% from September) and 96% outbound (+ 1 % from September). There were 9 delays greater than five minutes during the month of October. The following are primary causes: Signals/Track/MOW Dispatching Mechanical Operations 2 6 0 1 TOTAL 23% 66% 0% 11% Attachments: 1) Metrolink Average Weekday Passenger Trips 2) Metrolink Schedule Adherence Summary  Weekday Service Agenda Item 71 1.92 AGENDA ITEM 7J " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 'DATE: December 13, 2006 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Tanya Love, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Triennial Performance Audit for Fiscal Years 2003/04 Through 2005/06 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 07-26-074-00 with Pacific Municipal Consultants to conduct the triennial performance audit of the Commission and seven public transit operators in an amount not to exceed $71,290; 2) Allocate $71,290 in Local Transportation' Fund (LTF) funds to cover the cost of the audits; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its July 12, 2006 meeting; Commission staff was directed to release a Request for Proposal (RFP) to secure consulting services to conduct triennial performance audits. The audits are required for any regional transportation planning agency and transit operator funded through the state of ' California's Transportation Development Act. The audits evaluate the efficiency, effectiveness and economy of the Commission and the seven public transit operators: city of Banning, city of Beaumont, city of Corona, city of Riverside Special Services, Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency, Riverside Transit Agency and SunLine Transit Agency. Each audit must be performed in accordance with California Public Utilities Code Section 99246, the procedures of which are delineated in the Performance Audit Guidebook for Transit Operators and Regional Transportation Planning Entities published by Caltrans. The audits are required every three years and the next audit cycle must be completed by June 30, 2007. The RFP was distributed to approximately 67 firms. A total of six proposals were received, although one applicant subsequently withdrew from the interview process. Agenda Item 7J 195 Consultant interviews were conducted on November 20, 2006. The Evaluation Committee consisted of Commissioner Barbara Hanna and three Commission staff: Stephanie Wiggins;, Tanya: Love and dosefinaClemente. The following criteria were used to evaluate the proposals: 1► Qualification and experience of the firm; 2) Staffing and project organization; 3) Work Iplan; 4) Cost and price; and 5) Completeness of response. The following table provides a listing of each firm, the proposed costs (labor and. expenses) together with the Evaluation Committee's ranking: RANKING FIRM PROPOSED COSTS, (LABOR.& EXPENSES) 1 ,' Pacific Municipal Consultants $71,290 2 Moore &,Associates $67,020 3 Macias Consulting Group, Inc. $107,380 4 • Majic_Consulting Group $74,717 5 Mayer Hoffman McCann $259,400 While all of the firms were qualified to conduct the. audits, Pacific Municipal Consultants (PMC) is the firm recommended by the . Evaluation Committee to perform the triennial performance audits. Derek Wong of PMC was project lead on the triennial' performance audits conducted during the last cycle and.: as such, is familiar with the Cornmission.and the Riverside County public transit operators. His expertise will be especially valuable for the current auditing requirements due to the recent staff turnover at the majority of Riverside County transit operators. In. addition, Mr. Wong is under contract with Ca[trans to develop curriculum and teach workshops on how to conduct TDA performance audits. As required by the Performance Audit Guidebook for Transit Operators and Regional Transportation Planning Entities, a letter was sent to the Riverside County transit operators requestingfeedback on whether there ,;were any +,conflicts of interest or comments regarding the five firms. At the time. of writing this staff; report, nocommentshave been ,received opposing the firms:, Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Y Year: FY 2006/07 Amount: $71.,290 Source of. Funds: Local Transportation Funds Budget Ad ustment:j; N GLA No.: 106-62-65401 -. Fiscal Procedures Approved: \ .yay.,..44, Dater 1°9/27/2006 Agenda Item 7J 196 " AGENDA ITEM 7K " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION . DATE: December 13, 2006 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Tanya Love, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Citizens' Advisory Committee/Social Services Advisory Committee Transportation STAFF'RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Renew the memberships of Michelle Anglin, Peter Benavidez, Jim Collins, Eunice Lovi, Scott Richardson and Cindy Scheirer to the Citizens' Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee (CAC/SSTAC); and 2) _ Approve the membership roster for CAC/SSTAC effective January 1, 2007. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Transportation Development Act (TDA) provides direction for administering both Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds and State Transit Assistance (STA) Funds. Both fund types are used to support operating and capital costs for public transportation. Section 99238 of the TDA requires that the Commission have a Citizens' Advisory Committee/Social Services . Transportation Advisory ' Committee consisting of categorical memberships as follows: 1) One representative of a potential transit user who is 60 years of age or older; 2► One representative of a potential transit user who is handicapped; 3) Two representatives of the local social service providers for seniors, including. one representative of a social service transportation provider, if one exists; 4► Two representatives of local social service providers for the handicapped, including one representative of a social service transportation provider, if one exists; 5► One representative of a'local social service provider. for persons of limited means; and, Agenda Item 7K 197 6) Two representatives frorn the local consolidated transportation service agency, designated pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 15975 of the Government Code, if one exists, including one representative from • an operator, if one exists. As further identified in Section 99238, members of the social services transportation advisory council shall be appointed by the transportation planning agency (TPA). Candidates shall be recruited' from a broad representation of social service and transit; providers representing the elderly, the handicapped, ,and persons of limited means. The Commission is the TPA for Riverside County. ,In appointing council members, the TPA shall strive to attain geographic and minority representation among council members. Initial appointments to the CAC/SSTAC are staggered with members appointed for one, two and three-year terms. 'Once initial appointments are made, subsequent renewals are for a three-year term. Appointments for Michelle Anglin, Peter Benavidez, Jirn Collins, Eunice Lovi, Scott Richardson and Cindy Scheirer expire as of December 31, 2006. Staff contacted these members and all have indicated that they would like to have their appointments reconfirmed. • For the past several years, staff has requested CAC/SSTAC's participation in reviewing the testimony of the Commission's Unmet Transit Needs Hearing, the SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program and the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) Section 5310 program. Following is a brief desciiption of each program: • Unmet Transit Need's Hearing State 'law requires that 'prior to making any allocations of LTF funds not directly related to public transit, the Commission must identify, the unmet transit needs in the area and determine those that are reasonable to meet. At least one public hearing'must be held to solicit comments on unmet transit needs. The only area that this determination of unmet needs is, applicable to is the Palo Verde Valley where it is anticipated ,,that not all funds will be needed for transit. In the Western County and the Coachella Valley, all available local transit funds are being used for transit services. The Unthet Transit Needs Hearing 'is held annually in Blythe, California. For FY 2007/08, the hearing will be held on March,1, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program Each year, 2% of the LTF revenue is made available for use on; bicycle and pedestrian f'acility projects through the Comrnission's SB 821 prngram. This is a discretionary program administered by the Commission. ' Agdnda Item 7K 198 • • • There are three steps to carry out the program: 1) All cities and the county are notified of the SB 821 program estimate of available funding and are requested, to submit project proposals. (All school districts in the county are also notified and asked to coordinate project submissions with either their local city or the Riverside County Transportation Department.) The Commission's SB 821 program policies, project application, and selection criteria are also provided with the notification; 2) The Commission's SB 821 Evaluation Committee, comprised of members of the Commission's Technical and Citizens' Advisory Committees (three from each), meets to review and rank the project applications using the evaluation criteria adopted by the Commission and recommends projects and funding amounts to the Commission for approval; and 3) The Commission reviews the Committee's recommendations and approves a program of bicycle and pedestrian projects for funding. FTA's Section 5310 Program The FTA.Section 5310 program provides capital grants for the purpose of assisting private, non-profit corporations and public. agencies, under certain circumstances, in providing transportation services to meet the needs of seniors and persons with disabilities for whom public transportation services are otherwise unavailable, insufficient or inappropriate. The program provides funding for approved projects on an 88.53% federa1/11.47% local match basis. In addition to the above tasks, members of CAC/SSTAC review the draft Short Range Transit Plans from the eight public operators providing services in Riverside County. Attachment: CAC/SSTAC Membership Roster Agenda Item 7K 1'99 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBER ROSTER Effective January 1, 2007 Name/Area Represented Categorical Membership Term Expiration Date Qualifications Michelle Anglin / Norco Social service provider for senior citizens/disabled 1/2010 Provides senior/disabled services Peter Benavidez / Riverside Potential transit user who is disabled 1 /2010 Previous CAC/SSTAC member Jim Collins / Indio Potential transit user who is 60 years of age or older 1 /2010 Previous CAC/SSTAC member Eunice Lovi / Coachella Valley Consolidated Transportation Service Agency 1 /2010 SunLine Transit Agency staff Andrea Puga / Corona Community member 1 /2008 Past member of RCTC, RTA and Metrolink Scott Richardson / Western Riverside Consolidated Transportation Service Agency 1 /2010 Riverside Transit Agency staff Cindy Scheirer / Pedley Community member 1 /2010 Involved in community issues and has attended Transportation Now meetings Sherry Thibodeaux / Riverside Social service provider for persons of limited means 1 /2008 Interested in transit issues. Works for Community Access Center. Hosts support groups for women with disabilities and domestic violence cases. Mary Venerable / Perris Social service transportation provider for elderly 1/2008 Involved in community_ issues and a member of 'Lake Elsinore Transportation NOW 200 " AGENDA ITEM 7L " RIVERSIDE .COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE:. December 13, 2006 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Tanya Love, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Western Riverside County Measure A Specialized Transit Program': Care Connexxus, Inc. and Court Appointed Special Advocates STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the request for Measure A Specialized Transit funds available in Western Riverside County for Care Connexxus, Inc., Agreement No. 07-26-073-00 and Court Appointed Special Advocates, Agreement No. 07-26-072-00, in an aggregate amount not to exceed $181,000 in FY 2006/07 and $205,000 in FY 2007/08; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to enter into the agreements on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its July 2005 meeting, the Commission authorized staff to develop a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the Western Riverside County Measure A Specialized Transit program for the provision of non -emergency medical transportation services. In May 2006, the Commission reviewed requests from 15 non-profit transit operators seeking Measure A Specialized Transit funding. As a result of that process, nine applicants received funding; an additional three applicants: Blindness Support, Care Connexxus, Inc., and Volunteer Center received. interim funding pending further review and clarification of each agency's application. In September 2006, the Commission approved funding for both Blindness Support and Volunteer Center and again, approved interim funding for Care Connexxus, Inc., (CCI). Agenda Item 7L 201 Care Connexxus, Inc: For the past several months, Commission staff: togetherwith an RTA staff member, as part of the local', evaluation committee, has worked closely with management staff from Care Connexxus, _Inc. (CCI)' to provide hands-on' assistance' in finalizing the agency's grant;` application. Areas of concern included performance goals, , projected delivery date of identified equipment, coordination effortswith public operators as well 6s'various discrepancies in the proposed budget including vehicle depreciation costs_ Staff is pleased tcorePort that all areas' of concern identified" by the local evaluation committee, have been .addressed and as a result, ! recommends funding in . the. amount of $165,0001 for FY 2006/07 and $175,000 , for `FY 2007/08 If approved, .CCI will: continue to provide specialized transit services fore participants in its adult -day care, programs. The agency specialized :in the care of the elderly with Alzheimer.'s disease and. related disorders as well as providing support for their caregivers. ` Court Appointed Special Advocates In May 2006, Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) submitted an application requesting funding for mileage reimbursement for community based volunteers who transport children in the court's dependency system. As stated in its application: "The greatest, impediment to securing the requisite number of volunteers for deserving low-income children is the burden of the travel cost to a limited - income senior, or other generous volunteer. Over 50% of our volunteers are retired' and the rest work full time." CASA volunteers transport needy, low=income, abandoned and neglected children to medical, social and court appointments. Originally,; members of the'' local evaluation committee believed that the CASA program's application' had merit; however, the concern with the original application was that:, 1) No priority was identified on what trips would be reimbursed; 2) : The tracking mechanism for actual mileage reimbursement .was not fully, described; and 3) The connectionbetween dollar amount requested and "truly needy was inadequately defined. Less interim payments of $65,000. Agenda Item 7L 202 • CASA's management recently resubmitted the application fully addressing the concerns raised by the review committee. As a result, staff is recommending that Measure A Specialized Transit funding be approved for up to $16,000 for FY 2006/072 and $30,000 for FY 2007/08. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: g Yes Year: FY 2006/07 Amount: $181,000 Source of Funds: Western Riverside Measure A Specialized Transit Funds Budget Ad ustment: N GLA No.: 225-26-86101 Fiscal Procedures Approved: `14,44,adv•...14, Date: 11 /27/2006 2 FY 2006/07 funding would consist of mileage reimbursement and associated costs from January 1 through June 30, 2007_ Agenda Item 7L 203 AGENDA ITEM 7M • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: December 13, 2006 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Mark Massman, Bechtel Project Manager Erik Galloway., Bechtel Project Coordinator THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Advertise for Construction Bids on the Revegetation Work for the State Route 74 Segment IIRealignment Project from 0.5 km 'East of Wasson Canyon Road to 7"' Street in the City of Perris STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to authorize staff to advertise for construction bids on the revegetation work for the SR-74 Segment II realignment project from 0.5 km east of Wasson Canyon Road to Th Street in the city of Perris. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The SR-74 realignment project is a Measure A project from Dexter Avenue in 'the city of Lake Elsinore to T° Street in the city of Perris. The project was constructed in two segments. Segment I is from Dexter Avenue in the city of Lake Elsinore to approximately 0.5 km east of Wasson Canyon Road. Segment II is from approximately 0.5 km east of Wasson Canyon Road to 7'h Street in the city of. Perris. Segment I construction was completed and accepted by the state of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) on April 1, 2004. The revegetation work for Segment I commenced on February 4, 2004 and scheduled to be completed on April 9, 2007, if the reestablishment of the plant materials meets the acceptance criteria. If the criteria are not met, the project will be extended for an additional two years and will be completed on April 9, 2009. Construction of Segment II was recently completed and accepted by Caltrans on October 23, 2006. The revegetation work for Segment II should be initiated as soon as possible during the winter months to assist in the reestablishment of the native plant communities. The overall objective of the revegetation work is the successful reestablishment of plant communities where they have been temporarily disturbed by construction of the portion of the roadway project. This revegetation project addresses the on -site mitigation measures, per special conditions under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Agenda Item 71V1 204 Section 404 of the Clean Water 'Act authorization, under Nationwide Permit No. 14, the Regional. Water Quality Control Board Section 401 of the Clean Water Act Water Quality Certification, and. the California Department of Fish and Game-- Section 1601 of the Fish and Game Code. The Engineer's estimate for this work is between $42,000 and $50,000. Schedule The schedule for the bid process is as follows: Calendar of Events Advertise Request for Bids December 18, 2006 (Monday) Pre -Bid Meeting January 4, 2007, (Thursday) Request for Bids Deadline January 18, 2007 (Thursday) Evaluate the Bids and Submit to the Commission 'for Approval to Award Contract February 14,:2007 (VNednesday) Staff is requesting the Commission's approval to advertise for construction bids for the revegetation work for the SR-74 Segment It from 0.5 km east of Wasson Canyon Road, to 7`h Street in the city of Perris. After the bids are received, staff will review and bring back to the Commission a recommendation .for award to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder. Agenda Item 7M 205 " AGENDA ITEM 7N RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: December 13, 2006 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Claudia Chase, Property Administrator THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Replacement of the Buyer of the Commission's Madison Station Grounds STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the replacement of the buyer of the Madison Station Grounds from the city of Riverside to the city of Riverside Redevelopment Agency, BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its October 12, 2005 meeting, the Commission declared the Madison Station Grounds (4.15 acres) located on Railroad Avenue between Madison Street and Jefferson Avenue in Riverside as surplus property and authorized staff to initiate the 60-day public agency notification period. During the notification period, the city of Riverside provided the Commission a letter indicating its intention to purchase the property, pending the appraisal. The appraisal was completed in December 2005 and the appraised value is $1.070 million. On February 27, 2006, the Commission received a letter from the city of Riverside accepting the terms of the appraisal and sale of the property. At its June 14, 2006 meeting, the Commission approved the sale of the Madison Station Grounds to the city of Riverside in the amount of $1.070 million and directed staff to work with legal counsel and the city of Riverside to execute a Purchase and Sales Agreement transferring title of the former Madison Station Grounds to the city of Riverside. In November 2006, staff received notification from the city of Riverside requesting to change the acquisition agency from the city of Riverside to the city of Riverside Redevelopment Agency. Staff recommends the Commission approve of the replacement of the buyer. Agenda Item 7N 206 AGENDA ITEM 8 (Pomosag slu2I2I IId d I I Po?ITH 28 xou)1 lomPtIO uruzessoN 900Z `lu$1-1Xd9D OO ) 900Z `6 Tsn6ny voog °d Aaaoo d11 110!II3 xouN aauinno uewessoN uoiss!wwoo uoi#spodsueal Alunoo emsaanIN Timmy A?13A1-13a SdIHStI3N111\dd 31VAINd Ol NOIlof1aoNi 1 siapoW iGanilad £d .z sdiysaauped aleniad-oggnd lo nnaimanp � SdIHS213N121`dd 31b�nRld-o1�8f1d JO M31A - 3A0 ' � sect 01 NOI131.1001:11N1 NV aye ui MoN AyM ■ past aaayM saiduaexp •g•fl ■ suoissaouoo lo sadA1 ■ aaniepuawoN ■ (008) aleaad0-unn0-pun8 0 (Idd) aniTailiul aauauu alaniad o (0J8a) alaaad0-aauauu-Nng-ubisaa o (018) 012-lad0-aaj.suaJ1-pun8 o (109) Jejsuaal-alaaad0-plin8 o (Ed) (iNsaauTJad alanpd-ongnd o asNouaad o uopsaau00 o uonoesuaal .104 seweN ■ «suoissaouoo paxiW„ — sai}iipel Eup!xa to uo!Teaado pue uopuedxa `uopruisuooa■ «suoossaouoo luewdoianea„ — sepnoel meu to uNeJedo pue uoprulsuoo ■ «sasaa-vsales Tassel„ — slasse 6upsixa to uNeJedo pue asaa' t leir-64uoi ■ «uaaouoo 6up6 a 6u!Ars, o aoisenui wn}aa apeis `Ape sa gnba8 ■ anuanaa pua �o suaaai. ui aaiauoissaouoo aol egad )isp Jemoi o sasuadxa pua smog usao o AJo}siq aouaualuiaua pua oilaq `suoi}aaado o Ainoad 6u!Tsixo °saa-voles leggy ua to saingpily ■ eseeveies Tasse aenwp ewooeq s)isp `dn-fie}s ised eouo 0 aoisenui uanTeJ aai.ON sagnbaa maid >isp aay6!H ■ >isp dn-peisianuenaa pue ■ (surwenolsoo pue Aelap) >isp uopruisuo0 ■ ageuoisseouoo JOI 91140ad 1sia aa1.16!H suopefoad anuanaa )s) ogan pue salewpa i.soo uo eouene ■ sesuedxe pue smog use° uenoadun o fuo}siu eoueueTupw ao ogi.e.4 `suogeJedo oN o Aijnoed meN o uopseouo0 wewdolanea e jo sepicipily 0 yiloq ao 6upegs enuanaa ao aaunno Aouabe oNnd gauped ai.eniad uaoaj TuawAed luau& ui Elm ueo o aau}Jed alenpd ■ sIsoO uaaal 10 pu3ppegpueH ■ siso0 W'80 ■ (SeMeSaa ledpupd Jew!) sTsoo ;qaQ ■ slsoo leiideo ■ :peaoxe sanuanaa pefoad o spafoad anmsod anuana■ emseew uppeo a enoge suuopad loefom j.i aaumo Noeq $ jo amldeoaa aoj. epinoad Aew �� o seoue;swnaaio letvvk aapun pue ui 911,100 $ -INTO ao Jew() seop 1.1814M pue MoH o paliil si 4ide6„ moy aoj sepinoad paiwoo ■ gauped alenpd o} uanma i ■ sTs00 pu3pioegpueH ■ slso0 W'80 ■ (sanaasaa Iedpupd Isaaawi) slso0 Naa ■ siso0 !elide0 ■ :paaoxe Tou op senuenaa ioefoad o slaafoad eni.e6eN anuenaj ■ sexal pue Aasaar meN `ow) `siouilll ui sesAleuy Amcpsead/suoRe64senui o (paTaldwoo) ABAA )IS ■ o6e0NO A110 o (palaldwoo) paoH Ilol eue pul - Vd1 ■ eueapul o sasaalusaias Tassy ■ (Tueweinooad awe) aopeuuoo pocLIN pue1)1eO — MVO ■ (uoReaado ui) 1-6 CIS - V.10O ■ (uolpnai.suoo aapun) 5Z CIS — suea}leo ■ quaoneo o (painoexe peJwoo) pafoad aopp-100 90Z-1-11n0S -- _LOGO ■ (palnoexe peajuoo) pefoad i.uewenoadwl uoRepodsueal aapunG-6JegmeN -- _LOGO ■ (painoexe peJwoo) pafoJd espunS -- _LOGO ■ uo6aaO o (90, 'Too aouewwoo ouueweJnowd) 69-1 — dd1/100u1 ■ r i , eue pui o suopseouoo luewdoianea ■ (suopRo0au aapun) pefoad seueponal penal 1,8-1 -- lOCIA ■ emam o (uopJapisuoo aapun) speoassoa0 00t ye --1040 ■ (uoi.eaaplsuoo aapun) aoplaao0 Isan il-10N 5L5-1/5L-I --10a0 ■ qaaoao o (wauaamooad ann.oe) pafoad peol TsaM iseg edwel y}aoN ■ (Tuawaanooad anpe) lauunl pod ivaeiW — lOd.d ■ eppold o Clu03) suOISSe9uO3 luauadOleAea •■ (900Z 10 pua Aq eouewwoo swewaanooad) 88 1- HS/OZ8 HI pua HS .1.0ax1 ■ (sluewaanowd enl.oe)1,8Z S(1/v09 i. dooi pue 1.91- HS `69-10piaa00 sexal suaal `seuei pe5euelN 5E9 HI _Maxi ■ (palnoaxa paiwoo) g-g swewbas OEI, Hs o (paanooad aadolenap) 9C a0piaao0 sexal-sued 1Maxl ■ sexa1 0 Cluo3) suoissaouo3 ;uawdoianaa ■ (palaldwoo) ABA/wed squoyeood ■ e!u!ain o (Tuawaanoad anpe) 1-Z10 HS ■ sexal o suoissaouo0 paxiW ■ suopseouoo •s.n ssei = TAnsa■ bupeus enueneJ ao Tgap/Ambe ai.enpd bupueuu idwexe xei buix!w pepnioaad Aneopolsiy eney snel xei •s•n ■ aanpnaisa qui bupueug aoj. Tuepijj.a Tsow an se slevew Tdwaxe-xel au. peJonel anal saosme/sepuebe Aemg6N •s•n Tsow `saeeiC OZ-O 1. aanp ■ �% U.S./California transportation funding crisis o Insufficient federal and state funding sources �% Erosion of gas tax �% Barely funding ongoing O&M of existing facilities �% California fiscal crisis o Powerful transportation demand �% Recent transactions indicate that P3 model effectively competes in certain circumstances with tax-exempt model o SR 125 (CA) o Detroit -Windsor Tunnel o Chicago Skyway o Trans -Texas Corridor 35 o Indiana Toll Road �% Private Activity Bonds (PABs) included within SAFETEA-LU for up to $15 billion in tax exempt -financing to be mixed with private equity o Will further enhance_P3 model potential a.noxzD 3K1 dnwo elApeo o dnal6m0 o Aelueis ue6JoW o suaes uewpioo o uoptmod spund Apb3 uoppodsuali 's.n MaN — �Insa� seams 5uipunl jo eauepungy o sessep iasse Jegio uogele.uoo moi o onselaui slasse aol (saasn) puewea o smog yseo aigeloipaad pue o um oT s}soo 6ull.eiado moi o Apb3 ai.anpd spaoHoi ssauanipaq.i.y ■ _lopes °rind /Cq anezileaa Tau si will Apbe eTeniad aoiL amen Tueowu6p a}eaao ueo uoppaadep pa}eaalaooy o Aijnbe alenpd Aq penien Alg6!q }nq `aanion.gs idwaxe-xel ui penien Tou senuanaa snidans o saolsenui puoq Tduaaxe-xel aeaA pC-pZ leoidAl 'SA Me!A uozpoq aa6uoi a)e. of 6unum saoisenui Aijnbe alenpd ■ espedxe aoioas anal saoisenui Almbe alenpd ■ lualemp we sessep aoi.senui o (i.gap Jo junowe s w!!) so!Tai e6elanoo Tgap ani.enaasuoo 9.10W sell 6uiouelig lduaaxa-xel o ILIWOXD-xel 'SA Alrba aleApc1 ■ 0t7 A (Luseop 6upueug ldwaxe-xe};may semen Aiinbe;eqm C S-3aouu AN3A1-13a £d S£d 01-NOI1of1a0211N1 Ned 88a idaoxa `slapow anoge aui ile apnioui sed ■ si.upilsuoo 6uipunl pue spaau pua sieo6 Aoue6e `soppeloweuo sipefoad lenpinipui aye uo spuedap !wow rCiemep Tseq ay} 6upooy0 0 pafaad e .1014.10M Aew 'wow Aaanilap auo ueyn. aaoW ■ lueweeJ6y Tuawdolanaa-aad — `dad o uopseouo0 !Ind o aleaado-eoueuid-pline-u6paa — a,d8a o uppeW alendo-pline-u6pea — WOEla o ppne-u6pea — ea o pline-pie-u6isaa -Elea o siapoW kianilaa ■ uoReldwooisod asayd suoReJado JOAO loa}uoo ao}oas ongnd !Ind o poq-nnoi uo pasaq papalas aoioa poo ■ suogeowienb uo paseq papalas Jaubisa® ■ onni aye uaannlaq d!gsuon.eieJ ou ylinn paanowd Alalaaadas _lope.'woo pua aaubisaa o lonpoid paJamiap pua ssaowd NT JOAO loawoo ooignd o ubisap %OM sioaluoo _lopes ougnd o :sai.ngpw ■ 6uipun; ougnd canoes o. slsp lenoadde ao leopt.pai. Mee. L inn peui.aplem si pefoad o :ash iew!TdOileoldAl ■ uoRon4suoo pue u6isep uaanniaq se fteuAs oN o Tuauadolanap 6upnp seamosaa _lopes oggnd uo snoaauo Alennaa}siuivapy o sepa uenn 6uio6uo nna j o _lopes oilgnd yiinn sAels Nsp lepueuu o _lopes oggnd t_non sAms Nsp u6isea o _lopes a}enpd aaj.sue4 Nsp en! kleA o :senssyslieRd leRualod ■ (sJeaA Z-1,) apeuena uallo sequa uem o Aiuiepao Tsoo Jaw°. o >isp u6pap uo _lopes aianpd o (aaplinq -u6pap aye} Aoua6a loquoo to Tupd au° o (amen Tsaq) pua aopd uodn pasaq AlieoidAl paloalaS pa nuoo auo ain aaulla6o} pawl!'" aopaquoo pua Jeu6isaa o :saingpnv ■ uoReldwoolsod esegd suoRendo aano laiwoo _lopes ougnd ling o wewdoianep 6upnp seamosaa _lopes oggnd uo snonuo Aleni.e.ipuppe ssai o uoi.enouui _lopes ai.enpd sepui o uoRon4suoo pue u6isep ueemleq seAeuAs Tueowu6G o uoRon.ijsuoo pue u6isep >oail Tsej. i g6noagAa Niep pefoad elenteooe ueo o :sai.ngpnv ■ 6uipunj oggnd amoas o amen ppa uoRaaalaooa apnpayos lai.ualod pua uoRenouua _lopes ai.anpd aaaUnn Toafoad paupp ssai o :esrl lay, 00/Iao!clAi ■ _lopes a}anpd buRsoo aloAo-epi to aajsua g oN o _lopes oncind sAels sNsp iaanionuis Lwei. buoi o JoToes ougnd aol u6pep pafoad .lano loa.uoo ssai o _lopes oggnd union sAels )isp laiouau[d o :sanssl/sllePd lanu010d ■ saaaA 5 jo wnuaixaua a aol aq uao `spuoq Appe alanpd TnoyniM o aouaualulaw *SA palidao Jo sljo-apa q Lwei. 6uoi pua goys 6uisnao `Jopas alanpd )1sp 6uRsoo epAo-ell sJajsuaal o Awauem papualixa ua am sloe aouauapew pua suona.lado panuRuoo o uoReldwoo Onoay. pun9-u6isaa se auaas o :saingpnv ■ (eoueualupwisuogaaado aoj 6uipnijoup 6uipunj oiignd aanoes o uo!Tona}suoo pue u6isep Amenb jo eouaansse Jeneq pua 6ull.soo aloAo-en uo Awnoes aaoW sa rbaa _lopes ongnd inq `ea 01. _mums o :asn lauaiidO/IaoidAl pafoad suopuege aoi.oapoo os loaquoo wno ueyi. aaoua lsoo Aew pelep lepelew Jo uoRempegal Jo eoueualumAl o Aoue6e ougnd Aq suopRiedo }oefoad Jano iaquoo ssai o uoReidwoo Onoplin8-u6isea se ewes o :sanssl/sllepd Ie!.ualod ■ ■ si.dafoad penoi-uou pua aoj pasn aq uao o boa faid auk jo sasagd aoueuapewisuoila.iado pua luauadolanap auuo spadse ui aoi.oas alanpd sazmuaou! o luau do spun j laiidao as!ai anau lou saop aopas ovind ■ _lopes alanpd pa uelsue4 Asia 6upuauu o sasayd aouauapewisuoi.aaado pua wewdolanap g6nonii. Wogo o _mums o :sapngpny ■ 6upuauu ldwexa-xei. aoi.oas oggnd Taub 9-10W isoo AeN o }oafoad aeinoped uo puadap Aeuow amen spallaJ Tan Jaglaynn pua Jejsuaai Asia aoj Jaupad _lopes alanpd o} Aeuow iauowppa Cad AeW o )isp anuanaa/oilaaj suielaa uai.jo _lopes ougnd o W09C1 se auaaS o :senssl/sllell!d le!lualod ■ Aauoua JOI amen anauyoa Tou Aew )isp anuanaajouje.q. 6upJelsuaa. aaagM o a�qe� aye $ (oggnd-uou) meu sfiupq Oda] ■ fool JOAO `°6•e) Aili veij. /CoHod ouignd 6uiuia�ea eiNAA aouauij. _lopes aianpd j.o a6aluanpa a)iai. spaau _lopes ovind Tnq `WO80 of _mums o :esn lewRdo/IeoidAi ■ (sepeoplui dialsAs 6uilioi anp) AlopT aq ueo )oegpueH o Para d Jano loa.uoo _lopes ougnd palwi TsoW 0 OdBa 01 ael!w!S 0 :senssl/slleAd Ie!Tualod ■ _lopes alenpd aajsuag Aew ao (6umes area "a.i) ambaa Aoilod uielaa Aew aoi.oes °Find o Nsp anuanaa buipnpui s)isp to aajsue4 Ind 0 asegd aoueualupwisuoRaiedo pue }uawdoianap y6noay} Olga aelp s 0 Al ioel e Alieo!clAi 0 :saingpnv ■ Aeuow ao4 amen sene!goe Nsp enuenaa/oglaq. 6upJejsuali. uauM o Apo Jolein5eJ Teui. loa}uoo pera d ski }iw!I 01 N!IHnn sg pue Nsp wnw!xew Jejsuaal o� sluem Aouabe opgnd uegm `odea of JeiiLuG o :esrl lewRdo/Ie*Ai • 'wow A.Je pap Tuewe nooad oll.ab /OleLumn. abets wewdopanep ssaa6oad sailed o «uoisin„ `uepd luewdopanep `suopowienb uo peseq Appeo!clAi uogoapas o sseowd lenoadde imuewuagAue 6upnp Aileo!clAi ■ wewenponui aoi.oes alenpd .104 Allunpoddo Tse p ee sepinoki o :seingpnv ■ Toefoad pamlew eql aanooad ueo Aoue6e `heap aige}deooe eneNoe o} ape }ou ale sailed II ■ (uoRep6eu �o TLi6ia a se Lions) To*Jd aLi lueweidwi si.Li6p uppeo eneq Aew /CaLill. `paan}ew seq pefoad uegm `wni.aa ul ■ uogesuadwoo ou Jo elfin a01. sea moseijawn. aionap Aew _lopes aianpd o Toafoad aull.ap Aoua a sdiay pua ssaoad Jena dde ieluewuoainua Lap i.spse Jopas alenpd o se6eis Ape° le uoRenouui pue Tuawenionu@ aoi.oes aleniad it! jeueq paroid o uomupp se6els Agee ui si pafoad o :esrl lew!TdO/IeoidAl Jeep iseq„ eq4 }a6 }ou pip Aet41 uo!Tdeoaad leon.Hodioncind o lueweinowd ani.i.adwoo e Tou pue uoi.eilo6au ea mos aps a uNe wow si ssaooad `„leap„ 6uRei.o6eu pug. uetw o :senssl/sliepd les.uoiod ■ ■ N aopas awn !id - Sd ifoue6y jumwenoo - yS Sd Sd Sd Sd `dad 'd Sd Sd Sd Sd uopsaouoa linj *3 bJ Sd Sd Sd 0na 'a VO VS Sd Sd 1A1090 '0 VO VO d0 Sd 9a '9 dJ bJ d0 d0 99a 'd ppow Aijaoy}nd leBei senueneN 6upueuu INVO uogona}suo0 /uB!sea 41.19ua913 NSN " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: December 13, 2006 TO: Riverside. County Transportation Commission FROM: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Election of. Riverside County Transportation Commission Officers` and Appointment of Executive Committee Members STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for. - 1) The Commission to conduct an election of officers for 2007  Chair, Vice Chair, and 2"d Vice Chair; 2) The cities of _ Riverside, Corona, and Moreno Valley to select their representative to the Executive Committee; 3) The cities of Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon Lake, Hemet; " Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, Norco, Perris, San Jacinto, and Temecula to select their representative to the Executive Committee; and 4) The cities of Blythe, Cathedral City, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Indian Wells, Indio, La Quinta, Palm Desert, Palm Springs, and Rancho Mirage to 'select their representative to the Executive Committee. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Election of Officers In accordance with the Administrative Code, the Commission must annually hold an election of officers at its first meeting in December. The changes will be effective on January V' of the following year. The officers of the Commission shall consist of the Chair, Vice Chair, and :2' Vice Chair, The Chair, Vice Chair, and 2nd Vice Chair shall annually alternate between a regular member of the Commission representing a city and a regular member of the Commission who is a member of the Riverside County Board of Supervisors. For 2006, the elected officers are Marion Ashley as Chair, Terry Henderson as Vice Chair., and Jeff Stone as 2' Vice Chair. For 2007, the Chair and the 2nd Vice Chair shall be regular members of the Commission representing a city, and the Vice Chair shall be a regular member of the Commission representing the Riverside County Board of Supervisors. Agenda Item 8 207. Election of Representative to the Executive Committee The, membership of the .Executive -Committee. is, as follows: 11 ,Chair, of the Commission;. 2) Vice Chair of the Commission; 3) 2'd:..Vice Chair of, the ".. 'Commission; 4) Pest Chair of . the Commission; .5) ,A regular member of the Commission representing one of following cities: Riverside, Corona, Moreno Valley; 6) A regular. member :of the Commission representing one' of .the following cities: Banning; Beaumont, 'Calimesa, Canyon Lake, . Hemet, Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, Norco, Perris, San, Jacinto, and Temecula; 7) A regular; member of the`tommission representing one of the following cities: Blythe, Cathedral. City, Coachella, Desert. Hot Springs, ,Indian Vllells, Indio,, La Quinta, Palm Desert, Pelm;Springs'' and Rancho Mirage; and, 8) Three members of the Commission who are members of the Riverside County. Board of Supervisors. The term of the Executive Committee members, other than the Chair, Vice Chair and 2"°Vice Chair, shall; be for two years. At the end, of the two-year term, the Executive Committee members shall. stand for reappointment as set forth in the Administrative Code. For January 2007, the three groups of , cities will need to appoint their representatives to the Executive Committee: 1) Riverside, Corona and Moreno Valley; 2) Banning,,_ Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon lake, Hemet; Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, Norco, Perris, San Jacinto, and Temecula; and 3) Blythe, Cathedral City, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Indian Wells, Indio, La Quinta, Palm Desert, Palm Springs, and Rancho Mirage. The current members are , Jeff Miller, Roger Berg, and Michael Wilson, respectively. Agenda Item 8 " AGENDA ITEM 9 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: December 13, 2006 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Public/Private Financing and Delivery Plan Ad Hoc Committee Eric' Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Work Effort of 10-Year Delivery Plan for Western Riverside County Measure A Freeway Program- PUBLIC/PRIVATE FINANCING AND DELIVERY PLAN AD HOC COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) " Receive and file the results of the work effort to formulate the 10-Year Delivery Plan for the Western Riverside County' Measure A Highway program; 2) Approve the 10-Year Western County highway priorities, which include the prioritization of freeway investments on projects along the 1-215, 1-15, SR-91 and 1-10 corridors; 3) Authorize staff to utilize the 2006 forecast of Measure A" revenues in developing projections for the 10-Year Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan; 4) Direct staff to return to the 'Commission" in 90' days with detailed updates and reports regarding the Mid County Parkway (MCP) project, the realignment of SR-79, and the Bi-County 1-215 project; and 5) Return' to the Commission with quarterly updates and actions to facilitate and expedite the delivery of highway improvements ' in Western Riverside County. BACKGROUND' INFORMATION: In mid-2005, the Commission directed staff to pursue_ a 'three -pronged strategy aimed at developing the necessary background information" to implement the first 10 years of the 2009 Measure A program, approved by voters in 2002 The Commission has already taken action on some Measure A policy areas such as the acquisition of habitat areas for mitigation, ongoing planning on Community and Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) corridors and the implementation of a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fund (TUMF) program for Western Riverside County. Agenda Item 9 209 However, the one major policy area of the 2009 Measure A program that required a comprehensive background and data development effort is in the area of highway', projects in Western,: Riverside County. The Measure A expenditure plan approved by voters in November' 2002 provides funding for a wide .variety of local street . and road projects, regional arterials, specialized transit and rail projects and commuter services. The voter approved plan originally allocated $1.02, .billion• for improvements': tostate.highways in Western Riverside ;County', and specifically 'mentions that the Measure A dollars needed to cover the program would provide less than half of the needed money to complete the projects. The drafting of the 2009 Measure expected state and federal funding,ito +be used ,with measure dollars to finance :the ambitious, plan. Attachment 1 provides the detail that was included in the Measure A,plan. A Changed Environment The . Measure A expenditure plan was approved in . 2002 and was actually formulated by the Commission throughout that year and 2001. The projected costs for. individuat ,projects were estimated in close consultation with,the state of California Department of Transportation_(Caltrans) and represent an assessment of cost pro1ections, as they were known at that time. Shortly after Measure A was .approved, construction costs for major projects have skyrocketed along with the cost of real estate in Riverside .County. After careful study and consideration, Commission staff believes that the :;true cost of implementing the state highway projects included in ;the Measure A program now exceeds $4.5 billion At the same time,; Riverside County continues to; teeth most areas lin terms of population and job growth, congestion levels and commute distances. While the growth in population is helpful in terms of sales tax revenue generation, growth does bring added strain on the transportation system and the results :can be seen on freeway corridors throughout Western Riverside ,;County. Riverside County's residents and the overall economy are especially dependent on highways as the backbone of its transportation system.. Given the , dynamic 'transportation environment of Western;, Riverside '„County, ;the Commission directed ;'staff to move forward on three subject :areas in; order to lay the groundwork for developing an. implementation .plan strategy for the Measure A. state highway program and specifically the first 10 years, of the program.. The updated data would then be used to develop a 10-Year' Delivery Plan which is the Agenda Item 9 210 " " subject of this staff report.. The three subject areas which were often colloquially referred to as "moving parts" have been completed by staff and include: 1. An updated Measure A revenue estimate; 2. The use of innovative financing techniques such as public/private partnerships and toll roads; and 3 Updated scope, cost, traffic and data for the Measure A state highway program. An ad hoc committee appointed by Chair Marion: Ashley- guided the data development work that was conducted to advance these ,subject areas and the Committee's membership was comprised of; CommissionersAshley, Terry Henderson, Bob Buster, Frank Hall, Barbara Hanna, Robin Lowe, Bob Magee, Jeff Miller,, Ron Roberts, John Tavaglione, Frank West and Roy Wilson. Caltrans District 8 Director, Mike, Perovich, also participated in the ad hoc meetings. The result of this ad hoc committee's work guides the recommendations that are reflected in this staff report and was reviewed and unanimously forwarded to the Commission at its most recent meeting on November 27, 2006, Revised Measure A Revenue Estimate During the development of the extension of Measure -A for the November 2002 ballot, the Commission used a forecast completed in May 2001 with the assistance of Ernst & Young LLP. As a result of the significant economic growth in Riverside County the past three fiscal years, that forecast was no longer useful for budgeting andstrategic planning purposes. In mid-2006, the :forecast. of Measure A revenues through 2039 was completed by .the UCLA Anderson Forecast. Attachment 2 provides more details on the forecasted amounts. The new forecast of sales tax receipts for the 2009 Measure A, net of the 1.5% State Board of Equalization fee, is approximately, $10.354 billion compared to the original forecast of $4.662 billion. These amounts are reflected in real dollars, which are adjusted for inflation and represent the purchasing power of future receipts in current year amounts. This represents a 122% increase in forecasted sales tax receipts. Based on the forecast, staff has distributed the annual amounts by geographic area based on the distribution used for Measure A allocations during FY 2005/06. The following is a comparison, of the forecasts by geographic area: Geographic Area - 2001 Forecast 2006 Forecast Increase Western County $3,360,000,000 $7,675,300,000 128.4% Coachella Valley $1,255,000,000 $2,605,000,000 107.6% Palo Verde Valley $47,000,000 $73,300,000 56.0% Total Receipts S4,662,000,000 $10,353,600,000 122.1% Agenda Item 9 211 Assuming proportionality for program -allocations within each geographic area, the new , forecast results in :. approximately $486.2 million available for the Western County highway program during the first ten years of the 2009 Measure A and $2.330 billion for the:30=.year period. While the new projections indicate a healthy, growing economy,' Measure A will not be sufficient to fund priority projects in the first ten years of the 2009. Measure A (FY 2010-2019). As originally projected: in the Measure A expenditure; plan,state and federal funding will be needed and even then, revenues will •likely fall short. One possibility to close future gaps could be a fee on new development to build freeway facilities and the Commission is beginning the second phase of evaluating that approach. Other options could be through the utilization of user fees such as tolls. andsecuring one-time funding such as state bond dollars. Innovative Financing Techniques Including Public/Private Partnerships and Tolls' At its February 8, 2006 meeting, .the Commission approved a list. of !'pre -qualified firms for On -Call Strategic Partnership Advisor Services. The assistance of experts, knowledgeable in the area of transportation economics,: federal transportation funding tools and corporate equity investment evaluation, was critical in enabling.. staff to .independently evaluate the feasibility of public/private partnerships to build additional transportation capacity or to speed the delivery of already planned projects.F The idea.: of considering toll` facilities in Riverside County is consistent ;with actions that are taking place, throughout the country. Indeed state and federal policy have beenmovingin this direction with the idea of seeking', private 'sector participation for the funding :of infrastructure projects that include hospitals, water facilities and schools in addition to highways. The federal Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act; (SAFETEA LU) legislation encourages the private sector funding of highway improvements and allowed the Use of privately financed toll roads on ;interstate highways. In California, the :Legislature approved AB 1467 which allows for . four privately financed transportation facilities throughout the state. Although the Governor and, the Legislature trumpeted the bill ' as pan .example of 'innovative thinking, the provisions of the bill are so restrictive that: it is believed' that additional legislation will be needed in the next session to actually make implementation possible. =Nevertheless, it demonstrated a willingnes's':of the Legislature and the state to consider this 'type .of approach.'' Agenda Item 9 212 Finally, toll : roads of various kinds have been constructed adjacent to Riverside County in both San Diego and Orange .Counties. The facilities have all been unique in the way they were implemented but the -success of the 1-15' managed lanes in 'San Diego County, the SR-241 and SR-261 toll roads operated by the Transportation Corridor Agencies ITCH) in Orange County and the 91. Express Lanes have all shown that there is a market and a demand for the public to pay for additional capacity through tolls if it provides an attractive alternative to the congestion on conventional highways: All three of the above -mentioned toll facilities were implemented and are operated and managed in different ways. Furthermore, there is a wide variety of financing this type of development which is why consultants' wereretainedto examine toll financing alternatives. The result was an exhaustive nine -month- study, of both publicly and privately financed delivery methods and then' the application of these methods to actual corridors in Western Riverside County. In a best : case, scenario, toll roads offer, the promise of providing additional transportation .capacity that .can be ,financed through their own revenue stream. With the use of design -build contracting, the construction of this _type of project could also be expedited resulting in benefits beingdelivered quicker. Also if demand is sufficient, excess revenue from the facility could be invested in additional projects in the same corridor. The allure of working with the private sector is that more of the risks of constructing this type of project can be borne by the private company because of the private sector's need to generate profits .as quickly as possible. The best case scenario is predicated on strong user demand to entice the private sector to participate. Early on in the analysis of actual corridors, it became clear that toll roads and private sector. participation would only pencil out on heavily- trafficked freeways such as SR-91 and 1-15. That's why these highways_ already have toll facilities on them in adjacent counties. It also means that toll facilities will not pencil out on corridors with lesser traffic volumes such as SR-79 and the proposed MCP. Congestion is certainly a problem on SR-79 but the overall volume of traffic is not sufficient to finance a highway that is expected to more than a billion dollars. Also, while the need for a new east -west corridor as envisioned on the MCP is undeniable, the needed traffic demand to see anywhere near a break even revenue projection for a toll road is decades .into the future. If toll roads are to be considered as a near -term transportation strategy, the focus will have to be limited to improvements on SR-91 and 1-15. Agenda Item 9 213 Updated Scope, Cost; Traffic and Data for the MeasurerA State Highway Program At its June 3, 2005 .Commission workshop, staffvvas.provided with general' direction to develop the information necessary to assess the delivery status of the 1989 Measure A Western-CountyHighway Program (including, the MCP), as well as, develop an objective set of project measurements, Including state, recognized performance measures; to support the Commission in establishing priorities for; the first 10 years of the 30-year Measure A program: At its December 14,' 2005meeting, the Commission approved an amendment to the Bechtel Infrastructure program management' contract to assist the Commission in determining the ;status and deliverability of the 1989 Measure A program and developing the initial 2009 ;• Measure' . A program 10-Year Delivery i' Plan. The objectives of the effort were: , • An assessment of the status and challenges of completing the delivery of the Western County highway program for the 1989 Measure; • An, objective based assessment of the Western County portion of the 2009 Measure A transportation program; Prioritization of the Western County program of'projects; and Development of a delivery plan that 'will cover; the ! first 10 years of the 30-year extension of Measure A. Staff and the Bechtel team have completed this analysis; which involved updating project scopes, and developing quantitative and qualitative benefits of projects in the Measure A state highway program. This required updated modeling and traffic projections that •used a horizon year of 2015. The need to reevaluate the scopes - of the various Measure A projects was necessary because of limited detail in the Measure and the continued growth of the county:: Project scope, outlined on the ballot, in most cases only specified that an additional lane be added. The ballot did not specify if the additional lane would be a high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane or a mixed flow (MF).lane. Also in most cases the Measure did not consider ancillary projects that are necessary to improve the effectiveness for certain improvements. As an example,' merely1adding another lane to SR-91 "will have limited 'benefit :near the convergence of 1-15 and Main Street in Corona. While the primary cause of congestion in the area is traffic volume, the impact is exacerbated through a variety of traffic movements that take place in a °confined area. In less than a'. mile, vehiclesare entering SR-91 from both directions of, 1-15 while , others are attempting_ to either enter or exit the freeway from Main Street. All of these Agenda Item 9 214 i vehicle movements require lane changes . and other traffic moves that further complicate an already -congested situation. A goodway of addressing this area would be through the construction of a collector distributor road system that would add lanes alongside the freeway to allow ,for ingress, egress, lane changes and weaving off the mainline of thefreeway which would improve traffic flow and provide safety benefits. The problem is this type of system is not specifically identified in the Measure A program. Similarly the connector between the eastbound SR-91 and northbound SR-71 was seen as a simple enhancement of the existing loop ramp that is already in place at that location. Given the congestion in the area, what is really needed is a much • urger fly -over structure that would eliminate a hairpin turn and allow for more carsto, transition < .between the two freeways. Yet another work effort that plays a role in defining project scopes and definitions was the completion of project study reports. (PSR) by Ca!trans for the t-15, I-215 and.SR-91 corridors. This effort began in 2004 and is required by the state before a project can move forward. This . preliminary level of engineering and project assessment helps quantify project costs, needed right-of-way, assesses environmental issues and determines additional engineering or construction challenges. Quantitative Analysis By re-evaluating the scope of various projects, staff was able to model results for the quantitative measures of effectiveness that included: Facility Number of Trips Served -:Average Daily Traffic (ADT); • Facility Daily Level of Service (LOS); • Travel Time Savings; • Vehicle Miles Traveled Savings; • Distance Savings per Vehicle; • Vehicle Hours Traveled; • Value of Time Savings ($); • Value of Distance Savings ($); • Energy Consumption Savings; • Air Pollutant Savings, and; • Accident Reduction. These results were used to develop a cost -benefit : ratio for each of the 2009 Measure projects and 'project segments after the delivery costs for each project were updated and compared to 2015 baseline data. Agenda Item 9 215 Qualitative Analysis In addition to the cost -benefit ratios, the projects were compared using a list of qualitative measures. These measures were used to attempt to assess issues that are not easy to provides quantitative benefit. The qualitative measurestfocused on factors such as: • Opportunistic Timing; • Environmental Challenges; • , Need to Protect Right -of -Way; • Externalpfunding available that is project specifiq; • Time required to get the project ready to advertise, and; • Safety issues not addressed in the cost benefit analysis. The details from the comprehensive analyses are voluminous to the ,point that it could require months of meetings to fully report all of the information: In fact, that did happen with the ad hoc committee that oversaw the effort. Howev'er, in sifting through all of the information, there are a number of conclusions or 'assumptions that can be gleaned that provide the basis for formulating a delivery plan. They include the following: Increased Project Costs This is a statewide, and even a national problem but the situation in Riverside County is especially acute given increases in property value and the need to expand the scope of some of the Measure A projects. A funding gap exists and there needs to be a realization that Measure A is a 30-year program. Priorities need to be established and some improvements will have to be made befor&others. The quantitative benefit -cost analysis provides helpful data to evaluate some of these decisions. A Need to Act Quickly While the renewed; Measure A program does not officially begin until July 2009, Riverside County's residents and its economy require immediate action to address current traffic conditions. Furthermore there are potentthl funding opportunities thanks to the approval of Proposition 1B. There are advantages to keying in on projects that can be delivered quickly. Usually these are projects that require less right-of-way or that can be cleared environmentally with little complication. Finally, Riverside County is home to a number of freeway corridors that are essentially failing. Agenda Item 9 216 " Using these parameters appropriate priorities for the Measure A program. " 1-215 " 1-15 " 1-10 " SR-91 as a guide, four highway corridors are ideally situated � as the first 10 years of investment for the first 10 years of. The, corridors are: Staff recommends that a priority focus be placed on these highway corridors for the lion's share of Measure A, and state and federal funding, as well as to pursue additional forms of funding including tolls. The details of these projects are outlined in the subsequent staff report. " Staff also recommends that while the majority of investment must continue on these corridors, work must 'still continue on longer -term priorities including the development of the MCP, the widening of 1-215 to San Bernardino County and the realignment of SR-79 as well as improvements identified in the Riverside -Orange County Major Investment Study (MIS) that called for the construction of an elevated expressway facility along SR-91 and a new corridor between Corona and Irvine that could require a tunnel through the Cleveland National Forest. Unfortunately, these projects fail to meet the test of early implementation. Planning and studying future opportunities remains an important function of the Commission, but immediate construction of improvements on already impacted corridors must take precedence. For that reason, it is recommended that planning activities continue on these projects and that funds be allocated for ongoing environmental clearances and the protection of right-of-way, to allow future construction as funding becomes available. Next Steps The presentation of this report presents only the beginning of work that will come together to implement the first 10 years of the 2009 Measure A highway program. . Through the use of innovative financing, and aggressive construction scheduling, the effort seeks to intensify investment in the areas that are most congested. and need immediate relief. During the next few months, staff will continue to return to the Commission with action items to implement the overall plan. This will include contracts for environmental clearance, engineering, right-of-way acquisition and construction. Riverside County's transportation needs are significant and the current environment that sees construction crews working on various highways, streets and roads will continue and intensify with the implementation of this plan. Agenda Item 9 217 Attachments: 1) State. Highway Portion of 2009 Measure A Expenditure Plan 2) Taxable Sales Revenues for Riverside County — UCLA Report.: Agenda Item 9 218 ATTACHMENT 1 STATE HIGHWAY PORTION OF 2009 MEASURE A EXPENDITURE PLAN WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY The Expenditure Plan Map illustrates the Western and Coachella_ Valley areas. The Western County area includes the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon Lake, Corona, Hemet, Lake Elsinore, Moreno Valley, Riverside,Murrieta, Norco, Perris, San Jacinto, and :Temecula. It also includes the unincorporated communities of Jurupa, Mira Loma, Menifee, Wildomar, and Sun City and other more sparsely populated areas, and the reservations of the Pechanga Band of Mission Indians, the Soboba Band of Mission Indians, the Cahuilla Band of Mission Indians, the Ramona Band of Cahuilla Indians, and the Morongo Band of Indians. STATE HIGHWAYS Many more state highway improvement projects are needed to deal with congestion and safety problems than existing state and federal revenues can fund., Projected formula .funds from these .sources over the 30 years is estimated to be $640 million and will fund less than '/2 of the improvements needed and identified in the Expenditure Plan, which are estimated to cost $1.66 billion in current dollars. Measure A funds will supplement those funding sources by an estimated $1.02 billion and will coverthe remaining costs estimated to accomplish these improvements. The highway projects to be implemented with funding returned to the Western County area by extending the Measure A program are as follows: ROUTE LIMITS PROJECT EST. COST SR-91, SR-60, 1-15, & 1-215 Reducing congestion on these routes will require that new transportation corridors are constructed ' See Section 2 SR-91 Pierce Street to Orange County Line Add 1 lane each direction $ 161 million SR-91 /I-15 Interchange Add new connector . from I-15 North to SR-91 West $ 243 millon SR-91/SR-71 Interchange Improve Interchange $ 26 million SR-71 SR-91 to San Bernardino County Line Widen to 3 lanes each direction $ 68 million 1-215 60/91/215 to San Bernardino County Line Add 2 lanes each direction $ 231 million 219 ATTACHMENT 1 ROUTE LIMITS PROJECT EST: COST 1-215 Eucalyptus Ave to 1-15` Add 1 lane each .direction $210 million 1-15 SR-60 to San Diego County Line Add 1 lane each direction $ 359 million 1-10 San, Bernardino, County. Lin_ a to Banning ., Add . eastbound :'truck climbing' lane ` $ 75 million 1-10/SR-60 Interchange • Construct new interchange $ 129 million SR-60 Badlands, area, east of Moreno Valley Add truck climbing lane $ 26 million SR-79 Ramona Expressway , to Domenigoni Parkway Realign highway $ 132 million SUBTOTAL Measure A Funding State & Federal Formula Funds $1.02 billion $0.64 billion TOTAL $1.66 billion The Commission may ;add additional state highway projects, should additional Measure A revenue become available: An estimated 5% of the total cost for these highway projects ($83 million) will be used for environmental purposes to mitigate the cumulative and indirect impacts associated with construction of these projects. _ • ' " UCLA Anderson Forecast (May 2006) FY Receipts, net of 1.5�/n SBOE Admin Fee FY 1989 Measure A Receipts: FY06/07 FY07/08 FY08/09 Total for last 3 years-1989 Measure A " 2009 Measure,'AReceiptsi; " FY09/10 " FY10/1-1' " FY11/:1'2 FY12/13 FY13/14 FY14/15 ' . FY15/16 FY16/17 FY17/1:0 FY18/19 Subtotal -first 10 years s. FYt9/20 FY20/21 " FY21/22 FY22l23 FY23/24 FY24/25. FY25/26 FY26/27 FY27/28 FY28rZ9` Subtotal -second 1" 01aars FY29l30 " FY30/3 I FY31732 FY32133 FY33/34 FY34/35 FY36136 ' FY36137 FY37/38 FY38l39 Subtotal-last" 10,years Total 2009 MeasUfe"A Receipts Nominal % Change 157,297,293 " 165,479,599 174,546,921 $ 497,323,813 6.6% 5.2% 5.5% Real 155,656,422 160,492,344 166,055,764 482,204,530 $ 155;614;649 + : 6.3% $ " 198,710 986 's 7..15io " 213;295;313 7,3(% 228 374;831 7.1 % . 245;644;229 7.6%; 265023;979 7.9% 285;263;438' . 7.6% ' " 306,758 159 , ! 7.5% '" 329,748 058 7.5%= 354;050,324 ' 7.4�/n 265 626 465 , 4612;514;966 379;597,087 ' 405;695,897 6.9% 433,317 296. ' 6,8% 462,542,793 " 6.7�Jo S 35,378 493;506;894 6.7�f5.. 527;033,947 6.8% 561,231,905 6.5% ' 596;230A56 6:2% " 633,722,346 6.3% 673;568,856 6:3% 5,.166;447,478 % Change 4.1% 3.1 % 3.5% 172510,140 3f&9%' 1,80,168JOS 1$9,313,762 51�Io 198,299,31'0 208,636,209 5,2�fo 219,842;256 5>4% ' 230,744;178 50%'' 241,794;458 48%a' 253;448,052  4, 8% l4'8% 2160,382;'9'98 278,0071:'.941 4,7�fo, 290,226;330 ' '4:4�fu " 302,941,47��4;4%: 329;165,045 343;756,32,0 4:4%d 357;938,197 4:1�/u 371;434,114 3:8%. 385,126,945 3i7%' 398,960,486 3:6"Io' 3;372,991;233 715;437;009! 6,2% 413;233,600:. , 316% 759,782,47Z 6.2% " 428,286,115. 16%.` B06;135,371 6.1% 443,612;309' 3.6%' 854,085;054 : 5.9%" 453,744;105'`34%0 904,564,977 '5.0%' 474;234;608 .3.4%. " 957;058,151. " 5.8% 489,765,032. 3.3% 101:1',080,788 5.6%: 505,040,297 31% " 1,067;463,606 5.6% 526,453,646 3.1% " 1,126" ,189;734 5.5" % 535,930;840 " " 3.0%0 1;186,178;569 5:39S " 550,970;026 28% 9,387,976,230. 4,820,270;576 ;$17,166;938;675. !.- 10;353,644,808-` Note: Nominal dollars reflect actual dollars (year of receipt). Real dollars are adjusted for inflation, representing the purchasing power of future receipts in current year amounts (200,6 $). Amounts presented include deduction of State Board of Equalization fees (1.5%). 221 2009 Measure A Delivery Plan 2009-2019 December 13, 2006 Recommended Actions •Approve Plan for Western County Measure A highway projects •Focus on priority corridors •Act and deliver projects quickly •Maximize historic funding opportunities •Seek to invest more than $2 billion in first 10 years of the new Measure Why a Delivery Plan? •Obtain consistent Commission direction •Address unprecedented growth and demand in Western Riverside County •Maximize historic funding opportunities •Act and deliver projects quickly •Assess major funding gaps Recap of Activities •Updated cost data •Calculated congestion relief and other benefits –Quantitative & Qualitative analysis •Updated projected Measure A revenues •Considered public/private partnerships •Guided by Ad Hoc Committee Today’s Agenda •Present a plan of action –Build –Environmental –Right of Way •Discuss development of recommendations •Outline proposed actions –Estimated cost of $2 billion for prioritized projects •Identify strategies to pay for these actions Western County Delivery Plan Priority List through 2019 •Immediately pursue construction: –Interstate 215 –Interstate 10 –State Route 91 –Interstate 15 •Pursue environmental clearance: –Bi-county Interstate 215 project –Mega projects: State Route 79 realignment & Mid County Parkway •Protect right of way for mega projects •Consider additional projects as opportunities arise 2009 Measure A –WC Highway Route Measure ProposedImprovements Add 1 lane each direction from OC to Pierce St. Add New Connector I-15 North to SR-91 West Improve Interchange Add 1 lane each direction Add 2 lanes each direction from Riverside to San Bdno County Line Add 1 lane Moreno Valley & I-15 Route Measure ProposedImprovements Add 1 lane each direction San Diego to San Bernardino Add EB truck climbing lane System Interchange Improvement Add EB truck climbing lane Realign highway Freeways at a Glance Improvements •Add Mixed Flow Lane in each direction from I-15 to Nuevo Road •Construct HOV Lane in each direction from Nuevo Road to Box Springs Road •Cost: $294 Million Today Proposed Improvements •Construct EB Truck Climbing Lane from San Bernardino County line to SR-60/I-10 Interchange •Cost: $47 Million Today Proposed •Construct two HOT Lanes & a General Purpose Lane from OC Line to I-15 & a General Purpose Lane to Pierce Street •Construct EB Auxiliary Lane from OC Line to Serfas Club Drive •Build Connector Improvements & Collector Distributor (CD) System at SR-71 •Implement Connector Improvements and CD System at I-15 •Cost: $814 Million Improvements Today Proposed •Add 2 HOT lanes in each direction from San Bdno County to SR-74 •Construct HOV Lane from SR-74 to I-215 •Support French Valley Parkway •Coordinate with SANDAG regarding future improvements •Cost: $827 Million Improvements Today Proposed Measure A Forecast •Measure A WC Highway –2009 through 2019 $486.2 million –2019 through 2029 759.1 million –2029 through 2039 1,084.8 million –TOTAL $2,330.1 million Geographic Area 2001 Forecast 2006 Forecast Increase Western County 3,360,000,000$ 7,675,300,000$ 128.4% Coachella Valley 1,255,000,000 2,605,000,000 107.6% Palo Verde Valley 47,000,000 73,300,000 56.0% Total Receipts 4,662,000,000$ 10,353,600,000$ 122.1% Priority Project Cost Implications Stage Project Cost (millions) Build I-215 294$ Build SR-91 814 Build I-15 827 Build I-10 47 Subtotal Build Projects 1,982 Enviro I-215 Bi-county 55 Enviro SR-79 39 Enviro MCP 31 Subtotal Environmental 125 ROW SR-79/MCP 167 TOTAL 2,275$ Priority Project Funding Assessment Stage Project Cost (millions) Measure A State/ Federal CMIA Toll Financing TUMF Debt Financing Build I-215 294$ ±± Build SR-91 814 ±±± Build I-15 827 ±±± Build I-10 47 ± Subtotal Build Projects 1,982 Enviro I-215 Bi-county 55 ± Enviro SR-79 39 ± Enviro MCP 31 ± Subtotal Environmental 125 ROW SR-79/MCP 167 ± TOTAL 2,275$ $486 $500-$970 $0-$300 $500-$1,000 $500 $350 Funding Sources (millions) Policy Considerations •Submittal of CMIA project nominations •Existence of toll roads in Riverside County •$500 million Measure A debt limitation –Excludes toll road financing –Possible ballot measure in November 2008 to increase •Distribution of excess Measure A funds received –Proportionality –Modified proportionality Toll Roads in Riverside County •Over and above Measure A program •Public or private or public/private? •Opportunities to build projects sooner on SR-91 & I-15 •Need for legislative authority •HOV policy implications –HOV 2+ –HOV 3+ CMIA Project Submittal Total Project CMIA Priority Cost Request Order Project Description (000's)(000's) 1 SR 91 HOV Lanes, Adams to 60/91/215 IC 238,000$ 161,000$ 2 SR 91 E/B Auxiliary Lane, SR 241 to SR 71 81,000$ 74,000$ 3 I-215 Add 1 MF Lane, I-15/I-215 IC to Scott Road 56,000$ 56,000$ 4 I-215 Add 1 MF Lane, Scott Road to Nuevo 117,000$ 117,000$ 5 I-215 Add 1 MF Lane, Nuevo to Box Springs 121,000$ 121,000$ *I-215 TMS Field Elements, I-15/I-215 IC to Box Springs 68,000$ 68,000$ 6 SR 71/91 IC, Connector & Collector-Distributor System 99,000$ 99,000$ 7 I-15 Add 1 MF & 1HOV Ln, SR 91/I-15 to Indian Truck Trail 229,000$ 229,000$ 8 CETAP - French Valley Pkwy/I-15 OC & IC Improvements 135,000$ 26,000$ Totals 1,144,000$ 951,000$ * The cost for TMS Field Elements will be divided into the three segments on I-215. All costs are rounded. Next Steps •Today’s actions –Approve priorities for first 10 years of 2009 Measure A Western County Highway Program –Set policy direction on public toll roads in Riverside County –Approve CMIA project submittal •Future actions –Propose new Measure A debt limitation –Consider proportionality issues –Complete freeway study AGENDA ITEM 10 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE': December 13 2006 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Public/Private Financing , and Delivery Plan, Ad Hoc Committee Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: 10-Year Measure A Western Riverside County Highway Program Project Recommendations PUBLIC/PRIVATE FINANCING AND DELIVERY PLAN .4D HOC COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve CMIA list and prepare submittal to the California Transportation Commission (CTC); 2) Direct staff to ,prepare requests for proposals (RFP) to pursue environmental clearance work leading to the eventual widening and:. improvement of 1-215, 1-15, SR-91 and 1-10; 3) Adopt as a priority, improvements that would widen 1-215 by at least one lane in each direction between Box Springs Road and 1-.15; 4) Adopt as a priority, the construction of an eastbound truck climbing lane on 1-10 between the San Bernardino County line and 1-10; 5) Adopt as a priority, the construction of two lanes in each direction on SR-91 between the `Orange County line and 1-15 that would include the extension of the 91 Express Lanes to I-15 and the addition of a general purpose lane in each direction along with collector distributor road systems, improved freeway to freeway connections with 1-15 and SR-71, and an eastbound auxiliary lane . between SR-241 and Serfas Club Drive; 6) Adopt as a priority, the construction of two high occupancy toll (HOT) lanes in each direction on`1-15 between SR-74 and the San Bernardino County line and the addition of an high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane in each direction from the confluence of 1-15/1-215 and SR-74 along with support for the rapid implementation of the French Valley Parkway interchange; 7) Seek legislative approval for toll facilities on SR-91 and 1-15; and 8) Return to the Commission with a detailed report and construction staging plan for the widening of SR-91 and 1-15 with a special emphasis on HOT and HOV lane policy considerations and begin discussions with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) regarding operational issues between the 91 Express . Lanes and proposed HOT lane facilities in Riverside County. Agenda Item 10 222 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: With the completion of a comprehensive work effort to update projected Measure A revenues, assess innovative financing possibilities such as public/private partnerships and HOT lanes and in the updating scope, cost, and traffic data for Western Riverside County 'highway `projects, Commission staff concluded that a focus be placed on the county's most highly 'impacted highway corridors.: Specifically, 1-215, 11-10, 1-15 and SR-91 freeways `are in need of immediate improvement. The timing of therecentwork effort to update data for a delivery plan has come at an opportune time: The approval of Propositions 1A and 113 will have the effect of generating significant state revenue after years of shortfalls. The 'added: investment, especially in the area of highway corridorswill be especially competitive and a premium will be placed on timely project delivery. 