Loading...
06 June 11, 2008 CommissionRECORDS RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA TIME: DATE: LOCATION: 9:30 a.m. Wednesday, June 11, 2008 BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside Commissioners Chair: Jeff Stone 1" Vice Chair: Bob Magee 2' Vice Chair: Bob Buster 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 Bob Botts / Brenda Salas, City of Banning Roger Berg / Jeff Fox, City of Beaumont Joseph DeConinck / Robert Crain, City of Blythe John Chlebnik / Ray Quinto, City of Calimesa Mary Craton / John Zaitz, City of Canyon Lake Gregory S. Pettis / Kathleen DeRosa, City of Cathedral City Eduardo Garcia / Steven Hernandez, City of Coachella Jeff Miller / Eugene Montanez, City of Corona Yvonne Parks / Scott Matas, City of Desert Hot Springs Robin Lowe / Eric McBride, City of Hemet Patrick J. Mullany / Larry Spicer, City of Indian Wells Michael H. Wilson / Melanie Fesmire, City of Indio Terry Henderson / Don Adolph, City of La Quinta Bob Magee / Robert L. Schiffner, City of Lake Elsinore Frank West / Charles White, City of Moreno Valley Rick Gibbs / Kelly Bennett, City of Murrieta Frank Hall / Malcolm Miller, City of Norco Dick Kelly / Cindy Finerty, City of Palm Desert Ginny Foat / Steve Pougnet, City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch / Mark Yarbrough, City of Perris Gordon Moller / Alan Seman, City of Rancho Mirage Steve Adams / Andy Melendrez, City of Riverside Chris Carlson / Jim Ayres, City of San Jacinto Ron Roberts / Jeff Comerchero, City of Temecula Karla Sutliff, Governor's Appointee Anne Mayer, Executive Director John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director Comments are welcomed by the Commission. If you wish to provide comments to the Commission, please complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board. 11.36.00 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 9: 30 a.m. Wednesday, June 11, 2008 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 specia/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 3. ROLL CALL ALLEGIANCE 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS - Each individual speaker is limited to speak three (3) continuous minutes or less. The Commission may, either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote of the Commission, waive this three minute time limitation. Depending on the number of items on the Agenda and the number of speakers, the Chair may, at his/her discretion, reduce the time of each speaker to two (2) continuous minutes. In addition, the maximum time for public comment for any individual item or topic is thirty (30) 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 for factual information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 11, 2008 Page 2 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - FEBRUARY 28-29 AND MAY 14, 2008 6. PUBLIC, HEARING - PROPOSED BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2008/09 Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 1 1) Receive input on the proposed Budget for FY 2008/09; 2) Close the public hearing to receive input on the proposed Budget for FY 2008/09; and 3) Adopt the proposed Budget for FY 2008/09. 7. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS - The Commission may add an item to the Agenda after making a finding that there is a need to takeimmediate 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. Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR - All matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 8A. RESOLUTION NO. 08-017, "RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY. TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ESTABLISHING THE COMMISSION'S APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008/09" Page 219 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve Resolution No. 08-017, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing the Commission's Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2008/09". 8B. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Page 225 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the third quarter ended March 31, 2008. • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 11, 2008 Page 3 8C. RECURRING CONTRACTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008/09 Page 231 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the recurring contracts for FY 2008/09. 8D. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS Overview Page 235 This item is for the Commission to receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 4, 2007. 8E. MEASURE A DESIGNATION OF HIGHWAY 111 SEGMENTS Overview This item is for the Commission to 1) 2) Page 250 Approve an amendment to the Measure A Transportation Expenditure Plan/Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) to add the following segments on Highway 1 1 1: a) In Palm Springs, from the intersection of Ramon Road and Gene Autry Trail, north on Gene Autry Trail to Vista Chino Drive, thence west on Vista Chino Drive to North Palm Canyon Drive, thence northerly on the existing Highway 111 alignment to interstate 10; b) In Indio, from the crossing of Golf Center Parkway over Indio Boulevard, northerly on Golf Center Parkway to Interstate 10; and c) In Indio, from the intersection of Highway 111 and Indio Boulevard, southeasterly on Indio Boulevard and Grapefruit Boulevard, the existing and former Highway 111 alignment, through the city of Coachella and Riverside County to the intersection of State Route 195 (Avenue 66). Process the amendment to the TIP for inclusion of the Highway 111 new segments as outlined in Section 240302 of the Public Utilities Code. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 11, 2008 Page 4 8F. OBLIGATIONAL AUTHORITY LOAN TO SACRAMENTO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS Overview Page 268 This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Obligational Authority Loan to Sacramento Council of Governments (SACOG). 8G. FISCAL YEAR 2009-13 MEASURE A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS Page 270 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the FY 2009-13: Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) for local_ streets and roads as submitted. 8H. FISCAL YEAR 2008/09 SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS Page 272 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the FY 2008/09 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program recommended funding as shown on the attached schedule. 81. SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM EXTENSION FOR THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO Page 280 Overview This item is for the Commission to grant the city of San Jacinto an extension to June 30, 2009 to complete the De Anza Drive sidewalk and handicap rampsimprovement project. • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 11, 2008 Page 5 8J. MULTI -COUNTY .GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ANALYSIS AND OUTREACH STUDY UPDATE Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) PLAN AND COMMUNITY Page 282 Approve Agreement No. 05-25-536-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 05-25-536, with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) in the amount of $27,419 for consultant services provided by Wilbur Smith and Associates (WSA); Allocate $27,419 in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds to Metro; Approve the Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan (MCGMAP); Receive a status report on the Environmental Justice (EJ) Analysis and Community Outreach Study; Allocate $2,000 in LTF funding to serve as local match support for the EJ grant; and Approve Agreement No. 07-67-071-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-67-071-00, with Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), and San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) for $4,000 in local funding in support of the EJ grant. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 11, 2008 Page 6 8K. ON -CALL GOODS MOVEMENT CONSULTANT SERVICES Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 363 1) Approve the list of pre -qualified firms for on -call goods movement consultant services and award agreements as follows: a) Agreement No. 08-67-119-00 to Cambridge Systematics, Inc.; b) Agreement No. 08-67-120-00 to Iteris; c) Agreement No. 08-67-121-00 to . Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.; d) Agreement No. 08-67-122-00 to Moore lanofano Goltsman, Inc. (MIG); and e) Agreement No. 08-67-123-00 to Wilbur Smith Associates; with contract term of three years with two one-year options; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 8L. PROPOSED SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008/09 Page 366 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt the .preliminary FY 2008/09 Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metrolink) operating . and capital budget; 2) Allocate the Commission's funding commitment to the Metrolink in an amount not to exceed $8,086,400 comprised of $6,529,700 in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds for train. operations and maintenance -of -way, and $1,556,700 .for capital projects to be funded by Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307 funds and State Transit Assistance (STA) funds as local match; and 3) Authorize Metrolink to apply $1.1 million of the Commission's prior year carry over funds to its FY . 2008/09 operating budget. • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 11, 2008 Page 7 8M. AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER FUNDING • PARTNERSHIP WITH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY TO INCLUDE RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY'S NORTH MAIN CORONA METROLINK SHUTTLE SERVICE Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) 2) Page 371 Authorize Agreement No. 03-25-303-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 03-25-303, with the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metrolink) • for inclusion of the Riverside Transit Agency North Main Corona shuttle service as part of the Transfer Funding Partnership; and Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8N. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT AND LICENSE WITH RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY FOR THE USE, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FOR THE PERRIS MULTIMODAL FACILITY Page 373 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 2) I 80. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE Overview Approve Agreement No. 08-24-117-00 with the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) to provide for a cooperative agreement and license for the use, operation, and maintenance for the Perris Multimodal Facility that will be constructed on Commission property; and Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. Page 375 This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update on the Commuter Rail Program. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 11, 2008 Page 8 8P. PROPOSITION 1B FISCAL YEAR 2007/08 CALIFORNIA TRANSIT SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM - CALIFORNIA TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND AND SUPPORTING RESOLUTION Overview Page 384 This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 08-016, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Approving the Allocation of Proposition 1B California Transit Security Grant Program - California Transit Assistance Funds (CTSGP-CTAF) Government Code 8879.58(a)(2) - Population Funds," totaling $1,553,822 to the following lead project. sponsors: Western Riverside County - • City of Banning $ 14,850 • City of Beaumont $ 9,008 • City of Corona • $ 32,376 • City of Riverside $ 29,235 • Riverside Transit Agency $849,938 • RCTC Commuter Rail $263,832 Coachella Valley - • SunLine Transit Agency $330,343 Palo Verde Valley - • Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency $ 24,240 8Q. FISCAL YEARS 2008/09 - 2010/11 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLANS Page 390 Overview This item is for the Commission to review and approve, in concept, the FY 2008/09 - FY 2010/11 Short Range Transit Plans (SRTP) for the cities of Banning, Corona, Riverside, Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency (PVVTA), Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine), and the Commission's Regional Commuter Rail Program, as presented. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 11, 2008 Page 9 8R. PALO VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY'S FISCAL YEAR 2007/08 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN AMENDMENT Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) 2) Page 396 Reallocate $100,000 in Transportation Development Act (TDA) State Transit Assistance (STA) capital funds from the Clean Natural Gas (CNG) fueling station project to the Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency (PVVTA) new office project; and Approve Amendment No. 1 to the PVVTA FY 2007/08 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) to reflect the reallocation of funding among the capital projects as outlined above. 8S. SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY'S FISCAL YEAR 2007/08 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN AMENDMENT Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) 2) 3) 4) Page 397 Allocate $1,399,784 in Transportation Development Act (TDA) • Local Transportation Fund (LTF) operating funds to cover federal and Measure A funding shortfalls for operating assistance; Allocate $444,000 in TDA State Transit Assistance (STA) capital funds to cover cost increases in the purchase of paratransit buses; Approve Amendment No. 3 to the SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine) FY 2007/08 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) to reflect the additional funding outlined above; and Amend the FY 2007/08 Budget by $1,843,784 to reflect the additional funding outlined above. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 11, 2008 Page 10 8T. WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MEASURE A SPECIALIZED TRANSIT INTERIM FUNDING Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 400 1)• Approve up to $433,481 of additional Western Riverside County Measure A Specialized Transit funds to the approved grantees identified in Attachment 1 contingent upon grantee submittal of the Commission's Universal Specialized Transit application by June 16, 2008 at 2:00 p.m.; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to extend the applicable grantee contracts through September 30, 2008. 8U. PALO VERDE VALLEY — FISCAL YEAR 2008/09 UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS HEARING Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 404 1) Reaffirm the Commission's definition of "Unmet Transit Needs" and "Reasonable to Meet" standards; and 2) Make a finding through the adoption. of Resolution No. 08-013, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Adopting A Finding That There Are No Unmet Transit Needs That Are Reasonable To Meet In The Palo Verde Valley Area" that based upon a review of the requests for services received through the Unmet Transit Needs Hearing process, review of existing services and proposed improvements to the available services, there are no unmet transit needs which can be reasonably met in the Palo Verde Valley. • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 11, 2008 Page 11 8V. AGREEMENT WITH CALTRANS FOR PROJECT APPROVAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FOR STATE ROUTE 79 REALIGNMENT PROJECT IN THE VICINITY OF THE CITIES OF SAN JACINTO AND HEMET Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) 2) Page 411 Approve Cooperative Agreement No. 08-72-112-00 with Caltrans for project approval and environmental document (PA/ED) for the State Route 79 realignment project in the vicinity of the cities of San Jacinto and Hemet; and Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement and futurenon-funding related amendments and/or additional cooperative agreements with Caltrans District 8 on behalf of the Commission for this project. 8W. AGREEMENT WITH CALTRANS FOR PROJECT APPROVAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT, .PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND ESTIMATES, AND RIGHT-OF-WAY (ROW) ACQUISITION FOR THE INTERSTATE 215 WIDENING PROJECT FROM THE INTERSTATE 15/INTERSTATE 215 SEPARATION TO SCOTT ROAD, NORTH OF THE CITY OF MURRIETA Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) 2) Page 424 Approve Cooperative Agreement No. 08-31-1 14-00 with Caltrans District 8 for project approval and environmental document (PA/ED), plans, specifications, and estimates (PS/E), and right-of-way (ROW) acquisition for the 1-215 widening project from the 1-15/1-215 Separation to Scott Road, north of the city of Murrieta; Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement and future non -funding related amendments and/or additional cooperative agreements with Caltrans District 8 for the 1-215 widening project from the 1-15/1-215 separation to Scott Road on behalf of the Commission; and Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 11, 2008 Page 12 3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute future non -funding related cooperative agreements and amendments with Caltrans District 8 for the PA/ED, PS/E, ROW, and construction phases of the 1-215 widening project from Scott Road to Nuevo Road in the city of Perris. 8X. AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION AND CONNECTION OF A SEWER LATERAL, FROM ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, TO CITY OF PERRIS SEWER MAIN RELATED TO STATE ROUTE 74 CLOSEOUT WORK Page 440 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 08-31-103-00 for construction and connection of a sewer lateral, from a single family residence, to the city of Perris sewer main to Romo Pipeline, Inc. for the amount of $54,500 plus a contingency amount of $9,500 to cover potential change orders encountered during construction, for a total not to exceed contract authorization of $64,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8Y. AGREEMENT WITH SAN BERNARDINO ASSOCIATED GOVERNMENTS FOR ALTERNATIVE PROJECT FINANCING WORK IN SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY Page 443 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. . 08-31-1 13-00 between the Commission and the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) to further inter -county cooperation related to alternative project financing and to utilize existing Commission contracts to expedite initial feasibility work in San Bernardino County; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 11, 2008 Page 13 3) ! Approve the following amendments to agreements for on -call strategic partnership advisory services by incorporating the terms of the agreement between the Commission and the SANBAG: a) Agreement No. 06-66-026-05, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 06-66-026 with KPMG Corporate Finance LLC; b) Agreement No. 06-66-027-17, Amendment No. 6 to Agreement No. 06-66-027 with PB Consult Inc.; c) Agreement No. 06-66-028-07, Amendment No. 5 to Agreement No. 06-66-028 with Nossaman, Guthner, Knox & Elliott, LLP; and 4) ! Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the amendments to the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 9. TRANSIT VISION ADOPTION AND RELATED FUNDING FORMULAS FOR TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT AND MEASURE A FUNDS FOR 2009-2019 Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 464 1) Adopt the Transit Vision for 2009-2019; 2) Continue the existing funding formula for the Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds [Local Transportation Fund (LTF) and State Transit Assistance (STA) funds]: a) Coachella Valley — 100% public bus operator; b) Palo Verde Valley — 100% public bus operator (subject to the statutory "unmet needs hearing"); c) Western Riverside County — 78% public bus and 22% commuter rail operators; 3) Establish a funding formula for the Western Riverside County Public Transit Account of Measure A Ordinance No. 02-001: a) Allocate the Commuter Rail and Intercity Bus Service funds — 80% Commuter Rail and 20% Western Riverside County Public Bus Operators; b) Allocate 25% of Western Riverside County Specialized Transit funds to the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) as the Consolidated Transportation Service Agency for Western Riverside County; and 4) Approve a timeline for the TDA and Measure A funding formulas to be reviewed in FY 2018/19 with proposed changes to be imp emented in FY 2020/21. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 11, 2008 Page 14 10. INTERSTATE 215/VAN BUREN INTERCHANGE: TRADE CORRIDORS IMPROVEMENT FUND Page 494 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-31-124-00 with the county of Riverside (County) for an "off the top" allocation of $ 1 O million in Measure A Economic Development funds in support of the I-215/Van Buren interchange; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review; to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 11. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 500 1) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislation; and 2) Adopt positions on the following bills: a) AB 3034 (Galgiani) — Support; b) AB 996 (Spitzer) — Support with Amendments; c) AB 1646 (Padilla) — Support; d) SB 1507 (Oropeza) — Oppose; and e) . H.R. 5102 (Calvert) — Support in Concept. 12. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 13. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Overview 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. • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 11, 2008 Page 15 14. CLOSED SESSION 14A. CONFERENCE WITH. LEGAL COUNSEL: EXISTING LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (a) Names of Parties: RCTC and Liston Brick of Corona, et al. 14B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Negotiating Parties: RCTC — Executive Director or Designee Property Owners — See List of Property Owners Item APN Property Owner(s) 571-170-007 571-170-028 571-170-029 571-170-030 571-170-032 571-170-033 571-170-039 571-170-042 1 571-170-140 Winchester 700 571-170-141 580-470-003 5 80-470-004 580-480-001 900-070-001 900-070-008 900-070-009 900-070-010 15. ADJOURNMENT The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday; July 9, 2008, Board Room, County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET JUNE 11, 2008 N ME !, AGENCY F M AD%RESS 2 o 1 60 S' ; 11 Q -1 gOr;-' fJ t NCI /AL Jcl 1 i-(CJO'C•/` ".(09- ,� a J 1, ./itW/Pi 1-4-k-c) I Z --) 6 z-dl.. d5 " h ' iaAC Igil-cr L��� p l U,c-z,/,Acr-- c�cv�7� Og"\A IiR/!//� �. . 5' % c„. /- r o F 4,eye U�6ie5- `! /- 3 od c l� JGK G./ b 6S Al rl/L 12- /rT() iiN/� eee..e,Gialll�ao4e6+ti -n r J Srvic_C ,E4- � ., „, �-g.,,,,,,J,./., ��-tl�s � e,,,( - A �4Vf/Y A-- • /'/�1 / t i • ♦ `�i�I V L _1 _` , '(7 -4-�" � �� `i \-4 �� G5 Q-e___ lam . 6 ��Lr p!r,D 4%v.511G/(21.0)4s.Dr4j /f �✓ G6, L ,4....o*,,' .64-(�7,Df'Y" J c a()nla— l� c k/ C U �6�Uv4G (---eti ...5 Vi , 9 ��S, 6.6 . Jaµ GkfLe451\>1K GAL. fhes4 dpit4ikte ---mL,zA4,t- m1 e/ alt.....(42if r-Ltvpi-b atsari '.;/(:b � �N �Pr--y �' ,, ,Lam� /,V, �4 �1 4 52. / 2d% ��//�[% Ti 01/111 / We 1. 7-/-I S eAmte-ok6c_ Cir YA(6 ,--- Ae/es /) ,S,-,eT� .rsiPs To .iA.13 il 0._ --c A) t' i—, A (y“1-e RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ROLL CALL JUNE 11, 2008 Present Absent County of Riverside, District:I 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 Cathedral ,City City of Coachella City of Corona_ City of Desert Hot Springs City of. Hemet City of Indian Wells City of Indio. , City of La auinta City of Lake Elsinore City of Moreno Valley City of Mur"rieta 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 Governor's Appointee, Ca!trans District RCTC Conflict of Interest Form Purpose: This form is provided to assist members of the RCTC Commissioners in meeting requirements of Government Code Section Commission/Committee Instructions: Under certain 84308 and 87105 agenda items. circumstances, in documenting conflict of interests as related to RCTC RCTC Commissioners may be required to disclose and disqualify themselves from income, real property interests, applicable, Commissioners record, prior to consideration of the Board prior to leaving participating in, investments, must personally of the involved the meeting. influencing, or voting on an agenda item due to personal business positions, or receipt of campaign contributions. If state the following information, for entry into the public agenda item(s) and turn in the completed form to the Clerk I. Board Member Information Board Member Name City/County Name Meeting Date M ��.kv� A-cri ff-(-`" " � �ta`� _ i� read-f4t 6. —t V�eK II. Campaign Contributions (For contracts, permits and other entitlements only) 1. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution of over $250 from , and therefore I am abstaining from participation (Identify the name of the company and/or Individual) on Agenda item , Subject: . 2. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution of over $250 from d ��'.��—m::in��� and therefore I am absta 1I ning from participation 11 ti a am a co d/o all on Agenda item , Subje?: . 3. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution ��iF� /��o k of over $250 from '-'" and therefore I am abstaining from participation • (Identify the name of the company and/or Individual) on Agenda item C,Subject: /2Fr`c.c./Aii.t.c+-G c-0111"0"- 4. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution of over $250 from , and therefore I am absta ning from participation (Identify the name of the company and/or Individual) on Agenda item , Subject: . ll III. Financial Interest 1. I have a financial interest of , from/in and therefore I am absta (State income, real property interest, investment or business position) (Identify name of company or property location) ning from participation on Agenda Item , Subject: 2. I have a financial interest of , from/in and therefore I am abstaining (State income, real proper from participation y interest, investment or business position) (Identify name of company or property location) on Agenda Item , Subject: • IV. Signature Board Member Signature. 0,(---e-� 6 el ( -`cue Date: Please remember you must state turn in the completed form to additional information the information into the the Clerk of the Board prior public record prior to consideration of the involved agenda itemis) and to leaving the meeting. Please use reverse side of form to include any ILOG M4rTA1YV-7a r7O Rrrr-11\7-177G-witz=rin-Vr--rrm-OVPUIV DATE: Z `--71 8g--- CHECK IF SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: O PUBLIC COMMENTS: / AGENDA ITEM NO.: /O SUBJECT OF W �� ,!2- 5--- )AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) ! ,AGENDA ITEM: rF.v E. T / NAME:, ADDRESS: p iCi �l L G STREET REPRESENTING: �J�G / NAME OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP PHONE NO.: CITY ZIP CODE PHONE NO.: BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET CITY ZIP CODE • AGENDA ITEM 5 MINUTES RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES Thursday, February 28, 2008 WELCOME ANDI WORKSHOP OVERVIEW The Riverside County Transportation Commission Workshop was called to order by Chair Jeff Stone at 2:30 p.m., at the Embassy Suites Hotel La Quinta, 50-,777 Santa Rosa Plaza, La Quinta, CA 92253 and provided welcoming comments. Anne Mayer, Executive Director, provided an overview of the topics for discussion at the workshop. FOCUS ON GOODS MOVEMENT Anne Mayer and Stephanie Wiggins, Regional Programs Director, discussed the Colton Crossing) issue and addressed the Commission's contractual obligation, including the impact of the. Trade Corridor Improvement Fund (TCIF) nomination. GOODS MOVEMENT/TRUCK OPERATIONS SHIFT ANALYSIS Tanya Love, I'' Goods Movement Manager, and George Mazur, Cambridge Systematics, Inc., presented the Goods Movement/Truck Operations Shift Analysis. SAN JACINTO ,BRANCH LINE "PERRIS VALLEY LINE" AD HOC COMMITTEE CONTRACT AWARDS: AGREEMENT WITH STV FOR FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION COORDINATION AND SMALL STARTS APPLICATION SUPPORT FOR THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PHASE OF THE PERRIS VALLEY LINE PROJECT AGREEMENT WITH PARSON BRINCKERHOFF FOR TRAVEL DEMAND FORECASTING FOR THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PHASE OF THE PERRIS VALLEY LINE PROJECT Stephanie Wiggins, provided a brief update on the Perris Valley Line project and outlined the scope of services for the Federal Transit Administration coordination and Small Starts application support by STV and for travel demand forecasting for the preliminary engineering phase by Parson Brinckerhoff. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes February 28-29, 2008 Page 2 M/S/C (Foat/M. Wilson) to award: 1) Agreement No. 08-33-069-00 to STV for Federal Transit Administration (FTA) coordination and Small Starts application support for the preliminary engineering phase of the Perris Valley Line (PVL) project in the amount of $200,709; and 2) Agreement No. 08-33-068-00 with Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) for Travel Demand Forecasting for the Preliminary Engineering Phase of the Perris Valley Line project in the amount of $271,263. UPDATE ON THE IRVINE CORONA EXPRESSWAY GEOTECHNICAL STUDIES Tony Rahimian, Rahimian Management and Consulting, Inc., presented an update on the Irvine Corona Expressway geotechnical studies. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the workshop adjourned at 6:00 p.m. The Commission workshop will continue at 8:30 a.m., Friday, February 29, 2008, Santa Rosa Room, Embassy Suites Hotel La Quinta, 50-777 Santa Rosa Plaza, La Quinta. Respectfully submitted, Osur1/4)^:N-4L Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes February 28-29, 2008 Page 3 RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES Friday, February 29, 2008 The Riverside County Transportation Commission Workshop was called to order by Chair Jeff Stone at 8:30 a.m., at the Embassy Suites Hotel La Quinta, 50-777 Santa Rosa Plaza, La Quinta, CA 92253. FOCUS ON LEGISLATION: PLANNING FOR THE NEXT FEDERAL AUTHORIZATION BILL Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager, introduced the Commission's federal legislative advocates; Cliff Madison, Tom Skancke, and Kathy Ruffalo. At this time, each of the advocates discussed their background and perspectives on current federal legislation and the next federal authorization bill. The Commissioners, staff, and advocates then discussed opportunities to address constraints on federal revenues; approaches to requesting funds for projects; development of regional consensus around the county's transportation needs; and development of a unified position to enhance the opportunities for the county to receive more funding. Chair Stone proposed a Riverside County senatorial town hall type of meeting with Senator Barbara Boxer and participation from the Board of Supervisors, Commissioners, and city councils to testify on goods movement and transportation issues. The Commissioners, staffand advocates then discussed the benefit of such a meeting as well as a field hearing with the federal agencies to voice concerns. M/S/C (Craton/M. Wilson) to: 1) Receive and file presentations by the Commission's federal legislative advocates; 2) Request the Chair to appoint a Federal Authorization Legislative Ad Hoc I Committee to lead the organization of a countywide consensus effort for the next federal transportation authorization bill; 3) Adopt principles to guide the Federal Authorization Legislative Ad Hoc Committee's initial efforts; Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes February 28-29, 2008 Page 4 4) Authorize staff to organize a Federal Authorization Advisory Committee consisting of one government relations staff member from each city, supervisorial district, the Riverside Transit Agency, and SunLine Transit Agency to provide support and make recommendations to the Legislative Ad Hoc Committee; 5) Approve the Commission's federal fiscal year (FFY) 2008/09 federal appropriations requests; and 6) Support the Chair's concept for a town hall type of meeting with Senator Boxer. No: Kelly CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Subdivision (b) of Government Code Section 54956.9 Number of cases: One CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — INITIATION OF LITIGATION Pursuant to Subdivision (c) of Government Code Section 54956.9 Number of cases: One There were no announcements for Closed Session items. DELIVERY PLAN UPDATE AND CLOSING REMARKS Anne Mayer provided an update on the 10-Year Delivery Plan for the Western County 2009 Measure A Highway Program. Chair Stone provided closing comments and thanked the Commissioners for their attendance and participation. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the workshop adjourned at 1:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, (.)2)"` Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board • • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, May 1.4, 2008 1. CALL TO ORDER The Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Vice Chair' Bob Magee at 9:36 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, Commissioner John Tavaglione led the Commission in a flag salute. 3. ROLL CALL Commissioners/Alternates Present Bob Botts Daryl Busch Bob Buster Chris Carlson John Chlebnik Mary Craton Joseph DeConinck Kathleen DeRosa Ginny Foat Eduardo Garcia Rick Gibbs Frank Hall Terry Henderson Dick Kelly 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS Robin Lowe Bob Magee Jeff Miller Gordon Moller Patrick J. Mullany Yvonne Parks Michael Perovich Ron Roberts John F. Tavaglione Frank West Michael H. Wilson Roy Wilson Commissioners Absent Steve Adams Marion Ashley Roger Berg Jeff Stone Dennis Kidd, Highgrove resident, expressed support for the locally preferred alternative for the Perris Valley Line approved by the Commission at its April 9, 2008 meeting. However, he expressed concern for the 35-acre property located in Highgrove that is planned for a warehouse project and Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 14, 2008 Page 2 suggested the Commission ,purchase the land for a proposed Highgrove Metrolink station. He submitted documents regarding the property, which were subsequently emailed to the. Commissioners. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MAY 14, 2008 M/S/C (M. Wilson/Carlson) to approve the minutes of May 14, 2008, as submitted. PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2008/09 Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager, presented the proposed Budget for FY 2008/09, and discussed the following areas: • Budget process; • Guiding policies; • FY 2008/09 Budget challenges; • Comparison to other governments - Commission is project driven and most other governments are service driven; • Budget summary; • Revenue trends for FYs 2005/06 through 2008/09; • Revenues - Intergovernmental, Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) revenue, other revenue, investment income, Measure A sales tax and Local Transportation Fund; • Revenue breakdown for FY 2007/08 revised budget, FY 2007/08 projected and FY 2008/09 budget; • Expenditures - Debt service, local streets and roads, transit, management services, other programs and capital highway, regional arterial, and rail; • Expenditures breakdown by department for FY 2007/08 revised budget, FY 2007/08 projected and FY 2008/09 budget; • Department expenditure highlights - Highway, rail, and regional arterial projects; • Expenditures breakdown by function for FY 2007/08 revised budget, FY 2007/08 projected, and FY 2008/09 budget; • Expenditures by breakdown - Debt service and costs of issuances, capital outlay, personnel, professional, support, and projects and operations; • Functional expenditure highlights; • Personnel cost trends budget and actual for FYs 2003/04 through FY 2008/09; • Measure A administration - actual, projected, and budget for FYs 2005/06 through 2008/09; and • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 14, 2008 Page 3 • Next steps — receive input for the proposed budget, finalize budget, review final budget draft and close the public hearing and adoption of final budget at the June 11, 2008 Commission meeting. Vice Chair Magee opened the public hearing at this time. No comments were received from the public and the Vice Chair announced the continuance of the public hearing to the Commission meeting on June 11, 2008. M/SIC to continue the public hearing of the proposed Budget for FY 2008/09 to the Commission meeting on June 11, 2008. 7. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS Anne Mayer, Executive Director, announced an urgency agenda item, "Resolutions Regarding State Reimbursement for Costs of Commission - Sponsored Legislation". This item arose after the agenda was posted and mailed, and there is a need for this item to be addressed by the Commission at this time. M/S/C (R. Wilson/Henderson) to approve the addition of the urgency item to the agenda. 8. CONSENTi CALENDAR Commissioner Jeff Miller requested Agenda Item 8M, "State and Federal LegislativeUpdate", be pulled for discussion. M/S/C (Lowe/Henderson) to approve the following Consent Calendar items: 8A.. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT Receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2008. 8B. INTERFUND LOAN ACTIVITY REPORT Receive and file the Interfund Loan Activity Report. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 14, 2008 Page 4 8C. NEED FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANE PROJECT 1) Approve funding up to $51 million for the SR-91 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) right-of-way phase to be funded by a combination of federal funds and a Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP) letter of no prejudice (LONP) reimbursement by Ca!trans; 2) Approve up to $3.8 million of 1989 Measure A Highway funds as a loan to match the federal funds for cash flow purposes until the TCRP LONP funds are available to pay back any Measure A funds used; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the Cooperative Agreement Amendment. No. 08-31-002-01 and Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) baseline certification amendment on behalf of the Commission. 8D. ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST SAFE, ACCOUNTABLE, FLEXIBLE, EFFICIENT TRANSPORTATION EQUITY ACT: A LEGACY FOR USERS EARMARK UPDATE 1) Allocate $4.05 million of the Commission's Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) Alameda Corridor East (ACE) earmark funds to the city of Riverside for the Iowa Avenue grade separation; 2) Deobligate $4.05 million of Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds that were previously allocated to the city of Riverside for the Iowa Avenue grade separation; 3) Approve the reprogramming of $600,000 in SAFETEA-LU funds from the McKinley Street grade separation to Auto Center Drive grade separation; and 4) Approve the Riverside County ACE corridor updated financial plan for submission to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 14, 2008 Page 5 8E. AMENDMENT NO. 2 WITH BRE PROPERTIES FOR TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT AT THE LA SIERRA METROLINK STATION 1) Approve Agreement No. 07-67-004-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 07-67-004-00, with BRE Properties for transit oriented development (TOD) at the La Sierra Metrolink station; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8F. PROPERTY EASEMENT AMENDMENTS TO ACCOMMODATE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT PLANS WITH BRE PROPERTIES ADJACENT TO THE RIVERSIDE DOWNTOWN METROLINK STATION 1) 2) Amend property easement nos. 73060 and 313756 to accommodate transit oriented development (TOD) plans with BRE Properties adjacent to the Riverside Downtown Metrolink station; and Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8G. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE Receive and file an update on the Commuter Rail Program. 8H. RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY'S FISCAL YEAR 2007/08 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN Approve Amendment No. 4 to Riverside Transit Agency's (RTA) FY 2007/08 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) to reflect an additional $135,000 in Commuter Rail Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds to provide shuttle services to the leased satellite parking lot during construction of the North Main Corona parking structure. 81. WESTERN RIVERSIDE MEASURE A SPECIALIZED TRANSIT PROGRAM FUNDS ALLOCATION TO THE INDEPENDENT LIVING PARTNERSHIP 1) Allocate $32,000 in Western Riverside Measure A Specialized Transit funds to Independent Living Partnership to accommodate additional program participation; and 2) Approve a budget adjustment for a $32,000 increase to Measure A Specialized Transit expenditures in FY 2007/08. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 14, 2008 Page 6 8J. AGREEMENTS WITH EPIC LAND SOLUTIONS, INC., REAL ESTATE CONSULTING & SERVICES, INC., AND OVERLAND PACIFIC & CUTLER, INC. TO PROVIDE ON -CALL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT SERVICES 1) Approve Agreement No. 07-33-151-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-33-151-00, with Epic Land Solutions, Inc.; 2) Approve Agreement No. 07-33-153-05, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 07-33-153-00, with Real Estate Consulting & Services, Inc; 3) Approve Agreement No. 07-33-152-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-33-152-00, with Overland Pacific & Cutler, Inc., to provide on -call right-of-way property management services in the amount of $750,000 each, plus a ;pool contingency of $1 million, for a total services amount of $3.87 million; and 4) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 8K. AGREEMENTS WITH BRYAN A. STIRRAT & ASSOCIATES, LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC., NINYO & MOORE GEOTECHNICAL, BUREAU VERITAS NA, INC., AND TETRA TECH FOR ON -CALL RIGHT-OF-WAY PHASE 1 AND PHASE 11 ENVIRONMENTAL SOIL ASSESSMENT SERVICES 1) Approve Agreement No. 07-31-146-03, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-31-146-00, with Bryan A. Stirrat & Associates; 2) Approve Agreement No. 07-31-147-06, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 07-31-147-00, with Leighton Consulting, Inc.; 3) Approve Agreement No. 07-31-148-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-31-148-00, with Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical; 4) Approve Agreement No. 07-31-149-02, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-31-149-00, with Bureau Veritas NA, Inc.; 5) Approve Agreement No. 07-31-150-02, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-31-150-00, with Tetra Tech to perform on - call right-of-way phase I and phase II environmental assessment services in the amount of $350,000 each, plus a pooh contingency of $1 million, for a total services amount of $3.138 million; and 6) Authorize. the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review; to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 14, 2008 Page 7 8L. AGREEMENT WITH VOLT EDGE SERVICES TO PROVIDE MINOR GENERAL, ELECTRICAL, MAINTENANCE, AND REPAIR SERVICES FOR THE COMMISSION -OWNED METROLINK STATIONS. 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-24-087-00 with Volt Edge Services to provide minor general, electrical maintenance, and repair services for the .five Commission -owned Metrolink stations in the amount of $150,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement son behalf of the Commission. 9. AUTHORIZATION FOR ISSUANCE OF SALES TAX REVENUE BONDS Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer, provided an overview of the 2008 Series A sales tax revenue bonds and discussed the following areas: • Why issue 2008 Bonds; • Summary of 2008 Bonds; • 2008 Bonds analysis, ratings, and documents; and • Next steps. Anne Mayer congratulated Theresia Trevino and the consultant team for an outstanding job. She stated the consultants were resourceful in making the best use of Commission's funds. M/S/C (Craton/Lowe) to: 1) 2) 3) Receive and file the overview presentation regarding the issuance of the 2008 Series A sales tax revenue bonds; Adopt Resolution No. 08-010, "Resolution Authorizing the Issuance and Sale of Not to Exceed $130,000,000 Aggregate Principal Amount of Riverside County Transportation Commission Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds), Series 2008, the Execution and Delivery of an Indenture, Supplemental Indenture, Purchase Contract, Official Statement and Continuing Disclosure Agreement and the Taking of All Other Actions Necessary in Connection Therewith"; Approve the draft Preliminary Official Statement for the issuance of $130,000,000 in 2008 Series A Sales Tax Revenue Bonds and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the issuance of the final Official Statement; Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 14, 2008 Page 8 4) Approve the draft Indenture between the Riverside County Transportation Commission and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the final indenture; 5) Approve the draft First Supplemental Indenture between the Riverside County Transportation Commission and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the final first supplemental indenture; and 6) Approve the draft Bond Purchase Agreement between the Riverside County Transportation Commission and Lehman Brothers, as Underwriter Representative acting ,on behalf of itself and Banc of America Securities LLC, and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the final bond purchase agreement. 10. TRADE CORRIDORS IMPROVEMENT FUND PROGRAM OF PROJECTS AND NEXT STEPS REPORT Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager, provided an update on the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund program of projects and next steps. M/S/C (Lowe/M. Wilson) to receive an update on the. Trade Corridors Improvement Fund program of projects and Next Steps report. 11. PERRIS VALLEY LINE FREIGHT STUDY Stephanie Wiggins, Regional Programs Director, provided an overview of the Perris Valley Line (PVL) Freight Study and introduced Justin Fox, Wilbur Smith Associates, to provide a presentation. Justin .Fox provided an overview on the PVL Freight Study and discussed the following areas: • PVL Freight Study — study purpose and methodology; • PVL — Line runs 38 miles from BNSF Transcon in . Highgrove to San Jacinto, Commission owns the line, purchased in 1992, BNSF runs daily freight service on the line; - • PVL shipper locations and specifics; • PVL carloads; • Passenger train improvements to change operating environment; and • Small benefits for rail freight. • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 14, 2008 Page 9 Commissioner Bob Buster asked if the Commission train schedules, both initial and with growth, will likely shift any of the freight train movements from daytime to nighttime. Additionally, he asked if the Commission has the right to require BNSF to move freight train movements to a different schedule.He stated that mitigation for noise impacts and any safety issues will be important to address at community meetings. Stephanie Wiggins replied in the Commission's agreement with the railroads, the Commission has the right to change freight train schedules, specifically, a three hour window during the rush hour period that the Commission has the right to restrict BNSF freight trains from operating within. The operating schedules currently do not contemplate such a change, however, it will be factored in to determine what the final operating schedules are. Commissioner Ron Roberts asked with regard to the agreement with BNSF, if there is language that allows BNSF to park freight cars on the San Jacinto Branch Line (SJBL►. Commissioner Roberts expressed concern for the increase in the amount of freight cars being stored on the line and suggested the Commission look into this. Stephanie, Wiggins replied that the purchase and sale agreement does not allow for that. She stated that in a separate agreement, it allows BNSF to construct 'Istorage tracks south of Van Buren Boulevard to store additional equipment on the Commission's right-of-way. However, the agreement states that when the PVL is built, if those tracks are in the way, the tracks will be removed at BNSF's cost. Anne Mayer stated that this issue arose at a meeting with the subcommittee of the UCR Neighborhood Association. She stated this concern will be monitored to ensure the Commission has accurate information and staff will continue the dialogue with the UCR Neighborhood Association as well. M/S/C to receive and file a presentation on the findings of the draft Perris Valley Line (PVL) Freight Study. 12. RESOLUTIONS REGARDING STATE REIMBURSEMENT FOR COSTS OF COMMISSION -SPONSORED LEGISLATION Anne Mayer provided a brief overview of the resolutions regarding state reimbursement for costs of Commission -sponsored legislation. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 14, 2008 Page 10 M/SIC (Henderson/Lowe) to: 1) Adopt Resolution 08-014, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Certifying that Upon Enactment of Senate Bill 1316, the Commission Shall Not Seek Reimbursement from the State of California _ for. Any Costs Associated with Senate Bill 1316 or Any of the Activities Authorized or Mandated Therein;' 2) Adopt Resolution 08-015, '"Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Certifying that Upon Enactment of Assembly Bill 1954, the CommissionShall Not Seek Reimbursement from the State of California for Any costs Associated with Assembly Bill 1954 or Any of the Activities Authorized or Mandated Therein; " and 3) Forward to the California State Legislature. 13. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION 8M. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Vice Chair Magee stated that Commissioner Miller requested this item be pulled due to the recommended position on Proposition 98. M/S/C (Lowe/Carlson) to: 1) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislation; and 2) Approve positions on the following state bills and proposition: a) AB 3021 (Nava) - Support; b) AB 1854 (Duvall) - Work with author; c) Proposition 98 - Oppose. No: Magee and Miller 14. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 14A. Anne Mayer announced: • A new employee, Andrea Zureick, Senior Staff Analyst, with the Programming Department and welcomed her to the Commission staff. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 14, 2008 Page 11 • • Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager, has earned a Masters degree in Public Administration from the University of Southern California and congratulated him on his achievement. Mike Perovich, Caltrans District 8 Director, is retiring May 30. She congratulated and thanked him for all of his hard work and dedication. Mike Perovich thanked the local agencies for their cooperation, and specifically Commissioners Ron Roberts, Terry Henderson and Michael Wilson, who have been gracious in all their dealings. He commended the Commission for its ability to work together for the benefit of the region. He then announced that Karla Sutliff, Caltrans Project Managment, will be the acting director of Caltrans District 8. • Stephanie Wiggins, Regional Programs Director, is leaving the Commission after almost 10 years of service and thanked her for her service. She then introduced a video from Chair Stone in honor of Ms. Wiggins for her hard work, leadership, and dedication to the Commission. Stephanie Wiggins thanked the Commissioners and staff for their dedication, hard work, and support. 14B. Commissioner John Tavaglione announced and congratulated Aaron Hake for receiving a Volunteer Recognition award from the Corona -Norco YMCA. 15. CLOSED SESSION Steve DeBaun, legal counsel, announced the closed session is to discuss possible claims related to the 60/91 /215 interchange project. 15A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Subdivision (b) of Government Code Section 54956.9 (b). One l Case There was no announcement from the Closed Session item. • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 14, 2008 Page 12 16. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the meeting adjourned at 11:33 a.m. The next Commission .meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, June 11, 2008, in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, 92501. Respectfully submitted, Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board • AGEN A ITEM 6 PUBLIC HEARING RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: j June 11, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2008/09 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive 'input on the proposed Budget for FY 2008/09; 2) Close the public hearing to receive input on the proposed Budget for FY 2008/09; and 3) Adopt the proposed Budget for FY 2008/09. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The annual fiscal budget is the result of Commission staff determining the operating and capital needs for FY 2008/09 and identifying the resources to fund those needs. " The budget process began in January 2008. The goals and objectives approved by the Commission on March 12, 2008, were the basis of this budget. The goals and objectives considered during the preparation of the budget relate to mobility initiatives, goods movement, improved system efficiency, environmental stewardship, economic development, intermodalism and accessibility, and public and agency communications. On May 14, 2008, staff presented the proposed budget to the Commission. Subsequent to that presentation, staff updated the document as a result of the following changes,resulting in a net decrease of $24,475,400 to ending fund balance: • An increase of $5 million in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) sales tax revenue to reflect the apportionment to the Commission's Regional Issues Department for Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF) grade separation; • An increase of $20 million in bond proceeds to fund 2009 Measure A projects based primarily on a decrease in the commercial paper cash/fund balance at July 1, 2008, which reflects an increase in projected FY 2007/08 expendtures; Agenda Item 6 1 • An increase of $250,000 in other local reimbursements to reflect available carryover State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) appropriations for FY 2008/09 planning, programming, and monitoring activities; • An increase of $5 million in Regional Issues expenditures for disbursement of LTF funds to local agencies for the TCIF grade separation; • An increase of $1,933,300 million in interest payment expenditures for the commercial paper program due to the increase in commercial paper proceeds;. • A decrease of $850,000 in cost of issuance expenditures for the commercial paper program; • An increase of $200,000 in professional service expenditures for the commercial paper program financing activities; • An increase of $32,600 in Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE) expenditures for the TTY equipment maintenance work on the call boxes; • An increase of $4,125,000 in construction expenditures for Coachella Valley highway projects and a related increase in operating transfers; • An increase of $11,533,400 in land acquisition expenditures related to the MSHCP activities offset by the elimination of operating transfers for the SR- 79 realignment project due to sufficient TUMF fund balances; • A net decrease of $402,400 in LTF transit disbursements due to a decrease of $12,402,400 based on revised Short Range Transit Plans (SRTPs), a $7 million increase in estimated transit capital expenditures from prior year allocations, and the increase of $5 million for expenditures related to the TCIF grade separation; • An increase of $13,994,100 in State Transit Assistance (STA) transit disbursements. due to revised SRTPs and estimated transit capital expenditures from prior year allocations; • An increase of $20,000 in support cost expenditures for Mobility 21 membership; • An increase of $84,700 in LTF disbursements for SB 821 expenditures; • A decrease of $66,700 in operating transfers for the correction of the debt service allocation; and • A decrease in interest income of $237,000 as a result of a net increase in expenditures over revenues and the correlating decrease in the estimate cash balance as noted above. A public hearing to allow for public comment on the proposed budget, as revised, is required prior to the adoption of the proposed budget. The public hearing was opened at the May 14, 2008 Commission meeting. After the public hearing is closed on June 11, 2008, adoption of the proposed Budget for FY 2008/09 will follow. In accordance with the Commission's fiscal policies, the budget must be adopted no later than June 15 of each year. Agenda Item 6 2 • • Attached is tke proposed Budget for FY 2008/09. This document contains the executive summary, as revised, that was presented at the May 14, 2008 Commission meeting; the Gann Appropriations Limit; the guidingpolicies related to the preparation of the budget; a summary of the budget process; fund budgets; details of program revenues and other sources; personnel costs, and debt; department budgets; a community profile; and appendices including a glossary of acronyms, funding definitions, and program/general terms. A summary of the proposed Budget for FY 2008/09 is as follows: FY 2008/09 Budget Revenues and other financing sources: Sales taxes -Measure A and LTF S. 220,579,000 Reimbursements (federal, state, and other) 74,705,400 TUMF 7,730,000 State Transit Assistance 22,992,600 Other revenues 3,422,200 Interest on investments 7,980,000 Commercial paper proceeds 130,000,000 Transfers in 69,125,100 Total revenues and other financing sources 536,534,300 Expenditures and other financing uses: Personnel salary and fringe benefits Professional services Support services Projects and operations Capital outlay Debt service (principal, interest and costs of issuance) Transfers out Total expenditures and other financing uses Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses 6,743,000 7,054,300 4,863, 500 565,241,700 890,000 46,673,400 69,125,100 700,591,000 (164,056,700) Beginning fund balance 475,188,900 Ending fund balance $ 311,132,200 Attachment: FY 2008/09 Proposed Budget Agenda Item 6 • FY 2008t09 BUDGETj • • Honorable Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, California FY 2008/09 Budget Introduction In recent months, the headlines in business sections have been troubling. Energy costs continue to nse while home values decline: Residents and consumers are understandably cautious and government agencies -including the state of California (State), local governments, and school districts look for ways to balance precarious . budgets. Economic uncertainty presents its challenges but well -managed organizations find ways to continue their progress during tough times with the objective of emerging even. Istronger when economic conditions improve. This best- describes the upcoming Fiscal Year (FY) for the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission or RCTC). While projected revenues for FY 2008/09 are expected to be flat, the Commission will move forward with an ambitious !program of project development and funding leading to the eventual construction of billions of dollars in transportation projects over the next decade. While that is important news for the Commission, it is especially good news for all of Riverside County (County) and the region. All too often capital projects are delayed during tough t mes, leading to greater challenges in the future. A more thoughtful approach is to continue to invest in infrastructure during challenging times that often leads to welcome economic opportunities and a better future for everyone. The impact of transportation investment will be felt throughout Riverside County. The projects that w II receive funding in the coming year include: • State Route (SR) 91 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes right of way and engineering • SR-79 realignment right of way and engineering • Mid County Parkway right of way and engineering • North Main Corona station parking structure construction • SR-91, Interstate (I)15, and 1-215 corridor engineering • Perris Valley Line right of way and preliminary engineering Most of this investment is for projects that will start construction in the next few years. There are also other transportation projects that have been funded through the Commission that are currently in construction including the North Main Corona parking structure, the SR-91/Green River Road interchange project in Corona, and a number of local street and road projects financed by Measure A throughout the County. Finally, the construction work on the mammoth, SR-60/SR-91/1-215 interchange in Riverside is expected to wrap up in the early part of FY 2008/09. RCTC: A Local Mobility Partner Through its role as a regional transportation agency, in FY 2007/08 the agency was successful in attracting more than $162 million in Proposition 1B funding fora variety of railroad grade separations in Riverside County and for an interchange project at 1-215 and Van Buren Boulevard. While local jurisdictions will serve as the lead agencies for construction on the delivery of these projects, the Commission facilitated the award of funding and has been able to identify and obtain other sources of funding for various projects. With construction and right of way costs continuing to rise on infrastructure projects, the Commission will pursue a variety of means to fund additional projects. As a result, the Commission has taken positions to pursue high occupancy toll (HOT) lane development, Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Small Starts funding, and a coordinated approach with neighboring transportation agencies to maximize funding from sources such as Proposition 1 B and the upcoming reauthorization of the federal transportation bill. Current Responsibilities During FY 2008/09, the Commission will invest $371 million in capital projects that include highway, regional arterial, and rail projects. All told, the Commission's overall budget will exceed $631 million that includes additional investments for transit operations, payments to cities for street and road improvements, and a variety of smaller programs such as motorist and commuter assistance programs. The Commission's status has become somewhat unique in Southern California. As many transportation agencies have consolidated functions and grown in size, the Commission remains true to the original intent of the legislation that first created it, operating a staff of 45 budgeted positions. In doing so, the Commission remains effective in its role as a transportation planning and funding agency by maintaining productive relationships with other agencies. For example, Measure A pays for a score of lesser -known projects that are extremely important to local residents. In the coming fiscal year, the Commission will return more than $50 million in funding to local cities and the County for local streets, and roads needs. The Commission also receives and programs funding from state and federal sources. This includes the State's Transportation Development Act program dollars than are allocated primarily to the County's major public transit providers. Measure A also pays its share by funding transit fare discounts and programs for senior citizens, persons with disabilities, and individuals of limited means and by operating,a commuter assistance program that provides traveler information and ridesharing assistance to employers and commuters. I 6 Looking Toward the Future The focus of FY 2008/09 and beyond will be the development and delivery of the 2009 Measure A 10=Year Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan. Environmental work on the widening of SR-91 through Corona has already begun with additional work included for related improvements on the SR-71/SR-91 connectors interchange. Engineering and environmental work is also underway for the widening of the 1-215 in ! Murrieta and for HOT lanes on 1-15. The toll component of the SR-91 and 1-15 projects will require legislative approval that is currently working its way through the state legislative process. Assembly Bill (Jeffries) 1954 will provide the Commission the authority to develop HOT lanes on 1-15, and SB :1316 (Correa) will makes changes to existing state law regarding the 91 Express Lanes !franchise to allow the Commission to extend the existing SR-91 facility into Riverside `County. Both bills have received approvals from their houses of origin, and the desired outcome is for both to be approved by the full Legislature and signed by the Govemor during the latter part of 2008. The development of the Perris Valley Line Metrolink extension is yet another priority for now and until the anticipated launch of service in 2011. The project has received a favorable rating from the FTA and is eligible for as much as $75 million in federal Small Starts funding.) Two-thirds of the available federal funding has been included in the President's proposed FY 2008/09 federal budget, signaling strong support for the !project in Washington, D.C. !GFOA Distinguished Budget Award The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) presented an award of Distinguished Budget Presentation to the Riverside County Transportation Commission for its annual budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2007. In order to receive this award, a govemmental unit must publish a document that meets program criteria as a policy document, as an operations guide, as a financial plan and as a communications device. The award is valid for a period of one year only. The Commission believes that this budget document conforms to program requirements, and it will be submitted to the GFOA to determine its eligibility for another award. i Acknowledgements The preparation of this budget has been a collaborative effort of the Commission's staff. The budget reflects the Commission's desire to communicate the components of the budget in terms that are easily understandable and supportable for the general public. Staff acknowledges and appreciates the guidance and leadership of the Commission's 30-member Board of Commissioners and the sense of renewal and commitment they ;have and continue to inspire. Signature on file Signature on file Anne Mayer, Executive Director Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer ®ABLE OF CONTENTS, COMMISSION INTRODUCTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction: Budget Overview Personnel Department Initiatives Fund Balances Budget Comparative Overall Budget Budget Eimerctitures and Transfers Out Highway, Regional Arterial, and Rail Programs Governmental Fund Type Budgets GANN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT Section 1: GUIDING POLICIES Commission Policy Goals and Objectives Financial and Administration Policies Section 2: BUDGET PROCESS SUMMARY Budget Process Functional Organization Chart Staff Organization Chart Section 3: FUND BUDGETS Budget Summary by Fund Authorization, Amendment, and Fund Structure General Fund Special Revenue Funds EliCapital Projects funds Debt Service Fund I • Section 4: REVENUES AND OTHER SOURCES Funding Sources Revenue Sources Program Revenues Section 5: PERSONNEL Salary and Fringe Benefits Personnel Summary Section 6: COMMISSION DEBT Debt Capacity Analysis Debt Service Schedule Program and Geographic Debt Legal Debt Margin Debt Service Requirements Section 7: DEPARTMENT BUDGETS Budget Comparison by Department 7.1: MANAGEMENT SERVICES Executive Management Administration Legislative Affairs and Communications Finance 7.2: REGIONAL PROGRAMS, Regional Issues - Planning and Programming Rail Right of Way Management Specialized Transit Narrative discussion of the history of the Commission and list of principal officers Narrative overview of the operational and financial factors considered Summarized narrative overview, charts, and tables of revenues and expenditures Personnel expenditures and full-time equivalents Major initiatives and summarized expenditures by department Fund balances by program and geographic area Schedule of budget by summarized line item Schedule of budget classed by operating and capital purposes Expenditures and other uses summarized by fund type Listing of budgeted capital project expenditures Summary of estimated financial sources and uses by governmental fund types Narrative discussion of the appropriations limit Narrative description of policy goals and objectives Description of financial policies Narrative description of various budget stages Organization chart Organization chart Table summarizing fund and department revenues and expenditures Narrative description of authorization level, amendment process and fund structure Overview; narrative and charts of revenues and expenditures Overview; narrative and darts of revenues and expenditures by Measure A and non - Measure A special revenue funds Overview; narrative and darts of revenues and expenditures Overview: narrative and charts of revenues and expenditures Schedule of funding sources Narrative description of various revenues Tables and accompanying narratives of program revenues Chart and accompanying description of benefits and changes in salary and benefits Tables of personnel expenditures and full time equivalents Charts and accompanying narrative demonstrating debt capacity Schedule of debt maturities by year Charts of debt service by program and geographic area Schedule of calculation of legal debt margin Table summarizing debt service requirements by issue Schedule of expenditures by department Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Transit Commuter Assistance Motorist Assistance 7,3: CAPITAL PROJECTS Capital Project Development and Delivery Location of Capital Projects Capital Projects Summary Section 8: COMMUNITY PROFILE Riverside County Demographics Statisticahinformation Commission Facts APPENDICES Glossary of Acronyms Funding Definitions Program Terms General Terms Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Local map of major capital prrjeets for current year Narrative description of each capital project Narrative discussion of Riverside County's community profile Charts of various demographic data Charts of various statistical information Narrative overview of the Commission's programs and services Explanation of commonly used abbreviations Narrative description of various funding sources Description of Commission programs and related terms Commonly used terms in governmental accounting 10 Commission Introduction State of California (State) law created the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission) in 1976 to oversee the funding and coordination of all public transportation services within - Riverside County (County). The Commission's mission is to assume a leadership role in improving mobility in. the County. The goveming body consists of all five members of the County Board of Supervisors, one elected official from each of the County's 25 cities (including the newly incorporated city of Wildomar effective July 1, 2008), and. one non -voting member appointed by the Governor of Califomia. The Commission is responsible for setting policies, establishing priorities, and coordinating activities among the County's various transit operators and other agencies. The Commission also programs andfor 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 serves as the tax authority and implementation agency for the voter approved Measure A Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Measure N was approved by the County's electorate in 1988 and imposes a one-half of'one cent sales tax to fund specific programs that commenced in July 1989 0989 Measure A): The 1989 Measure A was approved for 20 years and expires on June 30, 2009. On November 5, 2002, the voters of. Riverside County approved the renewal of Measure A beginning in July 2009 through 2039 (2009,I Measure A). 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 callbox 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 also legally responsible for allocating Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds, the major source of funds for transit in the County. The TDA provides two sources of funding: the Local Transportation Fund (LTF), which is derived from a one -quarter of one cent state sales tax, and State Transit Assistance (STA), which is derived from the statewide sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuel. Finally, the Commission has been designated as the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) 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_ 11 I f Riverside County Transportation Commission List of Principal Officials Name Bob Buster John F. Tavaglione Jeff Stone Roy Wilson Marion Ashley Bob Botts Roger Berg Joseph DeConinck John Chlebnik Mary Craton Gregory S. Pettis Eduardo Garcia Jeff Miller Yvonne Parks Robin Lowe Patrick Mullany Michael H. Wilson Terry Henderson Bob Magee Frank West Ribk Gibbs Frank Hall Dick Kelly Ginny Foat Daryl Busch Gordon Moller Steve Adams Chris Carlson Ron Roberts To be named July 2008 Karla Sutliff Board of Commissioners Title 2id Vice Chairman (Commission) Member Chairman (Commission) Member Member Member Vice Chairman (Budget and Implementation Committee), Chair (Transit Policy Committee) Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Vice Chairman (Plans and Programs Committee) Member 1' Vice Chairman (Commission) Chairman (Plans and Programs Committee) Member Vice Chairman (Transit Policy Committee) Member Member Member Member Chairman (Budget and Implementation Committee) Member Member Member Governor's Appointee Management Staff Anne Mayer, Executive Director John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery Director Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director Agency County of Riverside, District 1 County of Riverside, District 2 County of Riverside,District 3 County of Riverside, District 4 County of Riverside, District 5 City of Banning City of Beaumont City of Blythe City of Caiimesa City of Canyon Cake City of Cathedral City City of Coachella City of Corona City of Desert Hot Springs City of Hemet City of Indian Wells City of Indio City of La Quinta City of Lake Elsinore City of Moreno Valley City of Murneta 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 City of Wildomar Cattrans, District 8 12 i I Executive Summary Introduction The budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2008l09 is presented to the Board of Commissioners (Board) and the citizens of Riverside County. The budget outlines the projects the Commission plans to undertake during the year and appropriates expenditures to accomplish these tasks. The budget also shows the funding sources and fund balances that will be used for these projects. This document will serve as the Commission's monetary guideline. To provide the reader a better understanding of the projects, staff has included descriptive information regarding each department and major projects. The discussion in each department includes a review of major initiatives and key assumptions. Staff used the goals and objectives approved at the Commission meeting on March 12, 12008, to prepare this budget. In addition to the Commission's long-term goals and strategic plan, the short'term factors listed below were used to guide the development of the budget: ;Operational • Complete projects and programs included in the 1989 Measure A and determine use for unexpended revenues. • Aggressively implement the environmental process on key components of the 2009 Measure A 10-Year Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan (10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan). • Develop the toll program consistent with the 10-Year Westem County Highway Delivery', Plan including obtaining toll authority for select projects. • Work closely with local jurisdictions to implement the FY 2007-2009 Transportation Uniform, Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Regional Arterial Program and facilitate the delivery of arterial improvements in western. Riverside County (Western County). • Circulate the project level environmental documents for the Mid County Parkway and the State Route (SR) 79 realignment projects. • Continue to work with the Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) to implement the Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) and assist in the assembly of the reserve system. • Continue cooperation with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) regarding the Small Starts process to support project development activities for the Perris Valley Line Metrolink extension (Perris Valley Line) project. • Improve utilization and increase efficiency of commuter rail lines serving the County. • Support' innovative programs that provide transit assistance in hard to serve rural areas or for riders with special transit needs. • Promote program efficiency and harmony between transit operators. • Maintain effective partnerships among commuters, employers, and government to increase the efficiency of our transportation system by encouragingand promoting transportation alternatives. • Continue to provide a motorist aid system that ensures safety and convenience to freeway l, motorists. • Maintain close communication with Commissioners and educate policy makers on all issues of importance to the Commission. 13 Financial • Maintain administrative program delivery costs below the policy threshold of 4% of Measure A revenues. The current Management Services budget is 3.15% of Measure A revenues. • Maintain administrative salaries and benefits at less than 1°% of Measure A revenues. The current administrative salaries and benefits is .99% of Measure A revenues. • .Continue to maintain prudent cash reserves to provide some level of insulation for unplanned expenditures. • Maintain current positive bond ratings with rating agencies. • Move forward on Measure A projects for highways and regional arterials using sales tax revenues, TUMF revenues, and state and federal funding as well as financing alternatives such as commercial paper, sales tax revenue bonds, and innovative financing strategies. • Look for opportunities, funding sources, and innovative approaches to address transportation needs that extend beyond Measure A. • Leverage and protect past Measure A investments in rail with state and federal funding for additional rail improvements, including the Perris Valley Line. Budget Overview Chart 1 — Revenues: Major Categories TUMF Revenue 2% Intergovemmenta 1 29% Other Revenue 1% LTF Sates Tax 25% Investment Income 2% Measure A Sales Tax 41% Total revenues are budgeted at $337,409,200, which are an increase of 25.9% over FY 2007/08 projected_ revenues and a 7.6% increase over the FY 2007/08 budget. The projected fund balance at June 30, 2008 available for expenditures (excluding reserves for debt service of $32,475,500 and loans receivable of $11,273,100) is $431,440,300. Total funding sources available for the FY 2008/09 budget, including commercial paper proceeds of $130,000,000, amount to $898,849,500. • 14 Chart 2 - Commission Revenue Trend S400010.00E1 5050.000.000 $300,1X10,000 $250,000,000 S200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000.000 S50.000.000 s- !FY 0607 FY 07108 FISCAL YEARS FY 011/09 - ®Mvesuneni income - ■Other Revenue OTUMF Revenue OMlernove tnnPntn BUFF Sales Tax 6 Measure A Sales Tat The State Board of Equalization has provided cities and other agencies its projections for statewide taxable sales over the next fiscal year to increase 3.8%; however, the local economy has been significantly impacted by the housing crisis. As a result population and -job growth have slowed down, and Measure A and LTF sales tax revenues and TUMF fees have declined. The outlook for 2009 is mixed when compared to the economic difficulties experienced in 2008. !This economic slowdown was not anticipated in the 2006 UCLA Anderson Forecast of taxable sales revenues for Riverside County through the 2009 Measure A accordingly, the ICommission has revised the long run forecast to include the current decline in sales tax revenues. After taking these economic factors and the state of the local economy into ,consideration, staff has projected that Measure A sales tax revenues will be comparable to 'the FY 2007/08 revised budget. On behalf of the County, the Commission administers the LTF for public transportation needs, local streets and roads, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The majority of LTF funding received by the County and available for allocation is distributed to all public transit operators in the County, and the Commission receives allocations for administration, planning, and programming in addition to funding for rail operations included in the commuter rail Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP). The LTF sales takrevenue received from the State is budgeted based on the LTF sales tax revenue projections, which are projected to remain flat with the FY 2007/08 revised estimate because of the state of the local economy. The 4.3% decrease in LTF funding is related primarily to an FY 2007/08 allocation for grade separation jump-start funding awards, of which one-half, or $5,000,000, of this allocation has been rebudgeted in FY 2008/09. intergovernmental revenues include STA transit allocations and federal, state, and local reimbursement revenues. STA funds are generated from the statewide sales tax on motor vehicle fuel and are allocated by formula by the State Controller to the Commission for allocations to the County's public transit operators. The STA transit allocation budgeted for FY 2008/09 reflects a 135.2% increase over FY 2007/08. 15 I I Reimbursement revenues are expected to increase 55.9% compared to the prior year budget; however, only 35.7% of the prior year budget amount is, projected to be realized as revenue in FY 2007/08 because of specific capital project activities. The decrease in FY 2007/08 projected revenues is primarily related to federal reimbursements for project development of certain capital projects that have been rebudgeted in FY 2008/09. For FY 2008/09, federal and/or state sources will partially fund rail capital projects including the Perris Valley Line, ,Perris multimodal facility, North Main Corona station parking structure, and station rehabilitation as well as highway capital projects including the SR-60 East Junction to 1-215 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes connector, SR-79 realignment, SR- , 91/SR-71 connectors, SR-91 HOV lanes/Adams Street to SR-60/SR-91/I-215 interchange, and 1-215 projects. Additionally, federal funds are supporting the geotechnical studies related to the Irvine -Corona Expressway, a Community Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) corridor. State funds will also reimburse planning and programming activities and Motorist Assistance services. Federal and state reimbursements also pertain to various Commuter Assistance programs. As a result of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Westem Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), the Commission will receive 48.7% of TUMF (as updated by the most recent Nexus study) through June 30, 2009, and, in accordance with the 2009 Measure A, thereafter at 100%, after deduction of an administrative fee, up to an aggregate of $400 million. This MOU, however, is expected to be amended in early FY 2008/09 whereby the $400 million maximum guarantee is removed in favor of continued funding at 48.7% of TUMF revenues. TUMF represents fees assessed on new residential and commercial development in Western County. FY 2008/09 TUMF fees are expected to decrease to $5,000,000 based on a weakened housing market in the Inland Empire, and these revenues also include TUMF zone reimbursements for the SR-74/G Street to 1-215 project. Other revenue is projected to decrease 34.6% from the prior years budget primarily because of the TUMF regional transit facilities contribution for the Perris multimodal facility, which contribution has been rebudgeted and is included in reimbursement revenues in the FY 2008/09 budget. Investment income is anticipated to decrease 53.3% in FY 2008/09 as a result of declining interest rates and declining cash balances. Staff continues to actively manage its resources and make appropriate investments to maximize the return to the Commission without sacrificingsecurity and affecting short-term cash requirements. " Table 1— Revenues FY 2007-2009 1 I FY 06107 FY 07108 FY 07108 FY 08109 - Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Measure A Sales Tax 6 154,539,800 $ 135,000,000 $ 135,000,000 $ 135,000,000 $ - - 0.0% LTF Sales Tax 85,293,200 89,388,600 78.153.700 85,579,000 (3,809,600) r4.3% Intergovernmental 26,046,700 59,149,800 28.339.800 99,193,000 -. 40,043,200 67.7% TUMF Revenue 40,757200 10000.000 10.305,700 7,7313,000 (2,270,000) -22.7% Other Revenue 6,415,500 2,947,900 2,002,100 1,927,200 0.020.700) 34.6% Investment trrc»me 23.897.400 17.096 70Q 14.175.700 7 mum (9,116 700) -53.3% TOTAL Revenues _5 336.949.660 $ 313.683.000 $ 267.977.000 ,$ 337.409.20Q. S 23.826 70Q 7.8% • • 16 • I Chart 3 - Expenditures: Major Categories Management Other Programs Services 6% 1% Transit 16% Local Streets and Roads 8% Debt Service 7% Capital Highway, Regional Arterial, and Rail 62% Total expenditures are budgeted at $631,465,900, an increase of 7.6% from the prior year budget amount of $587,043,300. Program expenditures totaling $579,164,500 represent 91.7% of total budgeted expenditures in FY 2008/09. Program costs have increased slightly by 7.4% from $539,182,100 in FY 2007/08. Significant highway projects include SR-91 corridor improvement high occupancy toll (HOT) and mixed flow lanes, SR-91/SR-71 connectors, 1-15 corridor and HOT lanes, and 1-215 . corridor projects engineering; SR-91Nan Buren Boulevard and SR-91/La Sierra Avenue interchange improvements construction; SR-60 East Junction to 1-215 HOV lanes connector, SR-74/G Street to 1-215 interchange, SR-79 realignment, and Mid County Parkway right of way acquisition and engineering; SR-91 HOV lanes/Adams Street to SR- 60/SR-91/1-215 interchange right of way acquisition and construction; and SR-111 and SR- 86 city projects engineering and construction. Additionally, advance funding from the commercial paper program for 2009 Measure A projects includes land acquisition for the MSHCP in Western County and Coachella Valley. Approved regional arterial projects will be in various phases of engineering, construction, and right of way. Right of way acquisition and preliminary engineering for the Perris Valley Line as well as the construction of the North Main Corona station parking structure and Perris multimodal facility will be significant rail capital projects in FY 2008/09. Debt Service of $46,673,400 has increased slightly as a result of the increase in commercial paper issuances following the refinancing of outstanding commercial paper in late FY 2007/08. Management Services expenditures of $5,628,000 have decreased 0.1% compared to the FY 2007/08 budget. 17 Table 2 - Program Expenditures FY 2007-2009 FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Charge Change Management Services § 4,792,400 $ 5.635,300 § 4,963.400 § 5,628.000 6 (7,300) -0.1% Regional issues 380,500 893,100 790200 5.915.800 5,022,500 562.4% Planning and Programming 3A39,900 8,977,500 1,741,600 6,1685130 (2,809,500) -31.3% Rail 7,897,300 9,034,100 8,601500. 9122,100 68,000 15% Right of Way Management 632,000 7 162 500 619,000 1,212,000 49,500 4.3%- Specialtred Transit " 6,358,200 8,323,500 5,257.100 7,955.400 1,631.900 25.S% Transit 74.370,100 96,013,200 91,459,200 102580500 6,667,700 6.9% Commuter Assistance 3,107,500 6,450,300 3,146.400 6,487,500 37,200 0.6% Motorist Assistance - 2,408,600 5,164000 4,204,460 3,353.100 (1,831500) -35.3% Capital Highway, Regional Medal, and Rail 81,706,100 342544,700 157,139,800 377,403,300 34,858,600 10.2% Local Strew and Roads 59,198,800 50567,500 50,087,500 50,085.300 (2.200) 0.0% Regional Arterials -Coachella Valley 9,138,500 12.511.600 - 13,215500 8,781.300 (3,730.300) -29.8% Debt Service - - 36.790.500 42.225.900. 150.823.30Q 46.673.400 4A47.500 10.5% TOTAL § 299218 40Q $567 n43 §QQ § 492 048 70Q § 631 465 90Q $ 44.422 BOQ 7 % Note: Management Services induct° Executive Management, Administration, Legislative Affairs and Communications, and Finance. Commission Personnel The Commission's salary and fringe benefits total $6,743,000 for FY 2008/09. This represents a decrease of 11.2% or $846,400 over the FY 2007/08 budget of $7,589,400. The Commission has set aside a pool of 3% for salary increases in FY 2008/09. The Full Time Equivalent (FTE) of 45.0 FTE positions is comparable to the FY 2007/08 level. The decrease in salary and fringe benefits is related to the prefunding of the postretirement health benefits accrued liability in FY 2007/08 as well as decreases in the California Public j Employees Retirement System (CaIPERS) employer contribution rate and the worker's compensation premiums. I Table 3 - Staff Summary by Department FY 2007-2009 FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 FTE FTE FTE i Executive Management 1.6 1.5 0.7 Administration 4.7 4.9 4.6 Legislative Affairs and Communications 2.4 2.7 2.6 Finance 6.1 6.3 6.6 Regional Issues 1.2 2.2 2.0 Planning and Programming 5.3 4.9 3.8 Rail 2.8 2.4 2.9 Right of Way Management 2.0 1.1 1.4 Specialized Transit 0.4 0.8 1.0 Transit 2.0 1.8 1.7 Commuter Assistance 1.5 1.4 1.8 Motorist Assistance 0.7 1.4 1.7 Capital Project Development and Delivery 4.3 12.6 14.2 TOTAL 35.0 44.0 45.0 Department Initiatives The preparation of each department's budget was based on key assumptions, accomplishments in FY 2007/08, major initiatives for FY 2008/09, and department goals and related objectives. Following are the key initiatives and summary of expenditures for each department. 18 Executive Management • Continue project development and delivery as the key Measure A priority. • Explore creative financing opportunities due to the impact of the State's general fund and budgetary issues on transportation funding. • Maintain regional cooperation. and collaboration as a significant effort consistent with the philosophy and mission of the Commission. • Enhance external communications with media, business, civic groups and the community. • Maintain and improve administrative efficiency and fiscally sound practices. • Continue to be competitive in the employment market and provide staff training and development opportunities to enhance skills, productivity, and value. Table 4 - Executive Management Program FY 06/07 a Costs Actual Personnel Professional Support TOTAL $ 269,700 47,600 44,800 $ 362,100 FY 07108 FY 07/08 Revised Budget Projected $ 263,700 $ 270,800 80,000 67,000 32,600 34,000 $ 376,300 $ 371,800 FY 08/09. Budget $131,800 75,000 58,700 $ 265,500 Dollar Percent Change Change $ (131,900) -50.0% (5,000) -6.3% 26,100 80.1% $ _1110,800) -29.4% Administration • Provide high quality support to the Commission and to intemal and extemal customers. • Continue to strengthen the electronic records management system to improve the Commission's reaordkeeping capabilities. • Continue efforts to support staff regarding the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program for federally funded capital construction projects. • Continue to provide timely communications to Commissioners with continued emphasis on the utilization of electronic mail. • Continue to update technology to streamline processes and provide easier access to Commission records. • Support and develop a motivated workforce with a framework of activities and practices that comply with employment laws and regulations_ Table 5-Administration Program Costs Personnel Professional Support Capital Outlay Debt Service TOTAL FY 06/07 Actual FY 07/08 FY 07/08 Revised Budget Projected $ 356,700 $ 454,700 79,900 97,200 1,071,200 1,375,200 9,000 322,000 26,100 $ 1.542.900 $ 2.2491N 19 $ 364,900 92,100 1,418,100 12,300 $ L18 7.400 FY 08/09 Budget Dollar Percent Change Change $ 444,000 $ (10,700) -2.4% 86,000 (11,200) -11.5% 1,471,400 96,200 7.0% 350,000 28,000 8.7% NfA $ 2 351.400 $ 192.300 126 Legislative Affairs and Communications • Continue efforts to seek greater state and federal investment in transportation infrastructure. • Advocate positions in the State Legislature and in Congress that advance the County's transportation interests, especially those related to the implementation of HOT lanes on SR-91 and 1-15 and of the Perris Valley Line. • Continue to develop a broad public information program regarding the Commission's responsibilities and accomplishments through a variety of media formats. • Continue to place an emphasis on providing communications support related to major project development efforts. • Provide new Commissioner orientation meetings and other continuing education opportunities for Commissioners. Table 6— Legislative Affairs and Communications Program FY 06/07 FY 07108 Costs Actual Revised Budget FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Projected Budget Dollar Percent Change Change Personnel $ 298,800 $ 372,800 $ 327,100 $ 390.000 $ 17,200 Professional 224,300 383,300 393,100 506,300 123,000 Support 151.400 172,700 149.300 188,700 16.000 ' TOTAL f 674.5.4Q $ _92:.800 $ 869.500 5 1M.000 $___156.200 • Finance • Continue appropriate uses of commercial paper to advance 2009 Measure A projects of the Commission and Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG). • Apply the sales tax revenue forecast update to develop a financing plan to support the 10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan, including consideration for a recommended increase in the $500 million 2009 Measure A bonding cap.' Develop and approve intemal audit projects related to the organizational accountability program. • Continue to keep abreast of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) technical activities affecting the Commission's accounting and financial reporting activities. • implement a centralized procurements process in order to strengthen controls to ensure consistency in the application of procurement policies and procedures and adherence to applicable laws and regulations. • Table 7 — Finance Program Costs Personnel Professional Support TOTAL FY 06107 FY 07108 Actual Revised Budget $1,117,200 $ 696,200 1,081,100 1,319,000 40.700 65,900 $2.23990Q $ 2.081.100 FY 07/08 Projected $ 729,500 1,049,600 55,600 $ 1.834.7QQ FY 08109 Budget $ 699,000 1,165,000 62,100 $ 1.926.100 Dollar Change $ 2,800 (154,000) 13.800) $ 1155.000) 4.6% 32.1 % 9.3% 16.1)_°/Q Percent, Change 0.4% -11.7% -5.8% -7.4% • 20 Regional Issues • Focus on-nterregional concems and maintain effective working relationships involving various bi-county transportation issues, including goods movement. • Continue to address airport issues including the March Air Reserve Base (March ARB) plans to develop air freight services. • Monitor the Port of Los Angeles and Port of Long Beach's projects for impacts on i Riverside County. ' Table 8 - Regional Issues Program Costs Personnel Professional Support Projects and Operations TOTAL FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 07108 Actual Revised Budget Projected $157,700 205,200 12,600 5,000 $ 407,700 467,000 18,400 $ 360,700 416,100 13,400 FY 08/09 Budget $ 358,100 535,000 22,500 Dollar Percent Change Change $ (49,600) -12.2% 68,000 14.6% 4,100 22.3% N/A $389.51)11 $ 8Q,3.100 $ 790.200 $ 5,915,60Q $ 5 022 50Q $62.4°� Planning and Programming i• Monitor increased funding authority and responsibility related to the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and impacts on the STIP caused by the state budget issues. • Ensure STIP and Proposition 1B funded projects are administered and implemented consistent with California Transportation Commission (CTC) and California Department of Transportation (Ca!trans) policies. • Continue to strategically program projects and obligate funds in an expeditious manner for the maximum use of all available funding, including monitoring the use of such funding to prevent funds from lapsing. • Monitor and track the TUMF regional arterial projects. • Continue development of innovative financing strategies. • Work cooperatively with member agencies to continue the work efforts on the new CETAP corridors. • Continue the Congestion Management Program (CMP) update and traffic monitoring along urban and rural highway systems. • Administer the SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program. • Continue the development of a web -based project management database for the monitoring', of project schedules and funding as well as providing access to local agencies. Table 9 - Planning and Programming Program FY 06/07 FY 07/08 Costs Actual Revised Budget Personnel Professional Support Projects and Operations TOTAL I $ 871,900 1,462,200 27,600 1,078,200 $ 3.439 900 $ 1,300,300 1,906,500 43,700 5,727,000 $ 8.977.5l10 21 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Projected Budget $ 826,300 $ 567,800 230,200 270,300 16,300 31,100 669,000 5,298,800 $ 1.741.80Q $ 6.168.000 Dollar Change $ (732,500) (1,636,200) (12,600) (428,200) $ 12.809.500) Percent Change - 56.3% - 85.8% -28.8% -7_5% - 31,3% Rail • Continue capital improvements at the commuter rail stations, including parking facilities, in Riverside County. • Continue project development and right of way acquisition activities related to the Perris Valley Line project. • Complete construction of Phase 1 of the Perris multimodal facility. • Work with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and the San Bemardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) to advance additional Inland Empire -Orange County (IEOC) and 91 Line train service by 2010. • Oversee commuter rail station operation and maintenance. 'Table 10- Rail I Program Costs Personnel Professional Support Projects and Operations Special Studies Capital Outlay TOTAL FY 06/07 Actual $ 391,800 133,700 734,700 6,532,400 83,700 21 000 $ 7.897.300 FY 07/08 Revised Budget $ 334,500 295,500 377,500 7,996,600 30,000 $ FY 07108 Projected $ 393,700 152,900 119,600 7,912,400 23,000 FY 08109 Budget $ 427,900 410,500 145,100 7,938,600 200,000 Dollar Change Percent Change $ 93,400 27.9% 115,000 38.9% (232,400) -61.6% (58,000) -0.7% 170,000 566.7% N/A 9.034.100 $ 8.601 60Q 29.122100 $ 88.000 ].01 Right of Way Management • Develop a right of way acquisition program in support of capital projects. • Develop a commuter rail station rehabilitation and strategic; plan for the long-term maintenance of the Metrolink stations. • Establish a right of way acquisition schedule and budget control measures. • Maintain the order, safety, and security of Commission -owned properties. • Continue development of the property inventory database in order to maintain accurate records of all Commission -owned properties, properties in acquisition process, . and income generating properties. Table 11- Right of Way Management Program FY 08/07 FY 07/08 Costs Actual Revised Budget Personnel Professional Support Projects and Operations TOTAL $ 281,400 $ 138,000 218,900 720,000 69,200 249,500 62 500 55,000 $ 632.000 $ 1.162.500 FY 07/08 Projected $ 119,200 360,300 121,300 10,200 $ 619.000 FY 08/09 Dollar Percent Budget Change Change $ 155,000 $ 17,000 12.3% 692,000 (28,000) -3.9% 285,000 35,500 14.2% 80,000 25,000 45.5% $ 1.212.000 $ 49.500 Specialized Transit • Support innovative programs that provide transit assistance in hard to serve rural areas or for riders having very special transit needs and monitor funding of these programs. • Initiate a call for projects covering FY 2008/09 and FY 2009/10 for the Western County Specialized Transit program. • Provide availability for local matching funds to Westem County applicants seeking FTA Section 5310 federal capital grants. 22 • f Table 12 — Specialized Transit Program FY06/07 Costs Actual Personnel Professional Support Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL Transit $ 58,600 8,200 4,000 6,287,400 2,500 FY 07/08 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Dollar Percent Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change $ 97,300 $ 55,000 8,700 6,162,500 76,900 $ 129,500 $ 32,200 33.1 % 400 62,500 7,500 13.6% 4,900 9,000 300 3.4% 5,174,900 7,754,400 1,591,900 25.8% N/A 6 360 700 $ Q :123 ,511Q $ 5 257 10Q $ 7.955"400 $ 1 631 90Q 2,5_ws • Review transit operator performance and annual progress reports through TransTrack and the SRTPs. • Monitor the implementation and performance of specialized transit projects as identified in the Coordinated Public Transit -Human Services Transportation Plan. Table 13 — Transit Program Costs FY 06/07 FY 07/08 Actual Revised Budget ' Personnel $ 220,200 Professional 184,400 Support 9,200 Projects and Operations 73.956.300 TOTAL $ 74 370.100 $ 208,600 157,000 10,400 95,637,200 $ 96.01320Q FY 07/08 Projected $ 170,100 40,700 13,300 91.235,100 $ 91.459.200 FY OW09 Budget $ 235,700 122,400 13,800 102,309,000 $ 102 M = Dollar Percent Change Change $ 27,100 13.0% (34,600) -22.0% 3,400 32.7% 6.671,800 7.0% $ 6 667 mn 6.9% Commuter Assistance • Continue rideshare incentives and support services in partnership with commuters, employers, and other governments. • Undertake a variety of programmatic changes to ensure the provision of cost-effective and efficient services. • Continue to utilize the Program Tracking and Performance Measurement Tool (Program Measurement Tool) to implement the Commuter Assistance program more efficiently. • Continue efforts for cross marketing of transit and rail services with the development of a new 140-space park and ride facility located in the city of Perris at the future Perris Valley Line Metrolink station. • Continue to maintain and operate a five -county ridematching database system with partner agencies. • Continueto provide a Guaranteed Ride Home (GRH) Program to serve Inland Empire employers. • Continue leadership role .in regional discussions relating to the implementation of 511 and the dissemination of traffic and traveler information services. • Provide funding to Cattrans for the installation of 75 radar detection stations on the 1-15 and 1-215 corridors to the San Diego County line. 23 Table 14 - Commuter Assistance Program Fv 06/07 Costs Actual Personnel Professional Support Projects and Operations Capital Outlay Transfers Out TOTAL Motorist Assistance FY 07/08 FY 07/08 Revised Budget Projected FY 08109 Dollar Percent Budget Change Change $ 249,000 $ 185,900 $ 190,800 $ 255,500 $ 69,600 37.4% 446,200 546,100 403,300 467,500 (78.500) -14.4% 411,100 645,400 508,600 512,300 (133,100) -20.6% 1,991,300 4,952,900 1,976,700 5,212,200 259,300 5.2% 9,900 120,000 67,000 40,000 (80,000) -66.7% 1,000,000 - 1,027,800 27.800 2.8% $ 3.107500 $ 6.450.300 $ 3.146.400 37b15.300 $ 1.065,000 16.5% • Continue implementation of the recommendations included in the 5-Year Strategic and Financial Plan (5-Year Plan) for the call box program, including the modification of approximately 670 call box sites. • Complete the implementation of the Automatic Vehicle Locator (AVL) system for tow trucks. t Table 15 - Motorist Assistance Program FY 06/07 Costs Actual Personnel Professional Support Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL FY 07108 Revised Budget $ 81,300 $ 187,200 89,900 39,400 29,500 40,200 2,207,900 4,917,300 388.200 490 000 $ 2.798.000 S 5.571.110 FY 07/08 FY 08109 Dollar Percent Projected Budget Change Change $ 93,500 $ 250,300 $ 63,100 33.7% 20,000 34,500 (4,900) -12.4% 39,200 43,000 2,800 7.0% 4,045,700 3,025,300 (1,892,000) -38.5% 490.000 (490.000)-100.0% $ 4.694.400 $ 3 353 100 $ (2.321.000/ -40 9%4 Capital Project Development and Delivery • Complete construction of the Perris multimodal facility phase I and the North Main Corona commuter rail parking structure. • Complete environmental clearance and continue preliminary engineering and right of way acquisition for the Perris Valley Line project. • Continue the environmental and preliminary engineering services for the SR-79_ realignment project as well as acquire right of way. • Continue development of a project report and environmental document for the Mid County Parkway project as well as acquire right of way_ • Acquire land as mitigation for the cumulative and direct impacts associated with construction of future Western County highway and regional arterial projects. • Complete final design and right of way acquisition for the SR-60 East Junction to I-215 HOV lanes connector. • Complete project closeout activities related to the SR-74/1-15 to 7th Street project. • Complete preliminary engineering and initiate final design and right of way activities related to interchange improvements at SR-74/G Street to 1-215. • Continue final design, right of way acquisitions, and construction related to the SR-91 HOV lanes/Adams Street to SR-60/SR-91/1-215 interchange. • Continue preliminary engineering and environmental studies for the SR-91/SR-71 connectors, SR-91 corridor improvement (HOT and mixed flow lanes), 1-15 corridor and HOT lanes, and 1-215 mobility improvement projects. 24 • Continue preliminary engineering and environmental documentation for the 1-215 mobility improvement projects. Provide funding and support to local agencies for SR-91 interchange improvements at Green River Road, Van Buren Boulevard, and La Sierra Avenue. Provide Measure A funding and support to. Coachella Valley local jurisdictions for construction of operational improvements along SR-86 and SR-111. Continue environmental and preliminary design for the bi-county1-215<project. Provide Western County TUMF funding and support to local jurisdictions for regional arterial project engineering, right of way acquisition, and construction. Provide advance funding and support of 2009 Measure A regional arterial projects and for the acquisition for land as mitigation in the Coachella Valley. Table 16-Capital Project Development and Delivery Program FY 06/07 FY 07/08 Costs ACtuai Revised Budget Personnel , Professional I Support Projects and Operations Capital Outlay • Debt Service Transfers Out TOTAL $ 1.171,700 $ 1,219,100 33,000 147,496,200 121,400 1,289,500 71.118.700 2,942,500 2.408,600 116,500 399,176,200 500,000 6,472,600 118.676,500 $ 222 449 500 5 530292.900 FY 07/08 Projected $ 1,136,800 933,800 180,700 217,973,200 215,800 114,400,000 75.105.700 $ 409.948.00Q FY 08/09 Budget $ 2,698,400 2,627,300 2,020,800 428,423,400 500,000 11,200,000 68.097,300 $ 515.567 200 Dollar Percent Change Change $ (244,100) -8.3% 218,700 9.1% 1,904.300 1634.6% 29,247,200 7.3% - 0.0% 4,727,400 73.0% (50.579.200) -42.6% $ (14.725700) ;all Table 17 - Projected Fund Balances by Program and Geographic Area at June 30, 2009 Measure A Western County Coachella Valley Pato Verde Other Total Reserved: CETAP $ - $ $ - $ 526,000 $ 526,000 Commuter Assistance 13,669.300 - 13.669,300 Debt Service - - 33,683,600 33.683,600 Highway - 65,230,700 9,700 1,945,600 67.106,000 Loans Receivable 10,775,600 - - - - 10.775.600 Local Streets and Roads 164,100 85,800 67,900 - 317.800 Planning and Programming - - 1,822,800 1,822,800 Rail 68,876,200 - 2,648,200 71,524,400 Regional Arterials- Coachella Valley _ - 1,158,700 - 1,158,700 Regional Arterials - Western County 1022'4,700 10,229,700 Right of Way Management - - 1,830,500 1,830,500 Specialized Transit 7,967,500 283.400 8,250.900 Transit - - 82,627,800 82,627,800 Unreserved, designated: Motorist Assistance 4,902,300 4,902,300 Unreserved, undesignated 2.626 800 2.626.800 TOTAL Fund Balance $. 166 683 4IIQ $ 1 537 6011 $ 67 900 $ 147 843 30Q $ 311 132200 25 Chart 4 - Projected Fund Balances by Governmental Fund Type and Program at June 30, 2009 Management Se rvbes $2,626,700 Placing and Programning $1,622.300 Rail 52,50,200 Righlof Way Management s1,830.500 I .� Wasbm County $177,439,100 'enannter Aa9sWlee S13,669,300 r�kpglr¢ys65,230,700 �laarc Rece"rade$10.775.6W ^Lod Steels and Roadss16a,100 LIMY $10,755,700 ,..Spe iarszed Tondt V.967,500 a�+a9 $68,876,700 �Coachela VatA741,5376SO ^"'"' F6tlnrar $9.700 °Local Streets and Roads 585,800 �Regnnal Artadals $t 158,700 ••••••6oedntzedTransit S283 ADO Palo Verde Valbv Local Steels and Roads 567,900 WaistAssidanot 5002,300 Sfax 'banal Assistance 519,339,800 Loral Tra Boor W6n Fund $8.3.288,000 26 • • TABLE IS -BUDGET COMPARATIVE BY SUMMARIZED LINE ITEM FY 2007-2004 REVENUES Measure A Sales Tax $ 154.539.800 5 135.000.000 5 135,000,000 $ 135000,000 5 0.0% LTF Sates Tax 65,293200 99,3138,600 78,153,703 65.579.00D (3.809.800) -4,3% STA Trend Alfa:Aim 18,887,000 9,774,100 9.774.100 ' 22992,600 13218500 135.2% Ve tlidc Registration Fees 1083100 3469,000 1476000 3495,000 35,000 2 4% Reimburses-nerd 5,498,600 42915.700 17,095200 - 74,705,400 26,786700 - 55.9% Other Revenue 6415500 1,947.900 - 2,002,100 1,927,209 (1,020.7001 -34.6% TUNE Revenue '�. 40,757200 10,000,000 10,305.700 7,730000 (1276.000) -12.7X Int/Omen Income 23 897 400 17096,700 14175780- - 2980,000 (9116.7001 :a1.3% I TOTAL Revenues 336,949,000 313,583,000 267,972000 337,439200 23,826,200 7.6% EJ(PENDRURES PersonmJSalarl' and Beneels - 5026.000 7589000 5.062.300 6.743.000 (846,400) -11.2% Prdessional and SuppOd Ge;ard Legal Services - 3464200 1577,900 1,078,300 1,938,500 300,600 228% Financial Advisory 123,000 1050,000 50,000 90,000 Audit Services 1.624000 523,006 471600 648.000 25,000 - 46% Prolebsienal Services - Other j 21887011 4723.70Q 2.565300 4477M (245 BOO) -5.2% TOTAL Professional Cost 1 5,400,700 8.474,600 4,1135500 7054500 (3420900) -16.8% Supped Costs 2639000 3156.700, 2 674 300 4063.500 _ 1.706.800 54.151, TOTAL Professional are Support Cests .8.039.703 11,631,300 6639,800 11,917,800 - 288,500 2.5% Frt Oj?0lb and Operations: Projecblienerat 3571200 4,419600 2,308,700 6061,300 2,241,500 507% Rail. 3019,600 1530,000 1572,000. 1,959,000 429,000 260% Matons' Assistance 1207,900 4.912.300 4.045.703 - 3,025,300 (1,887,300) -38.4% Cotirrular Assistance. . 1.948200 2,562900 1,934,900 2,722,200 159,300 6.2% EnOaeering 16.638200 88.983500 31.664.500 70,784,000 3.820,500 5.7% COrsbuction 23082,700 99.370.000 34.872.600 94,003,60D (5.366,400) -5.4% Right d Way and land 32726400 156,503100 85,724,800 200.236.400 43.737.300 27.9% SCRRA Contribution 5524500 17,919,300 6,339,600 5,979,600 (11,939,7001 -88.6% Spenal Studies 64560D 4.785.400 986000 6,929,300 162,900 3.4% Spedal Transpeadorgansib 6277.000 6,122500 6111,060 2714.400 1.591.900 26.0% Loral SeeNa and Roads 59.1968110 53 087500 50.087.500 50.085.300 (2,200) 0,0% Regional Arterials -Coachella Valet; 6138500 12511.600 13215.080 8,781,300 (3730,300) -29.8% LTF Disbursements 71507.400 87749,100 78218500 85.433000 42.316100) -2.6% STA Disbursements 3.4231Do 9239700/2016600 22928 ono 126883W 148.1% TOTAL Project and Operating Cads 239,700,900 524,653700 329028,200 565,241,700 40,587 0(10 7.7% Debt Service Principal Payments 30226600 32.012.100 142012,100 33.630.000 1.617.900 5.1% Interest Payments 6,564.900 9,903,800 7,883200 13,043.400 3,109,600 31'.3% Cost ar Issuance - 280_000 950000 - (280000) -1000% TOTAL Debt Service 36.790500 42,21690D 150.823.300 46673.40D 4,447,500 10.5% Caudal Outlay 181300 942.000 295100 890.000 (52,0001 s23 TOTAL Expenditures 290216400 587 041 100 492048.705 631.465.900 44.422600 7.6% Excess (Delkiency)tl Revenues Over (Under) Eager'':Rums 49.731.400 (273.460.300) (224,071,700) (294,056.700/ (20336.400) 7.5% FY 06N7 FY 07/08 FY 07708 FY 08109 Dollar Percent Atluat Revised Budget Projected Budget Charge Change 06rer Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers h 34.745,000 77,940.800 75.595,700 69,125,100 (6,815000) -11 3% Transfers W ''; (34.7460001 (77040000) (7650670D) (69,115,100) 8.815.500 11.3% Debi Proceeds 50000000 87.000,000 149100.900 136000.00D 43000,000 .4941 Excess Idefdulcy) of Revenues over (under) ExpeMfaees and Other Fiandng Sunrces(USeS) 96,731,400 (188.460.300) (74,971,700) 034056703) 22403000 12.0% Beginning Fund Balance �; 450.429200 550,180,6110 550.180000 475188,903 (74 971 700) -139% ENDING RIND BALANCE S 55015 &70 5 3637M31I0 i 475.199900 3 311.132200 5 (525631001 AIL% 27 Table 19 — Operating and Capital Budget FY 2008/09 FY2008/09 Operating Budget FY 2008/09 FY 08f09 Capital Budget Total Budget REVENUES Measure A Sales Tax S 11569,000 S 123.431.000 S 135,000.000 LTF Sales Tax 84.260.000 1,310,000 85,679,000 STA Transk Alloralion _ 22,992,600 - 22,992,800 Vehicle Regisba6en Fees 1,495500 - 1495.000 Reimbursement - 9502,400 64,903,000 74,705,400 Other Reveres - 497,000 1.430200 1,927,200 TUT Revenue 7,730,000 7,730,000 Investment Income.. 2.370800 5609200 7,980,000 TOTAL Revenues 132,986500 204.422,400 _ 337,409,200 EXPENDITURES Personnel Salary and Benefits 4A44500 2.698,400 6,743A00 Professional and Support I General Legal Services 528.500 1,410,000 1,938500 Financial Advisory 40,000 50,000 90.000 fAudit Services510500 38500 548,000 Professional Sunrises -Other 2848,500 1.620,300 t,477,800 TOTAL Professional Costs 3.927,000 3,127.300 7,054,300 ' Support Costs 2042,700 2,020500 - 4,861,600 TOTAL Professional and Support Casts 6,769,700 5,148,100 11.917.800 Projects and Operafio s: Projects -General 308,000 8,353300 6.661.300 Rai 1,959500 - 1,959,000 Motorist Assistance 3,025,300 3,025,300 Commuter Assistance - 2722200 - 00 .7222 Engineering 10000 70.774.000 72.722200 Construction23mA00 91,703600 94,003,600 R6gM of Way and Land 20,000 200,218,400 200,238.400 SCRRA Contribution S,s79,600 - 5,979,800 Special Studies 4,d20;&10 507,500 4,928,300 Special TrarspodatiaJiransil 7,714+400 • - 7,714,400 • Local Streets and Roads 50.085303 50,055,300 Regional Arterials - Coachella Valley 8,781,300 8,781,3W LTF Disbursements 85,431,000 - 85,431,000 STA Disbursements • 22,923000 22928500 TOTAL Project and Operating Costs 136,e13300 423423400 565241.700 Debi Service Principal Payment 33,630,000 33,630,006 Interest Payments - 13,043,400 f3,043,400 Cost of Issuance _ _ - _ TOTAL Debt Service - 46,673,400 46.673400 Capital Outlay 500,000 890,000 TOTAL Expenditures148.022.600 483.M3.300 631,465,900 Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures (15,035,800) (279,020,900) (294556,700) Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In 4,389,300 64.735.800 63125,100 Timeless Out _ (1.027.800) (68,097,300) (63125.100) Debt Proceeds 130 000D00 130500,0W 1 Etmrm : (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources µUses) (11,674,300) (152.382A80) (164,0537W) Beginning Fund Balance ENDING FUND BALANCE 166,663089 308,525511 475,188,900 118378800 S 192.753.600 S 911132200 28 • • Table 20 — Budget Expenditures and Other Uses Summarized by Governmental Fund Type FY 2003/09 Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional and Support Expenditures General Legal Services Financial Advisory li Audit Services Professional Services - Other TOTAL Professional Services SupportCosts TOTAL Professional and Support Services Project and Operations Expenditures Program Management Projects - General Rail Motorist Assistancel Commuter Assistance Engineering Construction Right of Way and Land SCRRA Contribution Special Studies I Special Transportation/Transit Local Streets and Roads Regional Arterials - Coachella Valley LTF Disbursements STA Disbursements TOTAL Project and OperationsExpenditures Capital Outlay Debt Service !i Principal and Interest Cost of Issuance !, TOTAL Debt Service Other Financing Uses: Transfers Out TOTAL Expenditures and Other Financing Uses General Fund Special Revenue Capital Projects Debt Service Total $ 3,328,900 $ 3,414,100 $ - $ $ 5,743,000 486,600 1,445,900 6,000 1,938,500 38,100 1,900 50,000 - 90,000 485,900 62,200 - - 548,100 2.287.200 1,540.500 50.000 4.477.700 3,297,800 3,050,500 706,000` 7,054,300 2,192,400 2671,100 - 4,863.500 5,490,200 5,721,600 706,000 11,917,800 - 6,238,300 6,238,300 118,000 305,00(1 - - -. 423,000 1,959,000 4,959,000 - 3,025,300 - 3,025,300 - 2,722,200 - - 2,722200 10,000 70,089,000 685,000 - 70,784,000 - 88,304,600 5,699,000 - 94,003,600 20,000 122,660,000 77,558,400 200,238,400 5,979,600 - 5,979,600 4,380,800 547600 4,928,300 - 7,714,400 - 7,714,400 50,085,300 - 50,085,300 8,781,300 - 8,781,300 6,050,000 79,381,000 - 85,431,000 22,926,000 - 22.928.000 18,517,400 462,781,900 83,942,400 - 565,241,700 333,100 556,900 890,000 11,200,0043 - 35,473,400 46,673,400 11,200,000 35,473,400 46,673,400 36 737,700 32,387,400 69.125.100 S 27.669.600 $ 509.212.200 S_ 1282aS 800 $ 35 473,400 $ 700 991 000 29 Table 21- Highway, Regional &kaiak and Rant Programs FY 2008f09 Dur olalion fdiso Os o esented in Section 7.3, exteot as lndioafadj H uiee� General Bechtel Program Management and Contract Administration SCRRA Program Managerrent TOTAL PROJECTS GENERAL Highway Engineering ing SR-60 Fast Junction to 1-215 IOV Lanes Connector SR-74/I-15lo 7111 Street SR-74/G Street to 1-215 Interchange SR-79 Reafigmcnt SR-91 Corridor Improvement (HOT and htired Flow Lanes) - SR9NSR-71 Connectors SR-111 City Pm(sLs (Cathedral Gly..Maio, la Quints, and Rancho LGrage) 1-10 Truck Climbing Lane -415 Crnidor and HOT Lanes 1-15lGjatrn iN„Nwnyn. 1-215 Mixed Flow Laheyl-15 to Scott Road 1-215 Mixed Row Lanes/Scott Road to Nuevo Road 1-215 HOV Lanes/Nuevo Road to Boa Springs Road 1-215 BECourty Project Mid County Parkway .General encr ded in Section 7,Z Right of Way Management) SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY ENGINEERING Regional Arterial Engineering . Various Western Canty TUMF Regional Arterial Projects Various Coachella Valley Regional Arterial Projects - SUBTOTAL REGIONAL ARTERIAL ENGINEERING Rail Engneering S 5,434,300 804,000 S 6,238,300 s 2,000,000 _ 100,000 1.970,000 3,000,000 9,1300.000 3.700,000 4,030,000. 300,000 11,600.000 500000 2.000,000 3,456.000 1.100.000 750,000 3,000,000 10,000 47,116,00(1 10,953,000 685,000 11,830,000 Pens Valley Line 12,030.000 SUBTOTAL RAIL ENGINEERING 12030.000 TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL EIIGIIIEER010 i 70,784,00D Highway Construction S12.60 HOV Lanese-215 to Redlands Boulevard S 10,000 SR-744-15 to 70h Steel 067,000 SR-91 HOV Lanes/Adanx Sheet to SR90/SR-914-215Interchange 20000,000 SR-91/Greerl River Road htechage 2,500,000 SR-91/La Sierra Interchange 17,000000 SR911Vanr Buren Interchange 7.600,000 SR-111 and SR-06 City Projects (Cathedral City, Indio, La Willa, and Rancho Mirage) 13,652,600 I-154-215 Traffic Flaw DetecBm'Pmjec/da(aes preserdedA Seddon 7.2, CommuterAssstance) 2.300,000 SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION 63,939,600 Regional Arterial Construction Various Western Courtly TUMF Regional Arterial Projects Various Coachella Valley Regional Arterial Projects SUBTOTAL REGONAL ARTERIAL CONSTRUCTION 10,464.000 Rail Co stnNdion Perris Multkrodal Facility North Main Corona Station Parking Structure SUBTOTAL RAIL CONSTRUCTION TOTAL HIGFIWAY, REGLONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL CONSTRUCTION Highway RIght d Way and Lad SR-60 East Junction to 4215 HOV Lanes Connector SR-60 HOV Lanes/I-215 to Redlands Boulevard SR-74/1-15 to 7th Sheet SR-74/G Sheet to1-215 Interchange SR-79 Realignment SR91 Correia hnpwvement (HOT and Mixed Row Land SR-91/SR-71 Connectors SR91 HOV Lanes/Adams Street to SR-60/SR-91/1-215 Interchange 1-15 Corridor and HOT Lames Mid County Parkway MSHCP Land Acquisition in Western Co ntyand Coachella Valley General (:rludadi/ Section 7.z Riffle of WaY Management,/ SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND Regional Arterial Right d Way and Lend Various Western Coady TUMF Regional Arterial Projects 13,440,000 Various Coadlella Valley Regional Marie! Projects - 1.000,000 SUBTOTAL REGIONAL ARTERIAL RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND 14,440,000 Rail Right or Way and Land Penis Valley Line 11,450,000 Perris Multimodai FaaTnty _ 110,000 SUBTOTAL RAIL RIGHT OF WAY AND LAN° ' 11,560,000 TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL. AND RAIL RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND S 200230,400 GRAND TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL PROGRAMS S 371,264,300 4,755000 5,596000 5,450,000 14,150,000 19,600.000 S 94,003,600 S 4.100.000 10,000 t.570.000 3200.000 10.050.000 10,000' 100300 17200.000 10000 61.500.000 76,558.400 20.000 174.238,400 30 6£ 0p2'LCIl18 $ DOB•991'9Le $ 009091099 $ 7 009'C99'CC S Wel/CU - $ 000ISLIC S O09091 $ 000'LLl $ OOC606'9L $ 00L1LC992 $ 000 CUre, S 009'L10'001 f OC£'S29'S $ 001 CIL'8 S 0001011 $ DOG '9tl'SL9 ODOSCOS4 DOeBZiew 00i9L1'2C COO9SCIC COA'eS✓OC 000'LLI 009606'65 006'991-'51 001'Cillee XV Lo0'094 OCS'CLC IC? 00I'CIL'a 00L'Bet '6 00t'Otte (002190100 (00L'ILOL) DOYI£C99-°COOL't 001'OLLI NOB/ 0001/9C1 - (0091C4,'95) 00L0/L'91 (00L'9)C9911 1001't2Ttf) 006'rZole 1000'/9t) (001'SCL) 00VOIL 000IBS001 $ 00✓r19'col $ 001'C0515 $ 00i Cie SC $ OOCCLe'SC $ 000 P2e St $ 00CSSOLL S OOC89✓9el $ 00i 9L9'SS S 00C21 C$09 9 0000 G'9CC $ 0021SC01$ f 00000942 $ 00$'91-1SI S 0004//11 $ COI'1L1'09 00[104'92 000'Sec 'et 000'096 • MO/SO 00S'Eil191 000'06L'OC 000'061 00I'962 000191' 000'Itrlt 00$'91C92 0010LOOZ C0C'114'9 000.91i'Cl 000£Ib DOC'9S0'0$ OOS'L9C'OS 0009611$ 00002872 000010CL 001.12)'C 00Ylit 000•I1-'S OOO'LLC9 'MISS" 000069 000'529 0091116'S 0090021'0 OOV/59'S 001-BCTOOL 009'1 c.$9 00900tCIt 009'000re 009'259Yt 00L190'12 C00191'OL DOS COC OOL9t9'OI DOC22LZ D06'1CA'1 ODCOO OOC'SZOB 00L'9101, 008'2,0CZ 900'11S6' I 0012$201 0091104 DOV$991, 00C90£'e 00el-Lit 00St99'I 000'119'e 000829'L 002 180i 000091'r 002.001V 000•21210 $ 000290'S S D00120$ S DOE109'9CS S 002 019'Le 009109'129 000lle 00419C'LC 000'CL✓SC 00011e$2 00000Z11 000•216'SI 000'096 00000✓1t1 009'692'I 001-1STLL 009/120/1 001014112 000•609'S (009'02C'2) COCOLC2 006'969. OOTLe • • OOD9aL • • 005'00 OOd'990'I $ 9 - S OOL'LCL'le 006'199'el OW 911.1$ • • 00C't 00121$ 000'9SS 004'202 00C461 001'tte 001.'11 COOL 000'1-1214 0001129L 002'28002 00030E 002128 002'14'9 00011T2I 000111'2 - 0000212209 D00210'00 001181'84 •- 000'0591$ D09'OLO'CI 00VCZYC •' 001,11C2 D001.1.1.'S 000'1129 - - • 00047S 000'612 000'£So 009'000 000'Le9 006281 • 002'6I 0046L21) 009b201) 008710$ 000'099'221 00012!'St 000'2100 000'02 002'0 00010212 00219TLt 00171L11 0001190'02 002'219'IC 00//1092 D00.01 • 001'02 O 02'222'2 006'1261 0029f61. • 002'020'2 00LSI0'o OOCLOCC • • - DOOe98•l 000'LL9'l COOL 15% O 01199.9 (Claire 00092C1 000'911 000'0 002'22 ' 001YL9'2 000'Cl9 000'114 OIWLSC5 000199't C00'900'2 °COCO't 0061.1.1'I OOL2091 ODY'16L'S D09'011'2 009'Len DOCIll'C S 00L199'I S 00VIOL'1 S 000'9LC'e S 000'099'C S CO242$1 S ➢ONYWO CNN 05/10N3 a0uele$ (30041000.01106 111010010223 GOO) . lup eenuewtl l4 00091011901 ae0q teen 610014d 0491141e➢1V101 In02100024 201 00000$1 0800194 00 i 0003 Le010 NORM e1~,t00$0 dl1 A000 /0040200 • 1001MUV I11NIe0a 1190019990$0$4010991 000l11'ley}luny ma puvidu epodauvur100d9 02201I61010009 00900/1000 VdaOS Owl We AeM 10 NSW u000nMu00 Bu1e0400➢ e0ul14H1 e1nW003 000120:61.100001 0011 1020000. 0101004 UDC MOOS 109W091eu0010190d 0100000 0000d N0 M10$10ww0d 6990TtONVN1d D09'1999C $ 00A969'90 9 OCTDLOt S CO✓IOCOCI S DSc SCL'OSL f. 00691 ✓OS $ 004CMift $ 00l190092 $ 009'909'91C$ 009190'92 $ 002'Ise '9l $ 091'6601t $ 110100$112,4t0d 0011012210101 001101'$9 00d'S84'SL DOO'SI/'1t DOVetr'SC COOLVI6 CC l'90011 009 LeVCC 00,99e'el 000 et! 000'fe2 DOC'AO - D00'000'0Cl 000'00L6Y1 000'00014 - 000'000'061 000'001'efl 000'000'OS --000'001'L _ 00L902111 002'32'01 ` - 000'02e'2 002'20001 0OCZSI'0e 000'O9Bi 00f0117l 001'Let'CL DOL'80Ct 001'022.t 001'692'2 $01-1 00014 00011Y 001'2014 009SC1'II 000OZL'0E 00l'191 00CIOC 000'89Y 000'901e1 0n0'Otl'1 DO LIST, 000'00e'1 010000 DOCIIIV1 - 0Ortee'L 00V200'Z 009'911'9 OOTSL✓l 001'6L✓I 009Y991 000161 000'C29 D09199 C997.66'Le 000OLL'6 D00'L9S'.el 009'e6B'e2 001.11.2'6 600'49014 0050CC5 0051669 (*Wee 0 - - 009'01,1'L 006'6)S 0014LS COON COO, I DoOse 000SIC'92 001'01- l'9 0091CL'I 001R1 - 00099CC2 000'!LI'L COT899'I 000'OZO'C ODY'I1I 0061t 009'999'0 008'COTI 004116'L - ODL'569'61 00•518V9 00 L'OOLL contort- OOC'10/ 00911a 0004LS'91 00Leli9L COOL O, 00011C09 , 000'0005L9 OCS'39l11 000'O9CLl 00[156'II OOL'OCCl/ 000'00C9et S 000000/56 $ ecals YCI $ $ • S $ • $ - $ • S 0004011C1 f 000000'I21. S C01'0200$0 S 000109C S 000.901'S $ 000'0c9'0 $ t00906 90100.31d. IeeleY 'p6pne PONelad IOnNV NOPAS Pe Kohl IrryeV N6pnS p0N019+d piny 110000 120100I01d NnNV 80601 A! 901LO Ai OW Ad 00290 Ad 9WLO A! 10/90 Ad 00I90 Ad 15110 Ad IOW Ad 60190 Ai 9011O Ad (WOO A! 00I90 Ad 90110 Ad LOl90 Ai rIe101 pund wows 1000 eN.1 m0i0'd pgde0 epund 02u00e0i 200009 000i I0 00 00 2.070.1011 10t0E010 0300 10000104 0/01 0W094 pNt11664 wed 000000001001000A en9e6ea n,60 00Le00IV1t0eq VLS 11020091004142b 10-10 pu0W04nOWlea 02210d 90100/04unqu119a awns 9/111N$ All 0/1 w1eS V NOHOW 6➢OM00➢ 1r10NVNld 96850 put 690100g p)IDu9uli pq OItta 0 Ammon Wu OZ • LOOZ li �• _ ZZelOel Gann Appropriations Limit In November 1979, the voters of the State approved Proposition 4, commonly known as the Gann Initiative. The Proposition created Article XIIIB of the State Constitution, placing limits on the amount_ of revenue that can be spent by public agencies from the "proceeds of taxes:" In 1980, the State Legislature added Section 7910 to the Government Code, providing that the goveming body of each local jurisdiction must establish, by resolution, an appropriations limit for the following year. The appropriations limit for any fiscal year is equal to the previous year's limit adjusted for population changes and changes in the California per capita income. The Commission is subject to the requirements of Article XIIIB. Gann appropriations limits are calculated for and applied to the Commission. In accordance with the requirements of Article XIIIB implementing legislation, the Board approved Resolution No. 08-017 on June 11, 2008, establishing appropriations limits for the Commission at $311,666,690. The FY 2008/09 budget appropriated $297,960,200 in taxes for the Commission, falling well within the limits set by the Gann Initiative. Based on historic trends and future projections, if appears the Commission's use of the proceeds of taxes, as defined by Article XIIIB, will continue to fall below the appropriations limit. The projected gap between the Commission's projected "use of proceeds" and appropriations limit remains significant over the next decade. The resolution and calculation for the FY 2008/09 appropriations limit are as follows: 32 2008-2009 APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT 2007-2008 Appropriations Limit $289,297,351 2008-2009 adjustment: Change in Califomia per capita income = 4.91 percent Change in Population, Riverside County = 2.71 percent 4.91 + 100 = 1.049 100 2.71 + 100 = 1.027 100 1.049 x 1.027 = 1.077323 $289,297,351 x 1.077323 = $311,666,690 2008-2009 Appropriations Limit $311,666,690 Source: California per capita income — California Department of Finance Population, Riverside County — California Department of Finance Demographic Research Unit 33 • 1SECTION I GUIDING POLIC ES 34 • Commission Policy Goals and Objectives The following material outlines the Commission's adopted policy goals, objectives and financial policies that serve as the framework for the work plan presented in the FY 2008/09 Budget. ,Promote Mob'Iity The Commission, in cooperation with local, state, and federal agencies, will strive to create fa n transportation system that promotes efficient mobility both within the County and While Riverside County grapples with the challenges of a declining real estate market and Ian uncertain economy, the need for better mobility and transportation remains a top public policy priority that the Commission is poised to address. The 10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan, approved in December 2006, will become more prominent this year as environmental work moves into high gear on SR-91, 1-15 and 1-215. The Commission will also work with partners including the Southem California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA or Metrolink), CVAG, and WRCOG to deliver transit services, improve highways and arterials in the Coachella Valley, and ensure investment of TUMF dollars in Western County. In moving forward with this aggressive program of projects and services, the Commission will face the challenge of lower Measure A and declining state transportation revenues along with uncertainty regarding the availability of federal dollars. The following are emphasis areas for the Commission in FY 2008/09: • Complete projects and programs included in the 1989 Measure A and determine use for unexpended revenues. • Aggressively implement the environmental process on key components of the 10- Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan which includes the widening of SR- 91, 1-15, and 1-215. • Develop the toll program consistent with the 10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan including obtaining state and federal toll authority for select projects. • Seek to obtain "state legislative authority to utilize the design -build method of project delivery to advance project delivery schedules. • Continue to work with state and federal agencies to program and construct projects in the STIP, Proposition 1B bond programs, the Measure A program, and other high priority projects. • Maxim'¢e the effective application and use of Western County TUMF funds to deliver eligible Commission priority projects. • Work closely with local jurisdictions to implement the FY 2007-2009 TUMF Regional Arterial Program and facilitate the delivery of arterial improvements in Western County. • Circulate the project level environmental document for the Mid County Parkway and receive the Record of Decision by the end of the 2008 calendar year. 35 • Circulate the draft project level environmental document for the SR-79 realignment project. • Evaluate the results of geotechnical field exploration, testing services, and technical evaluation for the proposed Irvine -Corona Expressway, a CETAP corridor. • Actively participate in the SR-91 Advisory Committee and Riverside Orange Corridor Authority to facilitate near and long-term improvements to SR-91; enhance intercounty public transit options and foster the development of a new corridor between the two counties. • Advocate streamlining efforts at the state and federal levels to facilitate timely project reviews and approvals. • Coordinate and provide public access to commuter information to foster the use of alternate modes of transportation such as ridematching for car/vanpooling, transit through the provision of a regional trip planner, and real. -time traffic information for congestion avoidance. • Continue cooperation with the FTA regarding the Small Starts process to support the initiation of the Perris Valley Line commuter rail service by2011, which has now been included for $50 million in the President's FY 2008/09 federal budget. Continue to develop a vision of transit service for Riverside County. Mitigate and Address the Impact of Goods Movement The Commission will work with federal, state, and local governments to facilitate the movement of goods and services to, within, and through the County, recognizing the vital role mobility plays in the economic health of the County, the State, and the nation. • Seek funding and local agency concurrence to implement the Commission's approved, high -priority railroad grade separation priority list to mitigate the impact of increased goods movement demands on the transportation system. • Remain. committed to a regional approach regarding goods movement issues in order to maximize funding from state and federal sources to goods movement needs in Southern California. • Work closely with Ca!trans, SANBAG, Ventura County Transportation Commission, and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority to conduct an environmental justice analysis and community outreach to supplement the Multi - County Goods Movement Action Plan (MCGMAP). Ensure improved System Efficiencies The Commission will select projects and allocate funds in a manner that will improve safety and reduce congested traffic corridors. • Advocate the development and use of advanced technologies for transportation applications that are affordable and practical • Work with public and private interests to apply real-time technology to disseminate commuter information that will support the use of alternate modes and improve 36 • • • efficiency of the regional transportation system. • Assure'the effectiveness of transit planning through the annual SRTP process with a goal toward promoting program efficiency and effectiveness. • Provide innovative commuter rideshare programs to reduce single occupant vehicle trips and coordinate with other regional rideshare service providers to address intercounty commute trips. • 'Support the deployment of a Southern Califomia Association of Governments (SCAG) region 511 system that will make real-time traffic information available to commuters for the purpose of trip planning and congestion avoidance. • Work with Caltrans and the Califomia Highway Patrol (CHP) to continue providing a motorist aid system which includes a call box program and an FSP program including temporary services in freeway construction zones. • Continue development, in partnership with Caltrans and SANBAG, of the Inland Empire Transportation Management Center. Foster Environmental Stewardship The Commission will achieve its mobility goals while promoting environmental stewardship and protecting the area's natural resources and quality of life. • Continue working with the RCA to implement the MSHCP and to assist in the assembly of the reserve system, with a goal to utilize the Measure A commitment to the MSHCP as much as possible prior to the beginning of the 2009 Measure A program. • Work with SCAG, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), sub -regional agencies, and local jurisdictions to implement a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) that meets regional air quality goals and conformity guidelines. • Support outreach and educational programs that promote the benefits of ridesharing, transit, rail, and availability of help through www.CommuteSmart.info, 1-800-COMMUTE, and 511. • Facilitate private/public use of clean fuels technology. • Consider and address new state mandates regarding greenhouse gas emissions as part,of long-range and transportation planning. This will require a close working relationship with regional, local, state, and federal agencies. i Encourage Economic Development Transportation decisions will consider the economic benefits derived from any improvement, and, where feasible and practical, will pursue transportation alternatives that enhance or complement economic development. • .Support local agencies in the design and construction of interchanges that are in proxim ty to regional economic centers and developments. • Support local projects, consistent with countywide transportation goals, which enhance business development, local employment, and area tourism. 37 i Support Transportation Choices through Intermodalism and Accessibility County residents will be served, where economically feasible, through the development of transportation alternatives that consider the needs of a wide range of citizens. • Work with transit providers and local social service agencies to provide specialized transit service and the Commission's innovative Transportation. Reimbursement and Information Project program to meet a broad spectrum of socio-economic transit needs. • Integrate commuter assistance programs and marketing with transit in order to foster the use of alternative commuting modes. • Implement the Commission's commuter rail SRTP and SCRRA's long-range strategic plan for expansion of the commuter rail system benefiting Riverside County constituents with an emphasis on the Perris Valley Line, an extension from Riverside to Perris via Moreno Valley. • Pursue the goals and objectives as outlined in the Public Transit -Human Services Transportation Coordination Plan for Riverside County related to a unified, comprehensive strategy for transportation service delivery focused on unmet transportation needs of elderly individuals, persons with disabilities, and individuals of low income. Prioritize Public and Agency Communications The Commission will provide timely, informative, and accurate information to encourage informed public and agency participation in the Commission's decision .making processes. • Promote a close working relationship with news and civic entities to increase interest in and understanding of transportation and related issues. • Enhance the provision of public information through various forms of communication (e.g., website, television, Speakers Bureau, print media, radio, etc). • Maintain an ongoing effort of informing Riverside County's Congressional and State Legislative delegations regarding County transportation issues. • Develop an effective long-range legislative strategy regarding the upcoming reauthorization of Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) to ensure that the federal government participates as a full partner in funding Riverside County projects that are of national and regional significance. • 38 Financial and Administration Policies Budget Policies • The Commission shall budget no more than one percent (1%) of Measure A sales tax revenue for administrative salaries and benefits. • Administrative program delivery costs will be budgeted at whatever is reasonable and necessary, but not to exceed four percent (4%) of Measure A sales tax revenues (inclusive of the one -percent salary limitation). • The Commission shall budget 100% of the annual required contribution related to the postretirement health care benefits. • Amounts will be budgeted by fiscal year for multi -year projects based on best available estimates with the understanding that, to the extent actuals vary from those estimates and the project is ongoing, adjustments will be made on an ongoing basis. • The fiscal capital budget should be consistent with the strategic plan and deviations appropriately noted, explained, and justified. • A balanced budget shall be adopted annually with operating and capital expenditures and other financing uses funded by identified revenues and other financing sources as well as available fund balances. i Revenue Policies • Sales tax revenue projections will be revised semi-annually to ensure use of current and relevant data. Staff may adjust annual amounts to reflect the most current ,economic trends. • A strategic application of local funding sources will be used to maximize federal and state funding of projects. • Fiduciary responsibility regarding Western County TUMF revenues shall be exercised, and revenues will be allocated pursuant to Commission direction and the approved 2009 Measure A. l Debt Management Policies • The Commission will maintain 2.0x debt ratio coverage on all senior debt. • Debt issuance will be for major capital projects including engineering, right of way, and construction. Operating requirements, if any, must be from current ongoing revenues. • Costs of issuance including the standard underwriter's discount will not exceed two percent (2%). • The Commission may enter into interest rate swaps to better manage assets and liabilities and take advantage of market conditions to lower overall costs and reduce [interest rate risk. • While it is the intent of the Commission to establish a cash debt reserve for long term bond issuance, surety bonds can be obtained when beneficial to the 39 Commission. • The commercial paper program and other short-term financing vehicles will provide advance funding for projects included in the expenditure plan of the approved 2009 Measure A. • The Commission will consider actions to lessen the restriction of the $500 million 2009 Measure A bonding cap, which could include the possibility of a future ballot measure to increase the cap. Auditing, Accounting, and Financial Reporting Policies • The Commission will issue a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) in accordance with the GASB Statement 34 financial reporting model. • An audit is to be conducted annually on the Commission's accounting books and records. As long as the Commission has outstanding bonds, an independent i accounting firm must conduct the audit. • The Commission is responsible for ensuring that audits of Measure A and TDA funding recipients are completed and reviewed for compliance and other matters in i a timely manner. • An intemal audit risk assessment program will be maintained to identify improvements in controls and procedures as well as best practices. Capital Planning and Programming Policies • Established priorities will be reviewed annually with the Commission. Reserve Policies • The Commission will maintain program reserves in accordance with Measure A and TDA policies and guidelines. • The Commission will maintain a cash reserve at least equal to five percent (5%) of annual revenues (exclusive of reimbursements and matching funds). • The Commission will establish and maintain a transit operator's reserve of ten percent (10%) for the Coachella Valley and Palo Verde Valley. Additionally, a ten percent (10%) reserve will be established and maintained for each of the Western County transit operators (public bus and commuter rail). Cash Management/Investment Policies • Where possible, the Commission will encourage receipt of funds by wire transfer to its accounts. • Balances in the bank operating account will be maintained at the amount necessary to meet monthly expenditures. • Idle funds will be invested per the Commission's established investment policy. emphasizing in order of priority: 1) safety, 2) liquidity, and 3) yield. • Cash disbursements to local jurisdictions and vendors/consultants will be 40 • completed in an expeditious and timely manner. Human Resources Management Policies • Commission staffing levels will be consistent with the intent of its enabling legislation, which envisioned a small, but effective staff. • Contract staff and consultants will be used to augment staff efforts as much as possible to support programs or work loads, which do not appear to be of a permanent nature. Information Technology Policies • Significant effort will be made to maintain efficient and cost-effective technology infrastructure by continuously upgrading network equipment and software to ensure', quality performance, productivity, and connectivity among staff, other agencies, and the public. Network security will continue to be a top priority to maintain the integrity of the Commission's network and information. 41 • SECTION. 21 BuraGer PROCESS SUMMARY 42 • Budget Process Summary The budget is the primary performance tool used to measure and control accountability of public agencies for taxpayer dollars. The budget communicates to all stakeholders (i.e., elected officials, regional agencies, and citizens) how the investment they made will be put to; use by providing detailed information on the specifics of resource allocation and expenditures. Progress is monitored on a monthly basis, and revisions and updates are made as, deemed necessary to reflect changing dynamics and. accommodating unplanned requests. This results in a budget document that is useful • and meaningful as a benchmark against which . to evaluate govemment accomplishments and/or challenges and to assess compliance with fiscal accountability.'' i I Chart 5 — Budget Process ID Task Name Duration 2007 2008 JIF1M1AfmIJIJIA J IJ IAIsloINID 1 Short Term Strategic Direction Phase 105 days 2 Resource Identiflcation and Allocation Phase 80 days ,f - 3 Needs Assessment Phase 90 days 4 Development and Review Phase 110 days ti ry 5 Adoption and Implementation Phase 40 days 6 Budget Roles and Responsibilities 225 days Short -Term Strategic Direction Phase The first phase of the budget process is to determine the direction of the Commission in the short-term and to integrate . this with the Commission's long-term goals and objectives. Annually a workshop is held for the policy makers to evaluate and determine where the Commission plans to be and what it desires to accomplish over the next five to ten years. Annual reviews allow for timely responsiveness to any significant political, legislative, or economic developments that may occur locally, statewide, or nationally. Staff then adjusts its course based on the long-term strategic direction of the policy makers. Staff convenes in early January to both assess actual results, compared to the current year budget, and map changes in strategy for the ensuing fiscal year by reviewing and, ' if necessary, redefining 'departmental mission statements and setting goals. Those goals, upon review by the Board, become the Commission's short-term strategic direction. Chart 6— Functional organization Chart FY 2008/09 43 CHART 6 - FUNCTIONAL ORGANIZATION CHART FY 2008/09 Board of Commissioners Policy Committees Transit Plans & Programs Budget & Implementation Property Advisory Committees Technical Advisory Citizens Advisory Legal Counsel Executive Management Executive Committee Multimodal Programs 'Commuter Assistance *Call Box Program ' Freeway Service Patrol ' Rail operations 'Transit Planning Administration Legislative Affairs and Communications 'Clerk of the Hoard and Board Relations •0trice and Records Management 'Disadvantaged Business Enterprise "Claims and Insurance Administration 'Rumen Resources • Legislative Advocacy •Legislati -e Analysis "Public Information and Communications ' Media Relations -Goods Movement Capital Project Development and Delivery 'Highway and Fail Capital Programs 'New Corridora 'Property Management "State Transportation Improvement Program •Regional Transportation Plan 'Congestion Management •TUMP Program ' Finance •Fineneial Management "Budget Development "Contract Management and Procurement Resource Identification and Allocation Phase Simultaneous with the short-term strategic direction phase, staff -focuses on what funding sources are available and what monies are estimated as carryover from the current year. In actuality, resource identification occurs throughout the year, but. it is finalized in the; upcoming fiscal year budget. Amounts to be borrowed are determined as part of the Tong -term strategic planning process, but such amounts are adjusted in the annual budget to reflect more current information. Needs Assessment Phase Staff and consultants evaluate what projects and studies need to be accomplished. Project priority and sequencing set in the long-term strategic plan are the top 'candidates for budget submission. However, priorities may have changed due to economic necessities or political realities, resulting in projects being rescheduled by acceleration or postponement. New projects may be added or existing priorities deleted based on Commission direction. Development and Review Phase Using all the data and information gathered from the previously mentioned stages, department heads submit their desired budgets to the Finance Department. The information, along with staff and overhead allocations, is compiled into a preliminary or draft budget. After review by the Executive Director and inclusion of the desired changes, the draft budget is presented to the Board for input. Adoption and Implementation Phase The proposed budget is submitted to the Commission at its May meeting. A hea ing is scheduled to allow for public comment on the proposed budget. The Commission may choose, after public hearing, to adopt the budget or to request additional information and/or changes to the budget. The budget must be adopted no later than June 15 of each year. Upon adoption by the Commission, the budget is entered into the . accounting system effective July 1 for the next fiscal year. 45 Budget Roles and Responsibilities Involvement in the budget permeates all staffing levels at the Commission from c erical support staff to policy makers. Each program manager develops a. detailed line item operating and capital budget. Those budgets by program are submitted to the department head for review and approval. The department heads submit their budgets to the Chief Financial Officer by mid -March. The Finance Department compiles the department budgets. Both the capital and operating budgets are combined into the draft budget for the entire Commission. The Executive Director reviews the entire budget for overall consistency with both the short- and long-term strategic direction of the Commission, appropriateness of funding sources for the identified projects and studies, and reasonableness of the operating budget expenditures, which should also correspond to the capital budget. Expenditure activities of the funds are controlled at the budgetary unit, which is the financial responsibility level (e.g., Measure A) for each function (i.e., administration, programs, intergovernmental distributions, debt service, capital outlay, and other financing uses). These functions provide the legal level of budgetary control (i.e., the level at which expenditures cannot legally exceed the appropriated amount). Budget -to -actual reports are distributed to program managers and directors on a monthly basis for informational purposes and quarterly for identification and evaluation of any significant budget variations. Management has the discretion to transfer budgeted amounts within the financial responsibility unit according to function or may provide support for supplemental budget appropriations requests. The Finance Department compiles the data and submits a budget appropriations adjustment at mid- year to the Commission for approval. Chart 7 — Staff Organization Chart FY 2008109 46 Lti CE:=1 1.4...V Nne LIOPlay. [RM.a FA. A eT1aYR NIIYLWYjj •AV.S j. I min.,' um I woom mro tArNe, sm.* 11.16 I /AMA /ma tng.aVvvy agorom 1•11./0 "'ft."*".IIAA"., 3 e"..."°'"J" P.OA/3.16ivvrmi MO.*. " """. II"[2.}I 3.1[1. 111111=1/11.111111. ...3.11/A pv/ I/0..04:3 4.**A1/6.1mlom nwuKlopemo 1.30./ AlttV ARO 1111=3 V*AIVIOW Nalwnnep [A/o pi A /poop 111:12ZEZ2LIZZO MILZ13=11ZEZINI ADvAtA f.qu.5 PROS V 0411/0 vaic Wourtow WIN }. IY.IPPNP.I buoune:Voy[... [ Y.h UY5/1 3.31/110S.v). [ AICIAVIL.01**PVVY In. 1/.n/VVV), A3NAA maws/ Idemn.1 eu!p,zeri JobeV•pl RAM V , [ MVO 1731/../ P'.r,./I6NP.PV IMIZZOZEZIEZIII P•411.A1 Ima 3AYka0 I .A.A.A0 A. root/ 3I AI V II *3 sJauorasnanuoo W peos uopsiwwoo uoppodsuau Awnoo appien! 60/800Z Ad • • • i SECTION .3] FUND BUDCETS1 transportation Commission 48 I' WC al Ile S Doa Fag CC S D09sae L 9 boo BCC '6t S 0 6t L SSL UI S Don 1a s DOB LES L 6 0.11 k. v sal 5 DOL 19a a S Doa OrE S Err6T6,1 Dos 901 C S JeaA lopu3 90ue's/ pun.' 006 In' SL9 009"9Lr ZC 000'LLt DM owlet bbs CLE 9L (00L'BSO'191) 00Z'BOZY 0C9'891't OOZ'PZ9 (0o9'660'll7 100Z'909'66) D00 000 OSL 7109 EL9'9C 009 Z19 a boo Oos Z boa CL9 9C 1004 LOC LC1 - - boo cos L o00'o00'oet - o00'o00'oCL - 100L'990'1,60) I00L'990'9C) (o0o946'96) bat E1r SC cop Ova 96 boa 604'le9 oottra'et 000'0e9'EC 000'OB2'BC9 006 66Z 9E4 009'969Y91 001'66e1 Oos'ar'e 000'OB9'L01 009'9C6'L ao0Y1Z'I 001'Ztt'0 000'981'9 009'616'9 000'929'S 001'9Z6 l Oo0'960'1 OD4'LSC'L 00S'99L OOZ'9Lr b09 BZe Z co9Cro"s£ boo 'ocett 009'E49't 000'OC9'£E • 000'00L'tt 004'94119 DOr'erL'r9 0o0'oos 000'009 o0L'60r'LCe °once't oat', 000'ON L 00eLE6'I 000'o£L'L 000'061.'86 000'8a99 000'000'901 S 00Z BOZ'1 OW r 1009'990'10 boo tse eL 00999 OOC'Its 'Z1 corns"L 1Z DOL Det9 o04 iG6 00L'11/6'9 00V10BZ 1¢eA to euluulOts ecuele9 PonA 00C1 100L'ELL'aN woo'Be9'99) 009't£r (009'tea (000'7,6) (009'Z691 se1111puear3 umo enueneyl0(AoutiliNeD)9900Z3 100Z9LE100 u 006 Ca Cl 1009 9L0 Zl 00E'roe (stun) rownos.8upueks 660 I009 el./ Cl (ooTblirZ)— • cos 99Z - mainly sorrow.' mac • (Loom 9aa nog 0u'0ueulA sau7C 000'1 (OOL'o00'p low't 9CZr) 009'LE9 (oo9'sos) (006'99E) 1009'269) campusax31960 en 016961 l0009910096) 690293 boo e 6 00e L9Z l4 006 ZCL"see bey Lst t 00Z 999 Z Dot Zee eL b0£ L£L 9 839,1110N3dk31V101 001'169'0a 001/' 199 0l l 009'9L6'ZZ 000'160'6C V9Z8'2Z 0' 19081 000'018 000'9L6'LC 009'999'200 000'EZ6 bbreTeTes 009989 ZOZ 000'89Z'0 o06'CLL-ll DOZ'9£0't ooe'rtei 00V69L'ZZ 00Z9�e0T— 006 r1CZ 000'e9Z'e OOS'LB4'9 004'999'9 • • 301Aa3S 1e301V101 accents' to moo slcaaAtd ItsAtut sluetuAed IeOpupd 301Ad361990 61666009d V 3dnSV31y 1Y101 N96Ie0 609 assMo19Ae0 pelad Iee060 611Y1100dd 1V11dV0 d316.0 ONV Y 3llCISV3W sotlesOdd lYN003d1V101 9weltlsty 1960101y 2auelspsy celnwula0 00S'LLC 11111E4 scueul pezryapeas 000'Z IZ' l ABM Jn 14e1d oot'ZZt'e suonead0 tied o00'a9L'9 0vestor Bad pue 0quueld 009'9I8'9 ceniil ItU010sd sruvuoodd lYN01'J3d 00E'911 00£161 001.'641 00E'LCL'r S301A93611N3W30yNVW TY101 009%0 bot Ls boo sot 0091311 aousuu DOZ'9Z 000'n 000'49l ODr'SLe suapeclunwurop pue suety tuumpOsl 001'U 001'19 009brC 001'189'1 uo0e-0tluPPV 006'9 006'9 00SVE Oob'rtz aeWeOeueyy 21,1o:axa S301Ad3S 1N3W3oYNVly 63dnL10N3d%3 009'LSC'CZ 009'98Z'99 OD(Vt/V9 00£'4Z8 009'LtZ'tS 002'0[6'011 001'oes't o01'999't Ooz'9Lt'et ao8'9r4'£ 000'o90 00996Z1 boa trt noel OOr OCL oa 9�196 0 9b C 6 Oct at 009'1Z1 bOZ£r 00L'OCr'l • 000'6 OOZ'l6r DOB' 000'000'9 - 000'0CL7 009766'ZZ _ _,,,,_,__ •, 000'£Bl'Z, ,__ ,- .., - - 009'95£'99 000'904L 000'Z49'1 00a'C06'S Doll 000'000'LB - - 00o'ete't a00'o92'Lt S- S • S• S 000'CM S 000'L09'ZC 4 000'066'Le S S S. 4 000'004'E 4 -Nook 301Ad3S 51031'Odd 30NV1SISSV SONnA 33d NOI1V511116 A371YA 1311YA mAnco 3dYS dSA 11,e3N30 1VI3N30 SNINI811100 1930 1611dV0 11SNYd1 NOI1V160dSNY211 1660AINI1 30d3A VT73Vi0V00 Nd31S3M A.C1J10d V 3NrISY311 31Y1S '1Y001 NOLLY1110dSNVul 01W •W. S3nN3A31:1 1V101 sumul 6091.1196661 enuanad 1aL00 9nuensd dWnl lelueWweboaawl sal colas All vel sal es y emteaW 93nN3A3d NOILAIP10630 w lows a un A grew Opus 6• tz sissy sy OW P d B •tl a10e1 Fund Budgets Budgetary Basis The Commission accounts for its 24 budgeted governmental funds using the modified accrual basis of accounting and the current financial resources measurement focus. Revenues are recognized as soon as they are both measurable and available to meet current year obligations. Revenues are considered to be available when they are guaranteed as, to receipt, based on expenditure of funds (i.e., government snatching funds), or certain to be received within 180 days of the end of the fiscal year. Expenditures are generally recorded when a liability is incurred; however, debt service expenditures are recorded when the payment is due. Chart 8 — Total Fund Expenditures and Transfers Out (Uses) Capital Project Funds 18% Special Revenue Funds 73% Budget Authorization and Amendment Process The Commission authorizes expenditures according to administration, programs, capital outlay, and debt service as well as other financing uses. As long as management does not exceed budgeted amounts in these broad classifications, it may transfer amounts among individual line items according to function and between financial responsibility units defined as the General, Measure A, Motorist Assistance, LTF, STA, TUMF, Capital Projects, and Debt Service funds. Any other budget changes require the authorization of the Commission. The Commission may take action at any monthly meeting to amend the budget. Those amendments are incorporated into the budget, as they occur, and are reflected in the CAFR in the final budget amounts reported in the budgetary schedules. Fund Structure There are 24 funds that account for the Commission's budgeted resources and are categorized into four govemmental fund types: General fund, special revenue funds, capital projects funds, and Debt Service fund. There are five funds reported in the General fund and 16 in the special revenue funds_ Two capital projects funds are used to account for capital project expenditures financed with short- or long-term debt 50 proceeds. In addition, the Commission has one Debt Service fund to account for debt related activity. Chart 9-Budgeted Funds Structure (femoral Fund Riverside County Transportation Commission Budgeted Funds Structure 1 1 Special Revenue Funds Measure A Administration ae LTF Administration e RCTC RaA Operations RCTC Right of Way Management RCTC Planning and Programming FSP I Capital PrUieCiS Furls LWestern Courtv Bond Reserve Comma -drat Paper SAFE TUMF Measure A Westem County Rail Capital Measure A Westem County Highway Measure A Westem County Specialized Transit Measure A Westem County Commuter Assistance Measure A Westem County Local Streets and Roads Measure A Palo Verde Valley Local Streets and Roads Measure A Coachella Valley Specialized Transit, Measure A Coachella Vallev H otwav Measure A Coati -fella Valley Local Streets and Roads Measure A Coachella Valley Regional Arterial Stale Transit Assistance Local Transportagnn Funds 2009 Measure A Westem County Highway I _ -Debt Service Fund' - Non -Budgeted Funds In addition to the 24 budgeted govemmental funds, the Commission has one fiduciary fund comprised of an agency fund. The Commission does not adopt a budget for this fund. General Fund Overview The General fund of the Commission is used to account for all activities not legally required or designated by Board action to be accounted for separately. For many public agencies, the General fund is the largest fund. The Commission's largest revenue source is Measure A, a locally levied sales tax that legally must be separately accounted for. The General fund receives a small portion of the Measure A sales tax revenue for administration and operation of the Commission. I 51 • The Commission's commuter rail operations, short-range transit planning, fund programming, j right of way management, regional issues, . and a portion of administration are accounted for in the General fund. ;The revenue sources for the General fund are Measure A sales tax,for administration; LTF sales tax; for administration and planning, programming, and monitoring (PPM) activities; LTF Article 4 funds for commuter rail transit operations and capital; user fees from licenses; statehighwayaccount (5B 45) funding for project planning; various other state and federal reimbursements not accounted for in other funds; and investment income. Chart 10— General Fund Sources i Other LTF Sales Tax 64% Transfers In 1% State Revenues 6% Measure A Sales Tax 13% Table 24 — General Fund Sources FY 2007 — 2009 FY O6107 FY 07/08 FY 07/08 FY O8/09 % Change % Charge Actual Revised Budget Proiected Budget Actual Revised MEASURE A SALES TAX $ 3,500.000 $ 3,400,000 $ 3,400,000 $ 3,400,000 -2.9% 0.0% LTF SALES TAX 11.130,700 12,163,800 11,153.700 17260,000 55.1% 41.9% STATE FUNDING STIP '., 218,400 918,800 101.300 1,393,800 538.2% 51.7% Other 166,000 300,000 N/A 80.7% FEDERAL FUNDING Other 47,300 3.220,000 111,400 3,020,000 6284.8% -6.2% OTHER REIMBURSEMENTS Local 264,100 508.000 147,400 410,000 552% -19.3% Misceraneous 1,400 1,500 2,400 180.000 12757.1% 11900.0% USER FEES Licenses and Leases - 497,700 400,000 427700 400,000 -19.6% 0.0% OTHER 50,200 57,700 95,300 92,000 83.3% 59.4% INVESTMENT INCOME 489,300 329,400 304,700 164,700 -66.3% 50.0% TRANSFERS IN - 250000 137,300 264.300 N/A 5.7% TOTAL GENERAL FUND $ 16 199 100 $ 21 415 200 $ 15 88120Q $ 26 884.800 68.0% 75.5% Measure A sales tax revenues are used for administration and are the same as the prior year. The administrative allocation is adjusted at mid -year based on required expenditures, but in no event will exceed four percent (4%) of total Measure A revenues (including administrative salaries and benefits). 52 LTF sales tax revenues fund administration, planning staff and studies, and transit operations and capital for rail services. The changes compared to the prior year budget are for the following reasons: • Planning money is set by law at three percent (3%) of estimated LTF sales tax revenues. The FY 2007/08 revised budget includes the effect of the mid- year projection adjustment. This adjustment usually includes the unapportioned carryover amount, which is not determined until after the fiscal year end. • Transit funding is also tied to sales tax revenue growth_ The allocation of funding to commuter rail and bus transit operators, however, is based on need to the extent that revenues are available. • Allocations aggregating $5,000,000 for local jurisdictions' grade separation projects are included in the FY 2008/09 budget. STIP revenues fund PPM activities, which may vary annually. Other state revenues include grants funding for environmental justice analysis and an 1-15 interregional partnership study. Federal revenues are primarily reimbursements for geotechnical studies related to the proposed Irvine -Corona Expressway and the Rising Stars in Transit Internship Program. Other reimbursements are from other local agencies related to the geotechnical studies and a portion of the security costs at the commuter rail stations. 53 • Table 25 - General Fund Uses FY 2007 - 2009 FY 06/07 FY 07/08 Actual Revised Budget Personnel Salary and Fringe Benefits Professional and Support General Legal Services - Rrranciel Advisory - Ana Services Professional Services -Other Lease/Utilities General Communications - Maintenance Insurance Staff Related Information/Publicity SUBTOTAL Project and Operations Projects - General Rail Operations j Engineering .fight of Way SCRRA Contribution Special Studies SUBTOTAL FY 07/08 FY D8/09 Projected Budget Actual Revised $ 3,824,900 $ 4,090,200 $ 3,480,600 $ 275.200. 454,300 319,000 45,000 71,400 9,500 363,500 494,900 415,400 1,058,100 2,212.200 1,396,500 478.600 589,20G 385,100 197.800 304,700 233,200 84,100- 63,000 - 36,000 475,000 309,800 161,700 441,000 571,500 712,200 140,800 225,900 159,700 280 700 202.300 173.100 3.839,800 5,499,200 4,001,400 42,700 50,000 45.000 1,019,600 1,530,000 1,572,800 20,100 5,000 - 18,200 5,512,900 6,466,600 6,339,600 192.300 4.405,400 647.000 6,787,600 12,457,000 8,622,600 % Change % Change 3,328,900 -13_0% -18.6% 486,600 76.8% 7.1% 36,100 -15.3% -46.6% 485,900. 33.7% -1.8% 2,287,200 116.2% 3.4% 395,000 -17.5% -33.0% 368,700 86.4% 21.0% 86,500 2.9% 37.3% 344,900 -27.4% 11.3% 571,000 29.5% - -0;1% 236.100 67.7% 4.5% 190.200 -32.2% -6.0% 5,490,200 43.0% -02% 118,000 176.3% 136.0% 1,959,000 92.1% 28.0% 10,000 -50.2% 100.0% 20,000 WA WA 5,979.600 8.5% -7.5% 4,380.800 21781% - 12,467,400 83.7% - 0.196 Other LTF Disbursements 974,200 1,351,600 6,050,000 521.0% 347.6% Capital Outlay - 29.600 306.400_- - 11.700 333100 1025.3% 0.7% SUBTOTAL 1,003,800 1,658,000 11,700 6,383,100 535.9% 285.0% Debt Service Principal Payments Irderest Payments 24,400 500 SUBTOTAL 24,900 TOTAL GENERAL FUND --100.0% --100.0% WA N/A --100.0% N1A S 15.481600 $ 2a704.400 $ 16.116.30Q $ 27669609 2..ZYa 16.7% Personnel salary and fringe benefits have decreased from the FY 2007/08 budget by 18.6°/a- This [decrease is due to the prefunding of the postretirement health benefits actuarial accrued liability in FY 2007/08 as well as decreases of 9% in the CaIPERS employer contribution and of 40% in the workers' compensation premium from a correction to the Commission's business classification. Professional and support expenditures and project and operations expenditures are comparable to the prior year's budget. ` Other expenditures have increased significantly because of the anticipated use of $5,000,000 related to the allocations for local jurisdiction grade separation projects. 54 Special Revenue Funds Overview The Commission's special revenue funds are legally restricted as to use. Measure A sales tax, LTF sales tax, Westem County TUMF, state budgetaryy allocations, and vehicle registration fees are all accounted for in the 16 special revenue funds. State and federal reimbursements and project matching funds are used to supplement the Measure A'sales tax revenues. :The special revenue funds' resources are expended on County highway, rail, and regional arterial engineering, right of way acquisition, and construction; local streets and !roads maintenance, repair, and construction; bicycle and pedestrian facilities; education land incentive programs to encourage use of alternate modes of transportation; special ;social service transportation programs; public transit operation and capital needs; and 'motorist towing and freeway call box assistance. !REVENUES AND OTHER SOURCES Chart 11 -Special Revenue Funds Sources Other 1% Interest 2% TUMF 2% Federal Revenues 7% Slate Revenues 20% I 55 Transfers In 10% LTF 20% Measure A 38% Table 26 - Special Revenue Funds Sources FY 2007 - 2009 FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08 FY 06109 %Change %Charge Actual Revised Budget. Projected Budget ACNaI RevisedOMB MEASURE A SALES TAX Highways $ 49,128,500 $ 42,537000 $ 42,537,000 $ 42,630,000 -73.2% - 0.2% Red 18,176,200 16,706,OOD 16,106,000 16,169,000 -11A% 0.4% Regional Aderals t5,166,800 13,215,000 13,215,000 13,075.000 -13.8% -1.1% Local Streets and Roads 59,175,000 51,558,000 51,558,000 51,557,00P -12.9X - 0,0% Specialized Transit 9.393.300 8.784,OOD 8.184.009 8.189,000 -13A% -0.2% TOTAL MEASURE A /51.039,800 131600.000 131,600.000 131,600,000 -12.9% 0.0% LTF SALES TAX Article 4 TransB 74,162,500 77,224,800 67,000,000 68,379,000 -7.9% -11.5% STATE FUNDING FSP Budgetary Allocation 1,243,500 1,416,300 1,441,500 1,474,000 18:5% 4.1% 571P - 208,690 5.617.900 4,300,000 31,457,200 14980.2% 458.9% State Transit Assistance 18667,000 9,774,100 9774,100 22,992,800 21.9% 135.2% State Other1,248,000 3,566,800 2,440,100 10,98t;SW 778.3% 207.3% I FEDERAL FUNDING Federal TransB Administration 98,300 6,448,703 359,1� 10,960,000 1t039.4X 69.8% STIP 23,500 - 100.0% 0,0% Congestion Mitigation and Air Qual4y 1,567,400 20,561200 8,617,91X) 9,425,300 501.3% 54.2% Federal Other - 4�27,000 2,993,000 NfA 29.2°h I OTHER REIMBURSEMENTS Local 554,700 1,263,500 S49,800 1,74D,800 105.6% -9.7% Miscellaneous 23,400 - 100 1,000,000 41735% 0.0% USER FEES - - Vehicle Registration Fees 1,681,f00 1 460,000 1,470,000 1,485,000 -11.1% 2.4% TUMF REVENUE OTHER INVESTMENT INCOME TRANSFERS r4 TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 40,757,200 10,000,000 10,305,700 7,730,000 -81.0% -22.7% 5,867,600 2,490,200 1,479,100 1,435,200 -75.5% 42.4% 20,724,100 15,057,400 71,838,600 6,602,700 -68.1% 56.1% 739900 42.217.300 39,985,100 33 387 400 44124% MI% $ 318 806 6QQ 3 Y4a 925 200 S 269.361.100 S 342903 52e Z.52fi e� Measure A Special Revenue Funds Of the special, revenue funds, 11 are funded primarily with Measure A sales tax revenue_ the six Western County operating funds, the four Coachella Valley operating funds, and the Palo Verde Valley operating fund. These 11 funds account for all Measure A expenditures that are paid primarily from 1989 Measure A sales tax revenues and transfers in of 2009 Measure A debt proceeds. Chart 12 - Measure A Sales Tax Revenues by Geographic Area Coachella Valley 25% Pab Verde Valley 1% 56 westem County 74% Westem County Measure A Operating Funds These special revenue funds account for Westem County's 74% share of the Measure A sales tax. Since the sales tax leverages state and federal dollars, most of the Commission's reimbursements flow through this fund. Chart13 — Westem County Percentage of Total Special Revenue Fund Sources Other Funds 42% Western County Measure A Operating Funds 58% Table 27 — Western County Measure A Operating Funds Sources FY 2008 — 2009 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Dollar % Change Revised Budget Budget Variance Estimated Measure A Sales Tax Highways S 37,581,000 $ 37,727,000 5 146,000 0.4% Rail 16,106,000 16,169,000 63,000 0.4% Local Streets and Roads 39,044.000 39,194,000 150,000 0.4% Commuter Assistance 2,440,000 2,450,000 10,000 0.4% Specialized Transit 2.440.000 2,450.000 10,000 OA% Total Measure A 97,511,000 97,990,000 379,000 0.4% Local Transportation Fund Sales Tax 10,224,000 1.319,000 (8,905,800) 437.1% State Funding State Other 2,837,800 10,667,000 7,829,200 275.9% STIP 5,617,900 31,457,200 25,839,300 459.9% Federal Funding Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality 20,561,200 9,425,300 (11,135,900) -54.2% Federal Transit Administration 6,448,700 10.950,000 4,501,300 69.8% Federal Other 1,300,000 1,300,000 WA TUW 2,730,000 2,730,000 WA Other Miscellaneous Revenue 1,050.00D 1,000,000 (50,000) -4.8% Local Revenue 573200 557,100 (16,100) -2.8% Investment Income 7,712,100 3,575,100 (4,137.000) -53.6% Transfers In 24022,300 26.762.400 2.740,100 11.4% TOTAL Westem County Measure A S 176 659.000 S '197 733.10Q S 21-074.100 11.952 As Table 27 demonstrates, total revenues for the Westem County operating funds are 11.9% above the prior year's budget, principally due to increases in state STIP funding and transfers in representing commercial paper funding. Although total Measure A sales tax revenues are expected to be flat in FY 2008/09, all the Westem County programs funded by Measure A are projected to receive an increase of 0.4% in sales 57 • i • I tax revenues due to the impact of population (in Western County and Palo Verde Valley) or dwelling unit (in Coachella Valley) changes and taxable sales changes on the allocation formula. Coachella Valley Measure A Operating Funds These special revenue funds account for Coachella Valley's 25% share of the Measure A sates tax. Chart 14 — Coachella Valley Percentage of Total Special Revenue Fund Sources Coachella Valley Measure A Operating Funds 11% Other Funds 90% Table 28 — Coachella Valley Measure A Operating Funds Sources FY 2008 — 2009 FY 07108 FY 08/09 Dollar % Change Revised Budget Budget Variance Estimated Measure A Sales Tax Highways $ 4,956,000 $ 4,903,000 $ (53.000) -1.1% Regional Arterials 13,215.000 13.075,000 (140,000) -1.1% Local Streets and Roads 11,563,000 11,440,000 (123,000) -1.1% Specialized Transit 3.304.000 3 269 000 (35 000) -1.1% Total Measure A i 33,038,000 32,687,000 (351,000) -1.1% Other Miscellaneous Revenue 1,430,200 1,430,200 0.0% Investment Income 409,000 130,400 (278,600). -68.1% Transfers In 4,125.000 4,125,000 N!A TOTAL Coachella Valley Measure A $ 34 872,2N $ 2122,M $ 3,495.40Q 10.0% Although total Measure A sales tax revenues are expected to be flat in FY 2008/09, all the Coachella ! Valley programs funded by Measure A are projected to receive a decrease of 1.1%e in sales tax revenues due to the impact of population (in Western County and Palo Verde Valley) or dwelling unit (in Coachella Valley) changes and taxable sales 'changes on the allocation formula- Other revenues represent the Coachella Valley TUMF program's share of the debt service on the 1993 Series A sales tax revenue bonds used to fund regional arterial improvements- Transfers in of commercial paper proceeds provide funding for Coachella Valley highway projects. Palo Verde Valley Measure A Operating Fund 58 This special revenue fund accounts for Palo Verde Valley's 1% share of the Measure A sales tax. Chart 15 - Palo Verde Valley Percentage of Total Special Revenue Fund Sources Palo Verde Valley Measure A Operating Fund 0% Other Funds 100% Table 29 - Palo Verde Valley Measure A Operating Fund Sources FY 2008 - 2009 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 (Dollar % Change Revised Budget Budget Variance Estimated Measure A Local Streets and Roads • Investment Income $ 951,000 $ 923,000 $ (28,000) 2,400 1.300 (1.100) TOTAL Pato Verde Valley Measure A $ 953 40Q $ 924.300 $ 09100) -3.1% Although total Measure A sales tax revenues are expected to be flat in FY 2008/09,`the Palo Verde Valley local streets and roads program funded by Measure A is projected to receive a decrease of 2.9% in sales tax revenues due to the impact of population (in Westem County and Palo Verde Valley) or dwelling unit (in Coachella Valley) changes and taxable sales changes on the allocation formula. Non -Measure A Special Revenue Funds The non -Measure A special revenue funds account for funding from TDA's LTF and STA, TUMF, and motorist services. Table 30 - Local Transportation Fund Sources FY 2008 - 2009 FY 07/08 FY cow (Dollar % Change Revised Budget Budget Variance Estimated Local Transportallon Fund Sales Tax $ 67,000,000 $ 67,000,000 $ an% Investment Income 3.555,400 1,295,500 (2259.9001 TOTAL Local Transportation Funds $ 70.555 40Q 'S 68 295.500 $ f2 259 900) 1.2.