2009 Measure A Plan and State Highways in Western Riverside County: The state's tight deadlines for the CMIA program with a: focus on ;'rapid project delivery are an important impetus for an aggressive implementation strategy for the 2009 Measure 'A Western Riverside County state highway program: Riverside County continues to be one of the fastest growing areas in :the nation:. Congestion continues to be a burgeoning problem and the maturation of the area's economy depends on'rapid infrastructure development. Toward that end, Riverside County is currently home to a number ;of ambitious projects that are already under construction. The most ,obvious -example is the reconstruction of .the 60/91 /215 interchange in Downtown Riverside that the Commission played an important: role in guaranteeing ;funding. Only a few miles west of : that location, crews are widening SR-60 between Valley Way and 1-15 with the addition of a general purpose lane and an HOV lane in each direction. SR-60 was also improved:' earlier by the Commission with an addition of an'HOV lane through Moreno Valley. Yet another project is underway to build the Cantu- Galleano interchange on 1-15 and next year. construction will., begin to rebuild the Green River Road ,interchange on SR-91. The bottorn line is; that construction is already taking place, at a rapid rate in Western Riverside County, but even more is needed and the sooner the better. In order to accomplish this vision, staff is recommending a comprehensive delivery plan that will seek 'to invest approximately $2 billion on four freeway corridors over the next ten years., Implementing the delivery ,plan .will require aggressive timetables for environmental clearance, engineering, and design, right-of-way acquisition and' construction. Moreover, it will .require "a comprehensive fiscalplan utilizing funding from the CMIA;_Measure A, .bonding :against future Measure A revenues State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) funding, federal funds, Agenda Item 10 223 " " and toll revenues from HOT lanes. This will need to be done in an environment in California wheremany other counties will also be aggressively seeking` to leverage their own sales tax 'measure dollars and state bond revenue. Specifically regarding the financial > situation, the '2009 Measure A program : is expected to provide $486.2 million over its first 10 years. Given the plan's goal of investing $2 billion in freeway investments during the first 10 years, this leaves gap of more than $1.5 billion. The Commission will likely compete well for CMIA funding and will receive its proportionate share of STIP dollars that will begin to close a, significant percentage of the financial gap, but additional funding will still be needed. One option that will be discussed in this staff report is use of HOT lanes that could be financed through user tolls while adding more capacity. Corridor Focus for Recommendations Staff recommends a focus on 1-215, 1-10, 1-15 and SR-91 while continuing. long- term development work on large-scale projects such as the development of. the Mid County Parkway (MCP), realignment of SR-79, the bi-county widening of 1-215 to San Bernardino County and Major Investment Study (MIS) recommendations that include a new facility parallel to SR-91 and the Corona Irvine Expressway which; could include a tunnel through the Cleveland 'National Forest. All of these projects are likely to cost as much as a billion dollars each and are unlikely to be ready for construction in the near -term. Most importantly, the four existing corridors of emphasis are heavily -congested and need to be improved' before projects such as MCP can be built and connected to them. The following are the detailed project improvements suggested by corridor: Interstate 215 The 2009 Measure A Expenditure Plan (Expenditure Plan) includes a lane in each direction on the 1-215 from Eucalyptus Avenue to the 1-15/1-215 split. For planning purposes, staff has divided the 1-215 into three segments: 1-15/1-215 to Scott Road  Add one lane in each direction " Scott Road to Nuevo Road  Add one lane in each direction " Nuevo Road to Box Springs Road  Add one lane in each direction The southernmost two segments are a priority because the 1-215 narrows to only two lanes in each direction south of D Street in Perris to the 1-15. The proposed build scenario for these segments would add a mixed flow lane in each direction from the 1-15/1-215 split to Nuevo Road. This proposed improvement would not only provide needed capacity but would establish three lanes in each direction on 1-215. Agenda Item 10 224 Additionally, Measure,A identifies the northern limit of the 1-215 improvement as being Eucalyptus Avenue; The build scenario .proposes to extend the northern limit from Eucalyptus Avenue to Box`:Springs Road. The reason,for this extension is that the 2009 Measure A project would leave a gap between the SR-60/I-215 east junction (East Junction) and Eucalyptus Avenue. The northernmost segment of the -215 corridor, Nuevo Road to .Box. Springs Road, adds an HOV lane that would link to the eastjunction project. , Due to existing right-of-way .located in the center median; from a cost/benefit perspective,' the improvement of 1-215 rates strongly, in, .;providing significant congestion' relief benefits at a relatively lower cost.. In terms of . project development, this corridor, is less complicated than some projects because most of the needed land to; do the widening project is already ; located in the existing freeway right-of-way. Most importantly, the state of California .Department of. Transportation (Caltrans) is about to complete its project study report (PSR) for these improvements, which means that one important task will be doneby the end of the year. The lower right-of-way, hurdle along with the completion of the PSR could allow that all three segments can be under construction by 2012: Theoverall cost of the proposed 1-215 improvements is estimated at ,$293-million. MeasureA :initially; set aside $210 million for the project. If the Commission were to ;proportionally increase the Measure A funding level , for the 1-21.5 by the 128.4 percent projected increase in future revenues, funding from the Measure alone would be sufficient. However if the project_ successfully „obtains 'CMIA funding, or by using available STIP funds, this would free up Measure A .funds to be allocated to additional Measure A projects. Paying for these improvements will require a combination of dollars beginning either with CMIA or STIP along with :Measure A. No matter the outcome, regarding the CMIA, staff recommends keeping to the state's goal of having projects` under construction by 2012. This requires the Commission to enter into contracts for environmental clearance :early next year, and staff recommends receiving the authorization to immediately issue a RFP to support this work. Interstate 10 Much' like the proposed 1-215 project, ;additions .to 1-10 provide significant benefits at a relatively lower ,cost. San ;Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) and Caltrans recently completed a truck climbing lane :,east of ,Redlands to Live Oak Canyon. ` . The Commission's' project , will ,not connect with the San Bernardinoclimbing lane, but it will create additional capacity on this . eastbound/uphill segment. .,of'1-10. Agenda Item 10 225 With. the exception of improving the interchange at SR-60, the eastbound truck climbing lane is the only project for 1-10 that was included in the Expenditure Plan. Given the increase in truck traffic through the Banning Pass area, the projectis needed and can be implemented, quickly. The newly estimated cost of construction of the eastbound truck climbing lane is $47 million; which isactually lessthan the original '$75 million estimate in the Expenditure Plan. The first plan of action for this project is to work with Ca!trans District 8 or a. private contractor to complete a PSR and then issue" a RFP for environmental clearance: The PSR andsubsequent environmental work could begin early next year. Staff is seeking authorization to either work with Ca!trans or to issue a; RFP for the PSR and to issue a RFP upon its "completion for the environmental work. State Route 97 In 1988, the. widening of the Riverside Freeway (SR-91) was the cornerstone project in the campaign to approve the 1989 Measure A program.' 'Upon its passage,, the Commission moved quickly to widen SR-91 through Corona and much of Riverside., With the passage of another decade, Riverside County has seen record housing and population 'growth and job centers in Orange County have expanded resulting in thousands of additional Riverside County residents using the SR-91 to get to and from work. At the end of 2005, the Commission along with the OCTA and Transportation Corridor Agencies conducted a MIS to consider cross -county transportation improvements. The effort was a natural outgrowth of OCTA's purchase of the 91 Express Lanes .and the creation of a state -mandated advisory committee for the corridor that consists of board .members from both counties. The MIS produced a comprehensive recommendation that included short, medium and long-term courses of action. The short-term actions have commenced with the opening of an auxiliary lane on the westbound side, the addition of express bus service and the enhancement of Metrolink service including weekend trains. OCTA is also pursuing environmental clearance far an eastbound auxiliary .lane between the SR-241 toll road and Serfas Club Drive. The remainder of the MIS recommendation suggested widening of SR-91 as a course of action to be followed by the development of alternative corridors such as a parallel facility adjacent .to thefreeway and the construction of a new highway between Corona and Irvine. The new Corona Expressway could travel through the Cleveland National Forest and would require significant tunneling structures. Agenda Item 10 226 With the passageofMeasure M in Orange County, the possibility of receiving state funding for the SR-91. HOV lane project in Downtown Riverside and the completion of the Commission's- analysis of, public/private partnerships, it is the: perfect time for the Commission : to consider a major_ transformation of the SR-91 through Corona and Riverside. In looking at the Expenditure Plan, the specified improvementsfor SR-91 fall 'short of the; expansionthatis needed alongthe corridor. .Merely -adding another lane to SR-91 will have limited :benefit.' Additionally there: are problem hot spots such as near 1-15 and' Main Street, where drivers are forced to make 'numerous' transition moves in, a confined :;area::A collector distributor road system is an excellent way of addressing; this kind of problem by adding lanes alongside the freeway: to allow for ingress, 'egress, lane changes and weaving off the freeway mainline thus improving traffic flow and provide safety benefits. A potential issue is this type of system improvement 'is not specifically identified in the Measure A program. '' Another: Expenditure iPlan issue is in the area of freeway .to freeway 'connections. For example the connector between the eastbound SR=91_ and northbound SR-71 was allocated only $26 million for a simple enhancement ofthe existing loop ramp that is already, in place at that location. Given the congestion:. in the area, what is really needed is ;a much larger fly -over structure that would allow for more cars to transition between ;the two freeways and is expected to; cost $78 million. In improving SR-91, the Commission must also consider the potential traffic disruption caused by construction. Adding one lane at a time in perpetuity would add . capacity but would result in recurrent construction impacts to residents, businesses and='commuters for only an incremental improvement. To address this :situation, staff` suggests the implementation of 'a major capacity increase on SR-91 to be builtat one time in order to bring improvements as quickly as possible while minimizing disruption and .also allowing :for the possibility of building an overhead; viaduct structure in the future as called for in the MIS. The only problem with this :approach is its cost. The Measure' A program allocates $161 million;;, for a ; new lane : in each direction between Orange ` County and Pierce' Street,'$243 million for an HOV to HOV connector with1-15 and $26 million to .upgrade the existing loop connector with SR-71, a total, of $430 million. These figures fall short of the recently updated costs. Instead;: $815 .million will be needed: forthe following projects that would provide projects specified in Measure A and additional improvement's to what is.called for in the Expenditure, Plan Agenda Item 10 227 " Add a mixed flow lane front Orange County line to Pierce Street " Construct :eastbound auxiliary 'lane from Orange County line to Serfas Club Drive " Build connector improvements and collector/distributor system at SR-71 " Build connector improvements and collector/distributor system at 1-15 " Build two HOTlanes from Orange County line to 1-15. The result will be the addition of two new lanes of 'capacity on SR-91 in both directions between .Orange County and 1-15. In the eastbound direction, the net lane improvement will be three lanes to Serfas Club Drive with the construction of the eastbound auxiliary lane. East of'1-15, the net gain will be a mixed flow lane in each direction. The key to achieving this is the use of HighOccupancy Toll Lanes (HOT) Lanes. Essentially, it would involve extending the existing 91 Express Lanes to Interstate 15. The Riverside County portion of the facility would be publicly -owned by RCTC, but it would obviously require full cooperation with OCTA so that commuters see the facility as a seamless transportation system. The two HOT Lanes would replace the existing HOV lane which currently exists � in the same area. Along with the HOT lanes will be the addition of the general-purpose lane from the Orange County Line to Pierce Street in Riverside. HOT Lane Po/icy Issues The idea to replace an existing HOV lane with a HOT lane is consistent with new federal policy that was established by the passage for SAFETEA LU. HOT lanes are recognized as a transportation control measure (TCM) for air quality purposes. In . the case of neighboring San Diego County, HOV lanes on I-15 in northern San Diego County : were. converted to HOT lanes and are often referred to as "managed lanes." The conversion was done in San Diego County because the lanes were underutilized. Carpools are relevant . in this 'discussion because HOT lanes are designed to allow carpools to travel for either a reduced cost or free of charge while' single occupant vehicles pay the full fare. This ,encourages carpooling just as NOV lanes do while allowing everyone to enjoy the time advantage of the lanes if they are willing to pay the toll: The policy issue to consider is that the 91 Express Lanes define a carpool as three or more passengers rather than just two. In most cases, three -plus carpools travel for free in the 91 Express Lanes except in the afternoon eastbound rush hour where they are charged half-price. The issue of two -plus versus three -plus will soon hit Southern California as HOV lanes continue to fill with carpools, alternative -fuel .vehicles and: hybrids. The HOV lane on the SR-91 is already congested during rush hours, which could eventually compel Ca!trans to raise the requirement to three or more occupants. Agenda Item 10 228 Most importantly, the Commissionn's modeling and researchwork on public/private partnerships and :toll, roads has found that allowing carpools of..two or more, rather than three. or more, would 'overwhelm the capacity of ,the HOT lanes rendering them unattractive for toll user's. The experience of OCTA with the 91 Express Lanes has shown that the three -plus definition is not onerous, hasencouraged carpool` formation and has actually, led to an increase in the number of, people who travel in the toll lane. The Commission must recognize that constructing HOT lanes on,SR-91 and.1-15 provides added ;capacity, allows for projects to;;be:delivered sooner with a separate funding, stream; and affords the possibility of future revenue generation. While a 'strategy that includes HOT lanes may, be controversial, the. added capacity, benefit is too significant to ignore. The attractiveness'. of using HOT lanes in Riverside' County' is the ability to offer capacity on SR-911,that exceeds what is provided_ in Measure A and to be able to provide the added capacity through a separate financing stream that would be supported through user tolls. This type of financing would not apply against Measure A's. $500 million bonding cap because Measure A funds would not be used to guarantee the repayment of the financing.' As a result, the.Commission would ° use Measure A and state funds to construct the free general ;purpose lane and ,bond, against future HOT lane tolls to build the HOT lanes. Future excess revenue 'could then be used for additional improvements in the :'same SR-91 corridor. Moving forward with such a large project raises a number of complexities that do not exist with the recommendations on 1-215 and 1-10. The size and scope' of the. project, will require a more robust environmental clearance effort than on the other corridors and will also involve the acquisition of , right-of-way. The idea of introducing . HOT lanes and tolls will also require a significant' public outreach and education: program.'' The. introduction of HOT lanes would' also requires added coordination with OCTA and staff believes that the first steps of that work'should begin immediately; along with the need to seek legislative approval for'HOT lanes in Riverside County.' ;Such legislative approval should also provide for the use of innovative contracting and bidding methods such . as design -build. 4` Staff . recommends : moving forward on . the overall ,package of , the HO,T. lanes .and . accompanying general purpose and auxiliary; lanes. This would require an RFP for environmental. clearance and subsequently a contract .for construction staging to work in concert with improvements on 1-15. Staff also seeks authorization to begin; communication with OCTA on toll coordination policies.' and to seek legislative approval for HOT lane authorization. As it is currently; envisioned the ,pricing structure .for tolls would be similar to the structure . used by OCTA although additional work on projections will need final refinement. Staff will return to the Commission .early next year with `a fullreport on tollpolicies such as the use of transponders, pricing, public outreach and legislative issues.. Agenda item 10. 229 This is necessary because the current .staff recommendation does not irreversibly bind the: Commission to HOT lanes. At any point in time, the Commission could reject tolls as a financing strategy but will have to do so with the realization that Measure A and state .funding will not besufficientto fund such a comprehensive $810 million improvement on this corridor. Interstate 15. Widening 1-15,"especially in sections adjacent to SR-91 and SR-60 are 'absolutely necessary to improve mobility in Western Riverside County. Much like 1-215, most of the needed land for widening is located within the existing right-of-way of the freeway. The Expenditure Plan sets aside $359 million for the addition of one lane in each direction of 1-15 from SR-60 to the San Diego County line. The description does not specify- whether the lane would be a general purposelane or an HOV lane, although is has been assumed that air quality rules would require an HOV lane. Widening the 1-15 as called for in the Expenditure Plan is now estimated to cost as much as $900 million. ' Giventhe proposed Measure A' commitments on SR-91, 1-215 and 1-10, Measure A funds will need either a' significant infusion of state and federal dollars or funding from HOT lane tolls. Yet another source could; be from an envisioned "freeway fee" on new development, however that study is about to begin Phase II and will not be completed until next year. Moreover, the amount of time needed to generate funding from such a fee, as well as the policy considerations that ,it wouldentail, make it difficult to predict when or if such a fee . would be enacted. Much like the case on SR-91, the addition of one lane in each direction on 1-15 will have only a limited; beneficial effect on congestion. Two lanes are necessary and staff recommends the development of two HOT lanes from SR-74 to the San Bernardino County line. This would bring added capacity to a congested area, allow for rapid development with financing from future tolls and allow for a comprehensive HOT system with a direct connector to the proposed HOT lanes on SR-91. Considering. HOT lanes on 1-15 involves many of the same policy issues that exist with the HOT lane proposal for SR-91. Once again, allowing carpools of two or more would overwhelm the capacity of the lane, and legislative authorization is still necessary and federal approval will be needed since 1-15 is an interstate highway: The major difference between 1-15 and SR-91 .is that there is not an existing HOV lane on 1-15. This proposal does not convert an existing facility, but instead provides, two lanes of added capacity in each direction while still offering an attractive incentive to form carpools. Also, the pricing for HOT lanes on 1-15 are projected through modeling at a much lower rate on than on SR-91. Agenda Item 10 230 The first phase in the 10-year program should focus on the portion of 1-15 between SR-74 and, San Bernardino County,, although additional extensions towardSan Diego- County could come shortly thereafter. , ,Along with the HOT. lanes,' the _Commission will seek.to construct an .HOV lane in each 'direction between SR-74 and the 1-215 interchange. In addition to these improvements, the construction' of French Valley Parkway will add significant capacity to the freeway south of the interchange. For that, reason, staff has 'added the French Valley. Parkway project for consideration as part of the Commission's CMIA submittal. The completion of the French , Valley Parkwayis of great regional, benefit and'' Commission will work closely with the city of Temecula to assure expeditious implementation': To summarize staff's recommendation for 1-15, it is ?quite similar to the' steps proposed for :SR-91. Once' -again, Caltrans is ready to wrapup its +�PSR for this facility. Immediate ,work: should take place .for environmental clearance and a construction staging plan to ensure that improvements on 1-15°are ,made in concert with SR-91. Legislative authorization is also necessary and staff should be directed to begin talks with OCTA and perhaps SANDAG regarding toll policies, billing` and other procedural matters. Once again, the approval of these recommendations does not irreversibly bind the Commission to HOT lanes for 1-15 but it will begin the process necessary to move forward > as quickly as possible, with additional improvements. Future Policy Issues The comprehensive project recommendations for the first 10 years of the Measure A Western Riverside County Highway program will require a number of future Commission decisions and staff work to ensure .its full implementation. Contracts will be required for environmental clearance, right-of-way' 'acquisition, -design;, construction staging, , bond financing, public .outreach, ;construction management and eventual construction.. Each of these contracts will require formal Commission action: Inaddition to the ongoing implementation items; there are larger policy issues that will need to be addressed. The _first , will be the limit,. in Measure A . on bonding against future revenue. Measure A contains an artificial limit of $500 million,' With projections showing strong growth in future Measure A revenue, the !Commission should consider, going to the voters in a future' election to raise" this limit. The Commission's credit :rating is unsurpassed among public rtransportation agencies and the financial industry has•repeatedly assured the Commission that a raise in the limit is in order and would not impact its credit rating. Another issue regards the proportionality of revenues as they grow above the original estimates that are contained . in Measure A. Overall, Measure; A originally . projected. $1.02 billion.for=Western County highways. The UCLA work effort now Agenda Item 10 231 projects an increase of 122 percent in projected tax receipts; does that mean a -- proportional increase for each listed project and program? A full report and analysis of .the issue is necessary and; the Commission will have to consider the issuein future years. , Finally, the establishment of ten years of Western Riverside County highway priorities, while important is onlya portion of the overall. Measure A effort: There are a wealth of additional issue areas such as regional arterials, rail transit, CETAP corridors, commuter services, transit services for seniors ' and persons ' with disabilities and additional highway projects in Measure A that are not proposed to beaddressed in the first ten years. 'These items :must also remain a" priority in Western Riverside County. A similar emphasis and priority is also necessary to advance projects in the Coachella Valley, which enjoys its own separate funding - stream from Measure A. NEXT STEPS CMIA Submittal Staff has presented an ambitious plan of investment that will require a 'number of Commission actions and decisions. These actions will take place on an ongoing basis; however, immediate action is needed to seek state bond funding. The first $4.5 billion of Proposition 1 B will be devoted to highway projects that will be ready for construction_ by 2012.,Projects submittals for the CMIA are due in mid -January. Of the $4.5; billion, the funds will be allocated on a 60/40 split with the 60 percent share allocated in Southern California and the .40 percent share allocated for Northern California. Project funding decisions will be made by the CTC with the input of Caltrans. Through, the issuance of program guidelines, the CTC has made_ it clear that it will use quantitative, empirical data to evaluate projects. In most cases, this is the same kind of data that Commission staff and the Bechtel team have been preparing over the last few months to develop a Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan. During the last few- weeks, Commission staff . has worked closely with .Caltrans District 8 to develop a project list for the CMIA program that will bring needed traffic relief while being able to compete well against other projectsthroughout the state. These same projects will also be in line for STIP funding; which will be allocated in June. The proposed list that staff has developed for the Commission's submittal includes the following in priority order: Agenda Item 10 232 Priority Order 1 Project Description SR-91 HOVLanes, Adams to 60/91 /215 IC Cost (000's) $ 238,000 Request (000's) $ 161,000 2 SR-91 E/B Auxiliary Lane, SR-241 to SR-71 $ 81,000 $ 74,000 3 1-215 Add 1 MF Lane, 1-15/1-215 IC to Scott Road $ 56,0Q0 $ 56,000 4 '' 1-215 Add'1' MF Lane, Scott Road to Nuevo Road $ 117,000 $- 1,17,000' 5 1-215 Add 1'. WIF Lane, Nuevo Road to Box Springs Road $ 121,000 $' 121,000 6 * 1-215'TMS Feld Elements, I-15/1-21.5 IC to Box Springs Road $ 68,000 $ ' ' 68,000 7 SR-7.1/SR791 IC, Connector & Collector -Distributor System , - $ 99,000 $.; 99,000 8 I-15:Add 1 MF & 1HOV Lane, SR 91/1-15 to, Indian Truck Trail $ 229,000 ,$ 229,000 9 -` ,CETAP!- French Valley Pkwy/1-1'5' OC & IC Improvements $ 135,000 $ ; 26,000 TOTALS :$1,144,000 ",$951,000' *The cost of TMS Field Elements will be divided in to the three segments on 1-215. All costs are rounded Staff : recommends' formal adoption of this list for 'submittal to the CTC for consideration. The deadline for the submittal is January .16, 2007, 'land the final CTC decisions are expected in March 2007. With the exception of the SR-91' HOV lanes, which are a 1989 Measure A project, the remainderof the list is compatible with staff's 10-Year Delivery Plan recommendations for: the 2009 Measure A -program. The Commission and Caltrans District 8 will both ° submit projects for CMIA consideration.:: Caltrans' recommendations will be financially constrained, making it unlikely for the District to co -nominate every project that the Commission submits. Regardless of CaWars' financial constraints in nominating projects, ;it pledges to assist the Commission throughout the process. The First Step in a Long Process The presentation of the two staff reports are seen by staff as the framework for action in developing the first ten years of the Western Riverside County Measure 'A highway program. ' The adoption of these priorities as part of an overall plan is the first of many steps that will take place over the next few months. The most immediate, item is the approval .of the CMIA proposal that is due next month: The outcome of the CMIA will then affect the availability of funds for the-rest'of the effort. Figures wilt be adjusted further- with the allocation. of STIP funds in June. As has, always' been the case, the Commission will seek- to combine funds from various sources to ensure; that the priorities set by the Commission' 'will then be implemented as quickly as possible. The subsequent work will then be pursued as quickly as possible and regular updates, reports, policy decisions and action will come before the Commission. This will be especially critical if the, Commission chooses to move forward with HOT lanes and the introduction of tolls to Riverside County's highway`system. The effort will require active participation from the Commission on policy issues as well as in educating and informing the public. Agenda Item 10 233 Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan GOALS AND OBJECTIVES MAINTAIN AND IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY BY SUPPLEMENTING EXISTING FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION Reduce current congestion and provide adequate transportation facilities to accommodate reasonable growth in the future. Provide funding for the adequate maintenance and improvement of local streets and roads in the cities and unincorporated areas. Enhance Riverside County's ability to secure state and federal funding for transportation by offering local matching funds. PROVIDE FOR ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE EXPENDITURE OF TAX PAYER FUNDS Provides for mandatory dedication of sales tax funds only for the transportation improvements and programs identified in the Expenditure Plan and no other purpose. Provides for a mandatory, annual financial audit of program expenditures to insure that all funds are spent in accordance with this voter adopted Plan and associated legal ordinance. Provides for a Maintenance of Effort requirement in funds made available to city and county governments for local street and road programs to insure the new money for this purpose is adding to current funding levels. Provides for the strict limitation of administrative staff costs in implementing this Plan, by limiting, in law, funds expended for salaries and benefits to no more than one (1) percent of the annual net amount of revenues raised by Measure "A". Provides for the Plan to be updated every 10.years for the period it is in effect to insure that the changing needs and priorities of the county are met. Provides for the mandatory termination of the tax in 2039, requiring additional voter approval for extension at a County General Election according to state law. PROVIDE FOR EQUITY IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF MEASURE "A" REVENUES Return funds to the Western County, Coachella Valley and Palo Verde Valley proportionate to the funds generated in those areas. Adopt a Transportation Improvement Plan, which address the unique needs of each of the areas of the county. Provide a reasonable balance between competing highway, commuter rail, transit, and local streets and roads needs. PROVIDE FOR LOCAL CONTROL OF THE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Provide for cost effective, local administration of the program through the existing Riverside County Transportation Commission. No new agency would be required to administer these funds. Delegates appropriate administrative responsibility to the cities and the county and other local agencies for local programs. This TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN, which shall act as the County's Expenditure Plan, was prepared by the Riverside County Transportation Commission for the purpose of extending the current '/z cent local transaction and use tax for transportation to be collected for an additional 30 years, if approved by the voters on November 5, 2002 — Measure "A". This is proposed by the Commission as a means to fill the funding shortfall to: implement necessary highway, commuter rail, and transit projects; secure new transportation corridors through environmental clearance and right of way purchases; provide adequate maintenance and improvements on the local street and road system; promote economic growth throughout the county; and provide specialized programs to meet the needs of commuters and the specialized needs of the growing senior and disabled population. 2 " " TAXPAYER ACCOUNTABILITY SAFEGUARDS LEGAL DEDICATION OF FUNDS Measure "A" funds may only be used for transportation purposes and described in the local ordinance governing this program, including the construction, environmental mitigation of transportation projects, capital activities, acquisition, maintenance, and operation of streets, roads, highways, including state highways and public transit systems and for related purposes. These purposes include but are not limited to expenditures for the planning, environmental reviews, engineering and design costs, related right-of-way acquisition, and construction, engineering and administration. MANDATORY ANNUAL FISCAL AUDIT No less than annually, the RCTC shall conduct an independent fiscal audit of the expenditure of all sales tax funds raised by this measure. The audit, which shall be made available to the public, shall report on evidence that the expenditure of funds is in accordance with the Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan as adopted by the voters in approving the sales tax measure on November 5, 2002. In addition, the audit shall determine that 'Maintenance of Effort requirements, other requirements regarding local government participation in Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Programs, as well as requirements described in Section 5 of the Plan entitled "Local Streets and Roads" have been complied with. The audit shall also insure that no more than 1 (one) percent of total sales tax expenditures are used for administrative staff salaries and benefits in implementing this Plan. MANDATORY PLAN UPDATE AND TERMINATION OF SALES TAX This Plan shall be updated by RCTC every 10 years that the sales tax is in effect to reflect current and changing priorities and needs in the County, as defined by the duly elected local government representatives on the RCTC Board. Any changes to this Plan must be adopted in accordance with current law in effect at the time of the update and must be based on findings of necessity for change by the Commission. The sales tax authorized to be collected by the voters shall be terminated on March 31, 2039, unless reauthorized by the voters to extend the sales tax prior to the termination date as required under state law in effect at the time of the vote for extension. 3 SPECIFIC TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS TO BE FUNDED WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY The Expenditure Plan Map illustrates the Western and Coachella Valley areas. The Western County area includes the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon Lake, Corona, Hemet, Lake Elsinore, Moreno Valley, Riverside, Murrieta, Norco, Perris, San Jacinto, and Temecula. It also includes the unincorporated communities of Jurupa, Mira Loma, Menifee, Wildomar, and Sun City and other more sparsely populated areas, and the reservations of the Pechanga Band of Mission Indians, the Soboba Band of Mission Indians, the Cahuilla Band of Mission Indians, the Ramona Band of Cahuilla Indians, and the Morongo Band of Indians. 1. STATE HIGHWAYS Many more state highway improvement projects are needed to deal with congestion and safety problems than existing state and federal revenues can fund. Projected formula funds from these sources over the 30 years is estimated to be $640 million and will fund less than %2 of the improvements needed and identified in the Expenditure Plan, which are estimated to cost $1.66 billion in current dollars. Measure "A" funds will supplement those funding sources by an estimated $1.02 billion and will cover the remaining costs estimated to accomplish these improvements. The Highway projects to be implemented with funding returned to the Western County Area by extending the Measure "A" Program are as follows: i 4 ROUTE LIMITS PROJECT EST. COST 91, 60, 1-15, & I-215 Reducing congestion on these routes will require that new transportation corridors are constructed See Section 2 Rte 91 Pierce Street to Orange County Line Add 1 lane each direction $ 161 91 /I 15 Interchange Add new Connector from 1-15 North to 91 West g 243 91/71 Interchange Improve Interchange $ 26 Rte 71 Rte 91 to San Bernardino County Line Widen to 3 lanes each direction $ 68 1-215 60/91/215 to San Bernardino County Line Add 2 lanes each direction $ 231 1-215 Eucalyptus Ave to 1-15 Add 1 lane each direction $ 210 1-15 Rte 60 to San Diego County Line Add 1 lane each direction $ 359 -10 San Bernardino County Line to Banning Add eastbound truck climbing lane $ 75 1-10/60 Interchange Construct new interchange $ 129 Rte 60 Badlands area, east of Moreno Valley Add truck climbing lane $ 26 Rte 79 Ramona Expressway to Domenigoni Parkway Realign highway $ 132 SUBTOTAL Measure "A" Funding State & federal Formula Funds $1.02 Billion $0.64 Billion TOTAL $1.66 Billion The Commission may add additional State Highway projects, should additional Measure "A" revenue become available. An estimated 5% of the total cost for these highway projects 083 million) will be used for environmental purposes to mitigate the cumulative and indirect impacts associated with construction of these projects. 5 Taxable Sales Revenues for Riverside County A Long Run Forecast Prepared by the UCLA Anderson Forecast Lead Consultant: Christopher Thornberg, PhD for the Riverside County Transportation Commission Final Report Prepared May, 2006 • Overview and Baseline Projections Riverside County is one of the fastest growing areas in the United States at the moment, and in the long run it will almost certainly continue to grow at a greater -than -average pace. A built -out coastal region has pushed new development toward inland areas as businesses and families seek space for growth. The population of the county has recently passed 2 million. This influx has changed the nature of the local economy. While commuters that work in Orange and Los Angeles counties still represent an important part of the workforce, the number of local jobs has been growing even faster than the population, and many of these new jobs are in high paying professional sectors, not just in local services as in the past. Add to this the rapidly growing tourist area of Palm Springs, and the economic future of the region is clearly solid. The UCLA Anderson Forecast has been contracted by the Riverside County Transportation Commission to provide a long run forecast of taxable sales growth for the county, in order to assist with long run planning. This brief document is being written to describe the process by which the forecast was made, and to discuss important short and tong -run dynamics that are driving the projections. One important thing to remember about long -run forecasts is that they represent long run averages. Short run dynamics in the economy will often cause the economy to first slow and then grow faster than normal. Short run dynamics are caused by unexpected shocks to the economy, and as such are largely unpredictable. These numbers should be considered to be long run averages. The one major exception to this rule is the current real estate bubble the economy is experiencing, and the impact that will have on the Riverside economy in the short run. This is explicitly built into our calculations. The forecast was created in two major steps. The first was the creation of a long -run demographic forecast using information on the current age distribution of the population in Riverside, trends in birthrates, declines in mortality rates and some basic assumptions regarding the level of in -migration into the county. The second step was to use these demographic results with information taken from our highly regarded long -run US and California models to establish forecasts for a variety of Riverside variables, including labor force information, payroll employment, income, building activity and taxable sales. The forecast was produced within a i • " " " statistical VAR (vector auto -regression) model, with a variety of cross effects between the various endogenous variables as well as exogenous variables taken from our long run state and national forecasts. With respect to population, we expect that population growth will slow from the currently very high 4.5% rate to 3% annually by the end of the decade. Overall growth will continue to trend down right to 2040, but will still be roughly twice the pace of the US overall even then. This slowing is being driven in part by our calculation that net - migration into the state will continue to slow in par due to tougher controls on immigration into the nation and the growing gap in housing prices between California and most of the rest of the nation. Another important driver is the fact that birthrates among immigrant groups are dropping rapidly to US norms to the surprise of many demographers. We expect population in the county will hit 2.25 million by the end of this decade, 2.85 million by the end of the next decade and come close to 4 million in 2040. The proportion of residents under 15 years of age will fall from 23% of the population today to 15% in 2040, while the number of people 65 and over will climb from Population Growth Forecast Household Employment Growth Forecast Payroll Employment growth Forecast 11%to 19%.1 ' One long -run issue is how the nation will support the rapidly increasing retired population. In general we have to assume that the participation rate both in Riverside and the nation overall will continue to climb, as a great portion On the economic side of the picture, household employment (as measured by place of residence) in Riverside is currently estimated to be about 800,000 jobs total. Total payroll employment (measured by the location of the employing establishment) is slightly less than 600,000. The gap between these two is comprised of commuters and those working in Riverside but not within a formal payroll framework such as the self-employed. By the end of the decade we forecast these figures to be 950,000 and 700,000 respectively, and we expect they will come in at 2 million and 1.85 million by 2040. Per capita income in Riverside is currently $27,500, below where it was in 2001 or 1990 in real (inflation adjusted) terms. The reason for the relatively flat level of income in the region is that increases in the number of high paying jobs in the county are being offset by the still high proportion of the population without a high school degree (21 % in Riverside compared to 16% for the US overall) along with the still relatively low proportion of the total population with an Associates degree or more (26% in Riverside relative to 35% for the nation overall). In a nation where trade and technological change continues to expand the education premium, lower than average education has a large impact on income growth in the short run. We expect that the education profile will shift more towards national norms in Riverside as the economy continues to expand into a more of a self-contained economic region and becomes less of a bedroom community for Orange and Los Angeles counties. We forecast that per capita incomes will continue to grow slowly and only reach $28,000 by the end of the decade and then begin to growth strongly, reaching $38,000 in 2020 and $55,000 in 2040. Taxable Sales Receipts The following chart shows displays taxable sales growth in Riverside, both historical since 1991 and the forecast through 2040. Since the start of fiscal year 1998 taxable sales growth in Riverside has grown at a remarkably fast 11.5%. Our forecast has this slowing sharply starting in 2007 and averaging 61/0 per year. This is a substantial slowdown relative to the past few years. of the eligible workforce actually holds jobs, and retirement moving farther into the future. This expectation is built into the labor force forecast for the county. • • • " " " Taxable Sales Revenue Growth, Nominal and Real Riverside County, Forecasted period in shade -4% O M E E E 2001 downturn was caused directly by There are two primary reasons for this expected change in trend. The first has to do with the overall distended state of the consumer sector in the US. Consumer spending began to ramp up sharply in the late nineties as the economy entered an over -heated phase around the furor of information technology and the dot.com bubble. The businesses pulling back sharply on new capital investments after a number of years of low profits as the `IT revolution' failed to live up to its promise. US consumers never responded in kind, and even as incomes shrank and jobs were lost overall consumer spending continued to rise. As a result consumer debt burdens are close to an all time high despite low interest rates being enjoyed by borrowing Americans. When the economy began to grow again in 2003, consumer spending increased along with it. In 2005 the net private savings rate (defined as 1  total consumer spending / total consumer income net of taxes) was negative for the first time since 1930. The trade deficit is the best indication of how out of equilibrium the economy is. It currently is about 6% of GDP. Two thirds of this amount is due to excess spending by consumers, while the balance is due to the public deficit. The reason for all this excess consumption on the part of individuals in the US is due in large part to the rapid run up in property prices seen in Riverside as well as across the nation. In Riverside the median price of a single family home in the first quarter of 2000 was $135,000. Today it is $375,000. That is an average increase of $40,000 per year for the last six years, approximately equal to per worker income in the area. This rapid increase in wealth is the primary driver of spending. Unfortunately much of this wealth is illusionary  the run up in Total Residential Unit Sales Riverside and the Balance of Southern California Seasonally Adjusted and Smoothed, Source Dataquick prices is due to massive speculation that is driving prices up far past their fundamental value —in short it's a bubble. The cooling of the bubble is a strong driver for our short -run projections of economic growth. Bubbles are, by definition, events that have a limited life span. The leading indicator of a cooling real estate bubble market is total residential unit sales. Once these start to fall, within one year price appreciation comes to a halt 2 Over the past six months there have been falling sales and rising inventories in every market in the Southern California region. Riverside lagged the boom by a few months, and it has also lagged in the cooling, but recent statistics indicate that the region is beginning to experience the same trend of falling sales and decelerating price appreciation. All the current statistics point to a cooling of the housing market across the nation as well. One of the big questions is whether housing prices will fall. The answer is almost certainly not. Real estate bubbles do not `pop' in the way that other type of bubbles do, such as in the stock market where prices fall rapidly. Instead a real estate market `pop' is characterized by flat nominal prices and reduced activity levels for a long period of time. In the case of Southern Califomia this may imply that prices will not grow again in any meaningful way until 2011. In fact in our forecast we actually have some small nominal declines in prices for Riverside. The economic impact of a cooling market will circulate through Riverside on two levels. First is that there will be a slowdown in construction activity, as those who buy new homes typically are selling their existing home. With fewer sales of existing homes this will cause a decline in the 2 Much has been made in the papers about the fact that sales are slowing even though prices are still rising, as if this is unusual. Instead this is completely normal. i • • " demand for new homes. We forecast a decline in construction from the current pace of 34,000 new units per year to 21,000 in 2009. This is not as great of a decline as in the early nineties inasmuch as we have not overbuilt the way we did in the late eighties. The real estate and mortgage industries will also be hit by a cooling market. The second way the cooling housing market will impact the economy is through the reduced wealth creation and how that spills over to consumer spending. With nominal prices flat there is little new wealth to be spent, and this will have a direct impact on consumer spending and of course taxable sales. At this point in time we do not believe that the housing market will be enough to push the economy into a recession. However overall it will have an impact on the economy and cool the pace of growth. Riverside was relatively recession proof in 2001 as a result of its lack of exposure to the information technology industry. However this slowdown will have a more direct impact on the county. In the long run we also have the pace of taxable sales growth slower than in recent years, even after the real estate bubble is over and its effects are removed from the economy. One reason is the slow Taxable Sales as a Percent of Personal Income 52.0% 48.0% 44.0% 40.0% 36.0% 32.0% Riverside Orange Los Angeles ��T \O CO O r [v '��} 1 1p CO ' O N 7 00 CO ON CA 01 ON ON - CIO O O, CA CA ON�� CA0 CA o 0 N N fV deceleration of overall employment and population growth in the region. A second reason for this has to do with the expected shifts in the type of consumer spending in the region as the economy grows and average incomes rise. The following graph shows taxable sales as a percent of personal income for Riverside, Orange and Los Angeles. Taxable sales in Riverside are currently over 50% of total personal income, considerably higher than either of its two larger neighbors. It has also been trending upwards, again completely out of alignment with its two neighbors. Tourism alone certainly does not explain this difference, given that the industry in Orange is a larger portion of the overall economy. Average income in a region is the largest driver. As incomes increase, more spending shifts towards services which are untaxed. As such, as average incomes in the area continue to grow they will see less direct impact on taxable sales receipts by the county. In short, as average incomes rise, expect the proportion of income spent on taxable sales to fall, lowering taxable sales growth overall. " " " UCLA Anderson Forecast (May 2006) FY Receipts, net of 1.5% SBOE Admin Fee FY Nominal % Change Real % Change 1989 Measure A Receipts: FY06/07 157,297,293 6.6% 155,656,422 4.1% FY07/08 165,479,599 5.2% 160,492,344 3.1% FY08/09 174,546,921 5.5% 166,055,764 3.5% Total for last 3 years-1989 Measure A $ 497,323,813 $ 482,204,530 2009 Measure A Receipts: FY00/10 l Y1 V/1 FY12/13 FY13/14 FY14/15 FY15/16 FY16/17 FY17/18 FY18/19 Subtotal -first 10 years 185,614,649 6.3% $ 172,510,140 3.9% 198,710,986 7.1% 180,168,169 4.4% 213,296,313 7.3% 189,313,762 5.1% 228,374,831 7.1% 198,299,310 4.7% 245,644,229 7.6% 208,636,209 5.2% 265,023,979 7.9% 219,842,256 5.4% 285,283,438 7.6% 230,744,178 5.0% 306,768,159 7.5% 241,794,458 4.8% 329,748,058 7.5% 253,448,052 4.8% 354,050,324 7.4% 265,626,465 4.8% 2,612,514,966 2,160,382,998 Pr'19/20 379,597,087 7.2% 278,007,941 4.7% FY20/21 405,695,897 6.9% 290,226,330 4.4% FY21/22 433,317,296 6.8% 302,941,476 4.4% FY22/23 462,542,793 6.7% 315,435,378 4.1% FY23/24 493,506,894 6.7% 329,165,045 4.4% FY24/25 527,033,947 6.8% 343,756,320 4.4% FY25/26 561,231,905 6.5% 357,938,197 4.1% FY26/27 596,230,456 6.2% 371,434,114 3.8% FY27/28 633,722,346 6.3% 385,125,945 3.7% FY28/29 673,568,856 6.3% 398,960,486 3.6% Subtotal -second 10 years 5,166,447,478 3,372,991,233 I .Y29/30 i Y30/31 FY31/32 FY32/33 FY33/34 FY34/35 FY35/36 FY36/37 FY37/38 FY38/39 Subtotal -last 10 years Total 2009 Measure A Receipts 715,437,009 6.2% 759,782,472 6.2%b 806,135, 871 6.1 % 854,085,054 5.9% 904,564,977 5.9% 957,058,151 5.8% 1,011,080,788 5.6% 1,067,463,606 5.6% 1,126,189,734 5.5% 1,186,178,569 5.3% 9,387,976,2.30 413,233,600 428,286,115 443,612,309 458,744,105 474,234,608 489,765,032 505,040,297 520,453,646 535,930,840 550,970,026 4,820,270,576 $ 17,166,938,675' $ 10,353,644,808 3.6% 3.6% 3.6% 3.4% 3,4% 3.3% 3.1 % 3.1 �/a 3.04/7 2.8%, Note: Nominal dollars reflect actual dollars (year of receipt). Real dollars are adjusted for inflation, representing the purchasing power of future receipts in current year amounts (2006 $). Amounts presented include deduction of State Board of Equalization fees (1.5%). Draft RCTC Corridor Mobility Investment Account (CMIA) Project Submittal List Priority Order 1 Project Description SR 91 HOV Lanes, Adams to 60/91/215 IC Total Project Cost (oars) $ 238,000 CMIA Request (000's) $ 161,000 2 SR 91 E/B Auxilia Lane, SR 241 to SR 71 $ 81,0 $ 74,000 3 1-215 Add 1 MF Lane, 1-15/1-215 IC to Scott Road $ 56,000 $ 56,000 4 1-215 Add 1 MF Lane, Scott Road to Nuevo $ 117,000 $ 117,000 5 1-215 Add 1 MF Lane, Nuevo to Box Springs $ 121,000 $ 121,000 * 1-215 TMS Field Elements, 1-15/1-215 IC to Box Sprin. s $ 68,000 $ 68,000 6 SR 71/91 IC, Connector & Collector -Distributor S stem $ 99,000 $ 99,000 7 1-15 Add 1 MF & 1 HOV Ln, SR 91/1-15 to Indian Truck Trail $ 229,000 $ 229,000 8 CETAP - French Valley Pk /I-15 OC & IC 1m.rovements $ 135,000 $ 26,000 Totals $ 1,144,000 $ * The cost for TMS Field Elements will be divided into the three segments on 1-215. All costs are rounded. 951,000 December 2006 Orange County Line Serfas Club Dr 91 /1-15 Interchange Main St Main St 71 /91 Interchange Orange County Line 1-215 Corridor 1215/115 Interchange Scott Rd Nuevo Rd 2009 Measure A WC Highway 10-Year Delivery Plan Proposal Serfas Club Dr 91 /1-15 Interchange Pierce St 91 /1-15 Interchange 91/1-15 Interchange 71/91 Interchange 91/1-15 Interchange Scott Rd Nuevo Rd Box Springs Rd Add one (1) MF Lane ea dir Add one (1) MF Lane ea dir Add one (1) MF Lane ea dir Add HOV Connector from NB 1-15 to W B Rt91 Add Collector -Distributor System ea dir Add EB Collector -Distributor & Rt71 Connector Increment to Extend Express Lanes & Required Facilities $125 4-- Route 91 Total $814 Add one (1) MF Lane ea dir Add one (1) MF Lane ea dir Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir I-215 Total $111 $1311.300r, $58 $229 4--- $82f-- $78 $56 $117 $121 $294 1-15 Corridor San Bernardino Cnty 91 /1-15 Interchange Indian Truck Trail Bundy Canyon Rd San Bernardino Cnty 91 /1-15 Interchange Indian Truck Trail Bundy Canyon Rd 1215/115 Interchange SR74 Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir Add one (1) HOV & one (1) MF Lane ea dir Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir Increment for Required Facilities & 2 HOT Lanes $189 $203 $221 $99 $115 I-15 Total $827 1-10 Corridor San Bernardino Cnty 60/110 Interchange Add EB Truck Climbing Lane /40 Total $47 $47 Total Proposed 10 yr Delivery Plan 2009 Measure State Hwy Projects $1,9821 December 2006 ROUTE 91 - EXISTING Route 91 4 MF 1 HOV 1 HOV 4 MF <> 4)4 EXISTING ROUTE 91 FOUR (4) MF + ONE (1) HOV LANES EACH DIRECTION FROM ORANGE COUNTY LINE TO I-1 S 56-I 013NIl A1Nno3 3JN11210 WONA NO11331110 H3113 S3N11110H {Z) OMl + AtivnIXn11(0 3N0 + (4) 3N0 aav 66 31f102i 03S0d021d semi lawny r — seuei Oquapwk sauei 10H UM :0N3031 Xnv 9 AN! 9 xnv l CES0(1021c1 - 16 all1011 I-215 - EXISTING 1.215 g. EXISTING 1.215 TWO (2) MIXED FLOW (MF) LANES EACH DIRECTION FROM NUEVO ROAD TO 1.21511.15 INTERCHANGE 3ONVH31131N1 Skl J Sal 01 at/021 OA3fIN INOIAA NV10314/ ONIISIX3 NI NO11331110 H3V3 3NV1 (AW) M014 03XIW 3N0 aad Sal 1N3W3A02ldWl 03S0d0Hd seuei 6upepiM :aN3J3'1 S 6Z'i S OdOlid - SiZ-I I-15 - EXISTING 1.15 f_ t 3 MF 3 MF EXISTING 1-15 THREE (3) LANES EACH DIRECTION FROM 1-215 TO SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY LINE 3Nn A1Nt100 ON1011VN2139 NVS Ol .1131f102! 141021A Nd103111 ONIISIX3 NI NO11331110 H3V3 S3NV110H (Z) OMl OOd ski 1N3W3A011dW103S0d021d CESOd011d - SI-I I-10 - EXISTING 3 MF st 1.10 f_ 3 MF EXISTING 1.10 THREE (3) LANES EACH DIRECTION FROM COUNTY LINE ROAD TO 1.101 ROUTE 60 INTERCHANGE 3JNdH32131N109 31nOb 106-I Oi CNN 3Nn AMMO WOW 3N1f1 JNIBWIIa Nom. aNnosisv3 aad 1N3W3A0?JdWI a3S0dO21d sour] 6upapm :dN303'1 avi QESOd021d - Ot-I �W £ Summary of Year 2015 ` 2009 Measure A Projects Transportation Model Cost ! Benefit Results and Qualitative Evaluation Ranking - Sorted by Corridor Qualitative Ranking (0 thru 5) See Evaluation Criteria Corridor Project From To Nuevo Rd Improvement Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir Opportunistic timing from other external forces 4 Environmental challenges that have not been addressed 4 Need to protect Right of Way 0 External funding available specific to project 0 Time required to get the project ready to advertise 2 fr uahtatt(re a 1 .,t Rai�o,. 4w s q._ _... 0.90 ROW Cost ($) $5,250,000 Project Cost ($) $121,000,000 Total Benefit Over 25 Year Lifetime $ () Benefit 1 Cost Ratio Combined Ratio: ?- Daily LOS Baseline F(3) Daily LOS Altemative F(3) $709,077,000 ._ 5.86 5.26 a Box Springs Rd b Nuevo Rd Scott Rd Add one (1) MF Lane ea dir 4 2 3 0 2 0.99 $2,400,000 $117,000,000 $199,958,651 1.71 1.69 F(2) F(0) c Scott Rd 1215/115 Interchange Add one (1) MF Lane ea dir 4 4 0 0 4 1.08 $1,350,000 $56,000,000 $131,856,349 2.35 2.54 F(0) D $294,000,000 91 a Orange County Line Pierce St, Riverside 91 Add one (1) MF Lane ea dir 5 3 0 0 4 1.08 $5,000,000 $299,000,000 $968,941,000 3.24 3.49 F(3) F(1) 91 b Orange County Line Serfas Club Dr Add one (1) Aux Lane East Bound 91 c Green River Rd 71/91 Interchange Add East Bound Collector -Distributor , : 2 5 0 0 4 0.99 $1,500,000 $78,376,179 $260,367,000 3.32 3.28 F(1) F(0) 91 d Main St 91/1-15 Interchange Add HOV Connector from NB 1-15 to WB Rt91 3 3 1 0 4 0.99 $8,250,000 $229,000,000 $102,540,000 0.45 0.44 F(3) F(3) 91 a Main St 91/1-15 Interchange Add Collector -Distributor System ea dir 3 3 1 0 4 0.99 $1,500,000 $82,000,000 $101,060,000 1.23 1.22 F(3) E $688,376,179 115 San Bernardino Cnty San Diego Cnty Line I I 115 a San Bernardino Cnty 91/1-15 Interchange Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 3 4 0 0 4 0.99 $804,375 $189,000,000 $831,935,000 4.40 4.35 F(3) F(2) 115 I. b 91/1-15 Interchange Indian Truck Trail Add one (1) HOV and one (1) MF Lane ea dir 3 4 0 0 4 0.99 $804,375 $203,000,000 $1,180,606,000 5.82 5.75 F(0) D 115 c Indian Truck Trail Bundy Canyon Rd Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 3 4 0 0 4 0.99 $1,061,775 $221,000,000 $1,087,301,000 4.92 4.86 F(0) F(0) 115 d Bundy Canyon Rd 1215/115 Interchange Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 3 4 0 0 4 0.99 $546,975 $99,000,000 $785,763,000 7.94 7.84 F(0) F(0) 115 e 1215/115 Interchange San Diego Cnty Line Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 3 4 0 0 4 0.99 $643,500 $132,000,000 $949,037,000 7.19 7.10 F(1) F(0) $844,000,000 110 San Bernardino Cnty 60/110 Interchange . a San Bernardino Cnty 60/110 Interchange Add EB Truck Climbing Lane 4 3 0 0 3 0.90 $1,500,000 $47,000,000 $191,050,000 4.06 3.65 F(0) F(0) ,'etke' b Improve Rt60/110 Interchange 2 0 5 0 0 0.63 $12,500,000 $195,000,000 $140,321,000 0.72 0.45 F(0) F(0) s: .w $242,000,000 a Redlands Blvd 60/110 Interchange Add EB Truck Climbing Lane 0 2 5 0 2 0.81 $1,500,000 $114,000,000 $43,197,000 0.38 0.31 F(3) F(3) a Rt71/Rt91 Interchange San Bernardino Cnty Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 1 3 3 0 3 0.90 $1,500,000 $59,000,000 -$14,325,000 -0.24 0.27 F(0) F(0) a Rt79/Ramona Exwy Rt79/Domenigoni Pkwy Realign/Widen to two (2) MF Lanes ea dir 5 3 5 2 $633,781,000 0.41 0.69 D D 4 1.71 $223,000,000 $1,560,000,000 • Combined Qualitative_Quantitative Evaluation Ranking Sort by LOS Baseline Page 1 of 1 12/7/2006 ' Summary of Year 2015 2009 Measure A Projects Transportation Model Cost / Benefit Results and Qualitative Evaluation Ranking - Sorted by Corridor Qualitative Ranking (0 thru 5) See Evaluation Criteria Corridor Project From To Improvement Opportunistic timing from other external forces Environmental challenges that have not been addressed Need to protect Right of Way External funding available specific to project Time required to get the projecthtatr ready to advertise :, r = • � bo z; ROW Cost ($) Project Cost ($) Total Benefit Over 25 Year Lifetime ($) • Benefit 1 Cost Ratio Combined . Ratio :,: Daily LOS Baseline Daily LOS Alternative a Box Springs Rd Nuevo Rd Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 4 4 0 0 2 0.90 $5,250,000 $121,000,000 $709,077,000 5.86 5.26 F(3) F(3) 115 a San Bernardino Cnty 91/1-15 Interchange Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 3 4 0 0 4 0.99 $804,375 $189,000,000 $831,935,000 4.40 4.35 F(3) F(2) 91 a Orange County Line Pierce St, Riverside Add one (1) MF Lane ea dir 5 3 0 0 4 1.08 $5,000,000 $299,000,000 $968.941,000 3.24 3.49 F(3) F(1) 91 a Main St 91/1-15 Interchange Add Collector -Distributor System ea dir 3 3 1 0 4 0.99 $1,500,000 $82,000,000 $101,060,000 1.23 1.22 F(3) E 91 d Main St 91/1-15 Interchange Add HOV Connector from NB 1-15 to WB Rt91 3 3 1 0 4 0.99 $8,250,000 $229,000,000 $102,540,000 0.45 0.44 F(3) F(3) 60 a Redlands Blvd 60/110 Interchange Add EB Truck Climbing Lane 0 2 5 0 2 0.81 $1,500,000 $114,000,000 $43,197,000 0.38 0.31 F(3) F(3) b Nuevo Rd Scott Rd Add one (1) MF Lane ea dir 4 2 3 0 2 0.99 $2,400,000 $117,000,000 $199,958,651 1-71 1.69 F(2) F(0) 115 a 1215/115 Interchange San Diego Cnty Line Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 3 4 0 0 4 0.99 $643,500 $132,000,000 $949,037,000 7.19 7.10 F(1) F(0) c Green River Rd 71/91 Interchange Add East Bound Collector -Distributor 2 5 0 0 4 0.99 $1,500,000 $78,376,179 $260,367,000 3.32 3.28 F(1) F(0) 115 d Bundy Canyon Rd 1215/115 Interchange Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 3 4 0 0 4 0.99 $546,975 $99,000,000 $785,763,000 7.94 7.84 F(0) F(0) 115 b 91/1-15 Interchange Indian Truck Trail Add one (1) HOV and one (1) MF Lane ea dir 3 4 0 0 4 0.99 $804,375 $203,000,000 $1,180,606,000 5.82 5.75 F(0) D 115 c Indian Truck Trail Bundy Canyon Rd Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 3 4 0 0 4 0.99 $1,061,775 $221,000,000 $1,087,301,000 4.92 4.86 F(0) F(0) is w a !. a San Bernardino Cnty 60/110 Interchange Add EB Truck Climbing Lane 4 3 0 0 3 0.90 $1,500,000 $47,000,000 $191,050,000 4.06 3.65 F(0) F(0) c Scott Rd 1215/115 Interchange Add one (1) MF Lane ea dir 4 4 0 0 4 1.08 $1,350,000 $56,000,000 $131,856,349 2.35 2-54 F(0) D P.4,(' - b Improve Rt60/I10 Interchange 2 0 5 0 0 0.63 $12,500,000 $195,000,000 $140,321,000 0.72 0.45 F(0) F(0) a Rt71/R191 Interchange San Bernardino Cnty Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 1 3 3 0 3 0.90 $1,500,000 $59,000,000 -$14,325,000 -0.24 -0.27 F(0) F(0) a Rt79/Ramona Exwy Rt79/Domenigoni Pkwy RealignNViden to two (2) MF Lanes ea dir 5 3 5 2 4 1.71 $223,000,000 $1,560,000,000 $633,781,000 0.41 0.69 D D • Combined Qualitative_Quantitative Evaluation Ranking Sort by LOS Baseline Page 1 of 1 12/7/2006 " Revised Item 3 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 26, 2006 TO: Public/Private Financing and Delivery Plan Ad Hoc Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: 2009 Measure A 10-Year Delivery Plan Approach, Assumptions and Criteria STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to approve: 1) The update of the 2009 Measure A project descriptions, segmentation and scope as presented; 2) The transportation model technical approach; 3) The suggested 2015 Baseline Network and the assumptions that were used to develop the Baseline Network; 4) The quantitative benefit measures to use to numerically rank the 2009 Measure projects based on the cost benefit analysis; and 5) The qualitative benefit measures to further assess the implementation needs for the 2009 Measure Projects that are not captured in the quantitative assessment of the cost benefit analysis. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the June 3, 2005 Commission workshop, staff was provided with general direction to develop the information necessary to assess the delivery status of the 1989 Measure A Western County Highway Program (including the Mid County Parkway), aswell as, develop an objective set of project measurements, including state recognized performance measures, to support the Commission in establishing priorities for the first 10 years of the 30-year Measure A Program. At the December 14, 2005 meeting, the Commission approved an amendment to the Bechtel Infrastructure Program Management Contract to assist the Commission in determining the status and deliverability of the 1989 Measure A Program and developing the initial 2009 Measure A Program 10-Year Delivery Plan. The objectives of the effort were as follows: " An assessment of the status and challenges of completing the delivery of the Western County Highway Program for the 1989 Measure, " An objective based assessment of the Western County portion of the 2009 Measure A Transportation Program, " Prioritization of the Western County program of projects, and " Development of a Ten -Year Delivery Plan that will cover the first ten years of the 30-year extension of Measure A. DISCUSSION: 1) UPDATE OF 2009 MEASURE A PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS, SEGMENTATION AND SCOPE Proiect Descriptions For the past several months, Commission and Bechtel staffs have been working on the development of the following two documents: 1) 1989 Measure A Historical Report, and 2) 2009 Measure A 10-Year Delivery Plan The records for each of the 1989 Measure projects are currently being reviewed and the status of each project is being documented. The scope of the 2009 Measure A projects is also being reviewed. After comparing the latest information on both sets of Measure projects, it is apparent that the project scope for six 2009 Measure projects would be best served it they were modified. These projects are shown on the 2009 Measure Project Map (Attachment 1), listed in the attached 2009 Measure Project Scope and Segmentation Summary (Attachment 2), and are summarized below. Project Route Limits Specified Project Proposed Improvement Rationale 2b 91/15 Interchange New Connector I-15 N to 91 W Add Collector - Distributor System each direction on 91 between Main St. and 1-15 Improve 91/15 Interchange Traffic Movement 5b 60/91 / 215 IC Interchange none Add Direct Connector, EB SR 60 to NB 1-215 Weaving movements will break down northbound SR-91 and eastbound SR-60 " " " Project Route Limits Specified Project Proposed Improvement Rationale 6.1 b I-215 Eucalyptus Ave to 1-15 Add 1 lane each direction Extend limits & Add HOV lane from Nuevo Rd. to Box Springs Rd. Continuity of HOV system 8b 110 County Line to 10/60 IC Add truck Climb lane Add 1 HOV lane in each direction Continuity of HOV system 10b SR-60 Badlands Area Add truck Climb lane Add 1 HOV lane in each direction Continuity of HOV system 12.1 b 1-215 Newport Rd north limit Add up to 2 lanes each direction Modify north limits from Newport Road to D Street This will eliminate a pinch point in number of lanes between Newport and D Street Optional project (2b) is to add a collector distributor system between Main Street and the Interstate 15/State Route 91 Interchange to mitigate for the close interchange spacing between Main Street and the 1-1.5 Interchange on SR- 91. This project would be in lieu of the currently named project at the same. location to construct a northbound 1-15 to westbound SR-91 connector at this same location. Ca!trans has recently completed a study of this area and believes that the collector distributor will provide a better operational improvement that would also improve the northbound to westbound move. The project study report indicates that this improvement would significantly improve traffic operations on SR-91 at the 1-15 Interchange. Staff recommends that this alternative project be added when performing the cost benefit analysis. The difference in cost between this project; when compared to the original project 2a, is estimated to be approximately $100 million less. If the Commission were to elect to move forward with this alternative project, it may require that the Measure be amended. Optional project (5b) is the east to north connector at the 60/91 /215 Interchange. The current 1989 Measure A 60/91 /215 project will replace the two conflicting loops on the west side of the interchange with fly over connectors. The two conflicting loops on the east side of the interchange would remain in place. The peak hour volumes on these loops are projected to be 1,852 for the east bound SR-60 to northbound 1-215 connector (proposed project 5b) and 1,656 for the northbound SR-91 to westbound SR-60 connector in the year 2040. The recent traffic analysis demonstrates that for a 2040 horizon year, traffic movement on these loops is projected to increase significantly such that the projected volumes will far exceed the ability of these loops to operate efficiently. Based on the higher volumes, it will be important to replace one of the two loops with a fly over connector prior to 2030 to remove this conflict that will again cause this important interchange to fail. Since the 1- 215 Bi-County Project is currently studying improvements to the 60/91 /1-215 Interchange that will already impact the northeast quadrant of the interchange, it would be logical to include the study of the impacts of the eastbound SR-60 to northbound 1-215 connector (which has the highest volumes) with that project in order to be able to set the ultimate right-of-way at the proper location for the 1-215 project -- even if the connector is built as a later phase. If the connector is not included in the 1-215 Bi-County Project, the residential area in the northeast quadrant will be impacted a second time that will result in a higher cost to deliver the connector at a later date. The additional cost of this work is. estimated to be in the range of $150 to $175 million. If the Commission were to elect to move forward with this alternative project, it may require that the Measure be amended. Optional project (6.1 b) is between the East Junction of the 60/215 and the Nuevo Road Interchange and covers the bridge widening and other necessary improvements that will allow the High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes west of the East Junction to be connected to the HOV lanes on 1-215 south of the East Junction. This project was originally covered under the Project Report/Environmental Document (PR/ED) for the 1989 Measure A 1-215 Improvement Project but was never funded. Since more than three to five years will have lapsed prior to construction, the current PR/ED will have to be updated. Because it was assumed that the East Junction would be completed down to Eucalyptus at the time when the 2009 Measure A 1-215 project was scoped out, the northern limit of the 2009 Measure A 1-215 project was set at Eucalyptus. So, unless the north project limit of the 2009 Measure A 1-215 improvement project is extended northerly through the East Junction, the addition of the proposed HOV lane will be discontinuous between Eucalyptus and the East Junction. Therefore, staff suggests that the north limit of the I- 215 improvement between Eucalyptus Ave and 1-15 be modified to East Junction 60/1-215 to 1-15. The additional cost of this work is estimated to be in the range of $50 to $75 million. Optional Projects 8b and 10b are to analyze the comparative benefit of adding HOV lanes to replace the 2009 Measure A proposed truck climbing lanes on the 1-10 between the County Line and the junction with SR 60 and in the badlands area of SR 60. This proposal was generated by additional work that the Department has performed on the operational improvements that would result for each of these projects. The additional costs of making this substitution are currently under review. If the Commission were to elect to move forward with this alternative project, it may require that the Measure be amended. Optional project (12.1 b) is to analyze the benefit of moving the north project limit of the CETAP north south corridor from Newport Road to D Street in Perris. • • • " The movement of the north project limit of Project 12 will remove a future pinch point between Newport Road and D Street where the lanes would remain at three lanes in each direction after project 6 adds one lane in each direction on I- 215 between 1-15 and East Junction of SR 60 and 1-215. North of D Street the 1-215 will be 8 lanes in each direction after Project 6 is completed. South of Newport on 1-215 the facility will be 10 lanes after Project 12 is completed. By extending the north limit of Project 12 to D Street, the minimum number of lanes on 1-215 between 1-15 and SR 60 will be 8 lanes. Staff recommends that the above named optional projects be studied along with the originally identified projects in order to understand their benefits, costs and program impacts. When all of this information is available, the Commission can make an informed decision on if they should be included, in whole or in part, with the named Measure projects. Project Segmentation During the development of the data base for the identified 2009 Measure A State Highway Improvement Projects and new 2009 Measure A CETAP Transportation Corridors, it was identified that several of the projects were very large in scope and cost. The proposed improvements to 1-15 are estimated to cost approximately $359 million and the proposed improvements to 1-215 are estimated to cost approximately $210 million. The funding required to support the implementation of these two improvements alone would potentially take all the funding available for the first 10 years of the 2009 Measure. Therefore, it is recommended that the larger 2009 Measure A State Highway Improvement Projects and new 2009 Measure A CETAP Transportation Corridors be broken into smaller logical segments, as identified on the attached 2009 Measure Project Scope and Segmentation Summary. The segmentation of the larger 2009 Measure A Projects was developed based upon logical break points and a cursory traffic analysis. However, even if the larger projects would be constructed in segments due to funding constraints, it would still be practical to develop an environmental document which addresses the full length of each project. The Commission would then only be required to update a completed environmental document at such time as the next segment could be funded. Scope Also, the project scope, outlined on the ballot, in most cases only specified that an additional lane be added. The ballot did not specify if the additional lane would be a HOV lane or a Mixed Flow (MF) lane. For freeway facilities, if there is not an existing HOV lane, and the additional lane takes the facility from 2 lanes to three lanes in a given direction, then the additional lane will be an HOV lane. If the freeway facility already has an HOV lane then the additional lane will be a mixed flow lane. On non -freeway (conventional highway) facilities, all new lanes will be assumed to be mixed flow lanes. Staff recommends that RCTC approve these project descriptions, segmentation and scoping changes, as outlined on Attachment 2, at this time in order that the revised improvements are considered in the traffic model and cost -benefit analysis that are to be performed for the 2009 Measure A program of projects. Staff will monitor the inclusion of this additional work to determine if it negatively impacts the project in the cost benefit analysis by dropping the project down the list. If this occurs, the additional work will be either eliminated from further consideration or considered as a later stage of work. • • " " " 2) Transportation Model Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) was included in the Bechtel Amendment, as a Sub - Consultant, to develop a detailed transportation model that can be used to evaluate the benefits of the various highway improvements listed in the 2009 Measure A program of projects. PB has also been retained by the Commission to develop a transportation model that can be used to evaluate the potential toll activity for various projects within Western Riverside County. In order to have a common model that would serve both needs, PB recommended the use of the OCTAM model after it is enhanced to more accurately reflect the proposed 2015 Baseline conditions of Western Riverside County. The OCTAM model has previously been used as the basis for development of the SR 91 Toll and Revenue Study prior to OCTA's purchase of the facility and OCTAM was used to develop traffic forecasts for the Riverside County to Orange County Major Investment Study. The attached PB letter, dated May 9, 2006, gives an overview of the Technical Approach for the 2009 Measure A Traffic Analysis. Also included in the model will be updated SCAG demographic data throughout the modeling area. After the traffic model is developed, it will be calibrated and validated prior to performing future model runs. The model then can be used for the 2009 Measure traffic analysis. 3) 2015 Baseline Network PB's approach is to enhance the OCTAM model to include the Riverside County Freeway, Inter -State and major arterial highway systems that would be operational in 2015.. Attached is a copy of the methodology of development for the 2015 Highway Baseline network (see Attachment 3) and the resulting 2015 Highway Baseline Network (see Attachment 4). In summary, only significant regional projects that are either constructed or under construction today are recommended to be included into the 2015 Baseline mode. 4) Quantitative Benefit Measures The 2009 Measure A Projects will each be modeled separately and the model results compared against the 2015 baseline model results for the measures of effectiveness that are outlined on the attached PB letter, dated May 9, 2006 (see Attachment 5). The benefit measures are consistent with those included in various other studies including the Riverside County to Orange County Major Investment Study and include; " Facility Number of Trips Served -Average Daily Traffic (ADT) " Facility Daily Level of Service (LOS) " Travel Time Savings " Vehicle Miles Traveled Savings " Distance Savings per Vehicle " Vehicle Hours Traveled " Value of Time Savings ($) " Value of Distance Savings ($) " Energy Consumption Savings " Air Pollutant Savings " Accident Reduction These results will be used to develop a cost -benefit ratio for each of the 2009 Measure Projects and project segments after the delivery costs for each project have been updated and base lined to a common year of value. 5) Qualitative Benefit Measures In addition to the cost benefit ratios, the projects will be further compared using a list of qualitative measures. These measures will be used to attempt to assess issues that are not easy to provide a quantitative benefit. The qualitative measures will look at factors such as: " Opportunistic Timing " Environmental Challenges " Need to Protect Right -of -Way " External funding available that is project specific " Time required to get the project ready to advertise " Safety issues not addressed in the cost benefit analysis The details of the proposed qualitative evaluation matrix are included in Attachment 6. The recommended qualitative evaluation criteria in combination with the quantitative cost benefit measures will be used to develop a recommended prioritization matrix for the 2009 Measure Projects. 'After this matrix is prepared for the suite of projects, it will be brought back to the Committee for review and approval prior to finalizing the priority list of projects, which when combined with the overall funding forecast, will be the basis for the 2009 Measure A 10-Year Delivew Plan. " " A summary schedule of the task items that will be required to complete the 10- year delivery plan in conjunction with the guidance of the Ad Hoc Committee is. shown in Attachment 7. Commission and Bechtel staffs are at a point now where direction, or concurrence, is needed with the basic transportation modeling approach, project descriptions, and criteria, prior to proceeding. With this agenda item, staff is requesting that the Private Finance/Delivery Plan Ad Hoc Committee approve the actions as listed above. Financial Information No Budget Action is required for this item. Attachments: 1) 2009 Measure A Western County Highway Improvement Map 2) 2009 Measure A Western County Highway Project List 3) 2015 Baseline Network Development Methodology and Sources 4) 2015 Baseline Network  consolidated list of projects to be included 5) May 9, 2006 Letter from PB regarding Technical Approach for 2009 Measure A Traffic Analysis 6) 2009 Measure A Qualitative Evaluation Criteria 7) Summary Schedule for Delivery of the 2009 Measure A Ten Year Delivery Plan MO-90 suoppio0 meN • swawenadw! Aem461H ele18 • seyuno0 e6uelo pue OPISJOA I Ile AK 410P11100 ANON 081 el sepun00 !W a8 ue ou ew S Poe aplamme ueemleq Jopw00 ANON ! 081 0 SL-I pue 6L aS ueem6x1 uopumo isem ise3 maN AemLped Alunco-pm au!' qunoo den Iles pue •08 UodmeN ueemiey lopwo0 6gen uepm 0 a AeAN461y u&Neel 0/ sue! awywp rrxe 83 pptl I luewenwdwi a6ueLpialul welat • (3) • duel 6uPeAlo Tony 83 PPtlel uopelp pee euel L PPtl uope4ONewe' LPPtl 0 uopeyp pea sauel d ppy 6 uop eg pea auel l PPV ' 9 0 akeymalul anmdwl ® • iseM 16 kJ of 4UoN S l-I uoloeuuo0 meN PIN 9 aco wpm) pea aue! L PPtl sluawanadwi pasodoad amseaW alnoa oafoid 3QISN3AI8 oxi¢.Xxaaa x apueul �# }uawyaeuv dew uoneooi wawenoadwi iteivkLAH kluno0 episaanw wake/ d aanseew 600Z " 2009 Measure A Western Riversidnty Highway Improvement Projects Attac nt #2 " 1 of 3 1. Western Riverside County State Highway Improvements Project Route Limits Ballot Specified Project Total Length (Miles) Ballot Est. Cost Seg Segment Limits Seg Length (Miles) Existing Facility Proposed Improvement 1 91 Orange/Riverside Cnty Line to Pierce Add 1 lane each direction 10.9 $161 1.1 Orange/Riv Cnty Line to Serfas Club 3.1 2 HOV and 4 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 MF lane each direction 1.2 Serfas Club Dr to 15/91 IC 4.1 1 HOV and 4 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 MF lane each direction 1.3 15/91 IC to Pierce St 3.7 1 HOV and 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 MF lane each direction 2 15 & 91 15/91 Interchange New Connector 1-15 North to SR 91 West 1 $243 2a 1.0 Freeway to Freeway Connectors for MF Lanes Only Add New HOV Connector 1-15 North to SR 91 West, or 2b Main St to 15/91 IC 1.0 1 HOV and 4 MF Lanes ea Dir Add C-D System each direction 3 71 & 91 71/91 Interchange Improve Interchange 1 $26 3 1.0 At -Grade Connectors Realign existing East to North Loop -Connector 4 71 71/91 IC to San Bernardino Cnty Line Add 1 lane ea dir 2.6 $68 4 2.6 2 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 lane each direction 5 215 60/91/215 IC to San Bernardino Cnty Line Add 2 lanes ea dir 2.1 $231 5.a 2.1 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV and 1 MF lane each direction, or 5.b 60/91/215 /C 1.0 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV and 1 MF lane each direction and Add one Direct Connector; EB SR 60 to NB /-215 6 215 Eucalyptus .Ave to 15/215 IC Add 1 lane ea dir 28.5 $210 6.1a Eucalyptus Ave, Riv to Nuevo Rd, Perris 9.5 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction with no connection to East Junction 60/215 IC, or 6.1b Box Springs Rd to Nuevo Rd. 10.7 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction with a connection to East Junction 60/215/ IC 6,2 Nuevo Rd, Perris to Scott Rd, Menifee 12.4 2 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction 6.3 Scott Rd, Menifee to 15/215 IC 6.6 2 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction Legend .1, .2, .3 Denotes Project Segmentafon a, b, c Denotes Alternative Project - niyi i vwuNai icy v ci iwic MF = Mixed Flow XB = Direction Bound 2009 Measure A Western Riverside County Highway Improvement Projects Attachment #2 2 of 3 Project Route Limits Ballot Specified Project Total Length (Miles) Ballot Est. Cost Seg Segment Limits Seg Length (Miles) Existing Facility Proposed Improvement 7 15 15/60 IC to San Diego Cnty Line Add 1 lane ea dir 52.3 $359 7.1 SanBernardino Cnty Ln to 15/91 IC 10.7 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction 7.2 15/91 IC to Indian Truck Trail 11.2 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction 7.3 Indian Truck Trail to Bundy Canyon Rd 14.1 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction 7.4 Bundy Canyon Rd to 15/215 IC 7.6 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction 7.5 15/215 IC to San Diego Cnty Line 8.7 4 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction 8 10 San Bernardino Cnty Line to 10/60 IC Add EB truck climbing lane 6.7 $75 8a 6.7 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add EB truck climbing lane, or 8b Add 1 lane each direction 9 10 & 60 10/60 Interchange Improve Interchange 1.0 $129 9 1.0 Add Direct Connector; WB 1-10 to WB SR 60, EB 1-10 to WB SR 60, Truck Bypass EB 1-10 & EB SR 60 10 60 Badlands Area, East of Moreno Valley Add truck climb lane 10.1 $26 10a Redlands Blvd, Moreno Valley to 10/60 IC 10.1 2 MF Lanes ea Dir Add EB truck climbing lane, or 10b Add 1 lane each direction 11 79 Ramona Exp to Domenigoni Parkway Realign Highway 12.6 $132 11.1 Gilman Springs Road to Florida Ave (SR 74) 7.6 1 MF Lane ea Dir Realign and widen to 2 MF lanes each direction 11.2 Florida Ave (SR 74) to old Newport Rd 5.0 1 MF Lane ea Dir Realign and widen to 2 MF lanes each direction Lege* .1, .2 enotes Project Segmentation a, b, c enotes Alternative Project HOV = High Occupan Vehicle MF = d Flow XB = Dire Bound " 2009 Measure A Western Riversidunty Highway Improvement Projects Attaairent #2 " 3of3 Project Route Limits Ballot Specified Project Total Length (Miles) Ballot Est. Cost Seg Segment Limits Seg Length (Miles) Existing Facility Proposed Improvement 2. Western Riverside County New CETAP Transportation Corridors 12 Winchester to Temecula On 215 near Perris to Temecula North/South Intl -a- County Corridor 21.1 $550 12.1 a Newport Rd, Menifee to 15/215 IC 12.4 2 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 2 MF lane each direction or 12.1b D Street to 15/215 IC 19.0 2 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 2 MF lane each direction 12.3 15/215 IC to Riverside/San Diego Cnty Line 8.7 4 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 2 MF lane each direction 13 Mid County Parkway Ramona Expwy - SR 79 to 1-215 Cajalco Rd - 1-215 to 1-15 East/West Infra- County Corridor 34.0 $3,000 13.1 Ramona Expressway to Antelope Ave 11.0 1 MF Lane ea Dir Realign and widen to 2 MF lanes each direction 13.2 Antelope Ave to 1-215 5.0 1 MF Lane ea Dir Realign and widen to 2 MF lanes each direction 13.3 1-215 to 1-15 18.0 1 MF Lane ea Dir Realign and widen to 2 MF lanes each direction 14 Moreno Valley to Redlands or Loma Linda To be Determined North/South Inter- County Corridor 10.0 14 10.0 Construct new Corridor with 2 MF lanes each direction 15 Riverside to Orange Cnty To be Determined East/West Inter- County Corridor $9,500 15a Strategic Alt #1 To be Determined $11,500 15b Strategic Alt #2 To be Determined $12,500 15c Strategic Alt #3 To be Determined Legend .1, .2, .3 Denotes Project Segmentation a, b, c Denotes Alternative Project HOV = High Occupancy Vehicle MF = Mixed Flow XB = Direction Bound Attachment #3 2015 BASELINE NETWORK DEVELOPMENT METHODOLOGY AND SOURCES The table of roadway improvements that is intended to be the basis of the 2015 baseline circulation system network was compiled from four primary sources. The documents identify projects that are funded and expected to be constructed by 2015. The documents include: 1. DRAFT RCTC Federal TIP: Riverside County Transportation Commission's (ROTC) 2006 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) (Fiscal Year 2006/2007 - 2011/2012) - Local Highway Projects and State Highway Projects (Draft printed on May 23, 2006) 2. City and County Measure "A" CIPs: Local Streets and Roads Measure "A" Capital Improvement Programs (CIP) as submitted to RCTC in July through December 2005 by cities in Riverside County and the County: Banning, Beaumont, Blythe (not included in network), Calimesa, Corona, Desert Hot Springs, Hemet, Indian Wells, Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, Moreno Valley, Norco, Palm Desert, Palm Springs, Perris, Rancho Mirage, City of Riverside, Riverside County, San Jacinto, and Temecula. CIP's for Canyon Lake and March JPA were not available. 3. WRCOG TUMF Zonal TIPS: Westem Riverside Council of Governments' (WRCOG) Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Five Year Transportation Improvement Programs for the Northwest, Southwest, Central, Pass, and Hemet -San Jacinto Zones. All were adopted in 2005, except for the Southwest Zone's TIP which was adopted in December 2004. 4. SCAG 2004 RTP Plan Proiects: Southem California Association of Governments' (SCAG) 2004 Regional Transportation Plan's (RTP) set of "Plan" projects was used as a cross-check. Projects listed in this document with a completion year of 2015 or earlier, and not listed in any of the previous documents, were included in the list. These sources represented the best available at the time the baseline network definition was compiled in May, 2006. However, it should be noted that these types of short-term documents are constantly being updated. In particular, WRCOG is currently in the process of updating the zonal TIPS (Item #3). This update was not yet suitable for release at the time this list was compiled, and thus these updates are not included in the list. The RCTC TIP (Item #1) was also being updated at the time this list was compiled. Although still in draft form, the updated RCTC TIP was suitable for release and was included in the compiled list, recognizing that it was still in draft form at the time and subject to change. Not all projects contained in the above documents were included in the table of 2015 baseline improvements: • Only projects in the construction phase were included. Projects in the planning, engineering, or right-of-way acquisition phases were not included. Projects whose phase was not specified were included. • Only projects that would have a significant effect on a regional modeling network were included. This included projects which would increase the number of through lanes on a roadway segment, add a new roadway segment, add a new interchange, or add new • • Attachment #3 interchange ramps. Grade separations, interchange modifications, ramp widenings, signal modifications, right or left tum lane additions, and median/shoulder enhancements, for example, were not included. • Only projects that were sufficiently defined for modeling purposes were included. For exatnple, a project listed as "Main Street Improvements" would not have been included due to the lack of detail provided. L . Nluv9aNAx.HW3•8018 W910Zau11900 6a4ae11Y'�90'HM0391000H PV 90 ei 30081933FIa0VW31d0109194 Y ZONId1.S S11133131 tOd161 0 IDS 108089Md1131310N1 SI•I lV SdWva/OI ON IV13313V 3NV1 110n31SN00 6 S3330 v131aanW Oa vsavoavW SSINA9 N331S3M 6C3S_ Y111030131 d111Y33O319002 0108 6633 SI SIHI Al 3anS ION 13001aa00 SStldAH 6/3303M 101a Vdl M3330 YP713anW' 3300 30013E 3N Y16 M3N 1On315NOJ t N3330 v1313anW 3300300120 SSIOA9 N33153M 683S v1noawai S1v1a31av I0d W OVOS S3NY19019 WOMN301M 9 O3 VIVd Sk1 I3oNY13NO016Lse v1no3W31 S191831331 60dI8 OVOS 33NVI I OI L W033 N301M / 1S HU OMB VNOWY3 H130N 600 01NI0Vf NYS SIV13313Y 10d13 OVDS 53NY1 I012 Woad N301M 6 03 HDNtl810NY0O 03 SONIadS NvvvntO 6610 O1NIDvf NVS 511933031 9008 0103 S3NY1 IT 01Z Woad N301M 6 AMNd IN0011430100 Oa NOSdWOHI 6C3S • AINn00301133013 Slo3road NY1d- 90813 OVOS 153Nv1610na15N001 AYMHOIH Nonvda Y AMNd INOOIN30100 AMdX3 VNOWY3 6C3S Amn0030Sa3Ala S1Y13313v 604301/0S - S36111901 Z 11031 N301M 9 MO 380HS3NY1 - Ali (3AVa3n100Po0301013A13)1835 330N1S133111e1 1103118Y 1080 01/05 13NY19°IL Woad N301M 9 3A0 011130 3O 330HS3SY1 130301SMAN1PUS 3310N151333Y1 d1111633035 90080103 S3NV3901 811031 N301M 9 1013901160 3311100 (3AV1101Ni016Las 3aON15133Xv1 S110318160d130 VOS S36110 901110I0111 N301M 9 1333S3NONIM 668S 03 SM3H11101 ILIA AINOOO 303336113 n 9133139 v08112) O YDS S36110 9016 Woad N301M 9 030YNY6113 511 68311 AP3noo 301133N0 SIJ3f03d NV1d• 60dld OVOS SN0110331061109 S3N VI Aavn9XOv OOY S3NYI XOV IS NI1010/31VM TO 010935/111 on IW YO 093S d11113303d 900E DION 33NVI AOH L COY AOHZ 0AI9 SONV1033 SILT 0931 D103 dll1va3031 9008 01D3 '310'93 NI Nl 1 /W 1 ONY AOH t 009 1101 Z 9 AOH L Sn1d on AVM A3TIVA SH 093E SNYanvo duiva303d 900Z 010a S3NY19 Olt W03d N301M 9 3000813NNtlH0 NOANY01Ya03 H1Y0153M 30 NOANVOIY1Yd 1993/1113S APO 1V303H1VJ S11/I33131/60d13 OYOS S3N151601890103111301M 6 13NNVHJ 3300 3OOI311 10N1 80 NAD 1va03Hltlo SPWn AIM Al/0MM SO NOANY0 1011Vd 3/1113S APO 1V3103H11/0 S1Y13313V 60d121DYDS S3NVI 9011 101033 N301M 9 SPWIId➢0 A1a31Sv3 31VONOS 50/M 1d 008 30 NOANv0 vulva ail ttas Aso nva03H1V0 du lva303d 900801031 S3N109016 01033 N301M 9 uSWVOV LS NOSa3dd3f IllaS Y1NInor d1111/33036 900Z 0103 S3111/19016 01081N301M 9 IS NOSa3llar IS NOSIOVW - 1113S OIONI dl11 V33031900Z 0103 111161I1V31110E1 OI IL'ZlWd 093SI SNl 210103NN001031110 AOH Z 301003d 01 for 10n315N0033111Jf 5181/0935 OILS AY01 093S 4 IOa SONIUS X09 On 013AV SO1dAlvon3 0/NI SILT NO S30103NN00 AOH M3N 530L03NN00 AOH • N0110Nnf 09aSlStLi 0103 S1tl1331av 60dla 0903 SIN 1Y 01 01 M3N 313AV SI113l9tZi Slaaad S103r03d NYld- IOd13 OVOS 1000696 V31 NO1103310 H0V33N1/1AOH I ONY dW I MP' dW Z4 AOH L SnId 3NIl A1N000 ONI03V11339 N VS 10f SI 81/1635/0935 5181 511V/13031900L 0108 ' 33NVI AOH Z OOV AOH LSnia NOI30611- 163S/SIZ-I/09a5 SO0➢a33013 Sal 0103 dll l Va303190080103 11182IEE1Y31 N13WI1O 100313S 4'XOY'AOH 0011008d/1101/3NIINIVIN 0110010Ni'SN711 019 N301M- IlldS 518/09 OI LOf SI L/16/09 101031- (Odd AO3d011300 9121 N3 'MIS/ I635l61L1 NO H P1dS WaS/SIZ-I N0110Nnf 093S/16815/9IL1 SILT SNYa11V0 50 v 3305 V3Y1 N3106P0 1530110 iv DI NON DI M3N 010AN:lane NVA/S11 301533N3 S1V13313YI0d13 OVOS • 01 IS 3N103110039 OlS111VSdWVa/OI IJn31SNOO OI M3N OI IS 3AI10/511 330N15133N01 dll 3NO2 MN 10101 INOI1Dn31SNOD• 3011YH0331NI S1-1/9110N0YW) aOOlaa00 1/110N0101 DI NON DI 3AY V110NOVW/SIi V610300 dll 3NO2 MN Axn14 dI0 V 33011301 0080N 30NYH0331NI 511 AVMN3Vd A311YA N3001H 50 N01131d1100 0IM3N 01 AMMd A311YA N300114/511 OJaON d111 v33035900E 0103 08 3111A3NIM 013AV a3NW VH Woad Oa ONI103NN00 IS 104311/03NY1t 100315NOJ ONv 093310f 0153NY1 XnY BN8 SOId Sd10113 4 1SN191 01 M3N 10n31SN00. 1S YN31v0/51-1 lY 00 AIN MN NI 01 M3N 0111 VN311(0/511 A1Nnoo 30I533A1 d113NOZ MN dPInl 1NOI1Jf1a1SNOJ130NYH0331NI5H/ONv311Y011INVO DI M3N DI ON V3111/0111N V0/911 A1NOOo aana3Na du-IVa303A 900� 0103 ISNI EI dWYa1f0 ea cc v 415N1 LI awva NO 9M 00V 1d0/13 01361 0103 N01310NIS/011 YS3101I1160 5103f03d Nvld bOd13 OYJ59 d111V3303d 900E J1O3 •4 SNl 6 Ol Z 83Navn 6130IM/NOI1Y3a 133d03000 3001390N10010NI 33N3 VA 01330HO HVNI0W031 WPM 01 3AY 110180d Ian V3 E1 NI M3N ion a1SNOO 3AY 1101110d/01-11V OI M3N 013AV V10130d/011 133130 W1Vd Lk 113303190080108 SN1 Xnv 501/9300v'I111 Li Sd1Nva d001A81N3 aM/03 NON 001'SdWva N301M 4 SN19 Ol Z 01031 OI N301M/1JnaI5NOJ3a :ol AMMd A311 VA MVO/01-11V SdWva M3N OI AMNd A311YA 3V0/011 1NOWOv30 dI1118303190020108 SNl SOIL 8031011I013S N301M SN1501E 11Y3I 31101LN/1301M 3N31 XOV 1DnaISNOO'ISN1Z-SdWY3'SNl 61 DI AMNd 00N03011 M3N 100a1SN00- 1IV313H0Vd V 0/3 V 1V 011 NO DI M3N 01AMNd 00N03010I/OH - SNY2111V0 Sl VIa313V 606118 OVOS 4 dll 1Va303d 90Z 0103 OATH OIONI ONOA39.009 XOaddY Ol LY 30113AV 11031 S3NY1 6OIL IS NOSIOYW N301M ONY tea V1 LI 3611118 4 01 3NY1 V M3N 10n813N00 - IS NO1103111V 011 NO OIONI NI DIM3N 011S NOSIOVvi/OH OMNI dil l V33031 90Z 0103 SdWva 4 DI Oa NOW V3 APOOW 4 OI ONOWYIO M361 VIM IS3NVI 91 NOISN3183 80 3d0H 309100310103 -0103 NOW V3 10111/3 WI 6'0 011S3M INN S' 1 11031 30V3I01OHON V3 21Y3N Ol-I NO DI M3N 01 a0 3d0H 308/011 SNY211l10 EMTOad NYld- Meld DUOS DM3N10n31SNOO OI M3N 01 OS 30N3AY/OH V113HJY00 SlO3fOad Nvtd • IOdla OV0S4 dI11V33033900L J1Oa IlYPo31IV IV SN12/ Sd1NVa Pa 1 (Nl I)SdWYa A31N3'1'310 HOY3 SN1001 AMU NO1HOnVNOW N191Jn3I5NOJ v33S APO SO10Vo O/M WM 9'I1 4 a3 NO1110 0/3 VOI 031011 NO JI M161 OIAMMd Noiaon MOW /011 V113HOVOD 1103 road N Yld• I0d13 OVOS 53NV1 A3VI1IX0V 1Jna15N00 S3NYI XOv - (E6a1(era] O/130 000M10NYS 0/3 DV 00S OS 3N11A1110000 YS31111V0 OH VS3111110 309110S S310N NOI14110130103f Oad S3NYI Mil Ol W031 01(03 NOI10105130f 6R10au1HOc17tl 1' NNOM1NN 91.4113SV9 SIOZ 3H1 NI NOIS0I0NI NOd NOI1VN301SNOD NOd S103f0114 JO 1SI1 031V0110SNOO AOn1S NOI1V2111NOINd V 3NOSV3W =a Z 1119MIeNAe19H V9mse9W 5103991999H t9lpeaVww00'11M01010OH SY 909Z-9019199a ep09MAueld 0139198$ Y emseeW 600Z1s?I1d116 S1V18318V/0d180YDS 5311V7/ 01Z W081 N301M 6 3AV HOS 3AY OILS 133211.9 HULA NVA V713HOYOD 1111Y33033 900Z DIOS 131116/ SL"XOadM S3NV1 b 01Z W081 N301M t 011 9845 Oa NO1110 Y113H0Y00 51HIa318 Y 60d180 YDS S3N Yl t 01Z Woad N301M 9 NOSIaa YH IS N38119 NYA 10'M S311WSCO OA19180da1V/953AY V113140V00 S1YIa318 V t0418 O VDS S3NV1 t 012 Woad N301M b 199010) NOSIaaVH N3a09 NVA 653AV V113610V00 S1VI831aV 9Odla OvOS 5311Y1 t OIL WOW N301M 9 IIISS 15 213111 /S 3AV 1/113HOv00 51VI431811 PULS O YDS 53NY1601Z WONA N301M t 133813831.11 193010) NO312001 tS 3AY - Y113H0v00 SlYI21314V 9Od la OVDS 33N V1 101 E 1(1081N301M 9 MSS MIS L53AY Y113140900 51V1831SY 00d18 DYDS 53N VI 6 01 £ WOal N301M Y 'AO4d1611 N0110352131NI/M 998S 101210381 LS 3AY Y113H0V00 SIV183121Y tOdda 01/0S 53N Y1 t OIL 1/1083 N301M 0 11185 N3an9 NVA OS 3AY Y113H31100 519I8314Y 90114 DVJS 3001893NY1117n815N07 t 213A18 831vM311HM a3A0 30018E 10NI 93aS M3N alas OS 3AY tl113HJVOJ S191831219 PO4110903 53NY1 V 01 L 16108d N301M 9 SO INIVd 31V0 Oa M31A NIVWOOW Oa a3NHVA ADO 1Y803H190 dl11tl8303d 900E 010a 53NY19019 Woad N30IM 9 YO 0l3 Aos'll SllWIl ADO 15Y3 nIYA SO WiVd 3lV0 Oa NDWYa ADO1V803H1VJ S1v18318Y Kalil OVOS Mr 9019 1(4081 N301M 9 Oa MOO Oa NOANVO 000MN01100 � 08 NAD OY0411Y8 3NVl NOANVO S1VI83121tl 60d121DYOS V d113NOZ MS JINN MITI b OIL WO8d N301M t 0211210dM3N NAO OVOa11Ya Oa 21300 3NVI NOANVO dI11Y83033900i J10a (S3NV19)NOISN31%38O 3d0H 808 9 DIOS NOWv8J011101SYd INNCO OI Oa NOWYB/OH 10 13361 YINSL 803d0H 909 SNY2111110 519Ia31811 60d18 0b'05 53NY190/ L'NOS 1 N301M t 0851113808 3AY1101100 08 N01310NIS V5316(11V0 51V18313 V 00d1210YO5 1YI83D1V 3N Y1 t 100815NO3 t 3AV DON07 IS INVA83 Oa N01310NIS V53161I1Y0 31901318Y 10d180VDS S361111 t OIL W083 N301M 9 Oa NAO 03101N11 NYS ()AA A311VA A883H0 a0 NMY11213530 I/IA/I YO 51Y18318V 00191 OYDS S3NY10OIL W081 N301M b IS INVAae OH Oa 3NI1),Nnoo YS31/111V0 di11Va303d 900L 0108 53NV1 L Ol I Oa 36111 A111000 N301M L Y531(1I190 OH Oa 3Nn A1N000 YS31N111/0 D11983031900L 0108 IOa 3Nn A1111100 WOW HMOS A51 X08ddY) SNl B 01Z 0A181/S3/NINO 9S N301M £ H11105 051 OS 3Nn A1N000 93 OAla VS31A111V3. Y531641190 SIV2131aV 00d161 0Y05 S3NYI 601E 17081N301M t Oa N0191ONI5 083NI1 A114000 1S 1NYA89 YS3WI1V0 S1VI83111V 90d121 0 YOS 1V18318V 3NYI 010112113N00 t IS/SI SO NMVI183530 OA1902132110d 1N0161nV3S S1Y183111160dla OVOS - SZINYI I,O1LW081 MGM t Oa 31610H ONVIHOIH 3AV SOW116150NY1HOIH IS NOSIIM ONINNV9 dI11Y8303d 900E 0173 S3NV79OIL W081 N301M 9 1S N10014I1 88d010 H1ZWS 3AV 135N05 OIINNY9 S1YI8317110 YOdla DV7S NOI1035 SIHINIHIIM 510n Sae MINI YOIL 161081 N301M - t 1S N100NI1 15 A3SWV21 3AY135NfK ONINNY9 S1VI4318V 906118 OVOS 9 d113NOZ SSYd 1161111 S3NY1L 010 Woad MOM L 3AV 13SN05 Oa MOH 0NY1H01H OA1953NY1 NM ONINNY3 S1YIa3DYV 'Oda) 0v057dI111/83031 900E OlOa A YMVH1VH 10180HS ant)01-1 Ol 33NYIL A1N0 10NI S1VIa31219 tOdlil OVOS n31I1/191L XOaddVI NOISN31X311381S 3N VI 9 600211SNO0 6 Oa S013Id IS AYMYHIYN IS A3SWY8 ONINNV9 (1ll l tl213033900Z 0138 3AV VN V10NI 1Y ISM L) dWYSN083 M3N 00Y dWYSNO 93 M3N D10A19 N331119 NYA/ 1685 3015a3A18 510310ad N Yid- MOO DYDS 3NVIA8Y111X0Y 00V 3NVI/VW 3NI1A1N0O73ONY8O ILSS 8M 168S YN080D 510310ad NYld• 90d180.03 Ian Ol SON31%3 83H10NY'83N8 N3380IV S31040 HOIHM 93 3NV1 AaV111X0tl OOY 3NY1 Xnv ILaS 3Nn A/N00030NYa0 9316aS YN0800 510310a d NVld- 10(11210905 NO1103810 1-10V33NY) dW 100Y dW L Slid 3NI1 A16100030NYa0 1533831d 16HS d111V/1303i 900L 0106 1VSIN30-610SIOYWISNIXOV'SNIAOH 00V 019IZ/0901SWY(31(- 1685 NO 5311tl1 MY V AOH L Snld ands 098S/5161 SWVOY 168S 01321 all 1 V83031900Z 01021 IOCCHO 1V3) 80 31110 SV1a33 Ol I L/ I6a51Df 1N081 3N Y1 AS 9I11XLI V 83 301A0ad 3NY1 MY 00Y SO 9110 SV1b3S 1L85 1685 SNVa11YJ d111983033900Z 0108 N$30NNH7831N1 HOn08H1 ION)33N V1An V 3A1110n2115N00- ISN011V00193 L ONY 9M El SN01180d'133a15 AHVW 013AV VIIONOYW W0811645 NO 301383A18 NI S3N VI Xnv S (1OV IS ASVW 3AV 19110NOVW I68S SN`/811V0 1111Ya303J 900Z 01021 118L00'0Ndd 10930 193) 3AV H11301210 51110110 18333CX0861dY WON 13N V11) SdW VS ONY 1361Y1 NY1031A1 16 SIO HOY) 361191 I '00 3N V1 9) 01 M3N 13021156100 795 3AVI ON9180daI V(599HS 1Y 0M3N 011953AVI0Ala I80d8I9/5938S SN1.1111V0 S103110ad NYld- PU1210935 30141/H0831Ni M3N1D081SNOD'V0J31N 8Y3N 01M9N 01118/E9'0131 I993AY) 561881tl S938S 11713H3Y00 31031021d 111f1d• 90dla 0 VOS 360NYH783I61IM3N lona ISNOD 0IM3N VHS 0/313 2131A1 399as 0/M IS 1131A1 S988S V113HOY00 310310a d NvId- tOdltl 0VOS 30NYH7a3INI M3N10na3SNOD 01 M3N NlOd 0 N V Z30 NYN21314 VI NM19 L53AY lY S99715 Y113HOY03 S/03f0a d N Vld- 90d180VOS 30NYHJa31NI 10NalSNO0 JI M3N OF 3AY lY S938S 9113HDY07 smroad NY1d• 1911180 V05 10NOWV10-0938dS) 30NYHOMIN1 M3N1011aISNO0 01M3N 380W111173ON V80 N6619 953AW0A19180d811( 1Y SMIS V113H3Y03 d113NOZ MS dWnl 153Ntl1601 M3N10NIN30IMI 6La5 01511 ' IA vMNSYd A3lIYA HON381) SMA9 11831S3M 6[eS 9 6L8S SH IAMNd A311 VA NONNI) Wilda Na3133M 6019 vl3laanw 31VI2131219 bOd180VOS IOLOL9k(1Ill1.310N) 53Nv1 V 01Z WOW N301M b Oa V11211108v46/ 16685I0a 8323610NIM SSVdA9 Na31S3M 6[95 V1n331131 dI111)(83031 900E 7178 6L85519111 i138nS lON 11351611d1 30018300Siv1 AB N83153M 3NV16 6 0/1tlI6180311V0OHJNY21 6183 SStldA8 Na31S3M 6683 VIn03W31 51VI2131SV 00(11a OVOS 1610394d118'310N) 1V18318Y angel 013(181SNOD 9 1S 1NOad NM01010 08 YIN80111V0 OHONVa SSYdA9 Na351M 6L8S V10731131 d113NOZ MS dW01 1S3NV1 6 01 M3N) N33a0 V131aa0W a3 AO 3001219 SS V1A9 N831S3M 6185 r 300189 N3380 V1318a0W SSYdA9 N83133M 6[8S V1(1031731 S1 V1831av tOdla OYDS 102039801a 310NI1V18318Y 3N Yl t 10n81SNOD t 08 YIN80111Y0 OHDNY8 33380 V13121anIN SSYdA9 Na31S3M 6L8S 16.10D31,131 308005 S310N NOI1d13OS30103(Oad MINI IYNH Ol WON OYOS NOIIJIOs of 4# luaw400llV )1NOMIZN 3N113SV9 ROL 3H1 NI NOISf11ON1130 N0I.0111301SN00 210i - i 31VOIlOSNO0 _ �-SIDE011d Aanis NOIIVZI 38nSV3W OlOe E H'Truman stlasozo99e--N/Ladiltl'0au00 HMVIaVItrpON 0Y gp 93r901wy1 aPo96Wald aepegg V ?a11499 dll 1V3303390OL 0103 ' SN1901L On N301M/10n31SN003S:0103 NAO OVOnlYa/9111V T 6 Oa ONa a NO 1111133W4Vns MIN=0Y0311Y3 - 3aONIS133MY1 51V1a31aYr0d1a OVOS 53NY19010 WOW N301M 9 Oa NOANYO 000MN01100 Meal N01551191 Oa WO OV031N3 330N31331V1 Si Y1331av IOd13 OYOS • 33NY1P 01Z Woad N301M r IS adVd0 31NOISSIW LS ;MO 330NIS133avi S1MIa31av Podia OYOS S3NY19 OLP Woad N301M 9 Oa NOANY0 AONnE 03 NOANY0031161 111NOISSIW 330NIS133MV1 Si via 31sv P0113 OV0S 33N Yl I 013 W031 Mira r 13331S NOS331131 IS NOlONIHSVM 3AV USW 60/1110 Y1 S1W3313V POLLS OYOS 53NY1P OIL 11.10111 N301M r 1VNtl0 '33WY 11V 10NI133a1S NOSIOVW IS NOSa31d3f L93AY VINIn0 V1 S1vIa31aY POd13 OY0S S3NV1 P 013 1V031 N301M P lVNY0 YY HIM 093AV LS 3AV 13331SNOS10YW V1NI00 YVOIONI S1V13313V 6043 Otl0S S361Y1901 Z 1,1031N301M 9 300139 331YM31.IHM/M OH OaVMIS3M ll laS IS NOS331136 v1Nan0 V1/010N1 51V1313Y P03113 OYOS S3Nv16 IOnal5N00. 3anS010 dY0 Y a0%SSW 03913 . 5311W 1332115 NOSIOYW ANnoomnaN1 S1v13313tl 1,0d13 OYOS S3NY1901Z WON N30IM 9 OA/8010N1 30000M33A11Y 30 OWSVM 03a3 A1Nn00/00N1 0'021313tl/0d13 Otl0S S3Nv1 P 013 99031N301M / DAV 440E 3AY Hier IS NOS10V9 91131i0Y00/0I0NI 51993310 rOd130V05 S3NY16 o1L Woad MOM P aA18 OKRA 30 ONISVM 0381 13321IS NOSIOYW 010N1 dIl1v3303190030108 ' S3N Y1 P 01Z W03d N30IM P OA13 010111 °NOAH 609 LP 3Atl IS NOSIOtlW 010NI Sltl121313tl POLLS 0V0S S3N V1101L Woad N301M I OA19010N1 a0 ON13VM 033d LS NOS333336 gONI S13310ad N Yid• 1,0d13 OYOS 1310 140v353NY1 a AVMS53ad%3 VNOWB Y/001vfY0 9 911 3AV NOSS30NYS VNOWV/O01VfVO•dV130 a 330NI513 3MY1 /YN0300 0113993H S1YIa31a V POd Itl OVOS 53 N611 OI L WOW N301M P AMMd INOE3N39400 3AV 30YNYI3153 OLIN3213YM' 1319414 S1Ma3191V/0dIa OVOS mania 3NY1 P10O2115N000NV 31Y00133 r 3Atl NOI9MV0 Oa N3S3VM 3AV 1403131S 13191314 S1Y1331aV YOd130Y05 S3N Y1/OIL Woad N301M r 16C3513Atl tl013014 3AV NOISNHOf IS }1ViS 13194311 S1V13313 a P3d14 0YOS 53NV/ 601 Z WOa3 NEW 9 3AV NOS1315 Wad INOOIN3W00 LS 31Y15 13W311 S'IYI3313v podia 09054 d113NOZ fS•131A13H 31A1n1 S3NV1 I O1L WOO N301M Y 3AV NOS131S AMUINOOIN3W00 3AY NOSa3014YS - 131943H 51VI4313V POdla OY06 53NVl I 013 W033 N301M r 3Av Y10V0V 13AV NOS1315 av3N1 ONISSOaO as 35N9 3Atl N05a30NV5 139N314 S1VIa31aY YOdla OYOS 531,1V1901L W039 N301M 9 3AV Ntl10Nl 3911S OAIB NOS331d SONIadS IOH 183530 S1V13313Y/Od13OYOS - 33NV1P 01Z WOS3 N301M Y 03 NOWYS 30330HS HYNIO 303d011 SOO 30VNIW OHONY3/9iN000 Sltlla31tltl 40d130tl0S S3NV1POIL WOai N301M o 303NOW NOSIOVW 301Stl3 S319,4 SO 0A79 1310d111tl/993AY V19100 Y119.114100 S1V1a313VP03110VOS S3Ntl1 r 01 L N103d N301M 0 133a15303N0191 15 NOSIOVW L93AY OMNI/A1N000 S1V13313tl POLLS VMS S3NY1/01 L YVON 61301M P 133211S MOIa033 IS NnOH1Y0 LS 3AV V113610V000,1611100 S1V13313Y P0113 OYOS 53NY1 I Ol Z Woad N301M r Oa M31A NIVINOOW 30 1N1Yd 03 a3NavA 1.301V303NZVO 0.114000 Si V18313Y Podia OYOS SdNV1901Z 1,1031N301M 9 OS S3NSVA 3AY HIM 3AV M31A NIYINOOW ASO 1V303611V0/A1N11IX1 SIVIailav Podia OVOS S3NY1901 Z Woad N301M 9 34011.909 SOWYly SO1 Oa NOWtla A1Nn00 51v1831av 1.090 OVOS S3NY11, OIL WON N301M r Oa NOWva 01-1. SAY A3331NOW A1N000 S1v1831aY 60.113 OYOS S361V1901Z 61033 N301M r 933AV 09 any 13331E N0S10VW A1N1100 S1VIa3111YPOd13 OYOS S3NV1 V 01Z 91033 N301M I 3AY H1.1,1 NO1110 3AV NYIONI A1N000 SlvItl313VYOd130Y0S - S3NV19013 PION N301M P 413S 901)99+9106A9114M 03 N01110 A1N000 Si V13313 Y IOdILIOVOS - S361V1601Z Woad N30IM r 30 W1Yd 3AY NYIONI 03 NO1110 AW000 51 VIS31SY YOd130tl0i S3N V11 01Z WOSd N301M I 300139331tlN311HM ON Oa NanaAWn00 51V13310 rodla OV05 53N vl r 01 L WOa3 N301M Y NOSMOVf 30aNOW 0A19190da1V/95;AY A1Nn00 S1V13313tl 'Oda 0V0S 53NV1YO1Z W033 N301M I wane NtlA 30'9A 531I1,1 SLO 15 NCXMOtlf OA191aOdaltl/9S 3AV AW000 51V13313V 'Oda OVOS S3NVl P 01Z W031N301M 9 133313331AI ' 13331E N09SaYH 0A181110d3111953AV A1011100 51 V1a314 tl60d13 OVOS S3N V1 P 013 61033N301M r 133a15 N00111Y0 0104S 1106400d LS 3Av AINOOo 51Y133191Y /Odla Otl054 d113NOZ MN 11Al01 No11035 Y1SIA vN3n9 01 NVYJa3H53H13on10N1 ION S300 dll 3NOZ MN own S3N tl1 P 01 Z 010111N301M 9 IONva 01V115 NIVW 3AY NY16433HS IS OVOLIV3 VN0300 S1tl13313V POdla OYOS (COLOI0AI311d118 VI Sd W Va ONY 1S 31YIS 013AY NOld W00:310NI S3N VI 9 Ol P WOSI N301M 9 911 1S WIN 3AV 013VIN0 YN0300 di! 1'd3303190030103 S3N V1901P tV03d N301M 9 IS 3/tl1S 3AV NO1d1100 3AV 0I3VIN0 YN0300 dI11V3303d 90030108 SN1901 r 1S NI VW' N 9S N30IM 9 SIIK1A90'N 3001avavd Iasi BNWt9'N VN0a00 51994310 rOdla OY05 53Nvi 901 P WOW N301M 9 3AV vlioNOVW 16115 15 AMMON YN0a00 S1Yla31atl rOdla Ov05 4 d113NOZ MN MAI d113NOZ MN dWnl NI03NId30 10N 53Nvt d0 a389,InN S3N V1901 P WOW N3099 9 OA190NVa0 MS IE NIVW V190a00 SIvIa31av Emil! OY05 53N V1 r 01 L WOW N3019A r 3AV 013ViN0 0A790Nv30. IS NIVW YN0300 S1v13313Y sOdla OYOS4 3111V33033900L OIJa N011035 n VdW13 91013tl1N031113001ONl lON 5300 dlllva3031900Z 0108 53NV19010 W033 N301M 9 1S H19 3AV 001 V1N0 _ 3Atl.Y110NOtlW VN0300 Si Y13313v 90413 Ov0S S3N V19010%Now N301M 9 as 35N9 15149 3Atl v110N0tl1,9 YN0a00 dH Iva3033 9003 0103 S3N V1903E W033N301M 9 03 HONV3Z3noNIWoo SdWYa NO/3303013197/I03 I6a3 Oa Saha N3330 VN0300 SIVIS3I11Y IOd13 OYOS 4 d111 tl33031900Z 0103 IS3119/ S'L MOaddv10 YOa 3Nvlr- NOISN3193 A1a3153M r 30NY40035vd 3AY MOM AM4d 1lIH1001 YN0300 dll1Va3033900L OlOa 53Nv19OIL N301M 9 Oa NOANVO030303E NOANY01WJS3W31. 03001YfY0 tlN0S00 S1YIa3Uly*Odin OVOS 53N VI 0 Ol E W031 N301M / I210d31VMS 3AV 3AY H1I9 13331S N3an8 NYA AiNn00/Y113190V00 3=105 5310N NOIldN0S30103fOtld 53NY11VNN Ol WO9d Ov03 NOIl0H161tl9f bd1 woulo011V MOM13N 3N113SV9 9LOZ 3141 NI NOIS(110NI 110d NOI1Va301SN00110A 51031'ONd AO 411 a31'da110SN00 Aan1S NOILVZ1111101Nd V 38n5V3W 010A b 310491NAxyH V19199117 310Zaufias99 19N01aYww00'HMNauldpoId 0Y90 92 901Swa3 399964913w 0111e1939 tl tunsdan 800219®11499 011tl3303i 9001 D1Ja 3O0R'93Ntl1/M3N V/M ONISSOaD 331VM .MOi 3NV1 L ONIISIX3 30Y1433113NN VHO 3`0V NIVaO HMOS NAO SVN33Y t 300I39 13NNtlH7 3DYNIY80 HMOS NAO SYN3HY 30 NOANV0 W1Vd'3 SONI3dSWlYd 31493313Y rOdld OVDS - 3001393N VI t lOna1SN00 r 11va1133003 03330 SY3310NY 30 NOANYO WIYd'S SONIadS WlY3 51 v13313 Y 90d13 OYDS S3NY1901 a 1^/031 N301M 9 AVM 3S13N0S aO NADW1Vd Oa NOWV3 SONIUS Wltld d111V33033900Z 0103 9 dID V 3211139319 509113dS IN1Vd S3NVI30 N 3NN30 ION S300 810 V 381159314/ SON1845 w1Vd 1311141 I X03ddY) S3NY19 Olt N301M 9 AVM 3513NOS 0131013 Oa NOWV8 SONIadS WIYd dlllY113031900Z D1D3 S3NV1901Z N301M 9 01-I1V 0313N3V0 3001393214111 30 NOANVO WWI SONI3d31411Vd S1 YI3313V bOd13 OVOS (S3NY1 r 01 Z 97033 SN301M COZI I OA13ad113 010NI 53NY19 019 WOai N301M 9 Oa M31AWVal - 30013933410 30 NOANYO NVIONI/3Atl NVIONI SON1345 W1Vd dI119413031900L 0/03 S3NY1 901 Z DO N301M 9 3AV 13918Y0 3AV HIM 3AY NYIONI SON1343 W1Y4 d!11V33034 900Z 0103 33NY19 OIL N301M 9 Y130033 VIA ONIHO YISIA 11V31A3111Y 3100 SON1343 14/1Vd dll 1va3033900� OlOa 53Ntl1I01Z N301M o 300I418 aadn 403013 H100S Y130053 VA 11Y31 A3Ntl3N30 50NI3413194IVd 4I1193303i 900Z 01J3 53Nv1901Z W03d N301M 3001390V04111V3 11 Ya1 A310tl 3N3019 9 HJVM 831tlM3aHM Oa YIA1V5 lltlal Aal(1V 3N30 SONI3d51,I1Vd 31tl1213171tl tOdla OVOS HSYM NOANYJ W1Vd 33A0300133 3NVlL Z Oa H0V0030Y15 al Y2Ntl 30 A8Vatl 50NIad5 Witld dll lVa3033900L 0103 (3111411903ddtl)33NY1901919033 N30M 9 300a0i 01Y330 3J 330115 HtlW0 3AY A3331NOW 1a3S30 14/1tl4 Sltl1831319 /0d13 OVOS - - 53119190111NO3i N301M 9 ONIaVM 0383 9 v10130d/NOSXOVI 511AH41 VIOIaOd aO ONWtlM 0331 133330 1411Vd 31Y13319Y' 004130903 33NY19010 WOW N301M 9 11Ya1NilOHX13 VIN30311V0 100NIZIYM 0331 1333301N1V4 SW13313 V 1041130903 33N V1101Z 141033 N301M t 3AY 2101WY11 3AY N00A300 30 0030N 0030N d113NOZ MN dWnl S3NV19011 N301M 9 30013A3Y4 33A13 YNY YINYS 339119011 00310N S1Y13313V IOd13 OVOS 33N Y1101Z WOW N301M b 311 ON 33W3 13 ONZ OJaON SlVI41313Y 1odla 0vJS S3NV74OIL WOW N301M I 3AY a3NWYN 3AV 300I3131v41 IS iSI 0030N d111933031 900Z D10a Oa OOOM3aHM 01 3AY XJOJNVN WOai I810 HJtl3 SN1 t) SN1 9OIL 01 N301M/10n31SN003310103 SOWV1V SO11V SI01 NO 9 08 000M3➢ 3AY 3000NYH SOWN Oa SON 501 V131E3914 dll 1 V33031900Z 0103 DO SIL-1 (310 HDY3 S3NY1L) 3NY7 0 M3N 1Jn31SNOD t Nl X3Y1M00V3V/ 03 WM13094 3NY113NNI1 vinanw 31V13313V 1030 V VOS 9 dI1198303d 900E D103 X333D V1313301,4 a3AO LOOP) 300133'IS VA v(103N VI M3N IJnaISN00 Z 3AY,314/YOV 3AV NOIONIHSVM IS YAV00 Y13133n191 S1YIa313Y'Odla OVOS (S3NV7 9 OI b W0213 DO SN301M SOLO l0A139d113 ,310N) S3NY1 9 01 Z W03d N301M 9 SIN a0 N011101 Oa H03X NO1NOO V13132101N dl11tl213033 900Z O1D21 SN19 012 JO SIN N301M 9 SdWtla SI Li SdWVa SILT Oa Hll31NOINOJ Y131339114/ d111v33031900L 0108 S3Nv19 plr N301M 9 Vivid SNVOIYJ On SIi Oa MO YIN30311V0 V131aa0W 31VI)1313tl 60d13 OtlJS SIN Y11OIL W03i N301M b 3AV NVIONI IS 9000Y3H Oa 313NOIW NVS A311YA ON33041 S1VI3313Y bOdla DYJS9 dI11tl33033 900E 010/ 9 41113NO3 1931N3J iW nl S3NY1 101Z 1A1031 N301M t IS%OpDV3H 03 NOANYO 311033 30 VISIA 311033 AMA ON3110W S1v13313Y r0d13 OVOS 191331319 3N V1 L lOna6NOD L 30 HDV390N330W a0 VISA 3H038 08 MAO 311033 A311YA ON331019 51vI4313Y 10413 OVOS 9 d113NOZ 19391301W111 ION '33030N19WI10 IV enan ni cum wviva-,iwm S311Y11 01Z W03i 1001M 0 3AV 000MN031 30 SONI3dS 913001H Oa 3394 N0301d 1311YA ON3210191 Si VIa3laV bOdla OVOS 53NYlI01Z WOai N301M Y 3AV OOOMND31 a0 tl1SIA 311033 OAIB SIaa3d 1311VA ON330141 d10 Y 38nSv3w 4311Vn ON330W 9 d111ba303! 900E 0103 53Nb1 i0339WON 3NId3010N S3p0 dIO V 33n3V311A311YA ON33019 13AY SOIDYD 01 d 1V1.OSAdI SN1 9 Z 9 IV 1V1.OSAd Ol AMdX3 VNOINVSI SN1 9 01 t N301M 9 IV 1v1-OSAd 5301110N113AV Sn10V0 AMd%3 VNOWVa OAB Slaa3d A311VA ON3aOW 31911313Y 10d130VOS 53NVl1, 01Z 1NOM3 N301M Y 0A190 V3WANNOS 3AV 000MN031 (M11151a2134 A311YA ON3VOW dID V 3anSY3W A311VA ON33019 9 d111b3303i 900E JIJa S3NVI 30 a38WON 3N1d3010N 5300 dIJ V 311n3V31.7 Aril VA ON34101,1 53NY1901 Z 190213 N301M 9 3Atl VLNtlZNtlW 3AY 000MN031 ON9 3133341 A311tlA ON3aOW 51Y18313Y rOdla 0VJ5 53Nv1I 01Z WOai N301M Y 3AV 33091Y310 3AV SO1JYJ 0Iaa Al9 S3d A311tlA DN3a0W dI11V3303d 900Z 0103 S3Nv19 OIL DO 093S NOS VN N301M 9 341191tl3093S SdWY309aS 1SNOSVN A311YA ON330641 31%9331010d13 OTOS S3NY11 01Z WOW. N301M / 0n1803ONV3S3IY 3AY 000MN0411 IS NOSVN 4311YAON3SOW 41111tl33033900L J1J3 53NYI901L 19031 N30144 9 SdWtla 043S SdWtla 0935 80 HDY300N330W A311tlA ON3aOW S1Via313Y rOdla Ov05 53NYl t OlL 1NOa3 N301M 1 0933 03 NOANV03110.33 80 HJY390N3a0141 A311VA ON330191 31v91318V rOdla DVJS 5311Y7001lwOa1 N30IM t 0n19 030NY3331v 0935 1531135301 ADMON3aOW 519133131V 10,113 OYJS 5314Y1101Z wOa3 N301M 1 OAI9 SONV10391 OH NOlaOW 3AY 000MN031 AMA ON3SOW 31v1a313v 104113 OvOS S3NV1/ OIL 1,403i N301M > 3AVa3ONV3I0 Oa 313HDIW NVS 3AV NVIONI A311YA ON33019 S1v13313Y tOd130903 S3NVlt 01Z VJOa3 N30194 t Oa 31311097 NvS 3AY Sn10Y0 1S )1000Y3H A311YA ONHOW di0 v 3311393W A311YA ON330W 9 dll 1V3303 900Z 0103 3001383N v19 V HOM 3001393N Y1 Z ONI1SI X330V1d33:IAMdX3 Y1109193 O.N S311W CZ X03dd VI NIV30 W301S A3l1vA S13213d 33A0 IS XDODV3H NO I NIY30 W301S A311VA SI333d 213A0 300139 1S X000Y3M A311YA ON33011 S1YI3313V bOd13 OVDS S3NV1r OIL wOa1 N301M I 0A19030N VSS3IY 093S Oa SONIadS NVWl10 A311VA ON31101,1 Slv121391b lOd130VOS 53Ntl19011 WOai N301M 9 15 XDI33O333 SIZi 3AV SO1dA1YOn3 1311tlA ON33001 S1V133121V 0,1130VJS S3NY19012 WOa! N301M 9 30 HDY330N3301A1 0A19 SI2133d 0A1903ONVSS3IV A31lVA ON39091 Sl V13313v bOdla OVOS 53NY1t01L 1NO3i N301M v Oa 50NIad5 NtlW1110 30 HOV390N330W 0A18030NY35319 A311VA ON3301A1 S1V13313V tOd1.3 DYDS S3NV19 Olt WOai N301A1 9 OA1951aaad 3101 OA190a0NY333IY A311VA ON3aOW dll 1V33031900Z D1021 S3Nv19 Olt WOai N301M 9 1S N013V9 3IZ1 lO 133M S311119'0 0A18 N3399 NVA Vdf H03VW 303005 S310N 90I1d130Sn 103903d S3 NVl1VNId OI W033 aY03 NO1101051391 va Iueul4oONV HNOMAN 3NI13SV9 SLOZ 3H1 NI ISf110NI NON00 NOL1Va30ISNOO 210A S1O3fONd d 31VOIlOS • . AOO1S NOLLVZI V 3NOSV3W 013N S OnNaNAr11H vs3nsseW SI0Z9eeefre9 tsUPeBY'wwo0'HMVINWd1P0H PV 60 0Z W1swe0 eW190191d 010 MS V 03111P 1:S d113N0N111.0n1 5361V1901M3N/ONINKIMW9 6LaS SI Li ON H➢3N No.n.+ A161n0031:15813NN d113NO2 MS Mill S3111.0 Y 01Z WOal N301M 9 IdY810 N3dd00 911 Oa H313H NOIWIO A1N000301383N8 d111VN3p3! 900301Oa S3•JOIaO ZHLM WWI VS %ONddV -1Y10133NV191 OYON 91038 NO11110 ID1181SN00/ON31X3 9 19LNS1 01163153HONIM OS adOl3WY ON HON NO114I10 11143100301SN3NN dHlY213034 9003 0108 S3NY1P016 WONT N301M t ONINYM OVA ' S3VW N0111I10 A11111003015a3N11 d113NO2 SSYd 199111 S3NY1 Z 010 WONT frOOM Z a3MQ111130 3100N 0A10 A311VA ANN3H0 1161000301S313NN SlY1N3181tl bOdIN OYJS 1tl1333111? 3Ntl1 b1JnN15NOD 3AY 3AYO113A a 311A3NIM .hvinvu�urrwinnvtin iuvn, ALNnOo 30SNIA1N Sl YIN31NV POdia O YDS S31.1119 OIL WONT N301M P NONVISNODI 6LNS ON VIN210111Y0 OHONY31 ON 30VIS 0131133311110 A/1000 301013N21 31113NO2 MS IWn1 OVOS 36/tl19)4N b SOwad510H 91313INOW 1311W Oa 30VIS 01alasauna uNnoo 301Sa3Na 3113NOZ MS 3191111 S3NYI t 01Z WOad N301M P 5131 SH ON HODS/NAD A09100 A161000301S83N71 dll 3NO2 MN d1N01 S3NV1P 01Z MOM- a3N31 VNY YIN VS 191001a 01Y81HD2161 9 3001110 313NN VNV VINVS 011,9IHONY d1Nn00301013NN S1W3331NY 903118 CVOS S3NY1 P Olt 1910a1 N301M P 3AY V18319PtlaN NO A03NN3N I NHOP 00000M gamma all 36102 MN 3192311 S3NY79 OIL Woad N301M 9 N331111 NYA IO 118103A69 Mani] NVA dO HMOS.00£ 000M 3015213NN S1YI213121v rOdla DYDS S d113NOZ MN dWnl 53NM I Ol L WOaI 11301M - b 80 VSOWa3H 3AV YIN0101A 15 NOlONIHSVM Balsam S1VI313131Y90d131OYDS S3NY1901P191031! N301M 9 AMNd 309a83130NYN0 ON 000M OA10 N38118 NVA 3003N4 S1VI313181Y tOdla OVOS 1901I0N8 ON Y SOLI 10/02141N SdY183A01330N1 6361V1901P WONT NNW 9 ON NOANYJ 08100NINJOW 313NN *NV VINVS GAIN N3a00 NYA amnia dq Y 3Nn5Y3w Ala AO AND V d111VN303l900L JLDN dO 33301(111N 361Id3010N S300 -1r� v svnrvw uw in ur. 53NV79016 WOBi N301M 9 a3NN YNY tl1NY5 1S NOSNDVf 0A79 N3800 NVA 301S83NN d111YN303d 90030108 SN19019 00168S 91301M 9 Tmona M3NONY 0A10 11311118 NVA 301S213NN S1VI313131Y /Od IN DYDS I d113NOZ MN imi S361Y1d0838WON 3611130 ION S300 31113NOZ MN warn 1Y1331N V 3NY1 b1DnN1SN00 r ON N01/810NYS 91130221S nvaimn AMNd N001N3A0 301S113NN dil l Va3031900Z O10a SN0VN1 man lV 3AY M31A NItl1N00W NM003S010 ON SS vdN30Nn 1Dna15N00. 88 do ON V 3AY Vdnaar lY 301S83AIN NI NM003S01O SNOV81aun 3AV M31A NI V1NHOW 301013NN 31VIN318V 90311N OVDS S3NY1P 01 L WONT N30IM 9 3AY VINO1DIA I631S 3AY YN3131S V1 301S83N11 S7WN318Y PIMA OYDS S3NY1901P WONT N301M 9 Na MI6 3AYtl110N0Y194 3AY 11011130 301S113A121 d113NOZ MN d1Nnl S3NY19 013 WONT N301M r V19A MA a00111D ANINHOD NO 153NO NOANYO 30133133M1 519I2131NY 90d1N O VDS S3NV19019 Woad N301M 9 OAIO ONONYSS3IY 3AY 1010NDYW 3AY NOlON1131Y 30ISMAIS Sl VIN31NY 90d1.E10 YDS S3NV190191408J N301M 9 ON NI3M1n Val 3AV NO1ON11NV CIAl00aONYSS3IY 301S83Na S1VlalitY POdld 0YDS SINV1901P WON111301M 9 YalYNIS NNVNd Imo AN1N1100 3AY A3N31NOW Amnon/30Ya1W OHJNY8 21v163131Y/0d1110VDS S3NV1901 r WOad N301M 9 ON SNYA3 0A19 Mind AMdX3 YNOWVa SI31313d 61VI2131N V 90d131 O VDS IS3NY1130100 SN301MLOL110AIaadlIN 310NI S3NV19 Olt 11084 MOM 9 OA105111213d 3131 WOG VNOWYa 6I31N3d 51VI3131d V 90d18 O YDS SINV190131108I N301M 9 15 a3OIN ON SNYA3 AMMO*NOMA SINN3d 31YIa31Ntl 90d111 0YO5 S3NV1P OlZ WON3 N301M b ON SNYA3 3AY NV10NI 3AY 1/116430Y1d Nand OVIN3131V 904310 YOS SNNYI b OIL WOal N301M P ON OAanN AM3113 VNOWVN ON051NN3d SINN3d S1VI31313JV IOdld OVOS S3NY1P OIL NOW N301M 9 AMd%3 YNOWVN 3AY 3130NY310 OAB SItlaad Said S1V183121Y 90418 OV0S S3NV1 b 0131NONl MOM > IS HIN ON DAMN 0A10 SINN31 Sliiad S11/1831NY 9041110010S 1Y12131N V 31011 P lonaimoo 9 (is 3113SSYHON SNYA3 3AV NV1028 3AV N3011V310 SI31213d Sl VIN318Y 90d121 0v05 S3NY1901 L W081 N301M 9 3AV NY'IONI Sal 3AY113011V310 1121213d d113N021v311N30 iWU S3NV1Z 01'MN L - NVONI SINN3d 43ONY310 SINa3d S1YIN31NV POd1N OYOS V d113NOZ 1tl819130 JINNIS3Nv1 r OIL NOM N301M b NO dV1600 ON 9131112111113 ON 03\321N SINN3d SlYIN318Y 90d18 OVDS S3N Y1601 LWONI N301M 9 Oa DYNYNI3 N1 N33S31 Oa Z1300 612143d 511143131Y 90d1N 0 v06 S3Nvtt OIL 1910a1N301M 9 ON DYNY1I3 0213SY0 03111300 SINN3d Sl YI831aY P03113 DUDS Y d113N021VN1N30 lWN 3361tl1 t 0131110313 N301M b 3AV viiN3DYld AMdX3 VNOWtlN Oa SNYA3 3IN313d SIY1831Nv r3d18 OVOS Y d1l aN021MN3O NMI S3NYl b OIL WON! N301M 9 Oa 0A311I1 3AY 1n1NSOV131 Oa SNYA3 N883d 319I313lNv rOd la 0YDS Y d113NOZ 1 VN1N3J 31,101 53Nv1bOIL WOal N301M I. AMd%3 VNOWtla 3AV N30NV310 ON 661tlA3 SINN3d SlY1313131V rOd1N 01,06 1913016V 3 N V1 r 10nad5NOo I SIZ-1 ON 0A3061 ONSNYA3 S13131331 S1Y1831a Y POdla 01e05 1YINala V 3N Vl 91Jnal5NOJ t as 21300 a03NO1SA3N ON OYNYHI3 SINN3d Sl VIN31NY 90d13 DVJS ON V d113NOZ 1VN1N3J 01311 5361tl1 b OIL W08d N30IM 9 p8 Y131NNnW 08 21300 ON OYNVH13 SINN3d S913131219 904121 OYDS 1VIN3121Y 3N Vl L iona15NOO L - SI Li ran 3AY SI113 231213d SIYIN3131V badla OYJS 31N V1 b OIL WON! N301M r ON Z3300 0A18 SINN3d ON 3500/15 Hll t SIN213d SlY13131NV ',Oda OYDS 33N V1 / OIL NOM NaalM 9 IS HIP 08 OA3nn 133313.Y. SI11813d SlYIN3111V 1,0d1N OYDS 536.1V1901* w081 N301M 9 N LAM 831YM3101M IO )1N Ya'3 11Va1 AMY 3N30 ON NO191Y21 ALD 1V71133HM /SONINdS tiNd S1Y183189'OWN 0130S S3N V19019 1910311N301M 9 AVM 3S1NN05 ail NOAN VD WiVd ONINO Y151A SONIN316111Yd 51tl18318V rOdIa OYJS 80103NNOOlV18318Y 3NV1606131%3/100815NOJ 9 NO NOANvO NYIONI NVS lO H1NONIAtlM 351NNn5 AVM 351NNOS SONINdSW1Yd d111va3033 9006 01J31 (90L1EONN NI 13NNYHD NAD SYN3a V ?GAO NOI180d 3001N01 S3NY1 9 Ol L WONI N301M 9 8/183000 ON NOANYO AYaanW NO NOANYD W1Yd'S SONIadSWIYd MOOS S310N NO1141110630103f0Nd S3NY11VNN 01 W0111 OVOY NOUDIOSIanf 1 ba lualllNODBV )180M13N 3N113SVO 51.0Z 3141 NI NOISn10N1110J NOI1Va301SN 00 30d S103f08d dO 1S11 031V0110SN00 AOn1S NOI1VilUN018d V anSV3W 010N 9 810m13146/ 9H YamseaW 510Z903393e 61100euY'wwrcj'HMlRyuldpoH PY 90 9Z 901swa9 ePu00YNe161 910616119 Y anseaW 80081se11X9 513618318Y 90313 OYDS s3NY19016 1/1081 61301M 9 08 Va8YOaVW 3Atl NO5434331 Oa YINNO31l VD OHONYB V1003W31 dll 1V913033 900Z D103 S361Y19 Ol L 19081 9301M 9 an DVNY1433 61.35 AMAd Y0999034 Y11D316131 d1118/83033900Z olon (my11,13AM ON V183A00931%3 9 04 200 600 YaYN V V0193AV 80 al.N3D 3021310900 'SO ONv183A0 V10031631 3111103033900Z 0103 S3NY16 ON31X3 6 105'010311)/D Oa 30Y1S 0139431109 04 SrOHD1N V31031931 dll 11/8303i 900E D1D8 5361Y7 60931%3 9 Oa YNIHd Y835 03103/1S 01311313116113 Oa 509138510H V1318anri V111031931 S1Y183111V 90d180905 A3330 V1312121093 SSOa OV 30011193991 L 1Jna1SN00 Z 1S10Md 1S1N083 NM01010 1S NIVW V10036931 d10 V 3a1159363 v10O3W31 3AY N05833631 O1dWV8-dd035 166841311VA HON34d dW)333303AV NO543333/ (3S1 AMMd A3119A 610143ad v1073W31 d111V43033900Z 0134 09043NY16 (3931X9 9 03 S091a15109 roam 08 V1940311)600610998 0830V1S 01311431M vinoam1 S1Y18318V 60d18 MOS 539V1901Z WOaf 9301M 6 3AV 30VNY1d53 AM31X3 MOWN% O8 N3aaYM 01910V/NVS 51918313V I0d18 0905 9 d113NO2 11-13933H 1Wn1 53991001 L 19031 9301M 6 3AY 30YNY1d53 AMdA3 YNOWVB 3AV N05313061YS OINIDVI- NYS 51918318tl 60419 0905 9 dll 3NO2 l'S.131431-1 16301 53NY7901L W083 9301M / 3AV 30YN VId53 3AV 0193161 3Atl 90383099S mowNVS S1'08301960dia OYDS 5361V1901L 190819301M 9 3AV 90583011V5 08 9384991 AMd133 VNOWV3 omnovI NVS S1v183139 60dLa OYJS S3NY19 OIL W083 N301M 9 1531915 3AY NOS/3306195 AMdX3 VNOWYA OINIOVf NV5 Sltlla31aY 90dW OtlJT ILEEZEAI3#d113 SdY133A0/310911V13318 V 3N V16100a1SN 00 6 8Y030 15 NIYW AMd%3 YNOWV3 OINIOV/NVS S1918314960d180Y05 - S3N Y19OIL V10439301M 6 1531v1s 08 61333VM 3AV 301/691d53 0191391Nv5 9YIa31av 60dia 0V35 S361V1601 L 19083 N301M b IS 31V15 08 N388YM 3AY000M901103 0I9I0V3NV5 d113NOZ MN 3W01 5361Y1901E 1/10839301M 6 918319688 0013669'0 000M A1N000301383A1a Si V1831aV/Od13 OVDS 539V19019 630a1 N301M 9 08000M Oa NOANVO 081309180019 0N0 N33G9 NVA A1N0003015a3A1a d1093a0SV36111110 Ma 153116-106'0'XOAdd VI S39Y1601 9301M 9 3AV tla8315 09215 Oa ON/numv/AVM A3119A AIN00030I583Na 51via31a V 90d18 Ov05 539V1901 L 19083 N301M Y 0A19 NOISSIW 098S AYMA TWA ',moo 301583AI8 dll 3NO2 MN 31901 S3N 91YOIL W083 9301M 6 NOISSIW ONOffiSWBV A311YA A1900D 301583N8 d113N01 MN MAI 53Nv16 OIL W081 N301M 6 90A1030 318tl3 Sil NOANV01YOS31931 A19000301533N3 di/1983033900Z OlDb S39V19 OIL 630819301M 9 133a 83153HDMM16La5 3121 an 11005 AWOOD mama dN 31602M5 AWnl 53NV1 601E 19083 9301M 6 6La5 SILT an 1100S A161000313083Na 3111983031 900Z O108 3001a93NViYVHAM 300188 3991Z 0NI15/X3 30Y1d3a - I15 iin19 O/N 311Y/ LL'01 83N8 9Nv YINV5 83A0 300189 6 83N8 VN9 Y1NVS ?lam YNV YINV5 08 a3Na A1N0003015a3N8 Sl vla318Y 90d18 OVOS 9 dll 361021V81N30 3Wn1 539916014 W083 930M 6 80 VISTA 314D38 3911 OD ONI08 V61839 NVS 08 NAD 39033 AIN000301383N8 d113N021V81N30 CNN S3NY16 01 Z WOad 13301M 6 4316130 501)118dS 113001H 81113Y166D1 SSYd NO3OId AINn00301533N8 d113NOZ MS dWnl S3N V16 CAL I90a3 N301M 6 NOlONIHSVM 1V8190ISSIW HY16101Vd A1N000301539N31 d1139021981930 Mill 53NY1901Z WOa1 9301M Y 333111319 dY161110 011 0/131161 lomoo 3015113N3 di/3902 MS 3WN S3NY1901M3N 9 V131480163 21900 1130dM39 A1N000301383A13 519114314v 60d180905 lvla318 Y 3 N Y1630na15N00 9 (S5VdA3 61831593I 668S Oa 1.03811031 Oa SONI8d51061 V131aanW AWOOO 301S83N21 d113907 M0116133 1WN S3N VI e01Z WOal 9301M s 11Y001/1 JYNYHI3 9131421019 AINOOJ 300313A121 di119913033900Z DIDZ1 5N19 OIL 08 N301M/ 13NNYHJ al AO 3001313 91-6100815900 6 9016010 13NNVH0 431'MW801S A311YA v113HOV00 AY S31I6,1 AWOOJ 301543AI8 dI13N02196816130 i19111 53991601M3N 9 1105d16315 319021301V 33d1613163 AWnOO 301583AI8 ell 1V8303390a 0108 IOW 1 XOaddY153NV1901 v WOW 9301M 9 3111/13NIM 8391.91VH 3AY 311901911 Amnoo 301583A18 d113NOZ MN 3WN 53N V1601 Z 1.9081 9301M s VONVMII3 a369816H 3AV 30901911 AINOOO 3015313N3 31VI8391Y 603118 6.)905 9 d113901 MN 1 Wnl 53611613 OIL W0819301M b 0A19 N3an9 NVA 3AV VON V66113 3A06 311NOW11 A1N0003015313A1a dI13902 MN 319N 9 dID V 3ansv3 W AI610 Ala 0311W 06'1'1(08dd V1 AMH 1914313V'N1W 31/Y1/01 1-1301M 6 3AY 061813A310 OS 316116890S13 3AV 9118315 )61 119000301583A18 dID V 3a05 V3W A1N0 N8 IS31166 3E'0-X03ddvI S3N V160 L OY089301m r 80 VI11304 V0 an 1911H an 39VNA A16100D 301383AI8 d1119a30339OOL D108 53NV19 OIL 1,1084 N311IM 9 Oa 91A1v5 011 80 1631Yd/lival/AMY 3930 AINOOJ 30083N31 dli1va30313100Z Dina 0309N03990015 v93190361V161Jna15NOJ 6 083111A3NIM 3AY a3NW1661 15 96131V0 AINOOD 301583AI8 dll 19a3031900Z 010A 539 V190IZ 300183 a ad v 0NIOO10NI1Y18318V 9000119301M 9 ONIHD VISTA SdVIY31 H18061 OH all 991Yd 31V0 AINOOJ 301S83N8 5191/016v sOd180 V35 539396012 W08361301M 9 3AY a3NWVH 3AV 01V91HD8V Oa 31V3a3A010 AINOOD 301583N8 S1v18318v 606160905 1918318 V 361V19 L0na LSNOJ 9 6685 Nl 98V1MOOY3161 08 HIM 9019113 AINOOJ 301583A1a 3nnos S310N NO116180530133fOad 539011991i 01 viral avail NOHOIOSIan! Y9 Watu400uv AMOMAN 3NI13SVI3 SIOZ 3H1 NI NOISMONI NOi NOLIVtl3OISNOO 310d S103fONd lC 31VOIlOSNOO - AGMS N011VZI�V 3NfISV3W OLOB  r00 YEARS Parsons Brinckerhoff 505 South Main St., Suite 900 Orange, CA 92668 714-973-4880 Fax: 714-973-4918 Attachment #5 Memo To: Karl Sauer Bill Hughes Subject: Overview of Technical Approach for Measure A Traffic Analysis From: Tim Byrne Date: May 9, 2006 To support Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) transportation planning studies and efforts, PB is developing a detailed transportation model that can be used to evaluate various types of transportation infrastructure improvements throughout Riverside County. This transportation model will be able to accurately reflect both free and toll highway activities. Since currently there are no appropriate transportation models that can be used to evaluate the potential toll activity for projects within Riverside County, PB will update and modify the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM) as a starting point of model development. OCTAM is most suited for this effort since the OCTAM model was used as the basis for development of the SR-91 Toll and Revenue Study prior to OCTA's purchase of the facility and OCTAM was used to develop traffic forecasts for the Riverside County to Orange County Major Investment Study. The following enhancements are being made to the OCTAM 3.2 model to develop this new model: " Incorporation of SCAG RTP 2004 demographic data assumptions throughout the modeling area " Addition of northern San Diego County into model to more appropriately model activity at the I-15 interface between San Diego/Riverside Counties " Incorporation of SCAG 3191 traffic analysis zone structure in Ventura, Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties " More detailed SCAG 4109 zone structure used as a basis for developing zones in Riverside County " Incorporation of Western Riverside County traffic analysis zones based on WRCOG TUMF zonal boundaries Once the traffic model is developed, it will be calibrated and validated prior to performing future model runs. This model then will be used for the Measure A traffic analysis. The Measure A traffic analysis will be performed on a 2015 scenario highway network. The Measure A projects will be evaluated against a 2015 baseline network The development of the 2015 baseline network includes the following: " Comparison of SCAG existing and 2015 network to document improvement assumptions " Identifying current or programmed construction projects within Riverside County that are expected to be completed by 2015 " Identifying high priority TUMF projects that are expected to be completed by 2015 The Measure A projects will be modeled individually and compared against the 2015 baseline alternative through several measures of effectiveness. Project measures of effectiveness will be compared in tabular and graphical formats where appropriate. Several of the Measure A projects will be segmented into stages and analyzed in a staged fashion PARSONS 1 Over a Century of BRINCKERHOFF Engineering Excellence " in order to determine the optimal staging of the corridor level improvements. Project costs will be developed by Bechtel for use in the alternative assessment. The benefit measures are consistent with those included in various other studies including the Riverside County to Orange County Major Investment Study and include the following: " Facility Number of Trips Served (Average Daily Traffic) " Facility Daily Level of Service " Travel Time Savings " Vehicle Miles Traveled Savings " Distance Savings per Vehicle " Vehicle Hours Traveled " Value of Time Savings ($) " Value of Distance Savings ($) " Energy Consumption Savings " Air Pollutant Savings " Accident Reduction The measures will be developed from the model at the daily level and expanded to annual values. After evaluation of the various benefit measure for each of the projects and staged components of the corridor projects, the Ad Hoc Committee will select projects to incorporate into a comprehensive 2015 alternative for a cumulative analysis. Additionally, a 2030 comprehensive cumulative analysis will be performed for the selected projects to evaluate benefits under a horizon timeframe. PARSONS 2 Over a Century of BRINCKERHOFF Engineering Excellence Attachment #6 2009 Measure "A" Program -10 Year Delivery Plan Qualitative Evaluation Criteria Each project or project segment will be evaluated considering each qualitative evaluation criterion. A score of 1 thru 5 will be assigned considering the relative need for each project to be given a higher priority for early completion. The table below summarizes the scoring convention for each criterion. Criterion Number Qualitative, Evaluation Criterion Qualitative Evaluation Score 1 2 thru 4 5 1 Opportunistic timing from other external forces No benefit from opportunistic timing Increasing need for the project to be given a higher priority Significant benefit from opportunistic timing 2 Environmental challenges Maximum cost or time required to obtain environmental clearance (Same as above) Minimum cost or time required to obtain environmental clearance 3 Need to protect Right of Way Right of way cost is not likely to increase significantly over time (Same as above) Early completion of the project will result in reduced right of way cost 4 External funding available specific to project External funding is not available to fund the project (Same as above) External funding is available to fund the project 5 Time required to get the project ready to advertise Extensive time required to get the project ready to advertise (Same as above) Minimum time required to get the project ready to advertise 6 Safety Early completion of the project will . result in minimal safety improvement (Same as above) Early completion of the project will result in significant safety improvement WH.Comm.Attach#6_Qualitative Evaluation Criteria Page 1 of 1 11/29/2006 2009 Measure A 10 Yr Delivery Plan Summary Schedule Attachment 7 ID Task Name Start 20Q6............ Feb 1 Mar I Apr r May ( Jun ( Jul 1 Aug I Sep I Oct i Nov I Dec Jan IFeb I Mar 1 Database Development and Data Collection Mon 3/27/06 Develop Scope of Proiects to be Evaluated Mon 2/27/06 2 6/26 � i i 6/26 • we 1 i i ; i i 6 11/ 10/23 7 Ad Hoc Committee approval Mon 6/26/06 Develop Proiect Cost Estimates Mon 4/17/06 3 4 5 Traffic Modeling and Quantitative Eval. Analysis Mon 2/6/06 6 _ Ad Hoc Committee Approval of Model and Criteria Mon 6/26/08 Quantitative Evaluation Mon 5/22/06 7 a 9 Ad Hoc Committee Approval of Criteria Mon 6/26/08 Develop Recommendations for Early Prolect Actions Fri 6/23/06 10 11 12 Ad Hoc Committee Approval Mon 9/25/06 _ Proiect Prioritization Mon 10/9/06 13 14 15 Ad Hoc Committee Approval Mon 11/27/06 16 17 Funding Forecast Fri 9/1/06 18 Ad Hoc Committee Approval Mon 10/23/06 19 20 21 Prepare Financial Plan Mon 10/23/06 i i , 12/29 Ad Hoc Committee Approval .Fri 12/29/06 22 23 24 Delivery Plan Report Thu 4/20/06 ♦ 1/29 i i 2/19 Ad Hoc Committee Review Draft Report Mon 1/29/07 Ad Hoc Committee Approval of Final Report Mon 2/19/07 25 26 27 28 Project: 2009 Measure A Delivery Plan Date: June 15, 2006 Task Milestone External Tasks Split Summary External Milestone Progress Project Summary ^ Deadline Page 1 ......g1J.0,..4.1.4.0.....::piu...g.:::$,(!-.0.1::40,.:4::.0.:,s:s....v...,...:.....,.,-.., •40'.0oaddd u0)d 44ani"aa a�aA-p 1- b aans0:aW 600Z N r� a eua��x� pue 6uidoas ueld aeai 01, 9YOJ sawnseaw plauas anne}rleno ■ saanseew wawa angemueno ■ :stool 6uNueN suondwnssd � maonnlaN augase8 SGOZ pasodoad uoeoaddd leoiugoal lapow uogepodsueal ■ :6uppow adoas pue uogepau 6es suogdposec uoafoad b aanseaW 600Z 10 a�spdfl ' :6uidoos loafoad / i uogeJap suo0 aaWWW00 a04 suaa I epielpo pue 6urdoos ueld Jen!lea no), 01, '03 ON1CI21VNVIA NV4 w anrs.a7: a Kw� oyia.��, an 4Ys s}uawen0.1dW1 Aenny6iH epapao pue 6utdoag ue d JOAflap aeaA 01, a UinnowM o ItI LRa,srs WPM unoo walsaM d wnseen 600Z ! 10,1 b epaprj pie 6ujdoos ueid aanrlaa aeah 06 s}uawanoadwi Aenny6iH a}e}s ikennu6m u6Heau 1 auel 6umwv Mona} 83 ppv luawanoadual a6uey3.aa}ul wa}sAS auel I?uiqualo Cana} 83 PPV ouipaeuaa8 ue$ o} o6aia ues uo!}aaaep yoea auel I pull s}uawanoadual pasodoad aanseaw #013a sAeMuDH elnoawal g nalleil ouamoi unn}q aip -ea auel 4 ppy ou paeuaa8 ues o} apisaanii woa} a,p ea Salle! Z ppll uogvamp yoea auel 1, ppd a6ueyaaa}ut anoaduij }saM 1.6 US _ o} u}aoN S �-I aopauuoo nnaN ppd euoao0 w aip ea auel ppl/ s}uauaanoadwl pasodoad aansean a}no�l }oafoad unoo uaalsa/A d aansaaW 600Z r :�a 5 • euawo pue 6uidoas ueid Jamie() JeeA py sagunoo;a6uaao pue amsaamm uaamiaq_ (s)aoppao'p maN saiiuno' ou!paeuaa8 ueS=pue ap!,saan►a uaann aq aopiaao0 maN S 4-I PUe 61 aS uaamlaq aopwoo /sem Ise] nnaN au!,-1 Alunoo ofia!a ueS pue pa podnnaN uaann}aq aopia.ao0 6u11six3 uapi/N sI,uauaanoadW1 pasodoad ddl30 saop1Ia.1o0 MON 091 091 Aemved Alunoo -PHA! Spa "S3 alnoa S� £ I� Z� pafoad saopiaa00 dd130 Alunoo apisaan V N 3/al g I�1, a1 ei ewo pue 6urdoS ue}d aamea ma), 0 sapils 6u nnonol ui pals!' ate suoRepen laafotd 1euoRdo asagl •sloafoad aanseaW pauaeu aql Blinn `fed a ab `alow% ui papnijoui -aaa sloafoad asagl `4! ao `nnog uo uoispap pawaolui ue aNew ueo uoiss!wwoo eta `ameliene si uoileauolui leuomppe s!ql uaum •sa6uego 6uidoos asatoto sloedw! wea6oa1 pue slsoa `slgauaq aul puelsaapun o�aapto ui spafoad aanseaw pa!Pluapi AlleuOpo au1 glinn 6uoie paipnls aq suogepen loafoad Ieaanas lag spuewuaooaa eels •pawluap! aaann sanssi Buidoos loefoad ieaanas `seouauipao d aanseaW 600Z pue 6861, 041 illoq u slaafoad aql to nnainaa angeiedwoo a cagy • 5uidoos Toa,aad a!aa41a3.pue 6utdoag ue}d aan,laa aeaA 0G ��oN 5�-� ao��auuo� nnaN ppt/ t p, VUQJO3 4 1J1Ngiflj 8 eiaa u� pue buidoaS ueid aea), pL aye �� 5 G-1 pub 46 CIS u�aq o� s�uau�anoadu� I�uoi��aadp s�uin s I i�ua od uoi11141 401•$ �LSG-1I�6 �S auk pug s�aaa�S u�o�ui� pua uiaw uaannlaq. �6 Ns uo s/Cs ao�ngia� ip ao��all9q u�inn ao�aauuoa �sann �6 :CIS o� • u�ou 5 �-I �ui��ldaa aap uo� ■ eueluo pue Buwdoos ueid aanflap aea), py eiaelpo pue 6uidoos ueld aaAllea aeaik 06 5 43a f oa d uiM paaealo pue paipnls aq ueo a6els aaa aq use sawnloA 0P0Z aeaA aol paoafoad as leg; sdooi 6ugov juoo 6uiuietuaa alp auo aoeldaa IHM uoul!w 00Z$-S1 G$ Jo lso leuoM ppb 01 SGZ/1•6/09 041 punoq tipou 01 09 2iS punoq sea a0130uu03 1,39a,19 mau ppb qg-pafaid e�aa} as pue. FuidoaS ueld aaAHaa aeeA pG 5 G-I pua n�dlC���n3 uaann�aq uo uo���aa�p ��ea au�� auo ppd epolpo pue 6u!doos ueid Jenflaa JeaA 01, loaroid paiealo pue paipnis aq ueo ■ 5LS-09$ 10 Isoo leuollippv •sioefoid ainseavi 600z pt.le 6861, auk uaamiaq sluawanoidw! loafaid de6 E' 1,1-18A9.111 01, SBU!„idS X08 `snlditie3n3 loaroid 81.11 sdols `uorl!PPe euel aglio loaroJd tipou pualx3 oiod „ t WI • q .9 ioefoid 7001 £6 eqapao pue Gutidoag ueid JanNaa ROA 01„ aaas spusipe8 auk ui 09 Js pue ssawlie0 aEau 0 i-i uo saual 6uigw113 Ana punoq lsea ppd 313d ap pue eg sparaid t�1N�3yJ b� epelpo'pue 6utdoos ueid JOMI Q Re), 01, _Suogeiado o gje.q, Joi poddns pue Apedaa uloq ui asaaaaui luaawu6is a apinoad_ II!M pauiwialap aq lsoo ui asaaaoul uogoaalp uaea uI auel AOH ao asodand leaaua6_e Jaime ill!m 09 CIS pua 01-1 uo_ sauel pui woo Cana punoq ;sea 6upeiclaa aapisuo3 Dull d i.:.' .sstior OD 3015E11011 O� ON3D4ItlNA3fl NVS q8 q0!, pue q8 spa aid of 5 L. pue Euidoas ueid aanila0 aea). 01, 315I,Z-1/51,-I auk pua paoN podmeN uaannlaq 5 GZ-I uo uo}aaalp uaea u saual Z ppd e loarad r* }iN• 94 elaamio pue 6u,idoos ueld a0n1100 aeah pL Z� loafoad inn alee � pue ai n s a ueo oafoa p I p p p� q �_ d peuiunelep eq o lsoo leuoimppd .}S Q 01 podmeN uaoa l!MI 13afoad uaaupou aqn 6uipualxe Aq Zi loafoad Jo ped se podmeN pue •}S Q uaann}aq euel leuoilippe ouo ppe 01 sl lesodoad peon podmeN pue els Q ueenn}aq pelea m 6u aq luiod_tlouid a ui s}lnsai sigl Z loefoad a_alle 015 4ZI5 pue podmeN uaannlaq seuel pG ao g peoH podmeN pue is p uaemlaq sauel 9 1S a pUe 09 NS ueennleq seuei g ■ aafoa as e 9 � d �� 5 GZ-I u 4 313d , �l ers . 411.71 '!u 7bedmM1 a 01 91Z/96 pue podnnaN uaann}aq S3uel 01, JO 8 1S Q pue 09 IJOOM aq sauel g q • Z peraid + Ho] 11 eiaa�aa pue Guidons ue{d aanrlaa aeaA Q6 luaidupellb ul s! s!l pefoad pai!elaa . 