% The LTF special revenue fund derives its revenue from one quarter of one cent of the. state sales tax that is retumed to source, and the LTF sales tax revenue in FY 2008/09 is projected to be unchanged. 59 • I Table 31 -Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Fund Sources FY 2008-2009 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Dollar % Change Revised Budget Budget Variance Estimated - Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee $ 10.000.000 $ 5,000,000 $ (5,000,000) -50.0% Local Revenue 612,100 500,000 (112,100). -18.3% Federal Other 4,227,000 1,693,000 (2,534,000) 59.9% Investment Income 2,059,000 1,141,900 (917,100) -44.5% Transfers In 17,705.000 2.500,000 (15,205,000) -85.9% TOTAL TUMF $ 34.603.100 $ 10.834.90Q ,$ (23-766 200) The TUMF fund accounts for the Commission's share of developer fee assessments on new residential and commercial developments in Westem County for regional arterials and CETAP corridors. TUMF revenue is projected to decrease 50% based on the weakened housing market. Federal revenues are related to federal reimbursements on the SR-79 realignment project. The transfer in consists of commercial paper funding for the SR-91/Green River Road interchange. Chart 16- Motorist Services Funds Sources FSP 54% Table 32 - Freeway Service Patrol Fund Sources FY 2008 - 2009 FY 07f08 FY Oa/09 Dollar % Change Revised Budget Budget Variance Estimated State Budgetary Allocation $ 1,416,300 $ 1,474,000 $ 57,700 4.1% State Other 729,000 294,500 (434,500) -59.6% Local Revenue 78,200 83,500 5,300 6.8% Investment Income ! 36,400 14,400 (22,000) -60A% Transfer from SAFE 490.000 - (490,000)-100.0% TOTAL Freeway Service Patrol S 2.749,90Q $ 1 866 400 $ 1883 5001 J2.1 % The FSP fund accounts for the state and local resources provided to cover the costs of servicing stranded motorists in covered service areas and construction zones by means of towing, changing tires, and providing fuel. Due to the accumulation of resources in the FSP fund balance, the transfer from the SAFE fund is not required. 60 Table 33 — Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies Fund Sources FY 2008 -- 2009 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Dollar °% Change Revised Budget Budget Variance Estimated Vehicle Registration Fees $ 1,460,000 $ Other Miscellaneous Revenue 10,000 Investment Income 149,500 TOTAL SAFE 1,495,000 $ 5,000 84,100 35,000 (5,000) (65,400) 2.4% -50.0% -43.7^% $ 1619.500 $ 1.584.10Q $ (35,4001 -2.2% The SAFE fund accounts for the $1 per vehicle registration fee levied on all registered vehicles within the County. It funds emergency aid call boxes located strategically on the highways throughout the County. Table 34 — State Transit Assistance Fund Sources FY 2008 — 2009 State Budgetary Allocation • Investment Income TOTAL State Transil Assistance FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Dollar % Change Revised Budget Budget Variance Estimated $ 9,774,100 $ 22,992,600 $ 13,218,500 135.2% 1133,600 360,000 (773,6001 -68.2% $ 10 907,700 $ 23 352,600 $ 12.444.900 114.1% The STA fund accounts for the state budgetary allocation for rail and bus transit operations and capital requirements. The allocation is strictly based on estimates of gas tax revenues and is provided by the Controller of the State of Califomia. It is subject to an annual state budget appropriation. EXPENDITURES AND OTHER USES Chart 17 — Special Revenue Funds Uses Transfers Out 7% Local Streets and Roads 10% LTF _ Disbursements 16% Projects and Other Operations 2% 65% 61 Table 35 - Special Revenue Funds Uses FY 2007 - 2009 FY 06107 FY 07108 FY 07708 FY 08109 % Change % Change Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Actual Revised Personnel Salary and Fringe Benefits $ 1.701,100 $ 3,499,200 $ 1,581,700 $ 3,414,100. 100.7% -2.4% Professional and Support General Legal Services 1,084400 1064,600 669,100 1445900 33.3% 35.8% Financial Advisory _ 2,300 3,600 500 1,990 -17.4% 47.2% Audit Services 15,200 28,100 46,500 62,200 309.2% 121.4% PrdessialN Services-OBrer 700,300 2.011.500 698,800 1,540,500 120.0% -23.4% Lease/Mitres21,500 24,200 64,900 85,700 298.6% 254.1% General 140,400 354,400 288.600 282700 101.4%-20.2%. Communications 49,300 52,800 45,500 57,300 16.2% .8.5% Maintenance - 18,400 53,400 113,100 1854,601) 9979.3% 3373.0% Insurance 23,700 29,000 36,100 29,000 22.4% 0.0% Staff Related 37900 133,700 40800 137,500 2628% 2.8% ' Information/Publicity 249 800 242.80Q 224.300 224 300 -102% TOTAL PROFESSIONAL AND SUPPORT. 2343200 3,998,100 2,228,200 5,721,600 144.2% 43.1% Projects and Operations Program Management 2,707,200 4.234,800 2,163000 6.238.300 130.4% 473% Park and Ride Lease Payments 43,100 90,000 41,800 190,000 340.8% 111.1% Projects- General - 578,200 45,000 58,460 115,000 -80.1% 155.6% Motorist Assistance - 2,207,900 4912,300 4,045,700 3.025,300 37.0% -38.4% Commuter Assistant 1,948,200 2,562,900 1,934,900 2,722200 39.7% 6.2% Engineering 18,818,100 64,357,500 31,647,300 70.089,000 321.8% 8.9% Construction 18,712100 98,470.000 37243,200 88,304,600 - 371.9% -10.3% Right of Way !i 9,562,000 91,476,100 35,770000 122,660,000 1182.8% 34.1% Special Smdles 453,500 360,000 249.000 547,500 20.7% 52.1% Specialized Transit 6,277.000 6.122500 5,111,000 7,714,400 22.9% 26.0% Stale Transit Assistance 3,423,100 9,239,700 13,016,600 22,928,000 569.8% 148.1% Regional Arterials- Coachella Valley 9,138,500 12,511,600 13,215,000 8,781,300 -3.9%-29.8%- Capaal CoMnbution 11 M 11,452,700 - - 100.0% -100.0 TOTAL PROJECTS AND OPERATIONS 71,680.100 305,835.106 144,51)4,400 333,315,600 365.0% 9.0% Other Local Streets and Roads 59,196,800 50,087,50D 50,087,500 50,085,300 -15.4% 0.0% LTF Disbursemenls 70.533200 88,397,500 78218000 70381.000 12.5% -8.1% Capital Outlay,,. 131700 635600 283400 556.900 322.9% -12.4% TOTAL OTHER 129,861,700 137.120,60D 128,589,400 - 130,023,200 0.1% -5.2% Debt Service Principal Payments TOTAL DEBT SERVICE TRANSFERS OUT TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 1200 _ _ _-100.0% N/A 1200 -1006% NIA 34.745.000 57,013,300 59.681.80Q 36.737.700 5.7% -35_6% $ 9=12.411 $ 507.466.36Q $ 336.565.50Q $ 509.272o 111_9% 4.121 Measure A Special Revenue Funds The Measure IA special revenue funds expend monies on capital construction and improvements'. to highways, commuter rail, regional arterials, and local streets and roads. Funding is also reserved for commuter assistance and specialized transit programs. The Commission is a self-help county, and, as such on major highway projects, the Commission supplements the State's spending. Upon completion of the projects, Caftans takes over the maintenance and operations of the projects. All revenues from the Measure A sales tax have been pledged as security for the Commission's' senior sales tax revenue bonds and commercial paper notes. Debt service on the bonds is recorded in the Debt Service fund, and most of the resources 62 I for the cash payments are provided through transfers out by the Measure A special revenue funds for the 1989 Measure A bonds and by a capital projects fund for the 2009 Measure A bonds. Debt service, consisting principally of interest, for the commercial paper notes is recorded in a capital projects fund, as the notes will be paid from 2009 Measure A sales tax revenues that commence in FY 2009/10. Westem County Measure A Operating Funds Table 36— Western County Measure A Operating Funds Uses FY 2008 - 2009 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Revised Budget Budget Personnel, Professional and Support Measure A Program Management Park and Rlde Lease Payments Projects -General Highway Rail iCommuter Assistance , Specialized Transit- : Local Streets and Roads Special Studies i Capital Contribution Capital Outlay Transfer Out TOTAL Westem County Measure A S 6,260,100 $ 7,892,800 3,990,800 5,904,300 90,000 190,000 45,000 115,000 85,728,000 108,163,000 33,139,300 43,190,000 4,862,900 5,022,200 1,945,500 4,445,400 37,573,500 37,722,300 340,000 547,500 11,452,700 630,600 540,000 28 825,400 28,839,200 Dollar Variance $ 1,632,700 1,913,500 100,000 70,000 22,435,000 10,050,700 159,300 2,499,900 148,800 207,500 (11,452,700) (90,600) 13.800 % Change Estimated 26.1 % 47.9% 111.1% 155.6% 26.2% 30.3% 3.3% 128.5% 0.4% 61.0% -100.0% -14.4% 0.0% $ 214.883.800 $ 242.571700 $ 27.887..= 12,9% The Western County highway expenditures include advance project development of the 2009 Measure A 10-Year Westem County Highway Delivery Plan projects. Rail ;expenditures are related to the Perris Valley Line, Perris multimodal facility, and the North Main Corona station parking structure projects. The decrease in the capital contribution is primarily related to the addition of the original $10 million allocation for grade separation projects to the FY 2007/08 rail capital budget in a special revenue fund. For FY 2008/09 the allocation for grade separation projects is reflected in the General fund. Coachella Valley Measure A Operating Funds Table 37 — Coachella Valley Measure A Operating Funds Uses FY 2008 — 2009 Personnel, Professional and Support Measure A Program Management Highway Regional Arterials - Specialized Transit Local Streets and Roads Transfer Out FY 07/08 Revised Budget $ 20,700 46,700 12,143,400 12,511,600 4,177.000 11,563,000 7,897 900 FY 08/09 Dollar % Change Budget Variance Estimated $ 31,900 $ 11,200 54.1% 33,000 (13,700) 29.3% 17,692,600 5,549,200 - 45.7% 8,781,300 (3,730,300) -29.8% 3,269,000 (908,000) -21.7% 11.440,000 (123,000) -1.1% 7.098.500 600 0.0°/0 TOTAL Coachella Valley Measure A $ 40 360.300 5 49146.300 $ 786 00Q 1.6% ;The Coachella Valley highway expenditures for FY 2008/09 reflect increased project ;funding approved by the Commission in FY 2007/08. Regional arterial projects are 63 I I managed by GVAG, and specialized transit funds are distributed to SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine) for transit operations. Palo Verde Valley Measure A Operating Fund Table 38 - Palo Verde Valley Measure A Operating Fund Uses FY 2008 - 2009 ., FY 07168 FY 08f09 Dollar % Change Revised Budget Budget Variance Estimated Local Streets and Roads ; 951.000 $ 923.000 $ (28.0001 2.9% TOTAL Palo Verde Valley Measure A S 951.000 $ 923 000 $ (28 000) In the Palo Verde Valley, 100% of the Measure A expenditures is related to local streets and roads. Non -Measure A Special Revenue Funds The non -Measure A special revenue funds account for LTF disbursements, TUMF Western County project costs, transit disbursements from STA, and motorist assistance expenditures including towing service and freeway call boxes. These activities are I budgeted in the LTF, TUMF, STA, FSP, and SAFE funds, respectively. Table 39 - Local Transportation Fund Uses FY 2008 - 2009 FY 07/08 FY caw Dollar % Change Revised Budget Budget Variance Estirnated LTF Disbursements', $ 86,397.500 $ 79,381.000 $ (7,016,500) -8.1% TOTAL Local Transportation Funds S - 66.397.5� S 79.381.000 $ f7016.5001 -8.1%. The LTF special revenue fund provides for funding of public transit operations in the County, bicycle and pedestrian facility projects, planning, and administration. In FY 2008/09 LTF transit allocations are primarily for operating rather than capital purposes due to the availability of other funds such as STA for capital needs. The actual allocations will not occur until July 2008. Table40 -Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Fund Uses FY 2008 - 2009 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Dollar % Change Revised Budget Budget Variance Estimated Personnel, Professional and Support $ 694,100 $ 652,100 S (42,000) -6.1% Program Management 197,300 301,000 103,700 52.6% Regional ArteriaUCETAP Projects 120,992,900 109,708,000 111,284,900) -9.3% Special Studies 15,000 (15,000)-100.0% Transfer Out 19.800.000 (19.800000)-100.0% TOTAL TUMF S 141.699.300 $ 110.661 10Q S (31 D38 2001 21 X/a The TUMF fund accounts for the expenditures in the Western County on regional arterial projects, including the CETAP corridors. The decrease in project expenditures 64 is attributable to the declining TUMF revenues, and no transfers out are required between the regional arterial and CETAP projects. Table 41 — State Transit Assistance Fund Uses FY 2008 — 2009 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Dollar % Chang: Revised Budget Budget Variance Estimated i Personnel, Professional and Support $ - $ 400 $ 400 N/A 1 Claimant Allocations 9.239.700 22.928.000 13.688.300 148.1% r TOTAL State Transit Assistance S 9.239 70Q $ 72,928 400 S 13 688 70Q 148�2% The STA fund is used to account for the state budgetary allocation of gas tax revenues j designated for transit purposes. The budget assumes that most of the state grant is i allocated to claimants for capital purposes. The actual allocations will not occur until f July 2008. Table 42 — Freeway Service Patrol Fund Uses FY 2008 — 2009 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Dollar % Change Revised Budget Budget Variance Estimated Personnel, Professional and Support $ 291,800 314,300 $ 22,500 7.7% i Towing 2.416,000 1,986,400 (429,600) -17.8% Operating Costs _ 138,400 138,400 • NIA 1 Capital Outlay 1,100 9,100 8,000 727.3% I TOTAL Freeway Service Patrol $ 2 708 900 S 2.44/70Q S MO 700) -9.6% The FSP fund accounts for the Commission's towing service, which is jointly funded by Caltrans and the Commission. The program also includes services to construction zones to help mitigate congestion, and such services are expected to decrease as a result of the SR-60/SR-91/1-215 interchange construction completion in early FY 2008/09. Table 43 — Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies Fund Uses FY 2008 - 2009 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Dollar % Change Revised Budget Budget Variance Estimated Personnel, Professional and Support 230,600 244,200 $ 13,600 5.9% Access Charges 84,500 69,800 (14,700) -17.4% Preventive Maintenance . 5,100 5,400 300 5.9°% Corrective Maintenance 5,100 moo 300 - 5.9°% Knockdowns 10,000 8,000 (2,000) 20.0°% Operating Costs 62,500 39,000 (23,500) 0.0% Vandalism 600 400 (200) -33.3% Equipment Maintenance - Call Boxes 2,328,500 772,500 (1,556,000) -66.8% Special Studies 5,000 (5,000) --100.0% Capital Outlay 3,900 7,800 3,900 100.0% Transfer to FSP 490,000 (490.000)-100.0% TOTAL SAFE S 3.225.800 S 1.152.50Q 5 12 073 300) 65 -G4 The SAFE fund accounts for the installation and maintenance of a freeway call box system within the County. Equipment maintenance costs reflect the substantial completion of technology upgrades and other site -related improvements in FY 2007/08. Capital projects Funds Overview 'The capital projects funds account for all debt proceeds from senior bonds and commercial paper notes. The last senior debt issuance by the Commission related to [the 1989 Measure A was in July 2000. In March 2005 a commercial paper program ;was established to advance project development and land and right of way acquisition !related to the 2009 Measure A projects. In June 2008, the Commission issued $126,395,000 in sales tax revenue bonds to refinance the outstanding commercial paper in order to maximize the availability of commercial paper funding for the advancement of 2009 Measure A projects. Chart 18 — Capital Projects Funds Sources Investment income includes interest payments from the cities of Temecula, Norco, Perris, San Jacinto, and Corona for outstanding loans made from 1989 Measure A bond proceeds. Table 44 - Capital Projects Funds Sources FY 2007 — 2009 j FY 06/D7 FY 07/08 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 % Charge % Charge Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Actual Revised Federal -Other 4 - $ - $ $24,7o0 $ WA NIA Investment Income $ 418,900 $ 444,000 $ 812,000 $ 4,400 -98.9%-99.Cr% Debt Proceeds _ 50.000.000 87,000.000 149.100.000 130.000.000 160.0% 49.4% TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS As substantially all of the remaining debt, proceeds from the 2000 bond issue have been expended on highway projects through FY 2003/04, project expenditures in recent years are primarily funded by commercial paper proceeds. Major expenditures include MSHCP land acquisition, Coachella Valley regional arterial projects subject to an advance funding agreement, and debt service interest payments on the commercial paper notes and the 2009 Measure A bonds issued in June 2008. However, a significant use of the debt proceeds is transfers out to special revenue funds for 2009 Measure A highway and regional arterial projects. $ 50.418.9011 87.444.000 ,$ 150 738.70Q ,$ 130 004IN 1 as, 48.7% 66 Table 45 - Capital Projects Funds Uses FY 2007 - 2009 FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 % Change % Change Actual Revised Budget Projected Projected Actual Revised . General Legal Services $ 104,600 $ 59,000 $ 90,200 $ 6,000 •94.3% -89.8% Financial Advisory. 1,321,800 1,575,000 40,D00 .56,000 -96.2% -96.8% Professional Services 430,300 500,000 480,000 650.000 51.1% 30.0% Engineering - 2,60/,000 37,200 685,000 WA -73.7% Construction 2370,600 900,000 (2,370,600) 5,699,000 140.4% 533.2% ROW/Land Mitigation 28,156,400 65,025,000 49,928,600 77,558,400 175.4% 19.3% Principal Payments 110,000,000 - WA - N/A Interest Payments 1,289,500 6.472,600 4,400,000 11,200,000 768.6% 73.0% Cost of Issuance - 280,000 950.000 • hVA . -100.0% Transfers Out 2D.927.30Q 15.913.90Q - 32.387.400 NIA - 54.6% TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS $ 3l$Z$.2$4 S 98-33q-900 17946q10Q $ 129235500 =Di 304% Debt Service Fund 1 Overview The Debt Service fund of the Commission is used to account for all activities related to :the sales tax revenue bonds debt incurred by the Commission. The Commission's ilargest single expenditure is debt service. The bond agreements require the trustee to !hold all bond proceeds and a portion of the sales tax revenues and to segregate all ;funds into separate amounts. These monies are included in the restricted investments held by trustee in the capital projects funds and the Debt Service fund. A portion of the debt reserve requirement for the 1989 Measure A bonds has been satisfied with surety policies purchased from a major insurance company and held by the trustee. Under the agreements, the Commission may use sales tax revenues for any lawful purpose related to the Riverside County TIP after the trustee has satisfied debt service requirements. 'The Commission made a conscious decision to issue debt to complete projects in the earlier years of the 1989 Measure A. This strategy brought quick relief to the transportation needs of Riverside County. As a result, the Commission has four outstanding bond issues with a final maturity date in June 2009. 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 2009 Measure A program, the Commission has the authority to issue bonds subject to a debt limitation of $500,000,000. In order to advance project development activities, the Commission established a $185,000,000 commercial paper program in 2005. In June 2008 the Commission refinanced the outstanding commercial paper notes of $110,005,000 with sales tax revenue bonds for a par amount of $126,395,000 in order to restore the commercial paper program to its maximum capacity for subsequent years' expenditures. 1 67 Chart 19 — Debt Service Fund Sources Investment Income 3% Transfers In 97% Table 46 — Debt Service Fund Sources FY 2007 — 2009 FY 06/07 FY 07/06 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 % Change % Change Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Actual Revised i Investment Income 1 $ 2,265,100 $ 1,265,900 $ 1,220,400 $ 1,208,200 -45.7% -4.6% Transfers In 34.005.100 35,473,300 35.473 300 35,473A00 4.3% 0.0% TOTAL DEBT SERVICE FUND $ 31,270200 3 36 739200 5 36.693.70Q S 36 68.1.50Q 1.1 % -0.2% 1 Transfers in consist of debt service funding from the 1989 Measure A special revenue funds for highvray, rail, regional arterial, and local street and road projects. Table 47 — Debt Service Fund Uses FY 2007 — 2009 FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 % Change % Change Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Actual Revised Professional and Support Costs $ - $ - N/A N/A Principal Payments $ 30,200,000 $ 32,012,100 $ 32,012,100 $ 33,630,000 11.4% 5.1% Interest Payments 5,274,900 3,461,200 3,461,200 1,843,400 -65.1% -46.7% TOTAL DEBT SERVICE FUND S 3 .,474.900 $ 35A73 30Q S 35 473 300 $ 15.473 44Q 0.0% 0.0% The debt service payments for the 1989 Measure A bonds conclude on June 1, 2009 at the date of final maturity. 68 • • SECTION REVE.NUES AND OTHER] SOURCES! • i e owl* lionsporkition 0111triSSIOri 69 DOE'4£9'9E9 D04'E09'ea $ 009'69a oL 1 uuu Stl4 L 004'9Z4'69 004'9Z4'89 000'000'0£4 000'000'0£L 00L'S99'l 00L eL 006$09'L 006'L9 006PLE'S 004'LLZ 004'e49'Z 004'594 00E'42.VE 00£'S 00L'L9L'6 00C94 009'89L' L L - 00£'LE 009'640'Z5 005'999'4 009'£9 009'94S caveat. 000'004 oL euu"£ l0 9 000 066 01 S DG@'TZrg—g DOS SEL Z 4 S too lS6 Z£ S a09 Z85 CC 5 C ITS7 'S6—S' boo 000 6E l Sound rd101 ggauaul ud IgaO 83021f105 ONIONbNId 2131410 009199E l - iemeei j 000'564'1 oo!Neg 000'009'4 000'001, 000'004 000'0S4'Z nwwo0 000'0944Z IIePedS 000'69Z'£ 881,1. IS oone - 000'009'8 b01!e21 000'000'E 000'00E 009'969'4 009'9E9'9 Suluueld 009'Z66'ZZ 009'1.2n9 - Ilsue4 SWV810021d WNOI OEN 001'£99'19 004'9 - - - 000'L55'45 . IS11081 00e1.60'£ 00e1.69 000'009'2 - - dV1.30 009'OLL'6L 004'ZL9 OOZ'0£9`4 000'069'4 • 000'5L0El u018e21 009'L1.9'99 00913L6'Z - 000'00£'4 000'096'04 000'000'L 000'00914 000'0001, - 000'619'4 000'594'91 11e8 006'eL4'L9 000654.Z 009'04L'e - - OOE'SZL'l 000'L99'9 00eLSO'a • 000'0E9'0 ie/441882I laen0e0 Pula lua IXIOIA ap Weald Ie4e0 SWV2i.O081d 14e1kreo 2f31110 ONV V aanSV31,1 00L'943 00L'045 002'90Z'4 $ 005'55 $ senuene2l Buplaied0 a410 so!oua6V/sa 80 Ieooi $ • saad uoneris16a21 alol4aA ueyy /,1.1980.1d $ • $ • $ - $ - $ 000'09L $ 000'006.£ $ WeLue6eueyy ue410 V14 OVWO ARCO d11S V1S di -I V ainseayl a lueuµwedep. IeuaPad ele1S xel aele6 60/800Z Ad wea6oudpuetuVetlep Aq mines Bu/pypd • 99 /Nei _` • Revenues and Other Sources Total revenues and other sources are budgeted at $536,534,300 and consist of Measure A sales tax of $135,000,000 (or 25.2% of total sources); LTF sales tax of $85,579,000 (or 15.9% of total sources); federal revenues of $26,388,300 (or 4.9% of total sources);', state revenues, including vehicle registration fees, of $70,074,100 (or 13.1% of total sources); TUMF of $7,730,000 (or 1.4% of total sources); debt proceeds of $130,000,000 (or 24.2% of total sources); transfers in of $69,125,100 (or 12.9% of total sources) and other revenues of $12,637,800 (or 2.4% of total sources). The specific revenue funding sources are shown in Table 49. Table 49 — Revenues and Other Sources • ! Measure A Sales Tax ; Local Transportation Fund Sales Tax State Transit Assistance California Department of Transportation Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Federal Transit Administration Federal Other Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee License Fees Coachella Valley Association of Govemments Department of Motor Vehicle Fees Freeway Service Patrol Investment and Other Debt Proceeds Transfers In TOTAL S Federal State Local 3,000,000 9,425,300 10,950,000 3,013,000 $ 26.388 30Q $135,060,000 85,579,000 22,992,600 43,818,000 1,495,000 1,768,500 Other Total $ - $ 135,000,000 85,579,000 22,992,600 46.818,000 9,425,300 10,950,000 3.013,000 7.730,000 - 7.730,000 480,000 480.000 1,430,200 - - 1,430,200 1,495,000 1,768,500 1,729,600 8,998,000 10,727,600 - 130,000,000 130,000,000 69.125.100 69,125.100 $ 70 074 10Q $ 291 AQQ,L Q $ 206 603 10Q $ 536.539.30 Revenue Sources —Definitions and Background Measure A: Measure A was first approved by Riverside County voters in 1988. More than 78% of the electorate voted to impose a one-half of one cent sales tax over a 20- year period to; pay for transportation improvements. It expires on. June 30, 2009. Measure A requires that all 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. The amount raised by this levy has increased as the County and its economic base have grown. Overall, the 1989 Measure A is expected to have generated over $1.7 billion during its lifespan. On November 5, 2002, the voters of Riverside County approved the renewal of Measure A through 2039. The 2009 Measure A is expected to raise more than $7 billion during its lifespan based on an updated forecast. 71 The Commission historically has obtained and updated Measure A revenue projections through a consultant for budget and strategic project planning purposes. The UCLA. Anderson Forecast completed the last update the in May 2006; however, this forecast was updated in 2008 as a result of the weakened Inland Empire economy that began in 2007. Measure A revenue projections for the next five fiscal years are presented in Chart 20 below. Chart 20 — Forecasted Measure A Sales Tax Revenues 2009 — 2013 175,000.000 150,000,000 125.000,000 100,000,000 75,000.000 50,000,000 25,000,000 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 The following additional assumptions were used in the development of the Commission's revenue forecast for FY 2008/09: • The Inland Empire economy is not expected to improve significantly in FY 2008/09. • The State does not change mix of items subject to the sales tax from what has been included historically. • The relative sales and property tax rates of Riverside and surrounding counties do not change from historical levels. • Internet sales will have minimal impact on revenue. As the transition between the two sales tax measures approaches, the Measure A sales tax revenue projections will be utilized in the 10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan financing strategy and an analysis of a potential increase to be sought in the $500 million 2009 Measure A bonding cap. Geographic allocation - Riverside County is comprised of three geographic areas: Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley. The percentage of Measure A revenues allocated to each of these areas based on retum to source is approximately 74% for Western County, 25% for Coachella Valley, and 1% for Palo Verde Valley. These percentages will experience some variations from year to year based on changes in levels of taxable sales. 72 Chart 21 — Geographic Allocation of Measure A Revenues Palo Verde Vevey 1% Coachella Valley 25% Western County 74% Program allocation - The Measure A TIP defines the manner in which the sales tax revenues are to be spent, as presented in the following table. :Table 50 - Program Allocation of 1989 Measure A Revenues Westem County Highway 38.5% Rail 16.5% Local Streets and Roads 40.0% Commuter Assistance 2.5% Specialized Transit 2.5% Coachella Valley Regional Arterials 40.0% Local Streets and Roads 35.0% Highway 15.0% Specialized Transit 10.0% Palo Verde Valley Local Streets and Roads 100% Based on the projected Measure A sales tax revenues of $135,000,000 for FY 2008/09, the geographic and program allocations are presented in the following table. Table 51 - Geographic Allocation of Measure A Revenues by Program Program Administration ' Western County Coachella Valley Palo Verde Valley Total Administration $ 3,400,000 $ $ - $ - $ 3,400,006 Highway 37,727,000 4,903,000 42,630,000 Rad 16,169,000 16,169,000 Regional Arterials - 13,075,000 13,075,000 Commuter Assistance 2,450,000 2,450,000 Specialized Transit 2,450,000 3,269,000 5,719,000 Local Streets and Roads 39194,000 11,440,000 923,000 51,557,000 TOTAL $ 3.400.000 $ 97.990.000 $ 32.687.000 $ 923,000 $ 135.000.000 Local Transportation Fund: LTF, established in state law by the TDA, is funded through a one -quarter of one cent of the State's 7.25% sales tax. The intent of the legislation was to provide a dependable revenue stream for public transportation operations. Based upon an annual projection of LTF sales taxes, the vast majority of LTF revenue in the County is allocated to the eight public transit operators, including the Commission for its share of Metrolink operations costs. Much like Measure A revenue, LTF had increased with the growth of the County and its economy until the ;recent economic slowdown. 73 Revenues received from LTF are allocated for regional and local transportation planning, program administration, bicycle and pedestrian facilities projects, public bus transit, and rail transit in Western County including the Commission for its share related to commuter rail operations. The Commission administers these funds on behalf of the County in a special revenue fund. Effective with the FY 2007/08 budget, this special revenue fund became a budgeted fund due to its significance to the Commission's operations, primarily related to the funding of public transit. State Transit Assistance: STA provides additional TDA state funding of transit operations and capital for urban counties. Sales taxes on gasoline and diesel fuels ;generate the STA funding. These funds are allocated to the County's eight public itransit operators. jState Transportation Improvement Program: Administered by Caltrans, the STIP is funded through state and federal gas tax dollars and is California's primary transportation fund. Dollars are allocated to each county based on a formula that takes into consideration population and highway centerline miles. Actual funding decisions for 75% of STIP dollars are made by local transportation agencies such as the Commission. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ): The CMAQ program is federally funded and is targeted for transportation improvements in areas with air quality problems. This program pays for improvements that reduce congestion while improving air quality. The Commission has also used CMAQ dollars to include fuel and commuter assistance programs, signal interconnects, HOV lanes, and transit projects. Federal Transit Administration: On a reimbursement basis, the federal government provides funding for qualified capital investments in rail facilities, track, and vehicles. FTA funding is generally allocated annually by the federal govemment and is based on calculated miles of service. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee: In connection with the 2009 Measure A, the TUMF program was established in the Western County to provide additional funding for regional arterial projects. TUMF is administered by WRCOG. Per the 2009 Measure A, the Commission is to receive up to the first $400 minion in TUMF generated on new residential and commercial development. As a result of an MOU with WRCOG, the Commission will receive 48.7% of the TUMF through June 30, 2009, when the original Measure A expires. Thereafter, the Commission will receive 100%, after an administrative deduction, up to the aggregate of $400 million. This MOU, however, is expected to be amended in early FY 2008/09 whereby the $400 million maximum guarantee is rernoved in favor of continued funding at 48.7% of TUMF revenues. TUMF revenues received by the Commission from WRCOG are allocated equally to the regional arterial and CETAP programs. TUMF revenues maintained by WRCOG are allocated for regional arterial zone improvements and regional transit facilities. Rail and Highway Licenses: The Commission owns parcels of land and rail right of way in selected areas throughout the County. The ownership provides licensing opportunities for fiber-optic cable, advertising signs, and business tenants. The amount ;of funding received from the licenses provides revenue to support the cost of owning land maintaining the Commission's land and facilities_ 74 F Coachella Valley Association of Governments: A portion of the Commission's 1993 sales tax revenue bonds was issued for regional arterial projects in the Coachella Valley. Annually, CVAG reimburses the Commission for 25% of the regional arterial portion of debt service. Service Authority. for Freeway Emergencies: This motorist assistance program places freeway call boxes throughout the freeways and state highways in the County. 'Additionally, the Commission may allocate a portion of the SAFE revenue to support Ithe FSP. The call boxes enable motorists to summon help should they encounter mechanical or emergency problems while on the road. This program is established ;through State law that allows county SAFE agencies to impose a $1 : surcharge on 'vehicle registrations within the County to pay for call box purchases and operations. !Freeway Service Patrol: Caltrans is the primary sponsor of the FSP and provides the majority of funding for the program. The Commission administers and implements the i program along with the CHP and Caftans. Investment Income: The Commission has established a prudent investment policy for cash on hand that is intended to maximize retum while providing absolute safeguards on principal and liquidity. A more detailed explanation of the Commission's investment policy is discussed in Section 1. Interest eamings on the State and County investment pools are estimated at an interest rate of 1.9%. The earnings on funds held by the trustee for debt service and projects in money market funds and investment agreements are assumed to be at 2.0%. Program Revenues Revenues and other financing sources are allocated to the various Commission programs as follows: Highways Funding for the highway program includes Measure A sales tax revenues and interest from loans to, cities to advance their local streets and roads programs. The 1989 Measure A sales tax revenues will be used for the SR-60 East Junction to I-215 HOV lanes connector, SR-60 HOV lanes from 1-215 to Redlands Boulevard, SR-74 widening from 1-15 to r Street and curve realignment, SR-74 from G Street to 1-215, SR-91 HOV lanes from Adams Street to the SR-60/SR-91/1-215 interchange, SR-86, and SR- 111 projects as well as for pass -through funding to the city of Riverside for SR-91 interchange improvements at La Sierra Avenue and Van Buren Boulevard. Included in revenues is $100,600 of interest earned from loan reimbursement agreements with the cities of Corona, Norco, Perris, San Jacinto, and Temecula. Those funds are used to pay debt service on the 1997 Series B junior sales tax revenue bonds. CMAQ funding will be used for the SR-60 HOV lanes from 1-215 to Redlands Boulevard and the SR-60 East Junction to 1-215 HOV lanes connector projects. STIP revenues represent funding of the SR-91 HOV lanes from Adams Street to the SR-60/SR-91/1- I215 interchange, 1-215 mixed flow lanes from 1-15 to Nuevo Road, and SR-91/SR-71 I 75 connectors. Other state revenues represent Surface Transportation Program (STP) revenues for the SR-60 East Junction to 1-215 HOV lanes connector project. The Commission will need to issue $130,000,000 in commercial paper to fund 2009 Measure A projects including MSHCP land acquisition in Westem County and Coachella Valley, preliminary engineering and right of way activities related to the 10- Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan projects, and Coachella Valley regional !arterial projects. Local revenues consist of $2,730,000 of TUMF zone reimbursement funds from WRCOG for the SR-74/G Street to 1-215 interchange project, $10,500 in other local agency reimbursements, and investment income. Transfers in represent $22,273,800 required for debt service for 1989 Measure A Westem County and Coachella Valley highway projects and commercial paper project funding of $25,762,400 for the 10-Year :Westem County Highway Delivery Plan projects on SR-91, 1-10, I-15, and I-215 and 1$4,125,000 for Coachella Valley highway projects. Table 52 - Highway Program Sources FY 07/08 Revised Budget Measure A Sales Tax $ 42,537,000 Federal - CMAQ 13,441,700 State - STIP 1,556.200 State - Other 15,000 Other Local 5,768,500 Debt Proceeds 149,100,000 Transfers In 45,298,100 TOTAL $ 257.716.500 Rail FY08/09 Budget Variance Percent $ 42,630,000 $ 93,000 0.2% 1,125.300 (12,316,400) -91.6% 27,057,200 25,501,000 1638.7% 5,467,000 5,452,000 36346.7% 5,200.400 (568,100) -9.8% 130,000,600 (19,100,000) -12.8% 52,161,200 6.863,100 15.2% $ 263.641 10Q $ 5.924 600 2.31a Measure A sales tax will be used primarily for the Perris Valley Line preliminary engineering and right of way. Rail operations, which include Metrolink operating and capital_ contributions, station and rail right of way maintenance, and support, will be funded with an allocation of $9,500,000 in LTF sales tax revenues. LTF capital allocations of $1,319,000 will fund the Perris Valley Line, station rehabilitation, and other general station projects. The LTF estimate for rail assumes the LTF apportionment formula (based on population estimates for the ;County's three major geographic areas provided by the .State Department of finance), calculates 22% (established for planning purposes by Commission policy) of the amount available for Westem County, and then compares that with budgeted expenditures. FTA transit capital funding will be used to start preliminary engineering and right of way acquisition for the Perris Valley Line and for construction of the North Main Corona station parking structure. Pass -through FTA section 5309 funding will be used for the Perris multimodal facility construction. CMAQ funds and STIP allocations will be used for the North Main Corona station ;parking structure. Other federal revenues consist of a Transportation Enhancements 76 • (TE) grant for the construction of the Perris multimodal facility and a grant that funds an intemship in the Rail Department. Other state revenues, including Proposition 1 B funds, will bel used for the construction of the North Main Corona station parking structure and Perris multimodal facility as well as for the station rehabilitation project. Local revenues include investment income, pass -through TUMF regional transit facilities funds of $1,000,000 from the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) for the Perris multimodal facility, SCRRA reimbursements of $179,000 for station security at the Riverside Downtown station, and other miscellaneous revenues of $10,000. Transfers ' in represents j$1,027,800 in Commuter Assistance funding for the Perris multimodal facility construction and maintenance as well as $6,007,000 required for debt service. Table 53 - Rail Program Sources i Measure A Sales Tax LTF Federal --FTA - Federal - CMAQ Federal - Other State - STIP State - Other Ogler Local'. Transfers In TOTAL , Regional Arterials I FY 07/08 Revised Budget $ 16,106,000 19,483,400 6,448,700 5,939,600 20,000 3.761,700 2,747,800 4,028,400 7.006.80Q $ 65.462 40Q FY08/09 Budget Variance Percent $ 16,169,000 10,819,000 10,950600 7,000,000 1,320,000 4,000,000 4,800,000 3,217,300 7 034 800 $ - 65.310.10Q $ 63,000 OA% (8.584,400) 44.2% 4,501,300 69.8% 1,060,400 17.9% 1,300,000 6500.0% 238,300 6.3% 2,052,200 74.7% (811,100) -20.1% 28.000 0.4% $ 1152 3001 .121 The Western County regional arterial program will receive funds primarily from TUMF assessed on new residential and commercial development in Western County- Other federal revenues include $1,000,000 in SAFETEA-LU funding of and $693,000 in other federal earmarks for the SR-79 realignment studies. Local revenues of $500,000 will be received from the city of Corona as reimbursement for costs related to the 1- 15/Cajalco interchange preliminary engineering. The Measure A regional arterial program revenues will be used to reduce debt service on the 1993 sales tax revenue bonds and to continue construction and improvements of the regional arterial system in the Coachella Valley. Local revenues of $1,430,200 from. CVAG will be used to cover the Coachella Valley's share of debt service for the 1993 Series A sales tax revenue bonds. TUMF collected and maintained by CVAG is the source for these funds. In addition to the local agency reimbursements noted above, other local revenues include investment income. Transfers in represent commercial paper funding of $2,500,000 for the SR-91/Green River Road interchange and $5,720,900 required for the Coachella Valleys share of debt service. 77 r I Table 54 - Regional Arterial Program Sources FY 07/08 FY08109 Revised Budget Budget Variance Percent Coachella Valley Measure A Sales Tax $ 13,215,000 $ 13,075,000 $ (140,000) -1.1% TUMF 5,000,000 2,500,000 (2,500,00o) -50.0% Federal - Other 4,227,000 1,693,000 (2,534,000) -59.9% Other Local 3,496,000 2,502,600 (993,400) -28.4% Transfers In 23,425,200 8,220,900 (15,204,3001 -64.9% TOTAL $ 49.363.200 S 27.991.500 $ 121.3711QQ) A3.3% CETAP The Westem County CETAP program will also receive funds from TUMF ,for development of new corridors. Local revenues represent investment income. Table 55 - CETAP Program Sources FY 07/08 FY08/09 Revised Budget Budget Variance Percent l TUMF $ 5,000,000 $ 2,500,000 $ (2,500,000) -50.0% 1Other Local 881,200 591,200 (290,0001 -32.9% TOTAL $ 5.881.70Q $ 3 091 200 $ (2.790.0001 47 4% Local Streets and Roads Measure A allocations for the local streets and roads program are distributed to the cities and the County to use for local street repairs, maintenance, and construction. Transfers in represent amounts required for debt service on the 1997 Series B junior sales tax revenue bonds, which proceeds were used to fund loans to Western County cities. Local revenues represent investment income. Table 56 - Local Streets and Roads Program Sources FY 07108 FY08/09 Revised Budget Budget Variance Percent Measure A Sales Tax $ 51,558,000 $ 51,557,000 $ (1,000) 0.0% Other Local 64,500 6,100 (58,400) -90.5% Transfers In 1 470500 1,471.700 1.200 0.1% TOTAL $ 53 093 00Q S 53.03 $21 $ (58.201:] all Transit LTF sales tax revenues are allocated primarily for public bus and rail transit operations and capital in the County. A small portion of these revenues is used for LTF planning and administration allocations as well bicycle and pedestrian facilities grants. Additionally, the STA allocation, which is based on an estimate received from the State Controller's Office, is used to fund transit capital. For FY 2008/09, the estimated allocation to Riverside County is $22,992,600, an increase of 135.2% from the prior year budget. Any changes by the State to the revenue estimates will be incorporated .during ongoing budget reviews for FY 2008/09. Local revenues represent investment lincome. 78 • Table 57 — Transit Program Sources FY 07l08 FY 08109 Revised Budget Budget Variance Percent LTF Sales Tax $ 67,381,000 $ 67,371,500 $ (9,500) 0.0% State Transit Assistance 9,774,100 22,992,600 13,218,500 135.2% Other Local 4,689.000 1.655,500 (3.033 500) -64.7% TOTAL $ 81844100 $ 92.019600 $ 1075.600 RAN Planning and Programming !Transportation planning studies are funded with an LTF off -the -top allocation equal to three percent of estimated revenues. An LTF allocation of $5,000,000 will also be used to fund local', jurisdiction grade separation, projects. STIP will fund planning, programming and monitoring activities of the Commission, and other state grants will fund an environmental justice analysis and 1-15 interregional partnership study. A federal earmark will be used to fund the geotechnical studies related to the rvine- i. Corona Expressway. Local revenues consist of other agency reimbursements for joint studies of $400,000 as well as investment income. Table 58 — Planning and Programming Sources FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Revised Budget Budget Variance Percent LTF Sales Tax $ 1,854,200 $ 6,638,500 $ 4,784,300 258.0% State - STIP 918,800 1,393.800 475,000 51.7% State -Other 166,000 300,000 134,000 80.7% Federal - Other 3,200,000 3,000,000 (200,000) -6.3% Other Local/Agencies 664,300 437,300 (227,000) -34.2% TOTAL - $ 6,803,300 $ 11,769,600 4,966,300 73.0% Specialized Transit Measure A also allocates funding to specialized transit programs that are designed to improve the mobility of seniors and persons with disabilities. The funds are also intended to subsidize transportation costs of the economically disadvantaged. Local revenues represent investment income. Table 59 — Specialized Transit Program Sources FY 07/08 FY 08/09 i Revised Budget Budget Variance Percent Western County Measure A Sates Tax $ 2,440,000 $ 2,450,000 $ 10,000 0.4% Coachella Valley Measure A Sates Tax 3,304,000 3,269,000 (35,000) -1.1 % Other Local 398.200 174.700 (223,500) -56.1% TOTAL I $ 6142?QO $ 5993.790 3 (248.500) -49% 79 i Commuter Assistance The Commuter Assistance program will receive funding from Measure A, STIP, other agencies, and investment income to assist in implementing services to commuters and employers in promoting use of alternate modes of transportation- The Commission will also receive CMAQ pass -through funds to support the San Bernardino commuter assistance program. Additionally, other state revenues include an ` Air Quality Enhancement grant to fund a ridesharing demonstration project in the Coachella Valley and Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (MSRC) grants for various projects. Table 60— Commuter Assistance Program Sources FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Revised Budget Budget Variance Percent Measure A Sales Tax $ 2,440,000 $ 2,450,000 $ 10,000 0.4% Federal - CMAQ 1,179,900 1,300,000 120,100 10.2% State - STIP 300,000 400,000 100,000 33.3% State - Other 75,000 400,000 325,000 433.3% OtherLocal/Agencies 1,029,600 824,000 (205,600)-20.0°% TOTAL $ 5_024 500 $ 5.73 4.000 $ —M9.501 7.0 Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies SAFE is funded from revenues received by a $1 fee included with the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) registration fees. Since the growth in these fees historically has not been substantial, the budget amount has remained relatively constant. Local revenues primarily represent investment income as well as cost recoveries from responsible parties related to call box knockdowns. Table 61 — SAFE Program Sources FY OMB FY 08109 Revised Budget Budget Variance Percent DMV Fees $ 1,460,000 $ 1,495,000 $ 35,000 2.4% Other Local 156,800 87,900 (68.900) -43.9% TOTAL S 1 816 KA S 1.582.9 0 $ 133.900) -2.1% Freeway Service Patrol Caltrans will allocate $1,474,000 in State highway account funds to cover the FSP. The State provides nearly 80% of the funding for the FSP program. The allocation of funding throughout the State is based on population, freeway miles,. and level of congestion- Other State revenues of $294,500 are related to funding of FSP services required for construction projects. The State's contribution is usually matched with an operating transfer from SAFE; however, there is sufficient fund balance available and no operating transfer is required for FY 2008/09. In addition to investment income, local revenues include other revenues of $83,500 from the city of Riverside for FSP services required for the SR-91/La Sierra Avenue interchange construction project. 80 i • Table 62 — ESP Program Sources FY 07108 FY 08/09 Revised Budget Budget Variance Percent State Budgetary Allocation $ 2,145,300 $ 1,768,500 $ (376,800) -17.6% Other Local 111,400 96,600 (14,800) -13.3% Transfers In 490.000 - (490.0001-100.0% TOTAL S 7.746 70Q $ t -865.100 $ (881$001 -32 1 % !Other Programs A total of $480,000 in revenues is expected from property management licenses and other miscellaneous revenues related to the San Jacinto and San Bernardino 'subdivision ra I program. Transfers in of $236,500 are related to Measure A highway (funding for the maintenance of the Commission's highway properties. Management services sales tax revenues consist of Measure A of $3,400,000 and LTF I sales taxes of $750,000 for administration. 'Other local revenues for property management and management services totaling $94,200 are primarily related to investment income. 81 SECTION 51 .PERSONNEL1 82 • Personnel Personnel salary and fringe benefits The Commission provides a comprehensive package of benefits to all permanent, salaried employees. The package includes: • `Health, dental, vision, and life insurance • Short and long-term disability • Workers' compensation • Tuition assistance • Sick and vacation leave • Retirement benefits in the form of participation in CaIPERS • Postretirement health care • Deferred compensation • Employee Assistance Program Chart 22 — Personnel Salary and Benefits Salary 62% In November 1988 when Measure A was originally approved, one of the requirements of the measure was for the Commission to not budget more than one percent of Measure A sales tax revenue for administrative salaries and benefits. In this budget, the Commission is utilizing .99% of this capacity, and other salaries and benefits are being funded by specific programs and other federal, state, and local funds. As a result of this requirement, the Commission maintains a small staff to provide the transportation services to Riverside County. The Commission's salary and fringe benefits total $6,743,000. This represents a decrease of 11.2% over the FY 2007/08 budget of $7,589,400 and is due to the following reasons • The prefunding of the postretirement health benefits accrued liability in FY 2007/08; and 83 • A decrease in the CaIPERS employer contribution rate and the worker's compensation premiums. The Commission has set aside a 3% pool for salary increase. Chart 23 - Personnel and Benefits Costs $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000.000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 51,000,000 $- 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 The FTE has increased by 1 position from the previous year, for a total of 45 FTE positions. Management continues to be firmly committed to the intent of the Commission's enabling legislation that called for a small staff. Staff will continue to be provided the tools needed, including state of the art technology, to ensure an efficient and productive work environment. However, it must be recognized that small is not viewed in an absolute context; it is relative to the required tasks to be performed and the demands to be met. Table 63 - Personnel Summary FY 06t07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 FTE FTE FTE Executive Management 1.6 1.5 0.7 Administration 4.7 4.9 4.6 Legislative Affairs and Communications 2.4 2.7 2.6 Finance 6.1 6.3 6.6 Regional Issues 1.2 2.2 2.0 Planning and Programming 5.3 4.9 3.8 Rail 2.8 2A 2.9 Right of Way Management 2.0 1.1 1.4 Specialized Transit 0.4 0.8 1.0 Transit 2.0 1.8 1.7 Commuter Assistance 1.5 1.4 1.8 Motorist Assistance 0.7 1 A 1.7 Capital Proiect Development and Delivery 4_3 12.6 14.2 TOTAL 35.0 44.0 45.0 84 SETIQN..0 • C.OMM.1SSIQN 4EBT1 85 • I Commission Debt A significant portion of the Commission's debt has been incurred for highway, regional arterial and local streets and roads projects for which title vests or, upon completion, will vest with Caltrans or local jurisdictions. Future Measure A sales taxes are pledged to cover Measure A debt service payments. Since these projects are not assets of the Commission, for which the Commission will have operating responsibilities, future operating costs related to these projects cannot be determined and are not applicable. However, for rail assets including those acquired through debt financing, operating budget impacts are considered in future project development. 1989 Measure A At June 30, 2008, the Commission will have $33,630,000 outstanding in 1989 Measure A sales tax revenue bonds, which will be retired in June 2009. Bond interest payments of $1,843,400 will be also be made. : The Commission has maintained an excellent credit rating and is one of the. highest rated self-help counties in the State. The Commission has been able to maintain its rating because of the high level of voter approval on Measure A, the higher standard of two times on debt service, and good financial management. Regarding 'the sales tax revenue bonds issued under the 1989 Measure A program, the Commission currently maintains an Aa2 rating from Moody's Investors Service (Moody's) and received an upgrade to AAA from AA+ from Standard and Poor's Rating Service (S&P) in May 2008. The Commission does not expect to issue any more debt from the 1989 Measure A. 2009 Measure A In March 2005 the Commission established a $185,000,000 commercial paper program to advance project development and land and right of way acquisition under the 2009 Measure A TIP. Maturities of commercial paper notes are rolled over to new issuances of commercial paper, as the 2009 Measure A sales tax revenues will not be available until after the 1989 Measure A expires in June 2009. Regarding the commercial paper notes, the Commission currently maintains a P-1 and a A-1+ rating from Moody's and S&P rating agencies, respectively. Interest .payments are; made from available commercial paper proceeds or new issuances of commercial paper. Since the inception of the commerci4 paper program and through May 2008, $110,005,000 of commercial paper had been issued. In June 2008, the Commission issued $126,395,000 in sales tax revenue bonds to refinance the outstanding commercial paper noted above and accrued interest, fund capitalized interest through December 2009, fund a reserve fund, and pay costs of issuance. The bond issuance was necessary for the restoration of the 86 commercial paper program to its maximum capacity in order to fulfill existing commitments for the use of commercial paper, pay costs related to 2009 Measure A projects during FY 2008/09, and provide short-term financing of FTA Small Starts reimbursable costs related to the Perris Valley Line project. As to the sales tax bonds issued under the 2009 Measure A, the Commission received ratings of Aa2, AA+, and AA from Moody's, S&P, and Fitch Ratings. During FY 2008/09, no principal payments are required; however, interest payments of $5,850,000 will be made. In FY 2008/09 the Commission will issue $130,000,000 in new commercial paper notes for the purposes described in the preceding paragraph. The Commission will make $5,350,000 in commercial paper interest payments during the year. The Commission expects to issue bonds to refinance the sales tax revenue bonds and all or a portion of the outstanding commercial paper notes related to the 2009 Measure A in October 2009. Debt Capacity Analysis The Commission is legally prohibited from issuing additional debt if its debt coverage ratio is less than 1.5 to 1 on all senior debt. The Commission has adopted a higher standard of 2 to 1 as part of its debt management policy. As Charts 24 and 25 and Table 64 indicate, the Commission has successfully met its policy standard. Any coverage less than 2 to 1 would necessitate using other program funding to cover all debt service expenditures. Chart 24-1989 Measure A Debt Capacity Analysis $160,000,000 $140,000,000 $120,000,000 $100,000,000 $80,000,000 560,000.000 $4o,0oo,000 $20,000,000 5- FY04/05 FY05/06 FY06/07 FY07/08 FY08/09 OSenior Debt 18 Junior Debt 6Available Revenue 87 • • Table 64 — Measure A Debt Capacity Analysis 1989 Measure A FY04/05 FY05/06 FY06/07 FY07/08 FY08/09 Sales Tax Revenues $ 138,921,300 $ 157,236,300 $ 154,539,800 $ 135,000,000 $ 135,000,000 Senior Debt Service $ 34,012,500 $ 34,012,600 $ 34,005,30D $ 34,002,900 $ 34,001,700 Coverage Ratio - Senior Debt 4.08 4.62 4.54 3.97 3.97 Subordinate Debt Service $ 1,473,000 $ 1,470,600 $ 1,469,600 $ 1,470,400 $ 1,471.700 Coverage Ratio - Alt Debt 3.91 4.43 4.36 3.81 3.81 Debt Rating Aa2/AA Aa2/AA Aa2/AA+ Aa21AAA Aa2/AAA 2009 Measure A' Commercial Paper Debt Service Senior Debt Service Commercial Paper Rating Senior Debt Rating 111.600 $ 833,800 $ 1,289,500 $ 114,400,000 $ 5,350,000 WA N/A . N/A $ - $ - 5,850,000 P-1/4-1+ P-1/A-1+ P-1/A-1+ P-11A-1+ P-1/M1+ WA WA N/A Aa2/AA+/AA Aa.2/AA+/AA Chart 25 —Available Measure A Revenue/Debt Service 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% FY04/05 FY05/06 FY06/07 Debt Service Schedule 1989 Measure A Sales Tax Revenue Bonds FY07/08 FY08/09 ®Available Revenues ® Debt Service Table 65 — Commission Debt Service Requirements Fiscal Year Principal Interest Tolal 2008/09 $ 33,630,000 $ 1.843,400 $ 35,473,400 Under the provisions of the 1989 Measure A, as amended by Measure AA, the Commission has the authority to issue bonds subject to a bond debt limitation of $525,000,000. The following is a summary of bonds issued and secured by 1989 Measure krevenues: 2000 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds}, Series A: In July 2000, the Commission issued $35,825,000 principal amount of serial bonds to finance the widening and construction improvements to enhance the accessibility and safety of SR-74 and other Western County projects. 1997 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A: The Commission issued $47;910,000 principal amount of serial bonds to refund $41,000,000 of the outstanding commercial paper notes along with $6,910,000 in new debt proceeds to fund various major highway projects. 88 1997 Sales Tax Revenue Junior Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds), Series B: The Commission issued $13,245,000 principal amount of subordinated (junior) serial bonds to refund $3,000,000 of the outstanding commercial paper notes along with $10,245,000 in new debt proceeds to fund various streets and roads projects for local cities. 1996 Sales Tax Refunding Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A In January 1996, the Commission issued $61,765,000 principal amount of serial bonds to refund a portion of the 1991 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds, (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A. The bonds refunded were the serial maturities due in 2002 and 2003 for $6,945,000 and $7,405,000, respectively, and the term bonds due in 2009 for $44,975,000, for a total refunded debt of $59,325,000. 1993 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A: In February 1993, the Commission issued $136,610,000 principal amount of serial bonds to finance the purchase of the Santa Fe use rights and other rail properties, improvements to SR-86 and SR-111, as well as major regional arterials in the Coachella Valley. The bond agreements require the trustee to hold all bond proceeds and a portion of sales tax revenues and to segregate all funds into separate accounts as required by the indentures, including a reserve fund equal to the maximum annual debt service of $35,473,400. The allocation of the sales tax revenue bonds to the 1989 Measure A programs is presented in Chart 26. Chart 26 — Program Long -Term Debt Regional Arterials 16% Rail 17% Local Streets and Roads 4% Highway 63% The allocation of the sales tax revenue bonds by the benefiting geographic area is presented in Chart27. 89 • Chart 27 — Long -Term Debt by Geographic Area Coachella Valley 22% Western County 78% The allocation of the sales tax revenue bonds debt service for the highway - program by geographic area is presented in Chart 28. Chart 28 — Highway Program Debt Service for FY 2008/09: 522,340,500 Coachella Valley 10% Westem County 90% 2009 Measure A Debt Under the 2009 Measure A program, the Commission has the authority to issue bonds subject to a bond debt limitation of $500,000,000. 2005 Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A and Series B: In February 2005, the Commission authorized a $200,000,000 commercial paper program. On March 31, 2005, the Commission established the program for $185,000,000 Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A and B. The repayment of principal and interest on the commercial paper notes is secured by an irrevocable direct draw letter of credit issued by the Bank of America, H.A., as the Measure A sales tax revenues securing such repayment will commence on July 1, 2009. Maturities of the commercial paper notes may range from one to 270 days, and interest rates are variable and dependent on current market conditions. The initial issuance of commercial paper in April 2005 was $30,005,000; additional amounts of $50,000,000 and $30,000,000 were issued during FY 2006/07 and FY 2007/08, respectively. The $110,005,000 in outstanding commercial paper notes were refinanced by the 2008 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds in June 2008. 90 The note agreements require the trustee to hold all note proceeds and a portion of sales tax revenues and to segregate all funds into separate accounts as required by the indenture. Receipt of the 2009 Measure A sales tax revenues begins in FY 2009/10. 2008 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds). Series A-1 and Series A-2: In June 2008, the Commission issued $126,395,000 principal amount of `bonds to refinance the outstanding notes of the 2005 Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds, Series A and Series B, which aggregated $110,005,000. The bond agreements require the trustee to hold all bond proceeds and a portion of sales tax revenues and to segregate all funds into separate accounts as required by the indenture. Receipt of the 2009 Measure A sales tax revenues begins in FY 2009/10. Outstanding Debt and Legal Debt Margin at June 30, 2008 A summary of the Commission's outstanding debt secured by Measure A sales tax revenues and. related legal debt margin at June 30, 2008 is presented below: Table 65 - Legal Debt Margin 1989 Measure A 2009 Measure A Authorized Debt $ 525,000,000 $ 500.000,000 1993 Series A 12,295,000 1996 Series A Refunding Bonds 10,030,000 1997 Series A 5,115,000 1997 Series B 1,405,000 2000 Series A 4.785,000 2005 Commercial Paper Notes 2008 Series A-1 and A-2 - 126.395,000 Total Outstanding Debt 33.630.000 126,395,000 Legal Debt Margin 491 370 00Q S 373.605 00Q Listed below are the principal and interest payments by bond issue for FY 2008/09: 91 • I • Table 66 — Bond Debt Service Requirements by Issue Bonds Issued Principal Interest Total 1993 Senior Bonds $ 12,295,000 $ 707,000 $ 13,002,000 1996 Senior Bonds 10,030,000 601,800 10,631,800 1997 Senior Bonds 5,115,000 243,000 5.358,000 1997 Junior Bonds 1,405,000 - 66,700 1,471,700 2000 Senior Bands 4.785.000 224,900 5.009,900 TOTAL FY 2008/09 Debt Service $ 33.630.000 92 $ 1.843:400 S 35 473 400 - • f SECTION 7 DEPARTMENT [BUDGETS 93 TABLE 67 - BUDGET COMPARISION BY DEPARTMENT FY 2007 - 2009 *VENUES: FY 06/07 FY 07108 FY 07108 FY 08109 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Protected Budget Change Change Operating Revenues - Measure ASales Tax $ 154539900 S 135,000,000 S 135.000.000 $ 135,000,000 $ • 0.0% LTF Sales Tax 85,293,200 89,388,600 79153,700 85579,000 (3,809,600) _ -4.3% STA Transit Allocation 19867.000 9774.100 9.774_100 22,992,600 13,218,500 1352% Vehicle Registration Fees 1.681.100 1.460,000 1,470,000 1,495,000 35,000 2.4% Reimbursement 5,498,600 47,915,700 17995,700 74.705,400 26,789,700 55.9% Other Revenue 6,415,500 2,947,900 2.002.100 1,927.200 (1,020,700) -34.6% TUMF Fees - 40,757200 10,000900 10,305,700 7.730.000 (2270,000) -22.7% Investment intone - 23 897400 17.096.70Q 14.175,700 7980,000 (9.116.700) Al % Total Revenues - 336949900 313983.000 267,977,000 337,409,200 23.826200 7.8% EXPENDITURES: Management Services Executive Management 362,100 376.300 371900 265.500 (110900) -29.4% Administration - 1,516,800 2,249.100 1,887.400 2,351,400 102,300 4.5% Legislative Affairs and Communications 674,500 928,800 869,500 1,085,000 156,200 16.8% Finance 2.239.000 2,081.100 1834,700 1,920100 (155.000) -7.4% Total Management Services 4,792,400 5,635,300 4,963,400 5,628,000 (7,300) -0.1% Regional Programs Regional Issues Planning and Programming Rail Right of Way Management 4 Specialized Transit Transit Commuter Assistance Motorist Assistance Total Regional Programs Capital Project Development and Delivery i Debt Service Principal Payments Interest payments Cost of Issuance Total Debt Service 380,500 893,100 790,200 5,915,600 5.022.500 562A% 3,439900 8,977,500 1.741900 6,168,000 (2,809,500) -31.3% 7,897.300 9,034,100 8,601.600 9.122,100 88,000 1.0% 632,000 1.162,500 619,000 1212,000 49,500 4.3% 6,358,200 6,323,500 5.257,100 7,955,400 1,631,900 25.8% 74,370,100 96,013,200 91.459,200 102980,900 6,667,700 6-8% 3,107,500 6,450,300 3,146,400 6,487,500 37200 0.6% 2,408.600 5,184,100 4204.400 3.353,100 (1,831.000) -35.3% 98,594.100 134.038,300 115,819,700 142.894.600 8956900 6.6% 150,041400 405,143.800 220,442,300 436269,900 31,126,100 7.7% 30,225,600 32012,100 142,012,100 33,630,000 1,617,900 5.1% 6,564,900 9,933,800 7,881,200 13,043,400 3.109.600 31.3% 280,000 950.000 • L280.0001 -100. ii 36 790 500 - 42 225 900 150 823,300 46,673,400 4.447.500 10.5% Total Expenditures 290 18,400 587,043.300 492048,700 631.465,900 44,422,600 7.6% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) j Transfers In Transfers Out Debt Proceeds Net Financing Sources (Uses) EXCESS (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 1 46,731,400 (273,460.300) (224,071,700) (294,056.700) (20,596,400) 7.5% 34,745,000 77,940,600 75,595,700 69,125,100 (8,815,500) -11.3% (34,745,000) (77,940,600) (75,595,700) (69,125,100) (8815900). -11.3% 50900 000 87 000 000 149,100 000 130,000,000 43,000 D00 49.4% 50900,000 87.000.000 149.100 000 130.000.000 43.000,000 49 4% 96,731,400 (186,460,300) (74,971,70D) (164,056,7(10) 22403900 -12.0% 453 429 200 550160,600 550.160.600 475.188.900 (74.971.7001 13_,¢1(i 2550.160 6IN7 $ 363 704,10) 1_ 475 188 90Q $ 311.132 2%) $ (52 566 1001 -t 94 • • SECTION 7.1 MANAGEMENT SERVICES' 95 • • Executive Management Mission Statement: "To maintain the highest level of achievement and professionalism possible while managing the activities of the Commissionwith a small staff, complemented with consultants, to effectuate sound transportation policies and legislation compatible with environmental standards." Chart 29 — Executive Management Support 22% rofessional 28% 'r Expenditures Personnel 50% Executive Management has a budget of $265,500 a decrease of 29.4% from last year's budget, for oversight of all Commission functions. Salaries and benefits decreased $131,800, or 50%, from the prior year's budget based on staffing allocations_ Professional costs include legal fees and consulting services. Support costs include various membership dues. Table 68 — Executive Management Expenditure Detail FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefits $ 269.700 $ 263,700 $ 270,800 $ 131,800 $ (131,900) -50.0% General Legal Services 44,200 55,000 45,000 50,000 (5,000) -9.1% Professional Services -Other 3.400 25.000 22.000 25.000 D.0% Total Professional Costs - 47,600 80,000 67,000 75,000 (5.000) -6.3% Support Costs I 44,800 32 600 34 000 58,700 26.100 80.1% TOTAL. Executive Management $ 362 100 S 376.300 $ 371.800 $ 265.500 $ 010 800) -29 4% 96 Executive Management Staffing Summary Department Budget Overview Department Description The Executive Director is responsible for and provides strong leadership in developing and implementing new strategies at the local, regional, and statewide levels to assure project delivery of transportation improvements throughout the County. Furthermore, Executive Management is committed to fostering a positive and supportive work environment for staff that emphasizes quality work and encourages teamwork and open communication, while recognizing individual achievement. This is accomplished through a productive and collaborative effort with the members of the Commission and the oversight of the Commission's Executive Committee. Key Assumptions • The Executive Director will play a prominent role with external audiences with an emphasis on working with Congress regarding the reauthorization of the federal transportation act and on advancing transportation policy in California. • Project delivery will be a top priority in FY 2008/09 given the recent award of Proposition 1 B bond funding in the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF) and Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) categories. • The Commission will repeatedly be in the public eye as projects ratchet up the public involvement process as part of the environmental analysis that is being conducted on the development of the Mid County Parkway, realignment of SR-79, construction of the Perris Valley Line project, and widening of 1-215_ • The development of the Perris Valley Line project will mark Riverside County's first major rail expansion in more than 10 years and will require significant effort from the Executive Director to obtain approvals from the FTA, local railroads, and community. Accomplishments FY 2007/08 saw extraordinary accomplishments at the Commission, placing it in the top tier of Califomia transportation organizations. In several areas, the Commission stood by itself in successful advocacy, innovation, and leadership. • 97 • Led the creafon of the Southem California Working Group which was formed to advocate for Proposition 1B funding on Southern California Goods Movement projects. • Through the efforts of the Southern California Working Group, the Commission was successful in obtaining $162.7 million in Proposition 1B TCIF to build 12 railroad grade separations and improvements on the I-215Nan Buren interchange. • Moved forward to implement components of the 10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan More than $89 million in engineering contracts have been awarded for preliminary engineering work and environmental studies on 1-15, 1-215, and SR- 91. • Obtained federal approval to move forward with the next stage of project development on the Perris Valley Lineproject which includes preliminary engineering and the commencement of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process. • Has received an earmark of $50 million for the Perris Valley Line project in the President's FY 2008/09 budget. •; Began right of way. acquisition for the 5R-91 HOV lane project in Downtown Riverside. •; Began the legislative process for obtaining toll approval on SR-91 and 1-15. This included the introduction of legislation in the State Senate and Assembly and a formal application to the federal Department of Transportation. • Adopted a new locally -preferred alternative for the Mid County Parkway that addresses a number of community and environmental concems. • Continued multiagency implementation efforts related to the proposed Irvine - Corona Expressway and, as part of this effort, began drilling for geological testing to determine the viability of a tunnel for this project. • Continued land acquisitions in support of the MSHCP using the commercial paper program. • Initiated and/,or funded major construction projects in FY 2007/08, including: o Opening of new direct freeway -to -freeway connectors as part of the SR-60/SR- 91/1-215 interchange. These connectors opened at the end of the 2007 calendar 'year; o Completion of other major components of the SR-60/SR-91/1-215 interchange including an eastbound truck bypass lane on SR-60; o Construction on a new parking structure at the North Main Corona station; o Ongoing STIP-funded Caftans project development efforts to deliver a new Bob Hope Drive/Ramon Road interchange on I-10; o Ongoing STIP-funded CVAG project development efforts for additional interchange improvements on 1-10; and o SR-91/Green River Road interchange construction as a result of state and federal funding buttressed by the Commission's commercial paper program. Major Initiatives Project development and delivery will continue as the key Measure A priority. Work efforts are ongoing for the SR-60, SR-74, SR-79, SR-91, 1-15, 1-215, Mid County Parkway, and 98 Coachella Valley Measure A commitments in partnership with CVAG. Continuing expansion of commuter rail parking as well as project development and planning for the Perris Valley Line will also be top priorities in FY 2008/09. Due to the continuing significance and volatility of the State's General Fund and budgetary issues on transportation funding, staff will continue to explore ;creative financing opportunities. The Commission issued sales tax revenue bonds in June2008 to address cash flow and to continue a rapid pace of project delivery on 2009 Measure A projects. Regional cooperation and collaboration will continue to be given significant emphasis consistent with the philosophy and mission of this Commission. This has proven successful as part of the Southern California Working Group effort and will become increasingly important to ensure that Southern California receives needed funding when Congress reauthorizes the federal transportation act in 2009. Enhanced external communications will remain a top Commission priority. Media relations will continue to be formally cultivated, and press releases will remain a major effort along with the Commission Connection newsletter. An expanding and systematic outreach to business and civic groups, focusing an the integration of the 1989 Measure A, program with the 2009 Measure A program, will be a central feature of the communications program. While actively participating in all of these major endeavors, the Executive Director will maintain and improve administrative efficiency and fiscally soundpractices' characteristic of the Commission. With a total of 45 budgeted staff positions, the Commission organization remains consistent with Commission direction. The Commission will continue to be competitive in the employment market and will retain capable staff as well as attract high quality applicants. Staff training and development will continue to be intensified enabling our small and dedicated staff to enhance skills, productivity, and value. Our goal is to maintain the most effective mid -sized transportation agency in California. Department Goals Maximize funding for transportation improvements in Riverside County through legislative advocacy and locally controlled funding options such as sales taxes. Objectives: • Implement the Commission's early development project priorities outlined in the recent Commission workshops, focusing on the first 10 years of the 2009 Measure A and the remaining period of the 1989 Measure A expenditure plan. • Advocate federal appropriations for the CETAP corridors, the FTA Small Starts rail funding, and the regional efforts to reduce the community impacts of rail goods movement. 99 • • Place an emphasis on initiating federally authorized and funded projects included within the new federal transportation bill and the Commission's ongoing project priorities. Executive staff will respond to the State's transportation funding issues by continuing; project work on named Measure A projects. Support regional transportation solutions in cooperation with surrounding counties that are of benefit to Riverside County. Objectives: • Continue work on grade separation and rail capacity projects funded through I SAFETEA-LU, TCIF, and called for in the Commission's $561 million Grade Separation P an adopted in October 2006. •1 Work with neighboring counties regarding corridor improvements on SR-71 and SR-91 as wel as on 1-15 and 1-215. Maintain effective working relationships with Commissioners to strengthen and expand the Commission's leadership in transportation policy decision -making at all levels of government. Objectives: • Facilitate Commissioner participation at the regional, state, and federal levels to raise the interests of the Commission and seek favorable action. • Continue the regular one-on-one meetings between the Executive Director, senior staff, and the Commissioners. While maintaining a relatively small staff, promote the Commission's effectiveness by improving and developing staff skills, using state-of-the-art working tools, and fostering an environment that encourages and rewards individual and team effort. Objectives: • Continue to maintain a well -documented employee appraisal process that provides clear, understandable, and measurable performance criteria for all employees. • Continue to refine the Commission's performance -based compensation system. Develop the framework for a Commission culture that enhances productivity, encourages regular and open communication among staff, and promotes the mutual achievement of individual and organizational goals and objectives. Objectives: • Conduct a semi-annual review of organization accomplishments as measured against planned objectives to determine progress in meeting those objectives and action steps needed. • Facilitate open communications and coordination between management, professional staff, and support staff through regular meetings. 100 Executive Management Performance/Workload Indicators FY 06/07 Actual FY 07/08 Estimated FY 08/09 Projected Budgeted Expenditures $290,218,400 $492,048,700 $631,465,900 Public Speeches 31 36 35 Staffing Levels 35 44 45 Administration costs as percentage of expenditures 1.65% 1.0% 0.9% 101 • Administration Mission Statement: "To provide quality and efficient services to the Board of Commissioners, its staff, and external customers and to comply with applicable federal and state requirements." Chart 30 — Administration Expenditures The Administration Department's total budget is $2,351,400 for office operations including management of office space, lease, and equipment; records; DBE compliance; Commission and committee meetings; and special events as well as for the clerk of the board and human resources functions. Professional costs of $86,000 cover various services including, but not limited to, Commissioners' per diem, legal fees, and consultant and other professional services. Support costs of $1,471,400 cover administrative overhead including office maintenance; Commission insurance coverage; information technology updates, support, and maintenance; and recruitments. 102 Table 69 — Administration Expenditure Detail FY 06/07 FY 0710B FY 07/08 FY 08109 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefits $ 356.700 $ 454,700 $ 364,900 $ 444,000 $ (10,700) -2.4% Professional Costs Commissioner - Per Diem 58,700 60,000 53,000 56,000 (4,000) -6.7% General Legal Services 20,200 31,000 25,500 19,000 (12,000) -38.7% Professional Services -Other 1.000 6.200 13.600 11.000 4,800 77.4% Total Professional Costs 79,900 97,200 92,100 86,000. (11200) -11.5% I Support Costs Capital Outlay i 1 Debt Service TOTAL Administration 1,071,200 1,375,200 1,418,100 1,471,400 96,200 7.0% 9,000 322,000 12,300 350,000 28,000 8.7% 26,100 NIA $ 1.542 90Q $ 2.249.100 $ 1 _a67.400 6 2 351.400 $ 192.30Q 0,51 Administration Staffing Summary Department Budget Overview — Office Operations Department Description Office Operations oversees the daily maintenance needs of the Commission's office facility and its staff; annually updates the DBE program, goal, and annual anticipated DBE participation level (AADPL) for federally funded projects; reviews and updates insurance coverage for the Commission and its properties; oversees the office lease; purchases office supplies and equipment; maintains a safe working environment for Commission board members, staff, and consultants; manages information technology and records management systems; and provides support services. Office Operations continues to operate with a small staff of four consisting of the Office and Board Services Manager, Senior Administrative Assistant, Administrative 103 F I i Assistant, and Senior Office Assistant. The Clerk of the Board also serves as the Commission's DBE Liaison Officer. Key Assumptions • Support is provided to 45 full-time Commission staff. • Requests for project proposals and project notices of completion are posted and printed in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations. • Information technology systems are updated to ensure efficiency. • An accurate and efficient records management system is maintained. 'Accomplishments ! of incoming and outgoing correspondence and documents • Posted requests for proposals for capital projects and legal notices for various Commission items. • Established a DBE goal of 3.59% for FY 2007/08. • Established a DBE AADPL of 4.47% for FY 2007/08. • Achieved 4.09% DBE AADPL for FY 2006/07; however the DBE goal was not achieved as the preliminary engineering contract on the Perris Valley Line project was delayed to FY 2007/08. Major initiatives The Commission's electronic records management system has provided a vast improvement in efficiencies as it relates to the management, storage, and accessibility of the Commission's actions and documents and the retention capability for incoming and intemally created 'records. Improvements will continue to be made. to strengthen the Commission's records management processes and procedures including an evaluation of various databases. The Commission is a member of the California Unified Certification Program. The Office and Board Services Manager serves as its DBE liaison officer. The Commission's DBE program will be regularly reviewed to comply with federal guidelines. Office Operations will continue to support staff members on capital construction projects as it relates to the Commission's DBE program, post legal notices for project requests for proposals and notices of completion, and set up special events to commemorate the start and completion of the projects. Office Operations will continue to provide high quality support services to the Board of Commissioners and to internal and external customers by providing a working environment that enhances the overall mission of the Commission. Updated the web page in a timely manner for the postings of agendas, legal notices, requests for proposals, and employment opportunities. Maintained efficient information technology infrastructure. • Maintained the electronic records management system to ensure accurate and efficient processing. 104 Department Goal — Office Operations Ensure quality service that demonstrates responsiveness and flexibility and provides services at the most reasonable cost. Objectives: • Support 45 full-time staff. • Provide accessibility to meeting agendas, legal notices, requests for proposal, and employment opportunities through the Commission's web page. • Continue to improve administrative efficiency through automation of records processing. • Provide a safe working environment with the maintenance of an injury and illness j prevention program. I • Post legal notices and requests for proposal on the Commission's web page and in the newspapers on a timely basis. + Provide. DBE program and certification information on the Commission's web page. • Provide office supplies, equipment, and services consistent with intended quality and capabilities at the most advantageous price afforded in the market. • Manage the Commission's information technology systems. Department Budget Overview — Clerk of the Board Department Description The Clerk of the Board staff provides support services to the Board of Commissioners, which will increase to 31 members in July 2008, and its alternates and for Commission and committee meetings. It serves as an important resource for. the Commission and has the responsibility for recording, publishing, preserving, and filing meeting proceedings of documents acted upon by the Commission and its committees; posting legal notices, capital project requests for proposals, and notices of project completion; processing claims against the Commission; fulfilling requirements of the Commission and the committees as it relates to the Conflict of Interest Code; coordinating Commission special events and meetings; and performing all duties required by law, rules, or order of the Board of Commissioners. Key Assumptions • Staff support and meeting services are provided to 31 Commissioners and their altemates, the Commission, five established committees, and numerous ad hoc committees. • Monthly agenda packets and supporting documents and legal notices are published and distributed in accordance with the Brown Act. • Officers and members of the Commission are kept informed by providing them with the most current and accurate data to assist them and facilitate their decision making responsibilities. 105 • • Frequent communication with Commissioners continues to provide news and updates on Commission items and transportation -related meetings. • Available technology is used to provide simplified access of agenda items and Commission actions by the public, local agencies, and staff. • Compliance, with state and federal updates is achieved as it relates to the Brown Act. Accomplishments • Updated the web page and the bulletin board for the agenda, minutes, and supporting documents. i • Posted legal notices in local newspapers and on the Commission's web page. I • Regularly advised officers and members of the Commission and their staff on changes to Commission meetings and other transportation -related meetings. • Arranged Commission and committee meetings and special events of the Commission. • Scheduled and advertised unmet transit needs hearing in Blythe for the Palo Verde Valley area. • Processed and transmitted Commission -approved resolutions and ordinances to appropriate agencies in a timely manner. Major Initiatives Each year, local agencies make changes to their appointments regarding their representation on the Commission. Staff has made and will continue to make every effort to ensure that the newly appointed representatives, as well as their respective staff, are aware of operational policies of the Commission and other transportation- ! related meetings. There will be continued emphasis on the utilization of electronic mail with Commissioners for more efficient communications. Staff will continue to update technology to streamline processes and procedures to provide easier access to Commission actions, minutes, resolutions, and ordinances. Department Goals - Clerk of the Board Ensure coordination and documentation of Commission and committee meetings and provide public accessibility to agenda items as required by state regulations.' I Objectives: • Provide 'accurate, high quality agenda packets for Commission and committee meetings. • Continue to provide support to Commission members, staff, and attendees of Commission and committee meetings. • Post meeting agendas and supporting documents in compliance with Brown Act requirements. • Maintain an accurate list of Commissioners and alternates and submit membership roster changes to the Secretary of State. 106 • Maintain and file all Commission and committee meetings and official records of the Commission. • Perform all duties within mandated deadlines. • Maintain and promote good Commission and staff relations. Facilitate access of information to Commission records. Objectives: • Continue to .respond to requests for records and information on a timely basis and in accordance with state law. • Continue to improve the Commission's recordkeeping practices by updating the j electronic records management system. ;• Maintain Commission agreements, amendments, memoranda of understanding, resolutions, and ordinances. i• Maintain a centralized database for Commissioners, agencies, and consultant contact information. • Coordinate special activities, meetings, events, and conferences as requested by the Executive Director and the Commission. i Department Budget Overview - Human Resources Department Description i Human Resources responsibilities include administering the recruitment, selection, and appraisal process; updating and conducting a biennial survey of comparable salaries and benefits; maintaining personnel policies and procedures; and scheduling periodic sessions for staff to review benefits and personnel rules and for supervisors to review the performance evaluation process. Key Assumptions • The use of consultant services for Human Resources administration is maximized. • The assessment of Human Resources practices and procedures will continue. • Continuous improvement in communication with employees regarding Human Resources information will be an ongoing process. • Compliance with state and federal labor law regulations is achieved Accomplishments • Revised the Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual. • Revised the annual employee performance review and process. • Provided the annual Benefit Statement to all employees. • Regularly provided information to employees on changes to health insurance, 401(a) defined contribution, 457 deferred compensation plans, and the personnel policies and procedures manual through the Commission's intranet. Recruited and filled 12 staff positions. 107 • • Held training sessions on violence in the workplace and employee performance reviews. • Completed the biennial compensation study. Major Initiatives Human Resources focuses on managing employees and consists of a framework of activities and practices that support and develop a motivated workforce while at the °same time complying with legislation and regulations that govem the !employer/employee relationship. Staff will use written position descriptions and 'performance expectations in order that each employee has a clear and consistent 'understanding of what is expected. Additionally, staff will utilize qualified human !resources consultants to assist in establishing good human resources management !practices, based on policies to establish parameters for fair and consistent decision - `making, and toiinstitute good workplace practices. A compensation program review wiII be conducted every two years to ensure fair compensation is established to !attract and retain the most qualified employees. Department Goals - Human Resources Administer human resources policies, procedures, and programs in order to align personnel laws and the Commission's policies with continuous improvement principles. Objectives: • Review and update personnel policies and procedures to comply with federal and state requirements. ,• Provide information to enhance the employee's knowledge of current personnel policies and procedures in various forms including electronic access, workshops, and printed [information. • Ensure that employee personnel records are updated timely for various personnel actions. Continue to employ and recruit a dynamic and talented workforce. Objective: • Maintain a 'compensation program which ensures internal equity and external competitiveness within the pay structure for Commission employees. Develop people to be their best in order to meet the needs of the organization. Objectives: • Build and maintain an effective performance system to include timely performance evaluations, personal development, and a supportive work environment. • Provide appropriate and timely training to meet the demands of the organization. 108 Understand and consistently deliver excellent customer service to all employees. Objective: • Focus on "employee as customer" and consistently strive to exceed expectations by supporting and maintaining individual respect, appreciation, management accessibility, and communication. ;Improve the quality of the work culture. Objectives: • Develop and maintain a safe working environment. I• Maintain a proactive employee relations process. 1• Promote a work/family balance. • Recognize and reward individual contributions. Administration Performance/Workload Indicators FY 06107 Actual FY 07/08 Estimated FY 08/09 Projected Employee Rules/Benefits Review Sessions Held 2 3 4 Recruitments 7 12 2 Positrons Filled 7 12 2 Documents Processed 8,269 4,170 4,587 Legal Notices 16 8 12 .. Commission/Committee/Ad Hoc Meetings 68 _ 70 74 Commissioners (including Alternates) Supported 53 53 54 Staff Supported: Regular Full-time Temporary/Seasonal 35 1 44 1 45 1 109 • • • Legislative Affairs and Communications !Mission Statement: ,"To strive to improve the lives of Riverside County residents by working through the !legislative process and by maintaining effective interagency relationships. This is 'supported by', facilitating interactive communications with the public and transportation stakeholders through variousoutreach and media efforts." Chart 31 — Legislative Affairs and Communications Support 17% Personnel 36% Professional 47% Expenditures The Legislative Affairs and Communications Department has a total budget of $1,085,000, an increase of 16.8% from last year's budget. Staffing costs make up 35.9% of the total department expenditures. Professional costs include legislative advocacy for $350,000 and graphic design and website updates aggregating $98,000. Support costs, which include media ads for $120,000, have increased 9.3% from last Year's budget_ Table 70 — Legislative Affairs and Communications Expenditure Detail FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefits - $ 298,800 $ 372,800 $ 327.100 $ 390.000 $ 17,200 4.6% Professional Costs General Legal Services - 3,200 8,000 -. 1,100 16,000 8,000 100.0% Professional Services -Other 221.100 375,300 392.000 490,300 115,000 30.6% Total Professional Costs 224,300 383,300 393,100 506,300 123,000 32.1% Support Costs 151.400 172.700 149.300 188.700 16,000 Inn TOTAL_ Legislative Affalrs and Communications $ 674.500 A 92n_800 ct + 500 $ 1 n85.o0Q $ 156_2QQ 16 8% 110 I Le • islative Affairs and Communications Staffing Summary j Department Budget Overview Department Description Legislative Affairs Transportation issues and system enhancements typically affect a number of jurisdictions and stakeholders. Through increased participation, the Commission is able to play a stronger leadership role at all levels of govemment to advance its interests and policy goals. The importance of this is magnified when the Commission is seeking changes in law or needs legislative authorization to move forward with a specific project. The Commission's Legislative Affairs efforts focus on taking full advantage of opportunities at both the federal and state levels when there is a potential impact to Commission programs. In doing so, the Commission maintains its role as a major legislative force and a statewide leader on a broad range of issues affecting transportation policy such as project delivery and enhanced funding. This requires the establishment and maintenance of ongoing communication with Riverside County's legislative delegations in Washington and Sacramento. The Commission accomplishes this via a combined effort that includes Commissioners, staff, and legislative consultants in the two capitols. Specific legislation in the coming year will be necessary to advance a number of important Commission work efforts. The Commission has received good news in the past year regarding the Perris Valley Line project with a favorable project rating from the FTA and the inclusion of $50 million in funding in the President's proposed Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2008/09 budget. The Commission will need to work with Congress to ensure the funding is maintained and will result in full funding for the project in 2010. The issue of federal legislation and working with Congress will have heightened awareness in the coming year because of the likely reauthorization of the federal !transportation bill in 2009. A significant amount of groundwork will take place 111 • through the latter half of the 2008 calendar year and the early part of 2009 to formulate the federal legislation which govems federal transportation policy and spending for as long as six years. In anticipation of this priority, the Commission has already bolstered its lobbying presence in Washington, D.C. to play an influential role in shaping this legislation. Yet another legislative priority for the Commission is to seek federal authorization for tolling on 1-15. !, A'key project in the 10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan is to construct two HOT lanes on the 1-15 between SR-74 and the San Bernardino {County line. Along with the HOT lane authorization, the Commission is working !jointly with the RTA to obtain federal funding for the development of bus rapid transit service on the HOT lanes when they are constructed. Developing effective partnerships with agencies such as RTA, SunLine, and CVAG will be an important component of the Commission's federal lobbying strategy in dealing with .the federal transportation bill reauthorization process. Ideally, Riverside County will communicate a unified message to Congress regarding its mobility needs. During the coming year, the Commission will play a leadership role in bringing various agencies together in this effort which will includes, cities, the county, and transit operators. While federal legislation will have a high profile in the coming year, state legislative relations are equally important. During the past year, a number of CTC actions have taken place to allocate Proposition 1B funds. The Commission has played a leadership role, in this process and has been successful in developing a Southem California Consensus approach to goods movement which should lead to funding for railroad grade separations. In the coming year, legislative actions are likely to codify the State and Local Partnership Program and additional grade separation funding. The Commission must also work with the Legislature regarding the need to obtain tolling authorization on I-15 and to extend the 91 Express Lanes. The Commission is sponsoring ! AB 1954 by Assemblyman Kevin Jeffries to provide tolling authorization on 1-15. The Commission is also co -sponsoring SB 1316 by Senator Lou Correa that will allow for the extension of the 91 Express Lanes into Riverside County. Both', bills were passed by the first houses in May 2008 and will be considered by the second houses over the summer 2008_ If both bills receive final approval, the Govemor may sign the bills in as early as September 2008. Communications The Commission is committed to communicating with and educating a broad arena of interested parties on the roles and responsibilities of the agency. Emphasis is placed on informing Riverside County residents and businesses about transportation projects and services and maintaining open communication with other transportation stakeholders. Various forms of media and communication tools are used in these outreach efforts with the overall objectives to provide accurate, informative, and easily accessible information; facilitate public participation in the Commission processes; and increase interagency coordination and cooperation. 112 The Deputy Executive Director is responsible for communications with the news media and prepares text for Commission materials, presentations, and speeches. Along with the. Executive Director, the Deputy Executive Director and Community. Relations Manager actively participate in public presentations at the local, regional, and state levels to represent the Commission's interests. i Strong relationships with the news media are very important to ensure that the public l is well informed regarding the Commission's progress in determining funding priorities, designing infrastructure improvements, and constructing projects. There are many points throughout these processes in which the public can and should play a role in shaping the future of the County's transportation network. I Key Assumptions '• The Deputy Executive Director will oversee the legislative affairs work: effort with support from the Govemment Relations Manager and legislative consultants. • The annual newspaper report to the public will be distributed throughout the County. • The Commission Connection newsletter will be published regularly as well as distributed electronically and posted on the Commission website. • The Speakers Bureau effort will continue to seek local community opportunities to expand outreach regarding the Commission's activities. • The Commission's website will be updated and refreshed on a regular basis. • Additional communications tools and opportunities will be explored for incorporation into the ongoing program to help build public awareness of Commission activities. • The Commission will take a leadership role in formulating a countywide direction on federal transportation policy in order to influence the reauthorization of the federal transportation act. • The Commission will take an active role throughout the legislative process in Sacramento to obtain authorization for tolling on SR-91 and 1-15. • Publicoutreach will take a heightened role as project development activities accelerate on projects such as the widening of 1-215, the SR-91 HOV lanes, the Perris Valley Line project, the Mid County Parkway, and the SR-79 realignment. • Construction updates regarding the construction of a new parking structure at the North Main Corona Metrolink station will continue to be a priority and will require coordination with the city of Corona and Metrolink as well as riders who regularly utilize the station. • Goods movement will remain a key policy priority for the Commission and there will be an emphasis to ensure that Riverside County receives significant funding for this need from state and federal govemments. Accomplishments • Participated in efforts to obtain Proposition 42 funding for goods movement projects throughout the county including railroad grade separations. 113 • • Published a four page annual report supplement in three major newspapers — The Press Enterprise, Desert. Sun, and The Californian. The supplement's centerfold [featured the recent completion of direct freeway -to -freeway connectors on the SR-60/SR-91/1-215 interchange and the recent completion of SR-60 HOV lanes from 1-15 to Valley Way. • Continued' effective relationships with the news media resulting in informative coverage regarding local and regional transportation issues and Measure A project delivery. • Provided extensive publicoutreach support as part of the project development process for the Mid County Parkway, SR-79 realignment, Perris Valley Line, and Riverside County to Orange County Major Investment Study (MIS) projects. • Supported; the Rail Department in the development of various marketing materials and advertisements including weekend and holiday train services. • Increased the Commission's presence on television with interviews on Time Warner Cable, KOCE, and KVCR. This included live, interactive television appearances that included Commissioner participation regarding the future of SR-91 and the Perris Valley Line project. • Completed an informational video regarding goods movement issues and railroad grade separations. • Launched 'an effective outreach program to inform Metrolink riders at the North Main Corona Metrolink station regarding construction impacts from the building of a new parking structure. • Took a leadership role in developing a five -county consensus working group on goods movement issues that resulted in a statewide effort to advocate for a larger share of Proposition 1B TCIF dollars. The multi -county working group will continue to work together on goods movement issues through the federal legislative reauthorization process. • Developed new collateral materials for advocacy with state and local governments regarding legislative priorities. • Filled the' new position of Community Relations Manager to strengthen community relations efforts especially involving project -related issues. • Completely revised and improved the look and functionality of the Commission's website. • Began distribution of the Commission Connection newsletter through e-mail. • Obtained a $50 million funding request in the President's proposed FFY 2008/09 budget for the Perris Valley Line project. • Actively participated in a region wide effort to expand the reach of Mobility 21, a Southem Califomia transportation advocacy group, to the Inland Empire. The emphasis resulted in co -hosting a major conference in Ontario in late'2007. • Developed a new Commissioner orientation program that will bolster Commissioner knowledge and participation regarding Commission projects and activities. Major Initiatives Legislative Affairs 114 Legislatively, the continued quest for additional state and federal investment in transportation infrastructure will be an ongoing concern. At the state level, ongoing state funding problems will likely result in the diversion of state transportation funding. The uncertainty of state funding has led the Commission to consider new funding strategies such as toll financing to build new projects: Still, there is a need to be especially active in state legislative matters to ensure that Riverside County needs obtain proper consideration and funding. While funding is always a priority, legislative changes are also needed to ensure that :funding of any kind is spent efficiently. During the coming year, the Commission will !seek legislative approval of two bills for the implementation of HOT lanes on SR-91 land 1-15-in Corona. These two projects are part of the Commission's 10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan. Another priority will be to ensure that $50 :million in proposed federal funding that has been submitted by the President for the Perris Valley Line project is included in the approved FFY 2008i09 budget. Finally, there is a need to develop a countywide approach for dealing with Congress on the reauthorization of the federal transportation act. Communications The Commission provides information to the public through various channels including: 1) participation at public meetings and service clubs; 2) production and provision of resource materials and fact sheets; 3) maintenance and enhancement of the Commission's website; and 4) development of newspaper press releases, radio public service announcements, and cable television spots. The Commission's largest publication effort to provide widespread understanding of its projects and expenditures is its four -page annual report which is published in three area newspapers throughout the County. Broad distribution of the Commission Connection, a monthly 'one -page, two-sided newsletter highlighting actions of the Commission and emerging topics, will continue as part of the Commission's communications efforts. Efforts will continue to update and expand the Commission's contact database including e-mail addresses in order to support distribution of the Commission's public information materials. Efforts will be made to increase the Commission's public information program targeted to citizens and businesses within the County as well as a broad array of public and private entities involved in the world of transportation. A focus will be placed on the development and. placement of periodic informational ads in the. County's major newspapers. The ads will be targeted to geographic areas and will communicate relevant information to the reader audience. A continuing emphasis will be placed on providing communications support to major project development efforts including the Perris Valley Line, Mid County Parkway as part of the CETAP program, and ongoing highway construction projects. The need for proactive public communication and outreach remains important, as the Commission continues to move forward with the delivery of the 2009 Measure A i 115 • • • work program. This is rapidly becoming an area of emphasis, because the Commission's approval in December 2006 of the 10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan places it in a high -profile role in the delivery of large-scale highway projects. This will require additional contact with the public by the Community Relations Manager. The Commission's outreach will include a proactive effort to work closely with various media formats such as print, radio, and television to increase their understanding of and interest in transportation issues and generate a higher level of media coverage. Toward that end, opportunities will be identified for live or taped .interviews and presentations that speak to local citizens and their questions conceming transportation issues which could include forums such as city council meetings and oval cable television. New Commissioner orientation meetings will be provided by the Deputy Executive Director in one-to-one or group settings. To supplement individual Commissioner meetings with the Executive Director, continuing education opportunities at the small j group level will also be provided to Commissioners which focus on timely issues. Department Goals Foster the Commission's full involvement in a broad range of local, regional, state, and federal government settings. Objectives: • Participate llinthe Self -Help Counties Coalition, the California Transit Association, Southem California Legislative Roundtable, League of Cities, Mobility 21, state and federal transportation agencies, and community/business organizations. • Work with the CTC and the Regional Transportation Planning Agencies to protect and enhance project funding for the County through influencing policy decisions. • Maintain a'I leadership role in local and regional transportation venues related to project development efforts and current and emerging issues including coordination with other county transportation commissions, councils of govemments, and local jurisdictions. • Continue to foster the success of the Southern Califomia Working Group in advocating for additional funding for goods movement projects. • Participate'fand influence intercounty discussions between Riverside and Orange counties regarding the operation of the 91 Express Lanes as well as overall transportation policy between both counties. This includes supporting efforts to develop a', new transportation corridor between the counties and to support additional transit service. • Provide leadership to the Technical Advisory Committee of the Regional Transportation Agencies Coalition (RTAC). Of particular concem is RTAC's role in development and overall approval of the RTP. • Form a Legislative Technical Advisory Committee formed of representatives from cities, the county and transit operators to develop a countywide strategy for the reauthorization of the federal transportation act. 116 • Consider the formation of an ad hoc committee of Commissioners to prioritize legislative interaction with the Commission's legislative delegation. Implement the Commission's state and federal legislative • program to maximize flexibility in the use of existing transportation revenues by supporting legislation to protect and increase current funding levels, ensuring an equitable distribution of available resources, streamlining administrative procedures to reduce costs and time of project development, and accelerating the allocation and use of existing resources. Objectives: • Coordinate legislative activities of federal and state legislative consultants related to SAFETEA-LU and Proposition 1B. Obtain monthly reports on activities performed. • Work with board members to establish policy positions, draft legislation, and take positions on pending legislation. i• Review and analyze legislation and recommend positions for the Commission to adopt on specific legislative proposals. • Effectively represent the Commission before the state and federal legislative bodies, the CTC, and other agencies in funding, programming, and policy matters. • Maintain contact and good working relationships with state and federal lawmakers and their staffs. Regularly meet and inform them of County' transportation issues, policy positions, and project priorities. + Convene meetings with state, federal, and legislative staff members, including' hosting federal staff for an annual full -day briefing and tour of projects. Support the continuing education of Commissioners to increase their understanding of transportation -related issues at local, state, and federal levels to maximize the effectiveness of the Commission in affecting policy and funding actions. Objectives: • Provide orientation training for new Commissioners. • Produce and distribute a monthly one -page fact sheet, Commission. Connection, highlighting actions and activities of the Commission. • Provide periodic educational workshops or study sessions for Commissioners. Develop and maintain an information program which educates the public and other stakeholders on the roles and responsibilities of the Commission as it relates to accomplishments achieved through Measure A or other funding sources controlled or administered by the Commission. Objectives: • Expand, maintain, and update information on the Commission's website which will include a major upgrade in the coming fiscal year. 117 • • Annually produce a report that informs the public regarding Measure A progress and other Commission programs. • Issue news; releases to the local media announcing significant achievements and providing information on Commission actions and activities_ • Develop and maintain open lines of communication with news reporters to facilitate adequate and accurate news coverage. • Schedule periodic media information briefings or news conferences when a particular issue warrants it. • Expand the stock of video footage for use in production of cable television spots that feature transportation projects funded and or implemented by the Commission. • Periodically use cable television and other forms of media such as billboards, if appropriate, to communicate information to the public regarding the Commission's activities and services. • Coordinate and oversee message content of all Commission publications and communications to provide uniformity of message and direction. • Support the development and planning of projects in regard to public outreach and communication efforts. • Require the use of Measure A project/program signage by funding recipients to increase public awareness of Measure A accomplishments. • Continue to administer and expand the use of the Speakers Bureau to reach community members in service and other organizations. • Monitor and distribute media coverage from various outlets in the County and throughout the region to Commissioners and staff to enable them to closely follow transportation policy trends. • Provide oversight and coordination to Commission departments in the development of communications' materials. Foster and maintain effective communications with other agencies to heighten their understanding of the roles and responsibilities of the Commission and increase interagency coordination and cooperation. Objective: • Assign des gnated staff members to attend other agency meetings and require staff to provide written/verbal communication on topics of discussion during regular staff meetings. Legislative Affairs and Communications Performance/Workload Indicators FY 06/07 Actual FY 07108 Estimated FY 08/09 Projected 45 Speakers Bureau Presentations.. 42 45 Legislative matrix submittals to Commission 9 9 9 Commissioner and state and federal legislator in -person meetings 30 30 30 Inland Empire Delegation staff briefings 3 3 3 Souther California Legislative Staff roundtables 8 9 9 118 I Finance Mission Statement: 1To safeguard the Commission's assets and maintain strong and prudent fiscal controls in investing, accounting, budgeting, procurements, and financial reporting induding ongoing disclosure to all interested parties. Seek financing altematives that complement the Commission's strategic direction." Chart 32 - Finance Professional 61% Expenditures Support 3% Personnel 36% Finance's total budget is $1,926,100 and reflects a 7.4% decrease over the prior year's budget. Department staffing costs will total $699,000, reflecting a slight increase of 0.4% due to Finance staff providing increased support to various programs and projects. Professional costs of $1,165,000 include various services related to general legal, investment and financial advisory, external and internal audits, debt management primarily related to the administration of increased utilization of the commercial paper program, and CAFR and annual budget graphic design. Support costs of $62,100 include CAFR and annual budget production costs of $45,000. Table 71 — Finance Expenditure Detail FY 06107 FY 07108 FY 07108 FY 08f09 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change salaries and Benefits $ 1,117,200 E 696,200 $ 729,500 $ 6'39,000 $ 2,800 0.4% Professional Costs Legal Services 113,200 9,000 16,600 6,000 (3,000) -33.3% Financial Advisory 123,000 150,000 50,006 90,000 (60,000) -40.0% Audit Services 314,400 520,000 435,000 ` 500,000 (20,000) ' -3.8% Professional Services -Other 530.500 640.000 548 000 569,000 (71,0001 -11.1% Total Professional Costs 1,081,100 1,319,000 1,049,600 1,165,000 (154,000) -11.7% Support Costs 40.700 65.900 55.600 62,100 (3.8001 -5.8% TOTAL Finance $ 2239.000 S 2.081.10Q ,5_1.634.700 51.926.10Q S (155.0001 -7.4% 119 • Finance Staffing Summary i�� n:Z EKtu3+i+ Department Budget Overview Department Description Commission resources are allocated to assure financial stability and fiscal accountability. Finance activities include investing the Commission's cash resources, planning and directing financial transactions, managing the procurements and contracts process, and subsequent monitoring of legal and regulatory requirements. Adequate cash flow must be maintained while at the same time prudently investing idle funds. Borrowing needs are carefully planned using both short- and long-term debt. Once debt is issued, there are ongoing responsibilities including interaction with financial advisors, bankers, dealers and underwriters, bond counsel, bond insurers, trustees, issuing and paying agents, arbitrage consultants, and rating agencies as well as providing regular and consistent information disclosure to investors. Fiscal accountability involves receiving all funds due the Commission, paying all Commission obligations, maintaining the general ledger, reporting regularly on the Commission's fiscal results, and preparing and monitoring the budget. Fiscal accountability requires the coordination of budget planning and monitoring and the accurate and t mely accounting for all funding sources, including compliance with all applicable laws and regulations goveming those funds. Accounting encompasses cash receipt and disbursement functions, maintenance of the general ledger including project cost accounting, payroll processing, quarterly and annual financial reporting, and retention of and coordination with independent auditors. The Commission also recognizes the importance of accountability for the organization. As a result, the Commission is highly regarded by individuals, peers, 120 t i f other organizations, and government officials at a local, regional, state, and national basis. A formal organizational accountability program was approved in January 2006 to address fraud risk, ethical conduct, financial and operational disclosure, and maintaining the public's confidence in the Commission. Accordingly, measures are in the process of development and implementation based on a conceptual framework related to oversight, reporting; fraud, internal control, and ethics. Key Assumptions • The commercial paper program will restored to its`$185 million fundingcapacity as a result of the issuance of sales tax revenue bonds in June 2008 with sales tax revenue bonds that refinanced the outstanding commercial paper. The commercial paper program will continue to provide short-term .advance funding for projects included in the 2009 Measure A as well as grant anticipation funding for the Perris Valley Line project. • The Commission will pay 100% of the annual required contribution related to the postretirement health care benefits. Arbitrage calculations related to the outstanding debt issues will be performed by a consultant on an annual basis. Directors and program managers will continue to have adequate project budget and accounting information to make informed decisions. • The indirect cost allocation plan submitted to Ca!trans will continue to be approved and used in determining state and federal reimbursements of project costs. • Investments will be maintained primarily in state and local agency investment pools for short-term liquidity purposes; however, investments in mid-term treasury and federal agency securities will be made as available funds are identified. The overall interest rate is conservatively projected to be 1.9%. • A centralized procurements and contracts management function will replace existing processes. Accomplishments • Implemented a reorganization plan of the Finance Department, as a result of two additional accounting positions, in order to increase staff specialization in the areas of primary responsibility. • Hired a sales tax audit services firm to perform a review and analysis of sales tax reporting to detect possible misallocations of sales tax revenues due to the Commission and to provide a quarterly analysis and report of statewide and Riverside County trends related to sales tax composition, changes, and performance. • Engaged a professional services firm to provide intemal audit services. A risk assessment was completed in May 2008 and will be used to determine an audit plan. 121 • I i • Selected and engaged two audit firms to perform the audits of the Commission and the Transportation Development Act claimants/Measure A recipients for three years plus two one-year option periods. q Met with three rating agencies in April 2008 regarding the issuance of bonds to refinance the outstanding commercial paper and achieved ratings of AA+, Aa2, and AA from S&P, Moody's, and Fitch Ratings, respectively. • Submitted a revised indirect cost allocation plan to Ca!trans in order to claim state and federal reimbursements for indirect costs related primarily to highway projects for FY 2007/08. • Obtained an actuarial valuation of the Commission's postretirement health care benefits under GASB Statement No. 45and implemented a prefunding plan. • Received approval for the addition of two new staff to support a reorganization of procurements and capital asset management.• . Obtained approval of the Measure A maintenance of efforts requirements for local jurisdictions 'receiving local streets and roads funding in connection with the 2009 Measure A. • Submitted CAFR for consideration of financial reporting excellence award from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) (15th year) related to the CAFR for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007. • Obtained GFOA distinguished budget award (12T year) for annual budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2007. Major Initiatives The commercial paper program has been in place for over three years and has provided advance funding for projects included in the 2009 Measure A of $110,005,000. Commission management will continue to consider appropriate uses of commercial paper to advance 2009 Measure A projects of the Commission, CVAG, and the local jurisdictions. Since the initial commercial paper program has been fully committed to certain projects and there are additional highway and rail capital project needs, the Commission refinanced the outstanding commercial paper in June 2008 with sales tax revenue bonds related to the 2009 Measure A. This financing transaction restored the commercial paper program to its maximum funding capacity of $185,000,000. Additionally, this financing resulted in bng-term ratings as required by the commercial paper program indenture. As a result of the adoption of the 10-Year Westem County Highway Delivery Plan, staff has commenced the development of a financing plan to support the highway and rail capital projects to be delivered through 2019. This financing plan will incorporate the sales tax revenue forecast update completed in February 2008 as well as other potential federal, state, and local revenue sources, including tolls. Based on the updated cost estimates for these projects and identified revenues, the financial advisory team will evaluate potential project funding shortfalls and innovative financing strategies that may be required. Financing altematives to be considered include commercial paper, long- term bond issues to finance Measure A and toll projects, and federal loan programs. The financing plan process will also include consideration of the restriction of the $500 million 122 i 2009 Measure A bonding cap, which could include the possibility of a future ballot measure to increase the cap. Upon completion in April 2008 of the business risk analysis phase of the internal audit risk assessment program, an audit plan consisting of approximately three internal audit projects per year will be developed and approved as part of the next major effort related to the organizational accountability program. An outcome of the projects included in the audit plan will be operational solutions such as process improvements. The Finance Department will continue to keep abreast of GASB technical activities affecting the Commission's accounting and financial reporting activities. Ongoing technical projects that may affect the Commission include fund balance reporting and governmental fund type definitions as well as the accounting and reporting for derivatives. As a result of the addition of a procurement and asset manager and a staff analyst to support procurements and contracts management, Finance management will implement a centralized procurements process to manage requests for proposals or qualifications and related contract development. Accordingly, this will strengthen controls to ensure consistency in the application of procurement policies and procedures and adherence to applicable laws and regulations, especially those related to federal and state grants. Furthermore, these positions will assist in the property management functions of the Commission's commuter rail stations. Department Goals Protect the Commission's cash resources by regular monitoring of investment practices to ensure consistency with established investment policy. Objective: e Achieve a rate of retum at least equal to the County of Riverside Treasury Pool rate. Manage the Commission's outstanding debt ensuring compliance with applicable laws and regulations and continued investor awareness and receptivity to the Commission's program. Objectives: • Provide an annual update and review of the debt programs with rating agencies no later than June 2009. • Meet continuing disclosure requirements of the debt programs. • Prepare arbitrage calculations as required. Ensure the Commission and funding recipients comply with Measure A and TDA laws and regulations as they relate to the annual financial and compliance audits as well as close cooperation and coordination with independent auditors. 123 • • I • Objectives: • Minimize the number of substantive management letter comments and compliance findings requiring corrective action by the Commission. • Maintain appropriate fiduciary review and monitoring procedures .for Measure A recipient and TDA claimant audits. Maintain fiscal and budgetary control through monitoring of periodic results and ensuring consistency with the Commission's strategic direction. Objectives: • Obtain the GFOA Distinguished Budget Award for the FY 2008/09 budget. q Provide monthly notification to managers on budget performance and assist managers regarding explanations and resolution of unfavorable budget variances. • Facilitate a comprehensive budgeting approach that effectively involves management staff, requiring full accountability for all department expenditures. • Fund 100% of the annual required contribution related to the postretirement health care benefits. i Assure fiscal j accountability for Commission funds with general ledger accounting and financial reporting consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. Objectives: • Provide monthly and quarterly activity reports to all managers ensuring proactive communication and timely responses to any noted errors, corrections, and budget transfers. • Obtain an unqualified opinion on the basic financial statements. • Receive financial reporting excellence awards from the GFOA. • Stay abreast of finance, accounting, and financial reporting developments by attending training and conferences in these general areas or in specialized areas applicable to job duties. • Update and maintain the fiscal policies and procedures manual. • Update and maintain complete accounting desk procedures manual to facilitate cross training. • Assist local govemments with Measure A funding by providing timely allocation of funds for eligible projects and financing opportunities to the extent funding does not impact other programs and is financially feasible and prudent. • Maintain financial software to reflect technical updates and current technology. Develop and maintain an organizational accountability program encompassing financial and operational functions. Objectives: • Establish and implement measures related to oversight, fraud, intemal control, and ethics. 124 • Issue annual disclosure statements related to financial and operational responsibilities. • Develop an annual intemal audit plan to include approximately three internal audit projects and update business risk analysis at least on an annual basis.., Procure goods and services from qualified consultants, contractors, and other vendors in accordance with laws and regulations at a competitive price. Objectives: • Assist departments and programs to procure and obtain goods and services in a cost effective and efficient manner. Ensure that procurements are conducted in accordance with a comprehensive Procurement Policies, Manual. • Ensure that agreements, amendments, and MOUs are entered into with appropriate legal considerations. • Process agreements, amendments, and MOUs in a timely and efficient manner. Finance Performance/Workload Indicators FY 06/07 Actual FY 07/08 Estimated FY 08/09 Projected Sales Tax Revenue Bond Rating Aa2/AA Aa2/AA+ Aa2/AA+ Commercial Paper Rating P-1/A-1+ P-1/A-1+ P-1/A-1+ GFOA Certificate of Achievement Awarded Awarded Awarded GFOA Distinguished Budget Award Proficient Proficient Proficient Invoices Processed 4,763 7,700 7,800 Checks Processed 3,340 5,200 5,300, Audit Adjustments 0 0 0 Average Yield on Investments 4.74 2.25 1.90 Payroll Hours Processed 65,485 77,071 87,000 Accounts Receivable Invoices Processed 202 224 258 Agreements Processed 244 325 375 125 • [! SECTION 7.2 REGIONAL ::PROGRAIVIS 126 • • I Regional Issues Mission Statement: "To strive to mprove the lives of Riverside County residents through the facilitation of interagency and interjurisdictional relationships in support of a coordinated regional I approach to transportation funding and solutions." Chart 33 — Reg onal Issues Support 2% Professional 59% Personnel 39% Expenditures Total budgeted expenditures for Regional Issues are $5,915,600. Staffing costs make up 6.1% of the department expenditures. Professional servicesinclude on -call goods movement consultants for $475,O00. The increase in professional services reflects the need for consultant support to conduct the environmental justice analysis and outreach as well as the transportation elements of the 1-15 interregional partnership with WRCOG. Projects and operations include a distribution for the TCIF grade separation activities of $5,000,000. 127 f f Table 72—Regional Issues Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Legal Services Professional Services -Other Total Professional Costs Support Costs Projects and Operations Special Studies LTF Disbursement Total Projects and Operations Capital Outlay TOTAL Regional Issues FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change $ 157,700 $ 407,700 $ 360,700 $ 358,100 S (49,600) -12,2% 33,800 171,400 90,000 135,000 50,000 (40,000) -44.4% 377 000 281 100 485,000 108.000 28.6Yo 205200 467,000 416,100 535,000 68,000 14-6% 12,600 5,000 18,400 13,400 22,500 4,100 22.3% - 00% 5,000,000 5,000,000 - WA 5,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 0.0% S 360 500 $ 893 10Q 5 790 700 Regional Issues Staffing Summary Department Budget Overview Department Description 0.0% Of particular importance are the promotion and maintenance of interregional cooperation to ensure that the interests of the Commission are disseminated in a proactive, informative manner. Within that context, partnership development, public and private, is viewed as critical to the Commission's continued success in affecting positive transportation decisions to meet future demands. Working in close coordination with the Legislative Affairs and Communications Department, Regional Issues advocates for federal, state, and local funding to mitigate the impacts of goods movement. 128 Key Assumptions • The Southern California MCGMAP is completed by June 2008. • Proposition 1 B TCIF are approved for 11 grade separations and a ground access project to improve the I-215Nan Buren interchange. Accomplishments • Retained consultant for the Environmental Justice Analysis and Community Outreach Study Caltrans Grant. • Submitted applications for Proposition 1B TCIF for 14 grade separations, a truck climbing lane on 1-101SR-60, and a ground access project to improve the I-215Nan Buren interchange. I Major Initiatives The Commission's work effort will remain focused on facilitating ongoing commitments as well as being responsive to various emerging issues. These include bi-county issues with the counties of San Bemardino, Orange, and San Diego as well as goods movement. Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) expansion issues will be monitored with focus placed on supporting and facilitating processes most likely to result in the redistribution of passengers and cargo from LAX to existing underutilized airports in the region. The Commission continues to support the March ARB plans to develop air freight services and resulting ground access improvement needs. The Commission will continue to be an active participant in the development of the Southern California Goods Movement Action Plan and will conduct an environmental justice analysis and community outreach to supplement the MCGMAP work efforts. The Commission will monitor the Port of Los Angeles and Port of Long Beach's projects for, possible impacts on Riverside County by reviewing agendas and requesting notices for projects under CEQA and the Brown Act. Department Goals Facilitate development of regional transportation solutions that benefit Riverside County. Objectives: • Participate and influence intercounty discussions between Riverside, Orange, and San Diego regarding the enhancement of intermodal options. This includes additional transit services (rail and express bus) and rideshare services. • Participate and influence the regional discussions on meeting air passenger and freight growth demands for the future, thereby encouraging the use of other regional airport facilities such as March ARB over LAX. 129 i i I Determine where future efforts on addressing Riverside County goods movement issues would prove most effective. Objectives: • Identify drivers of demand for goods movement services, performance of modal systems and services as well as public benefits, specific areas of inefficiency, and the impacts of goods movement on communities. • Implement the Commission's Alameda Corridor East Grade Separation Funding Plan through coordination of advocacy efforts with Legislative Affairs and Communications. Facilitate public and private investments in clean air technology in support of the broader air quality programs for SCAG, SCAQMD, and Riverside County local entities. i Objective: • Monitor the impact of AB 32 (greenhouse gas emission reduction) application to Commission transportation projects. 130 Planning and Programming Mission Statement: "To exert leadership in transportation planning and the programming of funds in order to improve mobility, foster environmental stewardship, expedite project delivery, and form partnerships with regional, state, federal agencies resulting in maximum return of federal, state, and private funding on local investment." Chart 34 — Planning and Programming Personnel Special Stlntk• 1/% Professional and Support s% projects. General LTF 6lsbtcaenrnls 17% t% Expenditures Planning and Programming expenditures of $6,168,000 have decreased 31.3% from last year's "budget as a transfer out is not required in the current year. Salaries and benefits decreased 56.3% as a result of the prior year's allocation of the pre -funding of the postretirement actuarial accrued liability and the annual required contribution related to the postretirement health benefits.. Professional services totaling $270,300 include consultant contracts to assist the Commission with comp etion of the geotechnical studies for the proposed; Irvine Corona Expressway, :CMP implementation efforts, air quality analysis,local and regional planning activities, strategic partnership advisors, and legal services. Professional costs have decreased 85.8% as a result of a reduction in the strategic partnership efforts. Projects and operations costs have decreased 7.5% due to a decrease in LTF disbursements that is directly related to the decrease in LTF planning revenues. Projects and operations costs include consultant services related to the 131 I development of a project management database to improve the management and monitoring of projects and funding. Table 73 — Planning and Programming Expenditure Detail FY 06107 FY 07108 FY 07100 FY 08/09 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefits $ 871,900 $ 1,300,300 $ 826,300 $ 567,800 $ (732,500) -56.3% Professional Costs Legal Services 52,600 76,000 112,300 25,000 (51,000) -67.1% Financial Advisory 1246,100 1,500,000 (1,500,000)-100.0% Professional Services -Other 163,500 330.500 117.900 245,300 (85200) -25.8% Total Professional Costs 1,462,200 1,906,500 230,200 270,300 (1,636200) -85.8% Support Costs 27,600 43,700 16,300 31,100 (12,600) -28.8% Projects and Operations Projects -General 400 45,000 68,000 68,000 t4/A Special Studies 103,600 4,375,400 624,000 4,180,800 094,600) -4A% LTF Disbursements 974200 1 351 600 - 1 050 000 (301,600) -22.3% Total Projects and Operations 1,078 200 5,727,000 669,000 5298.800 (428,200) -7.5% Transfers Out 0.0% TOTAL Planning and Programming $ 1439 90Q S 8.977.500 S 1.741.800 Ladka.02/ $ (2,809.500) -31.3% Planning and Programming Staffing Summary 132 Department Budget Overview Department Description The Commission is responsible for short- and long-range transportation planning and programming. Short-range planning and programming involves the development of the five-year STIP and preparation of the six -year Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) for Riverside County. These programming documents identify projects and their respective funding and schedules. The Commission's involvement with long-range planning efforts includes the coordination and input into planning efforts throughout the County and southern California region. These efforts include participation in local, bi-county, and regional corridor studies, including, but not limited to, continued development of the CETAP corridors and the RTP (a 30-year transportation plan) developed by SCAG in 'conjunction with county transportation commissions, sub -regional agencies, local agencies, transit operators, and other interested parties. The Comr ssion is responsible for approving projects for Regional Improvement Program (RIP) funds and coordinating with Ca!trans on the selection of Interregional Improvement Program (IIP) funds as part of the STIP approved by the CTC every two years. Last year the CMIA program was approved by the CTC, which is one of the various categories included in the Proposition 1B transportation bond package that was approved by the voters in November 2006. This year another Proposition 1 B category, the TCIF, was approved by the CTC: The Commission is a member of the Southem California Consensus Group that developed 'and submitted project proposals for consideration of funding from the TCIF program: As with the RIP and IIP funds, CMIA and TCIF funds are administered and allocated by the CTC. Programming specifically involves the development, review, and approval of projects for various funding programs. In order to receive federal funds and approvals, all projects funded with federal and state dollars, or local projects that are regionally significant,must be included in the FTIP. SCAG is responsible for incorporating all six -county (Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura) transportation improvement programs into one regional programming document and conducting a conformity analysis with the adopted air plans to ensure compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. This effort is performed every'18 to 24 months. The Commission is responsible for allocating the following local, state, and federal funding sources: 133 Local Sources: • 1989 and 2009 Measure A Expenditure Plans • TUMF regional arterial program State Sources: • SB 821 bicycle and pedestrian projects • RIP Federal Sources: • TE • STP • 'CMAQ The Commission also serves as the CMA for the County and is responsible for developing and updating the CMP. The CMP was developed to meet state legislation and federal Congestion Management System (CMS) requirements, which includes an enhanced traffic monitoring system. The CMP's highways and regional arterials are regularly monitored to ensure that they are not operating at deficient levels [Level of Service (LOS) "Fl. If a deficiency occurs along the CMP system, a deficiency plan must be prepared that identifies mitigation measures and/or projects that will improve the LOS to "E" or higher. Key Assumptions • The Commission will continue its efforts in working with transportation partners to streamline and improve project delivery. • A Special Use Permit has been obtained and federal funds have been obligated to allow initiation of geotechnical field testing in the Cleveland National Forest to determine the feasibility of tunnel construction for the Irvine - Corona Expressway. • Project development work for CETAP corridors will be funded with a combination of local, state, and federal funds. • The consultant contract for CMP services is maintained to provide assistance with ongoing traffic monitoring efforts, biennial updates to the CMP, and support on other related planning activities. • The Commission will continue the progress of transportation projects identified in the 1989 Measure A and the 2009 Measure A as well as other high priority projects, including TUMF Regional Arterial projects. • The consultant contract for TUMF project development and oversight will be maintained. • The Commission will continue participation in local, bi-county, and regional planning efforts representing the interests of the County. 134 • • The Commission will work with the CTC and local project sponsors to implement projects funded with STIP-RIP, CMIA, and TCIF to ensure that the programming and timing of allocations are consistent with project schedules. • The Commission will develop strategies to implement innovative financing including public toll roads: • The Commission will continue the development of a project management database that will consolidate all projects into one database: to improve efficiencies in monitoring projects and funding and to integrate other database needs within the Commission. - Accomplishments • Completed the 2008 STIP submittal to the CTC. • Completed the TCIF nomination submittal to the CTC. • Developed Measure A Regional Arterial Call for Projects and approval of program of projects is expected in September 2008. • Completed the draft project level Environmental Impact Study (EIS)lEnvironmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Mid County Parkway project. • Received a SpecialUse Permit to allow geotechnical work in the Cleveland National Forest to determine feasibility of a future Irvine Corona Expressway. • Continued funding contributions to the RCA to support reserve assembly. • Requested a Letter of No Prejudice repayment for $21 million for advancing CMAQ funds for the SR-60 HOV lane project from 1-15 to Valley Way. • Completed 22 local agency agreements and amendments for the implementation of TUMF regional arterial projects. • Developed and submitted comments to SCAG on the 2008 RTP. • Completed 2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) update, which included updating 310 projects totaling $5.7 billion. • Completed 92 RTIP/FTIP project amendments. • Developed and submitted toll application to CTC. • Completed the 2007 CMP Update. • Hired additional Staff Analyst for Programming Department. Major Initiatives With the passage of SB 45 in 1998, increased funding authority and responsibility. was placed on the Commission as it relates to the STIP. SB 45 provides for distribution of federal and statehighway funds into the following categories: RIP, IIP, and Intercity Rail.. Each county transportation commission throughout the State is responsible for programming RIP funds, which represents 75% of the total STIP funding available statewide for capital enhancement projects. The 75% funding level is then further distributed with 60% of the funds allocated to Southern Califomia and 40% to Northern California. A population formula is then applied to 135 determine county levels called "county shares." As a result of SB 45, the Commission is responsible for ensuring that projects funded with STIP funding are administered and implemented consistent with CTC and Ca!trans policies. Two percent of RIP funding available to Riverside County was allocated for :staff support to carry out STIP PPM activities. Transportation Enhancement funds are also administeredthrough the STIP. TE funds are federal funds and are not subject to general fund diversions; however, TE funds are authorized each year by the passageofthe state budget. CMIA and TCIF funds are monitored by Caltrans and the CTC. Baseline agreements are developed for each project under these programs. Any changes to project funding, scope, or schedule will require an amendment to the baseline agreement. The CTC allocates the CMIA and TCIF funds and the process for allocating the funds is similar to the process established for STIP RIP-IIP funds. Included in the 2009 Measure A is a provision that identifies $400 million of TUMF revenues collected on the Westem County TUMF network to be allocated to TUMF regional arterial projects. Of the $400 million, $200 million is slated specifically for the CETAP corridors and the other $200 million for regional arterial projects. In September 2004 the Commission established a 5-year program and approved $71.7 million to fund project development work for 24 regional arterial projects. An amendment to the $400 million provision is underway and will lift the $400 million cap. This will allow the Commission to fund the CETAP and Regional Arterial Program projects above the $400 million cap. The Commission initiated strategic partnership efforts to identify and evaluate innovative financing strategies. Innovative financing will likely be necessary to fund the significant gap between funding readily available through conventional govemmental funding/financing techniques and project needs. Innovative financing including the use of public toll roads will be necessary to fully fund the 10-Year Westem County Highway Delivery Plan. Transportation Planning The Commission's role in planning throughout the year will involve working with SCAG, sub -regional agencies, local agencies, and the other county transportation commissions intheregion on various planning efforts relative to the 2008 RTP including, but not limited to, corridor studies, goods movement studies, and efforts to update transportation computer modeling upgrades and project databases. During FY 2006/07, the Commission coordinated the project listing submittal for inclusion in the 2008 RTP update. In FY 2007/08, the Commission prepared comments on the draft 2008 RTP to ensure the Commission's policies and goals are reflected. 136 • In FY 2008/09 the Commission will continue its work efforts on the CETAP corridors. The draft environmental document for the Mid County Parkway is being circulated for public review. Public hearings will be held to obtain public comment on the proposed new corridor. Additionally, the technical studies and preliminary engineering ;work outlined as part of the Locally Preferred .Strategy for the Riverside County -Orange County MIS will continue this year. in cooperation with OCTA and the. -Transportation Corridor Agencies. We will also provide coordination and oversight, along with SANBAG, for the Moreno Valley -San Bernardino (County corridor activities with a focus on the Pigeon Pass and Reche Canyon road improvements. I The FY 2008/09 CMP effort will focus on updating traffic counter equipment to adapt to the digital technology recently implemented at call boxes along the CMP system. Transportation Programming As mentioned above, the Commission is responsible for allocating various state and federa funds. The funds are monitored to ensure that regulations are adhered to n order to prevent funds from lapsing. The following summarizes the status of these funding programs: Local Funding TUMF Project monitoring and tracking of TUMF regionalarterial projects will occur according to the agreements between local agencies and the Commission. In addition, Commission staff will work with local agencies regarding amendments to agreements' and any issues regarding project delivery. To date, 22 project agreements have been executed totaling approximately $61 million. During FY 2008/09; a total of $29 million of TUMF funding is anticipated to be expended by local agenc es. 2009 Measure A Regional Arterial Program Regional arterial projects will be approved in September 2008. The selected projects will be Western County project improvements located on the 2009 Measure A regional arterial system and TUMF backbone network. Agreements between local agencies and the Commission will be developed for each selected project. State Funding 137 STIR- RIPIIIP The 2008 STIP cycle is scheduled for approval by the CTC in May 2008. Staff prepared and submitted the 2008 STIP nominations by the February 19, 2008 deadline. Amendments to the current 2006 STIP will continue for projects that have changes in project scope, schedule, and funding. Projects requiring time extensions may be granted by the CTC if deadlines cannot be met; however, they are not guaranteed. SB 821 Annually, the Commission releases a call for bicycle and pedestrian projects in April The Commission establishes an evaluation committee to rank eligible projects that meet the established criteria. Project recommendations are approved by the Commission in June of each year. The Commission approved 16 projects in the amount of $1.6 million for FY 2007/08. The FY 2008/09 call for projects will have funding of $1.3 million available for award. These expenditures are included in the LTF special revenue fund, which is reflected in the Transit Department since this fund's activities relate primarily to transit funding. Federal Funding CMAQ, STP, and TE The Commission is responsible for allocating CMAQ, STP, and TE funds to transportation projects. The Commission has directed staff to program SAFETEA- LU funds (CMAQ and STP) to projects that were impacted by the state budget crisis and/or the recent rise in construction material costs with the exception of the CMAQ funding that is apportioned to the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB). The Commission defers the selection of projects for SSAB CMAQ funds to CVAG. In 2004 the CTC restructured the administration of the TE program by incorporating it in the STIP. Since TE funds are federal, they are not impacted by the state budget. In 2005, the Commission approved 18 projects totaling $17.6 million over fiscal years 2006/07-2009/10. These projects are included in the 2008 STIP. During FY 2006/07, two projects were allocated in the amount of $917,290. It is anticipated that five projects will be allocated by the end of FY 2007/08 totaling $6.7 million. During FY 2008/09, approximately $4 million is available to be allocated to TE projects. Project Monitoring In 2006, a consultant firm was awarded a contract to develop a web -based project management database. With the high demand for reporting and monitoring the . 138 • • i progress of, projects to prevent funds from lapsing, a consolidated database will allow for efficient monitoring of project schedules and funding. Local agencies will have access to project information as well as the capability to update their respective 'project information in a timely manner. The database will be implemented in phases with the first phase completed in October 2007 and additional phases implemented during FY 2008/09_ The Programming Department has begun to assist the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department with preparing and submitting requests for authorization (RFA) of federal funding. In addition, Programming; will take on a broader role in monitoring expenditures and project close out to prevent funds from lapsing. Department Goals — Planning` Build upo' relationships with local, state, and federal agencies to coordinate short- and long-range planning to ensure that transportation projects receive funding and approvals. Objectives: • Work with CVAG, WRCOG, Ca!trans, transit operators, local agencies, and SCAG to coordinate project submittals and amendments to the 2008 RTP. • Provide the Commissioners information to assist in advocating Commission projects. • Continue CETAP inter- and intracounty corridor work. • Continue working with the RCA to implement the MSHCP and provide funding to assist in the assembly of the reserve system. Continue to seek a stronger role for county transportation commissions in state and regional transportation and air quality programs in order to direct funding for programs and projects that will improve air quality and mobility in Riverside County. Objectives: • Support efforts to seek additional funding at the local, state, and federal levels for projects that improve air quality. • Support ongoing efforts to regulate federal emission sources. Continue implementation of the CMP in cooperation with SCAG, WRCOG, CVAG, Ca!trans, and local agencies and maintain federal certification for the CMP. Objectives: 139 • implement the CMP to meet federal CMS requirements cited under the metropolitan planning organization (i.e., SCAG) planning regulations. • Provide data collected on the CMP system to SCAG and Caltrans for reporting on the Highway Performance Monitoring System. • Provide data collected on the CMP system to local agencies and other interested parties. • Continue monitoring the CMP system to ensure the minimum adopted level of service threshold is met. Work with Caltrans and local governments including transit operators to seek opportunities to develop and implement Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) applications that improve the accessibility of highway and transit information to the public as well as achieve operational efficiencies. Objective: • Seek federal and state funding sources to support implementation of ITS strategies and projects consistent with the Inland Empire ITS Strategic Plan. • Program ITS projects in the FTIP to account for air quality benefits Continue to advocate for jobs/housing balance and attracting high income jobs to Riverside County in addition to addressing intercounty congestion. Objectives: • Participate in ongoing studies and activities regarding the jobs/housing imbalance between Orange and Riverside counties and San Diego and Riverside counties. • Support the County interests pertaining to transportation planning as population, job, and housing forecasts are developed by SCAG and the Stater Department Goals — Programming Identify innovative financing strategies in order to fully fund projects identified in the 10-year delivery plan. Objectives: • Continue the assessment and evaluation of available strategies. • Support efforts to develop public/private partnership legislation. Consolidate project databases to allow for efficient monitoring of projects and funding with the ability to share project information with local jurisdictions. 140 • l Objectives: • Work with the consultant to complete a web -based project management database that will enhance and promote information sharing. • Work with SCAG and other county transportation commissions to refine and maintain the SCAG regional database, including the coordination of the Commission's database with SCAG's FTIP database: - • Coordinate with Caltrans to assure database compatibility and promote information: sharing including timely reporting of fund obligation information. Ensure, maximum funding and flexibility for projects funded with STIP-RIP, Proposition 1 B, SAFETEA-LU, and federal reauthorization funds. Objectives: • Participate in statewide efforts to develop and implement guidelines and legislation for the various categories under Proposition 1 B. • Participate in various forums regarding reauthorization of SAFETEA-LU to increase funding levels, streamline programming processes, and provide flexibility in obligating funds, • Supports efforts advocating the continuation and protection of Proposition 42 funding and the payback of loans taken from state transportation accounts. • Advocate that RIP county share reserves receive priority programming over counties that advance shares. • Work with Caltrans and the CTC to meet the intent of the CMIA and TCIF programs of implementing projects within the timeframes specified in the baseline project agreements. • Continue to strategically program projects and obligate and/or allocate funds in an expeditious manner for the maximum use of all available funding. • Continue to monitor project implementation through the use of milestone reporting on a quarterly basis to maintain maximum funding levels for projects and prevent loss of funds to Riverside County. Provide support to the Commission's Capital Project Development and Delivery and Finance departments to maintain project funding and schedules land minimize programming issues. Objectives: • ProvidOnput to the budget development process. • Attend regular meetings with the Capital Projects Development and Delivery Department. • Serve in an oversight role regarding project invoicing and close-outs. • Prepare; project agreement summaries. • Coordinate project request for authorization/obligation packages. 141 Provide assistance to local agencies to facilitate and streamline project delivery. Objectives: • Continue coordination of monthly Technical Advisory Committee meetings and quarterly Project. Delivery Subcommittee meetings. • Provide information regarding project programming data, including' funding status, to project sponsors on a quarterly basis. • Participate in local, regional, and state forums to resolve issues regarding project delays or other problems with project delivery. • Provide local agencies with recommendations on project programming to minimize unnecessary requirements and delays. • Upon request, attend local agency project delivery team meetings to provide advice on programming issues. • Meet monthly with Ca!trans local assistance staff to monitor project submittals and resolve project implementation and obligation issues. Continue to work with state and federal agencies to streamline processes for funding and project approvals. Objectives: . • Establish relationships with key staff at state and federal agencies. • Identify problematic areas with project delivery and/or programming and develop solutions for streamlining and clarifying processes. • Participate in regional, state, and federal forums addressing issues related to project programming, implementation, and air quality conformity. Planning and Programming PerformanceNVorkload Indicators FY 06/07 Actual FY 07/08 Estimated FY 08/09 Projected Number of Projects Monitored (excluding TUMF) 8o 94 125 Number of TUMF Regional Arterial Projects 24 24 24 Number of TUMF Agreements/Amendments 4 6 6 Number of FTIP Amended Projects 85 92 92 Number of STIP Allocations, Amendments, and Extensions for Commission Projects N/A 7 7 Number of STIP Allocations, Amendments, and Extensions for Local Agency Projects N/A 4 4 142 i • • I • Rail Mission Statement: "To develop and support passenger rail transportation options for increased mobility within Riverside County and the region." Chart 35 — Rail Personnel 5% Special Studies 2% SCRRA Contribution 66% Expenditures Rail Station Operations -Otter 21% Professional and Support 6% Rail expenditures of $9,122,100 include Metrolink support and the five Commission - owned and operated commuter rail stations. Professional and support costs include legal and consultant services as well as general supplies. Station maintenance includes utilities, grounds maintenance, repairs, and cleaning of the Commission's rail stations; security services are provided at the five Commission -owned commuter rail stations. Operating maintenance consists of an operating contribution of $5,547,600 to SCRRA for Metrolink operations and $432,000 for shuttle services at the North Main Corona station during the parking: structure construction. The Commission's subsidy to SCRRA's operating budget has decreased by 7.5% from last year's budget. The Commission's commuter rail program expects to meet the number of required Productivity Improvement Program (PIP) targets for FY 2008/09. 143 Table 74 - Rail Expenditure Detail Salaries and Benefits Profess -venal hosts Legal Services Professional Services -Other Total Professional Costs Support Costs Rail Station Operations Station Maintenance Station Security Other Transit Operations Capital Maintenance Operating Maintenance Total Rail Station Operations Special Studies Capital Outlay - Property Improvements TOTAL Rail Operations Rail Staffing Summary FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY D7/011 FY 08/09 Dollar. Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change S 391,800 S 334,500 S 393,700 S 427,900 S 93,400 27.9% 39,000 110,000 43,400 230,000 94,700 185500 109.500 180.500 133,700 2'35.500 152,900 410,500 734,700 377,500 119,600 145,100 134,800 538,000 653,100 960,000 884,600 988,000 919,300 995,000 200 4,000 4110 4,000 4,100 - 5.508.700 6.466.600 6.339.600 5,979.600 6,532,400 -: 7,998,600 7,912,400 7,938,60D 83,700 30,000 23,000 200.000 21.000 120,000 109.1% (5,0001 -2.7% 115,000 38.9% (232,400) -61.6% 422,000 7,000 (487 0001 78.4% 0.TX, 0.0% 0.0% -7.5% (58,000) - -0.7% 170,000 566.7% N/A $ 7 897 inn ; 9 034 100 $ 8.601 600 $ 9.122.10Q $ 88 000 1 (M,G Department Budget Overview -Rail Operations Department Description The Commission has directed efforts in the areas of regional commuter rail, intercity passenger rail, high-speed rail, and capital improvements to support enhanced • 144 passenger and freight rail service. The entire program includes elements of planning, programming, commuter rail development and support, station and corridor management, mitigation of community and environmental impacts, legislative and regulatory advocacy, and construction of capital projects. Many elements are managed or supported by other Commission departments, legal counsel; and consultants. Departmental efforts contributing to the rail program are found throughout the budget document. Coordination and consultation also occur with a variety of public and private entities including the CTC, Ca!trans, California Public Utilities Commission, Califomia High Speed 'Rail Authority, Federal Railroad Administration, FTA, Amtrak, environmental agencies, the University of Califomia (UC), transit providers, SCAG, WRCOG, CVAG, San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), local govemments, private freight railroads, businesses, and property owners. The Commission participates in the ongoing funding and governance of Metrolink by SCRRA, a joint powers authority consisting of the county transportation commissions of Riverside, I,San Bemardino, Orange, Los Angeles, and Ventura counties. The Commission holds two voting positions on SCRRA's eleven member board. Commission staff serves on the five -county Technical Advisory Committee which negotiates service and funding levels, based upon the county's established priorities, and provides technical assistance, coordination between various SCRRA and commission departments, and linkages to local communities. Of the seven commuter rail lines operated by Metrolink, three routes consisting of the Riverside, IEOC, and 91 Lines directly serve Western County. Unlike the other SCRRA member agencies, the Commission owns and operates the commuter rail stations serving Riverside County: Riverside Downtown, Pedley, La Sierra, West Corona, and North Main Corona. Stationoperation and maintenance costs are included in the Rail Department budget with services currently coordinated by the Right of Way Department in FY 2007/08 and transferring to the Finance Department's Procurement and Asset Management Division in FY 2008/09. New and ongoing construction projects at these stations are described in the capital budget managed by the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department. Key Assumptions • Metrolink's preliminary FY 2008/09 budget is adopted by the Commission and SCRRA. • Ridership and fare revenues continue to grow on the Riverside, IEOC, and 91 Lines. • The Commission manages the station security guard contract. Estimated costs are based on the actual contract terms with a portion to be reimbursed by SCRRA. 145 Accomplishments • Started construction on the 1,000 space North Main Corona parking structure and developed a comprehensive parking strategy to minimize disruption to existing passengers during construction. • Supported the holiday toy train events at Riverside County commuter rail stations including the kick-off event at the North Main Corona station. Community participation grew substantially with record attendance at the four station events, and the Spark of Love Toy Drive generated a record number of toys for local charities. • Achieved the largest annual growth rates in the Metrolink system ,on two routes serving Riverside County with the Riverside Line growing by 11% and the IEOC Line by 6%. Major Initiatives Over the last 15 years, significant capital improvements have been made on the private freight corridors over which the Commission's commuter rail services operate. Current major initiatives include construction of a 1,000 space parking structure at the North Main Corona station. Additionally, the Commission is working with OCTA and SANBAG to advance additional 1E0C and 91 Line train service by 2010. The development of the Perris Valley Line project and its operational impacts will continue to be evaluated. Chart 36 Metrolink Ridership 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 2005 2006 2007 a Riverside/IA IS IEOC d 91 Line 2008 2009 146 • Chart 37 - Riverside County Metrolink Station Locations Riverside County Metrolink Stations Department Goals —Rail Operations Improve utilization and increase efficiency of commuter rail lines serving Riverside'County. Objectives: • Meet or exceed PIP goals through increased peak period patronage on the Riverside Line,1EOC Line, and 91 Line. • Increase weekend, midday, and reverse -peak patronage by 5% in FY 2008/09 by marketing unused capacity for business, recreational, and school trips. • Reduce the public subsidy per passenger mile traveled on lines currently serving the Countylthrough economies of scale, efficient use of train sets and crew hours, and increased passenger fares. Maximize opportunities for public use of rail -related investment. Objectives: • Support transit operator efforts to expand availability and use of connecting transit in order to improve access and reduce demand on parking capacity. • Expand opportunities for interline travel through coordination of schedules with Amtrak intercity and long distance trains and other Metrolink lines, including encouraging joint ticketing options. Department Budget Overview —Rail Development In order to expand passenger rail options throughout the County, the Commission conducts feasibility studies to assess the viability of commuter rail expansion. In 2005, the Commission completed the Commuter Rail Feasibility Study which examined the viability of extending Metrolink commuter rail service largely within existing rail rights of 147 i i way. The Commission approved the study and recommended advanced study of extensions on the San Jacinto Branch Line. (SJBL) to Hemet/San Jacinto and Murrieta/Temecula. The next phase of Altemative Analyses for these corridors will be pursued in 2009. The second phase of the Commuter Rail Feasibility Study is an 1-15 Commuter Rail Feasibility Study which examines the viability of constructing new tracks between Corona and San Diego via Temecula. The study was completed in June 2007 with the results presented to the Commission. The Commission determined that this service was not feasible to pursue at this time but could be reexamined in the future. San Jacinto Branch Line The Commission holds title to and manages the 38-mile SJBL and several adjacent properties, preserved for future passenger rail service. Burlington Northem Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) holds the freight rights in the corridor, providing service to local shippers, and performs maintenance on the line. Perris Valley Line Small Starts Project In June 2000, the Commission allocated $20 million of Measure A funds for capital and operating expenditures related to the implementation of passenger rail service on the initial operating segment of the SJBL, known as the Perris Valley Line. latest project cost estimates total $168 million. Staff is seeking a full funding grant agreement from the FTA Small Starts Program to fund at least $75 million of the project cost with the balance to be funded by other federal, state, and private funding sources, as illustrated in Chart 38 and Table 75. Details on this capital project are included in the Capital Project Development and Delivery section. Chart 38 — Perris Valley Line Funding Chart I 148 Table 75 — Perris Valley Line Funding Plan Federal: STP FTA 5307' FTA 5309 Small Starts FTA 5309 Rail Modernization FTA 5309 Bus CMAQ Spent in prior years 500,000 To be spent in future years Total $ 500,000 $ 500,000 22,000,000 22,000,000 74,500,000 75,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,300,000 2,300,000 2,900,000 2,900,000 State: STIP - 30,000,000 .30,000,000 STA 300,000 - 300,000 Local: , Measure A 20,000,000 20,000,000 Rail Property Sale. Proceeds - 11,000,000 11,000,000 March JPA Right of Way Donation 2,900,000 2,900,000 Total Perris Valley Line Project Estimate $ 3,700,000 $ 165,200,000 $ 168,900,000 in June 2003, the Commission adopted the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA): Metrolink Extension from Riverside to Perris along the SJBL with a connection to the Union Pacfic Riverside Industrial Lead. Based on updated information, the LPA was changed to the BNSF connection in April 2008. The project has received FTA approval to begin project development: The draft environmental assessment has been circulated for public review and comment and is nearing completion. The FY 2008/09 budget in the Capital Project Development and Delivery section includes total project expenditures of $26 million. Facilitating efficient freight service on the line continues to be a priority, and as a result, the Commission will continue to work with all communities (residentia, business, schools) through the public outreach program for this project. Chart 39 — Perris Valley tine Map 149 Passenger Rail to Coachella Valley In recent years the Commission has also focused attention on the creation of intercity passenger rail service between the Coachella Valley, Riverside, and the Los Angeles basin through advocacy efforts with state, federal, and local govemment entities and negotiation with the freight railroads. The Commission's current efforts include seeking capital and operating funds and coordinating with Amtrak and Caftans. High Speed Rail The Commission continues to play a proactive role in the development of a statewide, high-speed passenger rail system, including routing of the backbone corridor through the Inland Empire with possible stations in the Riverside area, Murrieta, and Temecula.. The California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) has completed a draft program EIR and program EIS for a 700-mile high speed train system serving Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. In 2007, the CHSRA completed the project level Los Angeles to Riverside Feasibility Study to identify alignment issues along the corridor. The CHSRA along with SANDAG would like to work with the Commission to pursue a similar feasibility study between Riverside and San Diego. Key Assumption • Project development on the Perris Valley Line will continue in FY 2008/09. Accomplishment • Received a medium -high rating from the FTA on the Perris Valley Line, allowing the Commission to commence project development activities. The President's Administration has earmarked $50 million in the FFY 2008l09 budget. • Evaluated conceptual plans to provide for additional layover track capacity at the Riverside Downtown station. • Completed a joint Commuter Rail Station Needs Assessment Study with SCAG and OCTA to identify opportunities for improvements at the commuter rail stations. Major Initiatives During FY 2008/09, the Commission will complete construction of Phased of the Perris multimodal facility. Additionally, as discussed above, project development and right of way acquisition related to the FTA Small Starts Perris Valley Line project is expected to continue. Department Goals —Rail Development I 150 • 1 • Identify and plan for capital improvements necessary to increase the scope, appeal, and reliability of commuter rail operations. Objectives- • Continue work to fully fund Segment 1 of the Perris Valley Line (Riverside to Perris via Moreno Valley) on the SJBL. • Finalize; the stationsforstart-up of the Perris Valley Line. • Implement the Commuter Rail Facilities Rehabilitation and Maintenance Plan. i Maintain efforts with local agencies, other Southern Califomia counties, and the state and L federal governments to expand intercity passenger rail service into Riverside County and the Coachella Valley. Continue to support and influence state efforts in the creation of a high-speed passenger rail system along an Inland Empire alignment through coordination with state land local agencies. Rail Performance/Workload Indicators FY 06l07 , Actual FY 07/08 Estimated FY 08109 Projected Growth of Average Daily Ridership on existing commuter lines • Riverside Line 4,633 4,533 4,604 j • IEOC Line 4,383 4,806 4,662 • 91 Line I 2,083 2,230 2,265 Farebox Recovery Ratio • Riverside (Line 46.46% 53.01 % 53.5% • IEOC Line 38.95% 42.60% 37.3% • 91 Line i 61.64% 45.53% 51.0% Rail PIP Targets: o Passenger Trips (annual growth) 2,987,023 2,996,389 3,143,274 o Farebox Recovery Ratio 48.86% 46.91 % 47.27% o Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.17 $0.19 $0.20 o Passenger Miles per Revenue Car Mile 33.10 34.05 29.57 151 I Right of Way Management Mission Statement: "To support project development and delivery through the acquisition and management of required right of way in the most economical, efficient, and timely manner." chart 40 - Right of Way Management i Projects and Operations Personnel T% 13% Support 24% Professional 56% Expenditures Right of Way expenditures are budgeted at $1,212,000 for right of way consultant seances in support of the Commission's highway and rail projects. Right of Way consultants in the fields of acquisition, negotiation, relocation, appraisal, appraisal review, property management, survey and right of way engineering, environmental assessment, and title companies have been selected on an on -call basis; expenditures for these right of way support services are included in the Capital Project Development and Delivery section. Professional costs include legal and other consultant fees. Projects and operations costs include $80,000 for weed abatement services on Commission -owned highway and rail properties. 