51.0Z Aq °Taldama eq pewnsse eq uea ao uoponalsuoo aapun Alluaaana aae Tall sloafaad apnlau! Apo IL!M suompuo3 augasa9 S I•OZ Aiunoo aplsaan!l aoj asnionais euoz palapdn aq II!M • elep aNclea6owep ap!saanft:l eVOS ao/ paiepdn eq IIlM • slsAleue dlysaauPed o!baleaTS ddd.aoJ pasn aq sauei II01 1,6 to aseuaand op ao!ad ApnIs Ilol SIN Alunoo a5ueapiap!saan!uo pasn Aisnweid pasn aq slapow 0£0Z 5 I•OZ Z'£ 1111b100- d Ieo!uwei ppow uoRepodsuaa1 nJ •,.l 8L eualuo pue 6uidoaS ueid aan1100 nail 01 uogonpaluaplaad s6uinaSusnllod a!V s6ulnes uondwnsuoa A6aau3 ($) s6u!nes aauals!a 40 anlen ($) s6u!nas auill jo anleA palanaal sanoH ala!ilan 913!110A aad s6u!naS aauals!a s6u!naS palaneu sallW 0130,19n s6u nS eau lanaal (S01) aajmas io anal Al!ea Al!Hoed (lad) pamas sdpi aagwnN • • • • • ...:....... �iad,, : samseen ij4eua8 annernueno { WY: it‘ 61. �j B1a8113 pue BuidoaS ueld aanlap aea)‘ 0y sanssi IC�a�S aspanpe Apeaa parotid paainbaa quail oll.pads laaroad i ;eta ane iane 6uipun j leuaa}x3 Aem 4146N laalom 01 paeN sa6uallaun ieluawuomnu3 6u!w a ogsiunpoddo �1. ;m, sa msaaW ani emend \ 7 'i 1" aaiii OV epalpo pue 6uidoas ueid aaAuaa Jea,k pL ZIlaafoad s!quo kiamiap aamaaa ua a6eanoaua mom mein ICaid ui leuaaixa Jain° 8a044 aad Lpalaidwoa 6uiaq loafoad sp.]; uo puadap eu slaa f oad luaaa f pa aatpo aaaq aab 46uipunj aol aladwoa papoddns s punj puoq appalels l oewea palonalsuoa seen loafoad au;a gaHane apaua aq pinomlato 6uipuni. wag si :Eu!w l ails unlaoddp • 13d„ samsaaW igoua8 °Nie en() 1 _ d oast l.Z eiaaliao pue 6uidoog ueid Janina aeaA p4 �sdnoa� uoi�isoddo ICua aaaW� aid . ��aa�oad a�� �oddns IC�runu�u�o� auk saoa �Sfl auk �a s�a�enn o� sadui ao `saiadoad la�iaos ss lions ��inn I�ap o� sanssi la�uau�uoainua }u��i�lu�is aaa�� aad ■ Z2�13/S13 ao b3lSI `3�13� aainbaa �aa(oad si�� Ilnn adu�a�ala I��uauauaainua �o Lanal ���IM- ■ :sa6uall��l� la}uau�uoainu3 :) saansaaW ani emend agigi ZZ 7-0-` epeipo pue 6u!doos ueld aen.ijaa JBOA 01 tpaitelep peroid Aem 4q6p pa eau etp amen ueddeq s! ;eta weld ieJeue6 peldope u! 1! sl ■ 4;3afoid au; uo uomsod s Alpotnne esn puel le30:41 041 s! 124M 6.1opuJoa meu e jo lueuidolenep au; e.imbea loefoid seoa tuogelueweicitui loefoid o Jopd Aelvt iti6p eJninj. eql aaau Jn000 AleNll luatudoleAap meu illm :Aem 146N loalom 01. PeeN eARETIE'no 10 £Z 3 ei ewo pue Gu!doas ueld aaAllea aeaA p� 4a0u0o paaanilap aq uaa parotid au ! algaliana lga(oad alp aoj. algel!ana you Allawaou aaa ;auT spun] aad ■ (puoq °leis '6'a) ioafoad Jain° Aus uo pasn aq you uea lag; laafoad sm.; aol algal!ana spunk lsuomppe aad 4kannap loafoad o empties awg aaa au A3ua6a leaol a algal!ane spun] leuo!lippa aab ag!aads 13afoad s! leg; algal!ane 6uipunj leuaalx3 samsaaW Tpua8 ani emend j�91 bZ epelpo pue 6u doas Ueld aaN100 aea) pL Lpaainbaa aq ipm leg; suoneoolaa ssauisnq pue lei}uepisaa eaegl ale `os ji ■ zl(enn o 1.46p lueowu6is aa!nbaa laafoad aqi seoa ■ 6ioafoad aqi paainbaa aq inm luawnoop leluawuoainua adAl legM ,alnpagas loafoad loedum sanolap ao saansolo pew anti; aad otpadoad peoaHea slaedw! °amp aad ■ 6uoneoolaa annbaa Him sagugn lueowuegs aaaql aa�► ■ Ladoas aul uo snsuasuoo 8a844 si ■ espanpe o Apeaa laafoad paainbaa avail samseen ffiaua8 ani emend i11ovi 5Z eiaaa a� pue 6uidoag ueld aannaa aeaA �L zpaluawaidw! ICialsipatinui aq sluauaanoviduai A;ales aql Gugsanbaa si leg; wrposuoo Aoua6a aoipue opgnd a again s� ,s!sAleua mauaq lsob aqll, u! pa uasaadaa Aialanbapa ;Du aaa leg; sanssi angl aab ■ :sanssi ICaaS saanseen iilaua8 °Nie en° 34a bi ''--� pue Buldo35 uEld Thine aEed 4 Ama9Gsaalad . tvessam 19UNTa wawa amnia mmnnnnmaaauawm1 s+a4ad eMS NEVE agar mac aed.4lwatA V WORM eta *Wald • l Rda4 l• _Oatg 4Ce'AZr'V P'd.', MSiRI ad aeltelk 9➢KEAI OP 90.14tt a9ri itaday milts, IemuddV e itadim Wa0 ma'am G3 oak PV. - off" to ..iv.AaaddVa quaao°aal!t PV ULU IePatuuld &MOM IsaaaddV agytatuo3 wat PV Vimsilralisan 7d t2 Oi at at EMU uGr Riktuott .,_y �+dd1f a+itoTa45'�fi P1f — 95,2p1,ti,„ : suoaav 7oa1uj i.,9 9.10i ufgitpuatutuoaay aNwaaao.—$— >� tt we • m:4149 aNaN+� W 4nwddV 41iLtt+� oN j77`'�oRi IMM 9CVIUa aaW �l G _ I9 iea �• Ram aav .t1vv$30 Pat NPatq Aa Ieamddll agl0� loo° a ttf ff _ a WO; UM - SISAltaV 'WS u caivanp Pim luMaPGW Mali a: aie'l;.l+tOita .' WS1' I veG I ran I We raegritillitirMigMin I Gad 910 tepoidditaApmwujo a°J+*W a r akvtF3. uµv patMeta a9 of 9iaalittd is aaaaS Gallas° a 9R1rTi4 uCpl uoaoaao3 rye° put tui of +seats° t a1G L iuuuita*MV alnpayog &mums utld Aaaaaa° dA 01 V ultimata 6041Z P3 Diagnostic Review Phase I PowerPoint and Preliminary Projects Assessment Report Presented to Ad Hoc Committee July 24, 2006 smep Ben el/udx 40008 /faro° d r 401113'2 xouyi Jeutijne uewessoN 900Z `frz /trip aapwwoo ooH pd uops!wwoo uoRepodsua u iC}unoo api eAN � aseud Maina& ollsou,6elQ �d z • I asayd nnainaj of}sou6ga aye jo s}Insaa /Gawwns pua Molopoynaw Ixaluoo ay} egposaa - II Pad slapow iGanilap £d afivaa a agposaa - I Pad - nnaina"8 opoubeia aye to sweuodwoo omnuasaad ■ saaTpafgp uomnuasam. • • spafoad alepipueo owoeds aoj uoReoHdde sd leiluei.od 40 nnaina�{ oRsou6en !emu! }onpuoo peupea oINdN pue uewessoN ■ si.oefoad i(enny6N jo alms a aoj. deb 6uipunj aye 6u!!!!I emeuaalle euo aae sed ■ peaepisuop eq paau slapow kienuep pue spun]seoanos aay}O ■ spaau aol luaiownsui pue pen!wwoo Ale6ael aae spunj. y eanseaW pue luaiownsui si 6uipunj pawed pue ems ■ swewenoadwi Aenny6N aoj. paau pea a si anti; `ow.ea} aemwwoo peseaaoui lue}insea pue `seRunoo _vl pue e6uea0 `episaeni.8 ui yTnnoa6 pepefoad lueowu6is ena ■ punat8png senssi esayi. lie ssaappe Aenuepun si )pom ■ spAieue Amcnseei lepueuu — �C�i�ige�ona�suo� — sseowd puewuoainuR — /Woqine enwisPei - peaye sebuelleyo ■ spafoad a#epipueo Cue aoj. algeln you Ed aapuaa !Doom lag 6umou sewoipui spAleue A.Jeulwilaad ■ aapisuoo slapow Ed ai.epdoadde ebue a a si Weill ■ sauiatu (faX s1apoyf (CiaazlaQ —I ',mil 9 sailed leogliod gloq ssone smo pue .s•ri aye u!q inn suopai yonoi 1001 £d 6ug!Iiln sale}S • spefoad plagueaa6fluewdolanap se Hem se `samoei. pea' 6uppm jo aseal waa#-6uoi ayT aol pez!ip 6uiaq si Ed pa}salun pue nnau }ou si `•ST1 91-11 ui sa6e}s APee s}i ui si Ed aul :uoi.eluesaid ley j.o sewayi. aye jo fuewwns ■ aanlonAseajui uoRepodsueai puns o� sepue6e leuoi6aa pue awls pasn pue anipage Al6uiseenui 6uiwooaq si £d pue 6upueyo si Te>pew •s•n aye Aqm suoseaj — Te)pew £d 's.n aye ui saaAeld pamdioque pue lue4no — •s•n 91.41 ui le>pew £d palm° — (suoisseouoo Apeinoiped) aanleouewou Ed — :o� peonpaqui seen eep!wwoo ooH py `Liwoua i.sei ■ n1awaa0 �d puueo sepuebe lewewuaeno6 spjeueq xe; upped ssaooe o} eme eq Aew kimbe elenpd mi-` aiadys a6essed (ssyd) spuoq A}i pe ei.eniad senuenaa snid.ms uo amen aay6iy saaeld Aiinba aleniad �e�idea welled si Almba a}enpd 6uppd >pp pue 6uppd Tuaiolga pue enissea66e o} & pee! espedxe aoloes sm.! Aimbe aleniid • • • • wow eoueug ongnclAdwaxe-xel •S•n leuoMpeal isuie6e Alen!pejo aladwoo ueo 1.1 6u!moys si Ambe alenpd lauuosaad suowedo pue uoilona}suoo 16upeeupue to ea.mos tiewpd aye do eNew sleAeld •s•n • aiadwoo o� mei( sm. pegoune! 6upq spun] Ambe .s.n `peoage woad 6uiwoo Aguauno si spafoad esegl aoj (AT!nbe pue;gap) 6uipund :uoRewasaad Teyi. j.o sawaul ay; to kiewwnS (p,mod) n1aTn.caa0 Ed- 8 Elea Tdeoxe `siapow enoge eql Ile epnioui scd ■ s}upTsuoo 6ulpunj pue speau pue sleo6 hua6e `soppapeieyo s joefoid lenpinlpul auk uo spuedap lapow kienllap }saq aqi 6ulsooyO - �oafoad a i014aon1 stew iapow A-19A ap auo ueyn aaoW ■ luawaaAv wawdolanaa-aid — dad uolssaouoa 'Ind a}eiado-aoueuld-Nn8-u6lsaa — OdBa uppew aleiad0-piing-u6lsaa — W08a piing-u6lsaa — 8a PIIne-pl8-u6lsaa — Elea • siapow A.19nijaa ■ syapoyt[ kwetilda Ed- 'ii111111 • uoReidwoolsod eseyd suopiedo aano io.poo aogoes ovgnd — pp-nnoi uo paseq pepeies aopapoo • suopowienb uo paseq p91391es JeAsea • onn� aye ueempq diysuoRelaa ou q inn paanooad Apeieaedes aopeawoo pue aau6!sea — }onpoad paaanilap pue sseooad aye aano laquoo ougnd ;son — u6isep %poi, sioaluoo _lopes ongnd — :sa}ngpnv ■ ' ta1saQ sanssifinvind pun saingpinv 06 • fiuipunj onond ainoes - s)isp lenoadde ao leoiuyoal nnaj 1-11inn paupplem si peroad — :esn lew00/IeolciAl ■ uo!Tona}suoo pue ufiisep uaann#aq se!6JeuAs oN luewdolanep 6upnp seamosaa _lopes ollgnd uo snoaauo Alen!Talisiuivapy sapauenn 6uio6uo meA ao}oes oncind yip sAeTs >isp lepueuid copes °Kind imm siCeis >isp ufiisea aoi.oes alenpd aajsuei. )isp elm fueA - :senssys118110lei#uelod ■ tdzsaQ ill sanssys1pnind pun sapiglow • • Attributes and Pitfalls/Issues ■ Attributes: - Designer and contractor hired together via one contract • Selected typically based upon price and other factors (best value) — One point of contact for agency (the design -builder) — Private sector takes on design risk — Greater cost certainty — Limited warranties often available (1-2 years) — Can accelerate project delivery through fast track design and construction — Significant synergies between design and construction — Invites private sector innovation — Less administratively onerous on public sector resources during development — Full public sector control over operations phase post -completion .11 zL 6uipunj ongnd aanoes — enien ppe uowJeleooe ainpauos iegualod pue uoRenouui copes aienpd aaaynn pafoad peugep ssai :esrl lewlidO/leo!al ■ aoi.oes a}enpd 6upoo epAo-epi to aajsueai oN — copes ogind u}inn sAels s)isp leanTon4s tale; Buoi — ao�oas ongnd aoj Asap pefoad aano loiwoo ssal — aopes ongnd qui% sAels )isp iepueuid — :senssl/slleRd le1Tualod ■ • ugiSaa sanssUs11vfigd pun saingz.inv • " (eoueuewiew{suageaado aoj 6ulpnloul) 6uipunj oilgnd canoes - uogon4suoo pue Asap fqilenb }o eoueansse aanaq pue 6uRsoo alok-en uo Alpnoes aaow sapbanoioes ongnd Tnq `ga oT _mime - :esn imuglolleo!ai �% pefoad suopuege aopeawoo os `peawoo W��gp ueu1 aaow Isoo Aew peep ispelew uoRempegw ao eoueuepeW  Aoua6e ongnd Aq suogaiedo pefoad aano loawoo ssai  uoi.aidwoo Om:Lig; pHn;g-u6isea se awes - :senssUsllellld leguelod �% weal( g wnwp ew a aol eq ueo `spuoq Ampe aTenpd pimpIAA  eoueuemew " sn mdeo jo sijo-apex# waa�� 6uoi pue pogs 6uisneo `Joloes a}enud o} )isp 6upoo apAo-emi saajsue.0  Aweaaem pepuepce ue sloe eoueuemew pue suogeaado penupoa  uopiciwoo Ono.NT ping-u6isea se awes  :seingpuy �% ut'zsact sanssiminfikr pun samgpnv ��6 spafoad pe!!o}-uou pue pa!!oi pesn eq ueo Toefoad sesegd eoueualu!ew/suoReaado pue wewdo!anep ayuo spedse !!e u! _lopes ewpd sezmueou! }uoa�� do spun; !ei!deo esp., oT anal you seop copes o!!gnd " aoi.oes alenpd pa uejsueai )!sp 6u!oueu!A sesegd eoueuepewisuo!.eaado pue wewdojanap g6nong WOBo of ae!!w!S :saingPIIV �% ugisaQ sanssys11nfi1d pun saingg.inv " Aeuow .10j. amen enepoe you Aew 5isp anuanaa/314.e.14 6upiejsue.q. 8.18yM $ (ougnd-uou) meu s6upq 0d8a • (semi 1101 aano "Bee) Auglxeg Aollod ougnd 6ululelaa eliynn eoueug aoioes aienpd Jo e6eluenpe a>iei spaau imes ogind Tnq `W08a o} Jams :ash lew00lleoiciA1 6upueuij idwexe-xel _lopes oilgnd }eye 9.10w isoo Awl — ioefoad aeinowed uo puedap iliM Aeuou.w ao amen sioeijeJ .191.11914nn pue aajsueal >isp a01. gauped copes aienpd o� �Cauow leuomppe Aed Aew — >isp anueneijog_jeal supaa uaijo aoioes ougnd — ■ W080 se awes - :senssUslleAd lel}uelod ■ • --u 1saa- sanssl/s11nfikr pun samq inv 96 Aauow a04 amen seneigoe ){Sp anuanaa/o1.4}e.11.6uiaaa4suea1. uegm — /quo aoi.ein6aa icuwoo pefoad bump s! pue 51sp wnwpcew Jejsue4 o} swem hue6e ongnd uegm `Odga aenwiS — :asn lew!}dO/leo!dAl (sepeoplui welsAs 64104 enp) eq ueo 5oegpueH - pefoad aano piwoo copes ongnd pelp.up }soW — OdBa aeliw!S — :senssl/sllell!d 1e41.1910d ■ aoPas alenpd o} aaisueal Aew ao (6umes area "al) et469a AoHod upleJ Aew ao}gas oiignd — 5{sp anuenaa 6uipnpui s>isp aaisuei ind — asegd eoueuemew/suogeaado pue wewdoianep y6nong Odga 01 RIPS — ■ AllIioel P81101 a ao} AlIeoidAl — :selnqpnv ■ o3 11nj sanssysppvfnd pun samggrnv 14 loafoid paimew eq; aanowd ueo Aoue6e leap aige}deooe eneigoe ene;ou we sewed • (uomo6au �sa�} to ;Li6p a se Lions) pafoid ay; wewaidwi slg6p uppeo eneq Aew tau; `paanlew seq loefoad uegm `wn}aa ui • uoResuedwoo ou Jo elm aoi saoanosaa/awiI alonep stew Joloes alenpd pafoid euilap Aoue6e sdieq pue sseoad ienoadde leWawuoainua qm 4sisse a0109s alenpd iapow kienilap weweanowd 01196 o} ebels luewdoianep g6nalq; ssaa6oad sailed „uoisin„ `ueld }uawdolanep `suoileowienb uo peseq Aileoid fq uopeies sseoad ienadde leluewuwinue 6upnp Ave*Ai • luewenionui JoIoas alenpd aoj. Aiiun}aoddo Tsaijaea sapinoad :sapngpily turz1acd sanssys11niizd pun samgT.nw 86 se6el.s Ape uoi}enouui pue Tuewenionui Dopes eienpd wag. lueueq !ISM percud — uomugep jo se6els Apee ui si pefoad — :esn lew!}do/leo!clAi ■ Jeep iseq„ aye e6 lou pip ANT 1eu1 uoRdealed leoMlod/ogInd — lueweinooad enpedwoo a you pue uoiieRobeu eamos alos e o} uNe 9JOW si sseooad `„leap„ eql 6u0Ro6eu Alleug uaym — :sanssl/slle!d le!Tualod ■ �utT1a.�d sanssUsppnfiTd pun sap/q?.iny- • c 6,* '1111111 Awes epAiid - Sd /fougv wewuienos - yO N Sd Sd Sd Sd `dad 'd N Sd Sd Sd Sd • uopseouoa pn j •3 N dJ Sd Sd Sd 0A9a 'a N bJ d0 Sd Sd WON 'a N d0 d0 b0 Sd 90 '9 A bJ dJ d0 d0 99a'V lepoW kipoy}nd Owl senueneb 6uloueulA W+gp /aisea luewel3 }IsIN uogon4suoa ecimururns lapoif cf.iaaT1aQ OZ • N I asnid nlazaay dysougnzQ —II kind • • 900Z Iled ul pepinoad eq IIIM spAleuy lepueutA - II esald - paaanllea - I aseyd - sesegd oN4 seq nnaina:l opoubeia ■ seleualise ;soa v l'go pue leglea - swewssesse enuenei pue 01e.1i - uoRewmi.ul leuomppe Kdlaow buipued si spAleue lepueug alaldwoo nnainaa kieui pe.id !emu! ■ perad Ed a se A;lllglseed - peroad a se Apq!sead - •�o enipedsaad aye waif. spefoid alepipueo to luewssesse !emu' ■ Maznay dysougvTQ alpfo asod.ind zz Alunoo oulpaeuaa8 ues o} Awnoo °Gala ueS wag (pallol Alle!Tuaiod) Amm Gul.sixe u!pm uogoe4 yoea seuel z leuoilippy — g alelsaalui (pallor AIlelwelod) Aemt44.1 plegueeJ6 - sauel g — ABA/wed iii.unoo puAl ■ (pawl AIlel.ualod) y aopp.100 ao aopp.mo 1,6 :js 6uRslxe anoge pnpgA ui seuel 'b — Amloed meN/Ionpein 1.6 8S ■ (pallol AIlegualod) ;sea seuel ssaadx3 1,6 s GuRsIxe ayuo uolsuaixa apai6-py — uoisuepG auei ssaadx31.6 ■ uoi.oaaip yoea ui auei ea4 auo—1oafoad y ainseen 1,6 jS ■ %MY ■ passassv spafodd arnpzpuva wewssesse senssi pue epe;po 6upeaaos jo aagwnu a sAoldwe Abolopoui.aW ■ suo!p!pspnf leuoileuiew! pue .S.n Jew aol AlinIsseoons pasn AbolopoLgeN ■ sed leRuelod — pue si.oefom - :se fqi!igiseal speraad a}epipueo auk ssesse podaa aye ui pasn Abolopoygaw ■ (fSopopoillam MIT • Methodology (cont'd) Assessment/Screening Issues: — System interface — Design and Construction: • ROW • rail • utilities • geotechnical • hazardous materials • constructability — Operations and Maintenance — Legislation — Acceptability - Project Schedule — Financial Feasibility 24 sans! ssaappe sai6ale4s uoReBmw )1sweoue6Hip enp swewaidwi oloN • peugap wow awooeq s}Darold • aigeliene spew si uoRewao}ui ieuomppy • :se ewR Kano 06ueuo stew sluawssessy swewssesse fueupllead ale podai eseyd onsou6en ay} ui swewssessy ■ sed se sseuanipame pue Amlgiseai perad aoj, pessaappe eq o} senssi Ae)i aye sepuep! luewssesse au ■ £d a se pafoad au; 6uppedoe f }o Nsp mo! senssi — Mo-/ pale6mw aq Alleilualod pinoo pue leoRpo se }ou aae pig Ed e se ampeipe ssa! pue Nsia a pafoad NT 4nd /few }eye sanssi — emepoyy Ed a se amelevewun pue aigisealui pefoad au; New `passaappeun }}af senssi — y6rH wonneway, 6upoos 6u!monol ayi ui senssi Jo wewssessy ■ dgolopotpaRT(p,luod) 9Z said Amsues una pue suoRdo Toefaad aoj siapow iepueug. palieiap aaedaad salepise lsoo loefoad doianea suoiido loefaad aoj. siseoaaoi. enuenaa doianea edoos pefaad peugaa doianea >ponnawau enRelsOei pueisaapun seipnis puewep oglag fueui neJd aaedaad (soplewoe6 `.6.e) se pnis leopgoal keupliaad a}epdaadde aaedaad senRoefgo pafoad Apluepi WNW :paw -lbw si uoi.ew_iolui Tuepulns pue alepdoadde `luewssesse pafoad alepipueo ayg alaidwoo Jew) ul ■ (p,luod) cffo1opotpaN Diagnostic Phase I Work Completed Based on available information, we have: Reviewed all relevant and available data Met with RCTC staff to discuss project objectives and scope — Met with other team technical experts — Completed preliminary screening assessment of each candidate project — Assigned a score to each issue for each project based on available information • Deferred scores where existing information was not present or was too uncertain at this time Financial analysis will be delivered in Phase II " 1111111m " Diagnostic Phase I Results gg , " RIVERSIDE CANDIDATE ISSUE COUNTY PROJECTS 4 ,-1 al N i TRANSPORTATION ISSUES ASSESSMENT g g Fi N h sl ei 1 COMMISSION SUMMARY < r4 1 cm I IC- 0 1 g a. 1-1 System Interface Low Moderate High High High Low Design and Construction " Right -of -Way " Rail Crossings " Utilities " Geotechnical " Hazardous Materials " Constructability Low Low Low Low Moderate Low Moderate Low Low Low Moderate Low High Low Low High TBD High High Low Low High TBD Moderate TBD Low Low TBD TBD TBD Low Low Low Low Low Low Operations & Maintenance Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Low Low 28 6Z* moi 4611-1 461H mai mai 461H aleJapovi amapoini mai 1161H awiapow 45114 moi 4511-1 94eJapoini OH mo7 .451H awnpoini alempoiAl mai 451H V/N alempow ' amptupS Pero.ld • sienoiddy Jetno • suopezpotpny pi. • siemuddy vasuiminuj • elnPaIPS Peraid/siencuddV a4eJapoini aleJapovi a4eJapow alenpow 4611-1 amapoiAi 1.161H amapoki awiapoini 942.Japoksi moi moi Ammeicloopy leormod • Ampiegloopy Nicind • A4111cleldeopV 1461H 1461H ON ON 461H L16!H sEd ay, uoneisi6e1 .... 4 cn 12 A 1 0 . § .< 1z KHVIAllni NOISSINV1103 i ! 0 ns INTIALSSgSSV PA NOIIVIZIOdSNVIll oA sgnssi sit:no:Mid AINI103 , E rl c > .1111(11 ACIII5.1.3Ara . Enssr 0 NVID (pduod) slinsay I asmid. vsouffnia 4E11 os uoRezpoyl.ne leaapa; leuolllppe selinbaa 6ullio� a�e�s�a ui — g 1,1 Apeinoped spefoid !Iv — suogezpowv Ilol ■ 6ulseud • sparoad aoppno 1,6 CIS Ily — uollona}suoo 6upnp wewebeuew °weal xaidwoo }onpel• n - Ampeion4suoo ■ 6urnol of pop° pue xeldwo0 • y aopp o rionpm — Wow klemep spedwl AIlepeiod alnpayoS - spefoad elepipueo Hy - slenoaddy lewewuaijAu3 ■ spefoad ai.epipueo Hy - uoi.els!be i cd ■ sagua11no pun sanssj dal" aoppioo engoe Aneopsias ui Ampel 6uRsixe uo >oap-91(1mo - pnpein - leopt.peloeo ■. doIN pue y aoppioo aol luewu6ile unnoupun Isoo - d0IIV Allei.uelod pue y Joppno `}onpein - AeM-i.o-TON ■ sauei ssaadx3 1,6 :jS 6uRsixe Limn Ameaadoaalui pue — y Jopinoo lonpein - eoepelul welsAs ■ (Aluod) sanssl day Z£ podaa !! eseyd oRsoufien ay. ui pepnijoui pue paaedaad eq !pm Ed a se pefaad alepipueo yoea Amgiseaj. ay} 6uissesse lapow lepueuu fuequailaid y ■ odaa !! eseyd opou6eia aye qui peimodmoui eq !inn uoi.eunolui palepdnyleuomppy ■ spefoad elepipueo eqi jo yoea aoi edoos peu!je l — spefoad elemueo eqi Jo uoee aol sindui enuene ! s}oafoad elepipueo 16 S aoJ Aprils sopiewoee kieuiu head - :6uipnijoui uogewmj.ui paliei.ap aloua 6uiuielgo to sseowd aye ui si 0l01 ■ • sda;s ixaiv - H asna opsougvTQ • siseq Ed a uo spefoad a}epipueo wow ao euo ylinn paemiol anoua 01. uoispep lequeiod aoj. uon.epunof epinoad — spe fold aiepipueo aoi boo} Ed uoReomdde legueiod ssesse o� Jepao ui sindu.i pue uoi.euuolui pup.] aaoua 010.1 epinaad - poda i aseyd opouben jo spoo ■ sdais ;xalv - H asvid apsougnTQ tb£ • uoTssnosTQ RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Preliminary Projects Assessment Report Diagnostic Review Phase I July, 2006 K PlV1 G RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 I. Introduction 5 II. Background 5 III. Scope and Methodology 6 IV. Candidate Projects 9 A. SR 91 Measure A Project 9 B. SR 91 Express Lanes Extension 10 C. SR 91 Viaduct/New Facility 10 D. Mid County Parkway 11 E. Interstate 15 Expansion 11 F. Candidate Projects Summary 12 V. Analysis 13 A. System Interface 13 B. Design and Construction 15 C. Operations/Maintenance 24 D. Legislation 26 E. Acceptability 27 F. Approvals and Project Schedule 31 VI. Finandal Feasibility 37 VII. Conclusions 38 Appendix A - Business Models 42 A. Conventional Model (Design -Bid -Build) 42 B. Design -Build Model 42 C. Design -Build Operate Maintain (DBOM) Model 42 D. Design -Build Finance Operate (DBFO) Model 43 E. Full Concession Model 44 F. Pre -development Agreement Model 45 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Executive Summary Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) is considering a number of transportation improvements throughout Western Riverside County that win help address existing congestion and lack of mobility, mitigate future congestion and enhance travel times and quality of life in the face of considerable projected population growth. As part of this analysis, RCTC is assessing the potential of a Public Private Partnership (P3) program to help fund and deliver a number of these improvements. In the context of this assessment, RCTC retained Nossaman, Guthner, Knox & Elliott LIP (Nossaman) and KPMG to assist with a Diagnostic Review of the potential application of the P3 model for some of the transportation initiatives being considered. The Diagnostic Review consists of two primary phases: • Phase I - preliminary evaluation of existing information and issues pertaining to the feasibility of the selected projects that may be potential candidates for P3 delivery. • Phase II - Additional evaluation of these issues to the extent supplementary information currently being developed is available, a comparison among different delivery models and presentation of the preliminary financial analysis_ The purpose of this report is to provide the results of the Diagnostic Phase I work. To address the urgency for increased capacity, RCTC has already undertaken a number of studies that consider improvements and expansions aimed at addressing current and future congestion. A number ofinitiatives are being investigated. Among the most prominent of these initiatives are the following: • State Route 91 (SR 91) Measure A Project (addition of one free lane in either direction at grade), • At -grade extension of the 4-lane SR 91 Express Lanes toll facility from the existing SR 91 Express Lanes in Orange County to east of 1-15 in Riverside County. • Addition of a new 4-lane facility (potentially tolled) either within the SR 91 corridor as an elevated Viaduct or in a new corridor alignment generally north of SR 91 (Corridor A), • The Mid County Parkway (potentially tolled) to the south of SR 91, and • Expansion (potentially tolled) of Interstate 15 (I-15) from San Bernardino County south to the San Diego County line. The Diagnostic Review utilizes a methodology that assesses the potential for a project to be delivered as a P3. This methodology has been employed successfully for similar exercises in other countries and U.S. jurisdictions. It involves the analysis of a comprehensive series of issues typical of P3 candidate projects. The issues addressed by the methodology are: A System Interface B. Design and Construction C. Operations and Maintenance " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION D. Legislation E. Acceptability F. Approvals and Project Schedule G. Financial Feasibility Each of the issues is considered and given an assessment of High, Moderate or Low in terms of issue significance or potential risk to the so orris of the project. Issues are assessed as they relate to concerns for the project's appropriateness for delivery using a P3 model. In this assessment, the issues are examined both from the perspective of the project as a whole and from the perspective of the project as a P3. For example, if an issue is of High significance, this may mean that the project itself may not be feasible and, therefore, a P3 would not be attractive to the market. However, a High ranking may also indicate that the project itself may be feasible but not attractive as a P3. High can also mean that a project is feasible; however the issue is of such importance to schedule or cost that it must be addressed to improve the project feasibility. An assessment of High for this analysis flags the issues that RCTC should pay close attention to, secure additional information and further define as the process moves forward. The assessments can be differentiated as follows: " High - issues that might make the project infeasible such as the inability to obtain environmental approvals or design and construction constraints that make it impossible to build would also make the project unattractive to the market as a P3. Not being able to secure appropriate legislation to permit a P3 would not necessarily make a project infeasible as a publicly funded initiative but would remove the potential for a P3 delivery model. " Moderate- issues that might put the project at risk and, therefore, unattractive as a P3 but which are less critical to project success and can usually be addressed satisfactorily through further definition, risk mitigation and appropriate risk allocation. " Low- issues that have already or are likely to be addressed easily or are not critical to project delivery under any delivery model. Certain of the issue assessments in this report are inconclusive because data is not yet available to support the determination of an appropriate ranking. Within each issue assessment, comments are included on what information gaps exist and. if these are currently being or need to be addressed. The second phase of the Diagnostic Review will focus on additional information that will be provided to us by ROTC and, to the extent of such information, will be more developed and refined. Where a ranking has been provided in this report, it is subject to change as new or refined information is made available in the Phase II Diagnostic Review. Based on the current information available, it is premature to conclude as to whether the candidate projects can be delivered as Pas at this time. The table below provides a summary of the issues analysis for each candidate project We recommend that RCTC continue to address the issues raised in order to support a series of definitive conclusions regarding the viability of using a P3 delivery model for the candidate projects. While there are issues in the analysis that have been assessed with a High ranking, there is nothing in this preliminary analysis that rises to the level of rendering any of the candidate projects not viable for P3 delivery or suggest that a P3 delivery model should not be pursued. The rankings simply provide a guide to RCTC as to which issues need the most attention. 2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Prior to determining an optimal delivery model, more information is required. RCTC has already initiated several of the key studies that will provide this information. Once the results of these additional studies are available, they will feed into the Phase II Diagnostic Review, which will support RCTC's ongoing analysis of the delivery models for the candidate projects. Candidate Projects Issues Assessment Summary RIVERSIDE CANDIDATE COUNTY PROJECTS TRANSPORTATION ISSUES ASSESSMENT COMMISSION SUMMARY S to u_' aa $y 0. A ISSUE a N V7 z y N 2W � V)tYJ G Vl System Interface Low Moderate High High High Low Design and Construction • Right -of -Way Low Low Low Low Moderate Low Moderate Low Low Low Moderate Low High Low Low High TBD High High Low Low High TBD Moderate TBD Low Low TBD TBD TBD Low Low Low Low Low Low • Rail Crossings • Utilities • Geotechnfcal • Hazardous Materials • Constructability Operations & Maintenance Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Low Low Legislation for Pas High High High High High High Acceptability • Public Acceptability • Political Acceptability Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate High Moderate High Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Approvals/Project Schedule • Environment Approvals • Toll Authorizations • Other Approvals • Project Schedule Moderate N/A High Low Moderate Moderate High Low High Moderate High Low High Moderate High Low Moderate Moderate High Low Low High MO Low 3 " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Key Issues The following are the key issues identified in the analysis presented in order of significance: Legislation  With the exception of the Measure A Project, all of the SR 91 projects and the Mid County Parkway will likely require specific legislation in order to be delivered by way of a P3 tolled facility There may be some opportunity for these projects under existing legislation but this is likely difficult to obtain. The I-15, as an Interstate will require specific legislation to permit a tolled P3 facility. Environmental Approvals All of the candidate projects will require full environmental approvals. This process may have significant impacts to the project schedule and therefore the potential delivery model. In particular, the Viaduct/New Facility will likely encounter complex issues due to the nature of the facilities. In addition, the environmental approvals will be critical to securing tolling permissions. " Constructability the SR 91 projects and in particular the Viaduct will face significant phasing and traffic management challenges during construction. " Toll Authorizations Each of the candidate projects will require specific tolling authorizations. This is particularly critical for the 1-15 as it must fit into one of a very limited number of slots under the federal pilot tolling program authorized under SAFETEA-LU because it is an interstate. " System Interface  The integration and interoperability between the SR 91 Viaduct or Corridor A with the existing SR 91 Express Lanes will need to be carefully managed in order to provide a seamless service. " Right -of --Way Each of the Viaduct, Corridor A and the Mid County Parkway present challenges for right-of-way acquisition. The Viaduct will require acquisition of lands in a heavily built up area and will impact a significant number of properties. The Corridor A and Mid County Parkway projects have not yet had alignments established and may encounter challenges depending on the route selected. " Geotechnical the Viaduct is a double -deck on an existing facility with live traffic in a seisinically active corridor. Geotechnical considerations aretherefore critical Each of these challenging issues will need to be addressed and mitigated in order for projects to proceed either as traditional projects or as Pas. Prior to determining an optimal delivery model, more information is required..RCTC has already initiated several of the key studies that will provide this information. Once the results of these additional studies are available, they will feed into the Phase II Diagnostic Review which will support RCTC's determination of the delivery models for the candidate projects. 4 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION I. Introduction Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) is considering a number of transportation improvements throughout Western Riverside County that will help address existing congestion and lack of mobility, mitigate future congestion and enhance travel times and quality of life in the face of considerable projected population growth. As part of this analysis, RCTC is assessing the potential of a Public Private Partnership (P3) program to help fund and deliver a number of these improvements. In the context of this assessment, RCTC retained Nossaman, Guthner, Knox & Elliott LLP (Nossaman) and KPMG to assist with a Diagnostic Review of the appropriateness of the P3 model for some of the transportation initiatives being considered. The Diagnostic Review is segmented into two phases: • Phase 1— preliminary evaluation of existing information and issues pertaining to the feasibility of the selected projects that may be candidates for P3 delivery, with a focus on the identification of any information gaps. Identification of any insurmountable issues precluding P3 delivery will be detailed. As part of this phase, action plans will be recommended to fill those gaps, some of which are already in process; • Phase 11— Additional evaluation of these issues to the extent supplementary information currently being developed is available, a comparison among different delivery models and presentation of the preliminary financial analysis. The purpose of this report is to provide the results of the Diagnostic Phase I work. II. Background Current travel patterns by commuters in Western Riverside County are primarily east -west to employment areas in Orange and Los Angeles Counties. Orange County has seen tremendous growth in high value employment over the last decade, a trend that is expected to continue to 2030. However, housing in both Orange County and LA County is extremely expensive, with a significant gap between median house prices and median incomes tin other words, a low "affordability index"). As a result, commuters have looked to Riverside County for more affordable housing opportunities and values, creating the existing east -west travel patterns. Given the existing freeway facilities and these travel patterns, there are considerable capacity constraints on the network with poor levels of services and ever-expanding "peak" travel condition periods. Population forecasts for Riverside County indicate significant growth from 1.5 million (current) to 3.0 million by 2020. Combined with the projected continuation of growth in employment in Orange County, there is expected to be additional strain on already overcapacity transportation facilities throughout Riverside and Orange Counties. In the absence of improvements, the strain on the network will be considerable. Accordingly, there is a sense of urgency around solving this problem. To address this urgency, ROTC has already undertaken a number of studies that consider improvements and expansions aimed at addressing current and future congestion. A number of initiatives have been put forward. Among the most prominent of these initiatives are the following: • State Route 91 (SR 91) Measure A Project (addition of one free lane in either drection at grade), • At -grade extension of the 4-lane SR 91 Express Lanes toll facility from the existing SR 91 Express Lanes in Orange County to east of 1-15 in Riverside County. 410 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION • Addition of a new 4-lane facility (potentially tolled) either within the SR 91 corridor as an elevated Viaduct or in a new corridor alignment generally north of SR 91 (Corridor A), • The Mid County Parkway (potentially tolled) to the south of SR 91, and • Expansion (potentially tolled) of Interstate 15 (I-15) from San Bernardino County south to the San Diego County line. The following table provides the current and forecasted Average Daily Traffic Levels for each of the projects noted above (SR 91 projects combined). Traffic analysis completed for RCTC (including the Major Investment Study for the SR 91 components, the Project Study Report by Caltrans for the Mid County Parkway (MCP) and the 1-15 Fact Sheet) indicates that the growth projections provided for 2030 cannot be accommodated at reasonable service levels with the existing transportation infrastructure for each of these corridors. Approximate Average Dail; Traffic Levey; Location Year 2004/5 Existing_ Year 2030 LOS SR 91 (tl 260,000 D,E, F 400,000 Mid County Parkway (2) 18,000 NA 120,000 Interstate 15 within Riverside County Pi 130,000 E 216,000 (11 MIS Mobrlily RuLkm and Purpose and Need Statement December 2004. (21 Caltrans PSR, 2004. (31 Ceram Fact Sheet 2005-ADTs are average of all Riverside segments. The Diagnostic Review is designed to further RCTC's assessment of these projects with respect to their potential delivery as Pas. III. Scope and Methodology This report addresses only the above -mentioned projects; other projects in the overall system under consideration by RCTC do not form part of the scope of this diagnostic assessment. For the purposes of this report, we have assumed the above -noted configurations for the candidate projects. Throughout the implementation of the projects, the actual configurations may change. The Diagnostic Review utilizes a methodology suitable for the assessment of projects as to whether they can be delivered as Pas. This methodology has been employed successfully for similar exercises in other countries and U.S. jurisdictions. It involves the analysis of a comprehensive series of issues typical of P3 candidate projects. The issues addressed by the methodology are: A. System Interface B. Design and Construction 6 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION C. Operations and Maintenance D. Legislation E. Acceptability F. Approvals and Project Schedule Each of the issues has a number of elements vvhich collectively are assessed in the methodology. Steps taken in employing the methodology for the first phase of this Diagnostic Review include: • Obtaining available information during meetings with RCTC and their sub -consulting team and reviewing background documentation provided (information is drawn primarily from the Major Investment Study (MIS) study for SR 91, the PSR for the Mid County Parkway and the 1-15 Fact Sheet) • Completing an assessment of the issues for each project based on information obtained. • Assigning a High, Moderate or Low ranking for each issue on the various projects (see below) • Identifying the information gaps that need to be filled in order to complete a full analysis of the P3 model potential for each project • Noting how those information gaps can be and are being addressed by RCTC • Providing a discussion on the various P3 models available to RCTC for the projects subject of this Diagnostic Review, which discussion will be developed in further detail in Phase 11 of the Diagnostic Review. Each of the issues is considered and given an assessment of High, Moderate or Low in terms of issue significance or potential risk to the success of the project. Issues are assessed as they relate to concems for the project's appropriateness for delivery using a P3 model. In this assessment, the issues are examined both from the perspective of the project as a whole and from the perspective of the project as a P3. For example, if an issue is of High significance, this may mean that the project itself may not be feasible and, therefore, a P3 would not be attractive to the market. However, a High ranking may also indicate that the project itself may be feasible but not attractive as a P3. High can also mean that a project is feasible; however the issue is of such importance to schedule or cost that it must be addressed to improve the project feasibility. An a�secament of High for this analysis flags the issues that RCTC should pay dose attention to, secure additional information and further define as the process moves forward. The assessments can be differentiated as follows: • High - issues that might make the project infeasible such as the inability to Main environmental approvals or design and construction constraints that make it impossible to build would also make the project unattractive to the market as a P3. Not being able to secure appropriate legislation to permit a P3 would not necessarily make a project infeasible as a publicly funded initiative but would remove the potential for a P3 delivery model. • Moderate- issues that might put the project at risk and therefore, unattractive as a P3 but are less critical to project success and can usually be addressed satisfactorily through further definition, risk mitigation and appropriate risk allocation. • Low- issues that have already or are likely to be addressed easily or are not critical to project delivery under any delivery model 7 " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Some of the issue assessments in this report are inconclusive because data is not yet available to support the determination of an appropriate ranking. Within each issue assessment, comments are included on what information gaps exist and if these are currently being or need to be addressed. The second phase of the Diagnostic Review will focus on additional information that will be provided to us by RCTC and, to the extent of such information, will be mord developed and refined. Where a ranking has been provided in this report, it is subject to change as new or refined information is made available in the Phase II Diagnostic Review. As mentioned above, the methodology involves the assessment of projects as to whether they are suitable candidates for delivery as Pas. Appendix A provides a description of the P3 business models considered in this analysis as well as a description of the non-P3 business model (Le., a Conventional Design -Bid -Build model). Finally, we provide a concluding section that comments on each of the candidate projects in terms of proceeding to the next phase of the P3 assessment fi.e., Diagnostic Phase 111. Conditions for Market Acceptability Once a project has been reviewed using screening criteria that takes into account the various issue areas analyzed in this Diagnostic Review and is deemed to be feasible for delivery with a particular delivery model, the actual delivery of the project still needs to be planned. The planning for projects delivered using a conventional delivery model is fairly well known as this model has been employed by RCTC and Caltrans for many years. For projects involving a P3 delivery model, this planning is initially more complex and challenging. The success of planning a particular approach, will determine whether the project and its associated procurement will be "market acceptable". Specifically, market acceptability for a given business model rests on a number factors including:. Well defined project parameters and scope " Efficient and secure procurement process " Flexible procurement process " Predictable and transparent evaluation and approval process " Suitable delivery model " The accuracy of the analysis of the screening criteria " Right timing for the market place " Appropriate procurement documents Should these factors be successfully established, it is reasonable to assume that market acceptability would be strong. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION W. Candidate Projects In this section, a description of the candidate projects being assessed in this diagnostic is provided. The following map depicts the location of the candidate projects. A summary of the candidate projects is provided at the end of this section. A. SR 91 Measure A Project SR 91 is Riverside County's primary transportation route to Orange County. Traffic congestion during peak hours can last for several hours and traffic -flow is unpredictable throughout the day. Travel speeds are well below the 30 miles per hour considered by the industry to constitute congestion and peak -time commutes frequently take more than two hours one way. As a result, adding capacity to SR 91 and/or developing an alternate corridor that addresses congestion on SR 91 is RCTC's priority project. As part of the initial Measure A (1989-2009), voters approved a 14 cent sale tax which was used to widen and improve SR 91 through the cities of Corona and Riverside, providing commuters with some congestion relief. Since that time, additional employment growth in Orange County and population growth in Riverside County has led to significant increases in congestion on SR 91 to an unacceptable level of service. In 2002, voters approved an extension to the Measure A from 2009 to 2039. Sales tax revenue under the extension is projected to generate an additional $4.6 bilion to RCTC. Of the $4.6 billion, $498 million is earmarked for additional improvements to SR 91, SR 71 and the SR 914/15 interchange as follows: • One additional free lane in each direction from Orange County Line to Pierce Street $161 million • SR 91/1-15 Interchange $243 million • SR 71/SR 91 Interchange $ 26 million • SR 71 Improvements from San Bernardino to SR 91 $ 68 million Caltrans has prepared a draft PSR which reviews potential improvements to the SR 91 corridor. According to the PSR, current capacity of the SR 91 facility ranges in general from four mixed -flow lanes and two toll lanes in each 9 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION direction between Gypsum Canyon Road in Orange County and Green River Drive in Riverside County, where the facility transitions to five mixed -flow lanes and one HOV lane in each direction to SR 71. East of SR 71 through 1-15 to Pierce Street, the facility narrows to four mixed -flow lanes and one HOV lane in either direction. The most recent Measure A program plan calls for RCTC to construct one mixed4low lane in each direction of the SR 91 from the SR 241 Pierce Street An environmental analysis has not been commenced for this work. The estimate for completion of the environmental process and for obtaining applicable environmental approvals is approximately two years. The Diagnostic Review analyzes the advantages and disadvantages of proceeding with the Measure A Project as a standalone undertaking or combining this work with other improvements planned for SR 91 (i.e., the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension and Viaduct/New facility projects). B. SR 91 Express Lanes Extension To address the existing and projected congestion of the SR 91, RCTC is considering the extension of the four tolled SR 91 Express Lanes' from the Orange County line to east of 1-15 in Riverside County consistent with the existing facility. It is unknown at this time how the existing free and managed facilities will interface. However, the total expansion will result in an SR 91 comprised generally of 14 lanes within Riverside County. A Major Investment Study IMIS) jointly commissioned by RCTC and Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) in 2005 considered the expansion of the SR 91 from the Orange County line to the 1-15 in Riverside County and concluded that the at -grade additions could be accommodated mostly within the existing right-of-way. While this option assumes that the extension to the SR 91 Express Lanes will be at grade and within the SR 91 corridor, it is possible that tolling will also be applied to the Viaduct or the separate corridor. C. SR 91 Viaduct/New Facility According to the MIS, even the additional capacity provided by the implementation of the SR 91 Measure A Project and SR 91 Express Lanes Extension will not be sufficient to handle the projected demand for the SR 91. RCTC is considering additional major improvements to serve this demand, which would approximately double the existing available capacity. Options for the improvements being contemplated are: • Improvements entirely within the SR 91 corridor by way of an elevated 4-lane (potentially tolled) Viaduct from I- 15 to SR 241 • A new 4-lane corridor (potentially tolled) to the north of SR 91(MIS termed "Corridor A") from 1-15 to SR 241. The MIS conduded that, subject to geometric feasibility, the planned improvements for a Viaduct could be accommodated primarily within the existing corridor. Specifically, the MIS concluded that additional capacity within the SR 91 ROW could be accommodated through limited at -grade widening in combination with an elevated Viaduct of four to six lanes. The MIS also recognized the possibility that four to six lanes of the additional planned capacity could be added through a new corridor alignment north of SR 91 in the Santa Ana Canyon, namely Corridor A. SR 91 Express Lanes is a barrier -separated, at grade, managed lane facility currently operated by OCTA pursuant to a franchise agreement with Caltrans. The OCTA franchise expires on December 30, 2030. 10 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Concurrent to this Diagnostic Review, a study for RCTC is being conducted by PB Consult to assess the structural geometrics and feasibility of locating a Viaduct in the SR 91 corridor. The ROW costs have been estimated as part of this study and the capital costs will be provided as part of the final study in July 2006_ From a financial and technical standpoint there is a possibility of combining the SR 91 at -grade expansions with a Viaduct/New Facility. There may be significant advantages to combining these projects especially if the SR 91 Measure A Project and SR 91 Express Lanes Extension are implemented with a Viaduct in the existing corridor. This could however, add to the length of the process if the environmental documents are also combined. These expansions are not fully funded by the Measure A program and state and federal funding are becoming increasingly difficult to secure, RCTC is considering the potential for a toll facility to assist with the funding and implementation of these required improvements. The toll facility could be developed and operated by RCTC or through a P3. In either context, a preliminary traffic and revenue forecast for the SR 91 Viaduct/New Facility project is being undertaken by PB Consult, with an anticipated completion in late Summer 2006 D. Mid County Parkway In order to provide a transportation corridor that will accommodate inter -regional east -west travel patterns within western Riverside County and additional capacity for regional trips to/from Orange and LA Counties, RCTC has been studying the potential of the Mid County Parkway, a new 32-mile corridor comprised of approximately six -lanes between SR 79 in San Jacinto and 1-15 in Corona. Ca!trans District 8 completed a PSR for the MCP in December 2004. The cost estimate being provided as part of the environmental document identifies a capital cost of approximately $3.04 billion (2006$) to develop the facility which includes roadway costs, interchanges, environmental mitigation, right-of-way, etc. excluding project development costs. Originally planned to be funded with public monies (County, State and Federal) as a state freeway, RCTC is now contemplating the possibility of using tolling and a P3 to help fund the infrastructure as a county highway. However, in order to remain eligible for state and federal funding, RCTC is complying with all state and federal standards. This project is a candidate to receive some Measure A dollars, but would not be fully funded with such contribution. RCTC has also commissioned a study to assess if and how the MCP could be fully funded using traditional public finance approaches. The MCP has been identified by Executive Order for environmental streamlining. A final determination as to whether the MCP will be tolled is required in order for the environmental analysis to be completed and the environmental approvals to be obtained. Currently, RCTC estimates that the EIS/ESR will be completed in 2008. E. interstate 15 Expansion Interstate 15 is a major truck and commuter route running north -south through Riverside County. It is a six to eight - lane divided freeway with three to four mixed -flow lams in each direction from San Diego County to San Bernardino County. Caltrans has completed a number of Fact Sheets in anticipation of undertaking a PSR in 2006. The freeway is currently at or near capacity and, in some locations, beyond the designed carrying capacity for the facility. The significant planned growth in the surrounding communities along the corridor is expected to exacerbate the declining levels of service and potentially lead to the operational breakdown of the facility unless additional capacity is provide in the very near future. Additionally, the lack of an existing HOV lane does not encourage commuters to carpool, which results in additional congestion. 11 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Measure A contemplates one additional mixed -flow lane being added to 1-15 in either direction from San Diego County to San Bernardino County. Further potential improvements under consideration by Ca!trans include one to two High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes in either direction. The improvements will be accommodated within the current ROW. Project costs from the San Bemardino County line to the 1-15/1-215 Junction are estimated in the 1-15 Fact Sheet at $3454359 million which includes roadway items, structures, right-of-way, etc. There is money within the Measure A to build the mixed -flow lanes. However, additional funding will be required for the HOV lanes. RCTC is considering the potential for tolling the expanded capacity on the 1-15 to assist with the funding shortfall F. Candidate Proiects Summary The following tables provide a summary of the existing and planned candidate projects. Existing Project ConCg(lrations Section Descriotlon SR 91 (1) SR 91 (1) SR 91 (1) MCP (2) 1-15 (3) 1-15 (3) Orange County Line to SR71 SR 71 to 1-15 1-15 to Pierce St. San Jacinto to Corona SD County line to 15/215 SB County line to 15/215 12 10-12 lanes 8 none 6 Main Free Lanes 10 8-10 6 none 8 6 Toiled Lanes 0 0 0 none none none HOV 2 2 2 none none none (1) M1S Final Project Report Loran Preferred Strategy Repay, January, 2006. (2) MCP PSR, Caftans, December, 2004. (311-15 Fact Sheet Cottons, 2006. Planned Prove€:t SR 91 11) Cot gy-ation ,, �n Orange County Line to SR71 . _ .. _ 16 _ .. free La;eS 12 r0(709cti COI'. Jlt3lJr 8t,Lri Tv.,e[i L?I'e5 TBD �-1_ TBD SR 91 11) SR 71 to 1-15 14-16lanes 12-14 TBD TBD SR 91 11) 1-15 to Pierce St 10 8 TBD TBD Corridor A (1) Orange County Line. to 1-15 4-6 4-6 TBD TBD MCP (2) San Jacinto to Corona 6 6 TBD TBD 1-15 (31 SD County line to 15/215 14 12 TBD 2 1-15 (3) SB County line to 15/215 10 8 . TBD 2 (1) MIS Final Project Report: Locally Preferred Strategy Report, January, 2006 and Draft PSR May 2006. Includes baseline improvements to SR 91 contained in Measure A two lanes from County Lure to Pierce Street_ based on Maximum Reasonable Lanes in Exhibit 8 of the MIS Final Project Report Locally Preferred Strategy Report January, 2006. (2) MCP PSR, Caftans, December, 2004. 131145 Fact Sheet Cantons, 2006 12 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION V. Analysis This section provides the resuhs of applying the methodology to the candidate projects. A. System Interface This section addresses whether system interface issues can be managed (i.e., how well the planned improvement integrates with the existing infrastructure and other planned improvements) 1. SR 91 Measure A Project The planned Measure A Project expansion to SR 91 has been studied extensively and it is expected that the project design will fully integrate the lanes within the existing SR 91 ROW to ensure a smooth system interface. If the Measure A Project was combined with the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension or Viaduct/New Facility, it might provide greater assurance of successful system interface (though the timing, size and scope of a combined project and the likelihood and'schedule of obtaining environmental approvals may render a combined project concept untenable). For purposes of the Phase' Diagnostic Review, there do not appear to be any substantial gaps in information for the implementation of the Measure A Project. The assessment of system interface issues for this project is Low. The risk of interface issues with other network infrastructure can be mitigated through proper design and construction planning. As a result, there is little threat to the project either delivered conventionally by RCTC or as a P3 from system interface issues. 2. SR 91 Express Lanes Extension The at -grade expansion for the SR 91 has been reviewed in the MIS and can be accommodated primarily within the existing ROW. The interface with the existing SR 91 Express Lanes and the mixed -flow lanes as well as the interchange with 1-15 will present important interface challenges for this project. The system interface issue assessment for this project is Moderate. Given the challenges with integrating a new toll facility with an existing one, as well as with existing mixed -flow lanes, design and construction will need to be carefully planned. Continued cooperation between RCTC and OCTA will help to ensure that system interface issues arising front incorporating'a new toll facility in Riverside County with the existing SR 91 Express Lanes facility are adequately addressed. 3. SR 91 Viaduct/New Facility The expansion or potential new facility either within the SR 91 ROW or in an alternate corridor requires further study. However, the MIS took considerable effort to determine that the improvements would interface with the existing infrastructure if planned appropriately. RCTC anticipates that the flow of traffic at the I-15 and SR 241 interchanges will be the most challenging. The improvements to these interchanges will also have significant cost implications which will be provided in the Geometries Study. Should RCTC pursue the Viaduct within the SR 91 corridor, potential connectivity to the SR 91 Express Lanes at SR 241 may also be considered. As part of assessing this issue, it will be critical that the planned improvements integrate seamlessly with the existing SR 91 Express Lanes facility in Orange County. Similarly, if a separate corridor outside the SR 91 is pursued, the termini of the corridor and its potential integration the SR 91 Express Lanes will be 13 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION complex and will need to be well planned_ This potentially presents a significant challenge and will need to have the cooperation of both OCTA and RCTC in order to fully integrate the two systems. Information required to finalize the assessment of the system interface issue for the SR 91 Viaduct is primarily focused on determining the physical scope and location of the project. Much of this work is already underway through a preliminary traffic and revenue study, the geometrics analysis and the SR 91 Implementation Plan and other studies. Information required to finalize the assessment of a separate corridor with respect to system interface issues will also focus on the physical scrape and location of the project The SR 91 Implementation Plan and the traffic and revenue study are aimed at providing more definition for these candidate projects. The implementation of these candidate projects is quite complex. The potential interface between either alternative project with the existing SR 91 Express Lanes, the 1-15 and SR 241 freeways are particularly challenging. As a result, the overall assessment of the system interface issue is High. These challenges, if not appropriately addressed, could threaten the viability of the project itself as well as its potential for a P3 delivery model. 4. Mid County Parkway The MCP will extend from the SR 79 in San Jacinto to west of the 1-15 in Corona. This may potentially create congestion at the interchange of the MCP and 1-15. It is anticipated that the interchange with Cape') Road and the I- 15 will be constructed with TUMF funding prior to completion of the MCP facility in order to partially mitigate congestion that may occur at the I-15/MCP interchange. The PSR identified the interchange at 1-15 as a significant project constraint unless the facility is extended west of I-15 into Orange County. This would be accommodated by the development of Corridor B as defined in the MIS or through other improvements in or around the 1-15 corridor. Should Corridor B or other improvements be constructed, this system interface constraint would be mitigated. Should Corridor B or other improvements not be developed or until such time as they are, this system interface issue will continue to exist, requiring careful assessment and development of mitigation strategies. Information required to finalize the assessment of the system interface issue for the MCP is primarily focused on addressing the traffic flow issues at the I-15/MCP interchange. Due to the uncertainty as to whetter or how the interface issues are going to be addressed (Corridor B or other improvements), the issues assessment for this project is High. The project itself is feasible without Corridor B or other improvements, however, it may be more attractive, particularly as a P3, if Corridor B or alternative improvements are implemented. 5. Interstate 15 Expansion The two primary system interface issues of concern are the interchange of the 1-15 with SR 91 and with the MCP. The 1-15 / SR 91 interchange must be well designed to ensure traffic flow is improved and does not bottleneck. In addition, the interface with the MCP noted above must be addressed. With the exception of these two items, there are currently no apparent concerns with the 1-15 expansion in terms of system interface. As such, the issue assessment for the 1-15 system interface is Low. Accordingly, while important to the feasibility of the project and as a P3, the challenges here are more easily mitigated. 14 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION B. Design and Construction This section addreso.ee significant design and construction issues and constraints affecting the candidate projects. In the analysis of design and construction parameters, the following aspects are addressed (with a focus on identifying any unique conditions or characteristics of the projects): 1 Right -of -Way 2 Rail Crossings 3 Utilities 4 Geotechnical 5 Hazardous Materials 6 Constructability 1. Right -of -Way (ROW) RCTC generally acquires property for its projects through negotiations with landowners and reaching agreements to purchase. However, RCTC may utilize its power of eminent domain as necessary to secure right-of-way for its transportation corridors_ The assessment of issues in this section is not focused on whether RCTC can secure the right-of-way, but rather the cost and practicality of so doing. In other words, the analysis is focused on whether there are circumstances (e.g., property taking that destroys a vibrant industrial area and carries heavy financial . impacts) where the cost and practicality of acquiring a property impact the feasibility and financeability of the project. SR 91 Measure A Project v The SR 91 Measure A Project will be incorporated primarily into the existing ROW. However, as a result of the new lanes, additional work is required at various interchanges and crossings. Consequently, the PSR indicates that a minimal amount of new ROW will be required and will be easily secured. The cost estimate for ROW acquisition in the PSR ranges from $3.7 million to $5.2 million including utilities. No additional information is required for this issue and the risk assessment is Low. There appears to be no material impediment to the Measure A Project from ROW issues. SR 91 Express Lanes Extension Some at -grade portions of the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension will be accommodated within the existing ROW. In certain locations, however, additional ROW will need to be acquired. Due to the constricted nature of the current SR 91 corridor and the types of high value land uses adjacent to it, the process for acquiring an expanded ROW may be lengthy, politically challenging and costly. The Geometrics Study estimates that the ROW acquisition costs will be approximately $12.2-13.5 million including utilities. The MIS and PSR provide the necessary information to address this issue. As a result of the required ROW takings to facilitate this project, the assessment for ROW issues is Moderate. It is likely that the ROW will be acquired, however not without some cost and effort. Obtaining the ROW is critical to the success of the project and its attractiveness as a P3. 15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SR 91 Viaduct/New Facility Should a Viaduct be located in the SR 91 corridor, additional lands will need to be acquired to accommodate construction and the ultimate freeway configuration. The Geometries Study estimates the ROW costs at $15.9-17.5 million including utilities and indicates that the impact of the Viaduct particularly in Corona may be significant. A new facility in a separate corridor outside the SR 91 will require acquisition of the entire corridor. The MIS estimates the cost to locate additional capacity in a newly acquired corridor at $575 million including utilities. The Geometries Study currently underway will provide an updated estimate of the ROW requirements and acquisition costs for the at -grade improvements and the Viaduct within the SR 91 corridor only. The SR 91 Implementation Plan will continue to look at the separate corridor (Corridor A) and will provide the ROW requirements and acquisitions costs. A financial analysis of the project will help determine whether ROW acquisition costs and issues materially impact the financeability of the project. As part of determining the final configuration (i.e., Viaduct in SR 91 or separate Corridor A) and ROW requirements, an,assessment of the costs, schedule and other issues associated with acquiring the necessary ROW will be undertaken. Until the geometric analysis is completed and the ROW impacts provided, it is difficult to assess a ranking for the alternatives in this project. However, acquiring the ROW is critical to the success of not only the project but also its potential as a P3 project. Given this criticality and the significant cost initially estimated for ROW acquisitions (as to Corridor A►, an assessment of High is ascribed. Once additional information is received, this assessment may change. Mid County Parkway Although a specific alignment has not yet been chosen (a number of alternative routes are under study at this time), the Ca!trans PSR estimates that the MCP will require the acquisition of approximately 540 hectares (1,335 acres) of ROW. The study estimates ROW acquisition costs of the 540 hectares at $182 million. An update of these parameters will be necessary when the final route is selected. A financial analysis of the project will help determine ROW acquisition costs and issues that materially impact the financeability of the project. As part of determining the final route and ROW requirements, an assessment of the costs, schedule and other issues associated with acquiring the necessary ROW will be undertaken. Given that the ROW requirements are relatively unknown at this time, a ranking for this issue is not provided at this time. Once additional ROW information is available, an assessment will be ascribed. This is a critical component to the project success which will also impact its attractiveness as a P3 depending on the costs and timirig associated with the ROW acquisitions. 16 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - interstate 15 The 1-15 will be incorporated into the existing ROW as much as possible. Minimal action is therefore anticipated. As a result, the assessment for ROW issues for this project is Low and there is little or no expected impact to the project as a P3. 2. Rail Crossings SR 91 Measure A Project According to the PSR, the SR 91 Measure A Project will be impacted by existing rail rights -of -way including the BNSF/Metro link facilities within the project limits at the West Prado Bridge and Temescal Wash. A number of fairly standard agreements with the railroads and permits will be required. Since the SR 91 currently interfaces with the railways, it is likely that the Measure A Project wilt not be difficult to incorporate, as a result, the issue is ascribed a ranking of Low. SR 91 Express Lanes Extension The at -grade expansion to the SR 91 may need to accommodate additional widenings for existing rail facilities (e.g., Prado Overhead, the West Prado Overhead and the Temescal Wash Overhead). For locations where the project crosses the rail lines, bridges will likely be built to go over the tracks or the existing tracks will be depressed under the roadway. The railroads will likely require that no material interruption of regular rail service occur during construction. Additional information is needed in order to provide a final ranking for this project It is anticipated that the rail issues will be overcome through appropriate design planning and negotiations with the rail authorities. Consequently, a ranking of Low is given for this issue_ This issue also is not likely to impact the projects potential asaP3. SR 91 Viaduct/New Facility A Viaduct within the SR 91 corridor will encounter similar interfaces with the rail facilities as the SR 91 at -grade expansions. Again, additional information will allow a final ranking for this project to be provided. It is anticipated that the rail issues will be overcome through appropriate design planning and negotiations with the rail authorities. This issue is not likely to impact the projects potential as a P3. As a result, an assessment of Low is ascribed. With a new corridor outside SR 91, impact on existing rail facilities will need to be considered. One of the proposed alignments for this expansion would, in part, run along the Burlington Northem Santa Fe Railway ROW. It is possible that this could become a critical issue to the success of a P3 delivery model. Additional information will be provided through the SR 91 Implementation Plan at which time a ranking will be provided. Mid County Parkway Since the alignment for the MCP has not yet been established, a rail impact analysis has not yet been completed. Technical studies are underway and preliminary information will be available later in 2006. However, RCTC does not anticipate that rail crossings will pose a significant challenge. As a result, an assessment of Low is provided. 17 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Interstate 15 With the planned improvements for the 1-15 being contained within the existing ROW, there are three structures impacted (Atberhill Overhead, East Corona Overhead and Mission Blvd. Overhead). ROTC anticipates that the expansions will be in the median. As a result, the ranking for this project is Low and the impact on P3 potential is minimal. 3. Utilities For each of the candidate projects, appropriate utility identification/relocation studies and underground/subsurface utility studies will be required. Tb date, information regarding utilities is preliminary. Consequently, the issue assessments in this section are also preliminary. These studies will highlight significant issues with respect to impact on project delivery from which a more detailed and substantive assessment of the impact on P3 potential can be completed. SR 91 Measure A Project According to the MIS, because the SR 91 Measure A Project is mostly within the existing ROW, it is not anticipated that utility issues will be significant, costly or have a material impact to the project schedule. A ranking of low is assessed for this issue. The PSR notes the following utility companies that will be involved in this project: • The Gas Company • Charter Communications • City of Riverside -Water • Verizon • Southern California Edison • City of Riverside-Pubtic Works • Kinder Morgan • Williams Communications + City of Riverside -Energy Delivery • Eastern Municipal Water District • Western Municipal Water • Department of Water Resources District • Sprint Communications • Pacific Bell City of Perris Public Works • Edgemont Community Services • City of Moreno Valley • Metropolitan Water District District • City of Corona Dept of Water & BNSF/RCTC Railroad Power SR 91 Express Lanes Extension The MIS indicates that because the SR 91 corridor for the Express Lanes Extension runs through existing developed areas, an allowance should be made in the construction costs estimates for utility relocation. With appropriate planning, it is likely that utility issues will be resolved. An assessment of Low is ascribed for this issue. It is unlikely that utilities will have a material negative impact on the project as a P3. 