152 • l • I f Table 76 - Right of Way Expenditure Detail FY 06/07 FY 07108 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefits $ 281,400 $ 138,000 $ 119,200 $ 155,000 $ 17,000 12.3% Professional Costs Legal Services 64,700 130,000 30,300 85,000 (45,000) -34.6% Audit Services : N/A Professional Services -Other 154200 590,000 330.000 607,000 17.000 2.9% Total Professional Costs 218,900 720,000 360,300 692,000 (28,000) -3.9% 4upport Costs 69,200 249,500 121,300 285,000 35,500 14.2% Projects and Operations Projects - General 42,400 Engineering 20,100 ROW Support Services Total Projects and Operations 62,500 Capital Outlay TOTAL Right of Way Management $ 632 GOO $ 1.162.50Q $ 619.000 $ 1.212.000 $ 49 500 50,000 50.000 0.0'% 5,000 10,000 5,000 100.0% 18200 20,000 20,000 N/A - N/A 55.000 18.200 80,000 25,000 - 45.5% - $ - N/A Right of Way Staffin • Summary i Department Budget Overview -Right of Way Acquisition and Support Services Department Description The Commission is responsible for the delivery of highway and rail projects included in the 1989 Measure A and 2009 Measure A TIPs. Right of way acquisition is on the critical path in the delivery of Commission projects. 153 4.3% In the past, the Commission secured the services of Caltrans and the County to acquire and deliver right of way for all Commission highway and rail projects. In order to retain control of right of way cost and schedule, the Commission authorized the development of a Right of Way Acquisition Program in 2006. To implement the Commission's directive, staff commenced the procurement of on -call right of ,way consultant services in the fields of title and escrow, right of way engineering and surveying, environmental assessment, appraisal and appraisal review, acquisition and relocation, feasibility studies and cost estimates, property management, and utilities relocation. These consultants will be managed and supervised by Commission staff. The primary goal of the Right of Way Management Department is to deliver right of Way in the most cost effective manner and within project schedules, while adhering to federal and state regulations. Commission staff required to supervise and manage right of way services and related support for individual projects are included in the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department budget. Key Assumptions • Right of way will be completed for the SR 91 HOV lanes, Perris multimodal facility, SR-60 East Junction to 1-215 HOV lanes, and SR-74/G Street to 1-215 interchange projects. • Development of the SR-79 realignment and Mid County Parkway projects will continue. • Work to implement the 10-Year Westem County Highway Delivery Plan will continue. • Development of the Perris Valley Line will continue. • File close outs and transfers of right of way acquisition files related to the SR 74 widening project (Segment 2) and the SR-60 soundwall project to Caltrans will commence. Accomplishments • Procured right of way services for appraisal and appraisal review; title and escrow; right of way engineering and survey; environmental assessment '(Phase I and Phase II); acquisition; relocation; property management; furniture, fixtures and equipment appraisal; goodwill valuation; utilities relocation; and feasibility studies and cost estimation. • Completed the Right of Way Policies and Procedures Manual in compliance with federal and state regulations. • Secured Caltrans certification to acquire right of way for the SR-91 HOV lanes project. • Completed procedures for advance acquisition of right of way for the SR-79 realignment and Mid County Parkway projects in compliance with federal regulations. • Completed close out and transfer of acquisition files to Caltrans for the SR-74 widening project (Segment!). 154 • I • Commencedithe close out process related to the SR-60 soundwall project. • Completed the MOU between the Commission and Metropolitan Water District for the Perris Valley pipeline project. • Completed the three-way swap of properties between Caltrans, March Joint Powers Authority (March JPA) and the Commission. • Completed advance acquisition of five "core" parcels for the SR-79 realignment: and Mid County Parkway projects located near the Sanderson Avenue/Ramona Expressway!area in the city of San Jacinto. Major Initiatives As a result of the nature of the projects included in the Commission's 10-Year Western County Delivery Plan, it is critical that the Commission continue development of an in- house right of way management program. Accordingly, a right of way acquisition program has been developed and maintained to deliver right of way for the Perris Valley Line, SR-74/G Street to 1-215 interchange, SR-91 HOV lanes, SR-60East Junction to 1-215 HOV lanes, and the Perris multimodal facility projects. This included a review of over 900 BNSF license agreements to determine encroachments and the need for relocations related to the Perris Valley Line. Advance right of way acquisition activities must also continue for other Measure A and TUMF projects. An important component of this program is the completion of right of way policies and procedures that has been approved by the Commission, as well as the establishment of right of way acquisition schedule and budget control measures_ Department Goals— Right of Way Acquisition and Support Services Advance right of way acquisition activities in support of the SR-79 realignment and Mid County Parkway projects. Objectives: • Ensure compliance with federal and state regulations for advance right of way acquisition activities. • Protect and, maintain properties acquired for future projects. Deliver right of way for the Perris multimodal facility project. Objectives: • Ensure right. of way policies and procedures comply with federal and state regulations; • Meet established budget and schedule. • Ensure fairjand consistent treatment of property owners and the public. Deliver right I,of way for the SR-60 East Junction to 1-215 HOV lanes, SR-74/G Street to 1-215 interchange, and SR-91 HOV lanes projects. Objectives: 155 • Ensure compliance with federal and state regulations. • Meet established budget and schedule. • Ensure fair and consistent treatment of property owners and the public. • Work cooperatively with Caltrans District 8 staff. Commence tight of way acquisition for the Perris Valley Line project. Objectives: • Work cooperatively with FTA staff. • Ensure compliance with federal and state regulations. • Ensure fair and consistent treatment of property owners and the public. • Meet established budget and schedule. Provide right of way support to all Commission projects. Objectives- • Provide right of way planning, cost estimate, schedule, right of way engineering, title search, environmental assessment, and utilities relocation support for all projects. • Provide right of way acquisition and property management support for all projects. Department Budget Overview -Property Management Department Description Since 1990, the Commission has acquired property assets in the course of rail and highway project implementation. To date, the rail properties number over 225 parcels, including five Metrolink commuter rail stations. Operation of these stations is overseen by Property Management; however, expenditures are identified in the Rail Department budget_ The Commission acquired approximately 500 parcels for the SR- 74 highway widening project. In addition approximately 40 properties have been acquired for the Mid County Parkway, SR-79 realignment, Perris Valley Line, and the SR-60 HOV lanes/I-215 to Redlands Boulevard projects. These properties were acquired in fee and will be transferred to Caltrans upon completion of the projects. Property Management develops license and right of entry agreements related to the SJBL and other Commission -owned properties which require the coordination of a variety of public and private entities (i.e., Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Caltrans, and BNSF). Numerous agreements are negotiated and executed as directed by the Property Committee and the Commission. Upon project completion, properties are reassessed and are deemed surplus when it has been determined that the continued retention of the property no longer supports the Commission's policy goals and objectives. Key Assumptions f 156 • • A review of 700 BNSF licenses will be completed. • Rehabilitation of five Metrolink stations will commence. • Construction of parking structure at the North Main Corona station will continue. • Development of the property inventory database will continue. • Oversight of the maintenance and operations of the Commission's commuter rail stations will be assumed by the Procurement and Assets Manager. Accomplishments • Completed the exchange and closed escrow on the March PA property along the 1-215. • Completed the required improvements for the auxiliary parking lot in Corona for the North Main Corona station overflow during the construction of the parking structure. • Continued to maintain properties and update files of property acquired by the Commission for rail and highway projects. • Closed escrow with the city of Riverside Redevelopment Agency for the Madison I property. • Completed construction of a pedestrian at grade crossing at the Riverside Downtown station. Assisted Bechtel with development of the station rehabilitation schedule for the Rail Department. • Generated over $36,000 in new revenue from increasing fees for existing billboard licenses. • Generated over $48,000 in out lease revenue from the BNSF. • Resolved property -related issues related to the Perris multimodal facility. • Completed procurement of services for on -call station maintenance, landscape maintenance, and general maintenance services. Major initiatives As a result of the Commission's property activities, it is essential to commence planning and database management efforts benefiting the long-term. To prepare for the long-term maintenance of Commission -owned Metrolink stations, a commuter rail station rehabilitation and strategic plan has been developed and will be implemented in FY 2008/09. In support of the Perris Valley Line, the ownership of the BNSF easement wit be converted to fee ownership. In order to maintain accurate records of i all Commission -owned properties, properties in the acquisition process, and income - generating properties, the property inventory database will be further developed. Department Goals -Property Management Maintain order, security, and safety at the Commission's operating and non - operating properties. 157 I Objectives: • Ensure undeveloped land is abated and secured with fencing. • Work with local law enforcement and the property management consultant to prevent trespassing or improper use of Commission -owned property:, • Monitor and improve closed circuit television systems at the five Commission - owned Metrolink stations. • Eliminate liability exposure by working with local law enforcement agencies to develop policies and procedures for emergency responses. Generate revenue to offset maintenance costs of rail and highway properties. Objectives: Surplus excess Commission -owned property. Implement the concept of "green power' at the Metrolink stations by changing i landscape materials to reduce water consumption. • Ensure license valuation and assessments reflect current market conditions on existing and future licensees. • Facilitate economic development along the railroad right of way. Provide support for property acquisitions and conveyance of capital project rights of way. Objectives: • Conduct a review of excess property related to the SR-74 widening project and convey to Caltrans. • Protect and maintain Commission -owned properties. • Review and update policy guidelines for all property management issues. • Maximize income potential of Commission -owned properties. • Convert Commission -owned BNSF easement to fee ownership. • Maintain accurate records and files of Commission -owned properties through the development of the property inventory database. Right of Way Management Performance/Workload Indicators FY 06/07 Actual FY 07/08 Estimated FY 08/09 Projected License Agreements 25 31 40 Appraisals completed 8 43 88 Appraisal reviews completed 8 43 88 Right of Way on -call consultants: Title and escrow services N/A 3 3 Survey and right of way engineering WA 3 3 Appraisers 5 5 5 Appraisal reviewers 3 3 3 Acquisition/relocation 3 3 3 Environmental assessment N/A 5 5 Fumiture, fixture, and equipment appraisers WA 2 2 Goodwill appraisers N/A 2 2 Property management N/A 3 3 158 • • Specialized Transit Mission Statement: "To maintain ''and enhance, as resources allow, transportation options for seniors, persons with disabilities, and persons of limited means through innovation and community interaction." Chart41 —Specialized Transit Personnel 2% Professional and Support 1% Regional Transportation 97% Expenditures The FY 2008/09 budget of $7,955,400 for specialized transit projects and operations ,has increased 25.8% over the FY 2007/08 budget, as a result of an increase " in anticipated requests for funds through the Westem County two-year call for projects. This increased activity results in a reallocation of existing staff resources. Western` County specialized transit expenditures of $4,445,400 are allocatedbased on a competitive process among qualified social service providers within Westem County. The call for projects was released in April 2008 for a two-year period covering FY 2008/09 and FY 2009/10 and included a non -emergency medical transportation component. The Coachella Valley allocation of $3,269,000 is disbursed monthly to SunLine, the major transit provider in the Coachella Valley. 159 Table 77 — Specialized Transit Expenditure Detail FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 07108 FY 08/09 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefits $58,600 $97.300 $ 76,900 $ 129,500" $32,200 33.1% Professional Costs Legal Services 3,800 4,000 400 7,500 3,500 87.5% Professional Services -Other 4,400 51,060 55,000 4,000 7.8% f Total Professional Costs 8,200 55,000 400 62,500 7,500 13.6% Support Costs 4,000 8.700 4,900 9,000 300 3.4% 1 Projects and Operations Regional Transportation 6,277,000 6,122,500 5,111,000 7,714,400 1,591,900 26.0% Special Studies 10,400 40,000 63,900 40,000 - 0_0% Total Projects and Operations 6,287,400 6,162,500 5,174,900 7 754,400 1,591,900 25.8% Transfers Out TOTAL Specialized Transit 2,500 $ 6.360.700 $ _6.323.500 $ 5257.100 $ 7.955 40Q $ 1-631.990 Department Budget Overview Department Description The Measure A specialized transit program provides a valuable service to the community. Substantial support is furnished to social service and public transit agencies, which serve special and unique needs of seniors and persons with disabilities. The Commission also allocates, following a competitive call for projects, funding through the FTA Section 5310 program which is administered by Caltrans. This program provides funding to nonprofit transportation and social service agencies and public operators under special circumstances for the purchase of capital equipment. With the passage of SAFETEA-LU, the following two new federal funding sources for specialized transit service are available: 1 160 • Jobs Access Reverse Commute (JARC) (Section 5316) program provides funding for the development and maintenance of job access projects to transport welfare recipients and eligible low-income individuals to and from work during non -peak hours as well as supply reverse commute options for workers in suburban areas. • New Freedoms (Section 5317) program provides funding for new public transportation services and altematives for people with disabilities beyond what is required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). j In accordance with the provisions of SAFETEA-LU, recipients under these programs must comply with all federal coordinated planning requirements to be eligible for funds. The reauthorization stipulates that projects selected for funding under these programs must be derived from a locally coordinated public transit -human services transportation plan (Coordinated Plan). Moreover, the Coordinated Plan must be developed through a process that includes representatives of public, private, and nonprofit transportation and human service providers and participation by the public. Development of the Coordinated Plan has been completed. A call for projects and project evaluation was released in April 2008 and will be completed by June 2008, respectively. Key Assumptions • Western County disbursements are estimated based on the results of a two-year call for projects released in February 2006. Specific funding allocations for specialized transportation for FY 2008/09 and FY 2009/10 will be based on the results of a two- year call for projects released in April 2008. • CVAG allocates substantially all of its discretionary 5% of Measure A funding to SunLine for specialized transit. Accomplishments • For FY 2007/08, the Commission provided approximately $1,734,700 to 14 non- profit agencies in Westem County as a result of the Commission's two-year competitive call for projects. The funding was used to provide transportation assistance to seniors, the disabled, and individuals of limited means of Western County. • The Commission identified the development of a mobility management program through the transit visioning process. Major Initiatives The Commiss on has long demonstrated a strong 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 public and non-profit transit operators for the provision of special transit services to improve the mobility of seniors and persons with disabilities. Along with support of traditional dial -a -ride services, the Commission 161 supports innovative programs which provide transit assistance in hard to serve rural areas or for riders having very special transit needs. For 19 years, the Commission has provided operating grants and capital to a number of non-profit agencies in Western County to assist in the provision of very specialized transit services. The riders, many frail and elderly; have come to depend on these services which provide a higher level of assistance than can be provided by the public transit providers and/or operate in areas not served by public transit. It is anticipated that in April 2008, a call for projects covering FY 2008/09 and FY 2009/10 will be released for Westem County Specialized Transit Program, including the non -emergency medical transportation component. In order to assure the availability of funds to support matching of FTA Section 5310 capita! grants, $150,000 on an annual basis is budgeted for Westem County applicants to meet the 11.47% local matching requirements for such grants. Department Goals Provide timely information to the public regarding Commission implemented projects and support public relations activities of Measure A funded programs by grant recipients. Objective: • Produce and distribute public information materials as needed including ,press releases, flyers, brochures, marketing materials, and newspaper ads. Allocate Measure A Specialized Transit funds to support services which will maintain andlor enhance mobility for seniors, persons with disabilities, and the truly needy. Objectives: • Monitor performance of Specialized Transit grant recipients through analysis of their quarterly performance reports. • Continue discussions with the Office on Aging and the United Way to encourage funding of transportation projects by these agencies. Assistance to screen eligible transportation programs and monitoring the cost effectiveness of these proposals will continue to be offered to both agencies. • Support the FTA Section 5310, 5316 and 5317 grant process to improve mobility for seniors, persons with disabilities and individuals of limited means by working with Ca!trans, public operators, and social service agencies to ensure a competitive process statewide for the allocation of federal transportation dollars for social service programs. • Provide technical assistance and program support to agencies offering specialized transit programs to ensure the maximum benefit of funding for improved mobility for. seniors, persons with disabilities, and individuals of limited means. Continue to provide staff resources to assist and support the coordination of transit services within the County and throughout the State. 162 ,. 4 I Objectives: • Implement ,mobility management countywide. • Regularly participate in meetings that focus on the coordination of transit services, such as the California Association for Coordinated Transportation, SunLine's Access Committee, RTA's ADA Committee, the Riverside County Foundation on Aging Board of Directors, the Older Californian Traffic Safety Task Force, and the Commission's Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Service Transportation Advisory Council. Continue Ithe development of a marketing and distribution network for communicating specialized transit mobility options to seniors, the disabled, and persons oftlimited means. Specialized Transit Performance/ Workload Indicators 1 FY 06/07 Actual FY 07/08 Estimated FY 08/09 Projected Number of Specialized Transit grants awarded 14 14 20 Number of one-way trips provided by Measure A funded non-profit operators 71,825 85,500 102,000 Number of one-way trips reimbursed through the Western County Transportation Reimbursement and Information Project 61,315 74,600 82,000 Number of transit tickets provided through the Transportation Access Program 53,153 80,400 83,000 Number of clients served through Blindness Support Services 32 40 40 163 Transit Mission Statement: "To coordinate the operation of all public transportation services within the County with a goal toward promoting compliance as well as program efficiency and effectiveness between transit operators and improving mobility." Chart 42 — Transit Personnel 0% Professional Support 0% / 0% Projects and Operations 100% Expenditures !Transit expenditures are budgeted at $102,680,900 for FY 2008/09. Transit is primarily comprised of LTF special revenue fund activities related to allocations for transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, planning and administration. The LTF special revenue fund iwas an unbudgeted fund in prior years; due to its significance to the Commission's operations, the LTF special revenue fund became a budgeted fund commencing in FY 2007/08. Professional costs of $122,400 include the costs to hire consultant staff to implement the Coordinated Plan as well as to maintain TransTrack. LTF disbursements consist of transit operating and capital allocations of $75,133,400, bicycle and pedestrian facilities allocations of $1,367,100, and planning and administration allocations of $2,880,500. 164 Table 78 —Transit Expenditure Detail FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Dollar . Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefits $ 220,200 $ 208,600 $ 170,100 $ 235,700 $ 27,100 13.0% Professional Costs, Legal Services; 12,500 5,000 3,000 10,000 5,000 100.0% Audit Services64,300 '` 10,900 10,000 10,000 N/A Professional Services -Other 107,600 152.000 26,800 102.400 (49.600} -32.6% Total Professional Costs 184,400 157,000 40,700 122,400 (34,600)-22.0°% Support Costs Projects and Operations LTF Disbursements STA Disbursements 9,200 10,400 13,300 13,800 3,400 32.7% 70,533,200 86,397,500 78,218,500 79,381,000 (7,016,500) WA 3423,100 9239.700 13,016,600 22,928,000 13,688,300 148.1°% . Total Projects and Operations 73,956,300 95,637,200 91,235,100 102,309,000 6,671,800 7.0% TOTAL Transit $ 74 370 LaQ $ 96.013.20Q 1. 91 459 20Q $ 102.680.900 $ 6 667 70Q 6,9% Transit Staffing Summa Department Budget Overview Department Description The Commission is responsible for short-rangetransportation planning and programming. Planning includes the development of the countywide SRTPs for eight public transit operators consisting of the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona, and Riverside; SCRRA's Metrolink commuter rail; Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency; RTA;. and SunLine. The Commission assists in coordinating the development, review, and approval of the annual countywide SRTPs and allocates transit funding resources. The Commission has responsibility for funding transit programs using Measure A, LTF, STA, and FTA Section 5307, 5309, 5311, 5316, and 5317 funds. 165 Proposition 1B approved by the voters in November 2006, included a program of funding for allocation to eligible public transportation projects. Proposition 1B funds are designed to help protect the environment and public health, conserve energy, reduce congestion, and provide altemative mobility and access choices for Califomians. Proposition 1B funds are annually appropriated by the legislature and to be used for transit related capital purchases or infrastructure/facility improvements_ In partnership with the County's transit operators, the Commission coordinates the allocation of available Proposition 1E3 funding and ensures proposed projects meet the mobility needs of the County. With the passage of SAFETEA-LU, two new federal funding sources for transit service i referred to as JARC and New Freedoms are available. In addition, based on available funding, the Commission may conduct an unmet transit I needs hearing in the Palo Verde Valley. The Commission has operator oversight and fiduciary responsibilities to ensure that annual fiscal audits and a state triennial performance audit are conducted. The Commission is also charged with annually reviewing transit operator activities and recommending potential productivity improvements to lower operating costs. Key Assumption • LTF, STA, and Measure A disbursements are based on projected budgetary allocations but will be adjusted after the Commission has approved actual' allocations. • Declining LTF revenues will require use of reserves for Western County transit operators. Accomplishments • Completed the public input and review process leading to the development and approval of a locally developed Coordinated Public Transit -Human Services Transportation Plan. • Issued a universal call for projects for Measure A (Western County specialized transit) and Sections 5310, 5316, and 5317. • Incorporated Proposition 1B Public Transportation, Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) funding in transit capital funding following Caltrans' release of program funding and guidelines at mid -year. • Secured approval from the Transit Policy Committee and Board of Commissioners for an update to the Fare Box Recovery Policy enabling transit operators to choose to include or exclude an extension of service into the fare box recovery ratio calculation. • Completed the Transit Vision process outlining the funding goals for the first ten years of the 2009 Measure A. 166 • I • Major Initiatives As a result of declining LTF and Measure A revenues, staff will be conducting long- range planning activities to ensure that anticipated revenues are in line with projected levels of service by the various transit operators. Subsequent to the completion of the call for projects process, the specialized transit projects approved for funding will require implementation and year -long performance monitoring as identified in the Coordinated Public Transit -Human Services Transportation Plan. Department Goal Coordinate the operation of all public transportation services within the County with a goal toward promoting program efficiency and harmony between transit operators as outlined in state law. Objectives- . • Review transit planning, resource allocation, and service implementation policy requirements including appropriate coordination of commuter rail, intercounty and intercity bus, local bus and paratransit, and social service transportation services to ensure convenient service for passengers. • Assure thei ongoing effectiveness of the SRTP process and work with the County's eight transit operators to assure efficiency and effectiveness as well as compliance with the PIP. • Coordinate' regional transit connections among commuter rail, buses, and paratransit services to ensure convenient service for passengers. • Monitor transit operators' quarterly capital grants reports. • Monitor transit operators' performance through analysis of their quarterly performance reports using the TransTrack computer -based tracking program. 167 Commuter Assistance Mission Staternent: 'To encourage and promote transportation alternatives for commuters through information delivery, technological innovation, education, and community outreach." Chart 43 — Commuter Assistance Capital Outlay Personnel 1% 4% Projects and Operations 80% Professional 7% Support 8% Expenditures Commuter Assistance expenditures and transfers out total $7,515,300, which represents a 0.9% increase from last year's budget. Professional costs of $ 467,500 have decreased 14.4% over the prior year due to the completion of the new marketing materials and program collateral. Support costs totaling $512,300 include mailand printing services, computer and vehicle maintenance, communications, and other office expenditures. The FY 2008/09 support costs reflect a 20.6% decrease resulting from completed projects. Projects and operations expenditures consist of a traffic flow detection project of $2,300,000; consultant services totaling $1,892,200 to manage and implement the program; merchant vouchers valued at $630,000; a transit operating contribution of $200,000; and park and ride lease payments of $190,000. The 1-15/1-215 detection project, the integration of transit schedule information into the RideGuides, and other Commuter Assistance special projects will be carried over from the FY 2007/08 budget. These special projects are intended to fund the strategic planning effort for the Commuter Assistance program as it moves toward implementation of the 2009 Measure A. 168 Table 79 — Commuter Assistance Expenditure Detail FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefits $ 249,000 $ 185,900 $ 190,800 $ 255,500 $ 69,600 37.4% Professional Costs Legal Services 16,000 20,000 18,700 20,000 0.0% Professional Services -Other 430.200 526.10Q 384;600 447.500 (78.6001 -14.9% Total Professional Costs 446,200 546,100 403,300 467,500 (78,600) -14.4% Support Costs I Projects and operations Program Engineering Program Construction Park and Ride Regional Transportation Total Projects and Operations Capital Outlay Transfer Out TOTAL Commuter Assistance 411,100 645,400 508,600 512,300 (133,100) -20.6% - - - N/A - 2,300,000 - 2,300,000 - 0.0% 43,100 90,000 41,800 190,000 100,000 111.1% 1,948,200 2,562,900 1.934.900 .2,722,200 159.300 6.2% 1,991,300 4,952,900 1,976,700 5,212,200 259,300 5.2% 9,900 120,000 67,000 40,000 (80,000) -66.7% 1,000,000 1,027,800 27,800 2.8% $ 3.107.50Q $ 7.450.30Q $.3.146A0Q t 7 515.34 $ 65 000 121 Commuter Assistance Staffing Summary Department Budget Overview Department Description White much of the Commission's work is focused on increasing transportation infrastructure and capacity, there is significant value in ensuring that the transportation systems are used efficiently. To help foster more efficient use of these systems, the Commission's Commuter Assistance Program seeks to encourage Riverside County 169 i constituents/commuters to make a mode -shift decision away from solo vehicle commuting and into a shared commuting arrangement. The Commuter Assistance Program seeks to influence driver behavior by fostering a mode shifting decision at both the employer and commuter levels via the following methods: • The use of incentives both for beginning and then maintaining a mode- s h ift/rideshare arrangement; • The provision of employer services to foster the implementation of employer - based mode -shift and rideshare programs; and • Public information services including the dissemination of traveler information through technology in order to foster congestionavoidance behavior by commuters. The Commission's Commuter Assistance Program was implemented as a specific requirement under Measure A to address congestion mitigation. While ridesharing has a beneficial impact on air quality, first and foremost, it is a strategy to ease traffic congestion through increased use of alternative forms of transportation including carpools, vanpools, buspools, public bus, Metrolink, congestion avoidance, walking, bicycling, and telecommuting. Key Assumptions • The Commission will place the contract to implement the program out to 'bid via the request for proposal (RFP) process during FY 2008/09 with the new contract to be effective at the beginning of FY 2009/10. • The Commission will continue to contract with the current consulting firm to implement the Commuter_ Assistance Program for FY 2008/09. A transition plan to deal with .>. _potential ramifications to program implementation arising from the RFP process will be in place as part of the consultant's budget. • At the regional level, four county transportation commissions (Los Angeles, Orange, , San Bemardino, and Ventura) will contract with the Commission for the provision of regional ridematching database and network operations, the provision of ridesharing • information services, and operation of the regional website www.CommuteSmarl.info and its transition into the regional 511 system. • Maintaining its long-term partnership with the Commission, SANBAG will contract with the Commission to manage and implement a "sister" Commuter Assistance Program for its residents and employers in San Bemardino County. Accomplishments • Based on the strategic planning effort conducted in the previous year, the Commuter Assistance Program created a commute benefits calculator for employers specific to the Inland Empire region, a complete new suite of marketing collateral, a new 170 • Rideshare Plus website, and a new short form electronic commuter survey to be used for non-SCAQMD regulated employers. • Upgraded the regional ridematching system with new computer hardware and software. • Continued to operate, maintain, and enhance the regional ridematching database and ridesharing information system for the five -county region. • , Operated, maintained, and enhanced the regional rideshare website, www.CommuteSmart.info, on behalf of the five -county region. The enhancement included a real time blog by television personality HueII Howser along with a tie-in to i his televisio0show, "California's Gold". Through this arrangement, we have been able to more heavily promote ridesharing across the SCAG region as well as drive additional traffic to the commutesmart website. • ` Continued work on the 1-15/1-215 detection project by completing the design and cooperative agreement elements of the work. Construction bids are expected to occur prior to the close of FY 2007/08 with construction completed by December 2008. • Continued work on the integration of the dormant MSRC Bike Metro website into the CommuteSmart website as well as the on -going MSRC rideguide project and the project development necessary to support the previously approved MSRC 511 marketing campaign. • Implemented the Coachella Valley Air Quality Enhancement grant which provides a $2/day rideshare incentive for the first time to Coachella Valley employers on a two- year demonstration basis. • Continued use of the Program Measurement Tool to evaluate program performance. • Renewed leases for park and ride facilities with the following locations: Canyon Community Church of the Nazarene (Corona), Elsinore Naval Military School (Lake Elsinore), La Sierra University (Riverside), Living Truth Christian Fellowship (Corona), Revival Christian Fellowship (Menifee), and the United Methodist Church (Temecula). • Secured new, park and ride lease arrangements for a Metrolink station auxiliary parking lot in Corona and with Hope Lutheran Church in Temecula. • Worked in partnership with the Rail Department to develop a park and ride lot in the city of Perris at the future Perris Valley Line Metrolink station. Major Initiatives A cornerstone of the Commuter Assistance Program is its continued partnership among commuters, emp oyers, and government. The partnership, based on voluntary efforts, makes a collective difference in increasing the efficiency of our transportation system — local roads, freeways, commuter rail, and public bus. The combined effort results in less congestion, decreased vehicle miles traveled, and improved air quality. For FY 2008/09, the Commission will undertake the following series of programmatic changes for the Commuter Assistance Program: • The =preparation of an RFP and corresponding scope of work necessary to support the procurement process for the award of a new five-year contract to 171 implement the Commuter Assistance program by the third quarter of FY 2008/09; • The continued provision of the modeshiftlrideshare incentive to the Coachella Valley on a demonstration basis using grant funds; • The provision of additional technical outreach to non-SCAQMD regulated small business employers via enhanced use of the Commuter Transportation Survey including the new short form electronic survey; • Continued development of on-line transactions to both small business employers and end user commuters; • The provision of additional call center support to provide for the anticipated increase in calls due to the implementation of the regional 511 traveler information system; and • The first major refreshment and revision to the www.commutesmart.info website since its inception in 2005 in order to update content and better organize the site to enhance the user experience. The Commission will be performing this work on behalf of its regional rideshare partners who will contribute to the project cost. In continuing support of ridesharing through the Commuter Assistance Program shopping cart of services, a GRH Program to serve Inland Empire employers will continue to be delivered in FY 2008/09 for both Riverside and San Bernardino counties. The Commission is also highly involved in the regional decision for the implementation of 511 and the dissemination of Advanced Traveler Information services. 511 is an unfunded federal mandate arising out of TEA21 and SAFETEA-LU, and it requires that real-time or near real-time traffic and traveler information be provided to the public. Staff has continued to represent the Commission by serving on the evaluation panel for the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority's (Metro) SAFE procurement of a regional 511 system. Should this procurement move forward, staff will continue to represent the Commission and Riverside County residents and commuters in a technical advisory role so that the Commission's needs are adequately met by Metro's implementation. Additionally, by participating on the MSRCTechnical Advisory Committee, Commission staff was able to assist in the shaping of the work plan by outlining a program that will devote MSRC grant funds to regional 511 marketing. This work plan is expected to deliver $1 million across the entire SCAG region for marketing and promotion of a regional 511 system. To further support the traffic map portion of the regional rideshare website, the Commission will continue to provide funding to Ca!trans for the installation of approximately 75 radar detection stations on the 1-15 and 1-215 corridors (covering 63 miles of freeway) to the San Diego County line. These detection stations are intended to support an increased traveler information service area for Western County including information contained on the live traffic maps published on www.CommuteSmart.info, 511, and private sector providers. This effort will also result in the provision of live travel 172 • • times into and out of the Temecula Valley on Ca!trans District 8 changeable message signs. It is expected that this work will be completed and functional by December 2008. The Commuter Assistance Program will also continue to work with our transit and rail modal partners 'n the development of the new 140 space park and ride facility located in the city of Perris at the future Perris Valley Line Metrolink station. This project is a joint effort between the Commission's Rail and Commuter Assistance Programs along with RTA and will result in permanent spaces available to the Commuter Assistance Program at the eventual Perris Valley Line Metrolink station. Department Goals Operate a cost-effective Commuter Assistance Program within Riverside County that results in a demonstrable reduction in single occupant vehicle trips thus assisting with congestion mitigation and improving air quality. Objectives: • Ensure the effectiveness of the Commuter Assistance Program through program i analysis and recurring assessments of participation and retention of ridesharers. Through the implementation of the Program Measurement Tool, the Commission will continue to look for ways to pare program costs without impacting service delivery or participation. Place the contract for the implementation of the program out to bid via the RFP process so as to ensure transparency on both performance and cost effectiveness with respect Ito the funding of the Commuter Assistance Program. • Continue the new employer recruitment effort to increase program visibility with Inland Empire employers and small businesses (100-250 employees each) not currently subject to or regulated by SCAQMD rules. • Complementing the new employer recruitment effort, continue to deploy and enhance a basic suite of on-line services to small business employer partners so as to make the administration of a trip reduction program an easier task for smaller companies. • Offer a basic suite of on-line services on a demonstration basis to end user commuters to achieve complete market penetration and cover those people interested in taking alternative commute modes but who are not affiliated with an employer partner. • Continue to offer short-term incentives for commuters to try a transportation mode other than driving alone. • Continue to provide a rewards program for long-term ridesharers to encourage their continued use of alternative modes of transportation. Ensure the coordination of ridesharing programs throughout the Inland Empire and the southern California region. Objectives: 173 • Continue to provide leadership with regard to the ongoing operation, maintenance, and enhancement of both the regional ridematching database and network and the regional rideshare website, www.CommuteSmart.info. • Using www.CommuteSmart.info along with 1-800-Commute, continue to take the lead in merging the development of real-time and accessible traveler information in nexus with the regional 511 deployment. The Commission will continue to work with its regional partners on technology development, implementation, and cost-effective delivery of such information. Continue to contract for the enhancement of the RideGuides through a grant funded by the MSRC. Working in partnership with Metro, this grant will enable transit` information to be displayed on individualized RideGuides produced for employees who have been surveyed. Continue to administer a "sister" Commuter Assistance Program in San Bernardino County on a contract basis, thus expanding the reach and effectiveness of commuter programs throughout the Inland Empire area. Fund and participate in regional rideshare marketing programs to enhance awareness of and encourage participation in commute modes that provide an alternative to driving alone. Enhance and pursue educational activities that encourage alternatives to driving alone and that encourage employers to assist employees in seeking commute methods other than driving alone. Objectives: • Continue and expand the operation of the new Commuter Exchange vehicle to include 70 site visits for the FY 2007/08_ • Via the marketing element of program implementation, focus on the widespread dissemination of the Commute Benefits Calculator for Employers that was developed as part of the strategic initiatives process from the previous FY. The calculator can be accessed via the Internet from a link on the Commissions website at http://www.commutesmart.info/rbc/. • In partnership with the four county transportation commissions and others, utilize the regional ridesharing database and website, www.CommuteSmart.info, to host and distribute the monthly electronic rideshare newsletter, CommufeSmarfNews. • Maintain, update, enhance, and refresh the Club and Team Ride members' only website, www.Rideshareplus.info which has been made a part of the CommuteSmart website along with a separate page for each county represented by our county transportation commission partners. • .Distribute regular broadcast fax information bulletins to local employers regarding commuter issues. • Implement widespread use of the short form electronic commuter survey and Rideguide with non-SCAQMD regulated small business employer partners. • Continue with the implementation of the on-line transactions program in order to increase small employer participation and reach out to end user commuters. 174 • I f • Advocate through the Commission's legislative program for commuter -friendly tax deductions for employers who assist residents by paying for transit passes and vanpool costs. • Publicize the participation of local employers in the Commission's Commuter Assistance Program through various media options. Table 80 - Commuter Assistance Program Budget Project Type Advantage Rideshare lo County Buspool Subsidies Club Rude Commuter Exchange Inland Empire Commuter Services - Riverside local Ridematching Services Regional Rideshare Marketing Special Project Development/Contingencies Park and Ride SANBAG Regional Rldematching Services General TOTAL Commuter Incentive Commuter Incentive Commuter Incentive Public Education Employer Services Employer Services Marketing Program Enhancement Commuter Services Commuter Incentives and Services: Employer Services Commuter and Employer Services Measure .A - Other FY 2007/D8 Budget $ 351,000 $ 105,000 186,500 192,900 496,000 66,900 17,500 31,000 190,000 477,600 3,978,000 1,381,600 21,300 - $ 351,000 105,000 1136,500 192,900 496,000 86,900 17,500 31,000 190,000 1,381,600 477,600 3,999,300 $ 6,112,40D $ 1,402,900 $ 7,515,300 'Commuter Assistance Performance/Workload Indicators FY 06/07 Actual . FY 07/08 Estimated FY 08109 Projected Number of one-way single occupant vehicle trips reduced as a result of Advantage Rideshare incentives 81,887 87,500 92,500 Number of Club Ride Members _ 4,436 4,750 5,000 Number of incoming 1-866-RIDESHARE telephone calls 2,613 3,500 3,700 Number of services provided try Inland Empire Commuter Services to support employer trip reduction efforts at worksites: • Employers Requesting Survey Services 116 125 132 • Employer Worksites Surveyed 116 125 132 • RideGuides Produced 14,125 21,000 22,500 • Technical Assistance Services 225 275 295 Number of events participated in by the Commuter Exchange in total, and as identified individually below: • Public Events 11 9 8 • Employer Work Sites 1 14 10 • Elementary Schools 48 47 50 175 Motorist Assistance Mission Statement: `To improve safety and convenience to motorists who experience mechanical difficulty on the roadway. i Chart 44 — Motorist Assistance Transfers Out 0% Projects and Operations j 91% Personnel 7% Professional 1% Supper 1% Expenditures Motorist Assistance expenditures are budgeted at $3,353,100 for FY 2008/09, or a decrease of 40.9% compared to the prior year budget. Budgeted expenditures for project operations include $1,986,400 in towing contract costs for the FSP program and $870,000 for the SAFE to cover cellular access charges, knockdowns, vandalism, miscellaneous repairs and maintenance, and call answering services. Towing costs have decreased 15.5% because of the termination of FSP service for the SR-60/SR- 91/1-215 construction project. Professional costs of $34,500 include legal services and contracted consultants to monitor the Commission's call box program and to provide monthly operating and statistical reports for the program. Equipment maintenance I expenditures are related to ongoing maintenance and site improvements to be completed in FY 2008/09. 176 i Table 81 - Motorist Assistance Expenditure Detail FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 07108 FY 08/09 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefds $ 81,300 $ 187,200 $ 93,500 $ 250,300 $ 63,100 33.7% I Professional Costs Legal Services 70,100 15,000 10,500 10,000 (5,000) 33.3% Professional Services -Other 19 800 24,400 15 500 24,500 100 1 0.4% , 1 I Support Costs 29,500 40,200 39,200 43,000 2,800 7.0% Projects and Operations Projects General - N/A Towing 1,639,600 2,350,700 2,013,000 1,986,400 (364,300) -15.5% i Access Charges 79,900 68,000 90,100 69,800 1,800 2.6% Preventive Maintenance 4,300 5,100 5,200 5,400 300 5.9% Corrective Maintenance 4,300 5,100 5,200 5,400 300 5.9% It Equipment Maintenance 370,400 2,330,300 1,823,900 772,500 (1,557,800) -66.8% Knockdowns 10,000 4,000 8,000 (2,000) -20.0% i Vandalism 1 600 300 400 (200) -33.3% i Operating Costs) 109,400 142,500 104,000 177,400 34,900 24.5% Special Studies 5 000 - - (5,0001 -100.0% Total Professional Costs 89,900 39,400 26,000 34,500 (4,900) -12.4% Total Projects and Operations 2.207.900 4,917,300 4,045.700 3,025.300 (1.692.0001 -38.5% Transfers Out 388,200 499,000 490.000 (490,0001-100.0% TOTAL Motorist Assistance $ 2796 800 $ 5 674.100 $ 4 694.400 1 3 353.100 $ (2321 Qal i Motorist Assistance Staffing Summary Department Budget Overview Department Description SAFE is the call box system that allows motorists to call for assistance in the event of a mechanical breakdown or accident on the freeway. Additionally, the FSP assists stranded motorists on certain segments of the freeway by towing, changing flat tires, t 177 i• i • i I• • and providing a gallon of fuel at no charge to the motorists. FSP service is also provided in construction zones through separate funding agreements with Caltrans to help mitigate congestion. Key Assumptions Current percentage levels of vandalism, knockdowns, and miscellaneous repairs to call boxes will remain consistent with the past year. Annual maintenance costs are based on a flat -fee contract based on the number of call boxes. Call box operating costs are based on estimates from the CHP and the call answering center contract through SANBAG. Cellular service charges are based on the existing five-year agreement for digital cellular service. Costs for ADA site accessibility retrofits are basedon estimates of work to be completed in FY 2008/09. Tow truck contractor costs for the nine existing FSP beats are based on Commission -approved contracts. Accomplishments • ; Continued the implementation of recommendations identified in the Riverside County SAFE 5-Year Plan by converting from analog to digital cellular technology and installing TTY's throughout the call box system. • Worked with the call box consultant to analyze the decline in call volume along with the need to maintain a "safety net" system for motorists in Riverside County and to develop a call box reduction plan to responsibly meet those needs. • Expanded FSP coverage on the SR-60 and 1-215 by working with the CHP and Caltrans to identify and justify the need for additional FSP beats, issued RFPs for the two beats, and awarded contracts for service on the new beats_ • Added one vehicle for midday FSP service (8:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.) to Beat #4 on SR-91 to mitigate congestion during the construction of the SR-91/La Sierra Avenue improvement project. • Discontinued midday FSP service on portions of SR-91 and SR-60/1-215 as construction was near completion on the SR-60/SR-91/1-215 interchange. • Implemented an FSP phone/online survey mechanism for more cost effective and more efficient processing of customer feedback. Major Initiatives The call box system reduction was completed in 2007; therefore, the implementation of the remaining recommendations in the SAFE 5-Year Plan will continue. Projects to enhance accessibility and retrofit sites will affect approximately 670 call boxes. The modifications will involve reconfiguring sites to meet new site standards, relocating boxes behind guard rails, replacing pedestrian pads, lowering call boxes on the poles, or replacing the sites with the new "L" or "M" site design, as described in the SAFE 5- Year Plan. 178 Staff will complete the implementation of the AVL system for the tow trucks. All of the FSP vehicles and drivers will be fully equipped by early FY 2008/09, representing the first SAFE in the State to implement the use of this technology. Department Goals Maintain the integrity of the call box system and service levels. Objectives: • Along with San Bemardino County SAFE, continue to monitor the operation of the call answering center contractor. • Implement the balance of the Commission's recommendations from the SAFE 5- Year Plan Continue the Freeway Service Patrol as long as state funding support is available. Objectives: • Research and address radio reception issues along 1-15. • Consult with Caltrans and the CHP to evaluate existing beats and determine if changes in service hours, number of vehicles assigned to each beat, or expanded service hours are justified should additional funding become available. • Review proposed construction projects with Caltrans and coordinate the use of temporary tow service to mitigate congestion. • Work cooperatively with Caltrans, the CHP, and other FSP program managers to gain increased funding for the program and review the funding allocation formula to attain a more equitable distribution of program funds. • Complete the implementation of the AVL system. Motorist Assistance PerformancelWorldoad indicators i FY 06/07 Actual FY 07/08 Estimated FY 08/09 Projected Number of Call Boxes 619 612 650 Number of Call Box Calls 9,595 8,000 7,000 Number of Vehicle Assists 39,007 52,750 55,000 179 • • ; SECTION 7,3 CAPITAL PROJECTS 180 • Capital Project Development and Delivery Mission Statement: "To keep the Commission's contract with the voters of Riverside County by accelerating the planning, programming, and implementation of projects and programs in the Measure A Transportation Improvement Plan to the extent that funds are available. To ensure that capital projects are environmentally acceptable,expertly designed, .and implemented in a cost effective manner." i Chart 45 — Capital Project Development and Delivery I Transfers Out 13% Debt Service 2% Capital Outlay 0% Expenditures Personnel 1% Professional 0% Support 0% Projects and Operations 83% The budgeted expenditures and transfers out total $515,567,200 to cover all of the Commission's major capital projects. General project costs include $6,238,300 related to program management provided by Bechtel Infrastructure (Bechtel) and SCRRA and $115,000 related to permits for rail capital projects. Highway cap tal expenditures of $282,964,000 are primarily for engineering, construction, and right of way on SR-60, SR-74, SR-79, SR-86, SR-91, SR-111, 1-10, I- 15, 1-215, and the proposed Mid County Partway. Other significant highway capital expenditures include land mitigation acquisitions for the Westem County and Coachella Valley MSHCP. Highway capital expenditures also include $7,500 for the completion of a study. Regional arterial capital expenditures amount to $36,542,000 for various Western County TUMF,regional arterial projects approved for TUMF funding in 2004 as well as Coachella Valley regional arterial projects. Rail capital expenditures amount to $43,190,000 for preliminary engineering and initiation of right of way acquisitions for the FTA Small Starts Perris Valley Line and 181 I construction of a parking structure at the North Main Corona station and of the Perris multimodal facility. Additionally, rail capital expenditures include"$500,000 to complete environmental studies related to the Perris Valley Line. Disbursements to CVAG for the Coachella Valley regional arterial program are j budgeted at $8,781,300. Local tumback payments to cities and the County for local streets and roads repair, maintenance, and construction amount to $50,085,300. Interest payments on outstanding commercial paper and the 2008 sales tax revenue bonds related to the 2009 Measure A are estimated at $5,350,000 and $5,850,000, respectively. I Repayment of sales tax revenue bonds debt principal and related interest is I $35,473,400 and is included in transfers out. Transfers out of $32,623,900 relate primarily to funding for Mid County Parkway right of way protection, preliminary engineering 'activities for projects included in the 10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan, Coachella Valley regional arterial projects, and highway property management. Other costs of $7,346,500 include salary and fringe benefits, legal fees and other professional services, and support. Capital outlay of $500,000 is related to on -call rehabilitation improvements at all commuter rail stations. 182 Table 82 — Capital Project Development and Delivery Uses Detail FY 0E407 FY 07/08 Actual Revised Budget Salaries and Benefits I Professional Costs Legal Services Financial Advisory' Audit Services Professional Services -Other Total Professional Costs Support Costs Projects and. Operations I 1 I Total Projects and Operations Projects -General �4 - 1 Engineering 1 Construction �i. Right of Way and Land Special Studies Local StreetsandRoads Regional Arterials • Coachella Valley SCRRA Contribution Cannel Outlay Debt Service- Commercial Paper Transfers Out TOTAL Capital Project Development and Delivery $ 1,171,700 $ - 2,942500 $ 900,900 223 200 1,219,100 FY 07f08 FY 01V09 Projected Budget Doltar Percent Change Change 1,138.800 $ 2,698,400 $ (244,100) -8.3% 1,024600 636,500 3,000 1.360.700 1,410,000 26,000 38,000 271.300 t 170.300 2,408,600 933,800 2,627300 385,100 37.6% 0-0% 35600 1166.7% (201,400) -14.6% 218,700 91% 33,000 116,500 180,700 2.020,800 1,904,300 1634.6% 3285,300 16 618,100 21,082,700 37,720,400 443,100 59,196,800 9,138,500 11 300 4.279,800 2,221,900 66,958.500 31,684,500 97,070.000 34,872,600. 156,501,100 85,706,600 315.000 185,100 50,087,500 50,087,500 12511,600 13215,000 11 452.700 - 6653,300 79,774 000 91,703,600 200,218,400 507,500 59,085,300 8,781 300 2.073,500 48.4% 3,815,500 5.7% (5.366.400) -5.5% 43,717,300 27.9% 192,500 61.1% (2200) 0.0% (3,730600) -29.8% (11A52.7001 147,496,200 399,176200 - 217673,200 428.423,400 29,247200 7.3% 121,400 500,000 215,800. 500,000 0.0% 1.289,500 6,472600 114,400.000 11,200,000 4,727,400 73.0% 71,118 700 118 676 500 75105.700 65097.300 (50 579 200) -42.6% % 277449 60Q % 530 792 9QQ $ 4git 9gag a1 % 515 567 20Q % 114 725 700) -2 a% Capital Project Development and Delivery Staffing Summary Department Budget Overview Department Description I 183 i Capital Projects is responsible for the development and delivery of major highway, regional arterial, and rail capital projects where the Commission is identified as the lead agency. The delivery of a capital project can include tasks such as feasibility studies, preliminary engineering, environmental clearance, final design, right of way acquisition, construction, and construction management. Approximately 73% of the Commission's i budget originates in this department managed by the Project Delivery and Development Directors responsible for the capital program. The primary goal of Capital Projects is to accelerate delivery of the Measure A, !Proposition 1B CMIA and PTMISEA, STIP, and federally funded highway, regional arterial, and rail capital improvement projects throughout the County. Highway improvements currently in progress include the addition of carpool and HOT lanes, widening and realignment projects, and interchange improvements as well as planning for new CETAP corridors. The Commission will continue its efforts to protect right of way for the identified highway improvements as funding permits. Regional arterial capital improvements include funding for Westem County TUMF regional arterial projects approved by the Commission in 2004 as a result of a call for projects and Coachella Valley projects identified in a commercial paper advance funding agreement. Commuter rail capital improvements include a new parking structure, the Perris Valley Line, and a multimodal facility in the city of Perris. This department also provides the necessary coordination between the Commission and Ca!trans for the development of scope, cost, and project delivery schedules for Measure A projects that are funded by the STIP and Proposition 1B CMIA. Capital Projects also has lead agency status over certain demonstration projects identified in SAFETEA-LU. The 2009 Measure A program includes stipulationsfor agencies in Western County to be eligible to receive the new Measure A local streets and roads funds beginning in. 2009. Each incorporated city in Westem County and the County must participate in the TUMF program, which is administered by WRCOG. Additional requirements include participation in the Westem County MSHCP and submittal of an annual capital improvement program. In FY 2003/04 the Commission and WRCOG entered into an MOU which identifies a distribution of the TUMF revenues prior to the 2009 Measure A which commences in July 2009. The distribution, after deduction of a WRCOG administrative fee, is 48.7% to . the Commission for regional arterials and CETAP corridors. The remaining revenues are distributed to WRCOG for the five TUMF improvement zones and for regional transit facilities. Given the staff support required to oversee and participate in the project development work, consisting of preliminary engineering and right of way activities, final design, and construction for the capital projects, costs for staff and related support have been included in this department budget. 184 • Key Assumpt ons • The Commission will continue its emphasis on completion of the 1989 Measure A program. • The 10-Year,Western County Highway Delivery Plan serves as the basis for defining the 2009 Measure A project selection and prioritization. • Western County TUMF regional arterial project costs are based on the list of projects approved by the Commission in 2004. i • Agreements for the advancement of 2009 Measure A funds have been obtained from CVAG and cities desiring to participate in the commercial paper program. • Highway project costs are based on engineers' estimates and scope agreements with Caltrans. • Construction projects are competitively bid to minimize costs. • All projects will be built to required standards. • All highway projects, with the exception of HOT lane facilities, are transferred upon completion to Caltrans; operation of these facilities is the responsibility of Caltrans. HOT lane facilities, when completed, will be owned and operated and maintained by the Commission through the term of the future franchise agreement between Caltrans and the Commission. • 2009 Measure A regional arterial projects will be selected and programmed to accelerate projects for implementation in the first 10 years. Accomplishments • Completed i and began implementation of the 10-Year Delivery Plan for the Western County Highway Program_ • Completed Ithe environmental document and initiated final design and right of way acquisitions for the SR-91 HOV lanes project through Riverside from Adams Street to the SR-60/SR-91/1-215 interchange. • Continued design and right of way acquisition for the SR-60 East Junction project. • Continued the project report and environmental process and began final design for the SR-74/G Street to 1-215 interchange project. • Continued successful negotiations with the FTA related to the Small Starts funding authorization for the Perris Valley Line. • Continued landscaping and plant establishment on Segment 11 of the SR-74 widening project and substantially completed project closeout activities. • Made substantial progress related to the environmental process for the Mid County Parkway and SR-79 realignment projects. • Completed final design and initiated construction on the parking structure project at the North Main Corona station. • Substantially completed final design on the Perris multimodal facility. • Initiated the project report and environmental studies for the following projects: ■ SR-91 corridor improvement project (SR-241 to Pierce Street); • 1-15 corridor and HOT lane project (San Bernardino County line to 1-215); ■ 1-15/Cajalco interchange; ■ SR-71/SR-91 interchange project; 185 ■ 1-215 widening from Murrieta Hot Springs Road to Scott Road; and ■ 1-215 widening from Scott Road to Nuevo Road. • Submitted applications to the CTC and the United States Department of Transportation requesting tolling authority for the 1-15 corridor. • Completed preliminary toll feasibility studies for the SR-91 and 1-15 corridors. • Completed TUMF project agreements and amendments to implement pre - construction activities. • Completed construction of TUMF project on Ramona Expressway. i Major Initiatives The Commission updates the STIP, FTIP, and Measure A revenues projected through !the year 2009 for each area of the County based on formulas approved by the Commission. In May 2006, the forecast of Measure A revenues through 2039 was. completed by the UCLA Anderson Forecast. Due to the economic slowdown in the I inland Empire, the forecast of sales tax receipts for the 2009 Measure A was updated and is being used in the development of a financing plan for the 10-Year Westem County Highway Delivery Plan, as described below. A significant effort was completed in FY 2006/07 to develop an implementation plan strategy for the 2009 Measure A state highway program, with a focus on the first 10 years of the program through 2019. An objective -based assessment of the Westem County portion of the 2009 Measure A TIP was completed along with the prioritization of the program of projects. Four highway corridors, 1-215, 1-15, 1-10, and SR-91, were selected as the priority focus for the first 10 years of the 2009 Measure A program. During FY 2007/08, staff initiated project development activities for the projects I identified in the 10-Year Westem County Highway Delivery Plan. Additionally, staff will I continue long-term development work on large scale projects such as the development of the Mid County Parkway, realignment of SR-79, the bi-county widening of 1-215 to I San Bernardino County, and geotechnical feasibility work on the potential Irvine -Corona `Expressway. The construction projects identified in the FY 2008/09 budget funded by Measure A, TUMF, state, or federal funds require the continued support of the Bechtel program management team which includes program managers, project engineers, construction engineers, inspectors, contracts administration, and support staff. Since the passage of SB 45 in 1997, the Commission is responsible for STIP-RIP fund programming and project delivery in partnership with Caltrans and the CTC. Additionally, the Commission may also be responsible for project delivery of federal demonstration projects. Further, the Commission has agreed to provide continuing assistance to Caltrans through Bechtel to support the completion of the SR-60/SR-91/1- 215 highway construction project through the design sequencing process allowed by AB 405. 186 1 The Commiss on also disburses Measure A local streets and roads funds directly to the cities and County for their use. The budgeted amount is set by formula established in the Measure A TIP. Local jurisdictions will receive $50,085,300 for focal streets and roads maintenance, repair, and construction. Each jurisdiction's respective allocation is based on population (Western County and Palo Verde Valley) or dwelling unit (Coachella Valley) and the amount of sales tax generated. A number of jurisdictions in the Western County have entered into loan agreements with the Commiss on for advance acceleration of 1989 Measure A local streets and roads revenues. The annual principal and interest payments for these loans are deducted by `the Commission from each;city's respective disbursements based on the terms of the. l loan agreements. The participating jurisdictions are the cities of Corona, Norco, Perris, San Jacinto, and Temecula. Additional agreements have been executed with CVAG and three cities to advance acceleration of 2009 Measure A regional arterial or local streets and roads revenues through participation in the commercial paper program. 1 La Quinta is the only city in the Coachella Valley which does not participate in the Coachella Valley TUMF Program. Accordingly, La Quinta's Measure A allocation is remitted to CVAG in lieu of the TUMF. The Coachel a Valley has a discretionary five percent of its Measure A sales tax revenues that may be allocated for either local streets and roads or transit as determined by CVAG. CVAG has usually elected to allocate such revenues to transit. Detailed descriptions of the capital projects, including local streets and roads funding, that are included in the FY 2007/08 budget follows the Performance/Workload Indicators. Implementation of tolling facilities within the SR-91 and 1-15 corridors, two major projects in the 10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan, requires obtaining ' tolling authority from state and federal jurisdictions. Efforts to obtain this authority include successful passage of state legislation, approval of state and federal toiling authority applications, and administrative approval from Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Department Goals Continue prudent right of way protection and preservation activities for Measure A and TUMF projects to control long-range project costs and project feasibility. Objectives: • Purchase property to protect right of way required for future projects, as funding is available. • Coordinate the design of Measure A- and TUMF-funded highway improvements with local agencies and private property owners as practical. 187 Build upon and strengthen the partnership with Caltrans toward timely delivery of identified Measure A, CMIA, and STIP projects. Objectives: • Develop agreements with Caltrans and FHWA, as may be required, to finalize project scoping and cost issues for the STIP, federal demonstration, and Measure A fundedhighway projects in Riverside County. • Provide quarterly contract status and cost schedule reports to the Commission and Caitrans. • Meet the project milestones identified in the CMIA agreements between Commission, Caitrans, and the CTC. To the extent permitted by law, pursue reasonable involvement of local DBE firms and minority and women business enterprises in contract work. ' Objective: • Maintain goal for a minimum DBE participation in all federally funded contracts. Continue to review quarterly report on DBE participation levels. Provide effective communication of project progress to the Commission board members, Caltrans, CTC, and FHWA. Objective: • Develop a strategy with Caltrans District 8 that would allow the Commission to advance specific projects identified in the 10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan to take advantage of any unexpected state or federal funding which may become available through increased state or federal budget authorizations or potential loan programs to advance construction. Work with Caltrans and other agencies toward completion of preliminary engineering and environmental clearance of all projects. Objective: • Work with Caltrans, the County, and the cities in Riverside County to complete preliminary design and environmental clearance for Measure A projects that could be eligible to receive additional or early funding from various sources that could become available if a project is sufficiently developed. Complete the construction of the highway projects identified in the budget. Objectives: • Complete the SR-111 project in the Coachella Valley. • Continue to provide funding and support for interchange improvements along the SR-91. 188 In coordination with the Rail Program Manager, construct capital improvements at existing commuter rail stations as identified in the budget. Objectives: Complete construction of the North Main Corona station parking structure. • Complete construction of the Perris multimodal facility. • Continue preliminary engineering, complete environmental clearance, and start right of way acquisition for the Perris Valley Line. Location of Major FY 2008/09 Projects within Riverside County INSERT MAP HERE 1) 1-10 Preparation of studies along the truck climbing lane for the betterment of goods movement. 2) SR-60 3) SR-74 4) SR-79 5) SR-91 Final design and right of way acquisition for the SR-60 East Junction to 1-215 HOV lanes connector. (A) Completion of project closeout and landscaping and plant establishment for Segment II from Wasson Canyon Road to 7th Street in the city of Perris. (B) Preliminary engineering and environmental and final design of the G Street to 1-215 interchange. (C) Preparation of project report and environmental documentation for the curve realignment at Winchester Road. Realignment between Gilman Springs Road and Domenigoni Parkway including project study report, project report, and environmental document. Construction of interchange improvements at (A) Green River Drive, (B) La Sierra Avenue, and (C) Van Buren Avenue. (D) Final design, right of way acquisition, and construction for HOV lanes from Adams Street to SR- 60/SR-91/1-215 interchange. (E) Preliminary engineering and environmental studies for improvements to the SR-91/SR-71 interchange. (F) Preliminary engineering and environmental studies for toll and mixed flow projects from SR-241 to Pierce Street in the city of Riverside. 189 i 6) SR-111 7) Mid County Parkway 8) Perris Valley Line j 9) North Main Corona Station j 10) Local Streets and Roads 11) SR-86 i 12) Perris Multimodal Facility 13)1-215 Bi-County Project 14)1-215 Projects Design and construction of intersection improvements by the cities of Indio, Cathedral City, and La Quinta and the County. Preliminary engineering, preparation of the project report, and environmental documentation for the project. Preliminary engineering and right of way acquisition for the Perris Valley Line (Riverside -Moreno Valley - Perris) along the SJBL Construction of parking structure. Allocation of Measure A revenues to each city and the County to improve, maintain, and repair high priority local streets and roads. Traffic signal at Avenue 66. Construction of a bus and rail multimodal facility in downtown Perris. Development of an EIR/EIS and preliminary engineering on the 1-215 North from Riverside to the San Bemardino County line. Preliminary engineering and environmental document preparation for segments from 1-15 to Scott Road, Scott Road to Nuevo Road, and Nuevo Road to Box Springs Road. 15)1-15 (A) Preparation of engineering and environmental document for the expansion of mixed flow and HOT lanes from the San Bernardino County line to 1-215 in Temecula. (B) Preparation of project report and environmental document for interchange improvement and bridge replacement. Capital Project Development & Delivery Performance/Workload Indicators FY 06/07 Actual FY 07108 _ Estimated FY 08109 Projected t Preliminary Engineering (Project Reports and Environmental Documentation) Contracts Awarded 3 7 Plans, Scheduies, and Estimates Contracts Awarded 2 2 2 190 R i Number of Projects with Active Right of Way Acquisition 2 4 5 Construction Awards 2 1 2 Highway and Rail Project Close-outs 1 1 5 Capital Projects Summary i !Western County Highway and Regional Arterial Projects SR-60 East Junction to 1-215 HOV Lanes Connector (P3017) I I 'Substantially complete final design and right of way acquisition. FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact i Operating Budget Impact $ 2,000,000 Final design $ 3,500,000 Right of way acquisition $ 600,000 Right of way support services Costs will be funded using CMAQ with 1989 Measure A for local match for final design and STP funds for right of way. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. ! SR-60 HOV Lanes/1-215 to Redlands Boulevard (P3000) Complete close-out of construction and continue plant establishment. FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 10,000 Construction support services $ 10,000 Right of way support services Costs will be funded using CMAQ with 1989 Measure A for local match. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR-74/1-15 to 7th Street (P3001) Complete project close-out and landscaping and plant establishment for Segment II related to the realignment and widening of four -lane roadway between Wasson Canyon Road in the city of Lake Elsinore and 7th Street in the city of Perris. FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact $ 100,000 Final Design. $ 860,000 Construction and construction management $ 7,000 Landscape Management $ 1,500,000 Right of way acquisitions $ 70,000 Right of way support services Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A. 191 Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caftans. SR-74/G Street to 1-215 Interchange (P3015) Complete preliminary engineering and environmental, initiate final design, and acquire right of way for the interchange improvements. FY 2008/09 Cost $ 20,000 Preliminary engineering and environmental $ 1,950,000 Final design $ 3,000,000 Right of way acquisition $ 200,000 Right of way support services Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A and TUMF zone contributions. Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR-79 Realignment (P3003 & P5127) Perform realignment environmental and preliminary engineering services from Gilman Springs Road to Domenigoni Parkway. FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 3,000,000 Preliminary Engineering $ 10,000,000 Right of way acquisition $ 50,000 Right of way support services, None; costs will be funded using TUMF regional arterial, federal earmarks, and SAFETEA-LU federal funds. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caftans. SR-91 Corridor Improvement (HOT and Mixed Flow Lanes) (P3026) Continue preliminary engineering and environmental studies for the toll and mixed flow lanes project from SR-241 to Pierce Street including HOT lane connectivity to 1-15. FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact I $ 9,600,000 Preliminary engineering $ 10,000 Right of way support services Costs will be funded using commercial paper proceeds as advance funding of 2009 Measure A highway funds. N/A; operation and maintenance of future HOT lane facilities are the responsibility of the Commission while all other state highway operations are the responsibility of Caftans. 192 • I I SR-91/SR-71 Connectors (P3021) Continue preliminary engineering and environmental studies for interchange improvements'ito the SR-91/SR-71 interchange. FY 2008/09 Cost $ 3,700,000 Preliminary engineering $ 10,000 Right of way support services Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using STIP-RIP funds and commercial paper proceeds as advance funding of 2009 Measure A highway funds. Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. j SR-91 HOV Lanes/Adams Street to SR-60/SR-91/1-215 Interchange (P3005, 3006) Continue final design, right of way acquisitions, and construction. FY 2008/09 Cost I Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $15,000,000 Right of way acquisitions $ 2,200,000 Right of way support services $20,000,000 Construction Costs will be funded using STIP-RIP, TCRP, and Measure A funds for environmental and right-of-way; CMIA funds generated by Proposition 1B will be used for construction activities. In accordance with an MOU, Caltrans is responsible for design and utilities relocation costs, which will be . funded by CMAQ and TCRP dollars to be accessed directly by Caltrans. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR-911Green River Road Interchange (P3016) Provide funding and support for construction of highway improvements including the replacement of the overcrossing bridge at Green River Road. FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 2,500,000 Construction Costs are funded with commercial paper proceeds as advance funding of 2009 Measure A highway funds with Caltrans as lead agency. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 193 SR-91/La Sierra Avenue Interchange (P3014) Provide funding and support to start construction to widen and fully improve La Sierra Avenue from SR-91 to El Sobrante Road. FY 2008/09 Cost $17,000,000 Construction Measure A Budget Impact . Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A funds with the city of Riverside as lead agency. ; Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway and regional arterial operations are the responsibility of Caltrans and the local jurisdiction, respectively. 1 SR-91Nan Buren Boulevard Interchange (3008) Provide funding and support for construction to widen and fully improve interchange , improvements at Van Buren Boulevard. FY 2008/09 Cost $ 7,600,000 Construction Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A with the city of Riverside as lead agency. ; Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. I-10 Truck Climbing Lane (P3025) Commence preliminary engineering for eastbound truck climbing lane from San Bernardino County line to I-10/SR-60 interchange. FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 300,000 Preliminary engineering Costs will be funded using commercial paper proceeds as advance funding of 2009 Measure A highway funds: N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 1-15 Corridor and HOT Lanes (San Bernardino County Line to 1-215) (P3027) Continue preliminary engineering and environmental studies to add two HOT lanes and one mixed flow lane in each direction from the San Bernardino County line to SR-74 and to add one HOV lane in each direction from SR-74 to 1-215. FY 2008/09 Cost $11,600,000 Preliminary engineering $ 10,000 Right of way support services Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using commercial paper proceeds as advance funding of 2009 Measure A highway funds. Operating Budget Impact N/A; operation and maintenance of future HOT lane facilities are the responsibility of the Commission while all other federal and state highway operations are the 194 f responsibility of Caftans. I-15/Cajalco Interchange (P2309) Provide funding and support for the project report and environmental document related Ito interchange improvements. 