18 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SR 91 Viaduct/New Facility A Viaduct within the SR 91 corridor will likely encounter similar utility issues as with the at -grade expansions. For purposes of this Diagnostic Phase I review, it is assumed that utility issues will be overcome by appropriate planning and negotiations with the utility providers. An assessment of Low is assigned to this option. It is unlikely that utilities will significantly impact the potential for this project to be delivered as a P3. If a new facility is pursued outside the SR 91 ROW in an alternate corridor, utilities may be a much more significant issue. As the potential alignment has not been selected and no utility study information is available, an assessment is not provided here. However, once additional work is completed through the SR 91 Implementation Plan, a ranking can be ascribed. Mid County Parkway While a final alignment has not yet been confirmed, RCTC anticipates that utilities will not present a challenge to the project, therefore an assessment of Low is ascribed. interstate 15 Given that the planned improvements for 1-15 are to be accommodated within the existing ROW, the impact on utilities is likely minimal. However, the PSR to be completed by Caltrans will provide a utility Information Sheet that will contain the information to allow for a ranking of this issue. For the purposes of this report, it is assumed that utility issues will be overcome by appropriate planning and negotiations with the utility providers. An assessment of Low is assigned to this project, however may be re-evaluated once more information is available. 4. Geotechnical For each the candidate project, appropriate geotechnical studies will be required. To date, information regarding subsurface conditions is preliminary. Consequently, the issue assessments in this section are also preliminary. These studies will highlight significant issues with respect to impact on project delivery from which a more detailed and substantive assessment of the impact on P3 potential can be completed. SR 91 Measure A Project Since the Measure A Project will require some additional ROW, geotechnical studies will be required where new lands are brought into the facility. For the purposes of this report, it is assumed that given the improvements are primarily within the existing ROW, geotechnical issues will be minimal and can be addressed with appropriate design and construction mitigation measures. As a result, a ranking of Low is ascribed. SR 91 Express Lanes Extension Additional geotechnical work will be required for any expansion beyond existing structures and pavement in terms of load bearing capacity, foundation design and seismic protection. Further geotechnical analysis will be completed as part of the PSR for this project. Given that the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension will be within the existing corridor similar to SR 91 Measure A Project, a ranking for this issue of Low is ascribed. This assessment will be updated as 19 " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION further information is received. However, it is unlikely that geotechnical issues would impact the viability of the additional at -grade expansions as a P3. SR 91 Viaduct/New Facility Additional geotechnical work will be required for any expansion beyond existing structures and pavement as well as for the Viaduct in terms of load baring capacity, foundation design, seismic protection and impact on these issues for the SR 91 corridor elements beneath the potential Viaduct. If a new facility is pursued outside the SR 91 ROW, detailed geotechnical studies will be required. Initial preliminary geotechnical work will be completed at the time the PSR is undertaken for either option of this project The MIS indicates geotechnical risks related to the Mindermann landslide and proximity to ground rupture potential zone at the Whittier and Chino faults. Given that the Viaduct represents a double -decking of a high capacity corridor in a seismically sensitive environment, geotechnical issues will be significant. While much additional information is required, a preliminary ranking for this issue as to the Viaduct is High. If a new corridor is pursued outside the SR 91 corridor, geotechnical issues will not be known until further studies are completed. As a result, a ranking for this issue as to a new corridor is not provided but will be updated as information is received. Mid County Parkway Since the right-of-way has not, been selected for the MCP, geotechnical studies have not yet been initiated. Once more information is received, an assessment of this issue will be provided. Interstate 15 Given that the planned expansions to the 1-15 are to be contained within the existing ROW, geotechnical issues are likely minimal. The risk assessment for this issue is Low as it is unlikely that geotechnical concerns would negatively impact the viability of the project from a P3 perspective. 5. Hazardous Materials SR 91 Measure A Project The PSR notes that, while no previous sites with hazardous waste or material were noted during the initial site assessment investigations, the project will require a Hazardous Waste Environmental Assessment (ESA) Phase I, and Aerial Deposited lead (ADU Survey, and an asbestos survey for all affected structures. The PSR Site Assessment aSA) Cheddist indicates that tyre is a Moderate risk with respect to hazardous materials. This is a project risk irrespective of delivery model. With appropriate investigation, prudent design and construction and use of reasonable risk mitigation and allocation strategies, hazardous materials risks can likely be adequately addressed. 20 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SR 91 Express Lanes Extension Similar to the SR 91 Measure A Project, the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension at -grade will require hazardous materials investigations. This study will be completed as part of the PSR for this project. The MIS notes a number of potential concerns to be investigated induding contaminated soils, ADL on unpaved shoulders, lead -based paint, asbestos in existing structures during demolition, pesticides, PCBs and PHCs. As with the SR 91 Measure A Project, there is a project risk to this issue which can be mitigated through appropriate investigation, prudent design and construction and use of reasonable risk mitigation and allocation strategies. As a result, a Moderate assessment is provided. SR 91 Viaduct/New Facility As with the SR 91 Measure A Project and the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension, hazardous materials investigations will be required for the Viaduct within the SR 91 corridor given that additional ROW and structure alterations will be required to accommodate the facility. If a separate corridor is chosen as the preferred alternative, more significant hazardous materials investigations may be necessary. Initial studies will be completed at the time the PSR is undertaken for either option of this project. As a result, a ranking for this issue is not provided at this time, however will be updated as additional information is received_ As with the SR 91 Measure A Project and the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension, there is a project risk to this issue which can be mitigated through appropriate investigation, prudent design and construction and use of reasonable risk mitigation and allocation strategies. Mid County Parkway Since the right -of --way has not been selected for the MCP, hazardous materials studies have not yet been initiated. Once more information is received, an assessment of this issue will be provided. Interstate 15 Given that the planned expansions to the 1-15 are to be contained within the existing ROW, hazardous materials issues are Ikely minimal. The risk assessment for this issue is Low and it is unlikely that hazardous materials concerns would materially negatively impact the viability of the project from a P3 perspective. This ranking will be updated once the PSR is available. 6. Constructability Constructability focuses on the technical feasibility of implementing the project scope in the context of cost, schedule and practicality. SR 91 Measure A Project The most significant constructability issue for the SR 91 Measure A Project relates to the traffic management challenges with building this improvement in an environment in which heavy volumes oftraffic must be accommodated. Construction work may be limited to off-peak hours and over night; temporary detours will have to 21 " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION be utilized and lane reductions may be required. Through the PSR, a Traffic Management Plan (fMP) has been . developed to minimize traffic impacts and delays during construction_ The cost estimated for the TMP is approximately $3.3 million. In addition, as a result of adding the Measure A Project mixed flow lanes to the SR 91, other improvements in the corridor will be required, including expansions to existing interchanges. In particular, the 1-15/SR 91 and the SR 71/SR 91 interchanges will require significant work_ Through appropriate planning, however, it is likely that these interchange constructability issues can be resolved. Given the relative simplicity of providing two additional at -grade free lanes on the SR 91, the ranking of the constructability issues is Low. The PSR and the MIS have considered this project in enough depth to determine that there are no significant design or construction impediments to this project. SR 97 Express Lanes Extension For at -grade Express Lanes Extension within the SR 91 corridor, the technical design appears manageable, subject to the traffic management issues described in the context of the SR 91 Measure A Project. Phasing of construction with other improvements and traffic management during construction will need to be carefully planned in order to minimize disruption to users. In addition, significant interchange improvements such as SR 91/1-15 interchange must be designed and phased to minimize impacts on users during construction. Given the relative simplicity of providing additional at -grade capacity on the SR 91, the ranking of the constructability issues is Low. The MIS determined that there appear to be no significant design or construction impediments to this project that would cause the project itself to fail or fail as a P3. SR 91 Viaduct/New Facility If a Viaduct is located within the SR 91 corridor, there are significant constructability concerns. The structure itself is more complicated from a design and construction perspective than at -grade lanes particularly in an earthquake and flood prone area. The MIS indicates that the size of the piers for the Viaduct may cause a net loss of at -grade lanes during construction. This may have a significant impact on traffic flow especially during peak hours. Given the volume of traffic within this corridor now, the traffic management during construction for peak and off-peak hours will be critical to project success. For a separate Corridor A, design and construction complexity will depend in large measure on the location of the corridor. The MIS anticipates a separate corridor north of SR 91 in part along the BNSF line which could require an elevated structure. If this is the case, design and construction of an elevated structure will have certain complexities (including earthquake and flood/drainage design issues). If Corridor A proceeds at grade, the constructability of the project will likely be easier and may be managed through appropriate design and construction techniques. Traffic management for a separate green -field Corridor A will not likely be an issue except around interchanges. Depending on the combination of improvements to SR 91, phasing will likely be a critical constructability issue. If all of the capacity improvements are located within the SR 91 corridor (i.e., undertaking the at -grade SR 91 Express Lanes Extension at the same time as the Viaduct), phasing and timing of construction will be complex. Given that this is an existing over -capacity freeway, traffic management and lane additions will need to be carefully planned. If 22 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION the improvements within the SR 91 corridor are not undertaken at the same time, careful consideration will be required during design in order to minimize "throwaway" costs and infrastructure of the earlier projects when the later projects are added. In other words, "ultimate" build -out including all SR 91 corridor projects must be taken into account during development and implementation of "interim" projects. The Geometries Study will provide additional insight to technical issues of constructability along with the cost implications of locating the Viaduct within the SR 91 corridor. A financial analysis of the project will help determine the impact of construction costs on the financeability of the project. Given the complexity of the Viaduct from a constructability perspective, an assessment of High is given to this project. A green -field Corridor A project will likely encounter fewer constructability issues and is ascribed a ranking of Moderate. Constructability of either option is critical to project success and must be a focus of ongoing study during the planning process. As a result, there is a significant impact of constructability on the attractiveness of the projects to the market place as a P3. Mid County Parkway To date, a preferred route for the MCP has not yet been selected and, therefore, no design studies have been completed. The PSR indicates that the main technical construction issue will likely be accommodating mountainous terrain along the corridor_ This likely can be dealt with through appropriate design and construction techniques. Further information on the project scope will be developed as the process proceeds. A financial analysis of the project will help determine the impact of construction costs on the financeability of the project. A ranking for this issue is not provided at this time, but will be updated as information becomes available. As noted above, constructability will be paramount to project and P3 success. interstate 15 Given that planned improvements will be within the 1-15 corridor as an expansion to an existing highway, significant technical design and construction issues may not be present for this project The most significant constructability issue for the 1-15 expansion likely relates to traffic management and accommodating traffic during peak hours. While an effective traffic management plan will likely be developed, there will be cost and schedule implications for delivery of the project. The PSR and a financial analysis of the project will help determine the impact of construction costs on the financeability of the project. Because traffic management appears to be the only relevant constructability issue that might have material cost implications, an assessment of Low is ascribed for this project. Constructability in this case does not appearto impede the project or its potential as a P3. 23 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION C. Operations/Maintenance In this section, the focus is on the operations and maintenance aspects of the candidate projects. The operations/maintenance issues are addressed from two perspectives: • Managing risk through appropriate risk sharing • Defining specifications SR 91 Measure A Project Caltrans currently operates and maintains the SR 91 as a state highway. It is anticipated that this will continue and will apply to the SR 91 Measure A Project once operational. As a result, the issue assessment for this project is Low. SR 91 Express Lanes Extension If a P3 model is selected to deliver the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension, the specific P3 model will impact the operations and maintenance of the facility. It is anticipated that the toll facility will likely be managed by a third party chosen by the private partner. Certain O&M issues arise when a private operator is engaged that will need to be addressed during the procurement process: Responsibility from "fence to fence"— RCTC will need to consider how responsibilities should be shared for the mixed -flow lanes as well as the toll facility. If the private sector partner has responsibility for the entire at -grade facility, there may be certain economies of scale and operational efficiencies that can be gained. However, Caltrans may resist giving up control over the existing right-of-way and private partners may not view taking over maintenance for a non -revenue producing portion of the road as attractive. This issue will need to be assessed in light of the development of design and financial modeling to see the implications of including or excluding operations and maintenance obligations and the interaction between the mixed -flow lanes with toll facilities. Interface with OCTA and Caltrans on the Orange County portion of the facility— RCTC will want to think about how O&M services under a P3 model are integrated with the SR 91 Express Lanes which are currently operated . by OCTA, which contracts much of the work out to a private firm. • Interoperability of tolling facility— (seamless interface for consumers with the SR 91 Express Lanes and other toll facilities state-wide and possibly beyond). In addition to general toll interoperability, interoperability and integration issues between the existing SR 91 Express Lanes and the new toll facilities built as part of these potential projects will be critical and will likely require consideration of pricing strategies, tolling policy, traffic management, compliance with financial covenants, etc. • Regulation and enforcement with respect to violators —Consideration will need to be given as to how toll violators will be managed with an external O&M contract. Technology and toll system decisions will be particularly relevant items to address_ 24 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Each of these issues can be addressed through the appropriate contract negotiations and regulatory control. However, it is likely that the integration with the existing SR 91 Express Lanes facility will be very challenging. As a result, a ranking of Moderate is ascribed to this issue. It is unlikely that O&M issues will make the project itself infeasible or lower the attractiveness as a P3. SR 91 Viaduct/New Facility With a Viaduct within the SR 91 corridor, the same issues as noted above for the at -grade SR 91 Express Lanes Extension will need to be addressed. The SR 91 Viaduct also brings the issue of: • Rehabilitation —If delivered using a P3 model, the operator of the Viaduct will need access to the at -grade infrastructure in order to rehabilitate, reconstruct and/or undertake major maintenance for Viaduct structures. Close coordination between operators (Caltrans and the private operator) will be necessary. If Corridor A is a state highway and operated by Ca!trans, there will be minimal concerns regarding O&M. If Corridor A is delivered through a P3, the issues of fence to fence responsibility, interface with the existing SR 91 Express Lanes and SR 241, interoperability and regulation and enforcement will need to be considered. As with the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension, the Viaduct and Corridor A do not appear to have O&M issues that would present a significant deleterious impact to the projects. However, due to the potential integration challenges with the SR 91 Express Lanes, a ranking of Moderate is assessed. However, through appropriate contract negotiations with a private sector provider, O&M issues can be resolved and are unlikely to prevent the project as a P3 from proceeding successfully. Mid County Parkway No current contractual terms exist for operations or maintenance of the MCP. A public agency such RCTC may be the operator or a private sector operator may be in place through a P3 procurement. Similar to the SR91, RCTC should consider the following O&M issues for the MCP: • .fnteroperability of tolling facility (seamless interface for consumers) • Regulation and enforcement with respect to toll violators. Given that the MCP is a green -field development, it is likely that O&M arrangements can be satisfactorily negotiated through the procurement process. As a result, a ranking of Low is assessed to this project. At this time, there appears to be nothing that would negatively impact the project as a P3 from an O&M perspective. Interstate 15 Caltrans currently operates and maintains the 1-15. If free lanes are added to the facility, then Caltrans will likely continue to be the operator. If a P3 model involving the transfer of O&M responsibility with respect to additional tolled lanes is pursued, a new operations and maintenance arrangement may be required. As with the SR 91, it is 25 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION possible that a private partner would not be interested or allowed (by Caltrans) to take over operations and maintenance of free portions of 1-15. This issue will need to be further investigated as the project proceeds. As with the SR 91 projects and the MCP, similar operations and maintenance issues arise as for the 1-15 facility. These will need to be addressed during the procurement process: • Responsibility for "fence to fence" operations and maintenance • Interoperability of tolling facility (seamless interface for consumers) • Regulation and enforcement with respect to toll violators • Rehabilitation access over free lanes. Given that the issues can be addressed substantially through appropriate planning and through the procurment process, the assessment of operations/maintenance issues is Low. D. Legislation SR 91 Measure Project The SR 91 Measure A Project does not require specific legislation to proceed under a conventional design -bid -build approach. If RCTC wishes to pursue the project on a design -build or P3 basis, it does not currently have legislative authority to do so and new legislation would be required. SR 91 Express Lanes Extension If the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension is delivered by way of a P3 tolled facility, specific legislation will likely be required. There may be limited opportunities to proceed under the existing regime of AB 1010 and the SR 91 Franchise Agreement between OCTA and Caltrans, but any approach will have significant challenges and financial constraints. SR 91 Viaduct/New facility If the SR 91 Viaduct/New Facility is delivered by way of a P3 tolled facility, specific legislation will likely be required. With respect to the Viaduct, there may be limited opportunities to proceed under the existing regime of AB 1010 and the SR 91 Franchise Agreement between OCTA and Caltrans, but any approach will have significant challenges and financial constraints. Mid County Parkway If the MCP is delivered by way of a P3 tolled facility, specific legislation will be required. There may be limited opportunities to proceed under the existing regime of Government Code 5956, but structuring such a transaction will be challenging and may not be commercially viable. 26 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Interstate 15 If the 1-15 is delivered by way of a P3 tolled facility, specific legislation will be required. Overall Legislative issue A�se44ment At the current time, no clear and limited risk legislative authority exists to deliver any of the candidate projects on a P3 basis. Securing that authority will be of paramount importance and wiH dictate the ability of RCTC to move forward with procurements and implementation of any project as a P3. Unless that authority can be obtained in the little time remaining in the 2006 legislative session, it win not be available until the 2007 legislative session and would not take effect, absent an urgency provision, until January 2008. The key issues with respect to legislative authority are: • Current lack of clear and limited risk legislative authority • Need to develop and commence implementation of a comprehensive legislative strategy to overcome and address the current legislative authority gap • If not obtained in the 2007 session, there is potential for legislative authority to have schedule impacts on project implementation (except for SR 91 Measure A Project facility if done conventionally) As a result of these factors, an assessment of Nigh for legislative authority is ascribed. Securing the appropriate legislation to permit P3 tolling is essential to the projects' attractiveness to the market. E. Acceptability 1. Public Acceptability SR 91 Measure A Project Since the SR 91 Measure A Project is part of the Measure A program which was supported by residents of Riverside County through voting to continue the sales tax, the public acceptability of the Measure A Project is considered positive. There do not appear to be any significant challenges with respect to public acceptability for the Measure A Project. As such, a rank of Law is ascribed to this project. SR 91 Express Lanes Extension Through the MIS, RCTC and OCTA have undertaken initial public consultation regarding the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension. Three rounds of public meetings were held within Orange and Riverside Counties during the MIS process. Each round coincided with a strategic deliverable of the study — Purpose and Need Statement, Conceptual Screening Alternatives, Strategic Alternatives — and consisted of a number of public workshops, open houses and public meetings. The main concerns raised during the consultations include: • Issues of congestion at specific interchanges with other State Routes and interchanges in the City of Corona • 1-15 congestion 27 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION • City street congestion paralleling SR 91 through Anaheim and Corona • Congestion during weekend hours • Irrpacts to residential and commercial developments • Safety and accessibility for EMS vehicles with no feasible alternative to traveling the SR 91 • Attracting more jobs to Riverside County • Providing more affordable housing in Orange County • Separating truck and automobile traffic Participants in Orange County overwhelmingly supported the use of tolls to fund the potential improvements to the corridor while those in Riverside County were opposed to tolls citing affordability as a major factor. Extending the SR 91 Express Lanes was not widely supported by participants in Corona but was supported by other communities. Some suggested additional developer fees for new residential development in Riverside County as a potential source of project funding. The results of the public outreach clearly indicate support for expanding the current over -capacity facilities and creating new projects to augment capacity and reduce congestion. However, the way capacity is expanded, the use of tolls and the means of funding the project raised certain issues. Public acceptability will be important to the project's success as a tolled P3 facility. Given the conflicting views on tolling throughout the MIS study area, an assessment of Moderate is assigned to this project. SR 91 Viaduct/New Facility. Through the MIS, RCTC and OCTA have also undertaken initial public consultation for the Viaduct/New Facility for SR 91. Three rounds of public meetings were held within Orange and Riverside Counties during the MIS process. Each round coincided with a strategic deliverable of the study - Purpose and Need Statement, Conceptual Screening Alternatives, Strategic Alternatives - and consisted of a number of public workshops, open houses and public meetings. The concerns raised for the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension project were mirrored for the Viaduct and Corridor A. In addition to the comments noted above for the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension, participants indicated the following concerns: • Impacts of Corridor A north of SR 91 on existing communities Corridor A located too far north to serve the needs of those in southern Orange County, Lake Elsinore and Temecula • Corridor A not able to alleviate congestion on 1-15 and other local freeways As with the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension, there is public support for expanding freeway capacity. Again, public acceptability will be important to the viability of the Viaduct or Corridor A as a tolled P3 project. Since the views on tolling are sufficiently conflicting at this lime, an assessment of Moderate is assigned to both alternatives. 28 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Mid County Parkway Public meetings were held in the fall of 2004 to determine the scope of studies to be undertaken for the MCP project as well as route alternatives and issues for RCTC to consider. Additional public outreach will be part of the project evolution as alternatives are assessed and refined. Public input indicated the following benefits to the MCP project: • Relieve traffic congestion • Improve safety • East -west alternative to SR 60 and SR 91 • Less traffic on local streets • Better connections with SR 79 and 1-215 Concerns raised during public consultations include: • Effects on homes and businesses • Impacts on wildlife habitat areas • Increased traffic on 1-15 • Impacts to air quality • Lengthy process to build As RCTC continues with its public consultation program for the MCP, the extent to which the public acceptability is positive will be evaluated. There is clear support overall for the project which was induded in the Measure A. Given the public comment both for and against tolling on the SR 91 projects, the potential tolling of the MCP may meet with some public opposition_ The importance of public acceptability to the success as a P3 project is equally important for the MCP as the SR 91 projects. Asa result, a ranking of Moderate is provided at this time. Once additional input is received, a final ranking can be assessed. interstate 15 Since the free lane portion of the planned improvements to the 1-15 are part of the Measure A program which was supported by residents of Riverside County through voting to continue the sales tax, the public acceptability for this component is considered positive. However, the potential tolling of Express Lanes Extension of the facility will face the same public acceptability issues as mentioned for the other candidate projects. Again, public acceptance of tolling will greatly impact the viability of the tolled portion of the project as a P3. As a result, an assessment of Moderate is ascribed for this issue. 29 " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 2. Political Acceptability SR 91 MeasureA Project The SR 91 Measure A Project appears to be well supported by the political bodies and agencies at all levels including county, state and federal given the Measure A support and the progress on the PSR. There do not appear to be any political barriers to a successful project deliver and, as such, a Low ranking is provided. SR 91 Express Lanes Extension Through the MIS, RCTC and OCTA have undertaken consultations and briefings with policy makers at the City and County levels in both Orange and Riverside Counties. Committees were established to provide strategic and policy input to the MIS process including officials from Caltrans, Riverside and Orange Counties, San Bernardino Association of Governments (SANBAG), and Foothills Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency (TCA). Stakeholder groups were also consulted including the Sierra Club, Auto Club of Southern California, Hills for Everyone, Endangered Habitats League, Riverside County Property Owners Association, TrTunnel Express, Southern California Commuter Network and the Irvine Company. Finally, resource agencies were consulted regularly throughout the process including the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA�%, the US Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS), the US Forest Service, the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and Caltrans. Political acceptability will be critical to the project success as a P3. Given the success of the SR 91 Express Lanes in Orange County and the cooperation of the political bodies to undertake strategic studies and initiatives to date, there is a good foundation for further cooperative work and political support for the Express Lanes Extension. Since the political bodies have not commented yet on the potential for private sector delivery of this project and given the history of the SR 91 Express Lanes project in Orange County, there could be some hesitancy toward a P3 approach. As a result, if delivery of the Express Lanes Extension through a P3 model is pursued, the assessment for the political acceptability issue is Moderate. SR 91 Viaduct/New Facility The MIS conducted joint consultations for both the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension and the Viaduct/New Facility with all of the above noted agencies at the same time. As with the Express Lanes Extension, political acceptability will be important to the project success as a P3. Based on the success of the SR 91 Express Lanes and the bi-county cooperation to date, the political bodies have built a solid foundation for future cooperative success on this project. However, given the other potential impacts of the Viaduct or Corridor A on the public, political concerns may arise. As a result, the assessment for political acceptability is High. This assessment may change as the process moves forward and the issues and concerns of elected officials are addressed. Mki County Parkway Through the PSR for the MCP, input has been obtained from policymakers at the local, state and federal level. The PSR recommended proceeding with the project at the staff level_ The Measure A funding to this project also 30 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION indicates public and political support. In addition, the federal government has expressed some level of support by approving the project for federal environmental streamlining. There appears to be local elected official support for the MCP and considerable effort has been put into moving the project forward. It is currently anticipated that, the Environmental document and environmental streamlining will have comparable political support. However, the potential tolling of this facility has not yet been tested politically so a ranking of Moderate is provided here. Once additional information is provided, an assessment of this issue will be finalized. Political acceptability will be essential to the project success as a P3. Interstate 15 Given the political support of the Measure A which will fund at least a portion of the planned improvements to the I- 15, it is assumed that political acceptability is positive. However, tolling of the facility has not yet been tested. As a result, an assessment of Moderate is ascrbed at this time. Once the tolling potential has been considered by the policymakers, this issue assessment will be finalized. Political acceptability will be critical to the project success as a P3. Overall Acceptability Assessment To the extent that tolled lanes comprise any portion of the projects, public and political acceptance issues surrounding toll rates and policy, enforcement and tolling itself may arise. In addition, in light of the limited but negative history with private operation of a tolled facility (the SR 91 Express Lanes), if a project moves forward as a P3, RCTC should anticipate the need for significant public and political outreach and education concerning the benefits and implications of private involvement F. Approvals and Project Schedule The overall assessment of the potential of a P3 delivery model for any of these projects will be greatly affected by pending approvals and other project schedule issues. Below is an overall summary of the outstanding approvals and future schedule issues for the each project. 1. Environmental Approvals SR 91 Measure A Project A Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report has been prepared for the SR 91 Measure A Project. The PSR is currently in draft form and will be followed by the environmental approval process. An Initial Study (IS) for CEOA and an Environmental Assessment (EA) for NEPA will be required and will determine the level of environmental analysis that must be undertaken (e.g., negative declaration, EIFVEIS, etc.). It is anticipated that this process will take approximately two years. According to the Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report contained in the PSR, the anticipated major environmental approvals will indude: • CEQA — Negative DedaratioMfocused ND — Caltrans as Lead Agency • NEPA — Finding of No Significance Impact (FONSI) — FHWA as Lead Agency 31 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION The main environmental issues to be analyzed for the SR 91 Measure A Project include: • Biological - 3 plant/8 animal sensitive species require consultation with US Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game • Invasive Pest Plant Species - presence of pest plant species requires natural Environmental Study • Water:- stormwater pollution prevention and erosion protection, floodproofing • Wetlands - delineation required • Air Quality - regional and project level analysis • Noise - for sensitive receptors adjacent to the project • Visual impact - embankments and interchange structures • Socioeconomic - impacts on adjacent businesses • Cultural - Section 106 compliance required • Native American Coordination - coordination with Native American Heritage Commission/ local tribes required • Hazardous waste - Preliminary ISA completed, additional study required (see previous discussion) • Section 4(f) resources - state parks and reserves impacted Mitigation measures, if required, will be detailed through the technical studies required for the environmental approval process. RCTC is currently assessing whether it will be able, under CEQA/NEPA, to prepare a separate environmental assessment for the SR 91 Measure A Project or an assessment covering the SR 91 Measure A Project and the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension in order to allow that project or projects to proceed relatively quickly. If that is not possible, RCTC may have to prepare a combined environmental, assessment for all of the potential improvements to SR 91, which would likely delay the SR 91 Measure A Project. Given the extent of the impacts anticipated in the PSR on the environmental factors, an assessment of Moderate is given. SR 91 Express Lanes Extension The SR 91 Express Lanes Extension will have similar environmental concems as with the SR 91 Measure A Project. In addition, if the facility is tolled, this will need to be analyzed in the environmental process. The MIS - Alternatives Evaluation and Refinement Report includes a detailed analysis of environmental factors for the at -grade expansions. The statutory environmental process has not yet been initiated for this project. Both CEQA and NEPA approvals will be required. RCTC estimates that the environmental analysis will take approximately 28 months with approval in early 2009. Environmental approvals are critical to the project feasibility and for delivery as a P3. The environmental approval process and potential concerns will be similar to that of the Measure A Project. As a result, the assessment for this issue for the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension is Moderate. 32 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SR 91 Viaduct/New Facility A Viaduct within the SR 91 corridor would have similar environmental issues as with the at -grade SR 91 Express Lanes Extension and the SR 91 Measure A Project. In addition, the visual and noise impacts may be more significant, right-of-way takes/impacts would be greater and safety issues would need to be addressed (e.g., emergency access). In at least six locations, the Viaduct would need to be constructed to a third level above existing overcrossings. These interchange areas as well as the remainder of the viaduct would be at least 50 feet in height over SR 91 and would be visible from nearby communities. The visual impact is anticipated to be greater with a Viaduct in the SR 91 ROW than with the Corridor A altemative. In addition, the land uses abutting the SR 91 corridor are potentially sensitive receptors for air quality and noise impacts. Given the volume associated with a Viaduct or Corridor A, locating the Viaduct in the SR 91 corridor may raise more significant noise and air quality issues than if the expansions were dispersed to Corridor A north of the SR 91. However, the NOS LPS recommends locating the extra capacity within the Viaduct in the SR 91 corridor thereby concentrating the air quality and noise impacts, rather than creating a new source (Condor A). For either alternative, a full environmental process will be required consistent with CEQA and NEPA. While significant study of the environmental impacts has been undertaken by RCTC, the environmental processes have not been formally initiated. For either alternative, tolling will need to be included in the environmental process. RCTC estimates that the environmental analysis for the viaduct will take approximately four years. No estimate of timing for environmental approvals for Corridor A can be provided due to uncertainly regarding alignment. Given what is already known regarding the extent of the impacts for either alternative, and the complexity of the issues, an assessment of High is given for these alternative projects. As with the SR 91 Express Lanes Extension, the environmental approvals are critical to implementing the project as wall as potential delivery as a P3. Mid County Parkway The environmental process for this project has been initiated with the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) and public consultations. The final EIS/EIR and other environmental documents are anticipated to be complete, and approvals obtained, by 2008. The MCP has been accepted as a project to participate in the new federal environmental streamlining program, currently one of only seven such projects in the country. Given that this project is a green -field project, the potential environmental impacts might include: • Biological — Lake Mathews. Requires consultation with US Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game • Invasive Pest Plant Species — a Natural Environmental Study may be required • Water — water quality, stormwater pollution prevention, erosion protection, floodproofing, hydrology • Wetlands — delineation required • Farm land — Prime, Unique and Farmland of Statewide or Local Importance 33 " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION " Air Quality - regional and project level analysis " Noise - for sensitive receptors adjacent to the project " Visual impact - on the open landscape " Socioeconomic - impacts on abutting land uses and communities " Cultural - Prehistoric, historic sites and architecture " Hazardous waste - Preliminary ISA completed, additional study required (see previous discussion) " 4(f) resources - state parks and reserves impacted Additional study is being completed by RCTC for this project. It is anticipated that since the size of the project is significant and it juxtaposes a facility with primarily rural surroundings, the environmental approval issue will be Moderate. Once additional information is available, this assessment may be revised. It will be critical to the success of the project and its potential as a P3 to obtain the environmental approvals. As noted above, should the project be tolled, the environmental approval process will need to include an assessment of tolling impacts as well. Interstate 15 The environmental approval process for this project has not commenced yet An Initial Study (IS) for CEOA and an Environmental Assessment (EA) for NEPA will be required and will determine the level of environmental analysis that must be undertaken (e.g., negative declaration, EIR/EIS, etc.). RCTC anticipates beginning the environmental assessment in the summer of 2007 and that the environmental analysis will take approximately two years. The environmental issues for the 1-15 are likely few given that the improvements will be located within the existing ROW. The main considerations will be: " Air Quality - regional and project level analysis " Noise - for sensitive receptors adjacent to the project " Socioeconomic - impacts on abutting land uses Mitigation measures, if required, will be detailed through the technical studies required for the environmental approval process. As such, an assessment of Low is ascribed to this project. As noted above, obtaining environmental clearance will be essential to the success of the project and for delivery as a P3. 2. Toll Authorizations In addition to environmental approvals, each of the projects, except the Measure A Project will also require specific tolling authorizations. In particular, all of the SR 91 projects and the MCP will require approval for tolling from FHWA (Section 129 agreements) if federal funding is utilized for the projects. Currently, there is no limit to the number of projects that can get approval under the federal Section 129 program. However, because this is a federal process and there may be some restrictions that accompany the approval, the ranking for this issue is Moderate. The 1-15 project tolling authorization is somewhat more complex. Additional tolling authorization will be required from USDOT/FHWA for the 1-15 project under one of the federal pilot tolling programs authorized under SAFETEA-LU because it is an interstate. Currently, the programs that may be utilized for tolling the interstate are 'pilot" programs RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION with limited slots. Each program has different rules and project development constraints. It is likely that the process to be accepted into one of these programs will be very competitive amongst state and regional agencies. By 2009, in connection with the next federal highway reauthorization bill, there may be new programs that might apply to a tolled 1-15 and the existing, programs may be expanded or eliminated. Without this authorization to toll, the project will not be viable as a P3 (or for any delivery model as a tolled project). Given that the tolling programs are competitive and inclusion in one of them is a prerequisite to toll the project, the mskt‘ssment of this issue for the 1-15 is High. 3. Other Approvals In addition to legislative, environmental and toll authorization approvals, a number of other approvals will be required depending on whether the facility will be tolled and the model of delivery chosen. Additional approvals may include: • SEP-15 approvals from FHWA regarding deviations from the federal design -build rule • If TIFIA financing or private activity bonds are utilized, approvals/allocations from those offices within USDOT • Army Corp of Engineers approvals (Section 404 and 401 permits) • Permits relating to endangered species, archaeologicaVcultural finds, etc., to the extent applicable. • Limited (if any) municipal or county approvals Giventhe extent and complexity of the other approvals required for the candidate projects, the ranking for this issue is High. This' assessment will be re-evaluated once supplementary information is available. 3. Project Schedule The schedules set out below assume a conventional design -bid -build approach to project delivery. If a P3 model is employed for any of the candidate projects, the timeline will likely be different For a P3 approach, given the need for legislation, if legislation is not in place at the time the project is ready for procurement, the project timeline may be impacted. However, the private sector may be able to deliver the project more expeditiously than a conventional design -bid -build delivery approach. SR 91 Measure A Project If procured through a conventional design -bid -build process, the PSR and the MIS Draft Action Plan estimate that for the SR 91 Measure A Project, assuming a June 2006 approval of the PSR, the PANED can be completed by 2009, the PS&E can be completed by 2011, right-of-way acquired from 2009 to 2011, and project construction from 2012 to 2015. The actual opening of the new lanes will depend on when environmental work commences. SR 91 Express Lanes Extension RCTC indicates that, using a conventional approach, and if the at -grade SR 91 Express Lanes Extension could be completed together with the Measure A project the timing would be the same as the Measure A Project with completion in 2016. This assumes the Environmental documents for both the Measure A and the Express Lanes Extension could be combined and processed together. Given the amount of study that has already been undertaken for this project by RCTC in conjunction with OCTA and Caltrans, the RCTC Board of Commissioners and the OCfA Board of Directors directed staff to update the 2004 State Route 91 Implementation Plan by June 30, 2006 in order 35 • " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION to advance implementation of the improvements. However, the timing of project delivery will depend on the environmental process which has not yet commenced. SR 91 Viaduct/New Facility The SR 91 Implementation Plan estimates that, using a conventional design -bid -build delivery approach, the environmental approvals, design and construction for the Viaduct/New Facility can be completed for delivery in 2030. However, with private sector involvement through a P3, this timeline may be significantly shorter. RCTC has assumed for the purposes of the traffic and revenue study sensitivity analysis that the P3 delivery of the Viaduct/New Facility would be in both 2017 and 2030. A decision on the location of the facility (either within SR 91 or Corridor A) will need to be made prior to completion of the PANED. In addition, the ROW acquisitions for Corridor A may be lengthy. Mid County Parkway The relevant study alternatives, environmental and engineering studies and public meetings are underway for the MCP currently. The final EIS/EIR is currently scheduled for completion in 2008. With a conventional design -bid -build delivery approach, final design and ROW acquisition will take place in 2009/10 with a construction start in 2011. Construction of the project is estimated to take 10 years from commencement using a conventional design -bid -build delivery approach. interstate 15 The PSR is currently underway for the 1-15 expansions and is anticipated to be completed by early 2007. The environmental process is scheduled to commence in the summer of 2007. RCTC projects that the PA/ED will be completed by May 2010. With an environmental approval anticipated in mid 2010, using a conventional design -bid - build delivery approach, RCTC estimates that PS&E will be finalized in 2013 for a construction completion in mid 2017. Overall Schedule issue Assessment None of the candidate projects have hard deadlines for completion. However, all of the projects are urgent as the transportation needs of Riverside County are extreme. At this time, the timing for delivery for each project is being driven by the environmental approval process andfinancial constraints. Some of the business models may also impact project delivery timing (e.g., the need for legislative approvals, on one hand, and potential private sector ability to accelerate the project, on the other hand). The information noted above provides a basis for RCTC to make trade-offs between schedule and other considerations. Once the studies currently underway for the various projects are available, the schedules can be refined for the Diagnostic Phase Il report. Project schedule is critical to project success generally and to financial feasibility for a P3 specifically. However, the schedules will not prevent a project or a P3 from proceeding ultimately. Consequently, an assessment of Low is ascribed to all of the projects. RCTC will need to pay significant attention to the schedule for each project in order to make optimal trade-offs. 36 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION VI. Financial Feasibility In the analysis of the financial performance of the candidate projects,'a number of parameters and estimates are required. Among the most significant of these are: • Capital costs • O&M costs • Rehabilitation costs • Traffic and Revenue • Expansions • Available public funding • Private financing Capital costs - preliminary capital costs have been estimated for all of the candidate projects. The phasing of the expenditures still needs to be developed. An estimate of the impact of inflation on construction activities would be beneficial. A risk analysis may also be used to be able to differentiate amongst the various delivery/business models and the types of risk that should be transferred to the private sector. O&M costs - currently there is no data available on O&M costs for the proposed projects. Benchmark data may be available from OCTA, Cahrans or other advisors. Rehabilitation -estimates of cost to rehabilitate the infrastructure periodically have similarly not been developed. The extent to which rehabilitation costs will be required depends upon the useful life of the facilities, the length of any P3, service level standards and the handback standards applicable to the project. Traffic and Revenues - a preliminary traffic and revenue (T&R) study is currently underway for all of the SR 91 projects, the MCP and the 1-15 with deliver expected in stages (August for SR 91, early September for MCP and late September for the 1.15). The T&R study will consider: • SR 91 Express Lanes extension as HOT lanes to 1-15 • SR 91 Viaduct or Corridor A as a tolled facility • MCP with two to three tolled lanes in each direr.innr. • 1-15 with two HOT lanes in each direction This work will serve as an initial basis for the later determination of a toll rate mechanism and tolling policies. It will also support the development of project scopes and, potentially, phasing. A risk analysis of the base case forecasts should also be developed. 37 " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Expansions - the forecasts of traffic from the T&R study will help determine the extent to which expansions that accommodate additional capacity should be planned within the horizon of the financial analysis for the candidate projects. Available funding- to date, financing options for the candidate projects have only been investigated for traditional delivery. Measure A is currently the only source of significant funding available. However, it does not apply to all the candidate projects and will not fund the entire program. TUMF may also be available to contrbute a portion of the financing but likely not a material amount If voters approve the statewide infrastructure bonds this November, there may be additional funds available to RCTC from those bonds. There are two federal programs of primary relevance for these types of projects: TIFIA (which requires an income stream pledged for repayment) and private activity bonds (PABs) (if a P3 model is used). Private Financing- any gap necessary to ensure a project is financially feasible would have to be addressed through other sources. For the cases where a P3 model is used, those sources will likely be private sector debt and equity. The return expected by those private partners and their lenders will come from projected toll revenues or public sources such as RCTC funds. Overall Financial Feasibility issue Assessment Due to the preliminary nature of the projects, it is not possible to accurately assess financial feasibility of all of the projects at this time. However, given the success of the SR 91 Express Lanes project and the projected 2030 traffic flows, it would appear that there is no challenge significant enough at this time that would lead RCTC to believe that the extension of the SR 91 Express Lanes would not be successful as a P3. The Diagnostic Phase II will include a more rigorous financial analysis of the individual projects using a financial model for each. RCTC has commenced a series of studies that will serve as the basis of the financial model. VII. Conclusions Based on the current information available, we are unable to conclude definitively as to whether the candidate projects can be delivered as P3s at this time. The table below provides a summary of the issues analysis for each candidate project. We recommend that RCTC continue to address the issues raised in order to support a series of definitive conclusions regarding the viability of using a P3 delivery model for one or more of the candidate projects. While there are certain issues in the analysis that have been aGrAgsed with a High ranking, there is nothing in this preliminary analysis that rises to the level of rendering any of the candidate project as not viable for P3 delivery or suggest that a P3 delivery model should not be pursued. The rankings simply provide a guide to RCTC as to which issues need the most attention. 38 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Candidate Projects Issues Assessment Summary RIVERSIDE CANDIDATE COUNTY PROJECTS TRANSPORTATION ISSUES ASSESSMENT COMMISSION SUMMARY re S &1 glg 8 'o s 8 fo. •i ISSUE Q ..I�q+� y 2 M M ..xMgjz %1 Si J i G .4= N 1 System Interface Low Moderate High High High Law Design and Construction • Right -of -Way • Rail Crossings • Utilities • Geotechnical • Hazardous Materials • Consbactability Low Low Low Low Moderate Low Moderate Low Low Low Moderate Low High Low Low High TBD High High Low Low High TBD Moderate TBD Low Low TBD TBD TBD Low Low - Low Low Low Low Operations & Maintenance Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Low Low Legislation for P3s High High High High High High Acceptability • Public Acceptability • Political Acceptability Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate High Moderate High Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Approvals/Project Schedule • Environment Approvals • Toll Authorizations • Other Approvals • Project Schedule Moderate N/A High Low Moderate Moderate High Low High Moderate High Low High Moderate High. Low Moderate Moderate High Low Law High High Low 39 " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Key Issues The following are the key issues identified in the analysis presented in order of significance: " Legislation - With the exception of the Measure A Project, all of the SR 91 projects and the Mid County Parkway will likely require specific legislation in order to be delivered by way of a P3 tolled facility There may be some opportunity for these projects under existing legislation but this is likely difficult to obtain. The 1-15, as an Interstate will require specific legislation to permit a tolled P3 facility. " Environmental Approvals- All of the candidate projects will require full environmental approvals. This process may have significant impacts to the project schedule and therefore the potential delivery model. In particular, the Viaduct/New Facility will likely encounter complex issues due to the nature of the facilities. In addition, the environmental approvals will be critical to securing tolling permissions. " Constructability- the SR 91 projects and in particular the Viaduct will face significant phasing and traffic management challenges during construction. " Toll Authorizations- Each of the candidate projects will require specific tolling authorizations. This is particularly critical for the 1-15 as it must fit into one of a very limited number of slots under the federal pilot tolling program authorized under SAFETEA LU because it is an interstate. " System Interface - The integration and interoperability between the SR 91 Viaduct or Corridor A with the existing SR 91 Express Lanes will need to be carefully managed in order to provide a seamless service. " Right -of -Way- Each of the Viaduct, Corridor A and the Mid County Parkway present challenges for right-of-way acquisition. The Viaduct will require acquisition of lands in a heavily built up area and will impact a significant number of properties. The Corridor A and Mid County Parkway projects have not yet had alignments established and may encounter challenges depending on the route selected. " Geotechnical - the Viaduct is a double -deck on an existing facility with five traffic in a seismically active corridor. Geotechnical considerations are therefore critical. Each of these challenging issues will need to be addressed and mitigated in order for projects to proceed either as traditional projects or as P3s. Prior to determining an optimal delivery model, more information is required. RCTC has already initiated several of the key studies that will provide this information. Once the results of these additional studies are available, they will feed into the Phase II Diagnostic Review which will support RCTC's determination of the delivery models for the candidate projects. In order to undertake the second phase of the Diagnostic Review, the following next steps will be undertaken: " Review findings of Geometries Study. " Review T&R study " Develop.financial model based on T&R study and final project scope " Review other studies that become available 40 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION • Based on and to the extent of new information, prepare further assessment of candidate projects as Pas • Develop legislative strategy • Develop briefing materials for workshop(s) with RCTC • It is anticipated that Nossaman and KPMG will assist RCTC staff in the delivery of two presentations to the RCTC Ad Hoc Committee throughout the summer as well as a workshop for the RCTC board in September, 2006 in order to understand and evaluate the advantages/disadvantages of the various alternative delivery models available to RCTC for each of the candidate projects. These activities will include completion of the Phase II Diagnostic Review. As part of this, a road map of the next steps in implementing the projects will be prepared after the workshops are completed and feedback received. 41 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Appendix A - Business Models The choice of delivery model is affected by a number of factors including project risk profile, project funding, project financial performance, RCTC objectives, market conditions, definitions of appropriate payment mechanisms, and a number of other issues. For purposes of this Diagnostic Report, the possible application of given delivery models are detailed below. A. Conventional Model (Design -Bid -Build) A conventional model wherein RCTC would hire a design engineer, approve 100% designs and then let the project to construction firms on a low -bid basis is the traditional and standard model for California highway construction_ It provides RCTC with the most control over the process and product that is ultimately delivered. Through detailed design specifications, RCTC could define the project. However, there are risks to this type of model. Design risk is retained by the agency and there is little opportunity to shift design and construction risk to the contractors. Following final acceptance, very little in the way of ongoing warranties or obligations exist for the contractor, meaning full asset condition risk passes to the agency. Design -bid -build is also the most onerous for RCTC to administer in terms of documents, contracts, change orders, project management, etc. Finally, because of its prescriptive nature and lengthy delivery timelines, design -bid -build is the least attractive to private partners and is inconsistent with many P3 funding concepts. A conventional model can work well when a project is well defined with few technical or approval risks and with secure (and conventional funding) in place. B. Design -Build Model A design -build model is characterized by projects bping less defined. Typically, public bodies would prepare preliminary design to approximately 10-30% completion prior to engaging the private sector. RCTC would prepare design requirements or performance standards to be met by the private contractor in designing and building the facility. The private sector entity would then complete the design to 100% and construct the facility to those standards. In this way, the private sector takes on the primary design risk rather than RCTC_ Limited duration project warranties 11-2 years) are often available in design -build, after which issues with the physical asset are the responsibility of RCTC. Design -build can materially accelerate project delivery through the overlap of design and construction activities and the close relationship of design and construction personnel. Combining design, construction and completion risk together for one private sector party often results in significant efficiencies for the public agency. This type of model is less onerous on RCTC in terms of administration and design and construction risk, however, long terra structural risk still rests with the public sector owner. Design -build can be effective when a project is less defined, where private sector innovation can add value and where potential schedule acceleration is attractive. As with design -bid -build, public sector funding will largely have to be in place prior to implementation (e.g., design -build may provide greater cost certainty for an agency, but it does not "create" new funding sources). C. . Design -Build Operate Maintain (DBOM) Model A design -build project that includes an extended warranty or some form of continued operation and maintenance is termed a Design -Build Operate Maintain (DBOM) model. It requires the design -build contractor to operate and maintain the facility for a set period of time. In this way, the design -builder makes some of the short and long term trade-offs with respect to construction quality and longevity. If the contractor chooses inferior materials for example, 42 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION operations and maintenance costs in the future may be higher (depending on the length of the operations and maintenance term). Consequently, the design -builder may be motivated to build facilities that last. Appropriately structured, a DBOM incentivizes more of a whole -life approach to design, construction, maintenance and rehabilitation — which may provide still greater value for money over the fife of the facility. The private sector typically is paid progress payments as construction progresses. Historically, because of U.S. tax laws, the maximum term for an operations and maintenance agreement (where tax- exempt proceeds are used to finance the project) was 15 years. With the advent of the private activity bond program under SAFETFA-W, for projects using Private Activity Bonds (PABs), this restriction would no longer be applicable. Federal funds are typically unavailable for operations and maintenance costs. Risks to RCTC in this model include the same risks during the design and construction period as with the design - build model. Risks associated with the operations and maintenance period focus on preventing the private sector entity from abandoning a project if material issues arise once constructed. Upon completion of construction, the design-buiker has already been paid for the capital costs of the project Should costly material defects arise sometime during the O&M contract period, a design -builder may determine that the financial retum on the O&M contract is not sufficient to rectify the defects and continue on as the operator. As with design -build, DBOM can be effective when a project is less defined, where private sector innovation can add value and where potential schedule acceleration is attractive. Where life -cycle costing is important to an agency and the agency wants greater leverage and assurance of quality design and construction, DBOM can be an effective tool to foster desired private sector conduct As with design -bid -build, public sector funding will largely have to be in place prior to implementation (e.g., DBOM may provide greater cost certainty for an agency, including during the operations and maintenance period, but it does not "create" new funding sources). D. Design -Build Finance Operate (DBFO) Model A DBOM that includes project financing is termed a Design -Build -Finance -Operate (DBFO) model and is attractive to the public sector because it requires the private sector contractor to take on the financing role for some or &of the life of the project. While the public sector sponsor may be able to access project debt directly, doing so may force a trade-off with other potential high priority projects. Depending upon the scope of the agreement and the nature of the project, shifting financing to the private sector for one project may free up the funds necessary to facilitate the construction of multiple facilities — offering greater benefits to local constituents. The public sector sponsor may also seek to pass on traffic and revenue risk to the private sector under the DBFO model (though it need not do so as DBFOs can otherwise be structured). As with other initiatives, public sector sponsors have often generated additional value for money by assigning the risk of future revenues to the private sector. In some cases, the value of this risk transfer may outweigh incremental additional financing costs that the private sector might incur vis-e-vis the cost of borrowing by public agencies (note that the use of PABs may reduce or eliminate this additional spread). At this time, modem private sector project finance for freeway infrastructure is fairly new to the US. Differential access to tax-exempt debt between public sector and private sector participants in a DBFO model is typically a significant consideration. Deals must be structured to take into account relevant state and federal legislation in a manner that ensures that the option selected is financially efficient overall. 43 " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION If, having elected to include private sector project financing within the scope of a project, future toll revenues are not anticipated to fully cover the capital and operating costs, plus a return to the private entity, the project is considered "revenue negative". In such a case, the public sector sponsor is typically faced with one of three options: " Increase the tolls to offset costs  depending in large part, on local price elasticity and other factors. " Extend the term of the agreement  which may provide sufficient additional cash flow at the tail of the term to make up the difference. " Subsidize the project directly  either up front, over time, or through contributions in kind (such as contributions of selected structures). Contribution of the subsidy can take many forms, through progress payments, through periodic payments or through concepts such as availability or performance -based payments. The DBFO model also ensures that the private entity cannot abandon the project without considerable legal and financial repercussions. With this model, RCTC would have more leverage with the private entity by withholding payments for non-performance. Since RCTC would be paying out the contract over a longer horizon (say 25-35 years or longer), it would retain sufficient funds to be paid out if issues arose later in the project. Further, the financial institution that backs the private sector financing would force the contractor to remedy material defects, in essence, outsourcing the ongoing contract performance. Often, this type of model is not tolled and the government simply makes payments to the private sector over time. Accordingly, there must be a source of funds upon which the private entity (and its lenders) can rely in order to be repaid and earn a return. Additionally, committing to a stream of payments over time can relieve the public entity from having to provide large sums of upfront capital for the project Private financing also brings a discipline to the deal which ensures optimization of cost allocation. The public agency must be cautious to structure the deal so that the source of funds (tolls or otherwise) matches the stream of payments to the private sector partner. The RCTC risk profile in the DBFO model is consistent with the DBOM model as they relate to the design, construction, operations and maintenance activities. In addition, the inclusion of financing in the private partner's scope results in a material portion of the financing risk being shifted away from the government agency. The implications of this can mean paying additional money to the private sector partner for taking on additional financial risk transfer (the "additional money" will be reflected in the private partner's pricing, cost of capital, etc.). Whether this represents good value for money is dependent on the specifics of the project. Frequently, in DBFOs, the risk of traffic demand remains with the public body. The DBFO model is effectively used On either a tolled or non -tolled setting) when the public sector wants to take advantage of private finance (i.e., does not have the capital funding for a project) but wants to retain the public policy flexibility around the facility users (i.e., users are clients of the government), through, for example, not tolling the facility or limiting tolls. As a result, the government is closer to its customers, but is not running the business. The model can also be a solution where shifting traffic/revenue risk to the private sector is "too expensive" and does not provide good value for money. E. Fun Concession Model Normally, a Full Concession is used when the private sector is being engaged for provision of a toll facility. In particular, if managed lanes are envisioned, a full concession provides the private sector developer with maximum control over the entire facility. In a best case, the tolls cover the capital and operating costs of the project plus a 44 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION return to the private entity. In a concession, revenues primarily accrue to the private sector concessionaire, though some forms of profit sharing with the public sector are typical of revenue positive projects. In the case of revenue negative projects, the public sector will provide subsidies from public funds either up -front or ongoing if needed in order to secure the public interest in the project. Contribution of the subsidy can take many forms, through progress payments, through periodic payments or through concepts such as availability or performance -based payments. The Full Concession model has similar benefits and a similar risk profile as the DBFO including less demand on public sector resources, but with further risk transfer to the private sector in the form of traffic and revenue risk. The transfer of traffic and revenue risk can be a significant additional benefit of this model. The Full Concession model has proven successful on many occasions because the private sector views its ability to efficiently build, operate and maintain the facility and the traffic/toll revenue growth more aggressively than the public agency. These expectations provide advantageous pricing for the deal and can, with certain projects, overcome the low cost of capital available in the tax-exempt markets. A full concession is viewed as a business with the government acting as regulator only. As a result, the private sector market will take more risks if it has the ability to manage the entire business to capture the potential upside. This in turn will provide better value for money for the public sector than the governmental agency doing the project itself or retaining traffic/revenue risk. The Full. Concession model utilizes concession terns from 25-30 years on the shorter end to up to 99 years on the longer end. Setting the appropriate term is dependent on project financeability, the project finance plan, govemmental agency goals and an assessment of value for money. With Full Concessions, toll rate authority and pricing is delegated within parameters to the private sector through the concession agreement. Typically, a rate schedule and/or a methodology (often indexed to things like CPI, GDP, etc.) is included which sets the maximum toll rates and the periods in which such maximums apply. Within those parameters, however, it is the private partner and not the governmental agency that sets the tolls. This "loss of control" on toll rates is sometimes viewed as a disadvantage of the Full Concession model. The Full Concession model is most appropriate and effective when the public agency wants to transfer maximum risk to the private sector, is willing to limit its project control to that of a regulator and can obtain value for money in doing so. F. Pre -development Agreement Model When a project is early in its planning and development, a pre -development agreement (PDA) model can be very effective. PDAs have been used successfully in several instances in the U.S., and up until the past 2 years, was the primary P3 delivery model used in this country. Under a PDA procurement approach, RCTC would award a project to a private entity primarily on the basis of its qualifications, development plan and conceptual financial plan. The chosen private partner would then assist RCTC in project development activities, including the environmental approval process, and also help develop a strategy for realization of the project, including the development of such things as a refined plan of finance, a project phasing plan, a ROW acquisition plan, etc. In return for its work effort, the private sector entity is paid some amount (though some entities will contrbute its work at reduced payouts or even at risk). In addition, upon completion of this "development work", the private partner would typically have an opportunity to submit a proposal for delivering the 45 • • i • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION project on an exclusive basis, which RCTC could either accept or reject. Often times, the private partner has a right of first negotiation for a specified period during which RCTC and the private partner would attempt to negotiate the private partner's proposal and the terms of the agreement. If RCTC rejects the proposal or the negotiations prove unsuccessful, then RCTC could undertake a competitive procurement for delivery of the project_ Ultimately, a PDA does not deliverthe project — it is a means to getting a project to a point where one of the other delivery models discussed above is utilized.. A PDA enables an agency to bring in the private sector earlier than any of the other models. One of the primary benefits of the PDA approach and why it has been used successfully is that the government agency gets the benefit of industry involvement in the pre -development of the project without having to make an early binding commitment to award the project concession to that entity. This has been particularly useful for projects that are in the environmental approval process, where ideas can potentially impact alternative definition and assessment. Private partners will generally bring ideas focused on enhancing project profitability (both on the revenue and cost sides). These ideas must be assessed through the envirorimental analysis prism (e.g., the ideas may not result in the best environmental outcome), but often can be incorporated into the project concept within the environmental process and parameters — ultimately to the significant benefit of both parties. In addition, project development can continue with fairly little risk and expense. Some private partners may be willing to devote considerable time and resources for little or nominal compensation. Delays in project development can be fairly easily accommodated. The primary issue with a PDA approach is that if and when project delivery and price/financing is ultimately negotiated with the PDA private partner, it is not in the context of a competitive process and is akin to a sole source negotiation. Arguably, a competitive process would produce better pricing and terms for the agency. While steps can be taken to address this issue, there may be a public or political perception that 'the best deal wasn't obtained". A successful PDA implementation addresses the public and political perceptions upfront through outreach and education. Model Summary The above discussion of the various models can be summarized in the following chart. Note that these are the typical models used, however every transaction has its own unique characteristics and hybrids of these models are very common. The optimal model for any project will be dictated by the specifics of that project. Risk Element Design/ O&M Financing Revenues Legal Construction Authority Model A.DBB GA GA GA GA Y B.DB PS GA GA GA N C. DBOM PS PS GA GA N D. DBFO PS PS PS GA N E. Full Concession PS PS PS PS N F.PDA PS PS PS PS N GA - Government Agency PS-Prtvate Sector RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: August 9, 2006 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager THROUGH: • Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: 2009 Measure A 10-Year Delivery Plan Approach; Assumptions and Criteria STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive a report on the 2009 Measure A 10-Year Delivery Plan. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the June 3, 2005 Commission workshop, staff was provided with general direction to develop the information necessary to assess the delivery status of the 1989 Measure A Western County Highway Program (including the Mid County Parkway), as well as, develop an objective set of project measurements, including state recognized performance measures, to support the Commission in establishing prioritiesfor the first 10 years of the 30-Year Measure A Program. At its December 14, 2005 meeting, the Commission approved an amendment to the Bechtel Infrastructure program management contract to assist the Commission in determining the status and deliverability of the remaining projects named in the 1989 Measure A program of projects and developing the initial 2009 Measure A Program 10-Year Delivery Plan. The objectives of the effort were as follows: • An assessment of the status and challenges of completing the delivery of the Western County Highway Program for the 1989 Measure; An objective based assessment of the Western County portion of the 2009 Measure A Transportation Program;. • Prioritization of the Western County program of projects; and • Development of a 10-Year Delivery Plan that will cover the first 10 years of the 30-year extension of Measure A. Agenda Item 8 At its June 26, 2006 meeting, the Public/Private Financing and Delivery Plan Ad Hoc Committee approved the following items: • The update of the 2009 Measure A project descriptions, segmentation and scope as presented; • The transportation model technical approach; • The suggested 2015 Baseline Network and the assumptions that were used to develop. the Baseline Network; • The quantitative benefit measures used to numerically rank the 2009 Measure projects based on the cost benefit analysis; and • The qualitative benefit measures to further assess the implementation needs for the 2009 Measure projects that are not captured in the quantitative assessment of the cost benefit analysis. DISCUSSION: UPDATE OF 2009 MEASURE A PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS, SEGMENTATION AND SCOPE Project Descriptions For the past several months, Commission and Bechtel staffs have been working on the development of the following two documents: 1) 1989 Measure A Historical Report, and - 2) 2009 Measure A 10-Year Delivery Plan The records for each of the 1989 Measure projects are currently being reviewed and the status of each project is being documented. The scope of the 2009 Measure A projects is also being reviewed. The 2009 Measure A projects are shown on the 2009 Measure Project Map (Attachment 1). After comparing the latest information on both sets of Measure projects, it is apparent that the project scope for seven of the eleven Western County 2009 Measure A projects would be best served if additional options were studied at this point in time. These project variations may add significant improvements to the overall project benefit. The 2009 Measure A projects with the proposed additional options and the proposed project segmentation are listed in the 2009 Measure Project Scope and Segmentation Summary (Attachment 2). The additional options being considered are summarized in the following table: • •. Agenda Item 8 Description of Proposed Optional Projects to be Studied Project Route Limits Specified Project Proposed Improvement Rationale 2b 15/91 IC Interchange New Connector 1-15N to SR-91 W Add Collector -Distributor System each direction on SR-91 between Main St and 1-15 Improve 91 /15 Interchange Traffic Movement 5b 60/91 / 215 IC Interchange None Add Direct Connector, EB SR-60 to NB 1-215 Weaving movements will breakdown northbound SR-91 and eastbound SR-60 6.1 b I-215 Eucalyptus Ave. to 1-15 Add 1 lane each direction Extend north limit from Eucalyptus to Box Springs Rd. Improves continuity of HOV system 7.1 b I-15 San Bernardino County Line to 15/91 IC Add 1 lane each direction Add bi-directional HOV Direct Connector SR-60 on east to 1-15 on the south, • Add 1 MF Lane and 1 HOV Lane in each direction HOV Direct Connector • Improves continuity of HOV system, • Improves weaving movements Additional Lane • additional cost of 2 lanes vs one lane may be minimal in median 7.2b I-15 15/91. IC to Indian Truck Trail Add 1 lane each direction Add 1 MF lane and 1 HOV Lane in each direction Additional cost of 2 lanes vs. one lane may be cost effective 7.5b 1-15 1-15/I-215 IC to San Diego County Line Add .1 lane each direction Add bi-directional HOV Direct Connector between 1-15 and 1-215 • Improves continuity of HOV system • Improves weaving movements 8b I-10 County Line to 60/10 IC Add truck climbing lane Add 1 HOV lane in each direction Continuity of HOV system with San Bernardino HOV system 10b SR-60 Badlands Area Add truck . climbing lane Add 1 HOV lane in each direction Continuity of HOV system from Redlands Blvd. to 1-10 12.1 b 1-215 Newport Rd. is current north limit Add up to 2 lanes each direction Modify north limits of CETAP N/S Corridor and Measure A project from Newport Rd. to D Street This will eliminate a pinch point in number of lanes .between Newport Rd. and D Street on I-215 , Note: Projects 7.1b, 7.2b, and 7.5b were added after the presentation of this item to the Public/Private Financing and Delivery Plan Ad Hoc Committee Agenda Item 8 Optional Project (2b) is to add a collector distributor system between Main Street and the I-15/SR-91 Interchange to mitigate for the close interchange spacing between Main Street and the 1-15 Interchange on SR-91 in the city of Corona. This project would be in lieu of the currently named project at the same location to construct a northbound 1-15 to westbound SR-91 connector at this same location. Ca!trans has recently completed a study of this area and believes that the collector distributor will provide a better operational improvement that would also improve the northbound to westbound move. The project study report indicates that this improvement would significantly improve traffic operations on SR-91 at the 1-15 Interchange. Staff recommends that this alternative project be added when performing the cost benefit analysis. The difference in cost between this project, when compared to the original Project (2a), is estimated to be approximately $100 million less. If the Commission were to elect to move forward with this alternative project, it may require that the Measure be amended. Optional Project (5b) is the east to north connector at the 60/91 /215 Interchange. The current 1989 Measure A 60/91 /215 project will replace the two conflicting loops on the west side of the interchange with fly over connectors. The two conflicting loops on the east side of the interchange would remain in place. The peak hour volumes on these loops are projected to be 1,852 for the eastbound SR-60 to northbound 1-215 connector (proposed project 5b) and 1,656 for the northbound SR-91 to westbound SR-60 connector in the year 2040. The recent traffic analysis demonstrates that for a 2040 horizon year, traffic movement on these loops is projected to increase significantly such that the projected volumes will far exceed the ability of these loops to operate efficiently. Based on the higher volumes, it will be important to consider the replacement of at least one of the two loops with a fly over connector prior to 2030 to remove this conflict that will again cause this important interchange to fail. Since the 1-215 Bi-County project is currently studying improvements to the 60/91 /215 Interchange that will already impact the northeast quadrant of the interchange, it would be logical to include the study of the impacts" of the eastbound SR-60 to northbound 1-215 connector (which has the highest volumes) with that project in order to be able to set the ultimate right-of-way at the proper location for the 1-215 project-- even if the connector is built as a later phase. If the connector is not included in the 1-215 Bi-County project, the residential area in the northeast quadrant will be impacted a second time that will result in a higher cost to deliver the connector at a.later date. The additional cost of this project alternative is estimated to be in the range of $150 to $175 million. If the Commission were to elect to move forward with this alternative project, it may require that the Measure be amended. • Agenda Item 8 " " " Optional Project (6.1 b) is to extend the northern limit of Project 6 from Eucalyptus Avenue to Box Springs Road just north of the East Junction of the SR-60/I-215 Interchange and proposes to include the bridge widening and other necessary improvements that will allow the High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes north of the East Junction to be connected to the HOV lanes on 1-215 south of the East Junction. This project was originally covered under the project report/environmental . document (PR/ED) for the 1989 Measure A 1-215 improvement project but was never fully funded. Since more than three to five years will have lapsed prior to construction, the current PR/ED will have to be updated. Because it was assumed that the East Junction would be completed down to Eucalyptus Avenue at the time when the 2009 Measure A 1-215 project was scoped out, the northern limit of the 2009 Measure A 1-215 project was set at Eucalyptus Avenue. ,So, unless the north project limit of the 2009 Measure A 1-215 improvement project is extended northerly through the East Junction, the addition of the proposed HOV lane will be discontinuous between Eucalyptus Avenue and the East Junction. Therefore, staff recommends that the north limit of the 1-215 improvement between Eucalyptus Avenue and 1-15 be modified to be the Box Springs Interchange just north of the East Junction of . the SR-60/I-215 Interchange. The additional cost of this work is estimated to be in the range of $50 to $75 million. Optional Projects (7.1 b), (7.2b), and (7.5b) are to analyze the comparative benefit of adding two lanes to the 1-15 median instead of just the one lane that the Measure calls out. The 1-15 median is approximately 70' wide. This will allow a cross-section that would provide for one 12' mixed flow lane and one 12' HOV lane in the median with no or minimal outside widening. The additional option to widen the complete median to accommodate the addition of one mixed flow lane and one HOV lane in each direction originates from the fact that the complete median will potentially be required to be paved for the addition of the first lane, therefore the cost to improve the median for an additional lane should be considered if a full structural section is constructed as is shown in the current project study report (PSR). If it is determined that widening the full median with a full structural section is the prudent course of action to eliminate future throw -a -way costs, the optional project to add an additional lane may not require that the Measure be amended. Otherwise, these project options may require that the Measure be amended. Optional Projects (7.1 b) and (7.5b) also include a proposal to study the benefits of constructing bi-directional HOV direct connectors at both . the I-15/SR-60 interchange (from and to the SR-60 on the west and the 1-15 on the south) and the 1-15/1-215 interchange (from and to the 1-15 on the south and the 1-215 on the north). The addition of the bi-directional HOV direct connectors is for continuity of the HOV system and to improve the operational characteristics of the two important system interchanges. Studying these optional projects would ensure that the future project interchange improvements would not be precluded. If the Agenda Item 8 Commission were to elect to move forward with these alternative projects, it may require that the. Measure be amended to address the HOV direct connectors that were not named in the 2009 Measure A program of projects. Optional Projects (8b) and (10b) are to analyze the comparative benefit of adding HOV lanes to replace the 2009 Measure A proposed truck climbing lanes on the 1-10 between the County line and the junction with SR-60 and in the badlands area of SR-60. The HOV projects would match up with and continue the HOV systems that currently exist on the SR-60 in Moreno Valley and with the San Bernardino proposed HOV lanes on I-10 that will stop at the County line. This proposal was generated by additional work that the Ca!trans has performed on the operational improvements that would result for each of these projects. The additional costs of making this substitution are currently under review. If the Commission were to elect to move forward with this alternative project, it may require that the Measure be amended. Optional Project (12.1 b) is to analyze the potential benefit of extending the northern project limit of the CETAP north/south corridor on 1-215 from Newport Road to D Street in Perris. Currently this CETAP corridor extends from SR-79 south on 1-15 to Newport Road on 1-215. The CETAP project has identified the need for seven lanes in each direction on 1-15 (SR-79 south to the 1-15/215 junction) and five lanes in each direction from the 1-15/215 junction north to Newport Road. The 2009 Measure A project for 1-215 adds one lane in each direction from the 1-15/215 junction to Eucalyptus Avenue on 1-215. Extending the northern limit of the CETAP corridor overlay on 1-215 for this optional project would support a review of the phased expansion of the 1-215 from its existing two lanes to five lanes in each direction from the 1-15/215 junction to D Street in Perris. With optional Project (12.1b) the minimum number of larfes on 1-215 from the I-215/SR-60 junction to the 1-15/215 junction could be four lanes in each direction while reviewing how to preserve the current five lanes in each direction ultimate facility. Project Segmentation During the development of the data base for the identified 2009 Measure A State Highway Improvement Projects and new 2009 Measure A CETAP Transportation Corridors, it was identified that many of the projects were very large in scope and cost. It is clear that there will not be sufficient funding to attempt to support the implementation of all of the named projects in their entirety in the first 10 years of the 2009 Measure. Therefore, it is recommended that the larger 2009 Measure A State Highway Improvement Projects and new 2009 . Measure A CETAP Transportation Corridors be broken into smaller logical segments, as identified on the 2009 Measure Project Scope and Segmentation Summary (Attachment 2). The segmentation of the larger 2009 Measure A Projects was developed based upon logical break points and a cursory traffic analysis. However, even if the larger • • • Agenda Item 8 " projects would be constructed in segments due to funding constraints, it may still be practical to develop an environmental document which addresses the full length of each project. The Commission would then only be required to update a completed environmental document at such time as the next segment could be funded. Scope Also, the project scope, outlined on the ballot, in most cases only specified that an additional lane be added. The ballot did not specify if the additional lane would be a HOV lane or a mixed flow lane. For freeway facilities, if there is not an existing HOV lane, and the additional lane takes the facility from three lanes to four lanes in each direction, then the additional lane will be an HOV lane. If the freeway facility already has an HOV lane then the additional lane will be a mixed flow lane. On non -freeway (conventional highway) facilities, all new lanes will be assumed to be mixed flow lanes. Staff will monitor the inclusion of this additional work to determine if it negatively impacts the project in the cost benefit analysis by dropping the project down the list. If this occurs, the additional work will be either eliminated from further consideration or considered as a later stage of work. TRANSPORTATION MODEL Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) was included in the Bechtel amendment, as a sub -consultant, to develop a detailed transportation model that can be used to evaluate the benefits of the various highway improvements listed in the 2009 Measure A program of projects. PB has also been retained by the Commission to develop a transportation model that can be used to evaluate the potential toll activity for various projects within Western Riverside County. In order to have a common model that would serve both _needs, PB recommended the use of the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM) after it is enhanced to more accurately reflect the proposed 2015 baseline conditions of Western Riverside County. The OCTAM has previously been used as the basis for development of the SR-91 Toll and Revenue Study prior to OCTA's purchase of the facility and OCTAM was used to develop traffic forecasts for the Riverside County to Orange County Major Investment Study. The .letter from PB (Attachment 5), dated May 9, 2006, gives an overview of the Technical Approach for the 2009 Measure A Traffic Analysis. Agenda Item 8 Also included in the model will be updated Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) demographic data throughout the modeling area. After the traffic model is developed, it will be calibrated and validated prior to performing future model runs. The model then can be used for the 2009 Measure traffic analysis. 2015 Baseline Network PB's approach is to enhance the OCTAM to include the Riverside County freeway, interstate and major arterial highway systems that would be operational in 2015. Attached is a copy of the methodology of development for the 2015 Highway Baseline Network (Attachment 3). and the resulting 2015 Highway Baseline Network (Attachment 4). In summary, only significant regional projects that are either constructed or under construction today are recommended to be included into the 2015 baseline model. QUANTITATIVE BENEFIT MEASURES The 2009 Measure A projects wilt each be modeled separately and the model results compared against the 2015 baseline model results. for the measures of effectiveness that are outlined on the attached PB letter. The benefit measures are consistent with those included in various other studies including the Riverside County to Orange County Major Investment Study and include; • Facility Number of Trips Served -Average Daily Traffic (ADT) • Facility Daily Level of Service (LOS) • Travel Time Savings (hours) • Vehicle Miles Traveled Savings (miles, %) • Distance Savings per Vehicle (miles) • Vehicle Hours Traveled (hours, %) - • Value of Time Savings ($) • Value of Distance Savings ($) • Energy Consumption Savings (gallons, $) • Air Pollutant Savings (tons, $) • Accident Reduction (points, $) These results will be used to develop a cost -benefit ratio for each of the 2009 Measure projects and project segments after the delivery costs for each project have been updated and base lined to a common year of value. •n Agenda Item 8 " " " QUALITATIVE BENEFIT MEASURES In addition to the cost -benefit ratios, the projects will be further compared using a list of qualitative measures. These measures will be used to attempt to assess issues that are not easy to provide a quantitative benefit. The qualitative measures will look at factors such as: " Opportunistic Timing " Environmental Challenges " Need to Protect Right -of -Way " External funding available that is project specific " Time required to get the project ready to advertise " Safety issues not addressed in the cost benefit analysis The details of the proposed qualitative evaluation matrix are included in Attachment 6. The recommended qualitative evaluation criteria in combination with the quantitative cost benefit measures will be used to develop a recommended prioritization matrix for the 2009 Measure projects. After this matrix is prepared for the suite of projects, it will be brought back to the Ad Hoc Committee for review and forwarded to the Commission for approval prior to finalizing the priority list of projects, which when combined with the overall funding forecast, will be the basis for the 2009 Measure A 10-Year Delivery Plan. A summary schedule of the task items that will be required to complete the 10-year Delivery Plan in conjunction with the guidance of the Ad Hoc Committee is shown in Attachment 7. Financial Information No Budget Action is required for this item. Attachments: 1) 2009 Measure A Western County Highway Improvement Map 2) 2009 Measure A Western County Highway Project List 3) 2015 Baseline Network Development Methodology and Sources 4) 2015 Baseline Network  consolidated list of projects to be included 5) May 9, 2006 Letter from PB regarding Technical Approach for 2009 Measure. A Traffic Analysis 6) 2009 Measure A Qualitative Evaluation Criteria 7) Summary Schedule for Delivery of the 2009 Measure A 10-Year Delivery Plan Agenda Item 8 *woo WOAlu00 meN • swewenwdwi AsAH ems • Aa,+gliteata 0.5 00*14 ice: ?k4-PAAY: .. AueweAA141U1 a 018444719487 . eU4410. 61 4,801* u01,1*10y 07.*OV GAAV u08�11703 euel l00 uag6eip440 ptiettPPtl 464�411el1.>/: e6ui*elul=enadq ';?111915 Ow k AA+Y't sluaaanoidwl pasocimd ainseatAl 081 081 Aemved /eun00-A111 GO a a ®® 941 alnob • • laafmd 4# wewyoeuy dew uogeool wealenoadwi AemtiBm kunoo eppiettiN umsem y ginseng 600Z 2009 Measure A Western Riverside,ty Highway Improvement Projects Attach rent #2 • of 3 . Western Riverside County State Highway Improvements � ..T... a� ,, 1 4.1 �L: , 1 HiJV and :r MF Lanes ea Dir r IP !1, ' 'ar`° -1-Pc+Ira; Acid 1 lv+' ar, eac, rirectiori 'roject Route Limits Ballot Speciffrid Prajecz- Add 1 lane each direction Tap,13 .•=,-; "--,' {,t:,f-2: i allot -.1 1.2 �t414 _„r Ora ,GF, :i` tv =r Serfas Cio, Serfas Club Dr to 15/91 iC Orange/Riverside Cnty Line to Pierce 1 91 1.3 15/91 IC to Pierce St 3.7 1 HOV and 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 MF lane each direction 2 15 & 91 15/91 Interchange New Connector . 1-15 North to SR 91 West 1 $243 2a 1.0 Frwy to Fnvy Connectors for MF Lanes Only Add New HOV Connector 1-15 North to SR 91 West, or 2b Main St to 15/91 IC 1.0 1 HOV and 4 MF Lanes ea Dir Add C-D System each direction 3 71 & 91 71/91 Interchange Improve Interchange 1 $26 3 1.0 At -Grade Connectors Realign exist East to North Loop -Connector 4 71 71/91 IC to San - Bernardino Cnty Ln Add 1 lane ea dir 2.6 $68 4 2.6 2 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction 5 215 60/91/215 IC to San Bernardino Cnty Ln Add 2 lanes ea dir 2.1 $231 5.a 2.1 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV and 1 MF lane each dir, or 5.b 60/91/215 IC 1.0 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV and 1 MF lane each direction and add one Direct Connector; EB SR 60 to NB 1.215 6 215 Eucalyptus Ave to 15/215 IC Add 1 lane ea dir 28.5 $210 6.1a Eucalyptus Ave, Riv to Nuevo Rd, Perris 9.5 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction with no connection to East Junction 60/215 IC, or 6.1b Box Springs Rd to Nuevo Rd. 10.7 3 MF Lanes ea DIr Add 1 HOV lane each direction with a connection to East Junction 60/215/ IC 6.2 Nuevo Rd, Perris to Scott Rd, Menifee 12.4 2 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction 6.3 Scott Rd, Menifee to 15/215 IC 6.6 2 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction Legend .1, .2, .3 Denotes Project Segmentation a h r rlanntac Altarnativa Rmiact. HOV = High Occupancy Vehicle MF = Mixed Flow XB = Direction Bound 2009 Measure A Western Riverside County Highway Improvement Projects Attachment #2 2of3 )roject Route Limits Ballot Specified Project Total Length (Miles) Ballot Est. Cost Seg Segment Limits Seg Length (Mlles) Existing Facility Proposed Improvement 7 15 15/60 IC to San Diego Cnty Line Add 1 lane ea dir 52.3 $359 7.1a SanBernardino Cnty Ln to 15/91 IC 10.7 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction 7.1b SanBernardino Cnty Ln to 15/91 IC 10.7 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV+1 MF lane each A- and a bidirectional NOV Connector at the 115/60 IC 7.2a 15/91 IC to Indian Truck Trail 11.2 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction 7.2b 15/91 IC to Indian Truck Trail 11.2 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV + 1 MF lane each direction 7.3 Indian Truck Trail to Bundy Canyon Rd 14.1 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction 7.4 Bundy Canyon Rd to 15/215 IC 7.6 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction 7.5a 15/215 IC to San Diego Cnty Line 8.7 4 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction 7.5b 15/215 IC to San Diego Cnty Line 8.7 4 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 1 HOV lane each direction and a bidirectional HOV Connector at the 115/1215 IC 8 10 SanBemardino Cnty Line to 10/60 IC Add EB truck climbing lane 6.7 $75 8a 6.7 3 MF Lanes ea Dir Add EB truck climbing lane, or 8b Add 1 lane each direction 9 10 & 60 10/60 Interchange Improve Interchange 1.0 $129 9 1.0 Add Direct Connector; WB 1-10 to WB SR 60, EB 1-10 to WB SR 60, Truck Bypass EB 1-10 & EB SR 60 10 60 Badlands, East of Moreno Valley Add truck climb lane 10.1 $26 10a Redlands Blvd, Moreno Valley to 10/60 IC 10.1 2 MF Lanes ea Dir Add EB truck climbing lane, or 10b Add 1 lane each direction Logan .1, .2, otes Project Segmentation a, b, c Alternative Project , HOV = High Occupants `vehicle MF = FIow XB = Direct ound 2009 Measure A Western Riverside,ty Highway Improvement Projects Attach #2 • of 3 project Route • Limits Ballot Specified Project Total Length (Miles) Ballot Est. Cost Seg Segment Limits Seg Length (Miles) Existing Facility Proposed Improvement 11 79 Ramona Exp to Domenigoni Pkwy Realign Highway 12.6 $132 11.1 Gilman Springs Road to Florida Ave (SR 74) 7.6 1 MF Lane ea Dir' Realign and widen to 2 MF lanes each dir 11.2 Florida Ave (SR 74) to old Newport Rd 5.0 1 MF Lane ea Dir Realign and widen to 2 MF lanes each dir !. Western Riverside County New CETAP Transportation Corridors 12 Winchester to Temecula On 215 near Perris to Temecula North/South Intra- County Corridor 21.1 $550 12.1a Newport Rd, Menifee to 15/215 IC 12.4 2 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 2 MF lane each direction or 12.1b D Street to 15/215 IC 19.0 2 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 2 MF lane each direction 12.2 15/215 IC to 15/79 S IC 8.7 4 MF Lanes ea Dir Add 2 MF lane each direction 13 Mid County Parkway Ramona Expwy - SR 79 to 1-215 Cajalco Rd - 1-215 to 1-15. East/West Infra- County Corridor 34.0 $3,000 13.1 79/Ramona Expressway IC to 1-215 16.0 1 MF Lane ea Dir Realign and widen to 2 MF lanes each direction 13.2 1-215 to 1-15 18.0 1 MF Lane ea Dir Realign and widen to 2 MF lanes each direction 14 Moreno Valley to Redlands or Loma Linda 1-215/60 IC to 1-10/30 IC North/South Inter- County Corridor 10,0 14 10.0 Construct new Corridor with 2 MF lanes each direction 15 Riverside to Orange Cnty To be Determined East/West Inter- County Corridor $9,500 15a Strategic Alt #1 To be Determined $11,500 15b Strategic Alt #2 To be Determined $12,500 15c Strategic Alt #3 To be Determined Legend .1, .2, .3 Denotes Project Segmentation a h c r)anntac Alternative Proiect HOV = High Occupancy Vehicle MF = Mixed Flow XB = Direction Bound Attachment 3 2015 BASELINE NETWORK DEVELOPMENT METHODOLOGY AND SOURCES The table of roadway improvements that is intended to be the basis of the 2015 baseline circulation system network was compiled from four primary sources. The documents identify projects that are funded and expected to be constructed by 2015. The documents include: 1. DRAFT RCTC Federal TIP: Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) 2006 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) (Fiscal Year 2006/2007 - 2011 /2012) - Local Highway Projects and State Highway Projects (Draft printed on May 23, 2006) 2. City and County Measure "A" CIPs: Local Streets and Roads Measure "A" Capital Improvement Programs (CIP) as submitted to RCTC in July through December 2005 by cities in Riverside County and the County: Banning, Beaumont, Blythe (not included in network), Calimesa, Corona, Desert Hot Springs, Hemet, Indian Wells, Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, Moreno Valley, Norco, Palm Desert, Palm Springs, Perris, Rancho Mirage, City of Riverside, Riverside County, San Jacinto, and Temecula. CIP's for Canyon Lake and March JPA were not available. 3. WRCOG TUMF Zonal TIPS: Western Riverside Council of Governments' (WRCOG) Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Five Year Transportation Improvement Programs for the Northwest, Southwest, Central, Pass, and Hemet -San Jacinto Zones. All were adopted in 2005, except for the Southwest Zone's TIP which was adopted in December 2004. 4. SCAG 2004 RTP Plan Projects: Southern California Association of Governments' (SCAG) 2004 Regional Transportation Plan's (RTP) set of "Plan" projects was used as a cross-check. Projects listed in this document with a completion year of 2015 or earlier, and not listed in any of the previous documents, were included in the list. These sources represented the best available at the time the baseline network definition was compiled in May, 2006. However, it should be noted that these types of short-term documents are constantly being updated. In particular, WRCOG is currently in the process of updating the zonal TIPs (Item #3). This update was not yet suitable for release at the time this list was compiled, and thus these updates are not included in the list. The RCTC TIP (Item #1) was alsobeing updated at the tirne this list was compiled. Although still in draft form, the updated RCTC TIP was suitable for release and was included in the compiled list, recognizing that it was still in draft form at the time and subject to change. Not all projects contained in the above documents were included in the table of 2015 baseline improvements: Attachment 3 • Only projects in the construction phase were included. Projects in the planning, engineering, or right-of-way acquisition phases were not included. Projects whose phase was not specified were included. • Only projects that would have a significant effect on a regional modeling network were included. This included projects which would increase the number of through lanes on a roadway segment, add a new roadway segment, add a new interchange, or add new interchange ramps. Grade separations, interchange modifications, ramp widenings, signal modifications, right or left turn lane additions, and median/shoulder enhancements, for example, were not included. • Only projects that were sufficiently defined for modeling purposes were included. For example, a project listed as "Main Street Improvements" would not have been included due to the lack of detail provided. S1V19312V 90dla OVOS S3NYI 90/ t 1/9091N3OM 9 Oa 0YNVHI3 soli PL9S AlNn0030593N2 S10300214 NYId • 50d12 OVOS SNO1103910 N109 53NY1 AllyniXnY 00Y ONY1 XnY 1S NIYW 0/3111 Z'0 0109a7/310/31W 9.0 099S d111Y930319COZ 010a S3NYIAOH Z 00Y AOHZ 0A1B50NV103a Sal 099S oua dI11V9303d POOL 010a 1110'Y3 NI Nl d /W I ONY AOH I OOY Olt 9 AON Z Mid 00 AVM A311VA SLi was SNVAIMID 21111 Va3031 900Z 31021 S3N VI 9011/ V1091 N301M 9 3009913NNYH0 NOANVO 19903011Y0193M 90 NOANYO 1111Yd 093/111a )0017003HIV0 SM/1931910 0021111 0I3S 9911Vi P OIL WOW MGM P 13NNV113 LIMO 3001a910m a NAO 1YaalHlY0 SB9NI,920 A1113153M aO NOANYJW1Y4 3/1112S AIM 11203H1Y3 51V1a31aV Podia 0703 S3NY19019 WON N301M 9 SIIWIIAM A19319Y3 31YONnS dO/Ml100L 90 NOANV0 VII1Vd 9/1112S A11311903141V0 01W/13031900Z 3109 S3NV1901P WON N301M 9 IS SWVOI' LS NOS931d30 11199 V1NInO V1 d111Va303d 900Z 0109 53NY19015 1909d N301M 9 IS N04931131" IS NOSIOVW 1112S 010NI 011v93031900Z 3109 It 1£6PP:73111S£1 01 lL"Zl :via 09a41 SN1 210303NNO0 I03910 AON Z 301A09d 011Jf 1On91SN0039 II100 SIZi/0995 011S AV01099S 9 !Oa 50N19d5 X09 0/5 013AV Sn1dA1 VOn 0/NI SILT NO 5901030000 AOH M3N 590103212100 AOH • NdlONnf 099f/SILi 0109 51219318V 103d19 OVOS 9l Z'1190 0M3N 013AV 3113/SILT 51aa3d 9133002121 NYId • PO419 OVJS 1002290 V31 W2133910 H3Y3 3NV1 AON I ONY MN t 001 dW Z 9 A04 Z Sold 3N11 ALN000 ON109VNa39 NYS LOf S1ZH/16aS/0921S SIZi dlllYa303190020109 53NYI AOH Z 00V AOHZ SnId NOI1J1411f 163S/561/0994 80011993313 SS21 Oqa a/1999033 9000 0109 11nem:V31 N1 AN1l0 nna19i 7'XOY'AOH 00Y9A09dIM 01/3011NI99105110410Ni YN19019 N301M•111dS SIL/09 01100 SIM 6109 11/091 • f09d AONVII 900 Sal N9'099S/1695/SIZi NO 9 91dS 0999/SIZ1 NOI13N110 0925/16219/41Z1 SILT SNY9I190 d10 V 3anSV3W Na d0 A90 1S 3N101Y 01 M3N 01 M3N JI OMB 2439119 NYA/911 30093Na SIV21319Y Padla OVOS 0193A110307033901911 II SdWVa/011.0na15N00 0IM3N 0IS 1N70/411 390NIS13321Y1 21113NOZ MN 19011 INOI10naaN00. 90NYH393110 9I1/YIIONOYWI 40014400 Y11E:mom 01 M3N DI MY MIONOYW/S11 VNOa00 21113NO2 MN 07nl 9 110 V 3911SY3W OOaON 30NYN0931N1 511 WW1/Id A311VA N300111 10 N01131dW00 01 M911 01 AMU Al11YA N30021/911 0090N 011,093031 9000 0109 O9 3111A3NIM 013AV 93NWYH SIGN O9 014110310100 LS Y193110351V15101191SN00 ONV 099510f OlS3NV1 LOY AN Z said Sd VIV9 9 ISN191 01 M301101191SNO3 • IS V013190/SI1 IV 00 N9 MN NI 01 M321 0LS VN31`00/SH A1Nn00301Sa3Na all 9NOL MN 117n1 INOII0na1SN00130N IN093/NI 911/091Y3MYON1WV0 01 MIN 0 ONY311VOnINVJ/SH A1Nn0030593N9 dll 1Ya3031 900Z 0109 I55/10 dW191d09300V 91SN121 dINV9NO AM 0O V SdINVII M3N 0109 NOIMONIS/01.1 VS3WIlY0 S103fOad NVid • 00d19 0Y05 Y dI11V93033 900Z OlOtl S,NI 1 OLZ 2132191/A N301M/N011V32 9 wain 93A0300199 ONIOn10N1931H9YA 01390110 NVNIO 41091SdWY9 9 0 3AY YI00102 1910 Y3 £1 N1 9 M311 LOna1SN00:3AV Y10190d/0111Y 01 M3N 013AV Y101aOd/OH , 193S30 my.1 01M/93031900Z 0109 SN1 XnV AW9900Y'ISNI LI 92141Y9 d001A911439M/93 M321 CIO V'SdWV9 NBOIM 9 SN1 9 OL Z Woad 01 N3OIM/1Jna14N003a:01 AMXd A311 VA X VO/0111V SdWVSM3N 01 AMXd A311YA NV0/011 INOWnV39 011Y/1309J 900Z 0109 SN1 S OlZ 90310NIVOS N301M SN1 S 01 C 11Y913N0V4V N301M.3011 XnV lO0a1SN00'ISNI Z• SdWVa'SN1 11 01 AMXd 0000900/M3N 10091SN00. 111913140Yd V 0/3 91V 011 NO 01 MIN 01 AMU 0000901N/011 5NY211190 S1 VIa31aV r Ddla OVDS 1 21I11Y93031 900i OlOa 0A19 clan ONOA39.009 90921dY 01 LP 311N9 AY W093 S3N Y1 P 01 Z IS NONO YIN N301M ONY 199NY1 LI Sd9V Va 9 JI 3NYI I M3010/1919003 - LS NOSIOYIN 1V OH NO OIONI NI 01 M3N JI IS NONOYW/011 010N1 011V/0031900Z 0109 1411418 9 01 09 NOW V9 A11001/1 9 01 ONOW VIO M34 Y /M (S3NY1 91 NOISN31X3 903d01190910na15NIX3.0109 NOWY9 dO 1SY3 WX 6'001153M WX 51 WOal 30Y9111OHONY9 9Y311 011 NO 01 IAN 01 a0 3d0H 909/011 SNV9IIYO S103009d NVId-P0d19 OVOS 01 M3410/1919N00 01 M3N 01 OS 90N3AV/011 Y113N0V00 S103009d NVid - 90d19 OVOS 9 dLL 1Y23031 900E OlOa 11Y'1931aY 1Y SN1 ZI SdVIYa 0X3 9 1N1 0 SdWVII A91N3 Tam HdJY3 SN1 0 0 AMXNOIHOMMOW Nl 9 10n21SN00 IVaaS All0 SMOYO 0/M WX YIN 9 0a NO11I0 0/3 WX S'SI OH NO 01 M3N 01 AAIXd NO1HOn VNOW /011 111300100 S1030094 NYld- 50419 VIDS S3NY1 AN nil xnV iDnal3N00 53NV1%nV IC'Pal Da a0 000M10NVS 0/3'W 00C IPP91 Oa 3NI1 ALNOOJ ® ISM/MVO 011 VS3W11V0 33IMOS S910N - NO1141909301330011 53NY119N0 01 W091 OVOV NOIUIOSI3nf b 1N3INHOVJ_LV NNOM13N 3N1135VI SIOZ 3111,NI NOISn1ONl HOd NOI1ba301SNOD a0d S1031'0114 JO 1S11 031Y0110SN0o xan1S NOILVII11NOlad V ansvaw OlOa 9111I13Lav Kola OYOS S3N Y1101Z 01OH NBaIM Y Oa NOL31ONIS Oa 3Nr1 AWn00 lS 1NYAa9 Y531VI1v0 Slassasav rodla OYJS IVIa3LaY 39I Y1910141SN00 9 i5151 a0 NM111a3S313 0A14 043n10d iNOWnv39 RV/Inlay 90dla OYOT - S3NY11 Olt WOW Ma1M 9 Oa 3WOH ONVIHOIH 3AV SOMaas ONV1HOIN IS NOSIIM ONINNV9 d111Va303d 900Z osoa SSNV1901 Z WOad N30IM 9 15 N10091I1 aadn d0 HMOS 3AV139Nns ONINNV9 Si v1a31aY 90d1a OYOS NOIl03i SIHINIHNMLi on aadn 93NV19 OIZ WOad N3OIM Y aN100N11 lS A3SWVa 3AV 135NnS ONINNYB Sl Yla3laY 90dla OYOS Y 413N0E SSVd awns Sara Z 0101704i NSOM Z 3AV 1399109 04 3WON ON Y1H0111 0A19 nor WS ONINNV9 S1VIa31aY IOdlo OVOSV dI11V113039 9002 004 AYMI'H1VH 10 INONS LSOf'OH 01 S3NY1L 41N0 13NI SP Io3laV YOdla OYOS IT3ilW L4%Oadd VI NOISN31%3isms 3NY11lOno1SN00 9 as SO13N 1S AVMVHIVH 1S A3SWVa ONINNV9 asWa303d 900Z OJOS 3AY VNVIOM IV ISNI dI ONYNNO 93 M3N 00V ONYYNO 93 M3N 0 0A78 N3anB NVA/ I6aS 301943N4 SiO3read NYld• 90dia 0V05 3NY1ANY110(nv 00v 3NVl XnY 391I1A1N00030NVa0 ILas BM MS YNOa00 9103fOad NY1d • 90dia OVOS ILBS Ol SONW%3 2131410NY'S NN N331101V saoaa HOIHM 83 3Nr Arall)(OV 00Y awn %nV IONS 3M1 A1Nn003ONVNO 9a l6SS VNOB00 S103fOdd NVld• 90dla OVOS NO1103410 HOY33N Y1 ON t 00Y ON LSnid 3NIl A1N0003ONY80 - IS 30a31d LioS d111Ya303d 900Z 010o 11YaW3e •NOSIOVWISN1ewe' 7N1AOH 00V 10151L/09015WYOY• LOTS NO S3Nv1 XOV I AON Z Snid a1dS 09aS/SIL1 SWVaV IONS J10a di 11Vaaaad 900Z 010a 10[LHO, 1Y31 Na 9n10 SVda3S Ol IL/LOTS A01 INOad 3NY1 ANYrNonv 83 301A04d 3NY1 XnY 00Y as 9n10 SVda3S ttat LOTS SNVa11'd0 dI11Va 303A 900Z OLON 1530NY910331141 910n04111 JONI S3N V1 %nV BM IonassNeo- (SNOI1V001 B3 Z ON BM SI mooed 'mass ANVW Ol 3nv VIIONOYW Woad LOTS NO 301S33Na NI SiNY1 MY S 00V IS ANVW 3AY VNONOVW LOTS SNYNI1V0 da 1Va3031900Z OLDS Nano :ONdd'0984r :Y31 MY H1LSOl NO DUO V0 143930 NOadav Woad ONY1 II Sorra aNY ONY1 NV1a397 t f 410 HOY3 3NY11:003N V1 SI 01 M3N lOna1SNOJ 11993AYI aA191a0dalY/S9ONS IV OI M9N 011993AV1 OMB laOdal V/S994$ SNYELNY0 S103 read NYid -90d1tl 0Y0S 30NYH0a31NI M3N IOnalsN00'Y0O3W aY3N OI Min CYIIa/C91011993AYI SOUS lY S99aS v113910Y00 S1O3rOad NY1d• 90,111 OVOS 3ONV910a31M mats lOnalSNOO 0M391 S9BtlS 0/31S MA1 8911aSOIM IS a31A1 - S98NS 10113910Y00 9103rOad NY1d• 90d1a 0V0S 30NVH0a3190 M3N10na1SN00 01 Mail Sled aNV E9ONYNtl3H Y1 NM18 LS 3AY IV S98aS 11713H0Y00 3103rOad NV1d• 90dla OVOS 30NY910431NI lOna1SHOO 01 M391 093AY 1V I9819 Y11amoreo SIO3 read Ord- YOdia 0Y0S I0Ne17710-OY3ada 30N VHMOD/I M3N lOnaisHOO OI M3N 31091111730NYMO NMI9 9S3A11/0A19 I80d19Y 1V S981S 11I13H01'00 d113N0E MS awns IS3NV t01M3N/ONIN30IM) 6L3S Ol SIi lAYMO4Vd A311YA HeN3o11 MaAB Na31S3M d[a6 Y dLBS SIi IAMOd A311YA NON31141 S9Vd69 Na91S3M OSS Y131aa0W S1V1a3laY YOdla OYJS IOZOL98dl1a310N1T3NV1 I OIL Woad N3aIM 9 ON YLBVOBVW 16[491 Oa a3153110111M SSYdAA Na31S3M dLaS Y10031,131 d111V33031900Z 010a - oaf Si SINl A Sans ION 03SVHd1 a001aa00 SSYdA8 N/31nm 3NY19 9 Oa VINNOdnYOOHONVa dLaS SSVdA9 Na31SaM OBS - 11n03W31 S1VIa31aY 90dia 0Y09. 1610Z98dlia.:310NI lvla31aY 3NY19 IOna19N00 I 1S 1NOal NMO1010 Oa V1NIOd0Y00HONVa SSVdA9 Na31T3M dLaS Y1n031731 d113N0E MS l9Wll 15391V7901 M3N1 3334e V131aa0W tl3A0'3OOItlB SSVdA9 Na3153M 6La5 9 3001311133a0 Y131tla0W SSVdA9 14431f3M dLaS V10e3W31 91 V1a31tiv lOdla OVOS IOLaL9adl1a 1310NI 11'Ia31aV 3NV1 YlOf1a1SNOO I Oa YINa0311Y0ON0NVa :133a0 V131tlanW SSVdA9 Na31S3M 6[aT Y1ne31N31 S1W431aV 90d1a OYOS 10L0L9ddlla aiON1911 1Y Sol Va/010NV1YI4314 V 399Y1 910na1SN00 9 a33a0 VolaanW ON YHaVO1YW SSVdA9 Na3193M 6/IS Y1nO3W31 da1Va3034 930Z OLON 6L35 SI YIHl/ions ION Iaedaaee SridA9' Na31S3M AO 111VdI S33a0 V131aanW a3A0300132 3NVl 9 MaN 10na1SN00 133ao'asininW a3Ae man SSVdA9 Na3143M dLaS 'aromas S1VIa3lNV tom OV05 S3NY19019 Woad N301M B Oa V1Vd SlM 1309NOSN0016LBS Y111039131 S1vIa31aV 90dla OYOS S3NYl9 Olt Wend N3OIM I 1S H1[ OA78 VNOWvtl NINON b[tlT OIMJVf NYS 91Wa31aY 9Odlo OvOs S3NY7901Z Woad N3aIM Y Oa HONVa laNVnO Oa SONIads NYW1110 6[1IS OWIOYf NVS d111Va303i 900Z 0104 S3NY19 01Z WOad N3OIM I AMad INOOIN3W00 Oa NOS070141 6121S AWnoo Banana 5103fOad NVld -90dla OVJS 153NV7Yions lSNOO)AYMHOIH NOn Via I AMSd I9100I91397 War0WarVN0WVa a[ns AWn00301Sn3Na Sivla3lllY 9Odla OYOS S3NV190LZ WON N301M 9 NO 3NOHS37Y1 SIM 13AV a311100/40303/13NO 9[aS 3809115133)I91 9111I431aY bOdla OYOS 53NV1901L Wend N3aIM 9 3AY ONVOO aO 3aeH533Y1 laa 3OISn3NBl /[a5 3aOMS133aY1 du ivra31900E 010a 93NY1901 Z woad Nlom 9 N43917110 11311100 13AV lVaiN301?Las 3aONIS133'AV1 s1Vla31aV 90d_a OYOS 93NV1901/97end N301M 9 I33193190NIM16[aS Oa SM391IIV419 9(ai AlN000 3015n3Nn 331110s s310N NOI/ol O530/Oirold S3NY11VNll el Wald OYOa NOLLOIOSIanf b 1N3WH3V.LLV J180M13N 3N113SV9 SLOZ 3141 NI 140151113N:110i NOLIV8301SNO3 110i S103fOUd d01511 031V0110SN00 .. A0n15 NOIIV7III801Ed V 380SV3W OJOS • S O43149 00d13 OYOS 33NY1 t 01; 9303i MGM r 30041331YM314M 011 Oa NO1110 AIN= 31113313Y MLA OVOS S3NY1 t 01Z HOW MGM Y NOSXOW 303N041 On11110d31Y19S 3AY AWn00 mangy 90d130405 53NV1 t 01Z MN NrINM r N31n9 NYA 30'M S31VI CO IS HOTS= 0,111MAIMS DAY A1N000 SWIMS'? 'OM OVOS SIN V1 r 01 L 11031 MGM I 133aLi aria 11310113031111914 0A11130131Y/9S MY A1Nnom swia31aV POdla OVOS 1301Y1 r 01 Z 191011 N3000 r 13331S 90091iY0 B IBIS Y034000 L43AV A1Nn00 519I1311V tOdla 0VOS1 dl3NO2 MN TMO1 NOI1035 MIA Mail NYW13NS 313130010NI ION S300 813NO2 MN dWnl 33NY1001 Z NON! N301M r IONY30!VI LSNYW 3AV N1YVa3HS LT OVOa1Ya V N0100 sima313V tOdla OYOS • IZDLDIONa$dlla I SdWY1 ON IS 3131S 01 3AY NO1dW00:31ON1 t3NY19 Ol t WOad N3019A 9 411 ISNMI 3AV CIMINO YN0100 10 19'33031 9001 0I03 S3NYi 901 t Mai N301M 9 IS 31Y13 3AY N0119300 3AV°WINO YN0100 111191303A 900Z OLON SN19019 IS NIVW'N SS N301N% 9 UM AND 'N 3001113Yd 133I LT NIYW'N YN0100 S1V1a3111' 90dia 0Y05 294VI 9 Olt 990113 N301M 9 3AV N10NOYW MS 151,31NSAOW YN0300 313Ia3laY 'Oda OVOS 1 MI 3NO2 MN MN 413N01 MN Mill N 03N130 ION S3NV1 lO 43111014 S3NV1901 t Mai N301M 9 0A110N110 1311 IS NWW VN0100 31V13314Y tOdIa OVOS 33N Y1 r 01Z WOai N30M Y 3AY O NYLNO 0A110NVNO ISNMI VN0100 tl YIa311Y rOdla OV051 dI11Va303l POOL O1Oa NOl03S nYd113 01 aIVW03HI 30n10W ION 3300 d111Y4303i 900Z 0103 S3N V19010 W013 N301M 9 LS 1419 JAY oI1V1No 3AY Y110NOVW VN0100 SlVIa31aV YOdIa OYOS 53NV19Olt WOW N3OIM 9 Na ONO 1S N19 3AY 3110N0YW YNO100 dll 1Ya3031900Z OIOa ran Y190l t 9301139130M 9 01 HONY323noNW00 WIWI N01330300111101 1131 Oa lama N3340 YN0100 t138013Y 00,113 03031 al1V4303i 900Z 0103 MIW PZX034011030a 3NY1 P• NOISNING A1431S3M r 30NYNO 03SW 3AY 01100M1 AM7d11311001 VN0100 01111303i 900Z OlON S3NY1901 Z N301M 9 as NOANY00101011 - NOANY0)V0131131 ON 00111Y0 YNO0100 31V1a31NY tOdla OVOS SIN VI r OI C Mad N300A Y 110dOW9S 3AY BAY min133114N3anI NYA AWnOWV113N0Y00 STONNINY 003110YOS ONY19 OLZ Mai MOM r 3AY H1tS ILLY 0044 mats N3an1 NYA Y11300900 J111383031900Z 0101 13111 41"X0add11 SBNYI t 01Z'Nom N30IM t OH . 901S Oa NO1110 9113HOY00 313133l3tl YOdla OYOS 53NV11 OIL WOai N3GIM Y NOSIa3VH' 1S NUM NYA i0'M WW19L0 0A111103111,91 3AV VII3HOY00 51VIa3INV OMNI OYOS S3NV1 P 01L WOai 0430m r 1930101 NOSINNVH N3an/NVA PS 3A3 Y113010Y00 3191131aY POdla OYOS 33NY1 Y OLZ Woad N301M t - IIINS IS 131A1 PS 3AV 111310Y00 s1Y1a311V tOaLa 0103 43NV1 t 01 Z WOai N301M r 133a1S a31A1 1990101 NOSI33YN PS 3AY VillHOY00 51Y733133 rOdla DUOS S3N119 01CW0313 N301M 6 11115 9911S L43AY Y11380100 N Y1331NY*Odla OYOS Mir r 01 CW013 MGM 9 'AOadPa N0003Sa1WVM 9983 10110311 Z43A9 Y113HOY00 3131a313 V rOdIN OYOS 53NY1 r 01 Z MaiN301M r lllas Nang NYA 013AV n131409'00 5111a3113 tOdla OVOS OIa 3O13NYit l011a15NM t tl3N3331YM3LHM a3AO 3001a910911 91a5 M3N llla4 01 ?AV 9113010Y00 STOMA V rOdla OVOS P3NYI t 01 Z 910111N301M r a0 931Yd IWO Oa LABIA NYLi0011 Oa a3NavA ADO 1Y109N1V0 d1lreciai Pace OL'0a s3N V7901P WON N301M 9 111tlA V0 On.005'11 SLY31 ADO 131,3 10 WIWI 11Y0 Oa NOWV1 ALO1V303141V0 31V1331aY rOdia OYOS Mr 901P Woad N1GM 9 Oa 21300 . Oa NOANYO OOOMN01100 03 NA303041V3 33YINOANV0 S1VIa31aV 00d13 OYOS 1 d113N01 MS iWnl SIN t O1 Z W011 N3GM t Oa laOdMari NAO 0Y01111Y1 ON 21300 31VI NOANVO d11Y1303i 9COL 0103 133N V7 91 NOISN3133 NO 1.10911109 9 0103 NOWV3i011101SY3 WO 10 0101 NOWVaMii iO 1S3M WX Pi NO 3001110i INYallY0 S1Wa31aY 90013 OYOS S3N11 t 01Z 04013 93301M r Oa SLa3103 3AY LON00 04 N01310945 15393190 313I3313Y 90dIN 01,03 - 1VOSINY 3NYI Y 10i14159100 Y - 3AVLONO0 lS 1NYA31 Ca N0131ONIS VSIM1Y0 511I331aY YDd130VOS 53NV1Y01L W0113 N301M f ON NAO 03101031 NVS 0A11 A311YA A44380 10 NMY711B930 VS3WII10 51YIa31aY 9041N OY03 Mir r 01 Z Mad N301M r 13 194YA11 oli Oa 30111 mono* v331M1V0 do Wia3031 not 010a 33N V1 Z 011 OaaNl AWnO0 MON Z YS3VAIY0 011 Oa 3901 AD9n00 Y531M1Y0 dI11V1303d 900Z MON 1013N1 AINOOO WOMA HIDOS,OSI XOMedV) SN1 t 01Z 0A13 VS39d1Y0 IS N30IM C HMOS.051 Oa 3N1 AWn00 1S OA11313WnY0 VS3W11Y0 3O10OS S310N N0113110s30/ovoid ONY111011 Ol W011 01903 NO401031100 b 1N31/4HOVllV )4110M13N 3NI135V11 SlDZ3HI1NI NOISf11ONl110A NOI1Va301SNOO110d 51731Oad d01Si1 431VallOSNOO Aaf11S NOI1VIIllaOlad V 311(ISV3W 31311 21102371V ID41E OVDS S3N Y1 P 012 W031013211M. I OMB 03014Y2S3IV was a3/13SSYI A311YA 011321017 Sl V/1313V 10d111 OVOS SIN Y1 P 012 11011101301M= Y 0Al2 SONV1033 Oa NOISOW 3AY 000M61031 A311VA 01433017 S1V13313Y tOd13 DYOS 53NY1 P 012 YY03d N301M / 3AV 330NY310 Oa 31301007 NYS 3AYNVION A311VA ON330491 51Y13313V tOd13 OYOS 53NY11 Olt W031N301M r 04113610117 NYS 3AY 2010Y0 lS B000Y311 A311VA ON3aOW LEO V 3E0SY3W A311VA ON33011 4 d111Y33031 9002 010E 30013E 3NY16 Y NOM 3001E93N VI 20011112330V1d31111A4d23 YNOIVa O.N 531117 a 202d d YI NI9/30 17301S 1.311VA Aa Sad 33A0 IS A000Y3H NO t NIY30 VOW A311VA 21E33d E3A0 300138 lS 3000Y301 A311VA ON330191 1119121311111 10d13 OYOS S3N Y10012 191031N301M 6 0Al2 0110NYSS3I9/ D9aS 03 SONIUS NVWEO A311VA ONUOW 5110E310 tOd1E OYOS 23N Y1901P INOE1N301M 9 IS 201330334 - Sal 3AY 1711dAlY0113 A311VA 0113110W S1YIE3131/ 60d1E0Y32 3311Y19012W03d N30111.1 9 30 H09/32 01133001 0A11 21E13d OA1B 0201411S3IV A311VA ON33017 519/1331EV t011E DYOS 33NY1 I012 NOW 11301M I - 0E SONIUS NY171110 30 N0Y39 ON33017 OMB 030NVSS3I11 A311YA ON3S017 51103313Y IOd1E 0Y02, S3NY19010 191034 N301M 9 0A19 SI3332 2I2-1 0A113 030NYSS7I11 A3111/A ON3aOW dI11VE303390020103 23N Y19016 WOSI N301M 9 IS N013Y9 9121101S3M 13111915D 0A19 N3309 NYA Ydf NOEVW d111YE3031900Z 010E SN1601200 N301M/1011315N0033:0103 HAD OY0311Y3/S111Y P Oa OMSYO 201111133691WOS Oa NAO OV0311Y3 3E0NI11332Y1 51Y13313Y/Dd1E OYOS 63NY1901I17033 11301M 9 Oa 1101.911/0000MN01100 117EINOISSIW O3 NAO avowaVa 3aONI61333V1 S1Y123111V 00.412 DUOS S3NY11 01Z W03i N30161 I 153030 SI. NOISAW 1S 3N10 3400251333Y1 5002311VIDd13 OV06 S3NY19 Olt W031 N301M 9 Oa NOANY0 AON09 OE NOANY00311171 3INCISSI01 330NIS1331V1 S1713312Y 00413 °YOB S3NY1 I Ol Z Woad N301M Y 133Els NOSSUAlf IS NOlONHSYM 3AV S3112.1 Yount" 1.91 S11913313 V 6041a CVO! - 53NY11 Ol 2 Woad N301M t •tl3WV 11tl'1DN113331S NOAOYW IS NO2334130 ZS 3AV VINI00 Y1 S1Y133111Y P0433 OVOS S3NY10012 NOW N301M 6 1YNY0 YY EB/M OS 3AY 25 BAY 13331S NOA017171 VINIOD Y1/010NI S1VI3313Y IOdIa OVOS 2217Y19012 191041 N301M 9 30079 331VM3OHM/M ON OEYMIS3M II13S 1S NOS33d231 V1NN0 Yi/OIONI S1V1331EYIOd130Y0S 11191V1 t 101131SN00- 31102010 dY0 I 400N13VM 032d S3110/ 133111S NOA07W A1N000/010N1 2110331E9/ POd13 0110S S3NY1 9012 NOM N301M 9 0AI2 OIONI SO 000M23A11S 110 ONI3VM 032d AN000/010N1 21111131411 10d130VOS UN Y1 V 012 WOEd N301M Y •^VHN19 3AY11190 IS NOSAOVf Y113HDY00/0I0N1 517I11313V 10.1E OY01 S3N Y1 t 012 WON N301M I 04I2 010141 20°NISVM032d. 133213 NOAOVYV OIONI .1111V/303d 9002010E 53N VI P 01Z 191031 N301M I OA11010NI ON0A30.009 2r 3AY IS NOAOYW OIONI Sl VI dila V 190d1E 0 YOS S3N VI 101Z WOE.N301M 1 21Al2 010NI BO ONIEVM 0381 IS NOS113d432 010N1 5103103d NY1d• 10dIS 0 Y0S 1310 HOY3 S3NY101 AYMSS32d23 VNOMS/001Y1V0 9 Ski 3AY NOSa30NYS W YNOVII moivIYo-dY130 38001I513 32 V1 /VN030001I3W3H 59011313Y/0d1a OVOS S3NY1 P 012 WOE. N301M I AMU IN001N3W00 3AY 30YN ♦ial Oa N33aYM 13W3H SlY111334Y 10d14 OVOS 1Y13313Y 301V11100E15100 ONY 31Y0013E Y 3AY NOISMVO 08N333YM 3AYNOS131S 13173H S17133121 Y I0d1301101 21NY1P 0121702d N301M r 10[2213AY Y013011 3AY NOISNHOI IS 31VIS WIN 510E31EY Pad to 0Y3S S3NY1 t 01217021 01301M t 3AV NOS131S AM9d IN010/0130100 IS 31YIS 13173H 11YI113121V •23NYIP IOd IE OVOS 9 d113NOZ 15.1301361 dW01 012 WOad 11301M r 3AV NOS131S AMU IN001N31700 3AV NOSa30NVS 1317361 S1tl2314V 10d12 OYDS S3NY1 P 012 WOld N301M t 3AY V10YOY 13AY NOS13122V3N1 ONISS030 as ISN9 BAY NOS330NYS 13913H 21173313Y P0d130 Y02 23N719012 WOai N301M 9 3AV NY10911 was 0A11 NO5331d 20NI3dS ION 1a3S30 SIAS31dY P0d13 0110S sawn f 012 WOad N301M 6 03 NOWYE SO 33ONS HYNIO SO IdON 202 30Va191 oHONYa /AN000 S1Y111313Y POdIa OYOS 53NVI P 012 W03d N3011A h 303N0191 14020Y1911013Y3 S3111750 0A19 I30d211Y/923AY YINI00 Y1/AN000 71013313V POdla OYOE - 53NYt / 012 1703d 01301M t 13331S 30301017 /S NOAOYI'/ 223AV 010NI /AIN000 Slim V/0d1a OYOS S3NY1P 01Z 191031 14301M P 133212E001034d IS N0011I10 223AY Y113110Y03/A1N1100 S1VI33121Y POdt3 OYOS 53NYI 0012 1703d N301M P 03 M31ANIYI170067 110 IlUd 03 213N31/A A1101Y303N1Y0/AIN000 MOMS 10d1E OVOS SBNY11012 WON N301M P 03 33N3VA 3AY H102 3AV M31A NIYINOOW ADO 1V2103111Y7 /UNI100 51713311Y PULE OVOS S3NY1 9012 Woad 04301M 9 3dOH 903 SOWYIV SOI O3 NOW V3 A1NOD0 sroa31aY POdld OYOS S3NY10012 1/9031 N301M 6 OS NOWY3 OH 3AV A3331140191 A1000 S1YIE31EY IOd1E OYOS 23NY1 I Olt Woad N301M P BS 3AV 093A11 133E1S NOAOYW A1N000 5171E31EY POd1E OVOS S3NY1 1012 WOaI N301M P 3AY HIPI Nona 3AY NYIONI A1N000 21Y3313 V POd1201,0S 63NY10 OLZ 010E1N301M 1 VIES 005921e1eme1111M OE N01110 AIN000 S1VIE31a V 1,04k 0VOS 23NY1P 012 01031N301M P 30 1911Yd - 3AV N1/10N1 •0a NO1110 AN000 303005 MON N0111130S301031DU UNY11VNN 01 W0111 • [NOW NOIl010S1301 b1N3INHOV11V 5130M13N 3N113SV8 BtOZ 3H1 NI NOIS010N1 3104 N011V11301SN03 1104 S1D3f0%d dO 1SI1 031V0110SN03 d0015 NOIIVZI11H0131d V 3a0SV3W O1321 - • d111313031900Z 01Oa 30011E 3NY19 M3N Y AM flNISS010131VM -M013N 31 Z ON110X310V1411113NNVH030YMY10 MOOS NAO SYN3IV P 30OIBB 13NNYX0 ' 30YMV10144703 NA0 33N319 aO NOANY0 W1Yd 1 30llladS WiVd S1Ha311Yhad18 OY7S 30018E 3NY19 lont15NOo h oval 113001 13310 SVIBONY aO NOANY0 W13d1 somas vdt Yd Sinate, 90d11 OYOS SIN Y19019 001091301M 9 AYM 30aNns 10 NA0 KM ON NOWYZ SOM1d5 991Yd dll lVa3O3l 900Z 01011 Y 40 Y 3ansvavr SONI1d3 W1Yd S3N31 l013Ml30ION S300 310 Y 3ansY3W SOMBdS WIYd 1311W I. X01ddVl S3N319019 N301M 9 AVM 31I14113 auto la • Oa NOWY1 SON1adS911Yd d111Va303l 900Z 0101 S3N31901 Z N301M 9 Oli 13. 01 13N0d0 30011111111 au NOANVO NHONI SONIadS W1Vd S13113111390d1a0YOS IS3NV7 Y 01Z 191013 SN301M 001.10N1ddlia 1310141 S3NV19 019 91013 N301M 9 Oa MlIAWVal - loam MO aO NOANYO NHON113AY NHOM &ONUS W1Vd 411111303A 900Z O10a SBNY1901Z 00 N301M 9 3AV 13N1Y0 3AY NLOZ 3AY NHOM SON1133 W13d 011333013 91301 0131 S3N131901 L N3OIM 9 vtano53 HA OMHO VISIA 11141 mum 3N30 SONIadS W1Yd 311 1343033 900Z 0101 SINY1901 L NiOIM 9 30011E 2133 303015 H1no5 3130033 HA 1V111 A1NY 1N30 SONI141194134 d111113033 900E 7171 S3NV7901L WOad N301M'300111 0y0111Va NYal ABNY3N301Y 9 HOYM 131YM3LNM OB HAtYS 11111 ably 3N30 SONIadS W1Vd swain, 90d1110105 HSYM NOAN 301911 Yd MO 3001113N 31 L L 04 MD10030115 11 YZNY a01BY1Y SOMBd1131Vd dI11V1B033900� 010b MINI I XOadd V) S3NY7901P Woad Na01M 9 100103011130 la 3101131111310 3AY 3313INOW 113130 19311d 51H13113 90100303 99131 9019 WON NNW 9 OMaVM OM 4 V1000d/N000Y9 S111ANd Y101104 110 ONIBVMOIBd 033301311d 313113113 lOdla OVOS 33N37901Y Woad N301M 9 1I311 N10H113 HNBOltYO a0 ONI1YM 03a! NanaW1Vd 31311314 Y PO4110VOS 53NY7901 ZW0a3 N301M 9 1AY13NWYN 3AY No0Aloo NO 0040N 0010N dI13NO2 MN dWnl 13NY19019 N301M 9 3001131Yd 13Na VNY Yll3Y5 113N1NVN 0010N ttn33111Y 90d3a 0303 33NV1901Z Woad N301M h Sli 0113N1 1S ONZ OOBON 313113113 90311 OYOS 53NV1901Z Woad N301M h 3AY 13N1911/91 magma LS 1Sl OOBON 31111Y/3033900E 0101 OB OOOM3LHM 013A3 a707NWi Woad lalc H*y3 SN10 0119 Ol Z 01 N3OIM/10naisNOoas 10101 SOWYIY 1011Y 9133 NO 9 0a 000M3LNM 3AY 3000NVN Oa SOWVIY 101 alum,/ 4111313033 900E 0101 00 SIM 1410 H033 53NY10 3NV19 M3N 100115N00 h N13431M00331/9 01 MVM13093 3N3113NN0 313114091 minim, 90d1a 03105 9 d111Y113033 900L 0101 33310 Y13IaanW 13A0 tool 30012'15 YAYn03NY1Z M34 10na1SN00 2 3AY SWYOY 3AV NOlOMNSYM IS YAW° venom 51H13383 911418 OVOS I131331 9 019 WOW 00 SN30IM COL0lova 13101310N1 S3N319 01 Z WOa3 N301M 9 S1.3-1 NO Notn01 04 3101 NO1M10 vianonW 311113/3033900t 0101 00901E 00 SIN N30M 9 SdWY1 gal SdV1Ya SlZi 013131 NOINOO Y131aanW 4111Ya3033900L0101 33N319019 N301141 9 YZY1d OIY01v0 On Sli 01 ElvaHNBOdnY* v111a1nW S1H131aV 901l8 0V0S 53NY1YOlZ WOW N301M Y - 3AY NHONI liXOOOY3N Oa 313N01W NYS A311VA ON310191 31311314tl 90d11 OYOSR dIl1Va3O3! 932 0108 Y d113N021YBIN30 nvnl SIN Y1901 LW013N301M I 001 IS X03H Oa NOANY031034 10 VIOA 313731 411YA 0N80W 1131131.11 90dla OYOS 13183183 3N 31 Z I0namon 2 a0 HOY3B ON3aolv aO VISIA 01031 OS NA0311031 1311VA ON310W 5130314Y 90d110303 Y 41113NOZ 131N/03vin1 """..°..'". ION 1308 ONIB9a1711 e^u, �u MO",'1.1.11 iI.InI S3N31901L Woad N311M 9 3AV 000MNO0 10 SoMad5 N3001H Oa SSYd NO300 1311VA ON3aOW S1H1311Y 90d11 OYDS . S3NY1901 LWOal N301M h BAY 000MNOZ1 lO Y10A 314031 0A19 SI11834 A3MVA ON310W da Y UO13311 A3113A ON310'N 9 d11190303A 900E 0101 S3NY1d013/W0N 3NH301ON S300 d10 V 3an5V3W A311YA ON321011 IaAY 5nlovo of v 1V1-0SAdI SN19 Olt 71Y 1V1.OSAd.01 AMdX3 VNOWYaI SNl 9 Y N301M 9 IV lY1-0SAd S30ntoNa 3AY SnioVO YNOWVB OAtB 0a13d 13113A ON3aOW 11311311Y 90d110.30S - - 53NY1901E11013 14101M a OAII OYBWANNOS MY 000AN0111 CA1004134 011YA ON31011 d17 Y 3anSv3W 011YA ON340W SdI11Va303d 900E 0104 S3NV1lO a3BWON 313I330 ION 5300 410 V 31033311 13113A ON380191 f3WOWY1901L WON301M9 3AV VBNVENYW 3AY OOOMNOaI 0A11SIaa3d A311YA ON310W S13031111 9031010103 S3N V1 h Ol Z 13011 N301M Y 3AY 130N3310 3AY alloy* CAM 3I1134 A311YA ON310W al 1313033900Z 0101 33N319 OIL 00091S NOSYN N301M 9 SdY1V4 0911 WIWI 0913 IS NOSYN A3MYA ON31011 S130311390dla OY7S 131411901 LWOal N301M 9 - 0A11040NYS3311 BAY OooMNoa1 1S NOSVN A3vIYA ON110113 31111343033900C o17a 53N vi 90l L Woad N301M 9 savoa Opts sews mar 40 NOV380NUM A311YA ON31001 510430Y 901111 0YOS 33NY7901 Z W013 N301M 9 0913 Oa NOANVo 3NO3a a0 H7v31 °NOHOW 411YA ON310991 1011101 1310N NO1131101301039033 S3W3113N11 OI W013 01'01 140110101110f V IN3WHOV1IV - VIOHU3N 3N113SVII BLOL 3H1 NI NOIS(117N1110d NOI1V21301SN00110A S103(0114 i015111331V0110SNOO - AOniS NOI1V21111101Sd V 3anSV3W 01021 S1M131aV (Odle Orors dl13NO2 MN Awns - S3NVI/OIL W0a1N301M / NO V1011434 3AV M80101A IS NOIONDISYM 301013Na S1V1a11aYI0d13CVOS S3NY19 Olt Woad N301M 9 AM/1d 30Y1133130NV80 ON 000M 0A10 N34119 NVA 3OISa3Na 51M13111V ENOS CVOS It800Na ON Bat lONaOd1111Sd1143A01310MS3NY19 Olt Woad 14301M. 9 Oa NOANYO OIIBONIXOOW MN VNr V1NVS 0A111 mane NYA 1010101E dIJ Y3a0SV3W NI 10 ADO 9411V/11303d 900Z 0104 AO a30WnN 3NIi3010N 5300 ,,,,,„„„,„,was,n, SIN Y19 Olt WO1111301M • 9 113N11 YNV VINVS 15 NOSXoVS ' OA1BN3anB NYA ' 101013N11 411111303d, 900Z OlON Nam, d SN19 Olt 00 163S N3OIM 9 111oiana M31aNY OAII N38011NYA 3131513N4 SiM1301Y ruts OV051 d113NOZ MN dW 11 S3NY1 d0 a3BWDN 3NN30 10N 1300 d1131402 MN AWnI 1VIa31aV 3NV1 110na1SN00 9 as XOYNIONYS NI 400121 nY31rHO AMXd 4001a3A0 Banana di/115330U 900Z OlOa SXOYal NNWlV 3AV M3iA NIgNnow NMOq 33010 ONY SSYda3aWl sonalSNOo • as do ON 3AV Ydnan5 lY swamis NI +MOO MID SXOYas aaen 3AY M31A NIVINOOW 301513N1 S1111311Y IDdla OYOS S3NV1 V 01 L WOai N301M 9 3AY YIlOLOIA ISIS . 3AY Y4831Sh 301513N3 51141013V tOdla OY05 1 S3NYi 9 Olt WOad N301M 9 as ISN9 3AY 4110NOYW _ 391V1V314133 301Sa3Na d113NOZ MN dims 5314Y1 t OIL NOM N301M / V1SIA MA BO IMO',MOOD aO ssaao NOANYO 301513N4 S1M1311V tOd1U OYOS _ S3NY19Olt WOa4 N301M 9 0A1901oNYS33IY 3Atl 1/110NOV4 3AYNOION813Y 301013N8 S1Y183121V/1d111 OYOS S3NY19 Olt WOaA N301M 9 ON NI3MAIY41- 3AY NOlONONV GA1001ONYSQ1Y 3OISaaNa S1Ma313YIOdla CVOS S3 NY19 Olt 14031 N301M 9 _ - ValYNISXNYlA Bnlo AasNnoo . 3AYA3331NOW 113S30 WIYd 2AlNnOJ /BOV11W ONONYa 51Y183111V tOdla OVOS S3NY19 Olt WONJ N301M 9 011NY/13 OMB S1113d AMdX3 VNOWYN 5134391 51V11314r tOdla OYOS 1S3NY180100 SN301M103l 10/48441111310Ni SINV19 Olt WONJ N301M 9 OMB S1133d SIZH AMdXl VNOINY8 SI81341 S1VIa3121V tOdll OYOS 53NY1 9OIL WOaA 11301M 9 1S MON ON I1IVA3 AM4133 VNOWVI Siaa3d MY11311V NUR OYOS S3NY1/01Z WOaA N301M I ON SNVA3 3AY NMONI 3AY MW3OYld SINNad 51M13IaY I0d11 OVOS 53NV1 I, 01 L WWI N301M / ON 041311N AM41X3 YNOWY4 OAIB 511111141 slaald S1M1311Y 114111 OVOS sawn post WOM N301M t AMdX1 YNOWVa 3AY IAONY310 OMIT BMW 311113d 51M13111Vt0dla OVOS SINY1/01Z WOli N30181 I IS HsII 01 0A311N OMI SIaaaa 0110341 51M131ar I0411.10YOS 1M1313V 3NY1 t 1Jna15NOo 9 115311355r) 04 INVA3 3AV NMONI BAY aaaNY310 SINSId 51Ma31a V/0d1a OVOS 1311Y19 OIL 14014 N30118 1 3AY NMOM 41L1 3AV 430NV310 MOW d113N021 Ya1N3o an. S3NY1401 M314 L NMOW 011838 310NY310 333341 S1Ma3LaV /Ddla OVOS 9 d113N011 Va1N3J AWOL S3NY1901Z 14011N301M t NO dY114110 Oa Y13143f1W ON 0A351N 311113d sma31ar Mill Oro5 S3NY1 t 01Z WON4 14301M t ON OYNM413 N113S511 ON 21300 51113d S1M33111Y I0d1.11 OVOS S3NY1 t OIL 14011N301M 1 Oa JYNY14I3 OS MO 012l900 SIl13d St Ma3lav /Ddla OVOS 1 4111 3NO2 1V81N30 AWnl S3NV1101Z 140411N301M I 3AY M1N3OV1d AMdX3 YNOWVa ON SNYA3 5111341 S1M131ar t0d11 `JVOS 1 d113N021Va1N30 Ain! 53NV1 I OIL WOad N301M I ON OMAN 3AY 1511N10Y1d ON SNVA3 S111438 S1MB31111/ IC M OVOS 1 d113NOZ VININ30 AWn1 S3N11 t OIL WOaA N301M I AM41X3 YNOWYa 3AY 130NY310 as SNVA3 3313d 51Ma311V/0414 OVOS 1M821aV 3N V1/son alSN00 I SIZl ON (DAMN Oa SNYA3 Slaald S1M1314 V I04111 OVOS 1M1311Y 3NVl t sonasSNOo / 04 Z1300 403NO1SA38 04 OYNYHI3 sand S1Ma31ar 904111 OVOS ON V 4113NOZ 11,8118130 AWN 53N V1 t Ol L WOal N30M . I ON r131annri Oa woo as OVNY14I3 818341 51V1a31NY 111411N OVOS- 1Ma311Y 3NV1 Z sonalSNOo 2 SILL ILaS 3AY 0113 stand Si V11311V IOdla OVOS S3NY1 t Ol L WONJ N301M Y Oa 21300 ONO Faa3d 04 35Y0/16 14111 Slla3d SiM8314V 90d14 0V05 Mr t 01Z 14034 N301M / I9 kV Oa 0A31111 133a1S.r. DaaBd 11M831NY I0d111 OVOS S3N V19 Olt WONIN3aIM 9 2I3N21 1131VM3OBHM AO XNY'3 9I Val ANIIIV 340 ON NO14114 ADO W803/111/0 /SONIIdS IN1Yd S1 M131NY I0,11 OYOS S3NVI 9 Olt, WONI N301M 9 AVM 3AaNn5 aO NOANYO IMMI ONINO Y151A SONIadS1^11Y11 S1M1311Y tOd14 OVO5 10103NNOo1Ma31a9 V 3NY10N31X3/lOna1SNOO t NO NOANYO NMONI Iaa 13Y4Y8 NYS iO N1110N1 AVM 3SIaNOS AYM 3SINNDS - SONIadS Y111'41 4111151303J 90CL 010a 19DLIEDAM NI 13NNVHO NAO SVN34Y 43A0 NOlia Od 3001311 53NY1 / 012 41031 N30IM t NI 23009 Oa NOANYO AYIIOW NO NOANYO /VIY411 S01111dS WiYd 101003 1310N NO1141105301015014 SPIY11YNN Ol W011 OVON NO110100145 V IN3INHOVllY )1210M13N 3NI135Y9 SIOZ 3141 NI NOIS1110NI 110d NOI1Va301SN00 aOi 5103r08d iO 1511 031V0110SNO0 A nis NOI1Y211I1101Yd Y 3ansvaw 3108 • SW1131111, rOdla OY05 SW 9 01Z WOal N301M 9 3AY NOSa30NVS Oa NaaaYM AMda YNOWY3 OINIDYf NVs StriaAY Podia Ov0S Mir 901Z WOad N301M 9 IS 31Y1S 3AV NOS33019VS AMdX3 V1401NY11 O1N17Yf NYS S1VIa313V*Od13 OV75 1LCCZCNaadlla Sd V1a3A0:310NI 1YlallaY 3NYl riOna1SN00 r aV030 NNW/ AMdX3 YNONYa 0.030Vf NYS Minis todia OVOS 53NY1 r OIL Woad N301M / 1S 31V1S Oa N3aaYM 3AY 30YNYLIS3 °NOW NYS S1V13313V rOdla DUOS 53NV1 r 01 Z WOai N3OM Y IS arris Oa N1aaYM 3AV 000MN01100 011,110Yf NYS al3NOI MN OHM 53101 P 01 Z 19103i MOM r YIaiNYaX 001YfY0 OOOM A1Nn00301533N3 Si YIa313V rOdla OYDS 33NY19010,N0al N301M 9 Oa 000M Oa NOANY00a190190001,4 OA11 N3sn NYA A1N000301S33Na J O V 330SY3a A1ND Na IS311191 06'0'303dd YI SW/1 r Ol N301M r 3AY vans 09a3 Oa ON011SNav /AVM 4311VA A1Nn00 3013a3Na 31'91331av eadla Ov05 S3NY1 / 01Z N0141 N301M r OAII NOISSIN 0911S AVM MYNA ANO07 301533N3 411 3NO2 MN Imam spun a 012 Mai N301M a No1S0N DNOa1SWaY 1311Y•A A1141100 mama d113NO2 MN dNAl Sawn r aLZ Mai MAIM r NOANYO aaVd 311 NOANV01VOS31131 A1Nn0030UMS J111'933031900Z D10a - S3NV190/ Z Mai N301M 9 la a3133H0NIMl 6L3S SILT Oa 11001 AINno7301013Na del 3NOZ MS uNnl SONYIt 01Z WON NNIM r uaS 91Z9 Oa 1100i /IMMORomania dlliva303d 900Z 010a 300121 3NM I,tl H0M 3001a9 akin ONI1S1X3 3DY1d33. 