1 FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact I Operating Budget Impact $ 500,000 Preliminary engineering Costs for preliminary engineering phase will be funded using local funds provided by the city of Corona as well as TUMF CETAP funds. N/A; federal highway and regional arterial operations are the responsibility of Caltrans and local jurisdiction, respectively. 1-215 Mixed Flow Lanes/1-15 to Scott Road (P3022) Continue preliminary engineering and environmental documentation to add one mixed flow lane in each direction. 'FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact !Operating Budget Impact $ 2,000,000 Preliminary engineering Costs will be funded using STIP-RIP funds; CMIA funds generated by Proposition 1 B bonds will be used for construction activities. N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caftans. 1-215 Mixed FlIow Lanes/Scott Road to Nuevo Road (P3023) Continue preli Iminary engineering and environmental documentation to add one mixed flow lane in each direction. FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 3,456,000 Preliminary engineering Costs will be funded using STIP-RIP funds. N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 1215 NOV Lanes/Nuevo Road to Box Springs Road (P3024) Commence preliminary engineering to add one HOV lane in each direction. FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 1,100,000 Preliminary engineering Costs will be funded using commercial paper proceeds as advance funding of 2009 Measure A highway funds. N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 195 1-215 Bi-County Project (P3012) Continue to fund the Phase I development of an EIR/EIS and preliminary engineering on the 1-215 North from Riverside to the San Bernardino County line through a cooperative agreement with SANBAG. FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact i Operating Budget Impact I 1 I Mid County Parkway (P2302 & P5123) Perform activities related to the development of a project report and environmental document for a new corridor from 1-15 to SR-79. $ 750,000 Preliminary engineering and environmental Current phase costs of this project will be funded using 1989 Measure A. N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. The match up project on the San Bernardino County side is on 1-215 from 1-10 to the Riverside County Line (1-215 South). FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 3,000,000 Preliminary engineering and environmental $ 60,000,000 ROW Acquisitions $ 1,500,000 ROW Support Services Costs will be funded with TUMF CETAP funds. N/A; responsibility for highway operations has not been determined. MSHCP Land Acquisition in Western County (P2800) Acquire land as mitigation for the cumulative and indirect impacts associated with construction of future highway and regional arterial projects as required by 2009 Measure A. FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $61,533,400 Land acquisition Costs will be funded using commercial paper proceeds as advance funding of 2009 Measure A highway funds N/A; land mitigation operations are the responsibility of the RCA. 196 • Various Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Projects (P5101, P5102, P5103, P5104, P5105, P5106, P5107, P5109, P5110, P5111, P5112, P5113, P5114 P5115, P5116, P5117, P5118, P5119, P5120, P5121, P5125, & P5128) Provide TUMF, funding and support for the engineering, construction, and right of way activities related to various Western County TUMF regional arterial projects. FY 2008/09 Cost $10,953,000 Engineering $ 4,765,000 Construction $13,440,000 Right of way Measure A Budget impact None; costs will be funded using TUMF funds with various local jurisdictions as their respective projects. N/A; regional arterial operations are the the local jurisdictions. Operating Budget Impact regional arterial lead agency for responsibility of Coachella Valley Highway and Regional Arterial Projects SR-111 City Projects (P3410, P3412, P3413, P3414, P3415, P3416 & P3417) Provide funding and support to complete signal and local intersection widening improvements along SR-111 as a result of the cooperatively programmed 1989 Measure A highway program funds by the Commission and CVAG. FY 2008/D9 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact SR-86 City Projects (P3418) FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 4,030,000 Engineering in cities of La Quinta, Indio, Cathedral City, and Rancho Mirage $13,344,500 Construction projects in cities of La Quinta, Indio, Cathedral City, and Rancho Mirage and an unincorporated area of the County Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A with each city or the County as lead agency for its respective project. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. $ 318,100 Constriction Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A with the County as lead agency. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caftrans. MSHCP Land Acquisition in Coachella Valley (P8100) 197 Provide funding and support for the acquisition of land as mitigation for the cumulative and indirect impacts associated with construction of future highway and regional arterial projects as required by 2009 Measure A under an advance funding agreement with CVAG. FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $15,025,000 Land acquisition Costs will be funded using commercial paper proceeds as advance funding of 2009 Measure A highway funds. N/A; land mitigation operations are the responsibility of CVAG. Various Coachella Valley Regional Arterial Projects (P8100) Provide funding and support for the Portola Avenue bridge and Cook Street widening 1 projects in the city of Palm Desert and for the Monterey Avenue corridor in the unincorporated area of the County under an advance funding agreement with CVAG. FY 2008/09 Cost $ 685,000 Preliminary engineering $ 5,699,000 Construction $ 1,000,000 Right of way Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using commercial paper proceeds as an advance of 2009 Measure A regional arterial funds with the cities of Coachella, Indio, and Palm Desert and the County as lead agencies for their respective projects. Operating Budget Impact N/A; regional arterial operations are the responsibility of the local jurisdictions. Rail Projects Perris Valley Line (P3800) Continue preliminary engineering and right of way acquisition and complete environmental clearance for extension of commuter rail services to Perris. FY 2008/09 Cost $12,000,000 Preliminary engineering $ 30,000 Engineering support services $10,000,000 Right of way acquisition $ 1,450,000 Right of way support services Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using FTA and 1989 Measure A funds as well as proceeds from sales of surplus properties. Subsequent year costs will also include STIP funding. Operating Budget Impact Rail station operations related to this project, which will be the responsibility of the Commission upon completion of the project, will be funded with LTF and property 198 • management fees. Rail service and capital operations will be the responsibility of Metrolink and will be funded by the Commission with LTF and STA based on an allocation determined by Metrolink. Annual station operations approximate $300,000 per station, or $1,800,000 annually in the aggregate for six proposed stations. Perris Multimodal Facility (P3816) Complete construction of the Perris multimodal facility Phase I. FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact I :`• Operating Budget Impact i $ 5,450,000 Construction and construction management $ 60,000 Right of way acquisition $ 50,000 Right of way support services None; costs will be funded using FTA Section 5309 bus funds, TE, TUMF regional transit, pass -through funds from RTA, Proposition 1B PTMISEA, and a contribution from the Commuter Assistance Program. Operations of this facility will be the responsibilities of the Commission and RTA, as defined in a cooperative agreement. Of the estimated $76,100 annual operating costs, the Commission will be responsible for approximately $31,000 to be funded by 1989 and 2009 Measure A Commuter Assistance funds. North Main Corona Station Parking Structure (P3808) Complete construction of a parking structure at the North Main Corona station. FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 14,000,000 Construction and construction management $ 150,000 Construction Support Services None; costs will be funded using STIP-IIP funds, CMAQ, STA, LTF, and FTA Section 5307 funds. Operations of this parking structure will be the responsibility of the Commission. Annual operating costs are estimated at $300,000 to be funded with LTF. Local Streets and Roads Western County Area Distribute local return funding for local streets and roads projects in Westem County. 199 I Operating Budget Impact ;Coachella Valley FY 2008/09 Cost 655,000 649,000 165,000 211,000 4,530,000 1,865,000 1,226,000 4,033,000 2,380,000 784,000 1,233,000 7,976,000 709,000 3,161,000 554,000 9,063,000 Banning Beaumont. Calimesa Canyon Lake Corona Hemet Lake Elsinore Moreno Valley Murrieta Norco Perris Riverside San Jacinto Temecula W ildomar Riverside County 39,194,000 Total Western County 1,471,700 Less: debt service payments $37,722,300 Total Westem County, net Measure A Budget Impact All costs will be distributed in accordance with 1989 Measure A. NIA; local street and road operations are the responsibility of the local jurisdiction. Distribute local return funding for local streets and roads projects in Coachella Valley. FY 2008/09 Cost $ 1,362,000 506,000 363,000 216,000 1,460,000 2,278,000 1,615,000 841,000 1,588,000 1,211,000 $11,440,000 Measure A Budget Impact All costs will Measure A. N/A; local street and road operations are the responsibility of the local jurisdiction. Operating Budget Impact I Cathedral City Coachella Desert Hot Springs Indian Wells Indio La Quinta Palm Desert Palm Springs Rancho Mirage Riverside County CVAG Total Coachella Valley be distributed in accordance with 1989 200 • Palo Verde Valley Area Distribute local retum funding for local streets and roads projects in Palo Verde Valley. r FY 2008/09 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 716,000 Blythe 207,000 Riverside County $ 923,000 Total Palo Verde Valley All costs will be distributed in accordance with 1989 Measure A. N/A; local street and road operations are the responsibility of the local jurisdiction. 201 • SECTION .0 COMMUNITY PROFILE' • 202 Community Profile Riverside County is the fourth largest county in California, stretching westward nearly 200 miles from the Colorado River and comprising more than 7200 square miles that include 24 incorporated cities. Riverside County can trace its beginning back to 1893 when voters approved the formation of a new county. The area was carved from parts of San Bernardino and San Diego counties; In its 115 years of existence, the County's economy has diversified and prospered. Originally, Riverside County was a, very agricultural area, known for a wide variety of crops grown on its fertile soils. :The County remains a strong agricultural area, but it is increasingly becoming a leader in manufacturing, transportation, construction, and tourism. The success of the area has brought dramatic population growth to Riverside County (Chart 46). Since the 1980's, the County has been one ofthe fastest growing counties in the state. The available and; affordable housing in Riverside County has attracted many, people to the County; however, a housing slowdown has occurred in recent years primarily as a result of the effect of the subprime'mortgages and the ensuing credit crisis (Chart 47). During the growth period, jobs also increased as many firms relocate to the area and move away from older communities; however, the Current economic slowdown has caused the County's unemployment rate to edge up from its near all-time lows (Chart 48). I The overall economic outlook for Riverside County is expected to improve by 2010 based on various economic forecasts. The area is preparing for its future as well in supporting better education. The County is home to a number of colleges and universities including UC Riverside. Chart 46 - Population 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 �.°°6 0 �°A�0 0 ti°° �y°° �y� tio° ° tio° ° r?o°� Source: California Departrnent of Finance 203 n Chart 47 — New Home Sales 1993 1995 Source: Dataquick 1997 Chart 48 -'Unemployment Rate 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1999 2001 2003 19,36 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Source: California Employment Development Depar6nent 2005 2007 As a result of these demographic changes, retail sales in the County have increased through 2006 (Chart 49 and Table 83); however, the effect of the current economic slowdown on retail sales was noted in sales tax receipts beginning in 2007. The prior years' increases in retail sales had a positive effect on the sales tax receipts generated in the County, which has a 7.75% sales tax rate including the Measure A rate (fable 84). The taxable sates generation by jurisdiction in the County is presented in Table 85_ 204 • i Chart 49 — Retail Sales (%) - $29.8 Billion — 2006 Data Other Services & Outlets 27% Other Retail Stores 3%, Automotive 23°% Apparel Stores 4% General Merchandise 16% Building Material 8% Household 3% Specialty Stores 8% Food Stores 4% Eating & Drinking 8°% Table 83 — Sources of County of Riverside Taxable Sales by Business Type (in 000's) 20062005 2004 2003 Apparel stores General merchandise Specialty stores Food stores Ealing and drinking Household Building materials Automotive Miscellaneous Total all other outlets Measure A Ordinance 88-1 cored sales tax rate 2002 $1,080,395 $990,129 $867,276 $746,015 $610,388 3,553,554 3,304,474 3,026,336 2,671,971 2,459,046 2262,442 2,104,040 1,885,435 1,649,224 1,501,106 1,309,782 1,197,438 1,079,972 1,028,392 967,171 2,316,422 2,157,801 1,940,610 1,713,632 1,559,215 949,217 964,629 862,551 691,051 594,049 2,390,236 2,424,898 2,226,117 1,679,347 1,427,831 6,956,756 6,751,648 6,035,203 5,198,391 4,563,779 1,024,551 944,155 792,450 653,929 569,148 7,973,892 7,417,279 6,521,199 5,678,183 5,248,261 $29,816,237 $28,256,491 $25,237,148 $21,709,135 619,498,934 0.50°% 0,50% 0.50% 0:50% 0.50% source: State Board of Equakation ' Year represents most recent data avaiable.. Table 84 — Direct and Overlapping Sales Tax Rates Fiscal Year Measure A Direct Rate County of Riverside 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 0.50% 7.75% 0.50% 7.75% 0.50% 7.75% 0.50% 7.75% 0.50% 7.75% Source: Commission Finance Department and CatifomiaState Board of Equalization 205 e Table 85 - Principal Taxable Sales Generation by Jurisdiction in Riverside County for 2006 Taxable Sales (in 000s) Rank Percentage of Total $ 5,034,072 2 16.9% . City of Riverside 12 0% City of Corona 3,576,700 3 675 4 9.1%704, City of Temecula 2,5.3% City of Palm Desert 1,593,699 5 961 6 4.4%7, City of Moreno Valley 1,303 8% City of Murrieta 1,120,712 7 1,053,235 8 3.5% City of Hemet 3.0% City of Cathedral City 898,801 9 619 10 2.9% City of Palm Springs 876,877 2.8°� City of Indio 837,12 2.5% City of La Quinta 754,063 818 13 2.3% City of Lake Elsinore 682,199,° City of Perris 579,848 14 City of Norco 557,095 15 1.9% 1.7% City of Rancho Mirage 514,119 16 190 17 1.0%08, City of Coachella 30.8% City of Banning 249,506 18 969 19 0.8%35, City of Beaumont 20.6% City of Blythe 173,316 20 728 21 0.4%27, City of San Jacinto 10 4% City of Indian Wells 105,715 22 23 0.3% City of Desert Hot Springs 95,513 0 � City ofCalimesa 50,575 24 City of Canyon Lake 12,496 25 0.0% 23,451,302 78.7% Incorporated 21.3% Unincorporated 6,364,935 1 Countywide $ 29,816,237 100.0% California $ 559,652,437 Source: California State Board of Equalization 206 i Commission Facts Programs and Services Measure A: I The Commission administers Measure A, the local half -cent sales tax for new transportatiorij projects in the County. Under Measure A, funding is used to improve highways, commuter rail, regional arterials, local streets and roads, transit and specialized transportation services including commuter assistance, economic development, new corridors, and Commission administration. Measure A expires in 2039. Transportation Development Act: The TDA is comprised of two elements: Local Transportation Fund and State Transit Assistance funding. The Commission administers the LTF one -quarter of one cent of the stale sales tax on behalf of the County. STA is generated from the statewide sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuel and is allocated by the State to the Commission on the basis of population and as a percentage of transit fare revenues. TDA funding is allocated primarily to bus and rail transit operators for transit operating and capital needs. Additionally, LTF funding is available for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, planning, and administration and allocated to the Commission and local jurisdictions in the County. Highways: The Commission assists with the planning and funding for highway improvements. Major current projects include: SR-60 East Junction to 1-215 HOV lanes connector, SR-74/G Street to 1-215 interchange, SR-79 realignment, SR-91 Corridor improvement project (HOT and mixed flow lanes), SR-91 HOV lanes/Adams Street to the SR-60/SR-91/1-215 interchange, SR-91 interchange improvements at La Sierra Avenue and Van Buren Avenue, 1-15 Corridor and HOT lanes project, 1-215 Corridor mobility improvement projects, and Mid County Parkway. State highway maintenance is the responsibility of Caltrans. Local Streets and Roads: The Commission administers funding to local jurisdictions to improve streets, intersections, signal coordination, and pavement. Local streets and roads maintenance is the responsibility of the local jurisdictions. Commuter Rail: The Commission funds and oversees Metrolink rail services within the County. The Commission's three Metrolink lines are the Riverside, IEOC, and 91 lines_ The Commission owns and maintains five Metrolink stations located at: ➢ Riverside Downtown Station, 4066 Vine Street, Riverside ➢ La Sierra Station, 10901 Indiana Avenue, Riverside ➢ Ped ey Station, 6001 Pedley Road, Riverside ➢ North Main Corona Station, 250 E. Blaine Street, Corona ➢ West Corona Station, 155 S. Auto Center Drive, Corona Motorist Assistance: The Commission provides emergency call boxes through the SAFE and offers emergency towing services through the FSP. Commuter 'Assistance: The Commission provides a variety of rideshare services both to employers and commuters. Through voluntary participation, commuters and employers receive a direct benefit from their sales tax dollars, and the entire region benefits from reduced traffic congestion and improved air quality. Specialized Transit: The Commission maintains a strong 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 public and nonprofit transit operators to assist in the provisions of special transit services to improve the mobility of seniors and persons with disabilities. 207 of • ItECTION *PPENDICES 208 • Glossary of Acronyms AADPL ! - Annual Anticipated DBE Participation Level AAL - Actuarial Accrued Liabilities ACE - Alameda Condor East ADA - Americans with Disabilities Act AVL - Automatic Vehicle Location Bechtel - Bechtel Infrastructure BNSF - Burlington Norther Santa Fe Railroad Board - Board of Commissioners for the Riverside County Transportation Commission CAFR - Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Caltrans - California Department ofTransportation CETAP - Community Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process CHP - California Highway Patrol CMA - Congestion Management Agency CMAQr - Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality CMIA - Corridor Mobility Improvement Account CMP - Congestion Management Program CMS - Congestion Management System Commission - Riverside Cotmty Transportation Commission County - County of Riverside CTC - California Transportation Commission CVAG - Coachella Valley Association of Governments DBE - Disadvantaged Business Enterprise DMV - Depamnent of Motor Vehicles EIR ' - Environmental Impact Report EIS - Environmental Impact Study FHWA' - Federal Highway Administration FSP - Freeway Service Patrol FTA' - Federal Transit Administration FIT - Full-time Equivalent FTIP - Federal Transportation Improvement Program FY Fiscal Year GASB - Govemmental Accounting Standards Board GFOA - Goverment Finance Officers Association GRH - Guaranteed Ride Home HOT - High Occupancy Toll (Poll Lane) HOV - Iligh Occupancy Vehicle (Carpool Lane) i - Interstate IEOC - Inland Empire -Orange County Metrolink Service IIP' - Interregional Improvement Program ITS - Intelligent Transportation System LAX - Los Angeles International Airport LOS - Level of Service LTF' - I Aral Transportation Fund March ARB - March Air Reserve Base Measure AA - Amendment to I989 Measure A to increase bond debt limitation to S525,000,000 Metrolink - Operating Name for SCRRA (see SCRRA) MIS - Major Investment Study MOU - Memorandum of Understanding MSHCP - Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan MSRC - Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (AB 2766) OCTA - • Orange County Transportation Authority OPEB - Other Postemployment Benefits Perris Valley Line - Pcrris Valley Line Metrolink Extension Project PERS - Public Employees Retirement System PIP - Productivity Improvement Program RCA - Regional Conservation Authority RIP* - Regional lmproverrentProgram RTA - Riverside Transit Agency RTAC - Regional Transportation Agencies Coalition 209 RTP — Regional Transportation Plan SAFE — Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies SAFETEA-LU* — Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users SANBAG — San Bernardino Associated Governments SB 45 — Senate Bill 45 Kopp 1997 Transportation Funding SB 821 — LIT Bicycle and Pedestrian Funds SCAG — Southern California Association of Governments SCAQMD — South Coast Air Quality Management District SCRRA — Southern California Regional Rail Authority SJBL — San Jacinto Branch Line SR — State Route SRTP — Short Range Transit Plan SSAB — Salton Sea Air Basin STA* — State Transit Assistance State State of California STIP* — State Transportation Improvement Program SIT* — Surface Transportation Program SunLine SunLine Transit Agency TDA* — Transportation Development Act TE* — Transportation Enhancements TEA21* Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century TIP Transportation Improvement Plan TMC — Transportation Management Center TOD — Transit Oriented Development TPC — Transit Policy Committee TUMF* — Transportation/Traffic Uniform Mitigation Fee (Western County/Coachella Valley) UC — University ofCalifomia Western County — Western area of Riverside County WRCOG — Western Riverside Council of Governments 1989 Measure A — Original 1/2 cent transportation sales tax measure approved by voters in November 1988 2009 Measure A — Extension of sales tax measure approved by voters in November 2002 which is effective upon expiration of original sales tax measure in June 2009 5-Year Plan 5-Year Strategic and Financial Plan for the Call Box Program 10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan — 2009 Measure A 10-Year Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan, adopted December 13, 2006 *Additional information provided in Funding Definitions. Funding Definitions Federal Fund Sources Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5309 discretionary funds generally provided to urbanized areas for funding new start rail projects, major bus fleet replacement, and transit facility construction. Matching ratios range from 50/50 to 80% federal and 20% local. Section 5307 formula funds made available to urbanized areas for operating subsidies, capital projects and planning. Operating match is up to 50*r6 of the net operating cost; capital and planning match is 80% federal and 20% local. Section 5310 funds made available to states for the purpose of providing capital support to private non-profit and, in certain circumstances, public transit operators. This is a state administered discretionary program providing funds on an 88.53%federal and 11.47%local basis. Section 5311 funds provided to support rural transit operating subsidies and capital projects. Operating match is up to 50% of the net operating cost; capital match is 80°A federal and 20% local. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) l 210 • • i In 1991, the Intenrwdal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) was approved by Congress to replace the former Federal Aid Urban/Federal Aid System funding programs. ISTEA was established as a six -year funding program and was reauthorized for another six years in 1997. This new transportation act was renamed as the Transportation Equity Act of the Twenty -fast Century (TEA21) and was extended through August 10, 2005 when the President signed into law the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). With guaranteed funding for highways, highway safety, and public transportation totaling 5244.1 billion, SAFEIEA-LU represents the largest sarface transportation investment in our nation's history. Under these programs the following fund sources are allocated to each county, and the Commission further allocates these funds based on federal provisions. Surface Transportation Program (STP) Funds allocated by the Commission and administered by Caltrans that provide funding for local street and road improvements. Current matching rate is 88.53% federal and 11.47% local. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Funds allocated by the Commission for transportation related air quality improvement projects in (air quality non - attainment areas. Current matching rate is 88.53% federal and l 1.47% local. Safety projects can qualify for 100% of CMAQ funding: Transportation Enhancements (TE) The amount of funds made available under this program is 10% of the state apportionment of STP funds: Projects are qualified and prioritized by the Cormnission and submitted to the California Transportation Commission for inclusion in the State Transportation Improvement Program. The basic definition of a transportation enhancement project is an improvement that is over and above the base transportation project. Project categories ate pedestrian and bicycle facilities, scenic or historic highways, scenic beautification, historic preservation, rehabilitation of historic transportation facilities, preservation of abandoned railway corridors, control/removal of outdoor advertising, archaeological planning and research, and mitigation of water pollution due to highway runoff. Current matching rate is 88.53% federal and 11.47%local. State and Local Fund Sources State Transportation Improvement Program The State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) consists of Regional Improvement Program (RIP) and Interregional improvement Program (IIP) funds. The RIP and IIP programs are mainly supported by Proposition 42 funding. The RIP component represents 75% of STIP funds available for capacity projects. Regional Transportation Planning Agencies are responsible for selection of projects proposed for RIP funds. The IIP component represents the remaining 25% of STIP funds available for capacity projects and Caltrans is responsible for the selection o£I1P-funded projects. TheiCommission and Caltrans District 08 work closely in coordinating projects for these fund sources. Proposition IB Program In November 2006, the voters in Cal ifomia approved Proposition 1B, which will fund various transportation programs from bonds issued by the state of California. Programs to be funded include corridor mobility improvements, transit capital, STIP supplement, goods movement, state -local partnership funds, and cities and counties. Transportation Development Act (FDA) The TDA is comprised of two elements: Local Transportation Fund (LTF) and State Transit Assistance (STA) funds. LTF funds are derived from 1/4 of one cent of the state sales tax and are returned to source There are three areas of apportionment within Riverside County comprised of Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley (Blythe). The Commission administers the LTF on behalf of the County of Riverside. Funds are provided for program administration, Southern California Association of Crovuuments regional planning, local transportation planning, and transit services! in Westem County and the Coachella Valley. In the Palo Verde Valley, funds support transit services and local street and road improvements. Funds are also provided to the County for local street and road improvements in unincorpoirated areas. Additionally, under SB 821, 2% of LTF funds are made available for bicycle and pedestrian projects. SFA funds are generated from the statewide sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuel and are allocated by the state to the Commission on the basis of population and as a percentage of transit fare revenue. The Commission has generally used these funds to support capital purchases and improvements as these funds have been subject to state budgetary actions. Measure A 21 returned to the Coachella Valley area. The Traffic Uniform Mitigation Fee schedule shall be established in order to generate at least the equivalent of Measure A funding toward the regional arterial system Local Streets and Roads Measure A provides revenues to 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 at a level equal to or greater than the base year amount (fiscal year 1987/811). LTF provides revenue for local street and road improvements in the Palo Verde Valley and unincorporated areas of the County. Specialized Transit Measure A provides revenues to improve transportation services for seniors, persons with disabilities and commuters. For seniors and persons with disabilities, it provides dial -a -ride cab service at night for emergency purposes, guarantees half-price bus fares, and assists centers with their transit programs. For commuters, it improves express bus service and expands ridesharing programs. In the Coachella Valley, revenues also are available for bus replacement and local bus service. Commuter Assistance The purpose of this program is to provide short term incentives to encourage single occupant vehicle drivers to use alternate modes of transportation including carpools, vanpools, bus pools, public bus, commuter rail, walking, and bicycling. Motorist Assistance The Motorist Assistance program has two elements. The Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) is a special team of tow trucks that travel on selected Riverside County freeways during peak commuter hours to assist drivers when their cars break down. The other element is the call box system, which installation and operation is made possible with revenue provided by the public. One dollar per year from every motor vehicle registration pays for the call boxes and their operation and maintenance. Call boxes are being provided by the Commission, which serves as the County's Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE). Bicycle and Pedestrian LTF provides revenues for the construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities and related right -of --way costs. Transit The Commission is the agency responsible for short range transportarion planning and programming and coordinating the operation of all public transportation service within the County. The Commission allocates and disburses TDA funds to the transit operators for operating and capital purposes. General Terms The following explanations of terms are presented to aid in understanding the narrative discussions and illustrations included in this budget document and the terminology generally used in governmental accounting, auditing, fmancial reporting, and !budgeting. Accountability The state of being obliged to explain one's actions, to justify what one does. Accountability requires a government to answer to its citizenry to justify the raising of public resources and the purposes for which they are used. Accounting System The methods and records established to identify, assemble, analyze, classify, record, and report a government's transactions and to maintain accountability for the related its and liabilities. Accrual Basis of Accounting The accounting of the financial effects of transactions, events, and interfimd activities when they occur, regardless of when cash is received or paid. Advance Refunding Bonds New bonds 'slued to refinance an outstanding bond issue before the date the outstanding bonds become due or callable to obtain better interest rates and/or bond conditions. Proceeds of the advance refunding bonds are deposited in escrow 213 with a fiduciary, invested in U.S. Treasury Bonds or other authorized securities, and used to redeem the underlying bonds at their maturity or call date and to pay interest on the bonds being refunded.. Agency Fund A fiduciary fund type used to report resources held by a government for others in a purely custodial capacity and cannot be used to support the government's own programs. The Commission's agency _fund is the Local Projects Agency Fund which accounts for the proceeds from a subordinate debt issue for various cities' local street and road projects. Audit A systematic collection of the sufficient, competent evidential matter needed to attest to the fairness of management's assertions in the fmancial statements or to evaluate whether management has efficiently and effectively carried out its responsibilities. The auditor obtains this evidential matter through insp.-akin, observation, inquiries, and confirmations with third parties. Basis of Accounting purposes. For A term used to refer to when the effects of transactions or events are recognized for financial reporting example, the timing of recognition can be when the transaction or event occurs (accrual basis) or when cash is received or paid (cash basis). Bond A written pmmise to pay a specified sum of money (face or principal amount) at a specified date or dates in the future (maturity date), together with periodic interest at a specified rate. Bonds are primarily used to finance capital projects. Budget A plan of financial activity for a specified period of time indicating all planned revenues and expenditures for the budget period Annual budgets are usually required by law and are essential to sound financial management. The Commission prepares an annual budget which is applicable to a single fiscal year. Budgetary Control The control or management of a government in accordance with an approved budget to keep expenditures within the limitations of available appropriations and available revenues. Budget Document The instrument used by the budget -making authority to present a comprehensive financial program to the appropriating governing body. Capital Outlay Expenditures resulting in the acquisition of or addition to the government's capital assets or assets to be transferred to Caltrans, such as highway projects. Capital Projects Fund A governmental fund type created to account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or construction of major capital projects. The Connnission has two capital projects funds for Measure A Western County and Measure A Coachella Valley to account for bond proceeds from sales tax revenue bonds and related highway and commuter rail projects. Commercial Paper An unsecured short-term promissory note issued primarily by corporations with maturities ranging from two to 270 days. The credit risk of almost all commercial paper is rated by a rating service. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report A fmancial report that encompasses all funds of the government. In the financial section of the CAFR are the basic financial statements and required supplementary information as well as combining and individual fund financial statements as necessary. The CAFR also contains introductory information and statistical data. Current Financial Resources Measurement Focus A measurement focus that reports on the near -term or current inflows, outflows, and balances of spendable financial resources. This focus is unique to accounting and financial reporting for state and local governments and is used for reporting the fmancial position and results of operations of governmental funds. 214 • • Debt An obligation resulting from the borrowing of [Honey or from the purchase of goods and services. Debts of governments include bonds, time warrants, and notes. Debt Coverage Ratio . The ratio of pledged revenues to related debt service for a given year. Debt Limit The maximum amount of outstanding gross or net debt legally permitted. Debt Proceeds The difference between the face amount of debt and the issuance discount or the sum of the face amount and the issuance premium. Debt proceeds differ from cash receipts to the extent issuance costs, such as underwriters' fees, are withheld by the underwriter. Debt Service Fund A governmental fund type created to account for the accumulation of resources for and payment of general long-term debt principal and 'interest. The Commission has one debt service fund for its sales tax revenue bonds. Expenditures Represents decreases in net financial resources on the transfer of property nr services for the purpose of acquiring an asset, service or settling a loss. Fiduciary Funds Funds used to report assets held in a trustee or agency capacity for others and cannot therefore be used to support the government's own programs. Financial Advisor In the context of the issuance of debt, a consultant who advises the issuer on any of a variety of matters related to the issuance. The financial advisor sometimes also is referred to as the fiscal consultant. Financial Audit An audit made to provide independent assurance whether the fmancial statements of a government are presented fairly in conformity with GAAP. Financial Resources Resources that are or will become available for spending and include cash, resources ordinarily expected to be converted to cash such as receivables, inventory, and prepaid assets. Fiscal Year For the Commission, the 12-month period that begins July 1 and ends with June 30 of the designated fiscal or operating year for accounting and budgeting purposes. Fund A fiscal and accounting entity with a self -balancing set of accounts in which cash and other financial resources, all related liabilities, and residual equities or balances,and changes therein, are recorded and segregated to cant' on specific activities or attain certain objectives in accordance with special regulations, tesnictions, or limitations. Fund Balance The excess of a governmental fund's assets over its liabilities. Fund Type Any one of eleven classifications into which all funds are categorized in governmental accounting. Govemmental fund types include general, special revenue, debt service, capital projects, and permanent funds. Pi .prietary fund types include enterprise and internal service funds. Fiduciary fund types include pension trust, investment trust, and private - purpose trust; funds and agency funds. GASB 34 Statement No. 34 issued by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board that was implemented by the Commission in FY 2001/02. GASB 34 established oew financial reporting standards for state and local governments. Under the new financial reporting model, governmental financial statements include basic financial statements that present both 215 government -wide and fund financial statements and required supplementary information, including Management's Discussion and Analysis. GASB 44 Statement No. 44, Economic Condition Reporting: The Statistical Section, issued by the governmental Accounting Standards Board will be completed by the Commission in FY 2005/06. GASB 44 improves the statistical section of the CAFR. GASB 45 Statement No. 45, Accounting for Other Postemployment Benefits (OPEB), issued by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board will be required to be implemented by the Conmrission by FY 2007/08. GASB 45 requires recognition of post -retirement health care costs on an accrual basis over a period approximating the employees' years of service and to provide information about actuarial accrued liabilities associated with these benefits and whether and to what extent progress is being made in funding the plan. General Fund The governmental fund type used to account for all financial resources, except those required to be accounted for in another fund. General Ledger A record containing the accounts needed to reflect the financial position and the results of operations of a government. In double -entry bookkeeping, debit balances equal the credit balances in the general ledger. General Long -tern Debt Long-term debt with a maturity of more than one year after the date of issuance which is expected to be repaid from governmental fund resources. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) Minimum standards and guidelines for financial accounting and reporting. GAAP encompass the conventions, rules, and procedures that serve as the norm for the fair presentation of financial statements. The GASB is the primary authoritative accounting and financial reporting standard -setting body on the application of GAAP to state and local governments. Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS) Rules and procedures established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) for the conduct of a financial audit. There are ten basic GAAS, classed into three broad categories: general standards, standards of field work, and standards of reporting. The Auditing Standards Board of the AICPA publishes Statements on Auditing Standards (SAS) and related interpretations to comment and expand upon these basic standards. Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS) Standards established by the General Accounting Office (GAO) in its publication, Government Auditing Standards, for the conduct and reporting of both financial and performance audits in the public sector. GAGAS set forth general standards applicable to both types of audits and separate standards of field work and reporting for financial and performance audits. The GAGAS standards of field work and reporting for financial audits incorporate and build upon GAAS. Governmental Funds Funds generally used to account for tax -supported activities. The Commission's governmental funds me comprised of general, special revenue, debt service, and capital projects funds. Grant A contribution by a government or other organization to support a particular function or program Independent Auditor An auditor meeting the independence criteria set forth in GAAS and GAGAS. Indirect Cost Allocation Plan A cost allocation plan developed to identify and document the cost incurred to administer state and federal programs and is used to recover such indirect costs from program grants or reimbursement agreements. Internal Auditing • 216 An independent appraisal of the diverse operations and controls within a government entity to determine whether acceptable po icies and procedures are followed, established standards are met, resources are used efficiently and economically, and the organization's objectives are being achieved. The term covets all forms of appraisal of activities undertaken by auditors working for and within an organization. internal Control Policies and procedures established to provide reasonable assurance that specific govemment objectives will be achieved. Joint Venture A legal entity'or other organization resulting from a contractual agreement and that is owned, operated, or governed by two or more participants as a separate and specific activity for the benefit of the public or service recipients and in which the government retains an ongoing financial interest or ongoing financial responsibility. The Commission is a member agency of Metrolink. Legal Level of Budgetary Control The level at which a government's management may not reallocate resources without special approval from the legislative body. Loans Receivable An asset account reflecting amounts loaned to individuals or organizations external to the Commission, including notes taken as security for such loans. Measurement Focus The objective of a measurement, that is, what is being expressed in reporting a government's financial performance and position. A particular measurement focus considers not only which resources are measured (financial or economic), but also when the effects of transactions or events involving those resources are recognized (basis of accounting). The measurement focus of the Commission's government -wide and fiduciary fund financial statements is economic resources, whereas the measurement focus of governmental fund financial statements is current financial resources. Modified Accrual Basis The accrual basis of accounting adapted to the governmental funds' measurement focus according to which revenues and other financial resource increments (e.g., bond issue proceeds) are recognized when they become susceptible to accrual, that is when they become both "measurable" and "available to fmance expenditures of the current period," Expenditures are recognized when the fund liability is incurred except for unmatured interest on general long-term debt and certain similar accrued obligations when due. The Commission's governmental funds are accounted for using the modified accrual basis of accounting. Other Financing Sources Amounts classified separately from revenues to avoid distorting revenue trends that represent an increase in current financial resources. Other financing sources generally include general long-term debt proceeds, amounts equal to the present value [of minimum lease payments arising from capital leases, proceeds from the sale of general fixed assets, and transfers in. Other Financing Uses Amounts classified separately from expenditures to avoid distorting expenditure trends and represent a decrease in current financial resources_ Other financing uses generally include transfers out and the amount of refunding bond procceds deposited with the escrow agent. Overhead indirect costs that cannot be specifically as mated with a given service, program, or department and thus, cannot be clearly associated with a particular functional category. Principal In the a nLext of bonds other than deep -discount debt, the face value or par value of a bond or issue of bonds payable on stated dates of maturity. Program Group activities, operations, or organizational units directed to attaining specific purposes or objectives. Program Budget 217 A budget wherein expenditures are based primarily on the functions or activities of a government rather than to specific items of cost or to specific departments. Purchase Order A document authorizing the delivery of specified merchandise or the rendering of certain services and the making of a charge for them. Refunding Bonds Bonds issued to retire bonds aheady outstanding. The proceeds of refunding bonds may be used to repay the previously issued debt (current refunding) or to be placed with an escrow agent and invested until used to pay principal and interest on old debt at a future date (advance refunding). Reimbursement Grant A grant for which a potential recipient must first incur qualifying expenditures to be eligible. Reserved Fund Balance Those portions of fund balance which are not appropriable for expenditure or that are legally segregated for a specific future use. Special Revenue Fund A governmental fund type used to account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources (other than major capital projects) that are legally restricted to expenditure for specified purposes. The Commission maintains special revenue funds for Measure A Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde; Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee; Freeway Service Patrol; Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies; State Transit Assistance; and Local Transportation Fund. Transfers All interfund transfers representing flows of BCSPtS between funds of the government without equivalent flows of assets in return and without a requirement for repayments. Trust Fund A fiduciary fund type used to report pension, investment, or private -purpose trust arrangements, under which principal and income benefit individuals, private organizations, or other governments. Trustee A fiduciary holding property on behalf of another. • 218 60/800Z aeaA leDs!d la6png pasodoid Budget Summary -Beginning Fund Balance Revenues Commercial Paper Proceeds Transfers In Total Estimated Sources 337,409,200 130, 000,000 69,125,100 Expenditures 631,465,900 Transfers Out 69,125,100 Total Estimated Uses $ 475,188,900 536, 534,300 700, 591,000 Uses Over Sources (164,056,700) (Offset by beginning fund balance) Ending Fund Balance $ 311,132,200 00£ `7£9 `9£9 $ 00 1. `SZ 1. `69 000'000'0£ 6 009 `LZL `0 009 `89L ` l 000 `96V` 6 OOZ`0£ti` l 000`08fr 000 `OEL `L 000 `£ o `£ 000 `096 `0 6 OOE'SZV6 000 `81,8 `9V 009Z66`ZZ 000'6L9'S8 000'000'S£ 6 plod. 006' l LO `Ott $ 00 6 `17L0 `0L $ 00£'88E'9Z $ 00 1, `SZ 1. `69 000 `000 `0£ 009`L3L'O l OOZ`0E17` l 000 `08V 000`0£L'L 000 `6L9 `98 $ 000 `000 `9E l aatgoileoo-i 009 `89L ` 6 000`S6ti` 6 000'8 6 8 `£17 009Z66`ZZ elelS 000`El•0'£ 000'096'01. 00£'SZV6 000 `000 `E leaped le�ol ul saaJ.sueal speaooki �qaa Jegio pue }uewlsanul d Sd seed Ana O`dAO seed asueon dWfll aau4O leaapad VIA OVINO sue4ea `d1S dl� y amseen saoanoS aaynp sanuanam 000'000'0171 000'000'0Z L 000'000'001 (suommi ul) 000'000'09 000'000'09 000'000'Oti 000'000'0Z r r r r r .. — _ p h N "[?i i .wx.'yiy[ Y' e f L.4 ew Y, ✓ ......r r P� Sii. 4 �l F"e in�+%ry39�mnewLeu'St v.2 S 'kWW ?F Y .t 8 lv L,� NdY :e}v'J b+iYM• M.+ aY y'�}iG Y4'R. .tlSa'MF.' ii)}'i"' rviSi�'Iv�d�4�34R�I� 3a"'.' ..ecmYlll Ap� y } +»6�i m xr ,f„ �. 5 . .^ Cq •v V �,: R i „c,r � 3. Y I OI MS i.. .0 .:' '.5 % ^ 3 .,., f •,r} a4 i ri J i �> 14. ^!. v... l .- f _ � ..h h. i $ �•� y�J -.:: LL tr t �.yn � TS F9 •X ii `i 1 5C��.. r.J0 , `IF- O vvi V 1.77e, ,j.K.. .. 4 .... ii sr i r kdiw� Y ��_... U3+f' "�.T C .:.H • 3 a �- Y4Sx Fn�O �Faaz�w�•v�:�'"^1`�}sm�I m��r.YfJr. �� _O fi dal M;`µ s01 .4 f .0 i 5 k h I F u. . k � .I A M A 7 t .1". Y Y t J y } -}.'Y CY'k � ... L F t I J �� j'`f A. ��% �� j4i'�n 31 _. 1 W y 1 •.i`ai i. 34t1 � I y a.mseaW spaaoo.y d� �1 u� saalsueal elelS leaapad sa3anos a041.0 vi? sanuaAau 006` 99t7` 1,E9 $ 00VEL9`917 006` 69Z` 9Et7 009`1768`Ztl, 000`8Z9`5 $ sairgpuedx3 60/8-0 Ad %£Z Swe160.1d ieuo46ab %69 kamea pue wa udolanap pero.d !elide° %L 0/06 aowaS lQaa saolnIaS wa ue6eueW e1ol a0inaas ea tianilaa pue luawdoIanas pofoad IeHdea swei6oad leuope seovues weWe6euew sawn}ipuadx3 lo Anwiuns weaBoad Ai igelun000e leuogeziueBao mg Jo lied se aeeA Jed sloafoad lipne leuaalui amp. to luawdolanea sMUM engels!Bal alels ui empe uiewab . ABolouyoal alepdn pue sseooad luaweBeuew spaooaa uaylBua ns of spolla anuguo3 80/LOOZ AA wolf % paseaioap Melt saanppuedx3 %6l suogeopnwwoo pue sne�1H wg4elsi691 %b£ aoueui3 %S waweBeuen aulnoex3 seowas luaLue6euew aoueuu suopeoiumwoo pue siiew anReisi6ai uoReJls!Lijwpy wawa6eueW angnoax3 °i°av uogei;siwwpy 000`8ZY9 00 C9Z6' 6 000`290' 6 00t` LS£`Z 002'99Z $ salniipuadx3 60/20 Ad saoinaas weweBeuew Regional Programs Regional Issues Planning and Programming Rail Right of Way Management Specialized Transit Transit Commuter Assistance Motorist Assistance Total Regional Programs Regional Issues 4% Motorist Assistance 2% Commuter Assistance 5% Transit 72% Planning and Programming 4% Rail 6% FY 08/09 Expenditures $ 5,915,600 6,168,000 9,122,100 1,212,000 7,955,400 102,680,900 6,487,500 3,353,100 $ 142,894,600 Right of Way Management 1% Specialized Transit 6% It r'y„fJI 6r'' ..nmcs a 4su �itlf-gr! 1 •'i r� ighlights: • Increase of 6.6% from FY 2007/08 • Continue active participation in Goods Movement Action Plan • Advance additional IEOC and 91 Line train service by 2010 • Support innovative programs to provide transit assistance to rural areas • Continue involvement in the 511 and the dissemination of Advanced Traveler Information Services 006` 69Z`9E17 $ AJani lea lu ewd olenea pa road !elide° lelol 000009 000` Z69`Z9 OOE` 1.8L`8 000` 069`Ct 00C` 980`09 009 1,Z6`99Z OOE` C9C`9 008` OZO`Z OOE` LZ9`Z 001` 869`Z $ Sal np uedx3 60/80Ad 41' Pu it .c�� ..�� � }1 I �1 Mgr `1.11�'' AellnO lelideO Al uno0 we}se /A - siepap y l euoi beH Aellen elleyoeo0 - slepapy leuoi 6e i Neil speo�l pue leooi sAemg6iH lama° :suo!imadO pue spefoid siso0 pod dns siso0 leu oissajoad siijaua8 pue sepeles uaeafioid rem:leo r.�:. Capital Program (continued) Capital Outlay 0% Support Costs 0% Professional Costs 1% Salaries and Benefits 1% Regional Arterials - Coachella Valley 12% 1 4 31 G ,y n�`�.Y1ilit 1.11Rn jail l �^ t{ 11 FZ f Local Streets and Roads 14% Regional Arterials - Western County 2% spefoJd pool Joj 6umunj y6noJyo ssed pue Jaded lepiewwoo br einseeIN uo!leBmw puei einpn.gs BuPPed uogels euwoo 41J0N A411!3eA lepowainiAl spied eun AelleA spied spe fold Aellen ellaypeo3 Aenoped Auno3 p!lN swemenoJdual A!i!g01N Joppio0 SI,Z-1 seuel 10H pue Joppio0 S 1-1 (Jopeuuoo `seuel pex!w pue lOH) sluewenoJdual Jop!-1103 1,6-2iS Q LPL 04 swepwseue, AOH 1.6-21S afiuetoJalul enem el 1.6-1:IS Q S I,Z-I 01 uogounr 4Se3 09-NS � spercud Neu pue lepepv leuo!6at1 Aenn AH weogiAs • s;y611y6iH weiBoad !elide° ovA0 stueuaasangsKI AGIPA elleVe00 ui slepapb leuo!Batl . Kellen alum /pled a/p1 000`£Z6$ Kellen elimpeo3.101 uOULLI tell$ Awnoo uaatsem a01 uorll!W L'LE$ speoll pue pails leaoi penuguoo) spAluB!H weafioad micle3 pro � poddns ^ra � ieuoissa}orid %os suopeiadp pue sioafad 701. IauuosJad %L seouenssi }o slsop pue aowas map goo 006`99ti'l.£9 $ 000`069 OOti`£L9'9ti 001`6tiZ999 009'£99`ti 00£'ti50`1 000'£ti1`9 $ sempuedx3 60/90 AJ saanpuedx3 le�ol Ae11n0 le}ide0 seouenssl jo s;so0 pue eovues �qaa su °paled° pue sloef as d 1.1 oddnS leuolssajoad leuuosaad uogounA nq unnopeaa8 sawn}ipuadx3 sanuanaa xel sales y aanseaw to 0/017 paaaxe 4ou slsoa uoge4siuRape ie}o; ao' A3nod uoissiu woo . sanuanaa xel sales y aanseaw jo % , smjeueq pue sepeies angealsiuivape swn y aanseaw • %09'£ • %00'E %087 %00'Z %09'3 % slsoo aNee. que.upy p % slyaueg pue saueres 63 %00' 6 %0B'0 %00'0 lenlad IenloV peperord la6png 60/90 Adl 90/L0 AA L0/90 AAI90/90 Ad uogeils!up.upy d aanseaw leBpnq leuu. pdope pue Bupeeti oncind esolo • watunoop mew pue ;a6pnq azneuu • Aepol le6pnq pesodoid Joj. ;ndu! emeoem • sd els 1xaN AGENDA ITEM 8A • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 11, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Resolution No. 08-017, 'Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing the Commission's Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2008/09" STAFF RECOMMENDATION. This item is for the Commission to approve Resolution No. 08-017, "Resolution of the Riverside 'County Transportation Commission Establishing the Commission's Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2008/09". BACKGROUND INFORMATION; Section 79101 of the California Government Code implements Article XIIIB of the California Constitution by requiring each local jurisdiction to establish, by resolution, its appropriations limit for each fiscal year and to make documentation used to determine the appropriations limit available to the public 15 days prior to adoption of the resolution establishing the appropriations limit. Staff has performed the calculations necessary to determine the limit. The resolution and documents supporting the calculation are attached. The Commission chose to use the percentage change in the California per capita personal income and the populations change within Riverside County as the factors in determining the appropriations limit_ As required, the adoption of the Commission's Gann Appropriations Limit was posted in the local newspaper. Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 08-017 2) California per capita income — California Department of Finance 3) Population, Riverside County — California Department of Finance, Demographic Research Unit Agenda Item 8A 219 ATTACHMENT RESOLUTION NO. 08-017 "RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ESTABLISHING THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT" WHEREAS, Article XIIIB of the California Constitution places an annual limitation iupon appropriations from proceeds of taxes by each local government of the State of California; and WHEREAS, in 1988, pursuant to Article XIIIB, section 4 of the California Constitution, the Riverside County Transportation Commission established its appropriations limit at $75 million for fiscal year 1988/89 under Ordinance No. 88-1; and WHEREAS, Section 7910 of the California Government Code implements Article XIIIB of the California Constitution by requiring each local jurisdiction to establish, by resolution, its appropriations limit for each fiscal year and to make the documentation used in determining the appropriations limit available to the public fifteen days prior to adoption of the resolution establishing the appropriations limit; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Senate Constitutional Amendment No. 1 approved by the voters of the State effective June 6, 1990, beginning with fiscal year 1990/91 and for each fiscal year thereafter, the Commission's Board of Commissioners is required to select either the percentage change in California per capita personal income or the percentage change in the local assessment roll due to the addition of local non-residential construction, and either the population change within the Commission or the population change within Riverside County, as the two factors to be applied in calculating the appropriations limit for each fiscal year; and WHEREAS, this Board wishes to select, as factors in determining the Commission's appropriation limit for fiscal year 2008/09 the percentage change in, California per capita personal income and also the population change within Riverside County; and WHEREAS, this Commission has documented its calculations of the Commission's appropriations limit for fiscal year 2008/09 and said calculations have been made available to the public at least fifteen days prior to the adoption of this resolution. 220 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Riverside County Transportation Commission as follows: 1. For fiscal year 2008/09, the factors selected for calculating the appropriations limit are (a) the percentage change in California per capita personal income, and (b) the population change within the County of Riverside. 2. The appropriations limit applicable to this Agency pursuant to Article XII1B of the California Constitution for fiscal year 2008/09 are hereby established and determined to be $311,666,690. 3. A copy of the documentation used in the determination of the appropriations limit for fiscal year 2008/09 shall be affixed hereto and shall be available for public inspection. 4. Pursuant to Section 7910 of the California Government Code, any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the establishment of the appropriations limit as set forth herein must be commenced within forty-five days of the adoption of this resolution. ADOPTED this 11th day of June, 2008. Jeff Stone, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 221 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 2008-2009 APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT 2007-2008 Appropriations Limit $ 289,297,351 2008-2009 adjustment: Change in California per capita income Change in Population, Riverside County = 4.91 percent = 2.71 percent 4.91 + 100 = 1.049 100 2.71 + 100 = 1.027 100 1.049 x 1.027 = 1.077323 $ 289,297,351 x 1.077323 = $ 31 1,666,690 2008-2009 Appropriations Limit $ 311,666,690 Source: California per capita income — California Department of Finance Population, Riverside County — Caiifornia Department of Finance Demographic Research Unit 222 PER CAPITA PERSONAL INCOME United California California %Change States %Change %of U.S. 1950 1,874 - 1,504 - 124.6% 1955 2,383 - 1,907 125.0% 1958 2,599 - 2,109 - 123.2% 1959 2,743 5.5% 2,209 4.7% .124.2% 1960 2,826 3.0% 2,269 2.7% 124.5% 1961 2,881 1.9% 2,327 2.6% 123.8% 1962 3,005 4.3% 2,440 4.9% 123.2% 1963 3,102 3.2% 2,527 3.6% 122.8% 1964 3,275 5.6% 2,672 5.7% 122.6% 1965 3,413 4.2°% 2,850 6.7°% 119.8% 1966 3,656 7.1°% 3,062 7.4% 119.4% 1967 3,874 6.0°% 3,254 6.3% 119.1% 1968 4,201 8A% 3,538 8.7% 118.7% 1969 4,529 7.8% 3,836 8.4% 118.1% 1970 4,810 6.2°% 4,085 6.5% 117.7% 1971 5,034 4.7% 4,342 6.3% 115.9% 1972 5,454 8.3°% 4,717 8.6% 115.6% 1973 5,944 9.0°% 5,231 10.9°%. 113.6°% 1974 6,552 10.2°% 5,707 9.1°% 114.8% 1975 7,129 8.8°% 6,172 8.1°% 115.5% 1976 7,825 9.8°% 6,754 9.4% 115.9% 1977 8,570 9.5°% 7,405 9.6°% 115.7% 1978 9,580 11.8°% 8,245 11.3°% 116.2°% 1979 10,753 12.2°% 9,146 10.9% 117.6% 1980 11,951 11.1°% 10,114 10.6°% 118.2°% 1981 13,175 10.2°% 11,246 11.2°% 117.2°% 1982 13,763 4.5°% 11,935 6.1°% 115.3% 1983 14,556 5.8°% 12,618 5.7°% 115.4% 1984 15,994 9.9°% 13,891 10.1% 115.1% 1985 16,956 6.0°% 14,758 6.2°% 114.9% 1986 17,668 4.2% 15,442 4.6°% 114A% 1987 18,549 5.0°% 16,240 5.2% 114.2% 1988 19,599 5.7°% 17,331 6.7% 113.1% 1989 a/ 20,585 5.0°% 18,520 6.9°% 111.2°% 1990 21,638 5.1% 19,477 5.2% 111.1°% 1991 21,750 0.5°% 19,892 2.1% 109.3°% 1992 22,492 3.4°% 20,854 4.8°% 107.9% 1993 22,635 0.6°% 21,346 2.4°% 106.0°% 1994 b/ 23,203 2.5% 22,172 3.9°% 104.7°% 1995 24,161 4.1°% 23,076 4.1°% 104.7°% 1996 25,312 4.8°% 24,175 4.8% 104.7% 1497 26,490 4.7°% 25,334 4.8°% 104.6% 1998 28,374 7.1% 26,883 6.1% 105.5% 1999 29,828 5.1°% 27,939 3.9% 106.8°% 2000 r/ 32,462 8.8°% 29,845 6.8% 108.8°% 2001 a 32,883 1.3% 30,574 2.4°% 107.6°% 2002 r/ 32,826 -0.2°% 30,821 0.8% 106.5% 2003 r/ 33,554 2.2°% 31,504 2.2°% 106.5% 2004 r/ 35,440 5.6°% 33,123 5.1% 107.0% 2005 a 37,462 5.7% 34,757 4.9°% 107.8% 2006 r/ 39,626 5.8% 36,714 5.6°% 107.9°% 2007 P/ 41,571 4.9°% 38,611 5.2% 107.7% al Reflects Loma Prieta earthquake. b/ Reflects Northridge earthquake. Note: Omits income for government employees overseas. Source: U.S. department of Commerce, Weal ot Economic Analysis, lingll ww.beadoc.gov/ r/ P/ Revised estimates for 2004-2006 and Preliminary estimate for 2007 were released March 26, 2008. T Updated: March 26, 2008 Filename: bbpercap 223 ATTACHMENT 2 Fiscal Year 2008-2009 ATTACHMENT 3 Enclosure II Annual Percent Change in Population Minus Exclusions January 1, 2007 to January 1, 2008 and Total Population, January 1, 2008 Total County Percent Chanae - Population Minus Exclusions - Population City 2007.2008 1-1-07 1-1-08 1-1-2008 Riverside Banning 0.19 28293 28,348 28,348 Beaumont 11.34 28271 31,477 31,477 Blythe 1.32 13,661 13,842. 21,695 Calimesa 1.56 7,420 7,536 7,536 Canyon Lake 0.66 - 10,979 11,051 11,051 Cathedral City 0.60 52,100 52,415 52,465 Coachella 5.20 38,515 40,517 40,517 Corona - 0.68 146,147 147,428 147,428 Desert Hot Springs - 4.66 24,907 - 26,068 26,068 Hemet 1.21 73299 74,185 74,185 Indian Wells 1.62 4,945 5025 5,025 Indio 5.57 77208 81,512 81,512 Lake Elsinore - 4.49 47,669 49,807 49,807 La Quinta - 4.46 41,125 42,958 42,958 Moreno Valley 1.80 180,603 183,860 183,860 Munieta 2.92 97,329 100,173 100,173 Norco 0.10 22,628 22,651 27,255 Palm Desert 2.25 49,789 50,907 50,907 Palm Springs 0.76 46,893 47,251 47,251 Perris 5.73 50,701 53,605 53,605 Rancho Mirage 0.59 16,957 17,057 17,057 Riverside 1.79 291,611 296,842 296,1342 San Jacinto 3.79 34,371 35,672 35,672 Temecula 3.11 98,009 101,057 101,057 Unincorporated - 3.15 537,520 554,455 554,571 County Total 2.71 -2,020,950 2,075,699 2,0.58,322 (6) Exclusions include residents on federal military instarations and group quarters' residents in state menu institutions, and stale and federal correctional institutions. Page 3 224 AGEND A ITEM 8B • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 11, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Financial Statements STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the third quarter ended March 31, 2008. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: During the last nine months of the fiscal year, staff has monitored the revenues and expenditures of the Commission. The attached financial statements present the revenues and expenditures for the last nine months of the fiscal year. Period closing accrual adjustments are not included for revenues earned but not billed and expenditures incurred for goods and services received but not yet invoiced, as such adjustments are normally made during the year end closing activities. The operating statement shows the sales tax revenues for the third quarter at 59% 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 it 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 revenues related to the collections through January 2008. On a cash basis, the Measure A and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) sales tax revenues are 6.8% and 4.2% lower, respective than the same period last fiscal year. Receipts continue to remain flat through March 2008, due to effects of the softening in the housing market and decline in auto sales. On February 13, 2008, the Commission approved the FY 2007/08 mid -year revenue projections. The downward trend of sales tax revenues prompted staff to submit budget adjustments reflecting a $30.6 million and $10.84 million decrease in FY 2007/08 Measure A and LTF revenues, respectively. These adjustments to budgeted revenues are included in the attached March 31, 2008 financial statements. Agenda Item 8B 225 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 Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) revenues remitted to the Commission by Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) reflect receipts through February 2008. TUMF revenues have declined 54.1 % for the nine months ended March 31, 2008. The housing crisis has had a significant impact on . the Inland Empire's local economy. As a result of the decreasing revenue trend, the Commission approved on February 13, 2008, a budget adjustment reflecting a $17.25 million decrease in TUMF revenues for FY 2007/08. This budget adjustment is included in the attached March 31, 2008 financial statements. The expenditure categories are in line overall with the expectations of the budget. Administrative salaries and benefits are slightly over 75% for the ,nine -month period due to temporary, nonrecurring staffing charges. Staff expects this category to be in line at the end of the fourth quarter. After exclusion of non -Measure A related administrative salaries and benefits and consideration of current Measure A receipt trends, Measure A administrative salaries and benefits are projected to not exceed the 1 % limitation on administrative salaries and benefits. Listed below are the significant capital projects and the status. The budget assumptions are based on project activities starting at the beginning of the fiscal year. Any deviations will have an impact to the budget: Highway Engineering/Construction/Right-of-Way/Land State Route 60 to Interstate 215 East Junction — Engineering efforts were increased in conjunction with the change in project scope. The amendment to the consultant's contract was approved by the Commission on September 14, 2007, and a pre -award audit for this amendment was completed in March 2008. SR-74 Curve Realignment — A decision to proceed with project development is pending, considering the city of Hemet's application for project funding through the 2009 Measure A regional arterial program. 1-215 Bi-County Project — San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) is the lead agency and the Commission is responsible for 25% of the consultant's fee. Preliminary Engineering had been delayed until SANBAG's recent decision on traffic and scoping. A preliminary assessment of the required scope of work has been identified, and project delivery team meetings have reconvened since February 2008. Agenda Item 8B 226 SR-91 Van Buren Interchange — The city of Riverside is the lead agency and has experienced delays related to environmental issues. The environmental process is now complete and right of way acquisition has commenced. Construction is not scheduled to start until FY 2008/09. SR-91 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes between Adams Street and 7'h Street — Approval of the environmental document was received in August 2007, and as the lead agency; Caltrans commenced the final design phase. Right-of-way acquisition was initiated following approval of the environmental document. Budget and definition of right of way requirements are being completed as part of the final design. The Commission is providing support with the right-of-way acquisition activities. SR-74 from G Street to 1-215 — Following Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) approval of the modified access report, the Commission issued a notice to proceed to initiate the "at risk design of the project in March 2008. SR-91 High Occupancy Toll (HOT) and Mixed Flow Lanes — Project startup took longer to ramp up than anticipated. SR-91/SR-71 Connectors — Project was initiated following the completion of the pre -award audit in February 2008. 1-215 from Nuevo Road to Box Springs Road — Project activities have not commenced. 1-215 from Murrieta Hot Springs to Scott Road and Scott Road to Nuevo Road — This project is proceeding on schedule; however, consultant invoices have not been received for all services performed. 1-15 HOT Lanes from SR-91 to SR-74 — Project was initiated with the completion of the pre -award audit, and a notice to proceed was issued in April 2008. SR-91 Green River Interchange — Project started in April 2007, and billing from Caltrans is lagging. Invoices through the end of February were recently received and will be reflected in next quarter's report. SR-91 La Sierra Interchange — Work on the interchange did not start until October 2007. An invoice from the city of Riverside for $5.2 million was received in May and will be reflected in the next quarter's report. SR-60 HOV Valley Way to 1-15 Interchange — Project has been completed. Agenda Item 8B 227 Mid -County Parkway and SR-79 Realignment Projects - A slow down in land development has caused a reduction in the right of way protection activities. Rail. Engineering/Construction/Right-of-Way/Land Perris Valley Line - Federal Transit Administration approval to enter preliminary engineering was received in December 2007. A notice to proceed was issued to STV, Inc. to start the preliminary engineering in December 2007. Riverside Downtown Station Eastside Parking Lot - Final invoice and retention was released for payment in April for the Eastside parking lot project. The project is complete and the Commission has filed a certificate of completion with the Riverside County Recorder's office. Perris Multimodal Facility - Surveys have been performed to determine the need and location of temporary construction easements. Final design is complete and now awaiting funding appropriation by the California Transportation Commission in July 2008. Construction is anticipated to start in October 2008. North Main Corona Parking Structure - Construction started in January 2008. This was later than expected as the Commission was awaiting the appropriation of Congestion Management Air Quality (CMAQ) funding. Local streets and roads expenditures reflect allocation payments made for the revenues received through January as noted above. The downward trend in Measure A revenues directly affects these expenditures. Intergovernmental distributions are expended as one-time LTF payments made based on claims submitted by Coachella Valley Association of Governments and WRCOG. Unused funds in this category are related to the WRCOG claim, which was paid in the fourth quarter, and planning and programming departmental expenditures. Capital outlay expenditures are under budget due to unexpended authority for potential office improvements, if any, and station improvements. Staff expects some of these improvements to take place in the fourth quarter of FY 2007/08. Debt service interest expenditures are made in December and June, while principal payments are made in June. Staff will continue to monitor the revenues and expenditures and notify the Commission of any unusual events. Attachment: Quarterly Financial Statements - March 2008 Agenda Item 88 228 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION QUARTERLY BUDGET VS ACTUAL 3RD QUARTER FOR NINE MONTHS ENDED 03/31/2008 DESCRIPTION Revenues Sales tax Federal, state and loca government reimbursements Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Other revenues Interest Total revenues Expenditures Administration Salaries and benefits General legal services Professional services - Office lease and utilities General administrative expenditures Total administration Programs/projects - Salaries and benefits General legal services Professional services General projects Engineering Construction Right of way/Land - Local streets and roads Regionat.arterial • Commuter assistance LTF and STA distributions Motorist assistance Planning and programming services Right of way management Rail operations and maintenance Specialized transit 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 fundbalances Fund balance July 1, 2007 Fund balance March 31, 2008 a...t.N FY 2007/08 BUDGET 224,388,600 49,450,700 10,000,000 12,722,000 17,096,700 313,658.000 1,787,401 103,001 1,776,493 390,000 1,256,405 5,313,300 5,802,000 1,474,900 5,220,200 15,977,000 66,963,505 99,370,000 166,751,100 50,087,500 12,511,600 3,298,300 99,259,892 4,974,000 4,603,400 549,500 8,511,100 6,203,200 3rd QUARTER ACTUAL REMAINING BALANCE 133,002,572 $ (91,386,027) 4,495,384 (44,955,316) 9,079,135 (920,865) 7,840,758 (4,881,242) 13,853,795 (3,242,905) 168,271,644 (145,386,356) 1,418,053 46,393 863,645 291,056 768,287 3,387,434 2,854,912 694,317 932,050 1,924,524 10,084,168 18,121,901 51,031,521 31,726,946 9,290,433 1,920,777 51,852,800 3,008,812 446,704 44,362 5,978,186 3,783,665 369,348 56,608 912,848 98,944 488,118 1,925,868 2,947,088 780,583 4,288,150 14,052,476 56,879,337 81,248,099 115,719,579 18,360,554 3,221,167 1,377,523 47,407,092 1,965,188 4,156,696 505,138 2,532,914 2,419,535 551,557,197 1,351,600 707,000 142,017,100 9,933,800 280,000 193,696,078 357,861,117 350,280 1,001,320 177,650 529,350 4,323,169 152,230,900 711,159,997 (397,501,997) 77,940,600 77,940,600 87,000,000 142,017,100 5,610,631 280,000 4,323,169 147,907,731 PERCENT UTILIZATION 59% 9% 91% 62% 81% 54% 79% 45% 49% 75% 61% 64% 49% 47% 18% 12% 15% 18% 31% 63% 74% 58% 52% 60% 10% 8% 70% 61% 35% 26% 25% 0% 44% 0% 0% 3% 201,934,611 509,225,386 (33,662,966) 363,839,031 26,804,382 26,804,382 30,000,000 (51,136,218) 51,136,218 (57,000,000) 87,000,000 (310,501,997) 466,881,300 30,000,000 - (57,000,000) (3,662,966) 306,839,031 550,160,613 83,279,313 $ 156,379,303 $ 546,497,647 229 $- 390,118,344 28% -8% 34% 34% 34% 0% 34% 1%- 118% 349% 0£Z /P9'L64'946 S 29£'69E'96 S Ll l'S6L'fit $ 9964LL $ 6L66448Z1 S LE8'48L'LZ 9 1.9L'8Z8'P2 9 OEZ'LE9'ZL S 088'09 $ 890'L96'66L $ E46'9L9'V 9 LUIZ!.L LL $ E l9'09L'C66 660'663'LE 966'2929Z ,20Z'Zll ZL L'9C£'66l OLZ'8ES'LZ ZL L'L9L'99 L£Z'E9V'SL _ 06E 09 ES8'9S6'E6L eee'SO6'e seo'see'6 (996'Z99'E) 90C'4L 1.'6Z 665'266'1 99L't ICCV9L6'0E) 2Z9'94Z'9 (L9E'9E6'8) 000'ZSO'E) 996'E see'900'e Cese'oet t) esL'aet'L 009'000'GE 640'ZOS'SZ 000'COO OE (see'00f1. C60'se - (62Veze'el SOLO�— 9L1'99 000 L62 000'090'0E - Z8E'40B'9Z 61Z'6tl .396'909'9Z BZE'2 L9'SZ MOuto,.,..«.,. neb,,,v.,,,eM. 900Z'LE uaeLN eaueleq pund LOOZ' 1 Ala f melee pund saaueleq pun' Le e6uegn lary sagyseanos 6upueue poi LueBe maosa o! IuauAed 000'000'0E - - - - - - spaeaad puce - - 922'00E - - 628'EZ6'S-666'626'6L 000'06b - lnola'eue4&Read0 - - 960'9E - - - 44B'8Ze 9Ll'SES 000'L6Z uVeleueq BulleLeo0 seen/saWnos 5upueu019W0 (996'Z99'EC) (14/'LBE) (LSSSCL'SZ) 902.2 (eu'9L9'oe) 1799'01.2'9 (L9£13E611) 81£'1 9'Z 986'£ 006'099'96 (eto'see'0 662'E28 aeLnepuedve(Awl) JOAO camera! eseu3 L L9'496'Lag 090'40E1L Z64'59463 99£'ZLZ'EP 9Z9899 909'00ZL9 Set ZC9'LL 99L L99 68089E Z4 659L9ZE 9Z£'CO8 LI eanllpuadealelal' 69 L VE.9 OMPOWL 901'6 LS'Z 69 L'MO 090'009'1. 501'6 LS'Z aapves 196P legal Bcuenea1101109 xel elegy 951u1141Y gee/Elul'. NtllovOd ;owes Igep 059'LLL - - - 28149L 899 . 099'll - Awe leede0 08Z'OSE - - - - 08Z'OOC uoraulelp leluewweno6&elul 9L0'969'EBL C46'Z99'9Z - 99C'ZLZ'E4 6E9'949 S09'40Z'Ls C96 ZC9'LL 992'29S L09'ZOO'Z4 EEO 660'C LSS'OZ9'8 spefold/sluel6ad Rol S99'C81'£ - 989 809 Z - 090'SLE'l - g!suee pezllelaeds 98L'026'9 - - - - - Bet '8L6g eoueue;ulew pue suollaeda llell Z9E'Y9 Z9E'99 lueweBeuew Aem/o 1461' POL'900 - - e0L'944 mime Bulwwa8ad pue lkoueld ZLe BOO'6 - - - - - ZL9'800'C - o0ueleWeele0010W 009'ZS9'1.9 - - S6Z'909 SOS 'bOZ'IS - - eualingylelp Vie Pug dll LLL'OZe'l - - zeeoz8'L - eeeeleleee serum* CEP 0636 999'LLC'Z - LbL'916'9 MEW leupl6ea 906'9Z2'LE - - - 1.99'6£0'L 69L299 999'61l'4Z pew pue 14604 W001 Lee ICO'LS EEZ'ZE4'CZ ese'see 9Z - - - 99S'809 6E9'SL purgem101461L1 LOB'lZL'et (pee'LGe t) L40'1.00'6 - 009.000'L 8£4'ZSb'6 uolpnnsuoo 89 L'080'CI 191 C661 892'9089 - - 622'ZLZ OZ9'8Z0'l - 898'Z 608°009 4Z5'4Z6'L - 59Let RS'00 6E99E91 • elee(olo!mu60 OSO'Z96 - 65L'91Z 094 OEE - - 9LL'SEZ 9l6'9 12B'ZL9 eea4ves leuemeelad GLE'469 9990L 99L'OEL ZCB'b LSZ'66C LL6'5 1.29 Z4l seoNes Reel !muss Z1.5 Pg9'Z - - - 6696ZZ - 99Z'2 Lt 996'9Z0'L 96£'£1 OL9'LLS'l eNeuaq pue eauelee sparad/swe601d 9£9'L9E'E 0Ve'ELE L9Z'99L 990'L6Z 2994E99 - L69'ELE C6E'9b 6PZ CSO'B L9' L 929'ZSl LL6'0ZWZ u011eoN1aPe1e101 LO L'LC lel'LEL eemllpueOxe enolzelulwpe pneue0 eso'et 966'91Z eelllllln pue easel poly° 09Z'SZ - 462'1,Z9 SBOIN9s leuoleS9lad 6ZZ'Z Sl6'C9 sevues leBel le.leus0• 4Z0'01 6Z6'49E'l ', seleue0 pue sepeleS uo11e1g91ulapie sempuedx3 y49'1.2t99L 6LE'9 L4'L L90'999'1. 914'3 909'9S9'ZL • 691'699'9 WL'99Z'Z4 L99'909402 Z91,LLS see'ZZB'Le Lee'LL6'L LZV/Litt senuenel ploy —_S6L'.ESB'EL—_._ 6LE'91.9'L CLC'999 99L'Z OL L'HO'S 9E9'069 LZS'29L'L £96'41.E C001, - 9ZE'49L'S 396'Z9L E1,919Z 'IMAM sevo 9'e. LZS'9ZZ'9 - L49'92 094'4£0'l 660'1 11,0'909 senuentu AL00 SE L'6L56 • - - LEZ'666'9 •- - 968'98 - (demi)Nd uo8eB18N1"011u/l uolleLlodeuell 49E'464'4 • 9L9'4Z9 - L9Z'921. - - - 60 L'Egrl. 9Ze'L9L'l 609'CL4 slu9weeingala Luewweno5 leool pue emit leLeped ZL9'Z60'CEL S - S - S S S - S EZ9'BOS'O4 S 19VEL L'OZ S 64l'L9S $ 90Z'L6Z409 $ - $ tag L5'L1 $ vel sele9 eenueneN 1V101 ' 301A899 WV3003d • N0110f12119N00 Imnl) 3010719I9SV 0NlId A3llVA 1311VA A1NI100 UV'S CNN N01141110S30 03NI91100 1e30 93dVd Alen° 93d NOl1VOI11W lISNYk1 NOILV180dSNVL1 Y1131-10V00 30213A N331SBM /4194 iVtl9N30 1V09231/1W00 N113163M - WNOdINO 31V1S 11/001 01tld NOIIVitIOdSNML V eaneve3W 800Z/LE/90 O30N3 SNINOW 314I01 Sod N31tlV110 ONE ONOd me vsinioV A1213121Vf10 NOISSIWW00 NOLLV1NOdeNV111 A1N000 301S213A121 • AGEND A ITEM 8C • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 11, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: 1 Recurring Contracts for Fiscal Year 2008/09 i STAFF RECOMMENDATION. This item is for the Commission to approve the recurring contracts for FY 2008/09. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Eleven years ago, the Commission evaluated all recurring contracts to determine when and if to hold a competitive process. As a result of that review, most contracts were rebid. In addition, the Commission required that recurring contracts, that is contracts that have not been rebid, be approved at the beginning of each fisca year.. All other contracts are bid on a periodic basis ranging from three to five years. The following is a listing of recurring contracts proposed for FY 2008/09: Schedule of Recurring Contracts Consultant Name Description of Services Budget FY 07/08 Budget FY 08/09 Dollar Change Percent Change Bechtel. Infrastructure Program Management Services $4,259,800 $5,434,400 $1,174,600 28% Best Best & Krieger General Legal Services 1,518,900 1,787,000 268,100 18% Comarco Wireless Technologies Call Box Maintenance 253,700 296,500 42,800 17% Inland Transportation Services (ITS) Commuter Assistance Program Management 1,700,000 1,834,000 134,000 8% Rahimian Management and Consulting Inc. Project Management Services 200,000 200,000 0 0% Ray Gorski Air Quality Technical Services 25,000 25,000 0 O% Agenda Item 8C 231 Consultant Name Description of Services Budget FY 07/08 Budget FY 08/09 Dollar Change Percent Change San Bernardino Associated Governments Call Answering Center Services for Riverside County Call Boxes 55,900 35,400 (20,500) (37%) Trapeze Ridematching Software 407,000 360,400 146,600) (11 %) VRPA Technologies Congestion Management 60,000 50,000 (10,000) (1796) The Bechtel Infrastructure (Bechtel) contract for FY 2008/09 reflects an increase of $1,174,600, which is attributable to the addition of the highway project and rail station rehabilitation project coordinators as well as additional part-time technical support in the areas of environmental review, tunneling, and implementation of new project management and contract management systems. The Commission's project management activities have significantly increased with the ramp up of project development for the 2009 Measure A and the wrap up of delivery of 1989 Measure A projects. The flexibility of obtaining additional support from Bechtel as needed for specific project needs is important and avoids the need to increase Commission staff. The Best, Best & Krieger (BBK) contract for FY 2008/09 reflects an increase of $268,100, which is primarily attributable to general legal services for capital project delivery and implementation activities related to highways and commuter rail under the 1989 Measure A and 2009 Measure A plans. General legal services related to management services and regional programs are comparable to or lower than amounts budgeted in FY 2007/08. These general legal services exclude reimbursable appraisal costs that may be procured by BBK for more complex right of way acquisitions related to the SR-91 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes project from Adams Street to the 60/91 /215 interchange. The Comarco Wireless Technologies (Comarco) contract expires December 31, 2008 and provides for routine corrective and preventive maintenance of call boxes, including knockdowns and vandalism. Comarco was selected as a result of a competitive procurement in 2001, in which it was the only responsive bidder, and has provided these services since the inception of the call box program. A request for proposal process is not anticipated immediately upon contract expiration, and Comarco has been included as a recurring contract for the last six months of FY 2008/09. The increase in cost is due, primarily, to the higher maintenance costs of the new digital/TTY call boxes. Comarco's CPI increase for the year is 3.29%. Agenda Item 8C 232 • ITS has been included as a recurring contract since FY 2003/05 for the implementation of the Commuter Assistance Program. The FY 2008/09 Commuter Assistance budget includes two new and four expanded projects, which have been added to ITS's scope of work. One of the new projects is a contingency for contract transition, as the Commission will developand issue in FY 2008/09 a request for proposals for the implementation of the Commuter Assistance Program. The contingency provides for transition efforts should a contract be awarded to a new consultant. A portion of the increase in the ITS contract is also related to services provided for the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) commuter assistance program, for which the Commission is reimbursed. i Rahimian Management and Consulting, Inc. (Rahimian) has provided project management services related to oversight of the geotechnical work and special permit application process on the Riverside County -Orange County (RC-OC) CETAP Corridor project, and this contract expires June 30, 2008. It is anticipated that the geotechnical work and related evaluation will be conducted in 2008 with final reports due in mid-2009. Based on the level of work associated with this geotechnical feasibility study and Rahimian's knowledge and expertise with the RC-OC Major Investment Study, it is recommended that this contract be extended through June 30, 2009. Ray Gorski has provided on -call technical services to the Commission primarily in the areas of a'r quality and alternative fuels. Projects funded with CMAQ funds are required to have project level air quality analyses. As the Commission continues to commit CMAQ funds on projects, it is essential to have the ability to utilize Mr. Gorski's services. During FY 2008/09, air quality analyses will be needed to continue the efforts of promoting transit and alternative modes of commuting as having a positive carbon footprint and a positive influence on the environment and air quality. The SANBAG Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE) has provided call box call answering and dispatch services for the Riverside County SAFE since July 2001 through a contract with Professional Communications Network (PCN). PCN was awarded the contract through a competitive bid process, and the Commission reimburses SANBAG for these services based on the actual number of calls taken at the center. The decrease of $20,500 is related to the declining call volume as a result of the decrease in the number of call boxes needed due to the use of cellular phones for emergencies. Proposals were solicited for a ridematching software program for the Inland Empire, and a contract was awarded to Trapeze in 2002. Subsequently the software/license agreement was expanded to include Orange, Los Angeles, and Ventura Counties functionality. The software also has been customized over the Agenda Item 8C 233 past years in response to the unique regional air quality requirements. As a result of the customization and five -county regional partnership, this contract has been included in the recurring contracts since FY 2005/06. The $46,600 decrease in the contract for FY 2008/09 is related to the ongoing work :to complete the Rideguide and transit integration project, which is funded by a grant from the Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee. VRPA Technologies (VRPA) provides assistance with activities related to the Congestion Management Program (CMP), including traffic monitoring. During FY 2008/09, VRPA work efforts will include analog to digital upgrades of the traffic counters in the call boxes and on -call regional transportation planning activities in addition to quarterly traffic monitoring of the CMP system. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2008/09 Amount: $10,022,700 Source of Funds: Measure A, TDA, TUMF, FSP, SAFE fees, Interest, and Other Budget Ad ustment: No GLA No.: N/A Fiscal Procedures Approved: \lifbv,imilikuvr Date: 05/23/2008 Agenda Item 8C • 234 AGEND A ITEM 8D • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 11, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: , `Quarterly Sales Tax Analysis STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 4, 2007. BACKGROUND INFORMATION At its December 12, 2007 meeting, the Commission awarded an agreement to MuniServices LLC, for quarterly sales tax reporting services plus additional fees contingent on additional sales tax revenue generated from the transactions and use tax (sales tax) audit services. The services performed under this agreement pertain to only the Measure A sales taxes. Since the commencement of these services, MuniServices has submitted an audit update, which reported approximately 30 sales tax audit findings that have been generated and submitted to the State Board of Equalization (SBOE) for review and determination of errors in sales tax reporting. If the SBOE concurs with the error(s), the Commission would receive the additional revenues; however, the magnitude of the value of the findings was not available. Additionally, MuniServices has provided the Commission with two quarterly reports for the third (Q3) and fourth (Q4) quarter of calendar 2007 sales, which Measure A sales taxes were received by the Commission in the quarter ended December 31, 2007 and March 31, 2008, respectively. These reports include an analysis of regional performance by economic categories and the three largest economic segments as well as an analysis of the quarter's cash receipts and the top 25 sales tax contributors. The executive summary section of the Q3 and Q4 reports are included as attachments to the staff report. Excerpts from the Q3 report were presented to the Commission in February 2008 in connection with the mid -year revenue projections. Highlights from the Q3 report included the following:---- - --- - - Agenda Item 8D 235 • Areas such as the Inland Empire, Sacramento Valley, and Central Valley that had experienced high growth in the past few years related to housing. impacts are now experiencing the lowest, and actually negative, growth. • In almost every region, the most significant declines were in the construction and transportation categories. • The Inland Empire experienced the worst decline in sales taxes with Riverside County's decline higher than that of San Bernardino County. • New auto sales was among the three largest segments for all regions but one; in Riverside County, new auto sales was the largest segment and experienced a 9.4% decrease. • Over the last two-year period, sales tax levels are at or near the high point with the exception of new auto sales and construction and building material sales, which are at the low point during the two-year period. A comparison of the Q4 report to Q3 indicates the continued negative effects of the housing market troubles on construction and transportation and decline in revenues from new auto sales and consumer spending; however, a new economic influence on sales tax is the rising fuel costs, which result in increased sales taxes. Other highlights include the following: • The Inland Empire and the North Coast areas had the highest negative growth, with Riverside County's decline higher than San Bernardino County. • In Riverside County, the construction and transportation categories experienced the most significant declines compared to the prior year. • The decline in auto sales in Riverside County in the Q4 benchmark year was 12.5% compared to 9.4% in Q3 benchmark year. While department store sales growth remained positive, they decreased to 1.2% from the Q3 period. Service station sales positively increased from a 0.8% decline in Q3 to 3.7% growth in Q4. The quarterly sales tax reports have provided staff with greater insight of the impact of the current economic influences on Riverside County's sales tax base. This information was recently used during the Commission's presentations to the rating agencies in April 2008 and was cited as a factor in the Commission's bond ratings by at least one of the rating agencies. The reports also include a sales tax forecast based on pessimistic, most likely, and optimistic considerations. The Q4 report forecast for FY 2007/08 ranges from $144 million to $150 million, with $147 million as most likely. Since staff reported a significant decline in sales tax receipts through December 2007 that resulted in a revised Measure --A revenue estimate of $135 million for FY 2007/08, sales tax receipts have remained somewhat stable Agenda Item 8D 236 District of Riverside Co RCTC Sales Tax Digest Summary FIRST Quarter Collection of FOURTH Quarter Sales Quarter 4, 2007 ATTACHMENT 1 INTRODUCTION Most jurisdictions in California experienced slow downs or declines in sales tax revenue during the year ended 4w Quarter 2007. Challenges in more than one economic sector press the California economy as it moves toward a year or two of flat to negative growth. The purpose of this summary is to provide Riverside Co RCTC with an overview of economic trends and pressures affecting the economy. The percent change in cash receipts over the prior year was 0.1 % statewide, 0.5% in Northern California and (-0.2%) in Southern California. The period's cash receipts include tax from business activity during the period, payments for prior periods and other cash adjustments. When we adjust out non -period related payments, we determine the business activity performance for the period. Overall business activity declined for the year ended 4t Quarter 2007 by (-0.9%) statewide, (-0.5%) in Northern California, and (-1.2%) in Southern California. After adjusting the business activity for inflation, we learn that California experienced declines of (-4.0%) statewide, (-3.5%) in Northern California and (-4.2%) in Southern California. KEY FACTORS Several key factors influenced the sales tax revenue during the year ended 4t Quarter 2007. The following table outlines the major influences on sales tax. Economic Influences on Sales Tax Fuel Costs I Housing Market Troubles Auto Sales General Retail • Increased sales tax from Service Stations. • Decreased revenue from Building Materials as building, remodeling and cash -out refinancing slowed. • Significantly decreased revenue from New Auto Sales. • Declining consumer spending. Information prepared byMun6eruices, LLC 238 t District of Riverside Co RCTC REGIONAL PERFORMANCE Diversity in California's economy necessitates analyzing the state by regions. The following table looks at business activity by economic category and three largest segments. The number on the left represents the proportion of the whole regions sales tax. The number on the right is the percent change from the prior year. EconomicCategories: Analysis of year ended 4`h Quarter 2007 General Retail %of Total 96 Change Food Products %of Total % Chan ge Construction % of Total % Chan • e Transportation % of Total % Chan . - Business to Business % of Total %Chan. e Miscellaneous % of Total/- %Chan. e TOTAL 28.9/-0.1 16.8/3.4 10.5/-81 24.4/-3.0 18.2/ 1.5 1.1/-3.1 /00.0 -0.9 27.8/0_5 M.0/55 103/-1.0 222/-03 22.6/4.3 1.1/-21 100.0 1.7 283/-1.9 151/1.1 132/-122 26. 9/-5..5 I54/L9 1.1/-3..8 100.0 -3.4 29.3/-2.1 15.7/3.5 13.7/-13.9 26.4/-4.5 M0/3.4 08/ 8.8 100.0 -3.1 29.3/ 0.4 173/3.5 9.3/-71 24.7/-2 9 184/0.3 1.1 /-2,8 100.0 -0.7 26.2/-L6 14.7/2.0 14 3/-14. 9 286/-56 14.5/-0.2 L6/-L8 100.0 -42 30.2/-26 15.4/0.6 I6-6/-9.2 28.2/-4.6 8.9/-6.0 0.7/-13..1 /00.0-4.2 34.0/- L7 25.9/3.5 1 L5/-9..5 20.7/-4.0 7.2/8.6 0.8/-12.9 100.0 -1.3 Three Largest Economic Segments: Analysis of Restaurants 10.7/5.3 year ended Auto Sales - New 1 L5/-13.1 _4`",Qtiartec2007 Department Stores 14.5/-0.8 Restaurants 12..3/3.4 Auto Sales - New 127/-10.1 Department Stores 13.9/-4.7 Restaurants 17.8/2 Is' Largest Segment %ofTotal/ %Change Restaurants I L5/3.0 w Z Largest Segment %nf natal/ %Change Auto Sates - Auto Sales - New 103 6.9 / Department Stores 11.3 02 / Auto Sates - New 11.3 106 / Auto Sales - New 11.2 6-9 / Department Stores 10.9 00 / Auto Sales - New 10.0 -8.5 / Department Stores 11.2 1-5 / New I10/-7.9 3fd Largest Segment %ofTotal/ %change Department Stores 10.5/0.9 Department Stores 9.7/1.7 Restaurants 9.4/-05 Restaurants 89/1.8 Stores 101/L2 Service Stations 100/40 Bldg. Matls- Retail 9.9/-6-0 Misc. Retail Misc. 10.0/-27 General Retail: Apparel Stores, Department Stores, Furniture/Appliances, Drug Stores, Recreation Products, Florist/Nursery, and Misc- Retail Food Products: Restaurants, Food Markets, Liquor Stores, and Food Processing Equipment. Construction: Building Materials Wholesale and Building Materials Retail Transportation: Auto Parts/Repair, New Auto Sales, Used Auto Sales, Service Stations, and Misc. Vehicle Sales Business to Business Office Equipment, Electronic Equipment, Business Services, Energy Sales, Chemical Products, Heavy Industry, Light Industry, and Leasing Miscellaneous: Health/Government, Miscellaneous Other, and Closed Account Adjustments Information prepared byMuniServices, LLC 239 District of Riverside Co RCTC PERFORMANCE REVIEW The following tables review the net cash receipts and the business activity performance for 4th Quarter 2007. Net Cash Receipts Analysis': Local Collections Share of County Pool 0.0% Share of State Pool 0.0% SBE Net Collections Less: Amount Due County 0.0% Less: Cost of Administration Net 402007 Receipts Net 402006 Receipts Actual Percentage Change $37,658,722 0 0 37,658,722 .00 (338,900) 37,319,822 39,136,066 - 4.6% Business Activi PerformanceAnal sis Local Collections Less: Payments for Prior Periods Preliminary 402007 Collections Projected 402007 Late Payments Projected 402007 Final Results Actual 402006 Results Projected Percentage Change $37,658,722 (2,398,692) 35,260,030 2,014,225 37,274,255 40,157,088 - 7.2% HISTORICAL CASH COLLECTIONS ANALYSIS BY QUARTER Net Receipts $42,000 $41,000 $40,000 S39,000 $38,000 S37,000 S36,000 S35,000 $34,008 S33,000 (in thousands ofS) 3Q2005 4Q2005 1Q2006 2Q2006 3Q2006 4Q2006 1Q2007 2Q2007 3Q2007 4Q2007 ®Net Receipts Admie Fees Dee $600 $500 $400 k. $300 a B 9 $200 $100 So Information prepared byMuniServices, LLC 3 240 District of Riverside Co RCTC TOP 25 SALES/USE TAX CONTRIBUTORS The following list identifies Riverside Co. RCTC's Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors. The list is in alphabetical order and represents the year ended 4th Quarter 2007. The Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors generate 21.9% of Riverside Co RCTC's total sales and use tax revenue. ARCO AM/PM MINI MARTS BEST BUY STORES CHEVRON SERVICE STATIONS COSTCO WHOLESALE DEPT OF MOTOR VEHICLES ALLOCAT FERGUSON ENTERPRISES GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. HOME DEPOT J C PENNEY COMPANY JACK IN THE BOX RESTAURANTS JOHNSON MACHINERY CO. K MART STORES KOHL'S DEPARTMENT STORES LOWE'S HOME IMPROVEMENT MACY'S DEPARTMENT STORE MOBIL SERVICE STATIONS RALPH'S GROCERY COMPANY RITE AID DRUG STORES ROBERTSONS READY MIX ROSS STORES SAM'S CLUB SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY STATER BROS MARKETS TARGET STORES . WAL MART STORES HISTORICAL SALES TAX AMOUNTS The following chart shows the sales tax level for the year ended 4th Quarter 2007 and the highs and the lows for each segment over the last two years. 525,000 $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $0 y1 - e, S `cs cs y`• P 9eQ• S• (in thousands °I'S) ♦S - ♦e' .• 1`.• ,. JS �¢6 �• ei 9•° i> s a`z' "St‘ ■ aQzao7 • High . L ow 4,6 6 Z1 vya� 4•° PQC Information prepared by MuniServices, LLC 241 District of Riverside Co RCTC ANNUAL SALES', TAX BY BUSINESS CATEGORY (in thousands of $) 4Q 2007 3Q 2007 2Q 2007 1Q 2007 4Q2006 3Q2006 2Q2006 1Q2006 4Q2005 3Q2005 SO $20,000 S40,000 560,000 $89,000 $100,000 $120,000 $140,000 5160,000 $180,000 ®General Retail OFOnd Prndnrta 170Trautpartati0o ®C onatru tilos ®Business T o Business ISM isrellaoeous FIVE-YEAR ECONOMIC TREND: General Retail $14,000 S 12,000 $10,000 58,000 $6,000 $4,000 $2,000 SO e 0 (in thousands of S) i N a g a N a M g a g a e a d g oa s c s a V Information prepared byMuniSen ces, LLC 242 5 District of Riverside Co RCTC 3rd QUARTER 2007 FINAL RESULTS • $35,874,694 Local net cash collections • $-335,900 Less pool amounts • $3,205,960 Less prior quarter payments • $2,151,859 Add late payments • $35,156,493 Local net economic collections after adjustments • DOWN BY 8.0% compared to 3rd Quarter 2006. MUNISERVICES' AUDIT RESULTS MuniServices, LLC performs an on -going audit for the District of Riverside Co RCrC. This quarter, Riverside Co RCTC received $0 in sales tax from MuniServices' audit efforts, bringing the total sates tax revenue produced by MuniServices to $0. Information prepared byMuniServices, LLC 6 243 • District of Riverside Co RCTC Sales Tax Digest Summary FOURTH Quarter Collection of THIRD Quarter Sales Quarter 3, 2007 ATTACHMENT 2 INTRODUCTION Jurisdictions across California experienced slow downs or even declines in sales tax revenue during the year ended 3rd Quarter 2007. Challenges in more than one economic sector press the California economy as it moves toward a year or two of flat to negative growth. The purpose of this summary is to provide Riverside Co RCTC with an overview of economic trends and pressures affecting the economy. The percent change in cash receipts over the prior year was 0.1%statewide, OA% in Northern California and -0.2% in Southern California. The period"s cash receipts,include tax from business activity during the period, payments for prior periods and other cash adjustments. When we adjust out all of the non -period related payments, we determine the business activity performance for the period. Business activity growth for the year ended 3`d Quarter 2007 was 0.2% statewide, 0.5% in Northern California, and 0.1 % in Southern California. After adjusting the business act vity for inflation, we learn that California experienced a decline of -3.1 % statewide, -2.8% in Northern California and -3.2% in Southern California. KEY FACTORS Several key factors influenced the sales tax revenue during the year ended 3rd Quarter 2007. The following table outlines the major influences on sales tax. 1 Economic Influences on Sales Tax Higher Food Prices I Housing Market Troubles I General Consumer Unease • Increased revenue from Restaurants as menu prices increased. • Decreased amount available for other consumer purchases. • Decreased revenue from Building Materials as building, remodeling and cash -out refinancing slowed. • Decreased revenue from New Auto Sales as consumer confidence weakened. • Increased revenue from Auto Leasing. • Slowed revenue from Department Stores as growth lagged behind inflation. Information preparedbyMuniSeivices, LLC 244 1 District of Riverside Co RCTC REGIONAL PERFORMANCE Diversity in California's economy necessitates analyzing the state in regions. The following table looks at business activity by economic category and three largest segments. The number on the left represents the proportion of the whole region's sales tax. The number on the right is the percent change from the prior year. Economic Categories: Analysis of year ended 3rQ Quarter 2007 _. General Retail 96ofTotal/ 96 Change Food Products % of Total/ 96 Change Construction 96 of Total/ 96 Change Transportation 96 of Total/ 96 Change Business to Business 96 of Total/ % Change Miscellaneous 96 of Total/ 96 Change TOTAL 295/ 1.3 16.8/ 4.3 10.6/-5.1 23..6/-3.4 18.4/3.2 1.1/-1.4 mao/0.2 30.4/ 1.9 17..1/5.3 9.9/-0.1 70.3/-L 1 21.2/5.9 1.1/-1.8 279/0.0 14.6/26 144/-10.9 26.2/-5.9 15.7/ 1.3 1.1/ 30 30.9/-0.4 15.8/4.6 14.6/-8.7 25..0/-5.5 12.9/2.8 0.8/-6.5 292/ 1.7 17.2/ 4.3 9.6/-4.6 24.3/-3.3 18.6/2.2 1.1/-08 273/-2.5 13.7/ 0.9 13.0/-12.4 25.6/-6.2 17.8/4.4 2.6/ L4 30.0/-L9 15.1/0.3 17.4/-3.3 28.0/-3..0 8.8/-4.2 0.7/-10.0 29.6/ 0.5 287/4.6 13.5/-6.5 18.7/-4.9 8.5/2.2 LO/-53 100.0/-0 4 100 0/2.4 100.0/-2.8 100.0/-2.0 100.0/0.3 100.0/-3.2 100.0/-2.4 hree Largest Economic Segments: Analysis of year ended Auto Sales - New 11.1/-123 3r° Quarter Department Stores IS2/0.8 2007 Restaurants 12.3/4.3 Auto Sales - New I20/-7.9 Department Stores 13.8/-4.6 Restaurants 19.9/3.6g la Largest Segment 9bofTotal/ 96 Change Restaurants 1L7/4.1 Restaurants 12.1/5.2 na 2 Largest Segment 46 ofTota!/ 96 Change Auto Sales - New 108 5.5 / Department Stores 10.0 36 / Department Stores 107 1.6 / Auto Sales - New I LO 9.7 / Auto Sales - New I LO 4.5 / Restaurants 9.9 0. I / Bldg. Mails- Retail 10.5 1.1 / Department Stores 96 2.1 / 3rd Largest Segment 96 of Total/ 46 Change Department Stores 103/21 Auto Sales New 9.9/-4.0 Restaurants 9.1/1.2 Restaurants 9.1/29 Department Stores 9.7/2.0 Department Stores 9.6/2.4 Auto Sales - New 10.3/28 Misc. Retail 8.9/02 General Retail: Apparel Stores, Department Stores, Furniture/Appliances, Drug Stores, Recreation Products, Florist/Nursery, and Misc. Retail Food Products: Restaurants, Food Markets, Liquor Stores, and Food Processing Equipment. Construction: Building Materials Wholesale and Building Materials Retail Transportation: Auto Parts/Repair, New Auto Sales, used Auto Sales, Service Stations, and Misc. Vehicle Sales Business to Business: Office Equipment, Electronic Equipment, Business Services, Energy Sales, Chemical Products, Heavy Industry, Light Industry, and Leasing Miscellaneous: Health/Government, Miscellaneous Other, and Closed Account Adjustments Information prepared. byMuniSefvices, LLC 245 District of Riverside Co RCTC • • PERFORMANCE REVIEW The following tables review the net cash receipts and the business activity performance for 3`d Quarter 2007. Net Cash Receipts Analysis Local Collections Share of County Pool 0:0% Share of State Pool 0.0% SBE Net Collections Less: Amount Due County 0.0% Less: Cost of Administration Net 302007 Receipts Net 302006 Receipts Actual Percentage Change S36,210,594 0 0 36,210,594 .00 (335,900) 35,874,694 39,508,978 -9.2% Business Activi Performance Analysis Local Collections Less: Payments for Prior Periods Preliminary 3C12007 Collections Projected 302007 Late Payments Projected 3Q2007 Final Results Actual 302006 Results Projected Percentage Change S36,210,594 (3,205,960) 33,004,634 2,217,370 35,222,004 38,193,969 -7:8% HISTORICAL CASH COLLECTIONS ANALYSIS BY QUARTER a m C d z S42,000 S41,000 S40,000 S39,000 S38,000 S37,000 536,000 S35,000 $34,000 S33,000 (in thousands of 5) Q2.005 3Q2005 4Q2005 IQ2006 2Q2006 3Q2006 4Q2006 1Q2007 2Q2007 3Q2007 r10111IN e1 Reeeipls -r-S BOE Adwia Fees Dee S600 S500 S400 m S300 e B $200 $100 SO Information prepared byMuniServices, LLC 3 246 District of Riverside Co RCTC TOP 25 SALES/USE TAX CONTRIBUTORS The following list identifies Riverside Co RCTC's Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors. The list is in alphabetical order and represents the year ended 3r 1 Quarter 2007. The Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors generate 22.0% of Riverside Co Rctc's total sales and use tax revenue. ARCO AM/PM MINI MARTS BEST BUY STORES CHEVRON SERVICE STATIONS CIRCLE K FOOD STORES COSTCO WHOLESALE DEPT OF MOTOR VEHICLES ALLOCAT FERGUSON ENTERPRISES GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. HOME DEPOT J C PENNEY COMPANY JACK IN THE BOX RESTAURANTS JOHNSON MACHINERY CO. K MART STORES KOHL'S DEPARTMENT STORES LOWE'S HOME IMPROVEMENT MACY'S DEPARTMENT STORE MOBIL SERVICE STATIONS RALPH'S GROCERY COMPANY ROBERTSONS READY MIX ROSS STORES SAM'S CLUB SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY STATER BROS MARKETS TARGET STORES WAL MART STORES HISTORICAL SALES TAX AMOUNTS The following chart shows the sales tax level for the year ended 3`d Quarter 2007 and the highs and the lows for each segment over the last two years. $ 2 5,0 00 $20,000 $15,000 $1 0,0 00 $5,000 $0 i tcs PS S� 0 s.coN° 0 \ ,GG (�T (in thousands or$) o`s `"`� `9s% c' 4` + tJ sS J� G''' q O¢ c° ■3Q 2007 ♦ High . L ow aJsyt� 1�4%yt ¢1ST t 11 7� Vs‘ Information prepared byMuniServices, LLC 247 4 District of Riverside Co RCTC ANNUAL SALES TAX BY BUSINESS CATEGORY 3Q 2007 2Q2007 1Q2007 4Q 2006 3Q 2006 2Q 2006 IQ2006 4Q 2005 3Q 2005 2Q 200S (in thousands of $) O-• •I < .: 0�� 0111.10111111O111- e 0 TO f20,000 540,000 560,000 T00,000 SI00,000 5720 ,000 $140 ,000 5160,000 5150,000 ®Cen eral R stall SFood Products ®Transportalion ®C ooslructlon ®Business To Business ®Miscellaneous FIVE-YEAR ECONOMIC TREND: Auto Sales - New S6,000 $5,000 S4,000 S3,000 S2,000 S1,000 SO (in Ihousnnds of Si 1:-.,::-.-.:,-:::: .,,,,,,-:::-. I,,,,.„,,...,..,,,,„.. .,,,.:::.,,,,,,-, „..,,.....::::::.::::....ii -..,...-:-;,-..,--c,r".17.17"111 1.--:',... •"'::1'il...", -:--1:--.:: =:"-:::::1........ ":...-:;...1-.----, :i1:--'...:..--;--:'," "::::::-.-1-.'-.'.-',---.::::::::-- --:----::::::::::::::::::.:::::------11"!. ::::::::::-Ir.--.:::::' I 0 a N 0 0 M 0 N a 8 a a 0 S a 0 N a S N a S N a 8 N a Information preparedbyMuni.Services, LLC 248 5 District of Riverside Co RCTC ZND QUARTER 2007 FINAL RESULTS • S39,076,287 Local net cash collections • $-335,900 Less pool amounts • $3,446,477 Less prior quarter payments • $2,508,409 Add late payments • S38,474,1 18 Local net economic collections after adjustments • DOWN BY 6.2% compared to 2nd Quarter 2006. MUNISERVICES' AUDIT RESULTS MuniServices, LLC performs an on -going audit for the District of Riverside Co ROTC. This quarter, Riverside Co RCTC received $0 in sales tax from MuniServices' audit efforts, bringing the total sales tax revenue produced by MuniServices to S0. information prepared by MuniServices, LLC 6 249 AGEND A ITEM 8E • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 11, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Measure A Designation of Highway 111 Segments STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve an amendment to the Measure A Transportation Expenditure Plan/Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) to add the following segments on Highway 111: a) In Palm Springs, from the intersection of Ramon Road and Gene Autry Trail, north on Gene Autry Trail to Vista Chino Drive, thence west on Vista Chino Drive to North Palm Canyon Drive, thence northerly on the existing Highway 111 alignment to Interstate 10; b) In Indio, from the crossing of Golf Center Parkway over Indio Boulevard, northerly on Golf Center Parkway to Interstate 10; and c) In Indio, from the intersection of Highway 111 and Indio Boulevard, southeasterly on Indio Boulevard and Grapefruit Boulevard, the existing and former Highway 111 alignment, through the city of Coachella and Riverside County to the intersection of State Route 195 (Avenue 66). 2) Process the amendment to the TIP for inclusion of the Highway 111 new segments as outlined in Section 240302 of the Public Utilities Code. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Changes to the alignment of Highway 111 in the Coachella Valley have raised questions in regards to eligibility of segments that have been relinquished by the state to local agencies, as well as the eligibility of the new alignment for Measure A funds. CVAG is also requesting an amendment to the Measure A TIP to include additional segments of Highway 111 that were not included in the original alignment depicted in Measure A. Agenda Item 8E 250 Designation of Highway 111 for Coachella Valley Measure A Highway Funds Under the 1989 Measure A, the Transportation Expenditure Plan, also referred to as the TIP, included a provision that 15% of the Measure A. funds would be allocated to Highway 111 improvement projects. The TIP identifies Highway 111 from Ramon Road to Indio Boulevard. Since the passage of Measure A, the designation of Highway 111 has been changed as portions of the original alignment . have been relinquished by the state and are now maintained by local jurisdictions. In addition, Highway 111 was realigned in the city of Palm Springs and now is located on Vista Chino Drive between Indian Canyon Drive to Gene Autry Trail, as well as the segment of Gene Autry Trail from Vista Chino Drive to South Palm Canyon Drive. CVAG requested a legal opinion in Attachment 2 regarding the possibility of using Measure A funds on portions of the original alignment that are no longer part of the Highway 111 system, and if Measure A funds can be expendedon the new alignment not identified in the original alignment. Commission staff also requested a legal opinion in Attachment 3 regarding the ability to add segments not identified in the original alignment. The legal opinion indicated that a reasonable argument can be made that supports the expenditure of funds on portions that have been relinquished by the state. The legal opinion also states that a reasonable argument can be made that supports the expenditure of Measure A funds on the new alignment. The legal opinion further concludes the following: "In either case, it is within the authority of the Commission to interpret its ordinance. As explained further below, the Commission's interpretation must be consistent with the voter's intent. As either interpretation described is reasonable, we believe that the Commission may select either interpretation as evidencing the intent of the voters. The Commission may consult with CVAG in determining the most reasonable interpretation of the voter's intent. Our office recommends that the Commission make its findings on the record, at a public meeting of the Commission." CVAG has submitted a letter in Attachment 4 requesting the Commission to process an amendment to the TIP adding the following segments to Highway 111: a► In Palm Springs, from the intersection of Ramon Road and Gene Autry Trail, north on Gene Autry Trail to Vista Chino Drive, thence west on ---- -Vista Chino -Drive -to North Palm Canyon Drive, -thence northerly on the existing Highway 111 alignment to Interstate 10; Agenda Item 8E 251 • b) In Indio, from the crossing of Golf Center Parkway over Indio Boulevard, northerly on Golf Center Parkway to Interstate 10; and c) In Indio, from the intersection of Highway 111 and Indio Boulevard, southeasterly on Indio Boulevard and Grapefruit. Boulevard, the existing and former Highway 111 alignment, through the City of Coachella and Riverside County to the intersection of State Route 195 (Avenue 66). Staff supports CVAG's recommendation to designate Highway 111 as described above. The process to amend the TIP is described in the legal opinion, which would require that the Commission make a "findings of necessity" and be followed by an approval by the board of supervisors, and a majority of the cities constituting a majority of the incorporated population. The amendment would have to be separately acted on by: 1) the Commission at its meeting; 2) the Board of Supervisors at its meeting; and 3) a majority of the cities, at their respective city council meetings. Attachments: 1) Map of Highway 111 Alignment Recommendation 2) Legal Opinion, January 28, 2008 3) Legal Opinion, April 16, 2008 4) CVAG Letter, January 29, 2008 Agenda Item 8E 252 - blt'�®�r1 9i381."j001.144 ��G hgmL-q3 ,L00Il1 ATTACHMENT 2 January 28, 2008 MEMORANDUM To: Anne Mayer, Executive Director FROM: Best Best & Krieger, General Counsel RE: Interpretation of 1988 Measure A as Applies to Current and Relinquished Portions of Highway 111 in the Coachella Valley BACKGROUND The Riverside County Transportation Commission Transportation Expenditure Plan and • Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance, Ordinance No. 88-1 ("Measure A") was approved by 78.9 percent of the voters in Riverside County. The Transportation Expenditure Plan, also referred to as the Transportation Improvement Plan ("TIP"), was attached as Exhibit B to Measure A and was • incorporated therein by reference. The TIP identifies State Highway 111 ("Hwy 111 ") from Ramon Road to Indio Boulevard as one of the projects in the Coachella Valley for which Measure A State highway funds are to be appropriated and expended. A map depicting the then -current Hwy 111 designation between Ramon Road to Indio Boulevard (the "Original Alignment') was part of the TIP. Since the passage of Measure A, the designation of Hwy 111 has been changed. Portions of the Original Alignment have been relinquished by the State and are now maintained by local jurisdictions. Additionally, new segments of roadway located in the Coachella Valley and not identified in the TIP. as part of Hwy 111 have been designated by the State as Hwy 111, and are thus now officially part of the State highway system ("New Alignment"). Notably, the New Alignment now bypasses the intersection of Ramon Road and Palm Canyon Drive. Pursuant to a request for direction from the Executive Director of the Coachella Valley Association of Governments ("CVAG"), you have asked our office to review the Measure A documents, in light of thechanged circumstances, and to provide an opinion on the appropriate expenditure of the Measure A funds earmarked for State highway improvements in the Coachella Valley (15% Measure A Funds"). QUESTION PRESENTED 1. Can the 15% Measure A Funds be expended on portions of the Original Alignment that have been relinquished by the State and are no longer part of the Hwy 111 system? 2. Can the 15% Measure A Funds be expended on the New Alignment not shown on the map included in the Measure A ballot documents identifying the TIP projects? ' RVPOBIHSHANE1744257.1 254 BRIEF ANSWER A reasonable argument can be made that the 15% Measure A Funds can be spent on all 'portions of the Original Alignment, including the portions that have been relinquished by the State. Alternatively, a reasonable argument can also be made in support of authorizing the expenditure of the 15% Measure A Funds on the portion of the New Alignment commencing at the intersection of Ramon 'Road and Gene Autry Trail, and south to Palm Canyon Drive.' In either case, it is within the authority of the Commission to interpret its ordinance. As ;explained further below, the Commission's interpretation must be consistent with the voter's intent. As either interpretation described above is reasonable, we believe that the Commission may select either interpretation as evidencing the intent of the voters. The Commission may consult with CVAG in determining the most reasonable interpretation of the voter's intent. Our office recommends that the Commission make its findings on the record, at a public meeting of the Commission. ANALYSIS I. Standard for Interpreting Measure A. It is a cardinal rule of statutory construction that a court will interpret a measure adopted by a vote of the people in such a manner as to give effect to the intent of the voters adopting it. (Diamond International Corp. v. Boas (1979) 92 Ca1.App.3d 1015.) Further, in interpreting a measure , adopted by vote of the electorate, the words contained in such measure are to be understood consistent with their popular meaning absent strong and convincing reason to the contrary. (Burger v. Employees' i Retirement System (1951) 101 Cal. App. 2d 700, 702.) Under the principles of statutory construction, one should first look to the plain meaning of the statute. (Delaney v. Superior Court (1990) 50 Cal.3d 785, 798; Penner v County of Santa Barbara (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 1672, 1677.) If the language is clear and unambiguous there is no need for construction, nor is it necessary to resort to indicia of the intent of the Legislature (in the case of a statute) or of the voters (in the case of a provision adopted by the voters)." (Lungren v. Deukmejian (1988) 45 Ca1.3d 727, 735.) A statute is considered ambiguous; however, if it is capable of more than one interpretation, both or all of which are reasonable. (Hughes v. Bd. of Architectural Examiners (1998) 17 Cal. 4th 763, 776.) In such case, a reviewing court will generally consider evidence of the Legislature's intent (or in this case, the voter's intent) beyond the words of the statute. A reviewing court may examine a variety of extrinsic aids including, "the statutory scheme of which the provision is a part, the history and background of the statute, the apparent purpose, and any considerations of constitutionality, 'in an attempt to ascertain the most reasonable interpretation of the measure."' ( Id. citing Watts v. Crawford (1995) 10 Cal. 4th 743, 751.) �-Expenditure of thesefundsontheNewAlignmentnorth of this intersection. and west on Vista Chino from Gene_ Autry_________ __ Trail to Palm Desert Drive would appear to require an amendment to the TIP. RV PIJBIRSHANEl7442571 -2- 255 I As further discussed below, the plain meaning of Measure A as applies to the expenditure of the 15% Measure A Funds in the Coachella Valley for the Hwy 111 project was clear at the time of adoption of the Measure. However, in light of the changed circumstances regarding the alignment of Hwy 111, there now appears to be an ambiguity in the statute. 2. Possible Interpretations of Measure A. a. General Provisions of Coachella Valley Portion of TIP: The Coachella Valley portion of the TIP states as follows: "The Transportation Improvement Plan generally illustrates the proposals for the Coachella Valley Area. The area includes the cities of Cathedral City, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Indian Wells, :Indio, La Quinta, Palm Desert, and Rancho Mirage..." (Emphasis added.) Under Section ] of the Coachella Valley portion of the TIP, appears the heading "State I Highways and Major Regional Road Project" ("Section 1"). Section 1 provides as follows: "Fifty-five percent of the Measure A funds generated within the Coachella Valley will be used for state highways and major regional road projects. The Coachella Valley is served by few state highways. The • proposed Regional Arterial System developed through the Coachella Valley Association of Governments would function much like state highways to address future needs for the area. Of the 55% share, about one -quarter will supplement federal and state funds for the following state highway projects:" (Emphasis added.) Section I includes a table showing the state highway projects to be funded out of the one -quarter share of the 55% of Measure A funds generated within the Coachella Valley. (Emphasis added.) In this table, "various operational improvements" to Hwy II I from Ramon Road to Indio Boulevard in the cost range of 20 million dollars (S20,000,000) is identified as one of the 15% Measure A Fund projects. This portion of the TIP further provides that: 'The remaining Measure A share of this fund will be used to implement the planned Regional Arterial System. The estimated cost for arterial system improvements will exceed S200 million.... The highest priority projects include the Mid -Valley Parkway (from Gene Autry north of Vista Chino to 1-10 at Monterey), Palm Drive/Gene Autry Trail (from the Mid -Valley Parkway to Desert Hot Springs), Fred Waring Drive (from Route l 11 in Palm Desert to Indio Boulevard), and Jefferson Street (from Avenue 54 to Indio Boulevard.) R V PUBV 1 SnAN E V 49257.3 -3- 256 In addition to the general identification of the Hwy 111 project from Ramon Road to Indio Boulevard contained in the table, the map depicting the TIP projects (the "Map") identifies the :Original Alignment as the area designated for improvement. b. Interpretation 1 — The 15% Measure A Funds may be utilized on the relinquished portions of the Original Alignment: As noted above, depiction of the Coachella Valley Hwy 111 project on the Map clearly ; identifies a particular route which is to be improved, the northwestern boundary of which commences at the intersection of Ramon Road and Palm Canyon Drive. Although Section I does state that the jfunding shown in the table in Section 1 is for state highway projects, voter's may have been more concerned with improving the particular route depicted on the Map, than with using these funds only for improving the state highway system. There is no state law governing use of the Measure A funds !that would restrict expenditure of the 15% Measure A funds to the state highway system, or that would preempt an interpretation of the Measure that would allow use of these funds outside of that system. The question; therefore, is one of interpretation and effectuation of voter intent. While interpreting Measure A to allow expenditure of the 15% Measure A Funds on the relinquished portions of the Original Alignment would be inconsistent with certain policies of the Measure and certain aspects of the statutory scheme, as further discussed below, it would be consistent Iwith the overall apparent purpose of Measure A. The overriding purpose of Measure A is to provide for transportation improvements in Riverside County as identified in the TIP. There is no question that the entire Original Alignment is included in the TIP which was passed by overwhelming vote of the electorate. Further, there was no inconsistency in the Measure at the time of adoption, and if the language is applied as to the alignment in existence at the time the voter's adopted Measure A, the voter's intent to fund the alignment shown and generally described in the TIP is clear. Therefore, it would appear reasonable to apply the literal meaning of Measure A, as applicable at the time of adoption of the Measure, and to interpret expenditure of the 15% Measure A Funds on the Original •Alignment, even those portions no longer part of the State highway system, as consistent with the intent of the voter's in passing the Measure. c. Interpretation 2- The 15% Measure A Funds may he utilized on specified portions of the New Alignment: The Measure A sample ballot submitted to voters states that the Measure is designed to: "Further reduce traffic congestion and increase safety by widening or improving Highways 60 (Pomona Freeway), I-215, 111, 74, 79, 86 and the Mid Valley Parkway in the desert...." Under the "Goals and Policies" section of Measure A, one of the stated goals is to "Provide for equity in the distribution of Measure A revenues Under this goal, the following policy is stated: "Provide for a reasonable balance between competing highway, commuter rail, transit, and local street and road • needs." In order to achieve this policy, specified percentages of Measure A funding are designated for the various competing transportation uses and improvements_ The Coachella Valley portion of the TIP identifies the funding share to be used for state highway projects, regional arterial system projects, local streets and roads projects and other transportation related services. Although the Map depicts a particular designation of Hwy 111, there is a reasonable argument that in approving Measure A the voters intended to allocate the twenty million dollars (S20,000,000) identified for Hwy 111 to that State highway, within the Coachella Valley, regardless of its particular alignment. Since the RV PUB\HSHANE17442573 -4- 257 `intersection of Ramon Road/Indian Canyon Drive has been bypassed and is no longer part of Hwy 111, iit would arguably be a reasonable interpretation of the voters intent to allow use of these funds on that portion of the New Alignment from the intersection of Ramon Road and Gene Autry Trail, north to 'Palm Canyon Drive_ Such use of the 15% Measure A Funds would be consistent with the language of .the project description found in the TIP, which describes the project as "Rte 111; Limits: Ramon to Indio Boulevard". It would also be in accord with the policy, stated in the Measure, of providing for a balance between competing improvement and servie,e needs and allocating the 15% Measure A Funds for state highway improvements only. Further, it would support one of the stated goals of Measure A, which is to improve Hwy 111. There is; however, some risk of legal challenge since the New 4 Alignment is not Consistent with the alignment depicted in the Map. j d. An amendment to the TIP is needed to authorize expenditure of the 15% Measure A Funds on the full New Alignment. Because that portion of the New Alignment north of the Ramon Road/Gene Autry Trail intersection and west on Visto Chino from Gene Autry Trail to Palm Desert Drive, was not identified in the project description of the TIP, or in the Map, the Commission may subject itself to legal challenge if it interprets Measure A to allow funding of this portion of the New Alignment without amending the TIP. Public Utilities Code section 240302 prescribes the procedure for amendment town expenditure plan. This procedure is included in Measure A and requires: (1) initiation of an amendment by the commission pursuant to findings of necessity; (2) approval by the board of supervisors; (3) approval by a majority of the cities constituting a majority of the incorporated [ populations. An amendment to Measure A is the safest route, from a legal perspective, for authorizing any funding of the New Alignment through Measure A_ e. Interpretation 3 — The 15% Measure A Funds may be utilized on both the relinquished portions of the Original Alignment and the specified portions of the New Alignment. The Commission could find that the voter's intent is unclear in light of the change in circumstances, and could determine that Interpretation 1 and Interpretation 2 are both equally reasonable. If the Commission makes this finding, it could allow use of the 15% Measure A Funds on both the relinquished portions of the Original Alignment and the specified portion of the New Alignment. This is potentially the weakest position to take, from a legal perspective. f. Interpretation 4- The 15% Measure A Funds may not be utilized on either the relinquished portions of the Original Alignment or the specified portions of the New Alignment. The Commission could find that neither Interpretation I or Interpretation 2 is consistent with the intent of the voters. In such case, the Commission could determine that the 15% Measure A Funds may onlyi be utilized on the portions of the Original Alignment that are still within the Hwy 111 state highway system, absent an amendment to Measure A. Amending Measure A to allow expenditure of the 15% Measure A funds for either or both the relinquished portions of the Original Alignment and/or the New Alignment would be, from a legal perspective, the approach with the least risk of legal challenge. R V PU MH SHANE1744257.3 -5- 258 CONCLUSION There appears to be more than one reasonable interpretation of the voter's intent as to the expenditure of the 15% Measure A Funds in the Coachella Valley. The Commission may consult with 1 CVAG in determining the most reasonable interpretation of the voter's intent as applies to the j expenditure of these funds. Our office recommends that the Commission make its findings as to its t interpretation of the voter's intent on the record, at a public meeting of the Commission. cc; John M. Wohlmuth, Executive Director, CVAG 1 RVPUB\HSHANE1744257.3 -6- 259 Memorandum TO: Anne Mayer, Executive Director FROM: Best Best & Krieger, General Counsel RE: ATTACHMENT 3 April 16, 2008 Amendment to the Transportation Improvement Plan to Include Segments of Highway 111 'Beyond the Original Alignment Included in 1988 Measure A Background The Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Commission") Transportation Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance, Ordinance No. 88-1 ("Measure A") was approved by 78.9 percent of the voters in Riverside County. The . Transportation Expenditure Plan, also referred to as the Transportation Improvement Plan ('TIP"), was attached as Exhibit B to Measure A and was incorporated therein by reference. The TIP identifies State Highway 111 ("Hwy 111") from Ramon Road to Indio Boulevard. as one of the projects in the Coachella Valley for which Measure A State highway funds are to be appropriated and expended. A map depicting the then -current Hwy 111 designation between Ramon Road to Indio Boulevard (the "Original Alignment") was part of the TIP. Since the i passage of Measure A, the designation of Hwy 111 has been changed. Portions of the Original Alignment have been relinquished by the State and are now maintained by local jurisdictions. Additionally, new segments of roadway located in the Coachella Valley and not identified in the TIP as part of Hwy 111 have been designated by the State as Hwy 111, and are thus now officially part of the State highway system ('New Alignment"). The Commission is currently considering initiation of an amendment to the TIP to authorize expenditure of Measure A funds on the relinquished portions of the Original Alignment and/or on the New Alignment. The Commission is also considering amending the TIP to include additional segments of Hwy 111 which were not included in the adopted TIP. These additional new segments proposed for inclusion in the TEP are generally described as follows: west from Interstate 10 to the new alignment of Hwy 111 at Vista Chino; east on a small segment commencing east of Indio Blvd to the Interstate 10 Interchange; and, southeast, a segment from Indio Boulevard to Avenue 66/Hightway 195. Questions Presented 1. Can the proposed amendment to the TIP include segments of Hwy 111 beyond the Original Alignment between Ramon Road and hidio Boulevard? 2. What is the definition of the phrase "findings of necessity" as used under California Public Utilities Code section 240302? 260 Brief Answers 1. If the Commission can make "findings of necessityfor the proposed inclusion of new segments of Hwy 111 beyond the Original Alignment shown in the TIP, then these new segments can be included in the proposed amendment. 2. The phrase "findings of necessity," when used in reference to a government entity's enactment of an ordinance, means that a need exists for the ordinance, or for its amendment, as demonstrated by the record of the rule -making authority. Analysis A. Process For Amending the TIP. Section 240302 of the Public Utilities Code provides that the TEP may only be amended by the following process: "(I) Initiation of amendment by the commission, reciting findings of necessity. I (2) Approval by the board of supervisors. (3) Approval by a majority of the cities constituting a majority of the incorporated population." (Pub. Util. Code, § 240302(d).) Additionally, Section XIV of Measure A incorporates the statutory requirements for amending the TIP. Section XIV requires: "Mlle Expenditure for Measure 'A' fiords may only be amended, if required, by the following process: (1) Initiation of amendments by the Commission reciting findings of necessity; (2) Approval by the Board of Supervisors; and (3) Approval by a majority of the cities i constituting a majority of the incorporated population." (Ordinance No. 88-1, §XIV.) B. Definition of the Phrase "Findings of Necessity" and Applicable Standard of Review. Neither Measure A nor the Public Utilities Code defines the phrase "findings of necessity." Although the phrase is used by the Legislature throughout Califomia statutes, it is 1 only defined once. Section 40727 of the Health and Safety Code defines the term "findings of necessity." Section 40727 provides that: "[A]s used in this section, 'necessity' means that a need exists for the regulation, or for its amendment or repeal, as demonstrated by the record of the rule -making authority." (Health and Safety Code, § 40727(b).) i There does not appear to be a California case that defines the term "findings of necessity." However, in Beals v. City of Los Angeles (1943) 23 Ca1.2d 381, 386, the court found that,in making findings of necessity. and convenience for the vacation of a_public street: "The act of the council in ordering the vacation of a street is legislative in character and is conclusive both as to the necessity or convenience of the improvement and as to the extent of the _2_ 261 i district to be benefited thereby" The court further held that the finality of such legislative determination is subject to exception only if the finding was the result of fraud or collusion between the city council and private land owners (id.). Thus, where the legislative body makes findings of necessity as part of a legislative or quasi -legislative action, the court will not second guess the Legislature's determination of such necessity. Such findings, if challenged, will be subject to the "abuse of discretion" standard under Code of Civil Procedure section 1085. (Wilson v. Hidden Valley Municipal Water Dist. (1968) 256 Ca1.App.2d 271, 276-278.) The findings required under Public Utility Code section 240302 involve a legislative or quasi -legislative action of the Commission. Thus, under the "abuse of discretion" standard, a court's review of the Commission's findings of necessity would be limited to deciding whether fraud or collusion existed, whether proper statutory procedure was followed, or whether the Commission's finding was arbitrary, capricious or completely lacking in evidentiary support. (Heist v. County of Colusa (1984) 163 Ca1.App.3d 841, 846.) In the absence of such a showing, a challenge will fail. Conclusion Consequently, the Commission can amend the TIP to include the additional segments of Hwy 111 if the Commission initiates an amendment with required findings of necessity. The findings of necessity should provide that a need exists for the amendment, including the inclusion in the TIP of the additional segments of Hwy 111 generally identified above. The Commission should supplement its findings in the administrative record as part of its rule -making activity. The amendment to the TIP must then be approved by the County Board of Supervisors and by a majority of the cities constituting a majority of the incorporated population. Based on a review of the above noted case law, the Commission's findings of necessity will not be subject to successful challenge unless such findings are based on fraud or collusion, are arbitrary, capricious, or entirely Iacking in evidentiary support, or if the proper statutory procedure is not followed. 262 • • CVG ATTACHMENT 4 82866 AM, SM COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCiAT10N of GOVERNMENTS Blythe • Cathedral Cty" • Coachella •- Desert Hot Springs • tndian Wells • .Indio • La Ouinta • Palm Desert • Palm Springs • Rancho Mirage Countyol Riverside •.Agua.Calience_6and of Cahuille8ndians •-Cabamn Band of Mission Indians= Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indiana Anne Mayer, Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Cemon Street, 3' Floor P.O.Box12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Subject: Dear Anne: Designation of Highway 111 JAM 31240 . e• ••,$Vci pity ���n++++�lv��rrvvtlttTATION C$gION First, let me thank you for authorizing RCTC General Counsel to provide a legal opinion to assist CVAG in determining the appropriate designation of Highway 111, and our authority to expend Measure A funds on projects' along that route. We presented the legal opinion as part of our report to the Executive Committee at their meeting last evening. • As the legal opinion states, we are now requesting that RCTC consider amending the Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) to provide expenditure of the 15% Measure A funds, allocated by the voters in 1988 for state highway projects in the Coachella Valley, on project segments not previously qualified to receive those funds. The attached Executive Committee staff report describes the staff direction, but in summary, we are requesting that the Riverside County Transportation Commission process an amendment to the TIP in order to add the segments of Highway 111: in Palm Springs, from the Intersection of Ramon Road and Gene Autry Trail, north on Gene Autry Trail to Vista Chino Drive, thence west on Vista Chino Drive to North Palm Canyon Drive, thence northerly on the existing Highway 111 alignment to Interstate 10; in Indio, from the crossing of Golf Center Parkway over Indio Boulevard, northerly on Golf Center Parkway to interstate'10, and; from the intersection of Highway 111 and Indio Boulevard, in Indio, southeasterly on Indio Boulevard and Grapefruit Boulevard, the existing and former Highway 111 alignment, through the City of Coachella and Riverside County to the intersection of State Highway 195 (Avenue 66). After RCTC's review of this TIP amendment request, CVAG staff is available to discuss any other reasonable, altemative interpretations of the Measure A legal opinion. The ExecutivelCommittee also designated Highway 111 as being, in Palm Springs, beginning at the Intersection of Ramon Road and Gene Autry Trail, south on Gene Autry Trail to East Palm Canyon Drive (Highway 111), thence easterly, through several cities, along East Palm • 73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 200 • Ralm Desert, CA 92260 • [760) 346-1127 • FAX [760) 340-5949 263 COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS Canyon Drive, and Highway 111, to Indio at Golf Center Parkway, thence northerly on Golf Center Parkway and ending at the crossing of Indio Boulevard. We are requesting RCTC confirmation, as part of a regularly scheduled meeting, that the Executive Committee's determination that the selected alignment of Highway 111 identified above is qualified under the language of the 1988 ballot to receive the 15% of Measure A funds dedicated to state highway projects in the Coachella Valley. We are also requesting confirmation that the segments of Highway 111 proposed for a TIP amendment are likewise eligible to receive,the 15% of Measure A funds. CVAG respectfully requests RCTC to consider processing these requests. Please inform us of the date of the Commission meeting _when these items will be presented. Should you have any questions, or comment, please contact me or Allyn Waggle. Ve ly yours, . John M. Wohlmuth Executive Director xe: Allyn S. Waggle, Deputy Executive Director 264 • COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS DATE: January 28, 2008 TO: EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE FROM: Allyn S. Waggle, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Consider Determination of Designated Highway 111 Alignmentfor Utilization' of the 15% of (Measure A Dedicated to State Highway Projects STAFF RECOMMENDED MOTION: That the Executive Committee: 1. Determine that In the City of Palm. Springs, Highway 111 begins at the Intersection of Ramon Road and Gene Autry Trail, thence continues Soutar to South Palm Canyon Drive (Highway 111), thence continues East on the Highway 111 Alignment to its Intersection with Golf Center Parkway, thence north to Indio Boulevard in Indio, and; 2. Direct that CVAG Request the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Procese an Amendment to the Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) In order to add. the Segments of Highway 111 In Palm Springs from the Intersection of Ramon Road and Gene Autry Trail North to Vista Chino Drive, thence West to North Palm Canyon Drive, thence Northerly on the Highway 111 Alignment to interstate 10, AS WELL AS, the Segment of Highway 111 in Indio from the Crossing of Golf Center Parkway and Indio Boulevard Northerly to Interstate 10, and; 3. Consider that CVAG Request the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Procese an Amendment to the Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) in order to add the Segments .of Highway 111. from ;the Intersection of Highway 111 and Indio Boulevard Southeasterly through the City of Coachella and Riverside County to the intersection of State Highway 195 (Avenue 66), and; 4. That the Proposed Alignments be Submitted to the Riverside County Transportation Commission for Confirmation and Authorization for Funding_ Tra nsportation 'Technical Advisory Su b-Committeq: At their meeting of October 26t, the TTAS determined the alignment of Highway 111 as shown on the 1988 ballot pamphlet should be the Designated Highway 111 Alignment qualified to receive 15% Measure A State Highway funding. Technical Advisory Committee: At their meeting of November 9th, the TAC tabled action on this item and directed staff to obtain a legal opinion regarding the qualification of projects on the re- aligned segments of I-Gghway 111 to receive the 15% Measure State Highway funding. They also requested an opinion regarding the qualification of projects on the relinquished segments of Highway 111 for these funds. CVAG staff sent a letter to the Riverside County Transportation Commission (ROTC) requesting input from .RCTC's General Counsel, which is: summarized with the following two questions: 265 COACHELLA, VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS First, for the purpose of qualifying 'Highway 111" projects as described in the 1988 Measure ballot language, can CVAG defend itself from a challenge, if raised, to funding projects from the 15% State Highway Account for "officially" designated Highway 111 segments, as now exist in Palm Springs and Indio, ratherthan the "Highway 111"alignment and limits described in the 1988 ballot pamphlet? Second, can the 1988 Measure A 15% State Highway Account funds legally be spent on segments of relinquished State Highway 111, now under local control, but still referred to as Highway. 111 by name? Transportation Committee: At their meeting of November 19h, the Transportation Committee recommended that any projects recommended for funding from the 15% Measure A State Highway funds located on Highway 111 between Ramon Road and Indio Boulevard; as shown on the 1988 Measure A ballot pamphlet, should be first In priority to receive these funds. They further recommended that projects located on the re -aligned segments of Highway 111 should qualify to receive 15% Measure A State Highway funds, but should be second in priority to receive these funds. The Transportation Committee made no distinction regarding the relinquishment of Highway 111. Technical Advisory Committee: At their meeting of January11 "', this item was delivered to the TAC as an Information Only Item. However, the TAC members made this an Action item and. approved the motion that the two cities on Highway 111 impacted by the issue of potentially conflicting, alignments of Highway 111 (Palm Springs for the Vista Chino Drive and Gene Autry Trail alignment verses the South Palm Canyon from Ramon Road to Gene Autry Trail alignment, and. Indio for the Gott Center Parkway from Highway 111 to Interstate 10 alignment versus the Highway 111 from Golf Center Parkway to Indio Boulevard alignment), would be allowed to pick which one of the alignments they wanted to propose for the 15% Measure A State Highway funds dedicated to State Highway improvements Tier 3 Call for Projects. The vote for this motion was 7 Aye, 3 No. The TAC members offered no direction relative to their initial request for a legal opinion from RCTC as described above. Transaortation Committee: At their meeting of January 10. the Transportation Committee members tabled any decision on this item and continued it to the next meeting. BACKGROUND: In the way of background, the ballot document accompanying the 1988 approval of Measure A provided that 15% of the Measure A funds returned to the Coachella Valley would be limited to the improvement of State Highway facilities. That document particularly described Highway 111 as being "Ramon to Indio Boulevard.' In addition, an area map was attached to the ballot pamphlet showing the alignment of Highway 111 qualified for the 15% Measure A State Highway funds. The issue has now been raised as to whether other recognized alignments of "State Highuvay" and/ or "Highway 111" should qualify to receive funds from the 15% Measure A State Highway account. The "State Highway' designation of Highway 111 has been removed from most portions of what was considered Highway 111 in 1988. Many of those original segments of Highway 111 are now . maintained by the adjacent jurisdiction. Further, in Palm Springs, the portion of Vista Chino Drive between Indian Canyon Drive to Gene Autry Trail, as well as the segment of Gene Autry Trail from Vista Chino [hive to South Palm Canyon Drive, have now been designated as State Highway 111 by the State of California. The same designation had been made for the segment of Golf Center ___Parkway.from .Indio Boulevard to Interstate 10 in the city of Indio._ While_ thesesegments may bear the official State Highway 111 designation, they are not commonly referred to as Highway 111 by long-time Coachella Valley drivers. 266 • COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS After the November presentation, the TAC was disinclined to make a determination regarding the designation of Highway 111 without additional information and a legal opinion regarding their options. As requested by the TAC, staff sent the attached letter to the Riverside County Transportation Commission(RCTC) requesting advice from their legal counsel. Atthe present time, staff has not received an answer from our letter to RCTC. CVAG staff also requested clarification from Caltrans as to what segments of Highway 111 had been formally relinquished, and what officially constituted relinquishment According to Caltrans, relinquishment officially occurs when the relinquishment agreement is recorded. CVAG received a map and aocompanying tables from Caltrans, and has summarized that informationon the attached map. In essence,-Caltrans currently recognizes as official state highway right of way the segment of Highway 111 from rfs departure from interstate 10, northwest of Palm Springs, south to Vista Chino Drive, east to Gene Autry Trail, then south again. to East Palm Canyon Drive (formerly Highway 111) in Palm Springs, then east again to the city limits between Palm Springs and Rancho Mirage, where the official state highway designation ends. The segments of Highway 111 in Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, Indian Wells, La Quinta, Indio and Coachella have been, or will be by Spring 2008, relinquished from state control. (Palm Desert relinquishment is scheduled to record in March, 20D8, through La Quinta in February, 2008, and for the Riverside County segment from the Coachella city limit south to Avenue 66 ( State Highway 195 } recordation of the relinquishment is yet to be determined though an agreement for relinquishment has been executed.) The segment of Golf Center Parkway within the city limits of Indio Is no longer officially state right of way. i Of related information, State Highway 74 In Palm Desert is scheduled to record relinquishment in March 2008. Relinquishment of State Highway 86, being the previous alignment along Harrison Street, within the Coachella city limits, as well as the County segment south of Coachella to its connection to State Route 86S, is yet to be determined, though an agreement for relinquishment also has been executed. Likewise, relinquishment of the segment of State Highway 195 from where it now crosses SR86S (at Avenue 66), to where it rejoins SR86S near Avenue 74, is yet to be • determined, though an agreement for relinquishment has been executed. FISCAL ANALYSIS: The designation/ confirmation of the Highway 111 alignment will qualify those selected- roadways for utilization of the 15% Measure A State Highway funds projected to be available for a'Tier 3" call for projects. The alignment selected will not negatively impact any other CVAG transportation funds. 267 AGEND A ITEM 8F RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 11, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Obligational Authority Loan to Sacramento Council of Governments STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to receive and file the Obligational Authority Loan to Sacramento Council of Governments (SACOG). BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission is responsible for allocating and expending federal funds including Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) and Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds. These federal funds are required to be obligated or encumbered on an annual basis. If 100% of the authorized funding is not encumbered in a given year, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) can rescind the funds and essentially give it to another state. In California, jCaltrans administers and monitors the federal funds. Caltrans identifies each region's annual federal fund target, which is referred to as Obligational Authority (OA). A region's OA target must be obligated or encumbered each year. Since project delivery schedules vary from year to year, Caltrans' OA management policy allows regions to loan and borrow OA. This policy helps regions that may not meet their OA target, but need OA above its target in a future year. For example, if a region has an OA target of $30 million and based on project schedules will deliver only $20 million, it can loan $10 million to a region than needs to encumber funds above its OA target. In turn, the region borrowing the OA will pay it back in a year agreed upon by the two regions. This year, the (',Commission will have a balance of OA. The SACOG has requested to borrow $6.2 million of OA and pay the Commission back in FY 2010/11. This arrangement helps protect the Commission's $6.2 million that the Commission will not be obligating, and ensures that the Commission will be able to program the funds in a year that the Commission will need OA above the Commission's target level. In 2006, the Commission entered into an OA loan agreement with the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG). The Commission will receive Agenda Item 8F 268 repayment of OA in fiscal year 2009/10, which will allow the Commission to program additional federal funds needed for the 60/215 East Junction project. As stated above, there is no fiscal impact in loaning the OA to SACOG. The Commission is not actually loaning dollars. The Commission is allowing SACOG to utilize OA for federal funds that the Commission will not be obligating this fiscal year. In turn, SACOG will allow the Commission to use the funds in a year that the Commission will need more obligational authority than the Commission target level to deliver projects upcoming projects on State Route 91, Interchange 215, and the Perris Valley Line. Agenda Item 8F 269 AGENDA ITEM 8G • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 11, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2009-13 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans for Local Streets and Roads STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the FY 2009-13 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) for local streets and roads as submitted. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Measure A Ordinance requires each recipient of local streets and roads monies to annually provide to the Commission a five-year plan on how those funds are to be expended in order to receive its Measure A disbursements. In addition, the Coachella Valley and Western County cities and the county must be participating in either the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) or Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program. The agencies are required to submit the annual certification of maintenance of effort (MOE) along with documentation supporting the calculation. On March 18, 2008, Commission staff provided the local agencies with Measure A revenue projections for local streets and roads to assist them in preparation of the required CIP. The agencies were asked to submit their CIPs by May 12, 2008, for submission to the Commission on June 11, 2008. To date, the Commission has received the required CIP, MOE certification, and supporting documentation from the following local agencies in the county: Western County Coachella Valley Palo Verde Valley Banning Riverside Indian Wells Blythe Beaumont Riverside County Indio Riverside County Corona San Jacinto Palm Desert Hemet Temecula Palm Springs Lake Elsinore Rancho Mirage Moreno Valley Riverside County Perris Cathedral City Agenda Item 8G 270 The six cities that have not submitted all of the required documents include: Catimesa, Canyon Lake, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Murrieta, and Norco. Commission staff has informed city staff that no disbursement of Measure A funds for local streets and roads will be made until all of the required documents are received and approved by the Commission. The city of La Quinta does not receive Measure A funds because it does not participate in CVAG's TUMF program. Attachment: Capital Improvement Plans Posted on Commission Website • Agenda Item 8G 271 84021 JR STAGECOACH TOXIN USA ESTABLISHED 1913 May 16, 2008 City of Banning Public Works Department Mr. Jerry Rivera, Project.Manager unt7,7 4080 Lemon St., 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92502 Re: Project Status Report for Fiscal Year 2008 Dear Mr. Rivera: This letter is:written to provide you ,witkan update of the approved Measure "A" streets from the 2008 Five -Year Measure"A" Capital Improvement Project list. The Specifications for the City of Banning's Project No. 2008-02 "A.C. Overlay, Pavement Rehabilitation and Sidewalk Improvements on Various Streets," includes streets to be overlaid with Measure "A" funds. These streets are attached as Exhibit "A". The streets previously. listed for. Fiscal Year 2008 were moved to fiscal years 2010 and 2011. The project was awarded by the City Council on April 22, 2008. The construction of the project should therefore begin by May 23, 2008, and be completed by August, 2008. If you need any further assistance, please contact me at (951) 922-3130. Sincerely Yours,..... ate/ Ann Marie I.oconte, P.E. Associate Civil Engineer Attachment Copy: Duane Burk, Director of Public Works . Kahono Oei, City Engineer File. . . X.29.01 99 E. Ramsey St. •P.O. Box 998 • Banning, CA 92220-0998 • (951) 922-3130 • Fax (951) 922-3141 EXHIBIT "A" STREET PAVING LIST,2008 No. Street Locations 1-1/2" to 2-1/2" of A.C. Overlay 1-1/2" of A.C. Overlay 6" A.C. Berm 4" of A.C. over Base Grade, Compact, and Place Specified Base 1. Westward Avenue, from Sunset Avenue to 22nd Street (south side) * * 6" Base 2. Wesley Street, from about 450 easterly of SanGorgonioAvenue to Hargrave Street * * * F" Ba-e .. 3. Hathaway Street, from Wesley Street to Porter Road * * 6" Base 4. 15S Street, from Hays Street to Ramsey Street 5. Florida Street and Repplier Road intersection * 3" A.C. * 4" Base 6. Wesley Street and Hargrave Street intersection (southeast comer) * * * 6" Base 7.. Alessandro Road, from Hoffer Street to King Street.(west side) * * * 6" Base 8. Wilson Street, from Apex Street to Highland Springs Avenue (north side) 9. Williams Street, north side, west of 381 E. Williams Street * * ' * 8" Base 11. Ramsey Street, berm in median, east of Omar Street on east bound side 12. San Gorgonio Avenue and Hoffer Street intersection (northeast corner) NOTE: Asterisk in column indicates the type of street improvement to be performed. The exact number of streets to be improved will be determined at the time of award of the Contract by the City Council. Thus, the number of locations may be reduced, along with associated Bid items, such as A.C. overlay, base, clearing and grubbing, utility cover adjustments, striping, etc., for a particular. street. An amount of $65,000 from the street pay.'ing(Bid Schedule .I) must be completed by June 30, 2008 ,to ensure that the City receives Proposition 42 funds. The Contractor must meet this deadline and show this.in the Project Schedule submitted to the City Engineer after the Contract is awarded. 83888 JR City of Beaumont 550 E. 6th street - Beaumont, CA92223 (951) 769-8520 FAX (951) 769-8526 Email: cityhall@ci.beaumonrca.us www.d.beairmont,ca.us u - \\17 May 12, 2008 Ms. Anne Mayer, Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, California 92502-2208 RE: City of Beaumont Five Year Capital Improvement Plan and Maintenance of Effort Certification Statement for Measure `A' Funding Dear Ms. Mayer: Please find the enclosed copies of the above reference documents that have been prepared in accordance with the directives of the Riverside County Transportation Commission. Please let me know if any additional information is required at this time. The City of Beaumont appreciates the opportunity to provide the documents and looks forward to working with you and your staff on Measure `A' projects. Thank you very much for your time and consideration in these matters. lan Kapanicas City Manager Enclosure X.29.02 FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN for RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE `A' TRANSPORTATION FUNDING Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: The City of Beaumont May 12, 2008 Table of Contents Section I. Executive Summary II. Measure `A' Projects III. Maintenance of Effort Certification Statement i I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Five Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) has been prepared in accordance with the directives of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) in accordance with the requirements of Measure `A' for funding of street and road projects. Section II of the plan describes the planned projects and provides a detailed budget and schedule for implementation of the Plan. II. MEASURE `A' PROJECTS The proposed Measure `A' Projects included in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan are consistent with the City of Beaumont Circulation Element Update. The update was based on an extensive City -funded computer modeling effort in conjunction with the RCTC, Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG), the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), the County of Riverside Transportation and Land Management Agency and neighboring cities. SCAG has found the City of Beaumont's transportation model to be consistent with the Regional Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) model. The following table provides a summary of the projects proposed for Measure `A' funding as part of the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan and the confirmed Engineer's Estimate of design, administration and construction costs. The attached Appendix includes the executed copy of the Maintenance of Effort Certification Statement required by the RCTC for Fiscal Year 2008- 2009. 1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2009-2013 Agency: City of Beaumont Prepared by: Public Works Department Date: May 12, 2008 Page 1 of 1 Fiscal Year PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST STATUS MEASURE "A" 2006 2008 Palm Avenue, Sixth Street to Oak Valley Parkway Rehabilitation $2,800,000 Completed $946,000 2008 2009 Pennsylvania Avenue, Sixth Street to Oak Valley Parkway Rehabilitation $1,259,000 Under Construction $470,000 2009 2010 Brookside Avenue, Cherry Avenue to Beaumont Avenue Widening and Rehabilitation $1,004,000 Design in Process $480,000 2010 2011 Eighth Street, Beaumont Avenue to Xenia Avenue Rehabilitation $700,000 Pending Design $499,000 2011 2012 Oak Valley Parkway, Beaumont Avenue to Cherry Avenue Rehabilitation $750,000 Pending Design $499,000 2012 2013 Brookside Avenue, Highland Springs Avenue to Cherry Avenue Rehabilitation $750,000 Pending Design $499,000 2 11 .;PO r= 3 =u.+ �. II pp ;1l r,J rt���L I IFI ')I L � 3AV VIMT< : =5.?ir7 Il 1 _ iniritednr, -- : t l l 1J' �7{ - 1:J1��� - �J IE` t„ � t�1 1I.�W tr f i'ii JLLL I; y971Egi471l1 11 RhTEERM° 1 priff IEI i 'IpP t7i1P� f4'yt"�� � I 1' t --r MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned hereby agrees and certifies for &F aint t % 1-11.41-4 e "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 88-1 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure "A" funds. Dated: , 20 . 83914 JR CITY OF B LYTH E 235 North Broadway / Blythe, California 92225 Phone (760) 922-6161 / Fax (760) 922-4938 May 9, 2008 Riverside County Transportation Commission Attn: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Dear Ms. Trevino: P �t `f i 2 MB 11r1p h r❑���%l?i.FY ah `.IAi ll!IG Cl}:YINC SMIY Enclosed is the City of Blythe's Measure "A" Five Year Capital Improvement Plan for Local Streets and Roads. This item is included in the 2008/09 Comprehensive Annual Operating and Capital Budget which is scheduled to be presented to the Blythe City Council for adoption at its regularly scheduled meeting of June 24, 2008. Please present this material to your commission in the City's behalf. If you should have any questions, please direct them to Mr. Jim Rodkey, Public Works Director at (760) 922-6611. Charles Hull Acting City Manager xc: Jim Rodkey, Public Works Director Chad Aaby, City Engineer Helen Colbert, Director of Finance Measure "A" Project File X.29.03 CITY OF BLYTHE MEASURE "A" PROJECT STATUS REPORT PROJECT Hobsonway Reconstruction Wheel Chair/ADA Curb Ramps Alleyway Improvements Fog & Chip Seal Asphalt/Base Materials Sidewalk & Street Improvements Combined Streets Project Traffic Signals Rehabilitation East Hobsonway & Intake Traffic Signalization DESCRIPTION Engineering/Design (Phase 2) 77% Completed/Install ADA Ramps On going Annual Improvements Street Improvements On Hobsonway completed Annual Stock pile for Street Improvements City Sidewalk Improvements Annual Street Improvements RehabilitationfTraffic Signals FY08 Project Completed New Project for FY 09 EXP. COMP. 2009/10 1998/13 2008/09 2007/08 2009/13 2008/09 2009/13 2008/09 Project Design/Construction 2009/11 CITY OF BLYTHE MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CALCULATION MEASURE "A" 2007/08 2008 Current year local discretionary expenditures $646,695 Less: Base Year Excess if current year expenditures over Base Year Excess local expenditures at beginning of year Excess local expenditures at end of year (475,677) 171,018 4,559,595 $4,730,613 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned hereby agrees and certifies for the City of Blythe (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 88-1 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction of loss of "Measure A" funds. Dated: May 09, 2008 Charles Hull t Acting City Manager ATTEST: Patti Whitney City Clerk 000`OOL`£L ntllO14Ntl2!°J -- - 000`S8L`Z --- £LOZ 000`OLL`L --- ZLOZ -- -- 000`OSL`L --- LLOZ 000`668`£ --- OLOZ _.000`006`Z --- 600Z -- - ■- 21A 213d 11/101 21tl3A 11/3Sld NOISSIWWOO E 10Z INV/1001W N011V1210dSNV211 - 600Z saNnA i1V3A 1V301 1V3S1.4 ..V.. 321nSV3W A1Nn03 3a1S213AR1 000`004`£4 rI\/101 aN111I0 -- 000`S8L`Z --- £LOZ -- 000`0LL`4 --- Z40Z -- 000`09L`4 --- 440Z -- 000`668`£ --- 040Z -- 000`006`Z --- 600Z ?lA 213d 11f101--- 211/3A I1/3SId -- NOISSIWINO3 £1,0Z Wtl21002Id NOI1d1210dSNd211 - 600Z SCINflA 21113A 1V301 1V3SIA ..V.. 32111SV3W A1Nf103 301S213A121 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2009 Agency: City of Blythe Prepared By: Helen Colbert Phone No.: (760) 922-6161 Date: May 9, 2007 Page 1 of 5 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'S) MEASURE "A" FUNDS ($000'S) 1 2008/09 Traffic Signals/Rehabilitation $65 $65 2 2008/09 Administrative Overhead $100 $100 3 2008/09 Sidewalk Improvements $50 $50 4 1998/13 Wheelchair Ramps (ADA) (50,000/yr) $1,000 $50 5 2008/11 E. Hobsonway & Intake/Traffic Signals (Design) $2,500 $1,000 6 2008/09 Asphalt Emulsion Oil/Base Material (Annual Stock), $175 $175 7 2008/09 Combined Streets Annual Improvement Project $100 $100 8 2004/13 Hobsonway/CVAG Loan Payment (Phase 1) $2,400 $260 9 2008/09 Hobsonway Reconstruction/Design (Phase 2) $2,000 $1,000 10 2008/09 Alleyway Improvements $100 $100 $2,900 Agency: Prepared By: Phone No.: Date: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2010 City of Blythe Helen Colbert (760) 922-6161 May 9, 2008 Page 2 of 5 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'S) MEASURE "A" FUNDS ($000'S) 1 1998/13 Wheelchair Ramps (ADA) (50,000/yr) $1,000 $50 2 2008/11 E. Hobsonway & Intake Traffic Signals $2,500 $1,000 3 2009/10 Alleyway Improvements/Annual Improvements $100 $100 4 2009/10 Fog & Chip Seal $100 $100 5 2004/13 Hobsonway/CVAG Loan Payment (Phase 1) $2,400 $270 6 2009/10 Hobsonway Reconstruction/Design (Phase 2) $2,000 $2,000 7 2009M0 Administrative Overhead $100 $100 8 2009/10 Asphalt Emulsion Oil/Base Material (Annual Stock) $175 $175 9 2009/10 Combined Streets Annual Improvement Project $100 $100 $3,895 Agency: Prepared By: Phone No.: Date: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2011 City of Blythe Helen Colbert (760) 922-6161 May 9, 2009 Page 3 of 5 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000%) MEASURE "A" FUNDS ($000'$) 1 1998/13 Wheelchair Ramps (ADA) (50,000/yr) $1,000 $50 2 2008/11 E. Hobsonway & Intake Traffic Signals $2,500 $500 3 2010/11 Alleyway Improvements/Annual Improvements $100 $50 4 2010/11 Asphalt Emulsion Oil/Base Material (Annual Stock) $175 $175 5 2010/11 Combined Streets Annual Improvement Project $100 $100 6 2010/11 Administrative Overhead $100 $100 4 2004/13 Hobsonway/CVAG Loan Payment (Phase 1) $2,400 $275 5 2010/12 Hobsonway Reconstruction/Design (Phase 3) $2,000 $500 $1,750 Agency: Prepared By: Phone No.: Date: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2012 City of Blythe Helen Colbert (760) 922-6161 May 9, 2008 Page 4 of 5 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'$) MEASURE "A" FUNDS ($000'$) 1 1998/13 Wheelchair Ramps (ADA) (50,000/yr) $1,000 $150 2 2004/13 Hobsonway/CVAG Loan Payment (Phase 1) $2,400 $245 3 2010112 Hobsonway Reconstruction/Design (Phase 3) $2,000 $1,000. 4 2011/12 Alleyway Improvements/Annual Improvements $100 $100 5 2011/12 Asphalt Emulsion Oil/Base Material (Annual Stock) $100 $100 6 2011/12 Combined Streets Annual Improvement Project $100 $100 7 2011/12 Administrative Overhead $75 $75 $1,770 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2013 Agency: City of Blythe Prepared By: Helen Colbert Phone No.: (760) 922-6161 Date: May 09, 2008 Page 5 of 5 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'S) MEASURE "A" FUNDS ($000'S) 1 2004/13 Hobsonway/CVAG Loan Payment (Phase 1) $2,400 $1,260 2 2010/13 Hobsonway Reconstruction/Design (Phase 3) $2,000 $1,000 3 2012/13 Alleyway Improvements/Annual Improvements $100 $100 4 2012/13 Asphalt Emulsion Oil/Base Material (Annual Stock) $175 $175 5 2012/13 Combined Streets Annual Improvement Project $150 $150 6 2012/13 Administrative Overhead $100 $100 $2,785 83880 JR TEL: 951.413.3130 FAX: 951.413.3170 WWW.MORENO-VALLEY.CA.US May 7, 2008 FED EX MORENO l VALLEY WHERE DREAMS Mr. Jerry Rivera, Program Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street Riverside, California 92502 SOAR 14177 FREDERICK STREET P. 0. BOX 88005 MORENO VALLEY, CA 92552-0805 Subject: Fiscal Years 2009-2013 Measure "A" Local Streets and Roads Capital Improvement Plan Dear Mr. Rivera: The City of Moreno Valley is pleased to submit its Fiscal Year 2009-2013 Measure "A" Local Streets and Roads Capital Improvement Plan. Although RCTC requires this information in mid -May 2008, the City Council may make changes to the list of projects as part of the City's annual budget approval process. If Council revises the list of projects, the amended Measure "A" CIP will be forwarded to RCTC. Supporting documents included for review by the Riverside,County Transportation Commission are the following: • Project Status Report for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2008 • Certification of Maintenance of Effort (MOE) • MOE Supporting Documentation For questions regarding the Measure "A" CIP please contact Linda Wilson, Senior Management Analyst, at (951) 413-3132 or by email at lindawi@moval.org. Sincerely, Linda Wilson Senior Management Analyst [5, C PM r 8 ruin RIVCi.v3,:. COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION X.29.12 I PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT L Letter to Mr. Jerry Rivera May 7, 2008 Page 2 Enclosures: Project Status Report for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2008 (pp. 1-4) Fiscal Years 2009-2013 Measure "A" Local Streets and Roads Capital Improvement Plan (pp.5-13) Certification of Maintenance of Effort (MOE) MOE Supporting Documentation c: File Robert G. Gutierrez, City Manager Steve Chapman, Finance Director Prem Kumar, Deputy Public Works Director/Assistant City Engineer WACapProj\CapProj\Measure FM -Year CIP12009-13\Letters-Memos\Cover Letter.doc RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2009 - 2013 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 1 of 12 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Date: June 1, 2008 Item No. Project Funding Year Project Name/Limits Project Type Status Total Cost 1,OOOs Measure A Funding 1,OOOs 1 2007/08 Measure A Program Budget 54140 Program Budget Provide functions for transportation projects and services: annual update of 5-Year CIP, revisions to Standard Plans, annual update to DBE specifications, development of DBE AADPL, preparation of grant applications, quarterly utility coordination, MSHCP reporting, and project engineering and right of way services for unfunded new projects. 352 352 2 2007/08 Annual Pavement Rehabilitation 56330 Rehabilitation On -going annual program. 2,827 ' 1,925 3 2007/08 Bicycle Lane Account (BTA) 65320 Bicycle Lane On -going annual program. Match funding for Lasselle St. Class II Bike Lane - Iris to JFK. 201 2 118 4 2007/08 Perris Blvd./Ramona Expressway to Perris Valley Storm Drain Lateral "A" 66622 Street Construction Funded by TUMF. Return funds to Fund Balance. 99 99 5 2007/08 Solar Powered Flashing Beacons and Speed Radar Sign 66624 Flashing Beacons Design and construction of flashing beacons for school sites. SR2S Grant not awarded. Return funds to Fund Balance. 321 321 6 2007/08 Route 60/Redlands East Bound Ramps and Traffic Signal 66625 Freeway Ramp and Traffic Signal Design to be completed August 2007. Construction schedule December 2007 to May 2008. 