115 BM 0/N 311W a'01 a3Na YNV YIN YS MAO 300131 / 33A1a vNV V1NYS 33Na VNV V1NYS Oa a3N4 A3Nn00 301SLaNa 51 VIa31aV r Odla 0Y0S 9 du amod 1Va1N3O MAI S3NV1 r 01Z Woad N301M 'r a0'VIDA 3H031 3NN OO ONIamaaa NYS all NAO 314034 A1N00030I533N3 all 3NOZ lYalN30 dW01 S3NY1 r 012 Woad MOM r 11319130 SONIadS N3001H 11NIaY2NY01 SSW N030id Altin00 3aISs3Na 4113NOZ MS dNni S3NY11, 01Z WO3l N301M r NOIONIHSYM 11Yal NOISSN aY•N01Yd UN0003a1Sa3Na 4113NOZ 1V111N3O Rini saNv1 r 01 Z WOad NNW P 3343431N dYiNna as OA3nN mrin0030433N3 d113NOZ MS dWn1 5311Y1901 M3N 9 - vialaanW 21300 1110dM3N AIN000 acasa3Na S1Yia31aY POdla OYDS 1v1a31aY 3NYl r 100113N00 r fSSYdA/N331tY316L3S Oa AOaanod Oa SONIadS ION YR31aanN AINOOD 30IS33N3 all 3N 021Ya1N30 ivanl S3NY1 r 01Z WOad N301M r 11V001V 7YNVH13 vaiaanW km000301013Ala d111Va3031700Z 010a SNi r 01E Oa N3OIM/13NNVHO a3A03001a 0 N1910nalaN00 a NOmalO 13NNVHO a31YMW105 A311YA Y111H DY00 AV Slim A1NA00301Sa3Na d113N021valN3D earl S3NY9 r Ol M3N r NOSd1MS a1Y0a3a1V 3311N3W A1N000 Magna all lY 33031900E 01021 IIN t XOadd Y133NY1 901r 14103d N3OIM 9 3111A3NIM a314NVH 3AV MOWN AINn00301Sa3Na d113NOZ MN iWnl 53NV1 r Ol Z Nom N301M 4 YONYMII3 a3NWYH 3AV 3111101h11 A1N000nova S1YI3313Y 1,0413 OVOS 9 d113NO2 MN da01 S3N Y1101E WOad N301M r OAla N3a0/NYA 3AY YONVM113 3AY 30NOWI1 /INn=3009/ua d113NOi MN Pan! 9 dID Y 330SV31/1 A1ND Na IS311N 061'303dd VI AMH train, 3NV1 r 01 N301M r 3AV ONY13A310 Oa 31NY310411 MY Ya3315 Y1 AINO07301013Na dID V 3SOSY31Y A1ND Na IS31IW SCO'XOaddYl S3N V1 r OI Ovoa N3OM Y as vIN30avO Oa INOH Oa alma A1N000 3a1Sa3Na an 1V3303f 900L 010a Sarin 901E W031 N301M 9 03 V1A1V5 Old lia a1Vdrava1 Aain V IMO A1Nn003aISa3N31 all Va303d 900E 010a au ONI1D3NNDD 15 V1931V03N Y1 r 10OalSriOD r as 3111A9NIM 3AV a3NWYH 1S YN311,0 • A1N0003a1533Na all 1v33034 900Z D10a S3101901 Z 3001a13ddy ONIOn17N11v1331a V 100 OH N301M 9 ONI140 VISTA SdNYa HDION Olt aONOW 31V0 A1N0003a1013A1a S1Ha31aY rOdla OYDS S3NY1/01Z WOad N301M a 3AY 33NNYH 3AY OlY11HDaV Oa moan= A1Nn003a1313Na S1Y013laY P0313°YDS 1YIa3121Y 3N Y19101131SNOo 9 Lao N1 laV1MOOV3W a3 HMS NOINIIO AlNn00301533Na dH 3NO2 Ms ovnl S3N Y1701 NON/ONIN301M 9 6LIIS tin Oa HAD NOD4110 A1Nn07301Sa3Na all 3NOZ MS Mill ' S3N V1 r 01Z W031 N301M r ld V3O 33dd00 511 O3 HMS NOUaID AiNnOD 301533N11 d111Va 303d 9002 D1Da 'T3001a0 Z NLM fS311W re XOad dV • 1Y10133NY191 OYOa 141133 NOINI13170a1SN07/ON3133 9 19La51 03 a31S3H0NIM Oa 3d0131NY Oa Him NO1N110 A1N00030Sa3Na dI11Va 3031900E D1Da 13N VI r 01C 1,1031 N3OIM / ONIaVM 033i 53111N NOlPolO AINn003a11a3Na all ?NCI SSYd dNnl S3N V1 Z 010 Mai N301M Z a3M01i1139 31SON 0A111311YA A3a3H0 A1Nn0030I5a3Na 51VIa31aY rOdla aYD3 1VIa31aY 3N V1 r10n3lSN00 r 3AV 3AY301139 0331NA3MM wvl nv u,u,,y nuvm�,ewniuvy Oa 30V1SO131Ra3W1 AINOOD 30013Na AI910003a1Sa3Na Siv1a31av 10430YDS 33N Y1 r OIL 141034 N301M r 13091YISNODI 6L35 03 VIN30inyn OHONVa all 3NOZ MS dWN Ovoa 3NV1 r M3N r 3ONIads i0H y13110014 01nY 03 30V1S Olalia311,13 WOOD 3015a3N3 dIl 3NOZ MS dWN S3N VI a Ol L 1,106 N301M r 31Z-I SH Oa 1100S/NA3 AONn1 AiN0003a15a3Na all 3NOZ MN RWn1 S3N V11 OIL N301M•33/03 VN Y viNVS 1Y'300I3301YOIHOa V r 300135 33N3 VNY VINVS a1V01N0aY AINOOD 3a1533Na 51Yia313Y e0dla OYDS S3NVI 1 OIL 1NO3l N301M r 3AV V1311.0113 30 A03NN33!NNW 03000M a01ss3Na all 3NOZ MN oru. S3N V1101E WM!N301M r N3an N VA iO NNW.0C9 Mae N VA a0 HMOS.003 DOOM 3a1533A13 3010101 S310N N0111130S3a1D3fald - S3NY11YNN Ol ISM 0Y03 Nouolastanf 171N301143111IV NNOM13N 3N113SYS SIOZ 31.11 NI NOISMONl SOd NOI1Ya301SNOO 110d S103f084 dO 1S11031YONOSN00 AOn1S NO1107111101ad Y BanSY3W MOS ' S1VIa31LV nail OVOS OVOS ONY19 Olt WOad NaO 9 Oa Ya3vOSYW 3AV N00134131* Oa YIN301110 OHONYSI v1n03riaL d1111113031900Z 010E S3NY1901Z WOad N301M 9 Oa DYNY14I3 6Laa MAW YONVH034 Y10030131 dI11Y11301d 9002 0106 1S3NY7 /Imac) 0NV1a3A00N31X3 + Oa In0 fO0YaYnlr YdN3nV 10 2131N303013WW00 tl00NYla3A0 nnOawal d11111303d 900Z 010E S314Y19 ON31%3 / 1051111031110 013011S 0131d33LOa 01 SV1OHDIN Y10031,131 41111130N 900Z 010E S3NY1 V 01131Y3 f Oa YNIHdYa3S Oa 30VIS 0131131311113 Oa SONIadS1014 rlalatlnW Y1n03W31 S1Via3laYpin060 OYDS S3310 Y121aanW 5506OY 3OOIaa 3NZ 10aa15= Z 1S lOfnd 1S 1NOai NM01010 1S NIVW v1n03W31 410 Y 3an5Y3W Y11031/31 SAY NOSa3441f 01 d1,11aVid0 OS AMU 1.311YA HON3114 dWY11303AY NO0133131' OW AMU A311YA140113ai vanOaWal d111V113031900Z 010a OVOa3NY110N31%3 f ON SONIadS 100 rimaanW Oa YIN30111Y0 OHONY1 01130Y13 0131da311nS Y111031/31 51VI213131 /Della OYOS f3nY1901L rvOad N301M r SAY 30VNVidS3 M14013 YNOWYtl Oa N3aaYM 01N10Vf NVS S1VIa31aV 10d1a OVOS R d113N0Z 11.131N3H 35/01 S3NY1101L Woad N301M / SAY 301NY1dS3 AM413 VNOWva 3nV NO0130015 OINIOVf NVS S11I131tlV frOd IS OYOS R 4;13NO2 rs•13 W3H iWnl S3NY1/OIL WOad N301M I 3AV 30YNY1dS3 3AV 01N311/ 3AY NOSa3ONYS OINIDYf NYS 303005 MON 1101141110330 l03f03d S310/1 WNW Ol WOad arm 11011010111111! b 1N3INHOV11V AMMAN 3N113SV9 SIOL 31.11 NI NOISOIONI VOd N011Va301SN031104 S103f0811 JO1S11 031Y0110SNOO A001S NOI1YZ1111101Hd V 3an SV3W O10a =y02 Parsons Brinckerhoff 505 South Main St., Suite 900 Orange, CA 92668 714-973-4880 Fax: 714-973-4918 Memo ATTACHMENT 5 To: Karl Sauer Bill Hughes Subject:. Overview of Technical Approach for Measure A Traffic Analysis From: Tim Byme• Date: May 9, 2006 To support Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) transportation planning studies and efforts, PB is developing a detailed transportation model that can be used to evaluate various types of transportation infrastructure improvements throughout Riverside County. This transportation model will be able to accurately reflect both free and toll highway activities. Since currently there are no appropriate transportation models that can be used to evaluate the potential toll activity for projects within Riverside County, PB will update and modify the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM) as a starting point of model development. OCTAM is most suited for this effort since the OCTAM model was used as the basis for development of the SR-91 Toll and Revenue Study prior to OCTA's purchase of the facility and OCTAM was used to develop traffic' forecasts for the Riverside County to Orange County Major Investment Study. The following enhancements are being made to the OCTAM 3.2 model to develop this new model: • Incorporation of SCAG RTP 2004 demographic data assumptions throughout the modeling area • Addition of northern San Diego County into model to more appropriately model activity at the I45 interface between San Diego/Riverside Counties • Incorporation of SCAG 3191 traffic analysis zone structure in Ventura, Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties • More detailed SCAG 4109 zone structure used as a basis for developing zones in Riverside County • Incorporation of Western Riverside County traffic analysis zones based on WRCOG TUMF zonal boundaries Once. the traffic model is developed, it will be calibrated and validated prior to performing future model runs. This model then will be used for the Measure A traffic analysis. The Measure A traffic analysis will be performed on a 2015 scenario highway network. The Measure A projects will be evaluated against a 2015 baseline network. The development of the 2015 baseline network includes the following: • Comparison of SCAG existing and 2015 network to document improvement assumptions • Identifying current or prograrmned construction projects within Riverside County that are expected to be completed by 2015 • Identifying high priority TUMF projects that are expected to be completed by 2015 The Measure A projects will be modeled individually and compared against the 2015 baseline alternative through several measures of effectiveness. Project measures of effectiveness will be compared in tabular and graphical formats where appropriate: Several of the Measure A projects will be segmented into stages and analyzed in a staged fashion in order to determine the optimal staging of the corridor level improvements. Project costs will be developed by Bechtel for use in the alternative assessment. PARSONS 1 Over a Century of BRINCKERHOFF Engineering Exceilence • The benefit measures are consistent with those included in various other studies including the Riverside County to Orange County Major Investment Study and include the following: • Facility Number of Trips Served (Average Daily Traffic) • Facility Daily Level of Service • Travel Time Savings • Vehicle Miles Traveled Savings • Distance Savings per Vehicle • Vehicle Hours Traveled • Value of Time Savings ($) • Value of Distance Savings ($) • Energy Consumption Savings • Air Pollutant Savings. •• Accident Reduction The measures will be developed from the model at the daily level and expanded to ammal values. After evaluation of the various benefit measure for each of the projects and staged components of the corridor projects, the Ad Hoc Committee will select projects to incorporate into a comprehensive 2015 altemative for a cumulative analysis. Additionally, a 2030 comprehensive cumulative analysis will be performed for the selected projects to evaluate benefits under a horizon timeframe. PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF 2 Over a Century of Engineering Excellence Attachment #6 2009 Measure "A" Program -10 Year Delivery Plan Qualitative Evaluation. Criteria Each project or project segment will be evaluated considering each qualitative evaluation criterion. A score of 0 thru 5 will be assigned considering the relative need for each project to be given a higher priority for early completion. The table below summarizes the scoring convention for each criterion. Criterion Number Qualitative Evaluation Criterion Qualitative Evaluation Score 0 1 thru 4 5 1 Opportunistic timing from other external forces No benefit from opportunistic timing Increasing need for the project tofrom be given a higher priority Significant benefit opportunistic timing 2 Environmental challenges Maximum cost or. time required to obtain environmental clearance (Same as above) Minimum cost and/or time required to obtain environmental clearance 3 Need to protect Right of Way Right of way cost is not likely to increase significantly over time (Same as above) Early completion of the project will result in reduced right of way cost 4 External funding available speck to project Extemal funding is not available to fund the project (Same as above) External funding is available to fund the project 5 Time required to get the project ready to advertise Extensive time required to get the project ready to advertise (Same as above) Minimum time required to get the project ready to advertise 6 Safety Completion of the _ project will result in minimal safety improvement (Same as above) Completion of the project will result in significant safety improvement A6.WH.RCTC.Qualitative Evaluation Criteria.doc Page I of 1 8/1f2066 t a8ed 4 aullPeaO ® AewwnS ha(oid sm8ad ♦ auotsegw Iewa;x3 tiewwnS IIIdS 900Z'9L aunp :ew0 ueld NenlIBO N Maw) 600Z :MOM v sxsel lewelx3 •euotsallw Isel 61/Z 6Z/t p ' • L0/6t/Z WIN podeN leuld;o [muddy aazlwwoa ooH Py 9Z LZ 9Z 9Z Loma _uoW_................................ 110d911 4E4 analneb ae:lwwoa 00H py 90/0Z/17 NI podaa ueid muAlleo ......................................................... . 4z £Z _ 6Z/ZL i 90/6Z/Zt 1.1d leno.iddy eenputuoo ooH Pt/ zz swam um Ueld lepueuld atedead Lz L CZ/ot /tt 9Z/• ! I I I i 1 9Z/9 4110 9Z/9 . ' 9Z/9 ti 90/£Ztot uow lenaddy emwwoo ooH Py O OZ 6t 90/t/6ud ;Seoeawd ouipund _ 9t Lt 90/LZ/bl uow lenoaddy 003311.uwop *ow Py :._.__ 91 9t .. _.._ ._, -- 90/6/0t uow uogezapohd;oeloid 90/9Z/6 uow leAaddy eeulwwoo ooH Py 4 4t £t so/£us!ad_ 31.1011.01/10610.id Alae3.10; suol;epuaww00eb dolanaa Zt tt 90/9Z/9 uow eHe Polo lenaddy eemwwoo ooH Pt/ .___ _-_,_. 01. 8 90/ZZ/9 uaw _ uol;enlen3 and;e;l;uent) 90/9Z/9 uow epa1eJ9 PUB lapopy 10 lenaddy eaWwwop 00H Py 9 L 00/9a um seshleuy •len3 enpe;l;uentj pue bullePoW 01J0.1l 9 g 90/LL/4uow Se;ewgs3;soo;59110,1dd019n0Q 90/9Z/9 uow lenoadde eequwuwoo ooH Py b £ 90/Lz/z uow pa;enlen3 eq o; spelomj.o ecdo0s dolenea _-_ z t I 90/LZ/£ uow_ uogoapoa Elea pue;uawdolenea esege;ea Jew 1 gad L uer Dap LA 1 po On 6ny l Ind 0nr 1 Aew1idy 1 Jew 1 Qad ye;S eweN Nsel CI L wetugoeuy wimps /Gewwng ueid tianuaa JA 01. y alnseew 600z • • 3 4 epalpo pue buidoaS ue}d /Gamiaa aeaA py saanseew;gaua8 angemeno ■ saanseaw }I jauas amelgueno :stool6u lueN suogdwnssb vg vomlaN auijase8 9 0Z pesodoad ■ udeoaddd leoiuuaal lapow uogepodsueal ■ :6uppow adoos pue uogelueuu6as suogdposaa loaload d aanseaw 600z jo alepdfl :6uydos hafoad mod uoiTaaapsuo0 aaTTiuIWOO aoI swaij epalpo pue fiu!doo5 dew AnnHaa maA p � „.d,•1,.11 .. sel;PdS O.) :1(11S21 1A121 .) O N 1(1 21 V )1 :1 N N.S AMNA mn '�, ;o.(wrnti�a ors 9bUU 90 !GP "Pagip ?- epa} aD pue 6uidoag ueid Anmaa JueA pi, I, d onwaaaaa nrh. :::jP i71Nji9J sluawanoadual Aenny611H ale;S i(ennu6m u6ileaN auel 6u!clw!13 83 PPV luawano.adiul a6uegoaalu1 uaalsAs aue! 6uiquaila )13nu 83 PPV ougueuaa8 ueS o� o6am ueS uo!paaip yaea auel L ppv sluawanoadual pasodoad aansealkl alnoN pafoad e as o pue 6utdoos Hid l(aanilaa aeaA p� elnoawal '8 AalleA ouaaolN unnlq aip ea auel L PPV 10 oulpaeuaa8 ues o} ap saangj WOJI aip ea sauel Z PPV uo!paalp yaea auel L PPV a6uet.oaalul anoadual 3saM 1,6 8S 01 1-11a0N aopauuo8 nnaN ppd euoao0 u! aip ea auei L pm/ sluawanoadual pasodoad aanseaw 1,9 alnoa �Ib00 9(1 3i3d sAemt_161H Aiunoo walsaAA b a mseeN 600Z 313a1,, epapJ3 pue 6u doas ueld Aaanllap aeaA 01, sagunoo a6ue.10 pue apisaamu uaamlaq (s)aopu. o maN sagunop outpJeuaa8 ueS pue apisaaAN uaamlaq aoppioo maN 54-1 PUe 6L 21S uaamiaq aopwo3 isa/N 4se3 maN aun Alunoo o6aR3 ues pue •pa podmaN uaamiaq Joppioo 6unslx3 uapiM quawanoadual pasodoad d'd133 9b00 ['0 saoppioo maN ❑81 0E11 Aemved Aiunoo -PUN a}noN S1. £ !. pafoad saopaa00 dblDO Awnoo appeA!H 9t00 90 ueld AIanilaa aeaA 06 semis 6u mollo aq} ui pals!! aae suogepen loafoad ieuontdo asagl •spafoad aanseaW paweu auk Lgyvk `ped ui ao `alogm ui papniau! aae spafoad aseg1 1.i ao uo uoispap pawaolui ue aiew ueo uoiss!wwoo `ape ene si ieuomppe sigl uagm •sa6ueg3 6uidoos asagl o sloedw! wea6oad pue sisoo `slilauaq puelsaapun ofaapao ui 543afoad aanssaw pagguapi Alieui6iao aql inyvk Buoie pawls aq suoRepen loafoad leaanas leg; spuewwooaa jje}s •pawluapi aaann sanssi 6uidoos 13afoad panes'`saoueu!pao d aanseaw 600Z' pue 6861. yooq ui spafoad aqo jo ma kaa angeaedwoo e aaw 9b0 90 ovi 1 L sV mod � , euapio pue 5uidoos ueld /Gani100 aeaA pL. z pafad ansean • elaallao pue 6u!do ueld kian!laa JeaA 01 S1.-1/1.6 aqi. pue 146 CIS qi.oq o sluawanoiclw! leuon,eiac10 s6u!nes legualod uo!ll!w 001$ 01 91-111•6 ES 041 pue ;awls u!euv uaalvqaq 1.6 21S uo waisAs Joioalloo .10108UU03 Isom 16 Hs gpou 6u!oeidai Jap!suo3 oiod ,4•00 90 qZ Perwci leuoRdo epo}uo pue burdoos ueld Alanijap /cols Ob sizluoaun Alunoo ouipaeuaa9 ues auk o apisaani Apo 044 uJoa uogoaa p tiara sausl Z ppb 0.10d, a BbOCi BD eg Taafoad aanseeN g 43afoad M inn paipnls aq IRO aBals aa}ei a aq use . saWr110A OPOZ /BOA IN Del of palaa(oad sdooi Bugoft uoa Efuliuiswaa auo aeidaa Him uog iw 00Z$-51I•$ Jo isoo leuo PPV 3ISI<ZI1•6109 a44 @7 94Z-1 punogNpou 04 09 21S punoq ;sea aoloauuo3 loaaia nnau ppe �safoad aanseaW ay; o; uomppe Lai . iod 9E00 90 qg loafoaci leuo!ido 00] 66 epawo pue 6u doos Uew Annijap ae0A 01, 5 L-I pua sn diClaan3 uaamlaq 5 I.Z-I uo uog3aa p gdaa aual auo ppb 3,13d , el- 9 peraid aanseeN • `l ig' Z 1, epolpo pue buidoog u.eid �SaeApa JE0A 0� g Pafoad oink paaaap pue paipnis aq ua3 uo�lliva SLS-09$ }o lsoa lauoilippd •slaaroad &inseaw 600Z pua 6861. auk uaaniaq s}uawanoadw! pafoad ui de6 a luanaad o s6updS xos o� `snld/Claan3 }a 13aCoad ay; sdols Anuaimo leg; `uomppa auai 5 GZ-1 au; laafoad gpou auk pualx3 3t�d d 1 9b00 90 q a Perald puoi dp el owo pue 6uldoos ueld IGaAflea Anil pl, aun it;unoO o6alp ueS ay} o3 0611e43a84u! SLZ154-I woad uoi;oO.np yoea ul`auel AOH (13 auo PPV OI S4Z154-1 Gin o; p21 uoitueO )(puns wail uogaaalp !pee ur auei AOH t4)"OLIO PPV bamommaavapia P21 uo)SueO /(puns o; heal Tonal uelpul woad . uol}oaalp !pea ul auel AOH i 4) auo pptl E't W ., Deal tonal uelpul o; a6ueyoaa;ul 54-1l66 wag uol;oaalp Vea u! auel AOH:(4) auo PPV o44 ofueyoaalurS4-1146 us ow o; t(;uno° oulpaeuiau ues woa} uol;oa.np yaea ul auel AOH (4) auo ppy tipou ay} uo 54Z-I pue toms ay; uo 54-1 ay; uaampq' 31 51Z-U54-1 aLi};e ao;aauuo3 AOH leuol;oanplq a ppe `;oa(oad aansem ay; o; uomppe ui epawo pue buidoD ueid Alen110p aeaA 01, Beal Tonal uelpul,o; a6ueyoaa;ul 54-1l46 21S- ay; won uogoamp Linea u1 eue-i ANI (0 auo ppe `;oafoad aanseam' ay; o uomppe ul 31 041' }o s6al y}nos pue }sane uaemlaq 31 09/54-i ay; ;e ao;oauuo3 AOH leuoa;oaalptq a ppe osiy a6ueyoaam. 54-1146 NS aLi; o; null Aluno3 oulpaeuaa8 ues ay} woa} uogoaaip Linea ul auei (4)' auo ppe `;oafoad aanseav4 ay; o; uomppe ul; 4 313d HPpO 90 cig-z sparaid ieuoiTd0 epalP0 pue 6uidoag ueid kaAga0 maA 01 said spulpsg 041 u! 09 tIS pue eseuaile3 asau 01,-1 uo sauei 6uigw!i3 tonal punos lse3 ppd �p� pue eg spa(ad anseen j71N�la iv ei owo pue 6u doo aid 4.10A ea aeaA 01, - suogendo oille.g ui assaaaui lueowu6p a apinoad Allah 11!M pauuaaalap aq lsoa ui aseaaaul uogaau goaa ui aual AOH ao asodand Ieaauao a aagila ill!m 09 NS pue 01,1 uo sauel 6uoquaiia Jana; punoq lssa 6uioaidaa aamsuo3 J,mod 6 J minim NUJ. 0) ]QIS213-Allt i 'OJ ON 34,1st as 90)0 90 q0pue aS spefoad leu000 eualuo pue Bu doos ueld l amiaa aeaA py auk pua pao� �odnnaN uaann�aq 5 GZ-1 uo uoi��aaip ���a ui sau�l Z ppb oiod e 171. 114aa AZ I loafoad aansaan eiaalpo pue fiuldo veld AJOI11100 aeaA 01 ZG }oafoad q}inn paaealo pue paipms aq uea }oafoad pawma}ap aq o }soo leuoi}ippy }S Q o} podnnaN WWI Za }oafoad }o }ivai }oafoad uaaq ou au} 6uipuma Ati }oafoid jo }red se (dew uo ewe uaaa6) }aodMaN pue}S a uaann}aq auel leuoi}ippe auo ppy ■ :aapisuo0 0 uoi}d0 moN (dew uo ewe uaaa0) podmeN pue •}SS p uaann}aq pa}eaao 6ua;mod ud e19 a ui swiaaq diuial 01 S 4Z19 6-1 pue •pN 4.iodnnaN uaann}aq sauel 01. ao g ■ ZG }aafoad aa}le SIrZ-I u0 01 91Z/g H pue •}S a uaaM}aq sauel 9 • '}S 0 pue 09 NS uaann}aq sauel g ■ 9 }oafoad'ale 92-1 u0 3l3tl cwv, VL £ 1, 9b00 50 31 SI.Z/56 pue podmoN uaann;aq E, sauel Ob ao.8 IlodnneN pue iso uaann;aq'; sauei g -1S a pue 09 uaann;aq j sauei g - '— q L.� peraid ieu000 eiaa;u� pue 6uidoaS ueid AJBAHaC aeaA 04 9b00 90 uaua oe u! s! s! oefoad a !e a . b � u ��b . � .I � p I. � a 910Z Aq alaldwoo aq pawnsse aq ueo ao uolionAsuoo aapun ARua uno ale Taub spefoad apnlau! Apo 1pm • suompuoa auHass8 910Z Alunoo ap saaigi aol aanToruls auoz gip paiepdn aq II!M • elep oNdeflowap apisaan!O`dOS aol palepdn aq II!M • spitieua d!usaauped o!6aialTS ddd a01 pasn aq ll!M puo `sauai II01 1-61S 10 aseyaand oO of ao!ad ApnlS Ho' 1-6.1S ` SIW Aiunoo a6uea0/9101saan!H uo pasn Aisnopaid pasn aq ium Slapow 0£0Z S 40Z ZI£ Wd130 t ®, Lpea ddd poimpal lapoN uowpodsuaal ��,oilt 1 Z 313d mom pile a ncloog ueld kani(afl RBA 01 ($ `sw!od) uogonpati wappov ($ `suo/) s6uinss�% ($ `suone6) s6wes uoRduansuo0 iiEueuma (% `smog) pafanen sanoH 013RleA ($) s6uines aouelsia anleA (sem) aioivaA aad s6uineS nueisip saw) s6uineg paianeal saliw 013140A " ($) s6uineg anleA (smog) s6uineg awil laneal " (S01) 03inaas }o lanal Aliea 11ad) panaaS sdial jo aagwnN AliHoej sa mseav4 Tpua8 an iernueno i F'3/01 LZ oloa ® , eiaa}ia�.pue 6uidoos ueld IGan11ap 7eaA pl• -sisAieue mauaq lsoo ail; ui passaapps you sanssi /( ales • aspanps Apeal laafoad 841;86 of paainbaa avail ogpads loafoad algaliana 6uipunj lsuaalx3 . Aem 10 PAN loaloid 04 paaN sabuallsuo laivawuoa nu3 6uiu i ogs unpoddp 9D00 90 samseen plaua8 ani emend • w epapJ0 pue buido - deed kiangea aea), 04 71:oo eo lloaraid Jo km/4pp aaipea ua a6aanoaua pinom Aald ui saolaaj „wino we'll aab tpalaldwoa 6uiaq laafoad siu uo puadap leg; sloaroad luasfpa Jain° wain aab taawea ;Lam loaroad a l �ralgsliana apaw aq mom lain 6u punk 9a841 SI 6u!wa 3ilsiunPodd0 ►:mod � saansealAl iilaue9 an!Teijlan0 epawo pue 6uidoog ueid fueNlap aeaA 01, tsdnoa6 uomsoddo Aua al/ tpafoad auk poddns A unwwo3 auk saoa ■ ooafoad s!�l� uo uo llsod sa!auaBy aaanosaN lsuM an auk o saalem sloadw! ao `sapadoad leopolslu `sapads paaa6uepua se glans tlllnn leap of sanss! leluawuoa!nua luaoglu6!s aiain aid ■ tNI31S13 ao YTS! `33/33 aa!nbaa loafoad inn aauaaaala leluawuoa!nua o lanai lauiV► ■ sa6u.allsuo lsluaLuuoa!nu3 oiod saansaaW 14eua8 °Nie en° E_' . `,100-,0 cualuo Buidoosueid Annijoa Reif 01, tpaAeiap loafaid eta Aem, ;Alkyl papaau aquo awn aqi. uaddeq o Ala)fli legm • 4ueid leilaua6 paldope u! si • 4loafoad atg uo uomsod sAmiloglne asn puel repo! °in sr leqm • 4.1opipioo mau e Jo luawdolaAap ail ai!nbaJ boa fond 0411W luoneluawaidm, loafaid wiopd item jo Gin Jeau anoao Alam luawdoianap mau illm • :Aem /46!zi PeeN sainseeN ffieues aNiemeno ei.1014a0 pue. 6uid039 ueid Lion!jea aea,k 0� 1.aauoos pa.aannap aq ueo laafoad aul algsuana laa f oad °in ao} algaliena you A lauaaou aae auk spun] aab • tloafoad aaugo Aua uo pasn aq you ueo lag; lnafoad aoi algeliane spun j. lauomppa aab 4.4.1an lap pafoad o anmsuas mug an 1E41 A3ua6u leaol a algaliens spunk leuNippa aid ogpads lsafoad sl Imp algsllans 6ulpunj peuaalx3 9roo 90 Wiod , sa msaaW ij jaua8 ani emend 379J ' Z .01 atad �i.f, . k00 90 epa o pue 6uidoos uew kuani ea aeah 06 Zauasa� awg pogs a ui uonorulsuoa asi.aanpe Apeaa apew aq uaa Jo asaimApe o Apeaa laarood aye s� as panpe Apeaa loaload ain paaijnbaa awa sanseen igoua8 an Tel len0 eualuo pue 6u►dog ueid AJDNIaa JeaA 01, Lpaluauuaidwi Aia4e!pauau! aq sluawanoaduui Alaias alp 6ugsanbaa si lag wniiosuoa /Caua6s aoipua ongnd a aaaql s� ■ tsisAieua ;gauaq lsoa 041 ui paluasaadai IC�a�anbaps you a.as sanssi ki,ajas aad ■ :spitieus mauaq lsoo auk u! passaappa you sanss! Alajss seansean Tpua8 GARB eno 3t3t1 940[) 90 t a6ed Q OWN* "UM'S1't4Dtd • 9aQaAM PLO* MAL NAM • MOON ijamunismanumomnnmmims 9ft001d mda 2321 And tartioY;rim500E WPM tut • it • mt I uy 1 ur csa 1 I9a 1 922, am t. 1.110001011011 I oils gir,=0 190d 901X ta'rt2t 1 iadatlRadPlAP+ddVtnPPIVraPOI PV ai ti LafQLIt LION 4nCIQl OWN D.PPOPP3 PPON PV ,Agar» NIl ffi 9atlrRt w Ituutki914.441unun aY tt sat= upY and RI°vaa1440104 w _Qi— AA C1100 ._._ woad* eagraaa9 esN Ptl et ffi•ut w ;MA'AM auP0041 9t 90.001900 AM090,1,9090W1100 O°FI9N9 tt At 90ttat LOA 0000214 14140Mad At 91506 "muddy oponsol roll PV osA0A141 suoVW-FNtwd 3+/oy suonspuatuuaoty acl 0 zs t 90401 taN 0090019 19+4+9dV 90009 �3 aM10110000 1 Amos uo19 roam Par PPMt9u lAluddVtmnie3 mom t L 410ARW RA3an?10aA0OPer ou11aa0R091001 � Aaltrt A0P1011031000 1009atd a01 9 939PA ua9 woad&0014 e 90t1 3000 Pa4t010A3 a4 04 Waa!aM aeoe! aa1M+0 9002512 tt OrRPOP0 APO Pat 4uaualaRAaO •R9nP0 t 'WM L 0091019991Y ataP+4u4 Ateuuang atld Am90.0 Ot Y OMAAO1 eau epee 0 6udoos uaid aaaA 01- SR-91 Toll Feasibility Study Riverside County Transportation Commission August 28, 2006 • Introduction & Background • i Report Objectives ■ Present the Diagnostic Phase II Financial Analysis results: — SR-91 various configurations provided in this report — Analysis of 1-15, MCP and SR-79 to follow in the Fall upon finalization of the Traffic & Revenue studies 3 Background ■ Nossaman and KPMG were retained to conduct an initial Diagnostic Review of potential P3 application for specific RCTC candidate projects ■ Phase I of the Diagnostic Review was delivered in July, 2006 and comprised a detailed assessment of a number of screening criteria for each project as well as a discussion of the potential delivery models that could be employed ■ Phase II of the Diagnostic Review will- be delivered in stages based on the projects with financial information available as follows: — SR-91 — August, 2006 — Mid County Parkway — September, 2006 — 1-15 — September, 2006 — SR-79 — October, 2006 • `i Background (cont'd) ■ This report presents the results of the financial analysis undertaken for the SR-91 Express Lanes Extension and the Viaduct which are potential candidates for P3 delivery ■ PB Consult is currently completing the Traffic & Revenue forecasts for the MCP, the 1-15 and SR-79 with the financial analysis to follow ■ The SR-91 Measure A Project (at -grade free lanes to be delivered by RCTC) was not considered in the financial analysis except in the traffic forecasts as existing improvements as RCTC requested a focus on the Express Lanes Extension and the Viaduct at this time ■ This report provides the Configurations considered in the Traffic & Revenue forecasts for the SR-91 improvements and the Scenarios considered in the financial analysis 5 II Project Descriptions &Scenarios for Analysis •6 1111 SR-91 Projects ■ The candidate projects related to SR-91 as assessed in the Diagnostic Phase I report included: - SR-91 Measure A Project — SR-91 Express Lanes Extension — SR-91 Viaduct/New Facility ■ This report considers two configurations for the SR-91 expansions that could potentially be delivered as tolled P3s - SR-91 Express Lanes Extension is Configuration 1 - Viaduct within the SR-91 corridor is Configuration 2 ■ Traffic and revenue information is not yet available to undertake a financial analysis of the New Facility Corridor A project 7 SR-91 Project Configurations ■ The following configurations were developed through the Traffic and Revenue Studies and form the basis of the financial analysis: ■ Configuration 1 — Extension of the two through lanes of the SR-91 Express Lanes in Orange County to east of 1-15 — Operational by 2015 — Toll structure same as Orange County (no trucks, no cash toll, HOV3+ travel free at certain times, same toll rate per mile and schedule) — No additional ingress/egress between the Orange County line and 1-15 •$ 1111 SR-91 Configuration 1 lirael� N� LCOENO — @NONE NNW, — antra lerirrrep/eerl — for y Lim amo brew law ® eehrVs IICr Lme eerrll MINK W an ► ave NNAlso elu Lee ! *all lee Ler NM MN laser -YrprlyRr Lave ® r.rva raw illrr Lee rro**, CONFIGURATION 1 ' STATE ROUTE S1 PROPOSED LANE OONFIOUSATION AND RX�IfbN OFSIN EXPRESS LAM M 9 SR-91 Project Configurations (cont'd) ■ Configuration 2 — Four -lane Viaduct from SR-241 to 1-15 above the SR-91 right-of-way — Operational either by 2017 or 2030 depending on if delivered with Express Lanes at grade or separately — Connects to SR-241 and SR-91 Express Lanes at western terminus — Single -lane connections with 1-15 north/south (direct connectors between 1-15 toll lanes and SR-91 tolls lanes will not be operational until 2030) — No ingress/egress along Viaduct — Toll concept same as SR-91 Express Lanes in Orange County except there will be no free passage for HOV's so • SR-91 Configuration 2 Lurie YM MintI 1••—a.a WO* Off v_iw111.' A1 --111IN11111I Ililaulal •S6wo. we .r =;fu 3Y ��I�pp :YY06 le l�R�!!!l111!:1!!!!!l1lii 1.$ q1•a' Mini** malnIflr M arffa Cleo V a Off Herat* 7t N Instant* measured Oran role* 6 tofla M a Off LEGEND 0a1MIas fawrpgefoo$ mono lira minOpomo Olfsat-Mnrew Mlat100 boom WO IOIMIIis o r uno Oaaal AMMO IMO tl• Nnta OOV/LOyMw Iaa 1E111 aaalidarf Iona MIND whelk. -odMriOarar Lair iran Arlwra I.aa lMit Imam Ma)aat) ® Malmo dam ldaann art* CONFIGURATION ! STATS ROOTS DI PROPOaRD LAIIR COMM/ORATION MAGID ON NTH LANs FROACT AND RxTENOION 0! RAMS* LANDO WITH 1111011121 VIADUCT) 11 Viaduct Typical Section CL SR-91 VIADUCT WESTBOUND EASTBOUND i 1 FGFNR 11111 EXPRESS LANE EXIST]NG LANE 11111 GENERAL PURPOSE LANE 11111 AUXILIARY LANE ROUTE 91 VIADUCT TYPICAL SECTION rIDFIF 12 • SR-91 Scenarios for Financial Analysis ■ The financial analysis considers Configurations 1 and 2 from different timing and delivery (public vs. private) perspectives ■ All scenarios contemplate tolling of these SR-91 configurations ■ Scenarios analyzed: A. Extension of the Express Lanes (Configuration 1) as a publicly delivered toll project in 2015, with the Viaduct (Configuration 2) delivered by a private sector developer in 2030 as a full concession B. Extension of the Express Lanes by a private sector developer in 2015 with the Viaduct delivered by a different private sector developer in 2030 both as full concessions C. Extension of the Express Lanes and Viaduct by the same private sector developer in 2017 as a full concession 13 III Methodology & Assumptions • .4 1111 Methodology ■ Elements of the projects considered in the financial analysis included: ■ Costs: — Project development costs — Design and construction costs — Rehabilitation costs — Operations and maintenance costs — Depreciation of assets — Taxes — Other annual costs 15 Methodology (coot') ■ Revenues: — Tolling revenue — Interest revenue ■ Financing: — Construction and long-term financing (PABs) — Government -backed private sector instruments (TIFIA) — Working capital reserve — Dividend policy Methodology (cont'd) Value: — Model produces a Value to RCTC: • For private sector operation, this is a concession payment under feasibility constraints • For public sector operation, this is a present value of future cash flow, discounted at the public sector cost of capital ■ Risk: — Public Sector delivery involves no risk transfer. • Public sector enjoys the benefits if capital/operating costs come in below estimate, or if revenues come in above estimate • Public sector incurs the cost of responding to capital/operating costs higher than estimated, or revenues lower than estimated • Increasing risk transfer with models as progress to full concession — Private Sector delivery transfers risks (upside and downside), but this comes with a price. 17 Global Assumptions ■ Design -Bid -Build model is used for delivery by the public sector ■ Full concession model is used for delivery by the private sector with no revenue or cost sharing ■ 50 year concession term (and valuation) regardless of the specific date of operations for SR-91 projects ■ Private sector efficiencies have not been taken into account ■ Operating cost efficiencies not taken into account for Scenario C ■ Right-of-way will be acquired at fair market value and at the same cost to either public or private developers ■ Inflation varies between 2.2% to 3.5% to reflect projected increase in consumer preferences and economic outlook 18 • Global Assumptions (cont'd) ■ Private sector operator subject to possessory interest tax, state income tax, federal income taxes — recent California legislation has exempt pilot projects ■ Allocation of capital costs to asset depreciation categories based on preliminary classification of these assets ■ Life cycle costs occur as if this is a going concern, without an attempt to deliberately run down the asset over time ■ Financing terms are based on current market conditions ■ Yearly revenue projected was interpolated between 2015 and 2030, and extrapolated past 2030 for a 50 year operating period ■ Collection, enforcement, processing costs to collect toll revenue have been fully accounted for 19 IV Financial Analysis & Results • 4° t Definition of Key Results ■ Results described in terms of Value to RCTC — When considering public delivery, this is the present value of potential future "dividends" (excess revenues after paying for operating expenses and debt service) — When considering private delivery, this is the concession fee that a private sector operator would be willing to pay RCTC, such that the operator has enough excess cash to pay operating expenses, debt service, and provides a reasonable rate of return to their investors — The three scenarios analyzed represent different combinations of public and private delivery 21 Results — Scenario A 2006$, MM Express Lanes (public delivery-2015) Viaduct (private delivery-2030) Toll revenue $913 $912 Capital costs ($511) ($1,824) Operating costs ($152) ($130) Possessory interest tax ($0) ($286) Rehab costs ($53) ($121) Income Tax ($0) ($0) Equity IRR Less than 0% Approximate subsidy required for 12% equity IRR $1.5 B PV of Operating Cash $191 MM 22 • i Results — Scenario A (cont'd) • Express Lanes: — Public delivery of express lanes shows an estimated net present value of future excess revenues of $191 MM — Public sector bears all risks (upside and downside) with this implementation model ■ Viaduct: — Very high capital costs exceed the present value of toll revenues — Considering the project from another perspective: revenues are approximately equal to operating costs. Hence the project "breaks -even" if the construction was provided "for free" — The project is not feasible without a subsidy. Subsidy would be roughly equal to the initial capital cost, i.e., $1.5 B, to generate an equity return of around 12%. The value to RCTC is shown as a negative number 23 Results — Scenario A (cont'd) Project Cash Flow —Express Lanes �a c �E 0 c (5. tt (100) (150) (200) (250) 200 150 100 50 sp% Project cash flow ■ Toll revenue ■ OPEX (incl. Poss. Int Tax) 0 Rehab ® Debt Service ■ Taxes 44 Results — Scenario A (cont'd) Project Cash Flow —Viaduct ($MM, nominal) 400 200 (200' (400) (600) (800) (1,000) (1,200) (1,400) Project cash flow ■ Toll revenue ■ OPEX (incl. Poss Int Tax) ❑ Rehab ® Debt Service ■ Taxes 25 Results — Scenario B 2006$, MM Express Lanes (private delivery-2015) Viaduct (private delivery-2030) Toll revenue $913 $912 Capital costs ($511) ($1,824) Operating costs ($152) ($130) Possessory interest tax ($112) ($286) Rehab costs ($53) ($121) Income Tax ($13) ($0) Equity IRR 5.4% Less than 0% Approximate subsidy required for 12% equity IRR $200 MM $1.5 B • i 1111 Results — Scenario B (cont'd) Express Lanes: — Project is close to being feasible; recommend refinement of assumptions — After taxes, financing and dividend constraints are factored in, equity investor is left with a 5.4% return. This is likely too low for a project of this type — The private sector operator would be able to increase an equity return to approximately 11.5% if they are able to either: • Effect a savings of $200 MM on capital costs, or • Expect revenue to be 50% higher than the base forecast — If the Possessory Interest Tax (PIT) can be waived for this project, the equity return increasesfrom 5.4% to 7.0%. Waiving the PIT while also receiving a $150 MM subsidy, increases the equity return to 12%. ■ Viaduct: — As described earlier 27 Results — Scenario B (cont'd) Project Cash Flow —Express Lanes 200 150 100 50 2 (100) (150) (200) (250) (300) Project cash flow ■ Toll revenue ■ OPEX (incl. Poss. Int Tax) ❑ Rehab ® Debt Service ■ Taxes • i Results — Scenario B (cont'd) Project Cash Flow —Viaduct ($MM, nominal) 400 200 (200' (400) (600) (800) (1,000) (1,200) (1,400) Project cash flow ■ Toll revenue ■ OPEX (incl. Poss Int Tax) ❑ Rehab ® Debt Service ■Taxes 29 Results - Scenario C 2006$, MM Express Lanes + Viaduct (private delivery-2017) Toll revenue $1,650 Capital costs ($2,335) Operating costs ($273) Possessory interest tax ($502) Rehab costs ($209) Income Tax ($0) Equity IRR Less than 0% Approximate subsidy required for 12% equity IRR $1.95 B i Results — Scenario C (cont'd) ■ Express Lanes + Viaduct: — Toll revenue is significantly lower than the initial capital costs pre - financing — Capital costs "as incurred" (nominal dollars) exceed $3 B by 2016, meaning interest due on the debt associated with this cost is around $185 MM (at 6% interest rate) in year 1 of operations. Principal repayments would be in addition to this — Revenue begins at $33 MM in 2017 (ramping u to $65 MM in 2020) and is finally equal to the interest required by 2039 (even then no consideration has been given to other cash flow needs — principal repayment, operating expenses, etc.) — The project is not feasible without a subsidy. — The project would be feasible (12% equity return) through: • Revenue is 3.3 times higher than projected; or . • Cutting capital costs by $1.35 B and doubling revenue; or • Cutting capital costs by $1.95 B — Other combinations are possible, but the above gives a broad understanding of the magnitude of the change required 31 Results — Scenario C (cont'd) Project Cash Flow — Express Lanes Viaduct ($MM, nominal) 400 200 (20e (400) (600) (800) (1,000) Project cash flow ■ Toll revenue ■ OPEX (incl. Poss. Int Tax) 0 Rehab ® Debt Service ■Taxes " Results  Scenario C (cont'd) Outstanding Debt  Express Lanes+Viaduct ($MM, nominal) 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 Outstanding debt �% Construction Financing (incl PABs, TIFIA) �% Long-term Financing Q' Bank overdraft 33 V Conclusions & Next Steps " Key Results by Scenario Approximate Value (Cost) to RCTC (2006$) A Public delivery of express lanes (2015 opening) $191 MM Private delivery of viaduct (2030 opening) ($1.5 B) B Private delivery of express lanes (2015 opening) ($200 MM) Private delivery of viaduct (2030 opening) ($1.5 B) C Private delivery of express lanes and viaduct concurrently (2017 opening) ($1.95 B) 35 Key Issues and Challenges ■ Express lanes appear financially feasible for public sector delivery — Excess toll revenue is valued at roughly $200 MM — All risks (upside and downside) reside with the government in this delivery model ■ With refinement of cost and revenue inputs, Express lanes could be in the range of financially feasible for private sector delivery; i.e., equity return is not sufficiently attractive, but results are sufficiently close that a refinement of capital costs, scheduling, revenues, creative financing or other changes could make this feasible ■ The Viaduct is revenue negative with current inputs and is not feasible without additional support (i.e., increased revenue, subsidy) • Diagnostic Phase H — Next Steps ■ Undertake due diligence on the Traffic & Revenue assumptions, inputs and results ■ As additional inputs become available, refine financial model and run additional sensitivities ■ Conduct a brainstorming session on go forward options to obtain feasibility: — Analyzing alternative operational strategies — Value engineer current projects — Refine scope of projects ■ Analyze New Facility Corridor A 37 Toll Feasibility Study for MCP PowerPoint Presentation Presented to Ad Hoc Committee October 23, 2006 9OOZ aag040O Apn;s ANip,seeA Ilol ABAAM.18d i(i.unoo p�W • n1J114J• nEpli!J CId llvl nciv►�aGd n{wiuJ F✓1VV suolsnlouoa •g opeueos uolsseouo0 ai.enpd 'L opeueos suogeiedo fuennea ollgnd •g sopeueos Buldueuu pue dlysaaunno •C suoRdwnssd Immo .t, ABolopowyg '£ puno.afi peg peroid 7 swewoo Jo awl • APMS MaSeed pi Jed 1(1uno0 Pin uoisseouoo elenpd . suoReJedo pue fuemep Appgnd . : peJepisuoo ueeq anew sopeueos aofew omi . LAemped Awnoo pa,w aye to wewdoisnep ati; poddns o; enuenaa Ho; esn emiseal Allepueug;1 si :uoRsenb 6upoliol ein aannsue Luis em . engoefgo VI 1$4;# ra *"" :1111109 IVA • r7A11YM1H17Y I 11L/111V 11f: 4:UVv'' 'IVy /IV/rVIJVa nfwwJ N:YY SeS H'S� 4K ti5 Plies 11.0 r/ VMM 1110110P #N i %I stamliep •Noli Vomit OW w irr 1 O MOM 6� 1 1 1 I i E � ` . w.��.w MN MAR s ,tursi, n s ofte'Bitt01 naa!naa leluauauoa!nuO u! engewelle OLIO Anuauno ennewelle epeoelcm.nos Jed uo spAleuy • g 1,OZ ao 91,0Z aoj peuueld `poigew fuenllap uo 6u!puedea • O9-2�S pue `fiL-?:IS ` 1.6-2:15 `5 uo seam. wan. eonpaj • seam euoaoa pue o}uper ues ay} ueempq uo!isa6uoo Isemisee enelle • 6L-2�S 0191.-1 6upeuuoo peal NT el!w-ZE `meN • punoiNpee peroad • Project Background (cont'd) ■ Jacobs Engineering has developed a preliminary cost estimate for the project and is now preparing the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) ■ PB Consult and Vollmer have completed a traffic and revenue forecast. ■ PB and Telvent Farradyne have estimated the cost of adding the toll collection system and facilities and Intelligent Transportation System (ITS). ■ PB Alltech has developed the plan and estimate for toll operations and system and facility maintenance. ■ The data collected from engineering cost and schedule estimates, and traffic and revenue forecast were used to design a cash flow model to determine the financial feasibility of the MCP under two different ownership/financing scenarios. 91 Aprils Amq!sead !!vl nemD!aed Nunoo p!W opeueos uo 6uipuedep 6upueug elenpd ao ogind . Bupueuu . sealego }seielut . saxel slsoo eoueualuieua pue suogaiedo . �soo uogemegeN . spoo &LI pue 6uBpi . s;sod uoRona�suoo pue Asea . s}soo wewdolenep peroad . swop . ewooui IseieWI . Jeumon pue gd /fq paaedaad iseoaaoi del enuenaa Ho! ■ anuanaa . :suopeS 6gpnioui pedoienep seen ` �6-is ao; wow stovydyi (pm weisrsuod ` epow lepueug y Opeueos uo!sseouo0 4oaw gd /fq pextu;s3 gd pelew!!s3 euifpaved;uen!al pa!eurgs3 sgooep ifq pejeurns3 gd Aq paleurnsg nolopoinew • " korns Ampseed l/ol , aed Juno* MIN ao�� pewn000e Alln�� uaaq aney anuanaa moo 6ulsseowd }uawaoaoIua `uogoalloo poped 6upied� aeaA 05 a aoj_osoz Ised pamodeapxa pue `osoz pue 5 i,oz uaanniaq palelodhalui seen papefoad anuanaa ApeeA suompuoo Ta)laew lua.uno uo paseq aye awes 6uioueul�� awls aano Tasse ay4 unnop una Aleleaagllap o�� ldwai4e ue `uJaouoo 6u106 a sl silk J.I se _moo sisoo apAo slasse asequo uoReogisselo Aaeulwllaad uo paseq sepaeleo uoppa.rdap iasse slsoo lewleo uolleoolld eigepen aq Minn s;soo awos lou op pue luelsuoo ale slsoo Imo >pop� olwouooe pue seoualajaad aawnsuoo ul aseaaoul papafoad loagaa o} %gas of %Z" Z ueempq sepen uoRegui saadolanep awApd ao ogind Ja me isoo awes alb pue anien le>pew alej 1.e paarnboe eq Him Aenn-joit46l! " 5leed uou gLo" os / dead gi," ps senuanai liol }un000e mul ua>1e1 uaaq lou anal salouelowe copes a��enlad . . . . . suoRchunssv iegopo " " Ownership and Financing Scenarios Public Delivery & Operations �% RCTC owns, designs, builds, finances, and operates the MCP �% Design -Bid -Build (DBB) delivery method, in two phases: �% Phase 1 from 1-15 to 1-215 �% Phase 2 from 1-215 to SR-79 �% Start of operations in 2016 for Phase 1 and 2018 for Phase 2 �% Exempt from income and property taxes �% Construction loan taken out by 30-year tax exempt bonds (level debt service) secured by toll revenue �% Overdraft fund to cover debt service shortfalls (loan at 5.50% or public subsidy) Private Concession �% RCTC owns the MCP �% Private partner is granted 50 year concession to design, build, finance, operate and maintain the facility (DBFO) �% Start of operations in 2016 �% Subject to federal income tax (35%), state income tax (8.84%), and possessory interest tax (1% of capital cost) �% Capital costs paid at 85% by construction loan and 15% equity, drawn at pro rata during construction �% Construction loan taken out by 30-year taxable bonds (level debt service) secured by toll revenue �% Overdraft fund to cover debt service shortfalls (loan at 6%) ANei nest unit/ DMrinunv Ted! Cee.nn:1.1814ti Civ IA" Pn S Il lisead pi red Aluno0 Pll 8 ge.e$ :algisee }oefoad a)jew papeau spunj. opgnd. WW 11,gs :senuenaa peoueug aq ueo leyuqaQ. (3) xe} 811100UI (Li,' IV woo geyalj (p$) xel }saaal.ui tiossessod (Z89$) slsoo Suileiedp (t7t75`E$) s}soo 'elide° 66E` 1.$ INN `$900Z °nue/kw pi swell iiseo uievy kiewums oveueos suogeiedo kenilea o!Ignd 01.1 Apt ney bweid !ICU c►GIVI4Jca N!YV sexel■ geyej ❑ eowes 3GeQ ® X3d0 ■ anueneu Holm X3dV011 siaeA NO GO w�°' NO) 6�°ti y� ��°�' w�°1' y�°ti yw6' 44 cfv ww4' �w°ti 6ti°ti v�°ti �ti°ti wti°ti �1,4, ENO) �,°ti �4, el, °ti , y°°ti (ooz' �) (000' 0 (oos) (oos) z 0 3 (000 V (on) 00Z OOb nnol j yse0 loa(oad oiaeuao, suoi;eaadp fuanilaa 311clnd • Apn/S Agllweed 11o1:Acmofed Ajuno0 RtW 8 gene$ :appeal ioefoid aiew pepeau spuni. owind . WW 1,9$ :sanuanaa wo4 peoueug eq ueo .Ian ma . s)isp pafoad lie saeaq aopas oNnd . aoinaas'Nap snid slsoo 6upiedo aan00 aanau senuena. Apisgns oiignd leuomppe 4noti nn peon !poi a se aiquseal you si pefoad suopnpuo0 opeueos suogendo fC emea ogind Z1, i►1✓11.1J- n;11141JGvj Uvl ncivvIJGcl n;ui"':J pm, 8 61•Z$ :elq!seel loafoad a>iew o pepaau spuni °Find• WW OLZ$ :senuenai Leo wag paoueug eq uao mul Tgea. (0$) xel awooul (VZ1.$) woo geyaa (0$) xe4 }sa lep fuossessod (Z01$) s}soo 6ugeJed() (Z9Z`Z$) slsoo mdeo 9Z9$ NW `$900Z enuanal 1101 swell tisuo umAl fuewwnS opeueos suolleied0 fuannea oilgnd £id • APnis Agficlseed.11oL Jed Aunoo Plliv 005`£$ + Panouaal xel lsaiew! krossessod %ZI. 10 Na fklinbe aol papbai nprsgns aleuaixoaddy %0 uey4 ssai 1:0 Apb3 (0$) xei. ewooui (917n) woo gegeb (Z£8$) xel Imam fuossessod (Z85$) s}soo 6uRaiedO (009`£$) spoo iewleo 17117` 14 WW `$900Z anuanal pi swell tiseo u!EN kisuauans opeuaos uopsaouoo Nemid VI, 1111114. cvj Ua.L i1c,vi11acp 110411WJ Mr sexel ■ geyel Q soin-Jeg igea ® (xel tiossessod •oui) X3dO ■ enuenea Dols x3dvO■ • MO), Ludt, scot& wco& Nico& 6�& & �°1 w�°�I, N4,4& goco& \c,u& �j& 4554' ,iw4, °1, \ti°L 44' 44) °'l� 6, y>4, °1, w°�l,, °'l, ,b°°'L (00e �) (ow' G) (ooe) (oos) (004) (OOZ) 00Z 004 z m 3 nnou yseo pafoad oeuaag uoissaauo3 - swiseN APnos All gseed ltol ' gd it)unoo P!W ljevieno Nuegp Buioueuld tweI-Buol■ 6upueuid uollonAsuo0■ saeeA el-, cif , , � , �, Doti, �,�o'� ��& \559, wwa, ,0 4, , ti& 4,4J 4,40 :400 6\61, y>a, • e�i i ,96 000'0 L 000'0Z 000'0£ 000'017 000'09 000'09 000`01 z d wea Bu!puslsmo opeuaos uoissaouoa - swisat 91. Apngs Appciseed Ilol Aennped Alum° P+W 8 90"£$ to Apisgns 6uippe pue anuanaa 6uNnoa . 8 05"£$ Appgns 6uippy . pue `xeusaaa}ui kossessod 6uReuiu is . :Aq wriTei Aimbe %Z 1. enseel eq moo loefoad sNsp 1.09f0ad Gan super copes oiignd eovues ;gap snid sisoo 6uReaado aanoo aanau senuenaa ApeeA spoo pue 6upiedo eni}einwno uey} JeM01 si anuanaa enilelnwna Appgns leuomppe lnogwvi peon no; a se aigiseal 4ou si peroad suoisnpuo3 opeuaos uoissaouoo 012n1ad L9Z`Z$ + panowal xe} Imam tiossassod %Z6 to all Amnbe ao4 paw -lbw xppgns aiewvoaddy %0 ueyl sse i 2:Ia A.1Inb3 (0$) xel. 911100u1 (t7Z 1,$) sIsoo geyaa (989$) xel }seiewl tiossassod (Z017$) s}soo 6upiadp (ZEZ`Z$) s}soo tgcleo 9Z8$ WIN 1900Z anuanai Ilol swell tiseo umeW IC��uuuans OpelIGOS UOISSO3U00 a��niad 'tpl/101.11JCv7 ULU. /1C.1vV4dGd i����u�� ��v;./ N1YY " pains! Tou si xe} isa iew! kossassod sawnssy - " auanion �weal aseaaoap Him 1! yfinoyp `anuenaa aseaaoui pue aseaaoui o} agssod aq Aeua :senuenaa !col dOW awnion owea, paseaaoui of peal /few opeueos lauun} !uno� aueao 8 OT �$ Z pue seseyd 8 OZ'Z$ 8 61, 7$ Aluo G esegd ,opeuaos aieApd opeueos aucind Amigiseai aol peilnbaa Appgns oi��gnd slsoo ielideo aol Aed paainbaa i.gap ay} eovues pue suogeaado i(ed welowns lou ale dopy aye mil anuenaa . suoisniouo3 Toll Feasibility Study for 1-15 PowerPoint Presentation Presented to Ad Hoc Committee October 23, 2006 1-15 Toll Feasibility Study Riverside County Transportation Commission October 231 2006 z sda�S p(eN pue suoisnlou00 n s�lnsa�l pue spAleuy leloueuid AI suo4c1Lunssy pue Abolopoy191/11 III spAieuy aoj. sopeueoS pue uoi.dposea Toefoki ll punoa6)loeg pue uoRonpoalul I • smajuo,7, fo a1gni puno.igyong uo onpo.ijul t� •Venoped *no° NAJ) spodaa waunouoo ui ao (1,6-21s) spodaa snoinaid ui Ja nie papinwd sloefaid alepipueo Jaw) ■ aul JOI spAleuy lepueuu !! esetm opou6eia auk wesaad ■ • savoa qo moday Background ■ Nossaman and KPMG were retained to conduct an initial Diagnostic Review of potential P3 application for specific RCTC candidate projects ■ Phase l of the Diagnostic Review was delivered in July, 2006 and comprised a detailed assessment of a number of screening criteria for each project as well as a discussion of the potential delivery models that could be employed ■ Phase II of the Diagnostic Review is being delivered in stages as follows: — SR 91 - August, 2006. Updates in January, 2007 — Mid County Parkway - October, 2006 — Interstate-15 - October, 2006 — Final Comprehensive Report - January -February 2007 5 9 nnainaa Ed seuei ssaadxe 5 [ 1 ensand enul.uoo o} uoilepuewwooa• senbluyoa; luewebeuew )lsia pue 6upueu!I engeaao `salouaioijja isoo aoi.oes ai.enpd paaaplsuoo iou sey sisiCleue lepueuil ayl ■ uogezlpisgns saainbaa lepow copes alenpd a tam AJemea ■ (Appgns seJobaa goiynn pefoad a `•a•i) pefoad apsealui ue ui sllnsaa wnuue cad %goL - 0/000L Alalewixoadde jo ssaoxa ui amen e eseaaoui ue ley; saleolpul peule}aa s�lsla ayi peljaa area Tunoosip aye 6imsnfpe jo slsAleue uy ■ uo!Illw 0517$-Oge$ Algesnai le pawn si moll yseo ssaoxa boa foad a smogs peupieJ s)lsp aye jo amen aye jo uoReaapisuoo ou yiinn pue lepow copes opgnd a imm fuemea ■ sa wa yi dax sgsd1vuv aofsogrvuaas suoudr.osaQ paford jI 8 eun Aiunoo episJeAN aye o� -1 aye spuedxe kiunoo °Ben ueS Ii paaapisuoo eq /quo Il1M 5 pue seseud fey paleoipui seq 0l0■ (o6eu ueS ouipaeweg ueS) 5'S `E pue z `1 seseyd - (12L 2IS ouipaewee ueS) E Pue `z `1, seseyd - sEd pawl se peaenuep eq AIleRualod woo ;mil uoisuedxe 91,1 eg1.10j. sopeuads onni. saapisuoo podaa s!qi ■ spAleue eqi .ui pepnloui Tou sly aanseeN Aq peugap se uogoaaip aayi.ia ui euei 994 euo uo Lippe aul seun Alunoo o6aia ueS pue ouipaeuaa8 ueS uaann}aq uoipa i p aaLThe ui seuei ssaadx3 z 6uippe sepnloui pefoad aieplpueo aul ■ seun Juno° ouipaeuaa8 ueS pue o6aia ueS ueemleq uoipagp Jaime ui seuel owl tb-£ sTsisuoo 5 -1 6unsixe ayl ■ A:. ■ uopdzosaQ pafo.id SI-lill • • " bL-2��S `cI01/11 `1,6-2:1S `09-2:1S `eun fgunoo ssaa6a/sseiBul scum uppeo le eau. +�nOH `I104 yseo ou `s)lonal ou `area (91:0$) dead -go auo pue (0�'0$) dead auo y}inn `aouelslp uo paseq silol 4EOZ 6uivadp " PL-��!S o dOW word seuel ssaadxa Z " " :c ase4d OZOZ 6uiuedp " 66-��IS 01 eun Alunoo ouipiewa8 ues woad. seuel ssaadxa Z " :Z aseyd 960Z 6u:eedspti" dOW o4 1.6-aS woa} seuel ssaxa Z " ed  ALIO E'8 Z `I sesegd sapnloul V oiaeuaoS :slsi(leue leloueuti fueulualiaad slseq aye uuoi pue selpnls enuena'8 og-Jail 941 ul padolenep 8.19M sopeueos 6Up01104 ayl �% �% so inuads pafo ld SI1 " eras " IIW/elue0 91 " es" d110 I.1191/11o" 0 99 " Heed :Ilol 91.1 idea 1101 YG " nod flue r11100Y sour' Weue W 1pal rem ssodmd Meuse ON3031 eY FL0100 0601g Lie SILL-1 NIP 41 L" I NMI Renowed R1uno0" plf9 f PL" as l6" a8 MIN eun R1ueo0 oulp me9 Lies �-4 3SVHd 91.1 1101 01021 0�0Z 10" A8 1.119 o9" as mmumps v opinion parau yri " opeueos se ewes idaouoo Ilol — aun Aiunoo °Bala ues aql pue uoRounf penlwaad aq lllnn sseJ6e/sseAul leuompp`d OEOZ ul 6quado `E esegd ylllnn peumwoo ale 5 sasegd - bl-2�S o} uopunf 51,Z/91, wail seuel ssaadxa Z • :C aseyd — uopunf S 2/9 1. eun Awnoo °field ues woo seuel ssaadxa Z • eseud opeueos ui se awes aye aae E '8 Z ` sesegd g-E'S `Z seseyd sepnpui 8 opeueos VW; (p,juod) sogrnuads pafo.id SI-I Z4 • 6L•88 611A/01000 Sl ' seed•AO !01111/010e0 OSgeed:1101 so; sgey Ilol VI ess4d gun sseooy sous, Oo Oeuel, / 1101 noel ssooind Iueu•D ON393n SOIn 40:100 00, ueg IWO S t i•1 MEM 6ereeled 63uno0.OIW MON 11.88 l0•US raw suln Liunoo oulp/emeg usg S�L 3SYHd 9111101 01021 0£0Z leans MY OaaS r vi uua tl a s — g owl/lads pafau • suoydurnssv ao/opotliay f III bL si.soo ienuue aay}o • sexel • s}asse to uogepaadea • sisoo aoueuelupw pue suopiedo • sisoo uo4epineya?:i • s}soo uoRorwsuoo pue u6isea • sisoo weLudolenep pefoad • :woo - :pepnioui spAleue lepueug aye ui peiepisuoo eseo eseq ayuo swewes ■ vr� aolopowaN 56 • 6uipunl pue senuena i `gsoo uo sesAieue Apensues to aagwnu a w:sopapun osie am ■ AoHod puema anaasaa pude° Buppom • 6upueug aue4-Buoi pue uoRongsuoo • :6upueuiA anuanaa iseiewl • anuanaa 6ui��ol • :sanuanall (duoo) cffopapotpam 91. (aa�suea} )isp Jo wewleaa} luaaemp aye jo asneoeq uie6e) lapow oNind ueLii algiseai. ssa! ?look of Lioeoadde aamap a}enpd ayi 6uisneo sisAleue aye ui paloegaa si siyi •aaj.sueai )isp aLi� 6uRdeooe uo wn!waad a ind !jinn aadoianep _lopes ai.enpd ayl ■ Al!!!giseaj.i.oefoad aannoi pue area Tunoosip aa(46iy a ui pinonn pue se Lions sloafoad ALI &len eq ueo aajsue4 )isp amen ayl ■ •s�sia to wewleaal aye ui eoualeglp puiva ui aeaq pinoys aapeaa aye `(pauelsueai ale s)isp lueogiu6is Lioiynn ui) s��nsaa iapow aoioes alenpd aye Li}inn iapow copes oilgnd aye 6upedwoo u! •aoi.oes alenpd aajsuea. )isp lueoil!As anIonui Tou seop !wow Aaanuep ogind ayuo spAieue ay1 ■ fo juaurvaiZ atIMMK.•• swum- szsdivur ivpuvuu AI 86 s.]o}sm! Ambe palsenui uo u.]nla! to ale.] emeuosea.] a pue `eovues Kgap `sisoo gelaa pue 6ugmado `Ie}ideo Aed gseo ssaoxa g6noue sel .]o;mado eql Lions `41 Aed a.]inba.] mom .]o 1010 1 Aed bullion eq mom .]ode.]ado .]opes alenpd a }eLi} ApIsgnstaal, uoisseouoo eqi si sili `kienilap aienpd 6upepisuoo uegm (spoo gala.] pue sesuedxe &piado `sTsoo lelideo !emu! 6uuted Jale senuena.] ssaoxa) «spuepinip„ anni. leguelod jo amen lueseid et4 si sil} ` uennep ogind 6upepisuoo uegm • ioz:1 amen to suuel ui paciposap slinsa8 ■ si1nsag cfaXfo uomulfaQill • I/1'cl)/ k [ Anbe ue enewe o; Japes e;enud ay; Jopes a;enud eta o; /fed o; oloa umbel mom;mg Apisgnsiee,; uoisseouoo ey; s;y; * (91,9) SVC (91. seseyd) AdrueA eCI eleAPd (9-1 seseyd) fueA1180 011Gnd 8 (99C) 17tt (E- I. seseyd) AleA fiea eleAPd (E-1. seseyd) kleNlea oilGnd v 4(1/11W 900Z$) 0l0?1 01 amen eleugxaddy ommaosf rCq sijnsay day " Results Scenario A 2006$, MM Phases 1-3 (Private Delivery) Phases 1-3 (Public Delivery) Toll Revenue 1,413 1,413 Capital Costs 666 666 Operating Costs 376 376 Possessory Interest Tax 225 - Rehabilitation Costs 102 102 Income Tax 19 - Equity IRR 5.6% NA Approximate subsidy for 12% equity IRR* 385 NA Approximate subsidy required for 10% equity IRR* 308 NA * All figures are NPV's using a discount rate of 5%, except capital costs, rounded to the nearest million. * The $385 and $308 M are the approximate subsidies (NPV 2006) to arrive at equity IRR's of 12% and 10% respectively. All figures rounded to the nearest million 20 wn000e ow! ue lel Tau am salouopui.a _lopes elenpd %L•L 01. %9'9 seseaaoul um}aa Aiinba ay; loafad slu4 Jo; Aidde you seop xel;swam fuossessod aye dl awn. aano swewited Jo salsas a uegl Aplsgns way& ue pawnsse aneq am `slsAleue �o asee and •paalnbaa si 600Z ul aowl a>lel pawnsse (900Z meA AdN) W 998$ - W 80 $ Appgns wo.On ue `%Z I. - %0 Aleleualxoidde io uan}aa kimba ue analgoe o} imeiedo aopas elen cl auk and adk} sly; }o pakud a ao; mol oq Alan sI slyl %g•g a ual sl imam!! Al!nbe `uI paaopej aae swle4suoo puemp pue 6uloueull `saxei. Jaw — Aienitea eleniad ■ pezlleaa aq IIlm W�1���$ aye �eyl Alamun sI �I `swewlsnfpe )isp Jame `lap sueew osie 11 enllap amApd ao� molaq pawasaad yllnn ameiedwoo Alloaalp lou si sly `�insaa a sy •lepow uogeweweidual s!LIT yTIm s)Isp lle &meg aoloas opgnd — WU1l irfrt$ jo mod yseo ssaoxe aann �o amen wasaad tau pelewpa ue smogs £ — sesegd o fuanliap ollgnd — fuenila❑ pilgnd ■ (Aluod) v og.Lvuan - si1nsay ZZ saxel■ aoyuas;ciao ■ ge4aa■ (xellul'ssod •104X3d0 anuenei ol■ N O g O g 080Z - 0£0Z Aiennea eleniad ?nog yseo peraid gq 005Z- 000Z- OOB I- 009- 3 3 0 m 009 0006 eferaazpaQ amag.id —mold tisv3 pafo td (xploo) v ozrvuaas — sijnsag • £Z`• sem, ■ e0pues igea ■ geyeN ■ X3dO ■ enue aap0j ■ 8 8 8 8 onz - o£oZ feA lea 31Ignd nno�� yseo perwd a W,; ie.' 000 009 i- w 0001- 3 009- c 3 0 V 009 0004 (CraagpaQ az14nd - ifsv3 paford (pduod) y> ozrvuaas - sijnsag " Results  Scenario B 2006$, MM Phases 1-5 (Private Delivery) Phases 1-5 (Public Delivery) Toll Revenue 1,707 1,707 Capital Costs 1,054 1,054 Operating Costs 443 443 Possessory Interest Tax 359 - Rehabilitation Costs 156 156 Income Tax - - Equity IRR NA NA Approximate subsidy for 12% equity IRR* 616 NA Approximate subsidy required for 10% equity IRR* 521 NA * All figures are NPV's using a discount rate of 5%, except capital costs, rounded to the nearest million. * The $616 and $521 M are the approximate subsidies (NPV 2006) to arrive at equity /RR's of 12% and 10% respectively. All figures rounded to the nearest million: 24 0 ` i.un000e ow! ua5ie4 you ale saloueloi.a _lopes alenpd paimeue6 si %9g's to uan as Arta ue loafoad sly; Jo; Aidde }ou seop xel Xiossessod aye di awls aano swewAed to SepeS a ueyl aaynea Aplsgns woi}dn ue pawnsse aney am `sisAieue to °see and Taalnbaa sl 600Z ul aoeid a)ie; pawnsse (g00Z mei( ndN) IN 969$ - W 1.Z9$ }o Aplsgns woaldn ue `%Z4 - %0 Aia}ewpcoadde �o uan�aa fqlnbe ue enelyoe ao}eaado copes alenpd ayn and poised papafoad 914 lnoy6noayl swawAed puepinip Jame') eigeun sl loafoid ayn Aplsgns }nogm AD!sgns a Tnogijm eiglseal }ou sl pefoad ayl NOW :fuenilaa ■ pazlleaa eq IIIM W £PE$ e1,111eul Aienun sl 31 `swewlsn fpe >isp Jaile sueaw os a }I enliep alenpd ao� moiaq pewasaad ayl Lap eigeaedwoo Alpo* you sl sly `}Insaa a sy -wow uogewawaidwl sly 1111M s)isp lie meg copes glignd — WW £n$ 4o sMoil yseo sseoxe aan�n� �o anien wasaad tau pamwllse ue VANS g — sesegd to kannep ollgnd — fuemea oiignd ■ Rg. (ptjuod) g oz.nmads — sijnsay 9Z sexel■ aoweg ;qa4 ■ ge4ea■ (Xellul 'ssod'loul)X3d0 si enuenai Ilol■ r . . • ... . .nigni. IZ 080Z - 0£0Z AlaAilea a;sni�d nno�� yseo pefoad 009Z- 000Z- 0091- 00o [- A 0 009- 3 0 0 m 00S 0001. kaarpaQ a;vetyd — n1oig. tisv,7 pafoadgill (pduod) g oynuao,s— swnsag • • sexel ■ eouues Rea ■ gegea ■ X3d0 N enuemeJ pol■ - - - - - - - - - - 080Z - 0£0Z kleAlla0 ollcInd nnol� yseo pafoad 009- 00V- 00Z- 3 0 0 0 00Z 3 3 00V m v 009 009 kaaz1aQ aT1gnd - Mou- ysv,) pafo.id. (pduod) g ozrvuads - sijnsag sZ luewu6isse siyi �o edoos aye eppno si pue AoHod Jo aa4eua a si !wow kaanllep ogind e aapun oimj o} )isp loefoad aoj Tun000e adoos pue aanleu sly} �o }oafoad e aoj esn }unoos p a}epdoadde ayl •aaisueal Asia Jol isnfpe 01 %0 Pue 0/ 91 j.o semi lunoosip 6uisn 8 pue y opeueoS to yoea jo,uolTdo klennep oirgnd ayi uo una eienn saRmsues ■ uoReuiquaoo ui slope; asayn uo said Amsuas una aney am Vida • SEIVd • swea6oad maao ao & pun; !awed an jo uoReoildde Gig sauansse 6uipunj. tspefoad uo Alini}isues xel isaaa}ui fuossassod oN %0Z Aq paonpaa sisoo WpSO %0Z Aq paonpaa s}sod %0•17 Aq paseaaoui sanuanald • IMO :8 pue y soiaeuaOS �o yoea uoRdo /Cie/map ai.eniad 9141 uo un.l alarm sampues ■ MX sa1pimsuas Sensitivities on Private Model Results Prf'v;ite DE. Scot] i(i Frhriri *S 1 - 3 Revenues + 40% Capital Cost -20% O&M costs - 20% No Possessory Interest Tax Federal Funding Programs • PABs Federal Funding Programs -TIFIA No Possessory. interest Tax with PABs No Possessory Interest Tax with PABs & Revenues + 40°% 9.98% 8.09% 6.31 % 7.72°% 7.05% 5.83°% 7.59°% 5.11"% NA 5.56% 4.69% NA 8.80°%, 7.27°% 12.45% 10.97% No Possessory Interest Tax with PABs & Revenues+ 10%, capital cost -5°%and 10.26% 8.71°% O&M -10% Aft 29 OE %p p soon slapow fuennap a}enpd pue ollgnd aye sa}enbe golynn area }unooslp ayl ■ (8 pue y sopeueos aol) amen leuomppe Cue aleaaue6 you saop aanannoy s.19n00 1.08foad ayn go kienilap 'wow ollgnd ay} %0'L %01 Alaieualxoadde to a}ea iunooslp a 1.y ■ • (Pa) (Z66) (804) (0) 8 Opeue0$ y Opeue0g ww9o9•4S, 313Z9 a pi?A sijnsad - papoRT ongnd uo sa1ytmsuas • sdais ixam sumnpuo3 zs kianllep _lopes alenpd aol uollezlplsgns aalnbaa seuel ssaadxa g [-I at (Aplsgns saalnbeJ golyM peroad a "el) l) pefoad eiglseelul ue ul s}insaa wnuue Jed %g•L - 0/001 Aleieualxoidde Jo sseoxe ul amen a elm Tunooslp ul eseaioul ud — ssal eq HIM s)lsP peulela i swewlsnfpe Nsp Je4e anien !wipe eql os !wow kianllep sly ul wewuaano6 ay} Lap appal s)isp !le `aanannoH ■ uolilP 05n-05E$ AN6noa penlen s! gseo sseox2 — Nsp to uoRalaplsuoo moimm fuemep Joloes'ollgnd Jo,. alglseal Alleloueuu aeedde seuel ssaadxa gyI ■ sagua1 mo pun sanssi (fax • senbluyoai Tuewe6euew Nsp penoadual (uomeose lsoo uo sbulnes leRualod `sanuanaa pue uoReidwoo a.allaee eneNoe 01 LON o} paei uol pafoad 6ulnow "el) l) saloualoha alnpayos uollonalsuoo pue u6lsep 6upnp uopieleooe alnpayos _lopes aienpd Amow uey} aaysanuanaa 6ulz wveW E AOH pue sNonai Jo 6upoll`d alep Alleuollewelul pue AIleolisewop uaas 6uiaq pue4 se ;seoaaoi. enuenaa ayuo nnaln enlssaa66e aaoua slimes ewpd salouapwe isoo gala' pue 'no lemdeo MOO :apnpui woo kienDep aopas alenpd ein ewool.no penoadwi a01 semuni..ioddo lenualod ■ (Aluoo) sagua11nto pun sanssl fag VS opeueos Jetme aapun A� c'peel Toefoad suasaonn seuel aaa� y aanseeN 91,1 ayi. jo uomppe aye to uoReaappuoo `esanoo to ■ saeeA 05 puoi(aq uuei uoisseouoo aa6uoi — 6upueug ewe.* — se6eNoed £d weie ip ow! pefoad aye 6uNeaa8 - (Aluoo) sa�ua11nD pun sanssl rfag • 10 Year Delivery Plan. Update Presented to Ad Hoc Committee October 23 2006 RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: October 23, 2006 TO: Public/Private Financing and Delivery Plan Ad Hoc Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Karl Sauer, Bechtel Construction Manager THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: 2009 Measure A 10-Year Delivery Plan Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive an update on the development of the 2009 Measure A 10-Year Delivery Plan; 2) Receive the draft quantitative benefit/cost ranking for the 2009 Measure A projects; 3) Receive the draft qualitative benefit ranking for the 2009 Measure_ A projects; 4) Concur with staff's recommendation that the quantitative benefit/ cost measures be the initial tool used to establish the prioritization list for the 2009 Measure A program of projects; 5) Direct staff to scrutinize the resultant prioritization list against the qualitative evaluation criteria to determine if any adjustments should be made in the proposed priority order of the 2009 Measure A projects; and 6) Direct staff to bring back the final priority list to the Ad Hoc Committee for review and approval. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the June 26, 2006, Public/Private Financing and Delivery Plan Ad Hoc Committee meeting, the Committee concurred with the following staff . recommendations: 1) The 2009 Measure A project descriptions, segmentation and scope; 2) The transportation model technical approach; 3) The assumptions used to develop the 2015.Baseline Network; 4) The quantitative benefit measures to numerically rank the 2009 Measure A projects based on the benefit/cost analysis; and Agenda Item 4 5) The qualitative benefit measures to further assess the implementation needs for the 2009 Measure Projects that are not captured in the quantitative assessment of the benefit/cost analysis. For the past several months, Bechtel and Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB), Bechtel's traffic sub -consultant, have been working on the development of a detailed transportation model to evaluate the benefits of the various highway improvements listed in the 2009 Measure A program of projects shown in Attachment No. 1. PB has also been retained by the Commission to develop a transportation model that can be used to evaluate the potential toll activity for various projects within Western Riverside County. As stated previously, in order to have a common model that would serve both needs, PB recommended the use of the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM) after it was enhanced to more accurately reflect the proposed 2015 Baseline conditions of Western Riverside County. Updated SCAG demographic data was also included in the model throughout the modeling area of interest. The traffic model was developed to include the Riverside County freeway and major arterial highway systems that would be operational in the year 2015. The model was calibrated and validated prior .to performing model runs for the 2009 Measure traffic analysis. The 2009 Measure A projects were each modeled separately, analyzed, an111° compared against the 2015 baseline model results. The following quantitative measures of effectiveness were tabulated: • Facility Number of Trips Served -Average Daily Traffic (ADT) • Facility Daily Level of Service (LOS) • Travel Time Savings • Vehicle. Miles Traveled Savings • .Distance Savings per Vehicle • Vehicle Hours Traveled The numerical total of the above measures of effectiveness, for each project, was then converted to dollar ($) savings/cost per year value and summarized for the following five major metrix categories: • Value of Time Savings ($) • Value of Distance Savings ($) • Value of Energy Consumption Savings ($) • Value of Air Pollutant Savings ($) • Value of Accident Reduction ($) Agenda Item 4 " " The five ($) measures, listed above, form the benefit portion of the benefit/cost ratio, while the project cost forms the cost portion. The five benefit measures were then expanded to cover the assumed project life. A 25-year- project life and a 5% discount rate were assumed. It was also assumed that all project costs were incurred in 2014, one year before benefits begin to accrue in 2015. Then a present worth analysis was performed to obtain a total benefit value for each project, in the year 2015, for 25 years of benefits, at a 5% rate of return. The total benefit, for each project, was then compared with the respective total cost, in 2006 dollars for each project, resulting in a benefit/cost ratio for each of the proposed 2009 Measure A projects and project segments. These results are summarized in Attachment No. 2. Attachment Nos. 3 - 8 display the quantitative information sorted by each of the above major measures captured from the model output. In addition to the quantitative analysis performed to determine the benefit/cost ratios, the projects were further compared using a list of qualitative measures. These measures were used to attempt to assess other important issues that are not easy to assess in a quantitative manner. The qualitative measures were as follows: " Opportunistic Timing " Environmental Challenges " Need to Protect Right of Way " External funding available that is project specific " Time required to get the project ready to advertise " Safety issues not addressed in the benefit/cost analysis Staff has completed their qualitative analysis for each project, and these results are summarized in Attachment No. 9. A summary table showing both the quantitative benefit/cost and qualitative results are shown in Attachment No. 10. Staff is recommending that the quantitative benefit/cost measures. be the initial tool used to establish the priority list of projects. The resulting priority list will be scrutinized against the qualitative evaluation criteria to determine if any adjustments should be made in the proposed priority order of the 2009 Measure Projects. After the recommended final priority list of projects has been prepared, it will be brought back to the Committee for review and approval prior to taking the list forward to the Commission. After the Commission approves the prioritization list and funding assumptions, Staff will develop_ the proposed financial plan for the first 10 years of the 2009 Measure A program of projects. The current schedule for the completion of the 10 Year Delivery Plan is shown in Attachment No. 11. With this agenda item, staff is requesting that the Private Finance/Delivery Plan Ad Hoc Committee approve the actions as listed above. Attachments: Agenda Item 4 1) 2009 Measure A Western County Highway Improvement Location Map 2) Year 2015 Transportation Model results for the 2009 Measure A Program of Projects 3) Year 2015 Transportation Model results. for the 2009 Measure A Program of Projects — Sorted by Benefit/Cost Ratio 4) Year 2015 Transportation Model results for the 2009 Measure A Program of Projects Sorted by Accident Reduction Savings 5) Year 2015 Transportation Model results for the 2009 Measure A Program of Projects — Sorted by Value of Distance Savings 6) Year 2015 Transportation Model results for the 2009 Measure A Program of Projects — Sorted by Value of Time Savings 7) Year 2015 Transportation Model results for the 2009 Measure A Program of Projects Sorted by Energy Consumption Savings 8) Year 2015 Transportation Model results for the 2009 Measure A Program of Projects — Sorted by Pollutant Savings (PM 10, NOX, VOC, CO) 9) 2009 Measure A Projects — Qualitative Evaluation Ranking 10) 2009 Measure A Projects — Summary of Year 2015 Transportation Model Benefit/Cost Results and Qualitative Evaluation Ranking 1 1) Delivery Schedule for 2009 10-Year Delivery Plan • Agenda Item 4 ?Jo pwo0 me . swewenadwl AemtAH mel aao m sep0-00`e. e0pue; spPeakiueei4e (ejiepitte mey sepunoj"ceipewe uePoe'': epurP011ky+nek • etiiii*OdboBej(j ueg': pue"Pa UodmeN ,3ueem}eg,. iapwo'J BulisgLep!M , de�ygjq u6�"�aaa euel fiwquwlr3:5101483 PPY luewenadwl:e6uepie0 uie Sa. euel BupieraAtiM a3 pm, uoPPe'AP ipeeegel {PPY uopoenp yoeaeuel. GpPV, uopoep pee seUerOPV, uopbeild yoeaeY�e);k . 68uayae�u�aeadw� ss4ye is m gUoN BG 14oRu,vgmaN",1 uoRprpea euej �!;ppy i. quawanadwl pasodad amseaW • PPW' 081 ae1 Femved punoo-pwl �® 9 a W W 9 a�noa O PAM I,# 4101.1.140E4 d dew uoRe001 1.uauaanoaduaI AWALIBIH kunoo appienN uaa;sem y einseew 600Z • • LO 003908'ttt 000000O4L9 lase* 901'9114 000'6990 000'089'8S 0001.0LYt COHN L at aePPWegeea (9L.1491 ay *NON Dtl•0d9 usul8Tda3 stomse Oral 9S VT CO 003L39'211 000'000'099.4 91L'£OITS 990.409$ 000'LLSZS 003/09/0 000.009.69 00/d11 L P1 PSDLWA89eaa era9/NWId NDBPwW00 Pe s809810090/013 Demme at -we cc rt Lg. 90 000LC8'44- 000'000'LLZ1 090109'CS- senate- o009ae'Ls Ooszess OOObte,Ls- (dW iOAOH 0AP/A011 t PW 3109119/011 'DNB aDPHD•e 00149 se u0t o'0 000'00'94 000'0004112 10£134'L7 949'9695 000'09911 000'990'05 000'94✓S- (el oval hart ea) Lava Swoop oon4 e3 PPY 3109-a9/00 'PAIS atwalPoe 09118 19 rot LO 000'990'09 000'000'9018 940•961$ 999Y4 000'9909 000024'9f 000'L05 0etl693 pus 0 W e3 eeed8000141'09119 LM 01011 Se TO-aS E1M 010110M:OM PPY 0100-018911 05 r. SI 0001.011.91 000'0009995 999'079 094197 000'909'38 000TYC'LZ3 0001133t$ (CPI C/AOH t)11D/A011 t PPY 0100•149011 41141Nuno099 011 ei rw 1'e 000'018119 000'000'L/S 091'1890 868'007 000'8991 000'OLSOIS 000'8599 (4118PDa1 APNL93) aaea Bahama vas a3 PPY - 0109-98911 *DM AM*BB 011 ex r'u Z1 0001119'/L5 000000'09M 9L4'11/814 206'08145 00000CY4 0a0'I50'LLS 000'1091U MI N9N 9 0/0 AOH V ICN 9/AOH 0 dW t V AOH t PPY at/114am* OB V 9101911 911 LT q4t iL ()canvass 0000o0'sste LLL'904'PS IOLLOPI5 000'951'15 OOstman OOD'BLB'9L2 IIN ethos ll AP/AOH t PP( Pan Nu1NO 09 V9191911 911 St r's't Oh 000'L80'911 000'000'805 998'O17'E9 005').01.4 000eLl'1$ 000'903'445 oorion'9Ls (dW VAOH IInO/AOH t PPV 0101L-1/9t•I Da PORu.O Name 911 SL vt 8'0 000'ELVELS 000'00013U P9e1.9L'99 1E4'/00'15 000'099'1S 000'974'099 000'809'4ES (dW 6/AOH II AP/AOH IPP9 PII PMUSO+(Dune aetl earlsase SW tx t'r. 9'S 000'BLLEILS 000'000'6039 Lea'LeVss e9VL99'49 000100LS 000716'LLT ' 000'ZLCY6S (dW WAOH 0 APLdW t 0011AOH L PPY II01110ne1D Pul 3111/1991/ 911 tot u%'t V4 oo0'LOV9es oo0'osoSat eis'eselle 49ODeSLS oo0'901YS oo00Co'OLS 0o0'eseVet Ian MOH II ANAOH t PPY Bell PALL WW1 OI le•LS911 911 LT "%'t. L9 000'LL9T017 000'0007ZOS eet'9e're sea'a40'LS 0o0'/Lsss Ooo'O05'LLS ooSasoass 09as/wetiso/O AOH V(in P/AOH 0 co Jed dN l Pug AOH 1 PPV Vl(1-a991•I etc Novo 99 911 Le `ft't 99 000'LlZ'9S0 00090009110* C9L'LLOTS C901040 000916i0 000't80YE0 00010904 IdN C/AOH 00P/AOH L PPY 01 te-119/91-1 Bun kenos es 9LY 9L ''CL D'C Wo'see'ZLEt OOO'OOetu'LS 909'806'res L89'9£YLS 000to ms o00Y0L'ailt 0o0'BLLSDS 9Ki N9N890Pa8s IVI w.01o/0 AOH 9Lvl1 Nuno009 of SlZ1 /1801a1 a•I811 u10Ptll W009 0/01 L 9 /09oorl W0u• nPlAOH L DDtl 01/n Nu1720011 sun Assun e9 911 St ma't l'9 000'0901L99 000'000'0ln 0te'18E'9/5 0113193'09 000491,L5 ase L8091Ls 000'891;1S AP/AOH 1.PPY 01814111.10 OS sun /0n03 OS 911 9$ ,11'L L f 000'BLBV1.$ 000'003999 C29'Lf 491'999 000680'19 000'11L'119 003140'15 UN MOH 0119/A01-119PY 0191M/911 Pa INDS 91Z1 LL 1'�I LZ 000'8012S 000'000'LII9 0! 1887 80£'9L13 000'999'4 000'03391S 000'999'0 ICW Z/AOH II119/A0H IPDC Da Pan se D+•nN Pal 9$ e'1 se 000'9taas swoons's LLe'ZL0'25 sanest osoassze essasesse Ooo'OeOZts 9Lei B P Sata m xi•(Sal C/AOH N OcAOH L PD9 Da PMnol Da sflu9d9 we 91L1 9t NI Ott 000'110.961 0001)00'L05 LS0'00010 11E'OL8'1 000'09025 000'19E'184 000'149'529 (AN 9/A0H 08P/AOH I.POV Pe oMAN any ar07N•Pn3 9191 ♦L /1.11 S'I D00'LEVOSS 000'0001899 Lle'E694S 9S0'091,I3 000709'SS 000e9V199 (MOTEL.= etel e e StOI m vs a tom AP/AOH t PPV 01 St4-VS11 PH 09010119 AP9 91Z1 CI 10'9 99 000/LZINS 000'000'09M 990'864'00 004190.1$ 000961'99 000'601992 000119'C29 AP/AOH LPOY 019131011. 400 onteNteme 91911 LL I'0'0 10 003070'934 0013000'L987 L99E84 El40447- 000'/09'Z4 000'9L0'945 00397L£S- 91Z1N/O?tlsm 0/O AOH-ass a(die rmoH L) nD/dIN L Pat AON L arm tun APno0 es 3191MM-89/09ln 921 V09119 IL A9' 8'0 000'078'007 000'000'400 C40'30919 098'704- 000'9LCCS 0001LC'LCS 000'0995- - (dW NAOH t) AP1dW 1 pus AOH 1 DPY awn 60100099 01 SlL191.91a9/09-a9 SILY OL r s no 0009981' 000'000'89S L2t1,L67` OL00tt- OOC'9e8 000ZL7- 0001959` (CH L/AOH 0 ADIAOH t PPY aun 44uno0 es OI La-ess4-es lL1a9 e n as oo0'ea9'LLe 000'Oooais 0Le'9las oY9'est sooase'IS 003009'913 000'0894 misauuoo deal tL-US eN of 101* ea ue8e-ea OI tO-tl9/lra8 S P Ll 000'000'00 000.000'085 sterner eL9'eeLt Nolan OOO'haeas o00'relase aLowta wag 9/1954e/cinglAHP/9199P49999 01/e•tl9911 DIPPD11/ulaN1s 1e119 OI t9-a9911 L u% 90 000848'99 000'000'ent 898'9599- 8LCL88• 000119$ °Weaves o00 Loves. te-asNYSVI s 3/0 AOH PONY 01 Le-es/BL/ L10aaniataW la Lose o116'89911 9 .7 d'1 000'980'a 0001003899 mean fit- 69s1CLI- 000'089IS OOOLSOIa asoaeYes- (dN samow I)*//dN. L DPW 19 nINd 911 Lele 9 t'1 0'L 000'009'0LS 000'000'alt L6/'9LL1- anat. 0001LE'LS 000'721499 000YED'94- law smcie LIAO/dW t PVC 911 40813 saves 18-e9 9 rt 6'S 000'LZ2'Ee1 000O:1'111f lir°Mt meet- ose'Le8'Et 000L98sst OOOYLe- (em dW WADI.? I'ea AN 9/AOH 210 WAVY IPPV /014181010R0S *Al Oa1•.10 te•S9 c vs. Z'E 000SL95P4 owooweeZ9 0S6'002'1¢ /LVOV* 000ae9'et 000'490'89S DOOTCL'B9- APIAI 1PPY 9w»Id sun OS= 19-99 L CI au VItI'a lsnq lnl.�u.�q ea eu (avaR 14900Z) 14900Z) ylauafl leaol asoO aVarord •v peaR/SI untlOnPaa yiaPiVaV 1 9u PeaA /SI WM (o0'oon '%ON'OLWd) //990m 5 auoonlaod •u poORAL) asoO Is6uues uq0/1901 o, ' RL+au d IN .. _ ())),A /S)aso0 Is6mnvS wrl to anle/t ea 1aea/Iis)aso0 Ls6ulneg -» uelslO Lo amen . Ill N 99119999 SLOL/eaR tuawanmdwl. of ^+e S1/1I19N011I9 .anon I JII 1 01 NMI N011AIH11;I0 aq In spajoid;o we.tBad y einseaW 600Z eta JO; sllnsaa lapow u0Repodsuell 910Z JeeAr, Z iuewyoeuy Z 70 Z 1509d1 1699•40P019.910 :0/0 dgyeAP led seael dW 6 9 coal nON L • (d1910150911) :a0119•619ad uaauc, MICR a 11014100.119101 sem 10 000'090'49T 000'000'0996t 6fG'BOO et S9900L'ZY 000'DSO ZS 000'SZS'bf 000'699'1SY (puumlaWdW E LOPwO m•u Plul."0 01102-91S1001-1A5 0I91-1/P8 011011110 91W CS 1st 00 000'9LZ'94- 000'000'00(eS4 Z9E'!09'99- 999'909'13- 000'CMPS 000'996'639 ON 991'PE9- 0•uu99)00I3W 2 Looluoo mu Pmlavo0 01102-LISMC4•91S 01614/PN 0911090 SIW LS as 6 0- 000'099ELP 000000'020'6S C90'OBCI LY LOSS1DZY 000'090'94 0009999®01 000'99L 099- aDtlW 9-91I0P11100me11 0I192N3/16415 015E-1/16W3 10-913 SS P91, 00 SOLOfit 00'000'022'2S E98'08S'LS` 202911'2V 00'969`SS 00'99S'99P 000'1Lb'099- 11P/dW Z-WaPw00m•N DI 192-919/10-NS 0191-1/16-1!S 10-NS OS •9L 6 0 000'1CVLS 000000'0901 L96'989'9 6904109'LS- GOO UP PS 00'13 0f4 000289'PLY mill Z PPV 01192-NS116-N9 01SL-1/16-NS L6-NS 6P VA L'0 000'0904bCS 000001)'020f9 LKtli YS- 299'eL9 00'99Z'CS 00'0E t'LfS 000'ZE0 tS AD/AN L1POWw meu U/496100 Atuno0 e6ue10 LI00e0•19I1/eNN PL-NS h •'9I 0'2 SOZLZ'SOZS 00'00'006'LS 9f 1'EBS'045 999'LLEItt 00'L61'L9 000926'6LI9 00'Ef0'S99 199/dW LlopWoo moo 9•011•11OP'd0130 01011109-N9 019121W9114 1911111100 maN LP tt 0'0 000SEL'LS 000'000103'LS ZC6089'SS 992'1161` 000'0910- DOD 0l9'let 030000LS` 11P/dW L of L WOA uepuyu09111uy 130 SL-1 912•1 dOW 90 Z'9:t 9'0 000'699'09f 00000'901'61 090'909lB 0026099S- 00005OS 000'Z69'1St 00'0 Sbl$ .9p/ANZ 01 L WPC u•OInVu86••1NV130 SLL-1 6L-NS NON SP -l't9 90 00'099'011S 00'00'BN'C4 260'EfP 9Z4 901'902'19- 000069'LS 00Y99'90LS 00'9L0'E2S 11P/AN Z 01 L wmlu•P4tyu69••1 AV130 Sly 09-NS dOW PP IITt •'aZZL IE 000'001'06S 000000609 000 SZf9- 996'Mt- 000'LSO& 000'f0e'6S 00'S091- IAN 6)00Id101ea0111PP• 4 PP•'lODP107dV130 maN Nlna909 e1n0N 01 912-11911 91L1 CP Z0 000'1999 00000'995 SCO019S- 9LL119Y 000'SBLS 000 Lee 5 000'859Y IAN/ S)/VAN t PPe b01911100 d1f130 maN 01.036S 111000 0191L•OS1I 91L1 LP 1'2'29 l'b 000'oetepf NO'NO'/9l9 102'612'L4 9LCSEY 00990'PS 00'90'COS ON't9L'St- (AIN9)!WAIN leUP!PPPe t PPe 9PPw00 dt1130 meN 0151E-9511 PN ar,•oN SIN IP 901973 Cl 000'221%221 000'000'00LS 06L01'Z4 0C9'9613- 000 ZOO'ES 000 OSZZLS 0001LCES- IdWC)11P/dW I PP• 9000,02 d913019•11 01912-POL-I PN 11+06N SIE1 OP u9-29 EO• 000'Ll9'1Y 0000'991 LLL'56LS- 20966ES- ON'6L9S 000'9E9ZS 00'PG2'OS- IAN 1011P/AW Ie1,019PPe L PPe S19p11100 dV130m•N 01912'991,1 PN 909116•N StL1 60 e$'L'2-1 94 00011$6'013 000'000lt IS S996184 090'911 00029L4 00001e99 000'90 (AN C)AP/iW t poe')0PP100 d9130'ON 01SLCV01.-1 ON 9edmets SL2-1 9C "t'Z9 fl 0001Z9'091 000'000'690S 0S'CL9'LI 4LZ99E1. 00'660'VS COO Z'Z99 00'996'9S- 110)dW Z PPe 40PLoo0 dV130 ^LPN VI 94-1/16co809 atno0 PNPP•nN 91L1 L5 n6'ZL L'1 00'099'1.29 00'0001309S 908'R19S E4989Y 000'9L2'LS 000999'9LS 000 OS .06/iW C PPe Yppp9004V-30 m• N 0151•IIPIna964.10Vtl PN Podm•N 9L21 9C 1'n ZJ L'0 0.1,1A avoD nnau..0 0009109'994 (19'19rt IS 9002) PlauaO revel 000'00'0994 (59110Z) LSPO »o)01a 690'499'tt (1e061S) uOgPNP•N auaPL»v 29e'190t (1ee6ISI asPJ (OJ'JOn '120N%USW sSPlneS uemn0a _—_—_—_I.__'_— ONbLO'Zf (1•YS IS) 9sP7 Is6•1•11S un9awnsuPO -•m•1 R6aau3 00'BZLns (Le LA t01 4sa7 Is6aue4 Le amen _.1 00o'E1619 (aead 31 JSP] Is6111ne5 a0ueis10 to amen - 1113/iW Z 0l 11ap9409••N luawanPlduq - 0L-N9/NNld N061uew00 of � (9L-NSlPAY •pPPld may tilnllONNl1lV _ 19 NS 01nnN i0 SC u1vnN Nt)IlA1NJS]O Z-11 n9 __$v__._. sloe[ad Jo weLBad y emseew 600Z eta Jo; swisea lepow uoRepodsueLl SLOZ geeA Z luewyoeuy • • " " � to I. 969cl ET 0o0'SL4'99s oo0'OOo'66Zs - Ilp/dW t PPV 1S 00l914 eun 021/00 Lfi-MS Z O'L E'S 000'469'LLs 6LC9L�'8Ls 1o1D6uu07 Pool 41:41S 8N 01 46-NS 83 416Ae-ay 01 46-14/1.1." 21S 9 F. 9'� 000'099'ZLZs 000'000'344' 4$ 0 01 - L - It- L" " I ! n t" I PI" = MOOeun 4Z-1 '11 ru. uelpul 01" 9-iiS =44/ R10" wo0 84u9J " f&" H t PPV f9unoo OS sun /4000 9s 91-1 61 90'L. L'� 00V6LVE L$ 000'000'99E_ (PIN E/AOH 4)J1P/AOH t PPV 019LZ-I/91.9 PLI1400S 94E-1 IL E-9 L'4 000b1.6'Z Ls 000'000'L4S ON E/eue-1 xorul 93) euel 6untulp Ilona 83 Ppv o109-215/04-1 sun /4uno0 9S O4-1 9L - en Pr o00'08Z'Eb$ 000'000'L9I$ GA b) IlP/dW IeuoPlPPe 4 PPg'Iopulo0 dV130 meN 0194E1/94-1 Pd OnenN 94Z-1 L4 994-zL 1.'b 000'099'9M 000'000'619$ 11P/A01-1 L PPV eun Iqunoo oS eun /qunoo 9S 94.1 91 eO'L Z'b 000' 1.65'4LS 000'000'49n 94Z-1 N/54-1 S ol0 AOH 8 (PIN 9/A0H 4) dW 4'8 AOH L PPV Gun Atunoo OS 01 94E1941 WI a 9s'L 4'b 000'LLZ'999 000'000'691S (PIN E/AOH 4) IIP/AOH 4 PPV 01 46-LIS/94.1 " eun /uunoo 8S - 94-1 OL et'L b'b 0003,LESL$ 000'00019n 11P/AOH t PPV 0151Z" 1/S4-1 env snidAlgon3 94E-1 ZL e0'9 31, 000'ZE0'069 000'000'E6Zs S4E-1S RSLZ" 1M 0/0 a4i1m4P/AOH LPPV 0194E1/94-1 pld sOuPd9%o9 92-1 es. v(1-9 L'b 000'LL9'ZOL$ 000'000'4ZE$ 09-23S M/94-1 S 0/0 AOH 9 (PIN 4/AOH 4) IlP Ied dyy 4 Pug AOH 4 PPV DI 46-TIS/S 4.1 Gull Atun00 8S 94.1 LE (-14'1. 63, 000'EL4'ELS 000'000' LZZs (PIN MOH 1.)11P/AOH t PPV NJ uo6ue0 Aeuns pe11 Norul uelpul 94-1 1Z E'L 9'S 000'LZZ'E4$ 000'000' 4Lts 18M dW 9/AOH t'83 dW 9/A0H Z-t) 4/.11N L PPV 10 gn10 seyas eun 08/00 46118 � 4'4 9'S coo'eLL'BL$ �comet= (AN 4/AOH 4)I1P/d141 4 Pug AOH 4 PPb' IIe118orul uelpul DI 46-k1S/S 41 94-1 �Z OE'L 6'9 000'S46'L4$ 000'000' LEIS 94E-1 S 19LZ-1 m xi a GIN E/AOH t) IIP/AOH I PPV PLl onanN pid s6uuds zos 9LE1 91 " 1V9 l'I. 000'LOV969 000'0008L 14 (PIN E/AOH 4111P/A041 t PPV IIe11 Norul uelpul DI 46-21S/S 4.1 S4.1 EL uE'L Z'L 000'0E4'49$ 000'000'ZE 4$ GIN MOH L) IIP/AOH L PPV aun Aluno0 OS 01 SLZ-1/94-1 94-1 9L es L. 6'4 000'160'ES$ 00o'0o0'66s (PIN E/A01-1 L) IlP/AOH L PPV 01 921/ t-1 P21 uoltueo 6pun8 94.1 9Z 17-1- 0'Ll 000'L4Z'e9$ 0oo'000les GIN E/AOH 4)I11P/AOH 4PPv pa OnenN any snldAleon3 94E1 4'L e4'9 _ _1E1 eu 014e71 1so0 pgauag eu (lea6 /5 900E) maua91elo1 eu (S 900E) 35o33aarold 410MION aupasea 91.0Z1e8A - luawanosdwl oy wol.-1 .. S3A .>lnoa IVNN3177/ 10 L OI unM N0I14I2-17S30 OI opeb;soo ngeua8 pepos spefoad;o una6oad y �inseam' 600Z KR .)o; s;insab iapow uogepodsueal SbOZ aeeA g ;uawyoey £ Z aBed Z'0 000:906'Z IS 000'000'09L$ -0P/dW Z 01 EeNhVu6pee21 (bL-2iS) any eppold pa s6dS uewpO/dx3 eu°wey ft-8s b£ , L•LL 1e0 000'61.6'Z9 000'000'41.3 UIN neuel,loru133) eue! 6u101.01P >10r6183 PPV 0109-21S/OL-1 'pnle spue!Pe21 09-21S L£ ,eOL e0 000'050'93 000'000:L96S 5LZ-1 N/09-NS M 0/0 AOH-00N R (dW 4/AOH U AP/dW L Pee AOH L PPV eun Aluno0 8s 019 LZ•1/1.6-21S/09-21S 51Z-1 V 09-21S LL 95 4'0 000'LZ9'Z4$ 000'OOO'09S't$ API VI 2 01 uappn/u611ee21 6L-JS/MEld !uo6!uawo0 p2{ s6dS ustumplx3 euowed BL-MS ££ 0•L1. b'0 000'6Z6'9$ 000'0008ZZS 1.6-21S NV91-1 S 0/0 AOH PPV 01 L61:1S/9L-1 0100E11/0RM le 1.6-21S 01 1.6418SL-1 9 eZ 9'0 000'49£'9L LS 000'000'9E0'£$ J1P/dIN Z 01 l WO4 uapinyu8pea/:8V130 9L-1 6L•21S dOW'zT.P ME O'£L L'0 000'60V5ES 000'000:09LS 'IP/dWZoluap!nyu6peea 641jS/Annu uoepawo0 (b141S)eMVePPold 6L-2JS S£ z'u. L'0 000'Z94'6$ 000'000'S6LS 09-2iS 83 PueOL•I 83 ssedAq>l0nq'09-t!S SN1o10L-I 83 :09-21S 8M 0101.•18M:0/0 PPV 0109.21S/OL-I 0£ 6 90 . 000:699'09S 000'000'LO C L$ u!P/dW Z of l wog uap!m/u6yeal:dV130 9LZ•1 • 6L•21S d011 Sb L-Et 6'0 000'096'0b$ 000'000'Z49S (dW 4/AOH L) AP/dW L Pee AOH 1 PPV au1l quno0 8S 01912-I/L6-219/09-21S 92-1 OL eS Z' L 000'649'4Z$ 000'000:609S 110/31/ Z PPe :414E00 dV130 meN 01 5 L-1/41n0S 6L alnoN P21ilodmeN 91.Z•1 9£ e071 Z' L 000'6Z9'99 0o0'0oozes uo!loal!p pee waleis uotnquls!p-uoloalloo ppV 01 t61:1S/91-1 u!oou!1MeW le 1.641S 01 16-215/9L•1 L qz £•I. o00'LZ9'04$ oo0'000'LLb$ -0P/dW Z PPe'JoPWo0 dV130 meN 019 L-1/111n0S 6L 91E021 P21°MEIN 91.Z•1 L£ UO'ZL 4•I. 000'L4E'0LS 000'000'L L LS (dW 0 JIP/dW L PPe'ioP1u00 dV130 Anat.! OI SLZ-1/91.1 PLI1+odmeN SLZ-1 9£ ern. L'L 000'S64'9$ 000'000'95$ (019-b/AOH 1.)-0P/dW L PPV 1S e01a!d 9L•1 L6-21S S E'L L'L 000'ZZb'ZZS 000000'00ZS GIN E)lIP/dW L PPe'/0Pw00 dy130 MeN 915LZ-I/SL-1 Pio/4PN 9LZ-1 04 91.73 6'L 00014L'La 000'000'94U (AWE/AOH 1.)-0P/AOH LPPV 0109-21S/0VI "11 Aunoo BS ON 63 90 02 000'ZLZVOZ$ 000'000'009'LS u!P/dW Z iopumo mall Lorulsuoo:dV130 0101.-1/0E-2iS 019LZ•1/09-21S 1op1u00 meN L7 VI. 4'L 0006666Z$ 000'000'LC It (dW 9/AOH 1.)1113/dW LPPV 5L•1 l0 E1E10 seyeS L6-21S b rt. L'Z 000'66 L'2$ oo0'000'Lt t$ (dW Z/AOH L)-0P/AOH LPPV P2J1700S 12l0nenN SLZ-1 91. . Z-9 L'E oLLeH 1500 lillauall 000'441.'OLS (.eaA /S 900Z) Rhluag 1e101 00o'0o0'64$ (S 9ooz) Ls0013a10ad (d1619)-0P/dW !eu061Ppe L Ppe'10pw00 dV130 meN uawano�dw i I - 41noS 61 aro21 o 1 01912-1/9L-1 woi d 53A111M1111V 9LZ-1 aino 2l 10 fib eeZ'Zt OI unit of NOI/d R19S3N open;soo ;gapes Aq papos sperom weJ6oJd y e.mseapq 600Z ay; Jo; swiseN ppow uoneliodsueJ1960Z JeaA £;ueunpe;;y • Attachment 3 Year 2015 Transportation Model Results for the 2009 Measure A Program of Projects Sorted by Benefit / Cost Ratio DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES From Project Cost (2006 $) $65,000,000 - Total Benefit (2006 S/ year) $871,000 Benefit/ Cost Ratio 0,2 ID Run ID Route To Route 79 South Improvement New CETAP Corridor, add 1 MF/dir (5 MF) 12.2a. 42 1-215 I-15/1-2151C 15a 48 SR-74 Riverside County Orange County Construct new corridor 2 MFldir $3,420,000,000 $34,050,000 0.1 15h 49 SR-91 SR-91/1.15 IC SR-81/SR-241 IC Add 2 MF/dir $680,000,000 $2,731,000 0.1 13.2 48 MCP 1.215 1-15 CETAP: realign/widen from 1 to 2 MF/dir $1,931,000,000 $1,738,000 0.0 15c 50 SR-91 SR-91/1.15 IC SR-91/SR-2411C New Corridor A - 2 MF/dir $2.720,000,000 $2,307,000 0.0 15e 52 MIS Cajalco Rd/1-161C SR-133/SR-241 IC. Construct new corridor 2 MF/dir (tunnel) $5,980,000,000 -$8,275,000 0.0 15d 51 SR-91 SR-91/1.15 IC SR-91/SR-2411C New Corridor A - 3 MF/dir $3,020,000,000 413,486,000 -0,1 151 59 MIS Cajalco Rd/I.151C SR-133/SR-2411C Construct new corridor 3 MF/dir(tunnel) $8.870,000,000 • 5'7,054,000 -0.1 4 9 SR-71 SR-71/SR-91 IC SB County Line Add 1 HOV/dir (1 HOV/2 MF) $59,000,000 -$968,000 -0.2 12.1 as 39 1-215 Newport Rd I.15/1-2151C New CETAP Corridor. add 1 additional MF/dir (4 MF) $83,000,000 41,612,000 -0.3 106 32 SR-60 Redlands Blvd. 1.10/SR-60 IC Add 1 HOV/dir (1 HOV/2 MF) $227,000,000 -$7,937,000 -0.5 Notes: Total fact Ily lane spedficatlona are per direction: (1H0V/3MF) = 1 HOV lane & 3 MF lanes per direction D/C: Direct Connector •ve Indicates cost Page 3 of 3 " " " Attachment 4 Year 2015 Transportation Model Results for the 2009 Measure A Program of Projects Sorted by Accident Reduction Savings DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATI JES - Accident Reduction (5 i year( I Puri ID'. Pause c,;,;-1 , 70 .,1`13 rev e.re,;! 8L 1 Year 2015 Baseline Network rna 13.0 44 MCP SR-79 1-15 CETAP- realign/widen from 1 to 2 MF/dr 524,433,092 14 47 New Corridor SR60/-2151C SR30/1-10IC CETAP: construct new corridor 2 MF/dir $16,583,138 7,0b 19 1-15 SB County Line SD Canty tyre Add 1 HOW&entire rortidorE l MFMtr bum SR-60 to 1r1dian Truck Tr, 1-215 to SO County Line a HOV O/C S 1-15AN SR60 3 S I-15M 1-215 $78306,808 13.1 45 MCP SR-79 1-215 CETAP: realignAviden from 1 to 2 MFAd'r $18,038,063 7,0a _--18 - 1-15 SB County line SD Canty Line Add HOV/dir $15,387,919 7. 20 2:1 1-15 1-15/SR-91 1C Indian Muck Trail Add 1 HOV all 1 MF/dk (1 HOW MF) 58442,621 7.24 22 1-15 F15/SR-911C Indian Truck Trail Add HOV/du(1 HOV/3 MF) 58,334,828 9.0 b 13 1-215 Brno Sprigs Rd I-151-2151C Add 1 HOW& with a D/C W 1-215 $. S 1-215 $5,883,912 0.04 12 1-215 Eucalyptus Ave I-154-2151C Add 1 HOV/dir $5,798,046 _11.2 46 MCP 1-215 . 1-15 CETAP: realigaWWen ham l to 2 MFAM $5,486,232 6.14 14 1-215 Eucalypads Ave Nuevo Rd Add 1 HOV/drc (1 HOW3 MF) 55,262,657 7. 3 24 - 1-15 Indian Tuck Trail Bully Canyon Rd Add 1 HOV/dv (1 HOV/3 MF) 55,251,866 7.5b 27 1-15 I-154-2151C SD County Line Add 1 HOV 8 1 MF (1 HOV/5 MF) 8 HOV D/C S I-15/N 1-215 54,941,275 7.1 h' 24 1-15 . SB Conlnty Line 1-15/SR-91 IC Add 1 NOV and 1 MF per dr (1 HOV/4 MF) 8 HOV DX S I-15/W SR-60 $4,506,438 7.5a. 26 1-15 I-15/1-2151C SD County line Add 1 HOWdir(1 HOV/4 MF) 54.104,711 7.4 25 I-15 Bundy Canyon Rd 1-15d-2151C Add 1 HOV/dn (1 HOV/3 MF) 53,810,955 6.1 h 15 ' 1-215 Box Springs Rd Nuevo Rd Add 1 HOWdir(1 HOV/3 MF) a D/C W 1-215 8 S 1-215 52,322411 12.1 bb 41 1-215 Nuevo Rd 1-151-2151C New CETAP Corridor, add 1 additional MFldir (4 MF) 52,279,291 12.1 h 40 1-215 Nuevo Rd 1-15/1-2151C New CETAP Corridor, add 1 MF/dir (3 MF) 52,134.150 11.0 33 _ SR-79 Ramona Exp/Gilman Spgs Rd Domecgani Pkwy/SR-79 ReaBon/widen to 2 MF/dir 52,103,716 7.1 a 20 1-15 SB Count' Line 1-15/SR-91 IC Add 1 HOV/dr (1 1-10W3 MF) 52,077.744 12.0h 37 1-215 Nuevo Rd Route 795o0M-151C New CETAP Corridor, add 2 MF/dr 51,613,934 11.2 35 SR-79 Florida Ave (SR-74) Domenigonl Pkwy/SR-79 Realign/widen to 2 MFAtir 51.487,078 5a 10 1-215 SR-60SR-91A-2151C SB Coady line Add 1 HOV and 1 MFWk (1 NOV/4 MF) 51,202,013 12.14 38 1-215 Newport Rd I-15/1-215IC New CETAP Corridor, add 1 MF/dv (3 MF) $679,683 8a 28 1-10 SB County Line 1-10/SR60IC Add EB truck din -thing lane (EB Truck lanen MF) $591.120 12.0 a 36 1-215 Newport Rd Rode 79 Soutivl-151C New CETAP Corridor, add 2 MF/dr 5421,903 9 SD I-10lSR601C SR-60, ED pt0lo WB SR-6f1, buck bypass EB 4 0 and EB SR-60$135,445 6.2 16 1-215 Nuevo Rd Scott Rd Add 1 HOV/dr (1 HOV/2 MF) $99,179 Sb 11 SR-60 81-215 SR60/SR-91/1-2151C SB County Line Add 1 HOV and 1 MF/dir (1 HOV/4 MF) 8 Nan-HOV D/C W SR-50/N 1-215 $93,867 -�� 8b 29 1-10 SB County lire 1-10/SR-601CC Add 1 HOV/dr (1 HOV/3 MF) $54,855 6, 3 17 1-215 Scott Rd I-15/1-2151C Add 1 HOV/dir(t 1-10V2 MF) $2,523 11.1 34 SR-79 Ranwna Exp/Gilman Spgs Rd Florida Ave (SR-74) Realign lvriden to 2 MF/dir -$42,697 12. 133 39 1-215 Newport Rd 1-15/1-215 IC New CETAP Corridor, add 1 addtio al MF/dr (4 MF) 4295.222 4 9 SR-71 SR-71/SR91 IC SB Canty line Add 1 HOWIr (1 HOV2 MF) -5324,371 t 2 2'1:1 43 1-215 . 1-15/1-2151C Rrnare 79 South New CETAP Condor, add 1 additional MH6r (6 MF) 4325400 3 8 SR-7I/SR-911C Re-a8gn EB SR-91 to NB SR-711oop connector 4414,919 2:1 6 1-15/SR91 IC SR91 at Mainflincokr 1-15/SR-91 IC Add HOV D/C S 615/W SR-91 4455,939 1 2.24 42 _ I-215 145/1-2151C Route 79 South New CETAP Corridor, add 1 MR.:4 (5 MF) 4510,035 1 1 3 SR-91 OCMC Line Series Club Or Add 1 MF/dr (1-2 HOV/6 MF EH,1 HOWB MF WB) -$610,821 1.2 4 SR-91 Series Cif Dr I-15 - Add 1 MEW (1 HOV/5 MF) 4776.482 i b 7 1-1518R-91 IC SR-91 at MaiM.incoln 1-15/6R-91 IC Add collector-6std6110r system each Median -$922,883 1. 3 5 SR-91 1-15 Pierce St Add 1 MF/dr (1 HOV/4-5 MF) -51,129,831 10a 31 SR-60 Redlands Blvd 1-10JSR-601C Add EB truck odbnbi ng lane (W Tuck lane/2 MF). -51.223,231 1.0 2 SR91 OCMC Line Pierce St Add 1 MF/dr 41,289,330 15a 45 SR-74 Riverside Carney Orange County Construct new corridor MF/dir 42.851,047 134 32 SR-60 Redlands Blvd. 610/SR60IC Add 1 HOVJdir (1 HOV2 MF) 43,348980 15 b 49 SR91 SR-914151C SR-91/SR-241 IC Add 2 MF/dr 45,895961 15e 52 MIS Cajako RM-151C SR-133/SR-241IC Construct new corridor 2 MFMr(tunnel) 46,607,382 1 5 c 50 SR-91 SR91d-151C SR91/SR-2411C New Corridor A-2 MR& 47.590,983 15f 53 MIS Cajalco Rd1-151C SR-133/SR-2411C - Construct new corridor 3 MFMh(tnnel) -$9,908,739 159 - 51 SR-91 SR911-151C SR91/SR-2411C New Candor A-3MF/dr 411.160,033 Told fatikty lane spedficebons are per drecborr (1H0Vl311F) = 7 HOV large 8 3 MF lanes per diredion D/C: Direct Connector -ve indicates post Attachment 5 Year 2015 Transportation Model Results for the 2009 Measure A Program of Projects Sorted by Value of Distance Savings !D Aun iD Recta From To r, nt - Year2015 Baseline Nelwodk Value of Distance Savings I Cost (Syear) na SL 1 7 31 18 1-15 SB County line SD County Line Add 1 HOVAM 381,409,000 7. D S 19 1-15 SB County line SD County Line Add 1 H0Wc it entire enmdor & 1 MF/de Own SR60 to Wean Ttuck Tr, 6215 bo SD Conn$65. line 6 HOV D/C S 1-15/IN SR-80 A S 145R41-215 729 13 47 New Corridor SR-60A-2151C SR30/1.10IC CETAP: oonsbud new corridor MF/de $55,033.000 7.23 22 145 1-15ISR41 IC Indian Truck Trod Add /H0V/dr(1 H0W31,4F) 335,955,000 7 3 24 1-15 Indian Truck Trail Bundy Canyon Rd Add 1 HOV/dr (1 HOVl3 MF) $34.506000 7.2 S 23 7, 5 b 27 675 1-15 1-15/SR41 IC Indan Truck Trod Add 1 HOV and 1 MR& (1 HOV/4 MF) 632272600 145/1-2151C SD Courtly Une Add 1 HOV 8 / MF (1 HOV/5 MF) 6 HOY DIC S I-15411-215 $28.501.000 6.3 h 13 1-215 Box Springs Rd 145/1.2151C Add 1 HOWdr with a D/C W I-215 & $ 1-215 - $27,732600 7.53 26 1-15 145A-2151C SD County Line Add / HOWdr(1 HOV/4 MF) 328,828600 6.13 14 1-215 Eucalyptus Ave Nuevo Rd Add 1 H0VA1r (1 H0V/3 MF) $25,251.000 7.4 25 615 Bundy Canyon Rd 1454-2151C Add 1 HOV/dr (1 H0W3 MF) $24,240,000 6.7a 12 1-215 Eucalyptus Ave 145/1-2151C Add 1 H0V/dr 623,614.000 7.1 h 21 1-15 - SB County Line 1-15/SR-91 IC Add 1 HOV and 1 MF pardr(1 HOV/4 MF) & HOV D/C S 1.15AN SR-60 620,0586W 7.13 20 1-15 SB County Line 1-15/SR-91 IC Add 1 HOW&(I HON/3 MF) 613,430,000 15.1 h 15 1415 Box Spmgs Rd Nuevo Rd Add 1 HOV/d-r (1 H0V/3 MF) a D/C W 1-215 S S 1-215 $12,644080 11.g 33 SR-79 Ramona Exp/GOnan Spgs Rd Damenigonl Pkv y/SR-79 Realign/widen to 2 MF/dr 69.640.01)0 11.2 35 SR-79 Florida Ave(SR-74) Domenigoni PkwydSR-79 RealigMeiden to 2 MF/dr 28,913,000 6.2 16 6215 Nuevo Rd Scott Rd Add 1 HOV/de (1 HOV/2 MF) 33,358600 20 7 1-1513R-911C SR-91 at Main/Lincoln 615/3R-91 IC Add coleder-dsldbutor system each direction $2,674,000 • 11.1 34 SR-79 Ramona Exp/Gilman Spas Rd Florida Ave (SR-74) RealigMniden M 2 MF/dr $2,201,000 171 48 SR-74 Riverside County Orange County Construct new corridor MFAG- 31,432,000 6.3 17 I-215 Scott Rd 1-158-2151C Add 1 HOW<F4(1 HOV/2 MF) 31674,000 3r 29 1-10 SB County Line 140/SR-60IC Add 1 NOV/dir(1 H0W3 MF) $1.028,000 3 a 28 -� _- 1-10 SB County Line 1-10/SR-60 IC Add EB buck Wnbing lane (EB Truck Lane/3 MF) $859,000 8 SR-71/3R-81 Rs-ntign EB SR-91toN8 611-71 bop connector 1660,000 12 13 38 1-215 Newport Rd 1-150-215 IC New CETAP Corddcy add 1 MFkBr (3 MF) $345,000 - ) _ 30 410/SR-6O IC Add D/C: WB 1-1010 WB SR-60, ER 1-10 to WH SR-60, truck bypass EB 1-10 and EB SR -ea 687•000 1'.1 3 SR-91 OC/RC Une Sedas Club Dr Add 1 MF/dr (1-2 HOV,O MF EB, / H0V/6 MF WS) 472.000 1,2.233 43 1-215 145f1-2151C ROOM 79 South New CETAP CmNor, add additional MF/dr(6 MF) 4406,000 - 4' 9 SR-71 SR-71/SR-91 IC SB County lime Add 1 HOVfdi (1 HOV2 MF) 4588,000 1 2.23 42 I-215 - 145/1-2151C Route 79 South New CETAP Corridor, add l MFkBr (5 MF) 4656.000 5, 10 6215 SR40/SR-91B-2151C SB Couny Line Add 1 HOV and 1 Mndir (1 HOV/4 MF) 4880,000 12.'2a 36 1415 Newport Rd Route 79 Sou8d1-15 IC Hew CETAP Corridor, add 2 MF/dr -$1,326,000 21 6 I-15ISR-91 IC SR-91 at MaNAinccin 1-154R-91 IC Add HOV WC S 1-15199 SR-91 41,901,000 51h 11 SR-60 & 1-215 SR401SR-914215 IC SB County Line Add 1 HOV and 1. MFIdr (1 H0V/4 MP) & NaFIbV WC W SR4N0N 1-215 43.253600 12.1b 40 -_ 1,215 Nuevo Rd 145d-2151C New CETAP Candor, add l MFMk(3 MF) -$3,770,000 t 2 4 SR-91 Sedan Club Dr 1-15 Add 1 MF/d1r(1 H0W5 MF) 43,637,000 12,12 a 38 6215 Newport Rd I-1562151C. - New CETAP Condor, add 1 additional UFA* (4 MF) ' 44,204.000 1.7 5 SR-91 1-15 Pierce St Add 1 MFldf (1 H0194-5 MF) 44,485,000 12.1;a 41 1-215 Nuevo Rd 615n-2151C New CETAP Conker, add l additional MF/dr(464F) -45,741,000 13 a 31 SR-60 Redlands Blvd. 14013R-60 IC Add EB Wok climbing lane (EB Truck lane/2 MF) 48,474, r' 12.2Y 37 1-215 Nuevo Rd Rwae 79 South/145 IC New CETAP Calddor, add 2 MF/dr 48,988.000 13. 2 46 MCP - 1415 145 CETAP. rea6tyNMdan from 1 to 2 MF/dir - 472990.' '' 1.3 2 SR-91 OC/RC Line Pierce SI Add 1 MFRS, 48,730.000 13.1 45 MCP 511-79 1-215 CETAP: realgnAdden from 11s 2 MF/dr 4102524,000 12 h 32 SR-60 Redlands BNd- 1-10ISR40 IC Add 1 HOVIdr (1 WW2 MF) 414,974,000 11.3 44 tin 49 MCP SR-79 1-15 CETAP" teaig hoiden from 1 M 2 MF/dr 423678600 SR-8i SR -gin -is lc SR-91/SR-241 IC Add2 MFfdh 424,882.000 15e 52 MIS Capko Rd4-151C SR-133/SR-241IC CwMbud newconddor2 MF/dir(tnnel) 434,153 1 5 c 50 SR-91 SR-914151C SR-91/SR-2411C Hew Caddo, A-2 Wide 440,471,'r 1 5 f 53 MI5 Cajako Rd-15 IC• SR-133/SR-241 IC Consbud neweonidor 3 MF/dr(kinel) 451,846,000 'I5d 51 SR-91 SR-91415IC SR-91/SR-2411C New Condor A-3 MF/dr 455.784.800 Notes: Tobl faculty lane specifieabons are per director,: (1HOVAMF) = 11401/ Mire & 3 MF tens per deedion DM: Dined Connector ' -ve indicates cost • • " " " Attachment 6 Year 2015 Transportation Model Results for the 2009 Measure A Program of Projects Sorted by Value of Time Savings e0 Run ID B 4 7 Raa13 Finn Ta Impr0/,. Value of Tim, Savings / Cost (5/ year Year 2015 Guano Nelxork na 7.20 19 1-15 SB County line SD County Line Add 1 MOV/dr entire corridor 81 MF/dr from SR60 to Indian Tick Tr, 1-215 to SD County Line & NOV CNC S I-15/WSR-80 S S I-15/N 1-215 5174 704,000 14 47 New Corridor SR60/4215 IC SR-308-101C CETAP: conskua new condor 2 MFIV6 5122926400 7 A a 18 I-15 SB County Line SD County Line Add 1 HOWdr 51 /8,091,001) 13 3 44 MCP SR-79 . 415 CETAP: realgrWriden from 1 to 2 MF/dir 5108,342,000 7,1 b 21 1-15 SB County Line I-15/SR-91 IC Add 1 HOV and / MF per dr (1140V/4 MF) 8 HOV D/C S I-15AV SR-80 371,590400 1.G 2 _ - SR91 OC/RC Line Pierce St Add 1 MF/dr 369462400 13. I 43 MCP SR-79 1-215 CETAP: realignMiden from 1 to 2 MF/dr $51,692,000 G 2 b 13 I-215 Box Springs Rd 4158-215 IC Add 1 HOV/drwith a OTC W 4215 & S 1-215 351486000 15:1 51 SR-9/ SR-91/1-151C SR-91/SR-2411C New Corridor A-3 MF/dir $49,435,000 " 132 50 SR-91 SR-91/4151C SR-91/SR-2411C New Corridor A - 2 MF/dir 346,588400 G.G i 12 1-215 Eucalyptus Ave 415/1-2151C Add 1 HOV/dr 345.493,000 1 2. +F b 41 4215 Nueva Rd I-158-215 IC New CETAP Cwddor, add 1 add Tonal MF/dr (4 MF) 343,0013,000 12.0 it 37 1-215 Nuevo Rd Route 79 SauRJI-151C New CETAP Condor, add 2 MF/dr $42,239160 7.2a 22 1-15 415/SR-91 IC Milan Truck Trail Add 1 H0W&(1 HOV/3 MF) $40,039,000 1.. t 3 SR-91 OCIRC Line Sedas Club Dr Add 1 MF/dr (1-2 NOV/8 MF ER. 1 HOV/6 MF WB) 338,967.000 7.27 23 1-15 1-15/SR-911C Indian Truck Trati Add 1 HOV and 1 MF/dir(111OV/4 MF) S37,375,000 50 70 1-215 SR-60/SR-91/1-2151C SB County line Add 1 HOV and 1 MR& (1 HOV/4 MF) $37,376000 7..0 b 27 1-15 I-15/42/5 IC SD Count' Line Add 1 HOV 8 1 MF (1 HOV/5 MF) & HOV D/C S I-15/N 1-215 $37,354,000 7. la 20 1-15 SB County Line 1-15/812-91 1C Add 1 NOV/doll H0V/3 MF) 337,091.000 G.1 a 14 1-215 Eucalyptus Ave Nuevo Rd Add 1 HOV/dr(1 H0W3 MF) - 334,387,000 15a. 48 SR-74 Riverside County Orange County Construct new corridor 2 MF/dr 332,130.000 1 5 b 49 SR-91 SR91/4151C SR-91/SR-2411C Add MF/d'r . 330,346000 7 3 24 1-15 Indian Truck Trail Bundy Carryon Rd Add 1 HOV/dr (1 HOV/3 MF) 330,258.000 7.31 20 I-15 415/I-2151C SD County Line Add 1 HOVMe (1 H0W MF) 330402400 0 t b 15 I-215 Bea Springs Rd Nuevo Rd Add 1 HOWdk (1 HOW3 MF) a DC W I-215 & S I-215 $29,963,000 .15e 52 MIS Cajalco Rt11-151C SR-133/SR-2411C Construct new corridor 2 MFddr(tunnel) $29,948,000 1 t 3 33 SR-79 Ramona Exp/Giaan Spgs Rd Domenlgonl Pkwi/SR-79 Realigrdunden to 2 WAN 328.307.000 fl.". 29 1-10 SB County Line 1-10/SR80 IC Add 1 1-10V/dr(1 H0V/3 MF) S27,342,000 5 b 11 SR-80 81-215 SR-BO/SR-91/4215 IC SB County Line Add 1 HOV and 1 MF/dir (1 H0W4 MF) 8 Nan-NOV O/C W SR60/N 1-215 326,075,000 112 35 SR-79 Florida Ave (SR-74) Doinenigon Pkwy/SR-79 RealignMiden to 2 MF/du 324.728000 . 1.2 4 SR-91 Sedas Club Or I-15 Add 1 MFJdr (1 HOV/5 MF) $23,425,000 12 0 a 36 4215 Newport Rd Route 79 5mM/4151C - New CETAP Condor, add 2 MF/dr 323,346,000 7,4 25 I-15 Bundy Canyon Rd 415A-215 IC Add 1 HOV/dr(1 H0V/3 MF) 122,604,000 12.1 b 40 1-215 Nuevo Rd I-15/1-215 IC New CETAP Gondar, add 1 MF lk (3 MF) $22.259,000 S. 2 18 1-215 Nuevo Rd Scott Rd Add 1 HOWdo (1 H0V/2 MF) 316.020,000 3 8 SR-71/SR91 IC Realign EB SR-91 to NB SR-71 loop connedor $15,685,000 G. 3 17 1-215 Scott Rd 415A-2151C . Add / H0V/dr(1 1-10V/2 MF) 311.754,000 1. 3 5 SR-91 I-15 Pierce St Add 1 MF/dk (1 H0VI45 MF) $11,059,000 C a 28 410 SB Courtly line _ I-10/SR60IC Add EB hock &Jibing lane (EB Truck Lane/3 MF) $10,528,000 12. 2 a a 43 I-215 415/4215 IC Route 79 South NeveCETAP Corridor, add 1 additional MFldr (6 MF) 59,904,000 1 1.1 34 SR-79 Ramona Exp/Gitlan Spgs Rd Florida Ave (SR-74) RafignAdden to 2 MFMr 39480400 1 Ca 37 SR-60 Redlands Blvd - 410/SR50IC Add E 3 buck cimbig lane (EB Truck lane/2 MF) 59466,000 1 Cif 32 SR60 Redlands Blvd. 410/SR-60 tC Add 1 HOWdr (1 H0V/2 MF) $9.270,000 2 a 0 415/S12-91 IC SR91 M Main/Lincoln 415/SR-91 IC Add HOV D/C S 415AN SR-91 58.568000 9 30 410/SR60IC Add WC: 4YB 410 b WB SR-60, EB 1-10 to W8 SR60, truck bypass ED 1-10 and EB SR-60 $8,420,000 12.1 a 38 I-215 Newport Rd - H5/1-2151C New CETAP Condor, add 1 MFMr (3 MF) 58,316,000 13 2 46 MCP I-215 I-15 CETAP. realigrWriden from 1 b 2 WAN $4,810,000 1 5 f 53  27 MIS Cajalm Rde-151C SR-1331SR-2411C Construct rcr corridor 3 MR&(tunnel) $4,525,000 7 415/8R-911C SR91 at Mai/Lincoln 1-15/SR-911C Add collector -distributor system each direction 34,097,000 'I 2.10 a 38 4215 Newport Rd 4158-215 IC New CETAP Condor, add 1 additional MF/dr (4 MF) $2,626000 12.2 a 42 4215 415/1-2151C Raub 79 South New CETAP c.,nMor, add 1 MF/dir 15 MF) $1,987,000 4 9 SR-71 SR-71/SR91 IC SB County line Add 1 HOWdlr (1 H0V/2 MF) -$72,000 otea: otal facility lane specifications are per dreedeo: (11-10VOMF) =1 HOV lane 83 MF lanes per direction O/C: Direct Connector -ve Mdcales cost Attachment 7 Year 2015 Transportation Model Results for the 2009 Measure A Program of Projects Sorted by Energy Consumption Savings DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES r once; Year2015 Baseline Nekvolk Energy Consumption Swings Cost (Si year) IL1 Rnn 10 EL 1 Routo- From - na ' 7.3 S 19 1-15 SB County Line SD Co Y �e era Add 1 HOW.* ere corridor 61 MF/dlrMom SR-60 to Indian Truck Tr, 4215 to SD Count) Line 6 HOV DV S I-151W SR-80 6 S 1-15/N 4215 $12.703,000 !TO 44 13 47 MCP New Corridor SR-79 415 CETAP mragrVwiden tiom 1 to 2 MFidir 57,694,000 SR-60Y4215IC SRS0A-101C CEFAP. construct new corridor MRdir 57,792,000 7.3 3 16 1-15 SB County Line SD County Line Add 1 HOW& $7,421,000 131 51 SR-91 SR-91/1-151C SR91/SR-2411C NewCoridorA-3MF/dk 56,940,000 10 2 SR-91 OC/RC Line Pierce St Add MF/dir $6,639.000 1 5 c 50 SR-91 SR9111.151C 5R91/S1i.2411C New Corridor A - 2 MRdir $6897,000 7.1 b 21 I-15 Se County Lime 145/SR-811C Add / HOV and 1 MF perdtr (1 HOV/4 MF) 6 HOV WC S 415AN SR-60 35,614,000 136 49 SR91 SR9/11-15 IC SR91/SR-241 IC Add MF/dir 54.462.000 15o 52 MIS Calera R41-151C SR-133/SR-2411C Construct new corridor NF/ilk gunnel) $4,323,000 1 2.O h 37 4215 - Nuevo Rd Route 79 SouW1.15 IC New CETAP Corridor, add 2 MFASr 54,0911,000 12. 15 a 41 4215 Nuevo Rd 415/1-2151C New CETAP Corridor, add 1 addrtional MF/dr (4 MF) 54,046,000 1.1 3 SR-91 OC/RC Line Sodas Club Dr Add 1 MF/dr (1-2 HOVI6 MF F9, 1 HOV/6 MF W0) $3,947,000 13.1 45 MCP SR-79 1-215 CETAP: realign/Widen Mom 1 to 2 MF/dir 23,813,000 G.3 b 13 I-215 Box Springs Rd - 415/4215 IC Add 1 HOVldrwith a DX W I-215 6 S 1-215 $3.603,000 S a 1 D 1-215 SRfi0/SR-91/4215IC SB County Line Add 1 HOV and I MB& (1 HOV/4 MF) $6276,000 15a 48 SR-74 Riverside County Orange County Construct puny corridor 2 MF/dir $3,264,000 G.Cis 12 7.1 a 2D 1 3 t 53 I-215 I-15 MIS Eucalyptus Ave 415/4215IC Add 1 HOV/dr 53.134,000 SB County Lille I-15/SR-91 1C Add 1 HOVAN (1 HOV/3 MF) $2,916,000 Cajalco Rd4-151C SR-133/SR-2411C Construct nevi corridor 3 MF/did (tunnel) $2.878,000 55 29 1-10 S8 County LMre 1-10/SR-60 IC Add 1 HOVAIr (1 HOV/3 MF) $2.668.000 1.2 4 SR91 Sodas Club Dr 1-15 'Add 1 MRdir (1 HOV/5 MF) 52.379,000 6.1 n 15 4215 Box Springs Rd Nuevo Rd - Add 1 HOV)dir (1 HOV/3 MF) a D/C W I-215 6 S I-215 $2,322,000 7.5 b 27 145 I-15/1-215 IC SD County Line Add 1 NOV 6 1 MF (1 HOV/5 MF) 6 HOV INC S 4/5/N 4215 $2.304,000 5 5 11 SR-6061-215 SR480/SR-91/4215IC SB County Line Add 1 HOY and 1 MFldu (1 HWl4 MF) a Non-HOV 13/C W SRSO/N I-215 52.304,000 12.03 38 I-215 Newport Rd Route 79 SouOJI-15IC New CETAP Corridor, add 2 MF/dr $2276,000 1 I 13 SR-79 Ramona Era/Gilman Spgs Rd Danealgonn Pray/SR-79 Resign/widen to 2 MF/dir $2,272,000 7.2a 22 6.1 3 14 1-15 I-215 415/SR91 IC Milan Truck Trail Add 1 HOW&(1 HOV/3 MF) $2,198.000 Eucalyptus Ave Nuevo Rd Add 1 HOV/dr (1 HOV/3 MF) $2020,000 11, 2. 35 SR-79 Florida Ave(SR-74) Domentgonl Pkwy/SR-79 RealignMidpn to 2 MF/dir $2,019,000 11,15 48 1-215 I-15 Nuevo Rd 1-15/4215 IC New CETAP Corridor, add 1 MF/di (3 MF) 52902.000 7. 2 t> 23 1-15/SR91 IC Indian Track Trail Add 1 HOV and 1 MF/dir (1 HOV/4 MF) /2,001,000 10n 32 SR-60 Redlands BNd. 410/SR-601C Add 1 HOV/dr(1 HOV2 MF) $1,898,000 7.53 29 I-15 415/4215 IC SD County Lire Add 1 MOWN' 41 HOV/4 MF) $1,795,000 7.3 24 1-15 Indian Truck Trail Bundy Carryon Rd Add 1 HOV/dir (1 HOV/3 MF) 51,650,000 1 8 SR-71/SR-91 IC _ Realign EB SR91 to NB SR-71 loop connector $7,808,000 3.2 16 4215 Nuevo Rd Scotl Rd Add 1 HOVMnr (1 HOV/2 MF) 61.552,000 , 9.0 31 5R-60 Redlands Blvd. 490/SRd0 IC Add EB rack climbing lane (EB Tnrck lane2 MF) 31,289,000 5 SR-81 1-15 Pierce St Add 1 MR* (1 HOVM-5 MF) 31285,000 7.4 25 145 Bundy Carryon Rd 1-15A-2151C Add 1 HOV/4r (1 HOV/3 MF) 51.175,000 6.3 17 1-215 Scott Rd I-154-2151C Add 1 HOVA9r(1 HOV/2 MF) 61.092,000 12. 231 43 4215 1-15A-2151C Rome 79 South New CETAP Corridor, add 1 addi9onal MRdir (8 MF) 5992900 11.1 34 SR-79 Ramona an/Gilman Spgs Rd Florida Ave (SR-74) Realign/widen to 2 NFldr 5953,000 3 a 28 I.10 SB County Line 410/SR-60 IC . Add ED buck c6Mlag lane (Eli Truck Lane/3 MF) 5889,000 21: 7 415/SR911C SR-91 at MaWLMcotn 145/SR-811C Add colleclor-0istnbulor system each dsection 5841900 9 30 MO/SR-601C Add oda VIS WO to VIM SR-60, EB 410to WA SR v1 ,�. .... as EB 1-10 and EB SR-60 $835000 23 6 415ISR-911C SR91 at Main Alneolr 415/SR91 IC Add HOV D/C 8415N/5R91 3817,000 12.13 38 1-215 Newport Rd 1-15/1-2151C New CETAP Corridor, add 1 MF/dir (3 MF) $782,000 12.1.3a 39 1-215 Newport Rd 4158-2151C New CETAP Corridor, add l additional MFrar(4 MF) 3479,000 12.23 42 I-215 4156-215lc Rase 79 South New CETAP Corridor, add 1 MF/dir (5 MF) 1295,000 a 9 SR-71 SR-71/SR91 IC SB Couny Line Add 1 HOVddir (1 410V2 MF) 545,000 13.2 48 MCP 4215 1-15 CETAP. realIgnMiden from 1 to 2 MFldir 4150.000 Notes: Total Maly lane specifications are perdrec6on: (1HOV/3MF) 1 HOV lane 6 3 MF lane per D/C: Direct Connector -ve Indicates cost coon " Attachment 8 Year 2015 Transportation Model Results for the 2009 Measure A Program of Projects Sorted by Pollutant Savings (PM10, NOX, VOC, CO) DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES Ts ,rzprwa^mrt year 2015 Baseline Network 10 R71 lC e L 1 Route Frog, Polutant Savings 1 Cost 16� year) na 7.23 18 I-15 SB County Line SD County Line Add 1 HOW& $4,261,010 7.05 19 1-15 SB Courtly Line SD County line Add 1 HOVIdr enthe corridor 4 / MF/dir from SR-6010 Indian Tn14 Tr, 1-215 to SD County Line 6 HOV OIC S 415NV SR-60 8 S 1-15/N I-215 $3 438 992 14 47 New Corridor SR-60/32151C SR-30A-101C CETAP. construct new corridor 2 MF/dir - $2,877,6411 7.2o 22 I-15 415/SR-911C Indian Truk Trai Add HOV/dr(1 HOV/3 MF) 51,880.054 7.3 24 1-15 Indan Truck Trail Bundy Canyon Rd Add 1 HOV/dir(1 HOV/3 MF) $1,804,431 7.2 h 23 1-15 I-15/SR-911C Indian Truck Trai Add 1 FIOV and 1 MF/dr(1 HOV/4 MF) $1,687,459 /.5 h 27 1-15 1-1511-215 IC SD County line Add 1 HOV 8 1 l3F (1 HOVl5 MF) 8 HOV WC S 1-15011-215 $1,490,302 5.3 h 13 1-215 Box Springs Rd 4/56-2151C Add 1 HOV/drwith a CVC W I-215 8 S 1-215 _ 51,450,056 7.5 o 28 1-15 1-15A-2151C SO Crony Line Add 1 HOVIdr (1 HOV/4 MF) $1,402,701 G.la 14 1-215 Eucatyphis Ave Nuevo Rd Add 1 HOV/dr(1 MOMS MF) $1,320,377 7.4 25 1-15 Bundy Canyon Rd 1-1511-215 IC Add 1 HOV/dir (1 HOV/3 MF) 51,267,500 6.3a 12 I-215 Eucalyptus Ave 1-15A-2151C Add HOV/dir $1,234,752 7.1 h 27 F15 SB Courtly Line 315/SR-91 IC Add 1 HOV and 1 MF per6' (1 HOV/4 MF) 6 HOV D/C S 4151W SR-60 51,048,833 7.1.3 20 1-15 SB County Line 315/3R-91 IC Add 1 HOV/dir (1 HOV/3 MF) 3702,263 6.1 h 15 1-215 Box Springs Rd Nuevo Rd Add 1 HOW& (1 HOV/3 MF) a O/C W 1215 a S 1-215 $661,252 I I.3 33 SR-79 Ramona EaprGiknan Spgs Rd Domenigoni Pkwy/SR-79 Resign/widen to 2 MF/dir $504,065 11.2 35 SR-79 Florida Ave (SR-74) Domengoni Pkwy/SR-79 Rea ignMiden b2 MF/dir 1361,472 5.2 16 1-215 Nuevo Rd Scott Rd Add 1 HOV/dr(1 1-10V2 MF) 5175,309 211 7 1-15ISR-911C SR-91 a1 MaiMincoln 145/SR-911C Add coaeclondshibutor system each direction 5139,819 11.1 34 - SR-79 Ramona Who/Gilman Spgs Rd Florida Ave(SR-74) Reakgnbiden to 2 MF/dir $115,103 15a 48 SR-74 Riverside County Orange Courtly Construct newcorridor 2 MF/dir 574,882 13 17 1-215 Scott Rd 1-15/1-2151C Add 1 HOWdir(1 HOV2 MF) 556./84 8 b 29 1-10 SB County Line I-10/SR-60 IC Add 1 HOV/dk (/ HOV/3 MF) 553,768 5.1 26 1-10 SB County Line 1-10/SR60 IC Add EB truck eambing lane (EB Truk Lane/3 MF) 544,939 3 8 SR-71/SR-91 IC Re-afign EB SR-91 to NB SR-71 loop connector - 535.540 12, la 38 7215 Newport Rd 315/1-2151C New CETAP Corridor, add 1 MF/dir(3 MF) $18,065 3 30 1-10/SR-601C Add D/C: WB 1-10 to WB SR-60, El3 1-10 to WB SR-60 truck bypass EB 1-10 and EB SR-60 $4,543 j.1 3 SR91 OC/RC Line Serlas Club Dr Add 1 MF/dr(1-2 HOV/6 MF EB, 1 HOV/6 MF WB) -$3,790 12-2a3 43 I-215 I-15/1215 IC Route 79 South - New CETAP Corridor, add l additional MF/dr(6 MF) -$21,165 T 9 SR-71 SR-71/SR91 IC SBCounty Lino Add 1 HOV/dr(1 HOV2 MF) -530,620 12.2d 42 $215 1-1511-215 IC Route 79 South New CETAP Corridor, add 1 MF/dir (5 MF) -544.776 5a 10 7215 SR-60/ER-91/1-2151C SD.County line Add 1 HOV and 1 MF/dtr(1 HOVl4 MF) 444,964 12.0a 38 1-215 Newport Rd Raub 79 SouOd-151C New CETAP Corridor, add 2 MFldr 469,342 27 6 1-15/SR-91 IC SR-91 al MaiM irrnkr 1-15/SR-91 IC Add HOV WC S 1-15M! SR-91 -599,379 -.. 11 SR-60 8 6215 SR-60/SR-91A-2151C SB County Line Add 1 HOV and 1 MFldn (1 HOV/4 MF)8 Non-HOV D/C W SRfiO/N I-215 4170,113 12. r h 40 1-215 Nuevo Rd 1-154-2151C New CETAP Corridor, add 1 MF/dr (3 MF) -$197,439 1.2 4 SR-91 Serbs Club Or 1-15 Add 1 NF/dr (1 HOV/5 MF) -5200,821 12.1 a:r 39 1-215 Newport Rd 1-15A-2151C New CETAP Corridor, add 1 addl0wlal MF/dr (4 MF) 4219,802 1.3 5 SR-91 145 Pierce St Add 1 MF/Br (1 HOVMS MF) -$234,498 12.1 h C 41 ' 1215 Nuevo Rd 1-15/1-2151C New CETAP Corridor, add 1 add6onal MF/dr (4 MF) 4300,175 12 a 31 SR-60 Redonda Blvd- I-10SR-60 IC Add EB truck crumbing lane (EB Truck lane/2 MF) 4339,545 12 C h 37 1-215 Nuevo Rd Route 79 SoueN-151C New CETAP Corridor, add 2 MF/dir -$364,271 13.2 46 . MCP 1-215 145 CETAP: realign/widen born t to 2 MF/dir 4417.788 7.O 2 SR-91 OCJRC Line Pierce St Add / MF/dir -456,477 13.1 45 MCP SR-79 1-215 CETAP: naliplMiden from 1 to MF/dir -$550,230 1 C b 32 SR-60. Redlands Blvd. 1-10/SR40 IC Add 1 HOV/de (1 HOV/2 MF) 4782.993 13.0 44 MCP SR-79 1-15 CETAP. rea9gnANden from 1 to 2 MF/dir -81206,736 15h 49 3R-9/ SR91/315 IC SR-91/SR-2411C Add 2 MR& 41,301,063 15C 52 MIS Cajaleo Will-151C SR-133/SR-2411C Construct new corridor 2 Whir gunnel) 41,785.846 15c 50 SR-91 SR91A-151C SR-91/SR-2411C New Condor A - 2 MF/dk 42,118$02 15P .53 MIS Cajalco RdA-151C SR-133/SR-2411C Construct new corridor 3 31F7c5rgunnen 42,700,545 15d 51 SR-91 SR-91/145IC SR91/SR-241-IC New Corridor A-3 MF/dir 42,916,902 ores: Total lacaiy lane ape ea are per drechon: (1140V1361F).1 HOV lane 8 3 MF lanes per dreedon O/C: Direct Connector -ve indicates cost Attachment 2009 Measure Qualitative Evaluation 9 A Projects Ranking Qualitative Ranking (0 thru- 6, with 5 being beat for the Category being evaluated) Run . Project Route From To Improvement Opportunistic timing from other edema! forces Environmental ehallanges Nat have not been • addressed Need to protect Right of Way External funding available specific to project Tune required to get the project reedy to advertise Safety Total Qualitative Score . No Benefit (0) Significant Remaining issues (0) Improvement inside current Stale ROW (0) No External Funding currently Available (0) >90 years =0 <10 years = 1 Already considered (0) Some Benefit (1.4) Some Remaining Issues (1-4) Some ROW will be required (1-4) Some Funding Available (1.4) <8 years = 2 � years = 3 <4 years = 4 Some Additional Improvement (1-41 Significant Benefit (5) No Issues (5) New Corridor (5) SlgN ibant Funding is available (5) <2 years = 5 Major Improvent not considered (5) 2 1 91 Orange County Une Pierre St, Riverside Add one (1) MF Lane ea dir 5 3 0 0 4 0 12 3 1.1 91 Orange County Line Serfas Club Dr Add one (1) MF Lane ea dir 5 3 0 0 4 0 12 4 1.2 91 Serfas Club Dr 91/1-15 Interchange Add one (1) MF Lane ea dir 5 3 0 0 4 0 12 5 1,3 91 91/1.15 Interchange Pierce St, Riverside Add one (1) MF Lana ea dir 5 3 0 0 4 0 12 6 2a 91 Main St 91/1-15 Interchange Add HOV Connector from N8 1.15 to WB R191 3 3 1 0 4 0 11 7 2b 91 Main St 91/1.15 Interchange Add Collector -Distributor System ea dir 3 3 1 0 4 0 11 8 3 71/91 Re -Align EB rt91 to NB Rt71 Loop Connector 2 5 0 0 4 0 11 9 4 71 Rt71/Rt91 Interchange San Bernardino Cnty Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 1 3 3 0 3 0 10 10 5a 60/91/1215 60/91/1215 Interchange San Bernardino Cnty Add one (1) MF & one (1) NOV Lane ea dir 5 1 4 0 1 0 11 11 5b 60/91/1215 60/91/1215 Interchange San Bernardino Cnty 5a+Add EB Rt60 to NB 1215 Connector 5 1 4 0 1 0 11 12 6a 1215 Eucalyptus Ave 1215/115 interchange Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 4 3 1 0 3 0 11 13 6b 1215 Box Springs Rd 1215/115 Interchange Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 4 3 1 0 3 0 11 14 6.1a 1215 Eucalyptus Ave Nuevo Rd Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 4 2 0 0 4 0 10 15 6.1 b 1215 Box Springs Rd Nuevo Rd Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 4 4 0 0 2 0 10 16 6.2 1215 Nuevo Rd Scocott Rd Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 4 2 3 0 2 0 11 17 6.3 1215 Scott Rd 1215/115 Interchange Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 4 4 0 0 4 0 12 18 7a 115 San Bernardino Cnty San Diego Cnty Line Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 3 • 4 0 0 4 0 11 19 7b 115 San Bernardino Cnty San Di o Cnty Line Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir, Add one (1) MF Lane ea dir for Segments 7.1, 7.2 & 7.5 3 4 0 0 4 0 11 20 7.1 a 115 San Bernardino Cnty 91/1.15 Interchange Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 3 4 0 0 4 0 11 21 7.1 b 115 San Bemardino Cnty 9111-15 Interchange Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir, Add one (1 j MF Lane ea dir for Segments 7.1, 7.2 & 7.5 3 4 0 0 4 0 11 - 22 7.2a 115 91/1-15 Interchange Indian Truck Trail Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 3 4 0 0 4 0 11 23 7.2b 115 91/1-15 Interchange Indian Truck Trail Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir, Add one (1) MF Lane ea dir for Segments 7.1, 7.2 & 7.5 3 4 0 0 4 0 11 24 7.3 115 Indian Truck Trail Bundy Canyon Rd Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 3 4 0 0 4 0 11 25 7.4 115 Bundy Canyon Rd 1215/115 Interchange Add one (1) NOV Lane ea dir 3 4 0 0 4 0 11 Page 1 of 2 • " " " Attachment 2009 Measure " Qualitative Evaluation 9 A Projects Ranking Qualitative Ranking (0 thru 6, with 6 being besSfor the Category being evaluated) Run Project Route From To improvement Opportunistic timing from other external forces challenges Environmental have not been addressed Need to protect. Right of Way External funthat dingget available specific to project The d to the project ready to advertise Safety Total Qualitative Score 26 7.5a 115 1215/115 Interchange San Diego Cnty Une Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 3 4 0 0 4 0 11 27 7.5b 115 1215/115 Interchange San Diego Cnty Line AdLane ed ona de (1)irfor HOV LaneSegments ea7ii 7.2 tlr, Adtl 6 one7.5 (1) MF 3 4 0 0 4 0 11 26 8a 110 San Bernardino Cnty 60/110 interchange Add EIS Truck Climbing Lane 4 3 0 0 3 0 10 29 8b 110 San Bernardino Cnty 60/110 Interchange Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 0 4 0 0 3 0 7 30 9 60/110. Improve R160/1101merchange 2 0 5 0 0 0 7 31 10a 60 Redlands Blvd 60/110 Interchange Add EB Truck Climbing Lane 0 2 5 0 2 0 9 32 10b 60 Redlands BNd 60/110 Interchange Add one (1) HOV Lane ea dir 0 2 5 0 2 0 9 33 11 79 Rt79/Ramona Envy Rt79/Domenigoni Pkwy RealignrWiden to two (2) MF Lanes ea dir 5 3 5 2 4 4 23 34 11.1 79 Rt79/Ramona Exwy Florida Ave 5 3 5 2 4 4 23 35 11.2 79 Florida Ave Rt79/Domenigoni Pkwy 5 3 5 2 4 4 23 36 12a 1215 Newport Rd 798/115 Interchange Add two (2) MF Lanes ea dir 3 2 1 0 2 0 5 37 12b 1215 Nuevo Rd 796/115 Interchange Add two (2) MF Lanes ea dir 3 2 2 0 2 0 9 38 12.1a 1215 Newport Rd 1215/115 interchange Add one (1) MF Lanes ea dir 3 3 2 0 4 0 12 39 12.1aa 1215 Newport Rd 1215/115 Interchange Add one (1) MF Lanes ea dir (Additional Lane) 3 3 2 0 2 0 10 40 12.1 b 1215 Nuevo Rd 1215/115 Interchange Add one (1) MF Lanes ea dir 3 2 3 0 2 0 10 41 12.1bb 1215 Nuevo Rd 1215/115 Interchange Add one (1) MF Lanes ea dir (Additional Lane) 3 2 3 0 2 0 10 42 12.2a 115 1215/115 Interchange 793/115 Interchange Add one (1) MF Lanes ea dir 3 2 0 0 4 0 9 43 122aa 115 1215/115 Interchange 7931115 Interchange Add one (1) MF Lanes ea dir (Additional Lane) 3 2 0 0 4 0 9 44 13 MCP Rt79/Ramona Exwy 1.15 RealignMAden to two (2) MF Lanes ea dir 5 3 5 2 4 4 23 45 13.1 MCP RI79/Ramona Exwy 1215 Realign/vMden to two (2) MF Lanes ea dir 5 3 5 3 4 4 24 46 13.2 MCP 1215 115 RealignANden to two (2) MF Lanes ea dir 5 3 5 0 4 4 - 21 47 14 MVSB 60/1215 Interchange 30/110 Interchange Construct New Corridor 2 MF Lanes ea dir 0 0 5 0 0 3 a 48 /5a 74 Riverside Cnty Orange Cnty Realign/Wden to two (2) MF Lanes ea dir 0 0 5 0 0 5 10 49 15b 91 91/115 Interchange 91/241 Interchange Add two (2) MF Lanes ea dir 4 2 5 0 0 0 11 50 150 91 91/I15 Interchange 91/241 Interchange New Corridor A - Two (2) MF Lanes ea dir 5 0 5 0 2 0 12 51 15d 91 91/115 Interchange 91/241 Interchange New Corridor A - Two (3) MF Lanes ea dir 4 0 5 0 2 0 11 52 15e MIS Cajaleo/115 Interchange Rt133/Rt241 IC Construct New Corridor 6 (4 lanes) 4 0 3 0 0 0 7 53 15( MIS Cajalco/115 Interchange Rt133/Rt241 IC Construct New Corridor B (6 lanes) 3 0 3 0 0 0 8 Page 2 of 2 Z Lo L e6ed a 000'000'09LS b 4 L 9 Z 9 Mold No01ueu1ousim eAV epyold OL Z'IL 9£ Z'0 000'000'09L9 tr tr L 9. Z 9 enV eP9ou Aneg BOOUIea/11L1Ld 61 14I 4£ 4'0 - 000'000'099'L£ 9 4 L 9 Z 9 ep ee Baum die(Z) one a uepywu6ees8 Amid No6Newoal6L181 Moc36uounliV6L121 BL ILL EE 9'0• 000'00VLZZS 0 Z 0 9 L E np es euel AOH (L) euo Pptl D6ueLlolelu1 OLV09 Pn18 ePuelpetl 09 QOL ZE 4'0 000'0001,1LS 0 Z 0 9 £ E suet 6upueo Mo1ul 83 PPtl e6ueutualul OLW9 PAS SPLIMeid 09 BOL LE LO 000'000'56L6 0 0 0 S 0 E efiueeaelul 0LV09RI en01due OLV09 6 OE 6' L 000'000'99ZS 0 £ 0 0 4 0 "0 es our AOH (1.1 euo PPV glum/Peel! 01V09 410 ouNUewee ueS OLI QB ELL L'4 000000'LPS 0 E 0, 0 4 4 our 6ulew110Mon+183RV e6ue401e1U1OLV09 A1u0oulWeweeueS CHI e9 9Z Z4 000'0001,926 0 4 0 0 4 E 5 L H ZC.'LIew 8e 6uel 'L 6$o9S 101111) (I) Quo PPV'SP ea Duel AOH (1) euo PPV w eu1l AL0006e10 S 9OUR MLUI 914/91ZI 9L1 Q9'L adie Z'L 000'000'ZEIS 0 4 0 0 4 E ep ee euel AOH(L) euo ppV eun Au006010 U9S e611eL4:1e1U19 LYSLZI 9L1 e51 9Z 6L 000'000'669 0 4 0 0 4 E ep ee eusl AOH(L) euo ppV esueuaem 9LVOLZI Pid LlauaO 41118 5LI 4'L SZ 6'P 000000' LLZS 0 tr 0 0 4 £ np ee our AOH (L) eu04PV PLI uoAusO APunB NM. Mehl uelPel 911 £'L 4Z 9'9 000'000'EOZS 0 4 0 0 4 E S'L'BZY'L'Gsluew0e 1ip ea ouremu ale IL) euo pptl'1!P ee Duel AOH OH (L) euo PPV Morin mom e6ueuaeNl9t•V16 9LI QZ'L EZ L'L 000'00016L3 0 4 0 0 4 £ 1lp ee aril AOH (L) euo PPV Nell rm.'. MN' dueLLae1u19L-VL6 91I BZ'G ZZ L'4 000'000'4ZES 0 tr 0 0 4 £ S'uo ppy'peeerAOH1 )De Duel dW I L) euo Pptl 7!p ee even AOH (U euo PPtl Q6lseaeNl 9L-UL6 Auo oulPlewee ueS 9LI QV/ LZ 4'4 oo0'0oo'B9Le 0 4 0 0 4 £ 11p ee suel AOH WOW pptl e6ueVaelul 9141.6 ALIO oull lewell ueS 9LI BL'L OZ 9'£ 000'000$L 1;a 0 4 0 0 4 £ S'L 9 Z'L' to Q1u our A H pip(t) De curl AN (U Quo PPV '1!p se even AOH (L) eu0 PPV sun AWO oes10 ueS 00 othe eweS ueS 9LI QC BL L4 000'000'6Ln 0 4 0 0 4 E 80 ee euel AOH (L) euo Pptl Bull Amp 06e10 ueS Am ousuewes ueS 9LI eL 9 L L'E 000'000'99S 0 tr 0 0 4 4 1@ se Duel AOH (L) euo PPtl B6ueW1B1u1911/9al lod AooS 9LZI £'9 LI a 000'000'LL3 0 Z 0 £ Z 4 -0P ee cruel AOH(t)suo PPtl P21 I100S Ptl0890N 9LZI Z'9 9L 6'9 000'000'1.M 0 Z 0 0 4 4 11P ee euel AOH (Lleuo PPtl P210nenN p81e094$808 9LZI QLs 9L 0'L L Ooob00'ZeS o 4 0 0 Z 9 nP se cruel AOH (L) euo PPV Pii 0AseN enV e1110Aleon3 9LZI ep9 PL 9'1, oo0'000'£BZ5 0 £ 0 L E 9 lip ee even AOH(L)euo pptl 86umpelu15LV9LZl Ptl 1641819 xo13 9LZI Q9 Cl 4'4 000'000'99ZS 0 E 0 L £ 4 eP 90 even AOH (L) eu0 PPtl e6ueLlaelu19;IS tZ1 QnV eMdAeon3 9LZI 89 ZL 4'0 000'o00'L96Y o 0 0 S 0 9 loloeuuo09 LL18N o1091893 ow+ e9 Auo ou!plewes ueS e6uego1elu194ZVL&099LZVLBI09 Q9 LL 6'0 000'000'Z99S 0 0 0 S 0 9 1ne ee euel AOH f t) euo V dW WOW PPV 41u0 oulpenugs ueS seue4Plelul S LZ146I09 9LZVL6109 Dq 01. Z0- 000'030'699 0 E 0 £ £ L ep ee awn AOH (L) eve PPV Aua oulWewe9 ueS e6ueyaeWl 1.6121/LLIa LL b 6 E'E 000'000'2LS 0 4 0 -0 9 L JMoeuuo0 6001 LL12i 8N of WU 83 u611Y-08 L6IIL E 9 Z'1 000'000'Z9S 0 V 0 0 £ Z ep ee muds lolncess10.1openoo PpV e6ueuaelul 91.-1/16 19 u1eW L6 QZ L 40 000'000'6ZZ£ 0 P 0 0 £ Z 1.618 8M 0191-I SN waspoloeuuo0 AOH PPV e6ueVo1eWl 91-1/1.6 IS uPW L6 eZ 9 L' L 000'0001346 0 V 0 0 £ 4 ep ee euel dW (1)8u0 PPY ePlelenl>d'is wield e6ueiguelUI 91.11.6 1.6 E' L 9 4Z 000'000'1M 0 tr 0 0 £ 4 11P se euel dW (0 euo PPV e6ueLKuelul 91-1/1.6 10 Q010 sepeS 1.6 3'1 4 9'2 000'000' L tit 0 4 0 0 E 9 -HP ee euel dW (L) euo OW 10 QnIO BspeS Bull Au4100 QeuwO Le L' L E Z'£ o00'o00'66Z£ 0 4 0 0 £ 4 ep ee sue" dW (0 euo Pptl OPPLee*1 lS eoueld eon A11000 aeus10 16 L Z ONeN 1sNJ p0eue8 (S 900Z1 iso0 70efad Atal'eS esplenpe 01 APe91 1oe(ad e41 Leh el Peenbel emu, Par' 01 oppeds mcgmene BulPunl Rumpsleluewu011nu3 Amu. Rona pelad w p6eN pessepppe uee9 Lou BAIN ptLQ se6uel1ey0 se014lewel" ,eu10 wan SUMO oNSlunu0dd0 Luewenadwl . 01 wad elnob 10a(ad una epe1P0 u penpus eas (g nog 0) 6uplue8'Apemen° . IepoW uogroodsuell BLOZ /sep,;o Rlewwng 600Z Oupluea uonenlen3 ennemenp pus sllnseli 4geue9 f woo saoejold V eansaeW 01, woul4osny Z to Z eeed CO- 000'000'0L9'96 0 0 0 S 0 £ (sou el 9) 9Joe LuoO raeN iorulsuo0 01 LemegCL18 eBuey01elu19LV0alefe0 SUN AL CS 0'0 000'000'098'9S 0 0 0 S 0 4 (seam 4) 91opw00 rash Lonesu00 01 Lymuc6lla setnryagul SLV001efe0 SIW eSl ZS L'l4 000'000'0Z0'£S 0 Z 0 9 0 4 np ee sear' 811 (£) Oral - 4 capas* meN etlueyaelul Lazne a8ueuuJelul 91416 L6 PSL LS 0'0 000'000'0ZL'ZS 0 Z 0 S 0 S np Be sour op(Z) oral -y.1opwaOmeN oeueyaslul 1.44./L8 OBUel Soelul SLULB L8 aSl OS L'0 000'000'099S 0 0 0 S 0 4 np ee sear joy (Z) om1 WY eBUeyeaLUl LbULe eBu6Uo1a1111911IL8 l8 09L 84 L'0 000'000'0Z4'66 S 0 0 S 0 0 16) as saur jyy (Z) omt of uspyyyu86eea • AL* dm° lyLO aplslenla 41 eSl 94 OZ 000'000'005'LS C 0 0 9 0 0 qP ae sauei dW Z l0Plu00 meN 3oMsuoO seuegolelul 01.1/0C a0ueyaeml 9LZ1109 bl L4 0'0 000'00016816 4 S 0 9 L S np ea seuei j4y(Z) oml ea uepyydu011eea &LI SLLI slOIN Z'CL 94 9'0 000'000'LOCLS 4 5 6 9 C S AP ee ssuei del (Z) ON 01 uepwau611eea SIZI dm13 euowey}8L8d slOIN VC S4 9'0 000'O00'960'£S 4 9 Z S Z S ep es seue7 jW (Z) oral of uepWuuBeese SL•1 too3 euowea/8Lla dOW CI 44 L'C Oootoo'84S 0 b 0 0 Z E (eue'i leuo!eppv)cp es sown jyq(L) eUo ppy e8ueyaslu1914s8L eaueyaelul SLINLZI SW eaZ'ZL C4 Z'0 000'000'SSS 0 4 0 0 Z 4 np ee seuel jyq Wow ppy 081.1eUcrslul 9LUSeL 00ueyaelul SLVSLZI SLI ern Z4 Sr 000'000'LS14 0 Z 0 C Z E (earl leuaeapy)np ea sauel jW (1) e00 ppy eOueUOJelul SLI/SLZI PLI OnenN SLZI PO l'ZL L4 L'L 000'000'00Z6 0 Z 0 C Z 4 np ea sour ALAI (L) euo ppy Owe -Jowl S LUS LZI Pa onanN SIZI gLZL O4 C'0- 000'000'69$ 0 Z 0 Z Z E (0uei leuo!ePPV) nP ea sour jpl(t) auo ppy e8uey0JeluI SLAM LZ1 Pa UodmeN SLZI ee L'ZL 8£ 0'1. 000'0001 LLS 0 b 0 L Z 4 1lp ea seuei R.;(L) auo ppy eaueyolelul S Leg al Pa liclONN &LZI Sal. 96 0' L 000'0001Lbe 0 Z 0 Z Z 4 JP ee seuel jyy (Z) ON ppy e01Jeg01e1u1 SLUS6L Pa OnenN SLZI sILL LC L'L 000'000'60es 0 Z 0 L Z 4 up ea sauei jyy(Z)omi ppy e8uetP1eW1SLUS8L Pa UodmeN SLZI eZL 96 011sa lso0 NJaue9 (S 900Z) Lso0l0efad ANTS eslueroe of �(Pea1 loafed 041 PB of pellnba eau poked of p9Loede elgellene &„„„r4 m�� Lam' p ly6la 10elad of PseN posse ppe ueeq Lou eneU lays seatiogeLp leluewualnu3 sacral ieulepce �atpo wa}Buiwry Orys!unuodd0 Iuewenadwl of aolj elnoa Loefad una epoLuo uoryen!en3 oos(& nlyl 0) 8upluea *apemen° • lepoW uopeyodeuell 91.0Z }eeA;o A1ewLung 600Z Bullluea uol;enlen3 en13E4llenp pug sunsea;aeue8-/;zoo s;oe(ad y wnseeW OL;uewyomy • • " i.ebed " 61H1sinitutueooat vet faulturtS "team t ttt tt Ytttttt Yl YAtt old " woman tvw 410 sus Aen 1 Jt+ ,en 40A I PeP SZ10t 9Z/9 410 *ealArm) poloa[ lolverst I x9iiriav(AmlasA Liketie Mike Pori *WS elatitual3 tell Of C eV* PA_ _ 90/L.ZJ9 Qeryr fientraegrainfa LOI1= PeN1 LO/9Z2 een LOAZO PA 90/�ZA)t LOME,win ....._..__Waft_Poll LO/6L/1.tPA....._ 90/148Pj..... LOP/1 uoW LO/ZZ/4 90^1 L06L11 PA 90/e7/01 PeW 90/0'1/11. PA 9019749 PA 90/�741 !!!VI._. 0174i uoW ..._.. 9010710L. P9 SOWS WIN 1e11addll sepipausoo P tea lepueul3 e i toold PrAwddY seetft=990 V044 179 tt pmaiddt/ mums.*soH pb oclionnintlid Peloid ldi/ topptauto *PH PMI oy r See d W>�� Jo# stioeePuauu nola . .... _'I1?e ' P "d1V sePPIPmat PP/I P1l Lot;srrl�� eas��le>'��O �� 90(F; % vaW 90/EUOL vow MAIM pwe 1000111 le i=add{/ filatustuoti 00}/.rtv 9CGOVO1 PA 90/9/i u0n 8111AtesN'Netta eArtaltWeid`PuybullePoVi WW1 9GfLZ2l PA_. 90/9Z/9',!>oW ----_.. .._ . seletw� Pe(aualaole/rea 90197.79 uoiN .. 90197./8 Pen 90IEZ/9 PA 90/LZR tiaV11 9011/6 PA 901121E tfon peacuddw wetwuswoo wen pw Pe rri e4 01 won caemil. 'kicipettoosocrabm x��la Oa ��z Z La as SL L�� 91 91 91 8L LL 01 6 9 L 9 9 4 6 Z L 4.9uli WAS a+ieN ��l dl bk iwetutiolinV Opipeir4 Autumns weld /Uenllea 11A 01 V euneeeyy 600Z xD/e slilaua8 }aaf. aanseaW 600Z wal! apua6e auk o; patios}fie auk ui algsfiana aaa sluaw6as138foad pua suogepenloafoad paaaplsuooJain° au;sl!nsaa Jul lo!!aq &meow eta u paposap sloafoad auk Aluo aoi uogaluasaad s!u ui unnous aaa s!s/C!eua anise;Deno pua anlielgusno auk (Bog jo s lnsaa JunAmie!o pua I( piclua!saoj /uopa ao ka iaaanas isuie6a ioafoad pea o luauassassa eNioafgns auk Onaigi pau!aigo — °Nie en° loafoad uoea o 6uppow pape ap u6noagi pauieigo — aNieiguano :sepo681s3 onn olu! pa;aasdas uaaq anew sweuag laa foal 31321 , , swaua8 ioafoad sarjaua8 loafoad b aanseaw 600Z UbOU ' s}ijaua8loaf° . d'aanseaW 600z .slaafoad d °inseaW 600Z Nil jo gasa aoj sung lapow Isnpygui a � 6uRuopad olaopd palspmsn pue palsaglleo Senn lapow eta 'S 1OZ ilea a ICq aoeld-ui aq palsdpgue aas;Big uaa s/Cs Aemg6N iepapa aofaua pua Aemeaal Alunoo aplsaaAN aye sapnloul Iapow 1Nb130 041 .Alunoo apisaanN walsam Joj suompuoa aupssq 510Z asaii auk aanldaa paouaqua sem (INV100). LapoiAl sIsAieub uogepodsueiu Alunoo a6uaap eq.]. mod paloaaa sane lapoiN aupse8 g1,OZ JeGA auk moH �� 'anJti 9h00 90 sigaua81aafaad d aanseaW :600Z palanea} smog 913iyaA �% paianeal saiiva 013iu0A �% awn, pneal iSOI) aoinaaS J0 lanai AP,IPej . (lad) Afiea aEseaand �% :una yea ao�� ei.ep 6uinnoa4l pa;einqel sung lapow 1/11b'130 aul oiod ,` paanide� sem Elea ieLIAA v>aanseaW 600Z ($) uogonpaa luappoe lo anleA ($) sfiuines lueltmod Jie anleA ($) s6uines uogdwnsuo3 A6aaua anieA ($) s6uines aouelsip anleA ($) s6uines am/ 40 anleA senn elep 6uptoliol 341 pue una lapow oupsaq eta of pai edwoa ssnn una lapow urea wail pau!elgo alep au1 310-t . l<� 9v00 90 paaapisuoo aaann sij jaua8 Taunt smieuag pefoad d aanseaW 600z sawn kepuow Tuapioae 09-leO s6uines uogonpaN luappoy sa ea (08-16.0) loo} Tpuaq-isoa sueajleO 00 `00A `xO N `0 all d • seuines suo!sspialuelnflod aid (900Z `dO) uolle5/61:ES • s6u nes uoRdwnsuo3 ABieu3 �SIW 00-O�1) anoniont.$ panes ami 40 anleA (SIW oo-oH) eglijovo panes aaueism jo amen 313d. 31321 9bpb 'op ueds a id ae0A-9Z e anal paLLInsse aaann sTg.auaq pafoad iijauaq poi aui 185 painw aaam sauobeiea fiiauaq pezilenuue sem Tgauaq uoe] goafoad pea ao j pale no eo ijjeua8 ���0.1 soAA moH queues pa• foad d aanseaW 600Z 'uomsej. aafims a ui pauwialap aaann sparoad Jaglo �o ogeN lso3 plauas au} paaedwo uagAik ICppel auk j.o amen jo uoneo pui ue si;oafoad eaoj ogeN lsoo wawa situ •lsos IC "noel aul Isuia6e_ paaedwoo aaann ICagl `Aoueloadxa asaA Sz pawnssa auk a01 patijwia;ap 0.10M sieuas 841 Jelly Bb00 9D o!TeH Tsoo of y.aua8 3-Nja9 • ri sijoua8 43afoad y amseaW 600Z s5uinas uoRonpaH ivaploobanlen lenuub sbuinas welnllod aid to anleA lanuuy . s5uineS uo4dwnsuo0 lau] pazllanuud • i aua8 sewer awa pazilenuuy • lilaua8le101 pazllenuud Nolaq pals!' sf!iauaq jo ll saapisuoa sq) o!Te l lso0 01 iolaua8 :;3afoad_ urea aoi palaino e3 swaua8 AaN gin jo pea uo papos s��nsaa angemuenb Aeidsip soRideab 6u nnoiloj aql mod woo en sijnsaH angC',vueno jo kiewwns smjaua8 pa(oad y amsean 600z den uoileool loafo- d aanseeN 600Z iro° r t_ov Z'O› s 9'0-Z'Oism Z•9'0 4' 4 Z Vim mom Buivea opsa zsoo vauag puaBai � a, , �1d d slijaua8 paload y anseeN 600z �r onej isoo Tgaua8 palueH speraid sigaua8 pafoad b aanseen 600Z Ot mom 000'000'03.01 sum 000'000Trn - 000'000'0 3 000'000'00 LS - 000'000'ort OZE1110 000'000'001� enieA ienuuy Buplueb u}auag �eiol pueBel 11 31.3t1 sl!Jau081300 . b aanseallg 600Z 000'00V94 > OM= ooa'aoo'azs - 000'009'8s s 000'000.014 000'000'ozs 000'aoa'oo000'000'ors® 000'000'003 < mmmo swam tenuud BulNued sButnes awl pueBei ,013d , ffieua9 s5uinas awa palueH spefaad " 9P00 no 000'000'ZS " x. ammo OS - 000'000'n- " smina 000'000' LS - 0S 000'000'0l S - 000'000' lS sane 000'000'0LS <nnr swains !entail', Buplue��{ sBulnes eounsla pueBan Lt oioal eua9 sewes apualsia pe)lueH sioafa i ALP: 4461ia8 bbrds , d biri§tbiN 600Z 000'000' LS e� 000'000-ES - 000'000' IS mom» 000`00011.000'000'ES 000`000'LS - 000'000't$IMMO 000'000'1.1 <� moues lertuuy Bullueb sBulnes Atimu3 pueBei a@4 9tU0 `i0 :!; 313a., ijjeuag sbuines .0,1°u-A Aq pa�uase:1 speraad i "��A� 96 000.009-Sr ammo 000'09-$ • 000'0091 OS - 000'09-S 000'000'tS - OS sima• 000'000'LS<� moues ienuu+y Buptuea uoitonpaa iuMnllod puesai f�.mod. 1 91+On 90 s'114a00815afoad b aanseaIA1-600Z- 11.401.108 uoijonpe Tuermod paluesparaid. 000'000' ki> 11111111.1. OS - 000'000' LS- MEM 000'000' LS - OS 000'000'0LS - 000'00D' L$ amillw 000'000'0LS<mom smeueg lenuuy Bupluea uolponpati lueppoy puaBsi mod . splau08 Pafoad y aanseaW 600Z fijoua9 uo!Tonpo wappay spa.foad " aaquaanoN ui spuoq uogelaodsuea au} jo e6essed Inissaoons atn au) 6ugsnfpe se Lions suompuo Buibuego o�� a elde a ue a va Buia se annayt si Bupoos ani e i enb a Iq p p Iq. I�� . q p .�� ��.I ul woos aayfi!u = Tgauaq i(Taies euo! i e s!sA eu an! e i uen a u! assay e ou senss! i(a e . I b ��_ ��.�� �� y�� p pp �� �� �� S aaoos as 16!y = auip ssal :aspanpe i(peaa Toefoad NT Taff of paa!nbaa awa . aaogs aa= oWgads Taafoad wow :ogpads pafoKI s! algel!ene bu!punj leuaalx] aaoas aaub!y paau Mpg isaleaa6 :item Jo Ty5!:1 911110aToad peoN woos aayb!y abuallayo leivauauoalnua bupewaa ssal :sabualleyo leTuawuoa!nu3 . WOOS JeL bly sloafoad aaoLu ao auo aaNlap of abenne! aaleaab :bulua!T o!islunTaocdp .euaiao 6ulnnolloj 91.1ao4 uogenlen3 e)D an eno aqn.o smnsaa auk azpeLutuns sai dea6 6upo o a slinseH en emend auk jo kiewwns 91,00 90 • r smug ;louse lup ILIOG IIIIMIND BUNUea oppnvoddp puaBal 310d ,, spjauag.patoad b aanseaW 600Z E f�� saoao,d leweixA JeLR0 woo j bu!wa o!TsiunTJoddo 9COo 5 sanssi 6u!uiewab lueotAu6ie imme s4ua ma- sanssi oN MIMI* Bupluea seauapeyo letuawuolinua puaBai sabualleu0 leTuauauoain iA 6u ie—uib� au nau slob -Rim Rb00 'i0 77••�N��N RINDS Paio . d aanseaW 600Z JOp111O3 McNi Bui�upa APZM 40 IOW PetOld o; paary puaBai �1��!„ AeAA lti5A Toe o1 paaN aM aau/A . 9bC0 90 wnsaa>ase MEM eKlelieAle 6uipund lueo6w6!91•=m, (pefoJd o; °Moods) algewzny Sumund lewa;x3 pueBal 5uplue (pafoad o owaads) alcieuend 5uipun j lauaalx3 ^nuo 0u` 031'i slgaua8 �aafo►�, d amseaw 600z slew( 01. mom slea(O6 > mom slea(g > sma(4 > meow slea( Z > ae espenpy o3 ApeeN toa(oid a4t tee et peainbed mu. puasal aswanpy .ol Apeaj peroad au1 Tee 01 pa rbe i quail 77��j17AJ PZ palaDpuoo Apee7ry mmai luewenoatlwl IeuoMPpd auuo5 i luawancvdwl leumppV awoS Wawa/maul leuolPppt+awo5 �s luawanaudwl leuolUPPd awoS MOINE ParaPPUO0 loN luawanoxlwl Joiew .mmia Ala}eS Pafoud pua6ai '+t (IO 00 s!si(ieuy aniimpeno au1 ui paaap suo0 Apea qv /oN sffieua9 fi a es pefoad leuoU PP`d s}ijaua8 }aafo d aanseaW 600Z .lenoadde pua ma!naa a01 e@p1 W00 aoH pV 0111 01 isH Alpopd 0u1)10eq buiaq gels Tuaaia . pua .sloaload b aanseaW 600Z NT in aaw) Alpo ad pasodoad aye ui apew aq wogs sluawisnfpa �Cua i auivaaalap euaipo uowniena anueuenb aui isuiebe uogeznpoud Tuelinsaa auk az!u Tnaos loaga siaafoad �o weaboad y aanseahl 600Z Gill ao.1 Ts!! uogezgpopd all us meisa o pasn leil!u! auk aq saanseaw Tsoo Tu.auaq angai!Tuenb auk ieql, uoRapuawwooaasjjeis gip anauoo :suope 6uinnonol alp wiopad o � s lump nnou aalliww00 spuewwooaa llelS 31.3d , 9b00 00 �aaaH WWI 09 ann oQ aaauM 2009 Measure A Delivery Plan 2009,-2019 6 • Presentation to the Public/Private ancing Delivery Plan Ad Hoc Committee ')er • • Why the Need for a Delivery Plan • Obtain consistent Commission direction • Address unprecedented growth and demand in Western Riverside County • Maximize historic funding opportunities • Act and deliver projects quickly Asmajor funding gaps • • • Today's Agenda • Present a plan of action Build — Environmental — Right of Way • Discuss development ment of recommendations • Outline the cost of the proposed actions ed build cost of $2 billion for prioritized Y fhe coons Development of Priority list • Updated cost data • Calculated congestion relief and other benefits —Quantitative analysis —Qualitative analysis • Considered deliverability hurdles • Assessed overall system requirements • Emphasized existing mobility issues • • Western County Delivery Plan Priority List through 2019 • Immediately pursue construction: — Interstate 215 — State Route 91 — Interstate 15 -- Interstate 10 • Pursue environmental clearance: Bi-county 1-215 project -- Mega projects: SR-79 realignment & Mid County • Parkway • Protect right of way for mega projects additional projects as -se • State Route 91 OC Line to Pierce, & Interchange Improvements at 71 & 1-1$ 91a Add LaneLs nfe rom Pie Street County ito rce 91b EIB Auxiliary Lane from OC Line to Serfas Club Drive 9 Conwiec:',71r Improvements ane pt Route 71 • • - , • f .e4if • I-15 'Improvements Route 60 to San Diego County 15A Add lanes from San Bernardino County to Route 91 15B Add lanes from Route 91 to ttidflan Truck Trail 15C trom Indian to Bundy A „ y 5, - • 1-215 Improvements Eucalyptus to 1-15 215a Box Springs Rd. to Nuevo Rd. (Add one Lane in each direction) 215b Nuevo Rd. to Scott Rd. (Add one (1) Lane in each direction) 215c Scott Rd• to 1-215/1-15 (Add one (1) Lane in each direction) ,,rornmendation: H.vistruct th„. 2 5c • I-10 Improvements Construct EIB Truck Climbing Lane 10 A San Bernardino County line to 6011-10 Interchange (Add EB truck climbing lane) Recommendation: Construct 10A • Identified Funding Sources • Measure A WC highway - 2009 through 2019 $ 486.2 million - 2019 through 2029 759.1 million - 2029 through 2039 1,084.8 million • State bond revenues • Public toll project revenues - Net revenues available for Measure A highway program • State and federal funding • Debt financing Priority Project Cost Implications Stage Project Build 1-215 Build SR-91 Build 1-15 Build 1-10 Cost (millions) $ 300 1,200 900 50 $ 2,450 Enviro 1-215 Bi-county $ 55 E nvi ro S R-79 39 Enviro MCP 31 $ 125 ROW SR-79/MCP $ 167 Priority Project Funding Assessment Stage Project Build 1-215 Build SR-91 Build 1-15 Build 1-10 Funding Sources Cost Measure State/ Toll Debt (millions) A Federal CMIA Financing TUMF Financing $ 300 \/ \I t t 1,200 \I \ t t f 900 4 4 +_ t ± 50 \/ \/ t $ 2,450 Enviro 1-215 Bi-county $ 55 \I \/ ± E mi ro S P ;r9 39 4 4 4 t Er virc V:P 31 4 4 4 f 25 v d t • • • Policy Considerations • Submittal of CMIA project nominations • Existence of toll roads in Riverside County • $500 million Measure A debt limitation — Excludes toll road financing — Possible ballot measure in November 2008 to increase lution of excess Measure A funds • CMIA Project Submittal Priority Description 1 SR-91 HOV lanes (downtown Riverside) 2 SR-91 E/B auxiliary lane (jointly with OCTA) 3 1-215 one additional mixed flow lane (1-15/1-215 to Nuevo) 4 1-215 from Nuevo to Box Springs 5 SR-710SR-91 collector roads and connector 6 1-15 from SR-91/I-15 to Indian Truck Trail, includes direct connector • • Toll Roads in Riverside County • Over and above Measure A program • Public or private or public/private? • Opportunities to build projects sooner on the 91 and I-15 • Need for legislative authority • HOV policy implications — HOV 2+ — HOV 3+ • " Today's actions  Approve project priorities for first 10 years of 2009 Measure A  Set policy direction on public toll roads in Riverside , County  Approve CMIA project submittal " Future actions  Propose new Measure A debt limitation  Consider proportionality issues  Complete freeway study " " AGENDA ITEM 12 COMMISSIONERS REPORT RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: • December 13 2006. TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Commissioner Frank West SOBJECT: Rail -Volution 2006 Conference BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The recent passage "of'Senate Bill 1234 requires a report ontripsthat are made by an elected official on behalfof a public agency. The purpose of this report is to provide information on the recently -completed Rail -Volution Conference in Chicago, Illinois that I attended during November 5 through November 8, 2006. On an annual basis the Rail -Volution Conference is held to address nearly every aspect of building livable communities with transit and Transit Oriented Development (TOD). In addition the conference had a number of mobile workshops that provided hands-on, real world learning about livability issues. The conference offered a mix of workshops developed for rail industry and community leaders. Some of the highlights, of the conference included sessions titled - "Rail -Volution 101 ", "What is Transit Oriented Development?" and "Master Developers and TOD". ATTENDEES: Frank West attended as an official for the Commission. Sheldon Peterson attended as Commission staff. WORKSHOPS. - There was a full assortment of workshops that directly related to Metrolink Commuter Rail operations or the development of the Perris Valley Line. The following list provides some examples; • What is Transit Oriented Development? • Changing the. TOD Cookie Cutter • Building Livable Cities • Sustainable Transport ToolBox • TOD Design Guidelines Agenda Item 12 234 This year's conference .provided very. usefulandtimeIrrinformation related to Metrolink and the Commission's commuter rail, operations. The opening 'session included comments from the new. U.S. Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters;' who reinforced her efforts to help streamline the New Starts process and continue support of transit as a fundamental .tool in congestion relief. The discussions regarding Transit Oriented Development {TOD} were helpful: to understand the relationshipbetween livable communities and the use of transit. In addition, we were able to participate in a couple of the mobile workshops, that provided opportunities to travel and see. the real world examples of TOD in action. The first was a trip on the CTA,; Red Line South to the Chinatown district that ,has emerged as a growing commercial and retail district. It was useful to see how the cultural and ethnic diversity is shaping the community and learn how ;transit opportunities are shaping development in this area. A second mobile workshop looked ;at the origins of early TOD in the Pullman Historic District. As part of this experience, we utilized the subway; city bus, and the Metra commuter rail to complete the trip'. During this tour, we walked the historic Pullman railcar factory and housing built in the 1880's as part of one of the original live work communities. in•;addition, we visited the A. Phillip Randolph Porters Museum that celebrated African Americans in U.S labor history. This was also very educational and informative. a. In addition to these sessions, the conference provided a unique opportunity for networking and to discuss the issues relating to rail service .with others throughout the country. During the trade show, it was useful to learn about the new tools that vendors are using for corridor development and rail planning. It was helpful to hear that many other agencies are working through their own challenges with the FTA New Starts program ;that has slowed the progress of the Perris Valley Line. Also, it was encouraging to talk to others regarding development around their rail stations and its impact on ridership and community' growth. Overall the conference was a success and I appreciated the opportunity to participate on the Commission's behalf., Agenda Item 12 235 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS Public Hearing Notice Integrated Regional Growth Forecast and Regional Housing Needs Assessment Methodology Conducted pursuant to Government Code Section 65584.04 Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:00 p.m. — 7:00 p.m. * Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Contact: Ma'Ayn Johnson 213-236-1975 SCAG Main Office 818 W. 7t Street, 12`s Floor San Bernardino Room Los Angeles, CA 90017 Video Conference Location SCAG, Riverside Office 3600 Lime Street, Suite 216 Riverside, CA 92501 Public Notice is hereby given that the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) will conduct the second of two public hearings relating to the Integrated Regional Growth Forecast/Regional Housing Needs Assessment Methodology, at the date, time and location identified above. This public hearing is being held pursuant to Government Code Section 65584.04 and SCAG's public participation policies. This public hearing is part of SCAG's efforts relating to the Fourth Cycle of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment process and preparing a Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) Plan as required by the State in order for local jurisdictions to prepare updated General Plan Housing Elements. This public hearing will provide information regarding SCAG's proposed RHNA allocation methodology, as further described in the attachment to this Notice. The public hearing will also cover SCAG's analysis of the information and local input gathered at the Integrated Growth Forecast/RHNA workshops held in late October/November 2006. Finally, the public hearing will provide an opportunity for any member of the public to provide testimony regarding SCAG's proposed RHNA allocation methodology. Additional information relevant to this public hearing may be found at: http://www.scag.ca.gov/Housing/rhna.htm. * SCAG reserves the right to conclude this pubic hearing before 7:00 p.m. in the event that members of the public have fully participated in the public hearing and have had an opportunity to provide public testimony. Notice posted: Friday, December 1, 2006 1