1,123 1,123 7 2007/08 Graham St./Bay Ave. Traffic Signal 66626 Traffic Signal Design and construction of traffic signal. Design Phase March 2007 to November 2007. 272 272 8 2007/08 Perris Blvd. Southbound Lane into Route 60 Westbound On -Ramp 66627 Project Study Report Project study report to identify design and construction costs. 60 60 1 Traffic Congestion Relief (Prop 42) - $901,687 2 FY 07/08 BTA Funding - $83,700 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2009 - 2013 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 2 of 12 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Date: June 1, 2008. Item No. Project Funding Year - Project Name/Limits Project Type Status Total Cost 1,OOOs Measure A Funding 1,OOOs 9 2007/08 Raised Median on Alessandro Blvd. at Gaye St. 66727 Median Installation, striping and signing. 160 160 10 2007/2008 Traffic Signal at Day Street and Cottonwood Avenue 66824 Traffic Signal Projected completed January 2007. Final reimb payment to City of Riverside for Moreno Valley's share of costs. Return remaining funds to Fund Balance. 351 351 11 2007/08 Heacock St. Bridge/PVSD Lateral A 66825 Bridge Environmental study and design of bridge 567 3 517 12 2007/08 Asphalt Raised Median Cactus Ave. East of Graham St. 66826 Median Design, construction and related signing/striping of an asphalt raised median. Project placed on hold. Return funds to Fund Balance. 50 50 13 2007/08 Moreno Beach Dr./Route 60 Right -Turn Lane Improvements 66827 Street Improvements Construct new right -turn lane on eastbound SR 60 off - ramp and modify traffic signal to provide eastbound right- turn. 75 75 14 2007/08 Temporary Median Redlands Blvd./Maltby to Kimberly 66926 Median Installation, striping and signing of a temporary AC berm median. Project placed on hold. Return funds to Fund Balance. 24 24 15 2007/08 Redlands Blvd./Route 60 Westbound Ramp Traffic Signal 66927 Traffic Signal • Design of traffic signal. 80 80 16 2007/08 Pilot Program for Traffic Signal System Upgrade 67025 Traffic Signal Upgrade First step to an upgraded advanced traffic signal system that consists of advanced traffic signal controllers and operating software. 70 70 17 2007/08 Pavement Management (PAVER) 67121 Street Pavement Condition On -going annual program to update condition of street pavement. 69 69 18 2007/08 Indian St./Cactus Ave. Improvements 67123 Street/Storm Drain Improvements Construction of street and storm drain improvements. 1,498 1,498 3 HBRRP Funding - $50,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2009 - 2013 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 3 of 12 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Date: June 1, 2008 Item No. Project Funding Year Project Name/Limits Project Type Status Total Cost 1,OOOs Measure A Funding 1,OOOs 19 2007/08 Ironwood Ave./Pigeon Pass Lane to Graham St. 67423 Reconstruction Design and construction of street improvements 2,184 4 1,073 20 2007/08 Aqueduct Bike Trail Projects/JFK Dr. - Cottonwood Ave. 67424 Bicycle Trail Warranty walk and as-builts. Project completed March 2007. Return remaining funds to Fund Balance. 135 5 117 21 2007/08 Heacock/Gentian -Poppystone & Frederick/Pigeon Pass/Sunnymead- Hemlock 67425 . Reconstruction Construction 2,684 2,684 22 2007/08 Aqueduct Bikeway Improvement/Indian St. - Fay Ave. 67524 Bicycle Trail Design, right of way acquisition and construction. 1,351 1,351 23 2007/08 Residential Traffic Management Program (Speed Hump Program) 82824 Speed Hump On -going annual program for design and construction of speed humps. 203 203 24 2007/08 School Walkway Infill 82825 Sidewalk On -going annual program for design and construction of sidewalks along school routes for improved pedestrian . safety. 911 6 295 25 2007/08 Slurry Seal Program 84830 Resurface On -going annual program. 3,487 3,487 26 2007/08 Surface Recycling 85020 Rehabilitation On -going annual program. 238 238 "TEA 21 STP Funding - $1,111,355 5 RDA - $18,000 6 General Fund - $301,745; SB 821 - $313,705 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2009 - 2013 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 4 of 12 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Date: June 1, 2008 Item No. Project Funding Year Project Name/Limits Project Type Status Total Cost 1,OOOs Measure A Funding 1,OOOs 27 2007/08 Street Improvement Program (SIP) 85523. Street Improvements ' On -going annual program. 1,601 ' 645 28 2007/08 Route 60/Nason St. Interchange 89720 Interchange Improvements EB/WB Ramps Design, utility relocation, and right of way. Estimated construction start date is April 2009. 4,300 4,300 2007/08 Subtotal 25,293 ' 21,557 * Includes FY 06/07 Carryover Funds 7 Traffic Congestion Relief (Prop 42) - $416,041 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2009 - 2013 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 5 of 12 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Date: June 1, 2008 Item No. Project Funding Year Project Name/Limits Project Type Status Total Cost 1,000s Measure A Funding 1,000s 29 2008/09 Measure A Program Budget 54140 Program Budget Provide functions for transportation projects and services: annual update of 5-Year CIP, revisions to Standard Plans, annual update to DBE specifications, development of DBE AADPL, preparation of grant applications, quarterly utility coordination, MSHCP reporting, and project engineering and right of way services for unfunded new projects. 377 377 30 2008/09 Annual Pavement Rehabilitation 56330 Rehabilitation On -going annual program. 5,888 8 1,050 31 2008/09 Bicycle Lane Account (BTA) 65320 Bicycle Lane On -going annual program. Matching funds for future grants. 56 56 32 2008/09 Route 60/Redlands East Bound Ramps and Traffic Signal 66625 Freeway Ramp and Traffic Signal Construction 1,283 1,283 33 2008/09 Graham St./Bay Ave. Traffic Signal 66626 Traffic Signal Construction 378 378 34 2008/09 Perris Blvd. Southbound Lane into Route 60 Westbound On -Ramp 66627 Project Study Report Project study report to identify design and construction costs. 160 160 35 2008/09 Raised Median on Alessandro Blvd. at Gaye St. 66727 Median Installation, striping and signing. 160 160 36 2008/09 Heacock St. Bridge/PVSD Lateral A 66825 Bridge Environmental study and design of bridge 567 9 367 d Traffic Congestion Relief (Prop 42) - $2,235,000; Proposition 1 B - $2,602,670 "HBRRP Funding - $200,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2009 - 2013 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 6 of 12 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Date: June 1, 2008 Item No. Project Funding Year Project Name/Limits Project Type Status Total Cost 1,000s Measure A Funding 1,000s 37 2008/09 Moreno Beach Dr./Route 60 Right -Turn Lane Improvements 66827 Street Improvements Construct new right -turn lane on eastbound SR 60 off - ramp and modify traffic signal to provide eastbound right turn. 452 452 38 2008/09 Redlands Blvd./Route 60 Westbound Ramp Traffic Signal 66927 Traffic Signal Design of traffic signal. 110 110 39 2008/09 Pilot Program for Traffic Signal System Upgrade 67025 Traffic Signal Upgrade First step to an upgraded. advanced traffic signal system that consists of advanced traffic signal controllers and operating software. 70 70 40 2008/09 Indian St./Cactus Ave. Improvements 67123 Street/Storm Drain Improvements Construction of street and storm drain improvements. 1,324 10 724 41 2008/09 Ironwood Ave./Pigeon Pass Lane to Graham St. 67423 Reconstruction Project completed. Funds for warranty and as-builts. 5 5 42 2008/09 Heacock/Gentian -Poppystone & Frederick/Pigeon Pass/Sunnymead- Hemlock 67425 Reconstruction Construction 1,805 1i 430 43 2008/09 Aqueduct Bikeway Improvement/Indian St. - Fay Ave. 67524 Bicycle Trail Design, right of way acquisition and construction. 938 938 44 2008/09 Residential Traffic Management Program (Speed Hump Program) 82824 Speed Hump On -going annual program for design and construction of speed humps. 155 155 45 2008/09 School Walkway Infill 82825 Sidewalk On -going annual program for design and construction of sidewalks along school routes for improved pedestrian safety. 284 12 68 46 2008/09 Slurry Seal Program 84830 Resurface On -going annual program. 1,882 1,882 10 HES Grant - $600,000 11 TEA 21 STP Construction Funding - $1,375,174 12 SR2S Cycle 7 Grant Award - $215,820 (Alessandro & Indian Sidewalk Gap Closure) RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2009 - 2013 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 7 of 12 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Date: June 1, 2008 Item No. Project Funding Year Project Name/Limits Project Type Status Total Cost 1,000s Measure A Funding 1,000s 47 2008/09 Surface Recycling 85020 Rehabilitation On -going annual program. 120 120 48 2008/09 Street Improvement Program (SIP) 85523 Street Improvements On -going annual program. 250 250 49 2008/09 Route 60/Nason St. Interchange 89720 Interchange Improvements EB/WB Ramps Design, utility relocation, and right of way. Estimated construction start date is April 2009. 3,663 13 1,463 50 2008/09 Cottonwood/Pattilynn School Crossing Traffic Signal Traffic Signal Design and Construction 311 311 51 2008/09 Cottonwood Avenue at Oliver Street Striping/Channelization/Roadside Safety Signing and Striping Construction 25 25 52 2008/09 Roadside Safety Improvement Elder West of Nason Signing, Striping and Guardrail Construction 54 54 53 2008/09 Indian Street/Dracaea Avenue Traffic Signal Traffic Signal Design 39 39 54 2008/09 Kitching Street/Bay Avenue Traffic Signal Traffic Signal Design 80 80 2008/09 Subtotal 20,436 11,007 * Includes FY 07/08 Carryover Funds '' CMAQ - $2,200,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2009 - 2013 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 8 of 12 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Date: June 1, 2008 Item No. Project Funding Year Project Name/Limits Project Type Status Total Cost 1,OOOs Measure A Funding 1,OOOs 55 2009/10 Measure A Program Budget 54140 Program Budget On -going annual program. 396 396 56 2009/10 Annual Pavement Rehabilitation 56330 Rehabilitation On -going annual program. 1,900 t4 200 57 2009/10 Bicycle Lane Account (BTA) 65320 Bicycle Lane On -going annual program. Matching funds for BTA. 110 t5 60 58 2009/10 Perris Blvd. Southbound Lane into Route 60 Westbound On -Ramp 66627 Project Study Report Construction 183 183 59 2009/10 Raised Median on Alessandro Blvd. at Gaye St. 66727 Median Installation, striping and signing. 336 336 60 2009/10 Redlands Blvd./Route 60 Westbound Ramp Traffic Signal 66927 Traffic Signal Construction 310 310 61 2009/10 Residential Traffic Management Program (Speed Hump Program) 82824 Speed Hump On -going annual program for design and construction of speed humps. 85 85 62 2009/10 School Walkway Infill 82825 Sidewalk On -going annual program for design and construction of sidewalks. 200 200 63 2009/10 Slurry Seal Program 84830 Resurface On -going annual program. 1,974 1,974 14 Traffic Congestion Relief (Prop 42) - $700,000; Proposition 1 B - $1,000,000 15 Anticipation of Receiving BTA Funding 000'009$ - uoge.ijsuowaa IZ V3191 Zb6`17 ZPVL Ie;o;qnS 0I./600Z 00Z 00Z u6lsaa leu619 °Weil 1eu619 ollleal anuany AeoaallS 614131!N 01./600Z 89 8£Z 8EZ u6isaa leu61S oweii 1eu61S owed anuany eeeoeianaallS uelPul 011600Z L9 Ott 9L Ob6 .01.0Z tienuer s1 amp pep uogonulsuoo palewgs3 /tens p ILI6u pue 'uoileoolaa ,tMP 'u6lsaa sdwe2{ 911N93 s;uawanwdwl a6ueywalul OZL68 a6umpalul 'Is uoseN/09 alnoa 014600Z 99 00Z 09Z •wei6oid lenuue 6u1o6-u0 s;uawanwdwl leallS E3998 (dIS) wekoid;uawenwdwl leads 06/600Z 99 OZl OZI• 1wei6wd lenuue 6up6-u0 uollePllgega2i OZ098 6u11oAoa21 aoei-mS 014600Z b9 s000`4 6u!Pund V &inseam' s000`I. ;sow Ie;ol sn;e;S eclAi aafad s;Iwll/aweN;oafwd JeaA 6ulpund ;oafoad 'oN well 800Z ' l aunt :a ea uosum epun :l(q paJedaad Z 6 Jo 6 96ed /fallen ouanNAl;o 40 :Aoua6y £ 60Z - 600Z Ad INV210021d SONnJ IVOOI V 321f1SV31A1 NOISSIWWOO NOI1V1210dSNV211 A1N1100 301S213A121 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2009 - 2013 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 10 of 12 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Date: June 1, 2008 Item No. Project Funding Year Project Name/Limits Project Type Status Total Cost 1,OOOs Measure A Funding 1,OOOs 69 2010/11 Measure A Program Budget 54140 Program Budget On -going annual program. 415 415 70 2010/11 Annual Pavement Rehabilitation 56330 Rehabilitation On -going annual program. $1,475 17 $475 71 2010/11 Bicycle Lane Account (BTA) 65320 Bicycle Lane On -going annual program. Matching funds for BTA. $110 18 $60 72 2010/11 Residential Traffic Management Program (Speed Hump Program) 82824 Speed Hump On -going annual program for design and construction of speed humps. 85 85 73 2010/11 School Walkway Infill 82825 Sidewalk On -going annual program for design and construction of sidewalks. $200 $200 74 2010/11 Slurry Seal Program 84830 Resurface On -going annual program. $2,000 $2,000 75 2010/11 Surface Recycling 85020 Rehabilitation On -going annual program. $120 $120 76 2010/11 Street Improvement Program (SIP) 85523 Street Improvements On -going annual program. $200 $200 77 2010/11 Route 60/Nason St. Interchange 89720 Interchange Improvements EBN1B Ramps Design, utility relocation, and right of way. Estimated construction start date is April 2009. 4,937 19 937 20010/11 Subtotal $9,542 $4,492 Traffic Congestion Relief (Prop 42) - $1,000,000 Anticipation of Receiving BTA Funding 19TEA 21 Demonstration - $4,000,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2009 - 2013 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 11 of 12 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Date: June 1, 2008 Item No. Project Funding Year Project Name/Limits Project Type Status Total Cost 1,OOOs Measure A Funding 1,OOOs 78 2011/12 Measure A Program Budget 54140 Program Budget On -going annual program. 436 436 79 2011/12 Annual Pavement Rehabilitation 56330 Rehabilitation On -going annual program. $990 $990 80 2011/12 Bicycle Lane Account (BTA) 65320 Bicycle Lane On -going annual program. Matching funds for BTA. $110 2° $60 81 2011/12 School Walkway Infill 82825 Sidewalk On -going annual program for design and construction of sidewalks. $250 $250 82 2011/12 Slurry Seal Program 84830 Resurface On -going annual program. $2,000 $2,000 83 2011/12 Surface Recycling 85020 Rehabilitation On -going annual program. $120 $120 84 2011/12 Street Improvement Program (SIP) 85523 Street Improvements On -going annual program. $250 $250 2011/12 Subtotal $4,156 $4,106 Anticipation of Receiving BTA Funding s£L`8Z$ 449`04 le;ol uol;oafoid JeaA anld 6u!pund `d1E1 6uln!aoab to uo!ledPILIV Lz 884`4$ 8£Z`4$ Ielo;gnS £L/Z10Z 09Z$ 093 •wea6oad lenuue 6u!o6-uO sluawenoadwl leaa3S EZ998 (dIS) wea6oad wetuenoadwl leeilS E4/Z10Z 46 OZl$ OZ13 •wea6oad lenuue 6uwo6-uO uo!lelll!geyaN OZ098 6u!lortoeu eoepnS El/Z40Z 06 000`n 000`Z$ •wea6ad lenuue 6u!o6-uO eoelinseN OE848 wea6oad leeS kunlS El/Z40Z 68 09Z$ 09Z$ .$)Ilennap!s to uopnAsuoo pue u6!sep aol wea6oad lenuue 6u!o6-u0 )llemep!S 9Z8Z8 Nu' AemNieM pews El/ZIOZ 88 09$ Lz 044$ vie aol spun; 6uNoleW wea6oad lenuue 6up6-uO euel elohlE1 OZE99 (V18) lun000y euei 30019 El/Z40Z L8 090'1$ 090'l$ .wea6oad lenuue 6u!o6-uO uo13e11I1geueu OE£99 uo!lel!Ilgeyab luewened lenuuy El/ZLOZ 98 894 894 •wea6oad lenuue 6u!o6-uO 4e6pn8 wea6wd 041 '9 le6pn8 wea6oad y aanseen £WZIOZ 98 s000`4 6ulpund v °inseam' s000`4 ;soa le;ol sn;e;S eclAi oafad nein/3=N;aafoad ieaA 6ulpund pafoid •oN wall SOOZ ' l eun f :alea uospm epun peaedaad Z4 Jo Z4 a6ed AelleA ouemoj to fyo :lou96y £ 40Z - 600Z Ad Wb21JO21d SCAN 1V301 V 321f1SV31A1 NOISSIWWO3 NOIl`d121OdSNVUI A1Nf1O3 301StGAIN MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned hereby agrees and certifies for the City of Moreno Valley that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 88-1 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure "A" funds. Date: 7, 20ag Reviewed By: Steve Chapman Finance Director/City Treasurer AReviewed By: od Chris A. Vogt, P.E. Public Works Director/City Engineer ATTACHMENT "B" Business Unit # 51110 52710 52710 53110 53110 53210 53210 53310 53310 53410 53410 54110 54110 55110 55410 Fund 125 Fund121 City of Moreno Valley MOE Projection As of February 29, 2008 County of Riverside Measure "A", 1/2 Cent Sales Tax City of Moreno Valley's Minimum MOE Expenditure: $943,143 Program Description Public Works-Admin. Public Works -Inspection Public Works -Inspection -Equip. Public Works -Trans. Engineering Public Works -Trans. Engineering -Equip. Public Works -Trans. Engineering Public Works -Trans. Engineering -Equip. Public Works-Traff. Sig. Maint. Public Works-Traff. Sig. Maint.-Equip. Public Works -Trans. Engineering Public Works -Trans. Engineering -Equip. Public Works -Capital Projects Public Works -Capital Projects -Equip. Public Works -Street Maintenance -Equip. Public Works -Signs & Striping -Equip. Measure A -Interest Gas Tax Transfer from General Fund YTD 2007-2008 8 mos. Projection 4,427,693 6,633,217 ATTACHMENT "B" 83963 JR CITY Of HU DEStK I 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL: 760 346-0611 FAX: 760 341-7098 info@palm-desert.org May 12, 2008 Mr. Jerry Rivera Program Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3`d Floor Riverside, California 92502-2208 VECIEOWEn MAY 15 2008 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Subject: Project Status Report — Measure "A" Projects Prior Year Plan - Fiscal Year Ending (FYE) June 30, 2008 Dear Jerry, At the beginning of the 07/08 Fiscal Year, the City of Palm Desert had eight (8) projects with Measure "A" funding. Included within these eight projects were projects being continued from the previous year, and projects scheduled for the 07/08 Fiscal Year. Of those eight (8) projects, the following five (5) projects remain on -going: "Portola Interchange @ 1-10", "Portola/Dinah shore Extension", "Monterey Avenue / 1-10 Ramp Modifications", "Cook Street Improvements from Fred Waring Drive to Frank Sinatra" and "Fred Waring Drive Improvements between Monterey Avenue and San Pascual." Two (2) projects, "Monterey Median between Hovley Lane West and Country Club Drive," and "Highway 111 — Improvements" have been combined with other projects and Measure A funds are no longer required. One (1) project, "Monterey Avenue and Avenue 35" has been com pleted. Enclosed is the City of Palm Desert's Project Status Report for Measure "A" Local Streets and Roads Prior Year Plan (FYE June 30, 2008). The amounts in the `Measure A Money Remaining' column are current as of the date of this letter, but are subject to change before June 30, 2008. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Alana Townsend of my staff, or me. Alana can be reached at (760) 346-0611, ext. 453, and I can be reached at (760) 346-0611, ext. 469. Sincerely, Mark c enwood, P.E. Director of Public Works Enclosures cc: Carlos L. Ortega, City Manager Homer L. Croy, Assistant City Manager for Development Services Paul S. Gibson, Director of Finance/City Treasurer J. Luis Espinoza, Assistant Director of Finance X.29.14 V, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITY OF PALM DESERT MEASURE "A" PROJECT STATUS REPORT PRIOR YEAR FYE JUNE 30, 2008 PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME STATUS/COMMENTS EXPECTED COMPLETION DATE Measure "A" Money Remaining 637-02 Portola Interchange @ 1-10 PSR/IS. Carryover 5,698,617 to next year. November 2012 5,698,617 617-02 Portola/Dinah Shore Extension Construction. Carryover 217,865 to next year. August 2008 217,865 liL.y„ l ' "ii x,(�❑,.k1.v, x�rS°� Lonteey AvenueAvenue �r.!{"'r1'*4'`" 1. I Ii ;a• treetPro1ecth„Co,p_ee, rig,, ..016;/OPF �j a1a' �W0�n$k�0 *.0(�. �!5Fi00!,f,:(,. 0ro2�Ram,J',xa0�.y. r �. 0",+..? '4t '• n, �•ile,.a K, v •'fi:4,1 M'ontee'edai6N „Ord .est66atk G+;DAin 4# •5tt K.�iy; .e.rt�ra4rK Street?Pro�ecro166VM' Vednog y,^v$�s. a ,Garro,'i .2 i BDecembe200$ .1. rl1" w56;303 669-02 Monterey Avenue / I-10 Ramp Modifications PSR/PR. Carryover 7,378,000 to next year May 2010 4,346,606 601-05 Cook Street from Fred Waring Drive to Frank Sinatra l Street Project. Under design. Funds divided between Years 1.& 2. October 2010 11,904,564 4(i , I- « � $ "SatareetPrb"e .Hegway1�rnprouement x4.- $, k„4,,,, „�I 'Pro1ecMoven Crryover 19z ,,. une S P r i . k, 656-06 Fred Waring @ Monterey Ave. Right Turn Pocket' will now be referred to as 'Fred Waring Drive Improvements between Monterey Ave. and San Pascual' Right turn pocket. This project has been combined with San Pablo NB @ Fred Waring Right turn pocket and renamed. Funds programmed over Yeas 1, 2 & 3. March 2011 1,205,000 RCTC project status report 6-30-08 CITY OF Hill DESERT 73-510 FREED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 9226o-2578 TEL: 760 346-0611 FAX: 760 341-7098 info@palm-desert.org May 12, 2008 Mr. Jerry Rivera Program Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, California 92502-2208 Subject: Five -Year Program and Maintenance of Effort Certification Statement Dear Jerry, Enclosed is the proposed 2008/2009 — 2012/2013 Five -Year Program for the City of Palm Desert, as well as the Maintenance of Effort Certification Statement and calculation documentation. The Five -Year Program will be reviewed in the near future by our City Council. If the City Council makes any changes to the program, a revised version will be submitted to you for approval. If no changes are made, please treat this submittal as the official submittal. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Alana Townsend of my staff, or me. Alana can be reached at (760) 346-0611 ext. 453, and I can be reached at (760) 346-0611 ext. 469. Sincerely, Mark Greenwood, P.E. Director of Public Works Enclosure cc: Carlos L. Ortega, City Manager Homer L. Croy, Assistant City Manager for Development Services Paul S. Gibson, Director of Finance/City Treasurer J. Luis Espinoza, Assistant Director of Finance �, flICE9 UX IFfI 9 XXXfX MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the City of Palm Desert (the "Agency") that Sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 88-1 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure `A' funds. Dated: May 8, 2008 ATTEST: GENERAL FUND 110 DEPT # CITY OF PALM DESERT MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CALCULATION ESTIMATED FOR FYE 6/30/08 as of 4/30/08 Ledgers BASED ON DISCRETIONARY FUNDS A B C LESS: EQUALS: Sub -totals AIClf ACCOUNT INELIGIBLE ELIGIBLE TOTAL EXPENSES EXPENSES FOR MOE 4300 PW ADMINISTRATION • SALARIES and 1,601,904.86 1001-1125 BENEFITS 682,686.56 SUPPLIES PROF/TECHNICAL OTHER SRVCS & CHGS CAPITAL OUTLAY 10% or 0 2,284,591.42 2,284,591.42 2110-2190 7,461.37 7,461.37 3003-3091 112,572.01 112,572.01 3110-3125 36,029.69 36,029.69 3210 0.00 0.00 3330-3340 2,500.00 2,500.00 3610-3660 15,445.50 15,445.50 4040-4045 11, 551.95 10, 396.78 1,155.20 4310 PW-Street & Maintenance SALARIES and 862,636.69 1001-1125 BENEFITS 449,872.24 SUPPLIES PROF/TECHNICAL GRAFFITI PROGRAM CAPITAL OUTLAY 10% or 0 1,312,508.93 1,312,508.93 2110-2190 20,120.84 7,942.13 12,178.71 3003-3091 0.00 0.00 3110-3125 7,241.43 7,241.43 3320 218,601.83 218,601.83 3345 1,737.74 1,737.74 3430 3,388.63 3,388.63 3510 5,089.83 5,089.83 3514 0.00 0.00 3630-3650 475.00 475.00 3915 12,098.58 12,098.58 0.00 4045 12,718.00 11,446.20 1,271.80 4311 Street Resurfacing Repairs & Maintenance 3320 2,891,959.77 2,891,959.77 4312 Curb & Gutter Repairs & Maintenance 3320 198,615.00 198,615.00• 4313 Parking Lot Maintenance Repairs & Maintenance 3320 119.99 119.99 0.00 4314 Storm Drain Maintenance Repairs & Maintenance 3320 7,637.00 7,637.00 4315 Striping Repairs & Maintenance 3320 0.00 0.00 4250 Street Lighting/Traffic Safety Supplies 2145/55 84,641.62 84,641.62 R&M -Signals 3325/70 158,067.86 158;067.86 Utilities -Electric 3514 78,488.74 78,488.74 Telephone line 3650 5,631.54 5,631.54 CAPITAL OUTLAY 10% or 0 4045 8,737.25 7,863.53 873.72 4330 Corp Yard/OVERHEAD EXP Supplies 2130/2174 0.00 0.00 R&M/Utilities/Others 3310-3695 52,205.01 52,205.01 4045 4,746.75 4,746.75 C % D4330/total = Eligible Exp) = .993034 56,912.09-56,912.09 4331 PW-Maint /Equipment- 10% of eligible Expenses 10% of Eligible Exp 4611 Maintenance of Medians(Moved) 4614 Maintenance of Medians 4614 Utility for Medians TOTALS �Total�Eligible Ezpensesl' 11=6ss" 61-0E,E 11 e1:.. 2110-2190 95,787.05 95,787.05 3054 6,477.04 6,477.04 3340/3640 160,684.86 160,684.86 4045 0.00 0.00 236,654.06-236,654.06 3370 0.00 3370 255,836.80 3510/3514 102,182.31 0.00 0.00 255,836.80 102,182.31 8,175,951.34 343,433.32 7,832,518.02 „98•t 51011] A85Q,937e02 fAntow Eluer MOEas of„Apriiilk 200,8'1 1(gOgditureSA RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2008 - 2009 Agency: City of Palm Desert Prepared by: Mark Greenwood Phone #: 760-346-0611 ext. 469 Date: May 12, 2008 Page 1 of 2 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME / LIMITS Carryover's from FY 07-08 PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000's) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000's) 1. Portola Interchange @ 1-10 On-ramp/Off-ramp construction 54,000 5,699 2. Cook Street Improvements from Fred Waring . Street Project 12,000 11,905 Drive to Frank Sinatra 3. Monterey Avenue / 1-10 Interchange Ramp Modifications On-ramp/Off-ramp construction 8,900 4,339 4. Monterey Avenue Widening from Fred Waring Roadway Widening 6,500 500 Drive to Country Club Drive 5. Portola / Dinah Shore Extension Street Project 1,600 218 Pre pm f/users✓ri/mea sureA 5yrform RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2008 - 2009 Agency: City of Palm Desert Prepared by: Mark Greenwood Phone #: 760-346-0611 ext. 469 Date: May 12, 2008 Page 2 of 2 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME /LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000's) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000's) 1. Portola Interchange @ 1-10 On-ramp/Off-ramp construction 54,000 3,000 2. Cook Street Improvements from Fred Waring Street Project 12,000 6,000 Drive to Frank Sinatra 3. Portola Avenue at Frank Sinatra, Intersection Street Project 4,202 1,817 Improvements 4. Fred Waring Drive Right Turn Pocket at Street Project 775 50 Hwy. 111 5. Fred Waring Drive and Monterey Avenue Street Project 3,075 275 Improvements 6. Hwy. 111 TIER III Project A Street Project 4,067 500 PrepmUusers/NmeasureA5yrform RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2009 - 2010 Agency: City of Palm Desert Prepared by: Mark Greenwood Phone #: 760-346-0611 ext. 469 Date: May 12, 2008 Page 1 of 1 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME / LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000's) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000's) 1. Portola Interchange @ 1-10 On-ramp/Off-ramp construction 54,000 9,000 2. Cook Street Improvements from Fred Waring Street Project 12,000 6,000 Drive to Frank Sinatra 3. Monterey Avenue / 1-10 Interchange Ramp Modifications On-ramp/Off-ramp construction 8,900 4,703 4. Monterey Avenue Widening from Fred Waring Roadway Widening 6,500 3,000 Drive to Country Club Drive 5. Fred Waring Drive Right Turn Pocket at Street Project 775 125 Hwy. 111 6. Fred Waring Drive and Monterey Avenue Street Project 3,075 600 Improvements 7. Hwy. 111 TIER III Project A Street Project 4,067 1,500 Prepmbusersbl/measureA5yrform Agency: Prepared by: Phone #: Date: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2010 - 2011 City of Palm Desert Mark Greenwood 760-346-0611 ext. 469 May 12, 2008 Page 1 of 1 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME / LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000's) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000's) 1. Portola Interchange @ 1-10 On-ramp/Off-ramp construction 54,000 0 2. Monterey Avenue Widening from Fred Waring Roadway Widening 6,500 3,000 Drive to Country Club Drive 3. Fred Waring Drive Right Turn Pocket at Street Project 775 600 Hwy. 111 4. Fred Waring Drive and Monterey Avenue Street Project 3,075 2,200 Improvements 5. Street Resurfacing Maintenance Street Project 2,750 656 Prepmt/users/ri/measureA5yrform Agency: Prepared by: Phone #: Date: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2011 - 2012 City of Palm Desert Mark Greenwood 760-346-0611 ext. 469 May 12, 2008 Page 1 of 1 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME / LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000's) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000's) 1. Portola Interchange @ 1-10 On-ramp/Off-ramp construction 54,000 0 2. Street Resurfacing Maintenance Street Project 2,750 675 Prepm f/users/n/meas ureA5yrform Agency: Prepared by: Phone #: Date: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2012 - 2013 City of Palm Desert Mark Greenwood 760-346-0611 ext. 469 May 12, 2008 Page 1 of 1 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME / LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST a000's) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000's) 1. Portola Interchange @ 1-10 On-ramp/Off-ramp construction 54,000 0 2 Street Resurfacing Maintenance Street Project 2,750 696 Prepmt/usershijmeasureA5yrform 83911 JR City of Palm Springs Department of Public Works and Engineering 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way • Palm Springs, California 92262 Tel: (760) 323-8253 • Fax: (760) 322-8360 • Web: www.ci.palm-springs.ca.us May 9, 2008 Mr. Jerry Rivera Measure "A" Program Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, r Floor Riverside, CA 92502-22083 61-r©l'E,[WrEa P'ii`ot 1 2 2008 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Re: Fiscal Year 2009-2013, 5-Year Measure "A" Local Street & Road Program Proposed City of Palm Springs Annual 5-Year Measure "A" Plan (Fiscal Year 2008/2009 - 2012/2013) Dear Mr. Rivera: Enclosed, at RCTC's request, is the City's proposed Local Measure "A" (Local Streets & Roads) 5-year Plan for Fiscal Year 2008/2009 through 2012/2013. The 2009-2013 Plan includes projects carried overfrom the current Fiscal Year 2007/2008 to Fiscal Year 2008/2009. The "Maintenance of Effort" (MOE) Calculation and Certification for Fiscal Year 2009-2013 are also attached as requested. If you have any questions, please call me at (760) 323- 8253, extension 8732. David J. Barakian Director of Public Works/City Engineer enc cc: David H. Ready, City Manager Tom Wilson, Assistant City Manager Geoffrey Kiehl, Director of Finance/Treasurer Nancy Klukan, Asst. Director of Finance Marcus Fuller, Asst Director of Public Works/Asst. City Engineer Post Office Box 2743 • Palm Springs, California 92263-2743 X.29.15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM Agency: City of Palm Springs Prepared by: David J. Barakian, Director of Public Works/City Engineer (by Marcus L. Fuller, Assistant Director of Public Works/Assistant City Engineer) Date: May 9, 2008 Fiscal Year 2009-2013, 5-Year Measure "A" Local Street & Roads Program Fiscal Year 2007/2008 continued to 2008/2009 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST MEASURE "A" FUNDS 1 Annual Street Slurry Seals (Contract) (Currently pending start of construction.) Street Maintenance $700,000 $700,000 2 Bridge Repairs (Remaining funds to be used with future project) Bridge Maintenance $114,727 $114,727 3. Belardo Road Bridge (Currently in environmental phase) New Road Extension and Bridge Construction $4,400,000 $695,672 4 Indian Canyon Drive Widening (UPRR to Garnet Ave) (Currently in environmental phase) Roadway and Bridge Widening $4,400,000 $233,859 5 Indian Avenue/I 10 Interchange (Currently in right-of-way phase) Expanded Freeway Interchange $35,000,000 $798,826 6 Gene Autry Trail/I 10 Interchange (Currently in right-of-way phase) Expanded Freeway Interchange $35,000,000 $992,599 7 Gene Autry Trail UPRR Bridge Widening (Currently in final design phase) Bridge Widening $5,000,000 $61,000 8 Indian Canyon Drive UPRR Bridge Widening (Currently in environmental phase) Bridge Widening 'Included in Item 4 above $186,246 9' Indian Canyon Drive Widening (Tramview Road to UPRR) (Currently in environmental phase) Roadway Widening $5,000,000 $149,931 Page 1 of 2 Fiscal Year 2009-2013, 5-Year Measure "A" Local Street & Roads Program Fiscal Year 2007/2008 continued to 2008/2009 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST MEASURE "A° FUNDS 10. ARHM Street Overlays (Construction) (Final design complete; bidding underway) Street Maintenance $1,500,000 $768,826 11. Bogert Trail Bridge Rehabilitation (Currently in environmental phase) Bridge Widening/Rehabilitation $4,888,950 $76,944 12.Ramon Widening Study Planning Study (El Cielo Road to Sunrise Way) $100,000 $50,000 13. SB 821 Sidewalk Project (FY 06/07) (Remaining funds to be used with future sidewalk grant) Sidewalk Construction $100,000 $17,700 14.Indian Canyon Drive/Tamarisk Road Traffic Signal (Currently in final design) Signal Installation $200,000 $179,031 15. Traffic Safety Projects (Currently in final design) Signal Modifications $80,000 $80,000 16. Traffic Signal Interconnect Communication Upgrade (Pending CMAQ grant programming in 2008 RTIP) Signal Synchronization $2,000,000 $50,000 17. Sunrise Way at Mesquite Avenue Traffic Signal Upgrade (Currently in final design) Signal Modification $150,000 $138,379 18.SB 821 Sidewalk Project (FY 08/09) (Remaining funds to be used with future sidewalk grant) Sidewalk Construction *Included in Item 13 above $30,000 TOTAL 2007/2008 CONTINUED TO 2008/2009 $94,233,677 $5,323,740 Note: Measure A funds are existing local Measure A funds balances in current accounts as of May 9, 2008. Page 2 of 2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM Agency: City of Palm Springs Prepared by: David J. Barakian, Director of Public Works/City Engineer (by Marcus L. Fuller, Assistant Director of Public Works/Assistant City Engineer) Date: May 9, 2008 Fiscal Year 2009-2013, 5-Year Measure "A" Local Street & Roads Program Fiscal Year 2008/2009 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST MEASURE "A" FUNDS 1. ARHM Overlays (Various Streets) Street Maintenance $1,200,000 $500,000 2. Annual Street Slurry Seals (Various Streets) Street Maintenance $500,000 • $500,000 3. Traffic Safety Projects Signal Modifications $40,000 $40,000 4. SB 821 Sidewalk Grant (08/09) (Farrell Drive, Andreas Road to Amado Road) (Ramon Road, Calle Encilia to Warm Sands) New Sidewalk Construction $120,000 $60,000 5 Baristo Road at Palm Springs High School Pedestrian Traffic Signal (Construction) New Traffic Signal $200,000 $200,000 6 Indian Canyon Drive at Vista Chino (SR111) Traffic Signal Modification / Upgrade (Design Only) Modified Traffic Signal $25,000 $25,000 7 Sunrise Parkway Extension - North Palm Canyon Dr (SR111) to Sunrise Way New Roadway $7,400,000 $400,000 8. Traffic Safety Projects Traffic Signal Modification $40,000 $40,000 9. Safe Routes to School Grant (07/08) Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety Improvements (Various Locations) New Sidewalk/Crosswalk $366,000 $37,000 10. Ramon Road Widening (including bridge widening) Landau Blvd to San Luis Rey Dr Widened Roadway $19,000,000 $12,500 Page 1 of 2 Z 40 Z e6ed ZZ6318` 3 ZZP` 606`8Z$ 600Z/800Z JeaA le0s!d 1V101 ZZib'03 ZZVO3 sWauaen0.1dwl;89.14S (OVAO);uewesmquap Aenoped AelleA PM '1.6 SONfId 1S00 ON „V„ 3�IfIsv vu 7d101 3dA1103fOThld S11WIl/3WHN 103CO ld 01311 600Z/800Z JeaA leas!d weaBoad speoN loan 1e301 „d„ amsem nek9 `£60Z-600Z JeaA 1e0S1d RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM Agency: City of Palm Springs Prepared by: David J. Barakian, Director of Public Works/City Engineer (by Marcus L. Fuller, Assistant Director of Public Works/Assistant City Engineer) Date: May 9, 2008 Fiscal Year 2009-2013, 5-Year Measure "A" Local Street 8 Roads Program Fiscal Year 2009/2010 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST MEASURE "A" FUNDS 1' Sunrise Parkway Extension - North Palm Canyon Dr (SR111) to Sunrise Way New Roadway *Included on previous sheet $3,000,000 2. Gene Autry Trail/I-10 Interchange (Currently in right-of-way phase) (Proposed allocation adds to required City match) Expanded Freeway Interchange *Included on previous sheet $1,400,000 3 Baristo Road Reconstruction (Palm Canyon Drive to west end) Street Maintenance $1,000,000 $1,000,000 4. Annual Street Slurry Seal (Various Locations) Street Maintenance $500,000 $500,000 5. ARHM Rubber Asphalt Street Overlay (Various Locations) Street Maintenance $500,000 $500,000 6. Street Reconstruction (Indian Canyon Drive, 18th Ave to 20th Ave) (Various, Local streets) Street Maintenance $500,000 $500,000 7 Indian Canyon Drive Widening (UPRR to Garnet Ave) (Proposed allocation adds to required City match) Roadway and Bridge Widening "Included on previous sheet $300,000 8 Sunrise Way at San Rafael Drive Intersection Improvements Roadway/Drainage Improvements $250,000 $250,000 Page 1 of 2 Fiscal Year 2009-2013, 5-Year Measure "A" Local Street & Roads Program Fiscal Year 2009/2010 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST MEASURE "A" FUNDS 9 Ramon Road Widening (Sunrise Way to El Cielo Rd) Roadway Widening $4,000,000 $250,000 10. Indian Canyon Drive at Vista Chino (SR111) Traffic Signal Modification / Upgrade Modified Traffic Signal $200,000 $200,000 11 Ramon Road Widening (including bridge widening) Landau Blvd to San Luis Rey Dr Roadway and Bridge Widening "Included on previous sheet $125,000 12. Date Palm Drive/1-10 Interchange (Proposed allocation creates City s share of local match for various 1-10 Interchanges pursuant to CVAG study) Expanded Freeway Interchange $824,000 (City's share) $100,000 13. Ramon Road/1-10 Interchange (Proposed allocation creates City's share of local match for various 1-10 Interchanges pursuant to CVAG study) Expanded Freeway Interchange $888,000 (City's share) $100,000 14. Traffic Safety Projects Traffic Signal Modifications $40,000 $40,000 15. SB 821 Sidewalk Project (FY 09/10) Sidewalk Construction $90,000 $30,000 16. Gene Autry Trail/Dinah Shore Drive Intersection (Preliminary Alignment Study) Intersection Improvements $25,000 $25,000 17. Mid -Valley Parkway Reimbursement - CVAG Street Improvements $10,422 $10,422 TOTAL Fiscal Year 2008/2009 $8,827,422 $8,330,422 Page 2 of 2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM Agency: City of Palm Springs Prepared by: David J. Barakian, Director of Public Works/City Engineer (by Marcus L. Fuller, Assistant Director of Public Works/Assistant City Engineer) Date: May 9, 2008 Fiscal Year 2009-2013, 5-Year Measure "A" Local Street & Roads Program Fiscal Year 2010/2011 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST MEASURE "A" FUNDS 1 Sunrise Parkway Extension - North Palm Canyon Dr (SR111) to Sunrise Way New Roadway *Included on previous sheet $4,000,000 2. Bogert Trail Bridge Rehabilitation Bridge Widening/Rehabilitation *Included on previous sheet $830,000 3. Ramon Road/I-10 Interchange (Proposed allocation creates City's share of local match for various 1-10 Interchanges pursuant to CVAG study) Expanded Freeway Interchange *Included on previous sheet $788,000 4 Ramon Road Widening (Sunrise Way to El Cielo Rd) Roadway Widening *Included on previous sheet $750,000 5. Belardo Road Bridge New Road Extension and Bridge Construction *Included on previous sheet $500,000 6 Ramon Road Widening (including bridge widening) Landau Blvd to San Luis Rey Dr Roadway and Bridge Widening *Included on previous sheet $500,000 7. ARHM Overlay (Various Streets) Street Maintenance $500,000 $500,000 8. Annual Street Slurry Seals (Various Streets) Street Maintenance $500,000 $500,000 9. Baristo Road Reconstruction Street Maintenance $500,000 $500,000 10. Gene Autry Trail/Dinah Shore Drive Intersection Intersection Improvements $450,000 $450,000 Page 1 of 2 Fiscal Year 2009-2013, 5-Year Measure "A" Local Street & Roads Program Fiscal Year 2010/2011 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST MEASURE "A" FUNDS 11. El Cielo Road at Mesquite Ave Traffic Signal New Traffic Signal $150,000 $150,000. 12. Bridge Repairs Bridge Maintenance $100,000 $100,000 13. Traffic Safety Projects Traffic Signal Modifications $40,000 $40,000 14. SB 821 Sidewalk Project (FY 10/11) Sidewalk Construction $90,000 $30,000 15. Mid -Valley Parkway Reimbursement - CVAG Street Improvements $10,422 $10,422 TOTAL Fiscal Year 2010/2011 $2,340,422 $9,648,422 Page 2 of 2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM Agency: City of Palm Springs Prepared by: David J. Barakian, Director of Public Works/City Engineer (by Marcus L. Fuller, Assistant Director of Public Works/Assistant City Engineer) Date: May 9, 2008 Fiscal Year 2009-2013, 5-Year Measure "A" Local Street & Roads Program Fiscal Year 2011/2012 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST MEASURE "A" FUNDS 1. Date Palm Drive/1-10 Interchange (Proposed allocation creates City's share of local match for various 1-10 Interchanges pursuant to CVAG study) Expanded Freeway Interchange *Included on previous Sheet $724,000 2. Annual Street Slurry Seal Street Maintenance $500,000 $500,000 3. Baristo Road Reconstruction Street Maintenance $500,000 $500,000 4. ARHM Overlay Street Maintenance `- $400,000 $400,000 5. Alejo Road at Ave Caballeros Traffic Signal New Traffic Signal $250,000 $250,000 6. Araby Road Bridge over Palm Canyon Wash (Project Study Report) HBP Grant New Bridge $500,000 $100,000 7. Traffic Safety Projects Traffic Signal Modifications $40,000 $40,000 8. SB 821 Sidewalk Project (FY 11/12) Sidewalk Construction $90,000 $30,000 9. Mid -Valley Parkway Reimbursement - CVAG Street Improvements $10,422 $10,422 TOTAL Fiscal Year 2011/2012 $2,290,422 $3,014,422 Page 1 of 1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM Agency: City of Palm Springs Prepared by: David J. Barakian, Director of Public Works/City Engineer (by Marcus L. Fuller, Assistant Director of Public Works/Assistant City Engineer) Date: May 9, 2008 Fiscal Year 2009-2013, 5-Year Measure "A" Local Street 8 Roads Program Fiscal Year 2007/2008 Project Status Report ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT STATUS 1. ARHM Overlays (Construction) Final design complete; bidding to be scheduled. 2. Annual Street Slurry Seals (Contract) This project is currently underway; contract has been awarded. 3. Indian Canyon Drive/Tamarisk Traffic Signal Federal HES funding was received for this project; this project was deleted from the Measure A Program. 4. Indian Canyon Drive Widening (UPRR to Garnet Ave) Continuing with preliminary engineering phase. Coordination with Caltrans environmental staff continuing with regard to responses to comments on draft Environmental Document; awaiting authorization from Caltrans to initiate public comment period. 5. Indian Canyon Drive Widening (Tramview Road to UPRR) Continuing with preliminary engineering phase. Draft Environmental Document prepared and being reviewed by Caltrans. 6. Bridge Repairs Consultant selection for engineering design to be scheduled. 7. Belardo Road Bridge This project is completing the environmental phase. 8. Ramon Road Widening Concept Study Request for Proposals to be prepared and released for consultant selection. 9. Traffic Safety Projects This project is completing the design phase. 10. SB 821 Sidewalk Project (FY 07/08) The City did not receive an SB 821 grant from RCTC in 2007/2008; these funds will be used for the City's next application for SB 821 funding. Page 1 of 2 Fiscal Year 2009-2013, 5-Year Measure "A" Local Street & Roads Program Fiscal Year 2007/2008 Project Status Report ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT STATUS 11. Gene Autry Trail Widening (UPRR to Garnet Ave.) Environmental phase complete; final design underway. 12. Gene Autry Trail Widening (Vista Chino to UPRR) Construction substantially complete. 13. Gene Autry Trail /Interstate 10 Interchange This project is being managed by Riverside County, and is currently completing final design, and acquiring right of way. 14. Sunrise Way at Mesquite Avenue Traffic Signal Upgrade This project is completing the design phase. 15. Traffic Signal Interconnect Communication Upgrade The City received a $1.8 Million CMAQ grant, which is currently being added to the 2008 RTIP. These funds will be used as part of the City's required federal grant matching funds. 16. Traffic Striping Improvements (City wide) This project was not funded as part of the City's final adopted 2007/2008 fiscal year budget. 17. Traffic Signal Street Name Sign Replacement Program This project was not funded as part of the City's final adopted 2007/2008 fiscal year budget. 18. Camino Real Street Improvements This project was not funded as part of the City's final adopted 2007/2008 fiscal year budget. 19. ADA Curb Ramp Retrofit/Repair Program This project was not funded as part of the City's final adopted 2007/2008 fiscal year budget. 20 Baristo Road at Palm Springs High School Pedestrian Traffic Signal (Design Only) This project is completing the design phase. 21. Citywide Traffic Signal Synchronization Study This project was not funded as part of the City's final adopted 2007/2008 fiscal year budget. 22. Sunrise Way/Alejo Road Traffic Signal Modification This project is completing the design phase. 23. Mid -Valley Parkway Reimbursement This is an on -going annual reimbursement to CVAG. Page 2 of 2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM Agency: City of Palm Springs Prepared by: David J. Barakian, Director of Public Works/City Engineer (by Marcus L. Fuller, Assistant Director of Public Works/Assistant City Engineer) Date: May 9, 2008 Fiscal Year 2009-2013, 5-Year Measure "A" Local Street & Roads Program Fiscal Year 2012/2013 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS • PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST MEASURE "A" FUNDS 1. Annual Street Slurry Seal Street Maintenance $500,000 $500,000 2. ARHM Overlay Street Maintenance $400,000 $400,000 3. Araby Road Bridge over Palm Canyon Wash (Design) HBP Grant New Bridge $1,500,000 $300,000 4. Traffic Safety Projects Traffic Signal Modifications $40,000 $40,000 5. SB 821 Sidewalk Project (FY 12/13) Sidewalk Construction $90,000 $30,000 6. Mid -Valley Parkway Reimbursement - CVAG Street Improvements $10,422 $10,422 TOTAL Fiscal Year 2012/2013 $2,540,422 $1,280,422 Page 1 of 1 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for The t✓; } 0-C PaImSPr rlythe "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 88-1 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Dated: May g, , 200 Ej CITY MANAGER ATTEST: v f] F City of Palm s S rin � g Measure A Transportation Fund Palm Springs, California Independent Accountants' Report on Agreed -Upon Procedures Performed on the Measure A Transportation Fund For the year ended June 30, 2007 October 8, 2007 i C&L Caporicci & Larson Certified Public Accountants J i C&L Caporicci & Larson Certified Public Accountants INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS' REPORT ON APPLYING AGREED -UPON PROCEDURES To the Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside County Regional Complex 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, California 92501 We have performed the procedures enumerated below which were agreed to by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, Riverside, California (RCTC) solely to assist RCTC with respect to an evaluation of the City of Palm Springs' (City) Measure A Transportation Fund (Transportation Fund) and degree of the City's compliance with RCTC requirements for the year ended June 30, 2007. It is understood that this report is only for the information of the management of RCTC for use in evaluating the City's compliance with provisions of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Transportation Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance (Measure A) that is referred to in the procedures described below. The engagement to apply agreed -upon procedures was performed in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The sufficiency of the procedures for the purposes of RCTC is solely the responsibility of RCTC. Consequently, we make no representations regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose. Scope of Procedures Performed and Findings Our procedures and findings were as follows: 1. Reviewed the 1989 Measure A (Ordinance 88-1) compliance requirements. 2. Obtained from RCTC the City's approved Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for the fiscal year. 3. Obtained from the City a detail general ledger and balance sheet for the fiscal year. a. Identified the amount of Measure A cash and investments recorded at the end of the fiscal year. Observation: The City recorded Measure A cash and investments in the amount of $6,643,697 for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007. b. Identified any amounts due from other funds. Observation: The City has not recorded any amounts due from other funds for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007. c. Identified any reservations or designations of ending fund balance for the Measure A Fund. Toll Free Ph: (877) 862-22oo Toll Free Fax: (866) 436-0927 Oakland Orange County Sacramento San Diego 180 Grand Ave., Suite 1365 9 Corporate Park, Suite 100 777 Campus Commons Rd., Suite 200 4858 Mercury, Suite 106 Oakland, California 94612 Irvine, California 92606 Sacramento, California 95825 San Diego, California 92111 t_ :J i Riverside County Transportation Commission City of Palm Springs Agreed -Upon Procedures Page Two Observation: The City had recorded fund balance as of June 30, 2007 as follows: Appropriation $ 10,466,996 Reservation for continuing appropriations 14,162,360 Unreserved (18,012,456) $ 6,616,900 d. Identified as to the existence of any restatement of the Measure A Fund balance. If any, inquired of management as to the reason for the restatement. Observation: The City had no restatement of the Measure A Fund balance. 4. Obtained an operating statement for the Measure A activity for the fiscal year, including budget amounts. a. Reviewed the revenues in the operating statement. 1. Inquired of management as to what fund was used to record Measure A revenues received from RCTC and identified what the total revenues were for the fiscal year. Observation: Per the Accountant, Fund #134 is used to record the Measure A revenues received from RCTC. The City had recorded total revenues in the amount of $2,588,641 for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007. ii. Obtained from RCTC a listing of Measure A payments to the City. Compared the Measure A sales tax revenues recorded by the City to the listing of payments made by RCTC. Observation: The City has recorded the same Measure A sales tax revenues as compared to the listing of payments made by RCTC as follows: City ROTC Measure A $ 1,910,536 $ 1,910,536 �u. Obtained from the City an interest allocation schedule for the fiscal year. Identified the amount of interest income allocated to Measure A activity for the fiscal year and compared this amount to the amount recorded in the general ledger. Observation: The amount of interest income allocated to the Measure A Fund for the fiscal year was $330,291 and agreed to the amount recorded in the general ledger. b. Reviewed the expenditures in the operating statement. i. Inquired of management as to what fund was used to record Measure A expenditures and what the total expenditures were for the fiscal year. Riverside County Transportation Commission City of Palm Springs Agreed -Upon Procedures Page Three Observation: Per the Accountant, Fund #134 is used to record the Measure A expenditures. The City had recorded total expenditures in the amount of $1,985,122 for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007. it Selected expenditures for validation that comprised at least 20% of the total expenditures. Observation: The City had total expenditures of $1,985,122 of which $764,893 (38.53%) was validated. L For the expenditures selected for validation, compared the dollar amount listed on the general ledger to the supporting documentation. Observation: The expenditures selected for validation agreed to the supporting documentation. 2. For the expenditures selected for validation, reviewed the 5-Year CIP and verified if the project was included in the 5-Year CIP and was an allowable cost. Observation: The expenditures selected for validation were included in the 5- Year CIP and were allowable costs. iu. Inquired of management as to the nature of any transfers recorded in the Measure A Fund. Observation: The City did not have any transfers recorded in the Measure A fund. iv. Inquired of management as to the amount of indirect costs, if any, included in expenditures. Observation: The Accountant indicated that there were no indirect costs included in the expenditures. 5. Compared the budgeted expenditures to actual amounts; inquired of management as to the nature of significant budget variances. Observation: There was a significant budget variance in construction and maintenance expenditures due to some of the budgeted projects not starting because of bidding problems and planning obstacles during fiscal year 2007. Regional Measure A Local Measure A Actual Budget Variance $ 527,627 $ 4,554,550 $ 4,026,923 1,457,495 5,912,447 4,454,952 Total $ 1,985,122 $ 10,466,997 $ 8,481,875 Riverside County Transportation Commission City of Palm Springs Agreed -Upon Procedures Page Four L6. Obtained from ROTC a listing of cities who participate in the Western County or Coachella Valley Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) programs. a. If the City is a participant in the TUMF program, selected at least two disbursements for validation as to the amount remitted to the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) or Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG), as applicable. Observation: The City appears to be collecting and remitting TUMF fees as required. b. Indicate the total amount of TUMF fees collected and remitted during the fiscal year. Observation: The City collected TUMF fees totaling $1,145,473 during fiscal year 2007, and remitted $1,145,473 to CVAG as of June 30, 2007. 7. Obtained from RCTC the Maintenance of Effort (MOE) base year requirement. a. Obtained from the City a copy of Schedule 3 from the 2007 Street Report. b. Compared the amount of discretionary funds spent per the Street Report to the MOE base requirement. c. Added any current year MOE excess or deducted any current year MOE deficiency to the prior year carryover. Observation: The City had the following MOE base activity: 2007 2006 f ! Excess of current year expenditures over Base Year 3,206,361 1,196,017 Excess local expenditures at beginning of year 21,934,063 20,738,046 Current year local discretionary expenditures $ 5,098,945 $ 3,088,601 Less: Base Year (1,892,584) (1,892,584) Excess of local expenditures at end of year $ 25,140,424 $ 21,934,063 We were not engaged to, and did not perform an audit of the City, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion on the elements, accounts, or items specified above. 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 use of RCTC and should not be used by those who have not agreed to the procedures and taken responsibility for the sufficiency of the procedures for their purposes. et�.;e4; Irvine, California October 8, 2007 .1 r Exhibit A City of Palm Springs Summary of Revenues and Expenditures For the year ended June 30, 2007 (unaudited) 2007 Revenues Measure A $ 1,910,536 Interest income 330,291 Other income 347,814 Total revenues 2,588,641 Expenditures Regional Measure A Local Measure A Total expenditures 527,627 1,457,495 1,985,122 Revenues over/(under) expenditures $ 603,519 Note: The above numbers were taken directly from the City's financial records and were not audited. 83913 JR CITY OF PERRIS HABIB MOTLAGH, CITY ENGINEER May 5, 2008 Theresia Trevino Chief Financial Officer Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 fl V MP COVNTY Attn: Jerry Rivera Re: FY 09-13 Measure "A" Improvement Plan Enclosed, please find City of Perris proposed 5-year capital improvement plan. Also enclosed, please find an exhibit depicting the status of the currently adopted 5-year plan and the MOE prepared by the Finance Department and signed by the City Manager. Please call if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely, abib Motlagh City Engineer Cc: Ron Carr, Assistant City Manager James Fructuoso, Finance Director DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING 170 WILKERSON AVE., SUITE D, PERRIS, CA 92570-2200 TEL.: (951) 943-6504 - FAX: (951) 943-8416 X.29.16 City of Perris atatus of A 0 0 roved FY 07-11 1 Ethanac Road Phase II Environmental Complete. Working on right-of-way and utility conflicts. 2 Placentia / I-215 Interchange and Road Extension •Interchange on hold subject to alignment of MCP. •R/W for road extension in process. 3 Goetz Road Intersection Partially completed, Phase II advertised. 4 Dirt Road Improvements Right -of -Way Underway 5 Miscellaneous Sidewalk Improvements Completed - On Going 6 Slurry Seal Project Completed - On Going 7 Murrieta Road Improvements Completed DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING 170 WILKERSON AVE., SUITE D, PERRIS, CA 92570-2200 TEL.: (951) 943-6504 - FAX: (951) 943-8416 Agency: Page 1 of 5 Prepared by: Phone #: Date: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE 'A" LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2008 - 2009 City of Perris Habib Motlagh (951) 943-6504 5/5/2008 Item No Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 1 City Wide Slurry (On -Going) Slurry Seal & Overlay 500 400 2 Placentia Avenue Extension New Pavement 400 400 3 Downtown Alley 86 Sidewalk Improvements New Pavement, Widening, Curb/Gutter 1,500 300 4 Goetz Road Improvements Pavement Rehabilitation 100 100 00S 00tb 00S`T 0017 NIBmaplS `clin0 `21-Iivaptm `TuauzanUd magi kepanO 98 Teas .kuniS sTuaumAodcluij IiemapiS / X3Ipi. umoTumoQ putop-up) ialnIS QPIPA XTD Z T (s,000$) spun, d oins-eow (s,000$) Tsop ieToj, aciXd, Tooraid slIol i / atu-oN Toaroad uzaTI oN 800Z/S/S 170S9-£176 (TS6) sTimd To 40 OWE - 600Z.i PII6'2 DO&I SaV021 QNV S.LHad,LS 7VD07 „V„ 2HI1SVHW NOISSILINOO NOLL6idalS'NV L 1i,LNI1OO aais anm :aT�Q :## auogd :Xq pa.zedaid S3oZo ed :zouo v Agency: Page 3 of 5 Prepared by: Phone #: Date: City of Perris Habib Motlagh (951) 943-6504 5/5/2008 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE 'A" LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2010 - 2011 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 1 City Wide Slurry (On -Going) Slurry Seal 86 Overlay 300 300 3 Perris Blvd. Rehabilitation - North of Remove / Replace Existing Pavement 4,500 500 Ramona Expressway 4 Ethanac Road Improvements - PH. II Pavement Rehabilitation 2,500 100 009 00E OOS`Z OOE uogelmciuuasMutuomm luauzaned XeiiaA0 28 Teas am -IS II aseild - s;uauzanoaduzl peom aeuutp2 keiianO / (8uioO-uO) ainTS QPIA140 Z T (s.000$) spund b aanseayi (s,000$) gsoQ Ieloy ad4lop fbId sliuzrl / aureN laafoad ulolI oN 800E/S/S VOS9-E176 (T S6) T42epow gigeH sPiad 30 -(Ii0 ZIOZ- ITOZfig 11V2IOOdd SCIVOd CLAW S.Laa2I.LS 76'007 „V, aansvaN AIOISSILITHO0 AIOLLKWOdSAi6'2LL A,B11100 aQIS2Ianta :a�eQ :# auoud paiedaid S 39 b aaed :�Saua�y 00S 00S 00S`1 00S uogeijuqetiag luauzaned XBPQA0 V MaS •znlS •PAIS s?aaad (Zu?oO-uO) /Curtis ap?M X1?0 Z i (sD00$) spun, V aills'eQW (s,000$) lso0 ielo,L actisi, loafoad sl?uin / aureN loafoad u131I oN 800Z/S/S tOS9-Ct6 (iS6) LTREP01/11 sIii3d Jo �l?0 EIOZ-ZIOZAd. NV2lJO2Id SQVO8 QAIV slaa is 7VOO7„6 , adlISVgN AIOISSIL1iI103 AIOLLVIdOcISAIV211 AJAT1100 aarsugnI I :alBQ :# auotid fq pa redaid S 3o S aaed :2foua2y MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned hereby agrees and certifies for the City of Perris that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 88-1 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines, and that the City shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the City for local transportation purposes. The City hereby acknowledges that the failure of the City to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of "Measure A" funds. Dated: 47 , 2008 ATTEST: J '.y Haughney, City C r CITY OF PERRIS MEASURE A - MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT FISCAL YEAR 2007-2008 ESTIMATED 1987-1988 Base Year - $399,945 FY 2007-2008 G/F Dept Description Estimated Actuals MOE 3033 Street Maintenance 3031 Engineering 3034 Fleet/Equipment Total Street Maintenance Less Eligible Gas Tax Transfer 1,263,106 $ 1,263,106 205,993 205,993 305,077 305,077 1,774,175 (1,597,865) Total General Fund Cost 176,310 Fund No. Description Total 112 Traffic Safety Fund $ 121 Street Lighting - Property Tax 124 Street Lighting Maint Dist 84-1 127 Landscape Maint Dist 1 130 Flood Control Maint Dist 142 Special Revenue Fund 157 City Projects/External Contrib. $ 354,241 3,705 521,333 1,046,657 188,057 1,046,451 1,466,007 Total Other Sources 4,626,451 GRAND TOTAL 4,802,761 LESS 87/88 BASE YEAR (399,945) DIFFERENCE $ 4,402,816 CITY OF R NC O MIRAGE 0 May 12, 2008 Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside County Regional Complex, 3rd Floor P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 83932 JR Re: FY 2009-2013 Measure "A" Local Street and Roads Capital Improvement Plan Dear Ms. Trevino: Attached are the Local Streets and Roads Program for Measure "A" Funds for FY 2009-2013, the Maintenance of Effort Certification Statement, and the project status report for prior year Plan (FY 2007-2008). The City's maintenance of effort for FY 2008-2009 is $5,917,608, which exceeds our established maintenance of effort requirement of $1,191,036. The City's five-year Capital Improvement Program totals $23,151,000 and identifies Measure "A" local funds totaling $6,413,500. The City currently carries a fund balance of approximately $2,812,309 in the Measure "A" Local Fund account. Therefore, with current and projected future allocations, adequate funds appear to be available for the program. Attached is the City's Maintenance of Effort Certification Statement along with supporting documentation and the status report for our prior year Plan FYE June 30, 2008. Please feel free to call me at (760) 770-3224 should you have any questions. Sincerely, Bruce B. Harry Jr. Director of Public Works Enclosures: Maintenance of Effort Certification Statement Measure "A" Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans Project Status Report FY 2007-2008 o I�C�I�fIMC� \` AY 1 3 2008 I RIVr:RSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ADMINISTRATION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCE HOUSING AUTHORITY PUBLIC LIBRARY PUBLIC WORKS Tel. (760) 324-4511 Tel. (760) 328-2266 Tel. (760) 770-3207 Tel. (760) 770-3210 Tel. (760) 341-7323 Tel. (760) 770-3224 Fax. (760) 324-8830 Fax. (760) 324-9851 Fax. (760) 324-0528 Fax. (760) 770-3261 Fax. (760) 341-5213 Fax. (760) 770-3261 69-825 FFICF+WAY 111 / RANCH.° MIRAGE, CA 92270 www.ci.rancho-mirage.ca.us X.29.17 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT the undersigned agrees and certifies for City of Rancho Mirage (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 88-1 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended' by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Dated: , 200 G CITY MANAGER ATTEST: vIr • `? CR ARY SE City of Rancho Mirage Department of Public Works Maintenance of Effort — Measure "A" Fiscal Year 2008-2009 General Fund Expenditures 101 3100 Engineering 7100, 7200 Salaries and Benefits $695,447 (50% of $1,390,894) 7400 Professional/Technical $75,000 (50% of $150,000) 7460 Inspections $20,000 (50% of $40,000) 7624 Vehicle Operations/Maintenance $4,000 (50% of $8,000) 7800, 7803 Mileage $5,290 (50% of $10,580) 7806 Meetings & Travel $6,750 (50% of 13,500) 7818 Dues & Subscriptions $1,300 (50% of $2,600) 7839 Reproduction & Printing $1,000 (50% of $2,000) 8000 Supplies $2,500 (50% of $5,000) 8020 Uniforms $750 (50% of $1,500) Sub Total: $812, 037 101 3200 Street Maintenance 7100, 7200 Salaries and Benefits $501,871 7120 Overtime $3,000 7603, 7606 Utilities $18,000 7609-7621 Street Related Maintenance $375,000 7624 Vehicle Operations/Maintenance $15,000 7806-7818 Meetings & Travel/Dues & Subscriptions $1,200 8000-8024 Maintenance Supplies/Small $25,500 Tools/Uniforms/Traffic Control Supplies 8905 Street Maintenance Service Truck $40,000 Sub Total: $979, 571 101, 224, 309, 370 & 372 Capital Projects Other Funding Sources FY 2008/2009 90018 Crack Seal/Rubberized Slurry Seal $600,000 Various Public Streets 90343 Bob Hope Drive Street Improvements $800,000 from Dinah Shore Dr. to Ramon Road 90339 Frank Sinatra Dr. Grind and Overlay from $232,000 Hwy 111 to Mirada Circle 90292 DaVali Dr. Pavement Rehabilitation from $250,000 Gerald Ford Dr. to Dinah Shore Dr. 90337 Highway 111/Frank Sinatra Dr. $1,500,000 Intersection Improvements 90334 I-10/Bob Hope Dr. Interchange $744,000 Improvements Sub Total. $4,126,000 MOE Grand Total: $5,917,608 Required MOE: $1,191,036 Excess MOE: $4,726,572 FEND 101- GENERAL FOND DIVISION 3100 - ENGINEERING ACCT ACCOUNT NO. NAME 7100 Salaries - Full Time 7120 Overtime 7200 • Benefits EXPENDITURE ACTIVITY DETAIL For Eiscal Years 2007-08`and 2008.09 JUSTIFICATION FOR STAFF REQUESTS TOTAL $ Benefits paid by City including group insurance, retirement and other benefits $ Director of Public Works City Engineer • Senior Civil Engineer Project Manager Civil Engineering Assistant Public Works Inspector Senior Traffic Signal Technician Engineering Technician II Department Secretary Office Assistant III FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 896,942 1) Department Secretary and Office Assistant III: . typing documents, typing specifications, filing and other assorted duties that can not be accomplished during regular work hours 2) Engineering Technician: performing various duties and inspections for permit tracking; plan checking services, maintaining drawing flat -files and high accident location software 3) Public Works Inspector: performing early inspections in order to maintain quality control offsite/onsite construction. Also ensure projects are properly closed at the end of the day 4) Traffic Signal Maintenance Technician: after hours call outs for traffic signal problems FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 8,500 FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 391,712 TOTAL $ 7400 Professional/ 1) Traffic Engineering consulting services Technical 2) Plan Checking services, special studies, traffic counts, radio maintenance services, and software services FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 200,000 Budget FY 2007-08 AMOUNT $ 150,458 143,293 123,782 77,352 87,970 83,407 83,781 71,227 60,010 54,006 TOTAL $ 935,286 Budget FY 2008-09 AMOUNT $ 155,277 147,883 127,747 83,827 90,787 86,464 86,464 75,715 63,792 55,736 $ 973,692 1;500 $ 1,500 2,500 2,500 8,000 $ 385,702 $ 385,702 $ 10,000 $ 1,500 1,500 2,500 2,500 8,000 409,202 409,202 10,000 115,000 140,000 TOTAL $ 125,000 $ 150,000 130 r 1 r r 1 / 1 r 1 1 1 / 1 1 r 1 • r 1 • EXPENDITURE ACTIVITY DETAIL For Fiscal Years 2007-08 and 2008.09 FIEND 101- GENERAL FOND DIVISION 3100 - ENGINEERING ACCT ACCOUNT NO. NAME JUSTIFICATION FOR STAFF REQUESTS Budget Budget FY 2007-08 FY 2008-09 AMOUNT AMOUNT. 7444 Temporary Agency Contingency in the event temporary help is required for Services vacation, illness, jury duty, etc. $ 1,000 $ 2,000 FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 10,000 TOTAL $ 1,000 $ 2,000 7460 Inspections Provides special inspections and testing in areas where greater expertise is required and supplementary inspector when City Inspector is absent $ 40,000 $ 40,000 FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 40,000 TOTAL $ 40,000 $ 40,000 7464 Survey Control Maintenance of all 56 benchmarks for vertical control in FY 2007-08 and routine maintenance of benchmarks and centerline monuments for horizontal control in FY 2008-09 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 25,000 TOTAL $ 25,000 $ 25,000 7624 Vehicle Provides for the operation and maintenance of the Public Operations/ Works Inspectors and Traffic Signal Technician's vehicles $ 8,000 $ 8,000 Maintenance FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 8,000 TOTAL $ 8,000 $ 8,000 1 7800 Mileage Reimbursement for use of personal vehicles by Engineering personnel on project administration and inspections $ 500 $ 500 1 FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 800 TOTAL $ 500 $ 500 7803 Car Allowance For Director ($420/month) and City Engineer ($420/month) for use of personal vehicles to attend meetings, seminars, conferences and the like in the Coachella Valley $ 10,080 $ 10,080 FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 9,264 TOTAL $ 10,080 $ 10,080 7806 Meeting & 1) American Public Works Association (APWA) Travel International Conference [Director and City Engineer] $ 4,000 $ 4,300 2) Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) International Conference [Director] 1,500 1,700 3) League of California Cities Conference [Director] 1,500 1,700 4) Permits Plus Users Conference [Engineering ...-- Technician or Engineering Assistant] 1,500 1,500 5) Miscellaneous technical seminars [all staff] 4,500 4,300 FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 13,700 TOTAL $ 13,000 $ 13,500 131 FOND 101- GENERAL FOND DIVISION 3100- ENGINEERING ACCT ACCOUNT NO. NAME 7818 Dues & Subscriptions 7839 Reproduction & Printing 8000 Supplies EXPENDITURE ACTIVITY DETAD, For Fiscal Years 2007.08 and 2008.09 JUSTIFICATION FOR STAFF REQUESTS Dues for American Public Works Association, National Society of Professional Engineers, American Society of Civil Engineers, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Notary Public; technical books and manuals and various subscriptions FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 2,000 Budget FY 2007-08 AMOUNT Budget FY 2008-09 AMOUNT $ 2,600 $ 2,600 TOTAL $ 2,600 $ 2,600 Printing specifications, plans, special prints, etc. $ 2,000 $ 2,000 FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 3,000 , TOTAL $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Office supplies, print paper, delivery services for plan checks, training videos, and film $ 5,000 $ 5,000 FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $14,000 TOTAL $ 5,000 $ 5,000 8012 Small Tools, Furniture & Equipment Miscellaneous small tools & equipment as may be necessary $ 2,000 $ 2,000 FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 2,000 TOTAL $ 2,000 $ 2,000 8020 Uniforms Uniforms for Public Works Inspector, Traffic Signal Technician and safety clothing for Engineering staff $ 1,500 $ 1,500 FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 2,200 TOTAL $ 1,500 $ 1,500 • DIVISION TOTAL $ 1,564,668 $ 1,653,074 132 FUND 10I - GENERAL FUND DIVISION 3200 - STREET MAINTENANCE ACCT ACCOUNT NO. NAME 7100 Salaries - Full Time EXPENDITURE ACTIVITY DEM Foe Fiscal Years 2007.08 and 2008.09 JUSTIFICATION FOR STAFF REQUESTS Street Maintenance Supervisor Street Maintenance Worker II Street Maintenance Worker II Street Maintenance Worker I Street Maintenance Worker I FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 302,665 Budget FY 2007-08 AMOUNT $ 79,791 62,518 62,518 56,706 56,706 TOTAL $ 318,239 Budget FY 2008-09 AMOUNT $ 82,347 64,521 64,521 58,522 58,522 $ 328,433 7120 Overtime 7200 Benefits 7603 Electricity These items are for emergency callouts for traffic accident clean up, traffic control, cleaning debris and fallen tree limbs, placing barricades and warning signs during rainstorms, completing projects started during regular work hours and special events $. 3,000 $ 3,000 3,000 $ 3,000 FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 3,000 TOTAL $ Benefits paid by City including group insurance, retirement and other benefits $ 163,239 $ 173,438 FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $166,306 TOTAL $ 163,239 $ 173,438 Electricity and maintenance for 91 streetlights throughout the City $ FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ I1,000 13,000 $ 13,000 TOTAL $ 13,000 $ 13,000 7606 Water 7609 Street Striping Water for street sweeping and other miscellaneous uses $ 5,000 $ 5,000 FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 5,500 TOTAL $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Provides for annual restriping of the City in September/October. Also provides for thermoplastic arrows and legends. $ 65,000 $ 65,000 FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 70,000 TOTAL $ 65,000 $ 65,000 7612 Maintenance Maintenance of regulatory, warning, street, & information signs $ FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 3,000 TOTAL $ 5,000 $ 5,000 5,000 $ 5,000 7615 Street Sweeping Street sweeping contract FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 35,000 TOTAL $ 30,000 $ 35,000 30,000 $ 35,000 136 41 FUND 101- GENERAL FOND DIVISION 3200 - STREET MAOITENANCE ACCT ACCOUNT NO. NAME 7618 Traffic Signal Maintenance/ Electricity EXPENDITURE ACTIVITY DETAR For Fiscal Years 2007-08 and 2008-09 Budget Budget FY 2007-08 FY 2008-09 JUSTIFICATION FOR STAFF REQUESTS AMOUNT AMOUNT Electricity for 50 traffic signals, relamping, emergency callouts, major knockdowns and replacement of equipment as necessary $ 205,000 $ 215,000 FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $185,000 TOTAL $ 205,000 $ 215,000 7621 Street Related Repairs Asphalt, concrete, aggregate base for repairing streets, disposal of old asphalt and concrete, equipment rental, catch basin repairs, landfill charges for disposal of roadside refuse, and miscellaneous other street repairs as needed FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 55,000 $ 55,000 $ 55,000 TOTAL $ 55,000 $ 55,000 7624 Vehicle Operations/ Maintenance This item provides for the operating and maintenance cost of the Street Division vehicles and equipment. Includes fuel, lubricants, replacement parts; repairs and safety inspections. $ 15,000 $ 15,000 FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $16,000 TOTAL $ 15,000 $ 15,000 7627 Graffiti Removal Purchase of supplies for City crews and/or contract personnel for graffiti removal and supplies for distribution to property owners for graffiti removal $ FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 200 TOTAL $ 200 $ 200 $ 200 200 7630 Trails & Bike Path Maintenance 7806 Meetings & Travel 7818 Dues & Subscriptions Provides for contractual services for the maintenance of the trail system FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $17,000 $ 16,000 $ 17,000 TOTAL $ 16,000 $ 17,000 Training seminars for specialized licenses, technical seminars on asphalt and concrete maintenance, traffic school for Class A Driver's License, and Supervisor's training classes $ FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $1,000 TOTAL $ Dues for Maintenance Superintendents Association, American Construction Inspectors Association and technical publications $ FY06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 200 1,000 $ 1,000 1,000 $ 1,000 200 $ 200 TOTAL $ 200 $ 200 137 FOND 101- GENERAL FOND DIVISION 3200 - STREET MAINTENANCE ACCT NO. ACCOUNT NAME EXPENDITURE ACTIVITY DETAIL For Fiscal Years 2007-08 and 2008-09 JUSTIFICATION FOR STAFF REQUESTS Budget FY 2007-08 AMOUNT Budget FY 2008-09 AMOUNT 8000 Supplies The purchase of traffic paint, markers, silica sand for sandblasting, guardrail material and posts, concrete patch material, parts and supplies for small equipment FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 25,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 TOTAL $ 10,000 $ 10,000 8002 Equipment Rental For rental of equipment as needed FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 0 $ TOTAL $ 5,000 $ 5,000 5,000 $ 5,000 8012 Small Tools, Furniture & Equipment Shovels, chain saw chains, drills and bits, jacks, jack stands, landscape tools, signal maintenance tools, mechanic tools, safety equipment, and miscellaneous special tools as required FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 6,000 $ 8,000 $ 5,000 TOTAL $ 8,000 $ 5,000 8020 Uniforms Purchase uniforms, safety clothing, and shoes for all Street Maintenance personnel FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 2,500 $ 2,500 $ 2,500 TOTAL $ 2,500 $ 2,500 8024 Traffic Control This account provides for the purchase of barricades, both large and small, traffic cones, light board replacement parts, batteries, lights, and rental of traffic control setups FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $1,000 $ 2,000 $ 3,000 TOTAL $ 2,000 $ 3,000 8905 Automotive Replace 1998 Ford F-250 Pickup with new Low Emission F-250 4x4 Service Body truck Replace 2001 Ford F-350 Dump truck with new Low Emission F-350 4x4 1-Ton truck FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 10,000 $ 32,000 $ 40,000 TOTAL $ 32,000 $ 40,000 8910 Other Equipment One changeable message sign/arrow board FY 06/07 BUDGET AMOUNT $ 50,000 $ 20,000 $ TOTAL $ 20,000 $ DIVISION TOTAL $ 974,378 $ 996,771 138 CITY OF RABIC O MIRAGE 0 zl CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) FY 2008.2009 NO PROJECT GENERAL FUND (101) LICENSE TAX (103) PARKLAND FUND (218) GAS TAX (224) MEASURE A LOCAL (236) MEASURE A REGIONAL (CVAG) STREETS/TRAFFIC 1 SIGNALS Highway 111 90337 Highway 111/Frank Sinatra Drive intersection improvements 2 Bob Hope/Dinah Shore 90192 Loan repayment to the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians for street improvements 3 Slurry Seal/ ARHM Overlay 400,000 400,000 90018 Rubberized emulsion aggregate slurry and reconstruction using asphalt rubber hot mix overlays 4 Bob Hope Drive 600,000 200,000 400,000 1,200,000 90343 Add 3rd lane from Ramon Road to Dinah Shore Drive 5 I-10/Bob Hope Interchange 456,000 90334 City's share of construction costs 474 0 0 r•.; FRANK SINATRA A.D. (309) DEVELOPMENT FEE FUNDS (350-359) REDEVELOPMENT Whitewater (370) I Northside (372) TOTAL PROJECT COST COMMENTS 1,500,000 Add dual left tum lane for northbound & southbound 1,500,000 Highway 111, and westbound Frank Sinatra Drive. Construction set for Summer 2008: __ 220,000 City executed agreement with Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians for street improvement 220,000 loan repayment. 3rd of an estimated ten equal annual payments. 200,000 Various public, residential and arterial streets (Venus, Saturn, Nebulae). 1,000,000 Joint project with County of Riverside. Construction set for 2,400,000 Summer 2009. Portion of General Fund costs to be reimbursed by Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. 744,000 Construction set to begin July 2008. Completion by January 1,200,0W 2010. Cal Trans will be the lead agency. 475 NO PROJECT 6 Frank Sinatra 90339 Grind and overlay Highway 111. to Mirada Circle CITY OF ROC O MIRAGE 0 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (UP) FY 2008-2009 GENERAL FUND (101) LICENSE TAX (103) PARKLAND FUND (218) GAS TAX (224) MEASURE A LOCAL (236) 159,000 MEASURE A REGIONAL (CVAG) 7 San Jacinto Drive 90340 Pavement rehabilitation from Rancho Las Palmas Drive to Indian Trail STREETS/SIGNALS SUBTOTAL 600,000 600,000 1,415,000 1,200,000 UTILITYi. UNDERGROUNDING' 8 Vista Del Sol 90347 Utility undergrounding of 115Icv and 331cv electric wires UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING SUBTOTAL LANDSCAPE MEDIANS 9 Frank Sinatra 90335 Median island reconstruction from Bob Hope Drive to Vista Del Sol 10 Bob Houe 90341 Median island reconstruction from Highway 111 to Rancho Las Palmas Drive 1 476 FRANK SINATRA A.D.(309) 232,000 DEVELOPMENT FEE FUNDS (350-359) REDEVELOPMENT Whitewater Northside (370) I (372) TOTAL PROJECT COST 391,000 COMMENTS Construction set for Summer 2008. Construction set for Summer 2009. 450,000 450,000 232,000 220,000 1,950,000 944,000 7,161,000 Need street plan and profile design. 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 Construction set for Fall 2008. 300,000 300,000 Construction set for Fall 2008. 300,000 300,000 477 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2008 - 2009 Agency: City of Rancho Mirage Page 1 of 5 Prepared by: Bruce Harry, Director of Public Works Phone #: (760) 770-3224 Date: May 1, 2008 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL PROJECT COST ($000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) 1. Citywide rubber crack sealing, rubber slurry sealing and minor asphalt overlays on various public streets. Preventative Maintenance/Pavement 'Rehabilitation 400 400 2. Bob Hope Dr. widening (NB) from Dinah Shore Dr. to Ramon Rd. Widening/Capacity Enhancement 2,400 400 3. Plumley Rd. pavement reconstruction from Gerald Ford Dr. to Dinah Shore Dr.* Pavement Reconstruction 800 400 4. Monterey Ave. street improvements from Gerald Ford Dr. to Country Club Dr. W idening/Capacity Enhancement/Pavement Rehabilitation 5,000 232.5 5. Frank Sinatra Dr. pavement rehabilitation from Highway 111 to West End and Da Vali Dr. pavement rehabilitation from Gerald Ford Dr. to Dinah Shore Dr. Grind/ARHM Overlay 791 159 6. Bob Hope Dr./I-10 Interchange New Diamond Interchange 2,500 456 *Carryover Project TOTALS 11,891 2,047.5 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2009 - 2010 Agency: City of Rancho Mirage Page 2 of 5 Prepared by: Bruce Harry, Director of Public Works Phone #: (760) 770-3224 Date: May 1, 2008 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL PROJECT COST ($000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) 1. Citywide rubber crack sealing, rubber slurry sealing, minor asphalt overlays and striping on various public streets. Preventative Maintenance/Pavement Rehabilitation 1,000 400 2. Monterey Ave. street improvements from Hovley Ln. West to Magnesia Falls Dr. Widening/Capacity Enhancement/Pavement Rehabilitation 3,800 830 3. Country Club Dr. pavement reconstruction from Highway 111 to Whitewater Low Water Crossing. Grind/ARHM Overlay 500 200 4. Mirage Cove Dr., Stellar Dr., Nebulae Way, Venus Dr. and Saturn Cir. pavement reconstruction. Pavement Reconstruction 1,000 241 TOTALS 6,300 1,671 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2010 - 2011 Agency: City of Rancho Mirage Page 3 of 5 Prepared by: Bruce Harry, Director of Public Works Phone #: (760) 770-3224 Date: May 1, 2008 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL PROJECT COST ($000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) 1. Citywide crack sealing, slurry sealing, minor asphalt overlays and traffic striping on various public streets. Pavement Maintenance 500 300 2. Highway 111 asphalt rubber hot mix overlay from Bob Hope Dr. to east city limit. Grind/ARHM Overlay 850 400 3. Frank Sinatra Dr. pavement rehabilitation from Bob Hope Dr. to Monterey Ave. Grind/ARHM Overlay 850 158 TOTALS 2,200 858 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2011 - 2012. Agency: City of Rancho Mirage Page 4 of 5 Prepared by: Bruce Harry, Director of Public Works Phone #: (760) 770-3224 Date: May 1, 2008 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL PROJECT COST ($000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) 1. Citywide rubber crack sealing, rubber slurry sealing, minor asphalt overlays and striping on various public streets. Pavement Maintenance 500 400 2. Morningside Dr. pavement rehabilitation from Country Club Dr. to Frank Sinatra Dr. Grind/ARHM Overlay 850 492 TOTALS 1,350 892 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2012 - 2013 Agency: City of Rancho Mirage Page 5 of 5 Prepared by: Bruce Harry, Director of Public Works Phone #: (760) 770-3224 Date: May 1, 2008 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL PROJECT COST ($000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) 1. Citywide Crack Sealing, Slurry Sealing, minor asphalt Pavement Maintenance 660 472.5 overlays and street striping on various public streets. 2. Rancho Las Palmas Drive pavement rehabilitation from Highway 111 to Bob Hope Drive. Pavement Rehabilitation 750 472.5 TOTAL 1,410 945 May 12, 2008 Ms. Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside County Regional Complex, Third Floor Post Office Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Re: FY 2007/2008 Measure "A" Local Streets and Roads Status Report Dear Ms Trevino: The following is the current status of City of Rancho Mirage projects identified in our FY 2007/2008 Measure "A" Local Streets and Roads Program as requested. 1. Project: City-wide rubberized crack sealing, rubberized emulsion aggregate slurry and striping. Status: Over 3 million square feet of local residential streets were crack sealed, slurried and striped in the late summer of 2007. All planned work has been completed. 2. Project: Bob Hope Drive pavement rehabilitation from Dinah Shore Dr. to Ginger Rogers. Status: Project was completed in November 2007. 3. Project: Plumley Road pavement rehabilitation from Gerald Ford Dr. to Dinah Shore Drive. Status: This project is located directly adjacent to a Middle School and had to be delayed until summer 2008 recess. Award of the contract is scheduled for May 2008 with construction commencing June 2008 for 60 days. ADMINISTRATION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCE HOUSING AUTH-ORITY PUBLIC LIBRARY PUBLIC WORKS Tel. (760) 324-4511 Tel. (760) 328-2266 Tel. (760) 770-3207 Tel. (760) 770-3210 Tel. (760) 341-7323 Tel. (760) 770-3224 Fax. (760) 324-8830 Fax. (760) 324-9851 Fax. (760) 324-0528 Fax. (760) 770-3261 Fax. (760) 341-5213 Fax. (760) 770-3261 69-825 FFIGFFWAY 111 / RANCF+O MIRAGE, CA 92270 www.ci.rancho-mirage.ca.us 4. Project: Monterey Avenue Street Improvements from Country Club Drive to Gerald Ford Drive. Status: Final engineering design is 90% complete. Minor right-of- way acquisition has been challenging and will likely delay construction till May 2009. 5. Project: Da Vall Drive pavement rehabilitation from Frank Sinatra Drive to Gerald Ford Drive. Status: Project was completed in November 2007. Should you have any questions please feel free to call me at (760) 770-3224. Sincerely, Bruce B. Harry, Jr. Director of Public Works c: RCTC Measure "A", FY 2009/2013 File 84123 Public Works Department April 24, 2008 Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attn.: Ms. Anne Mayer, Executive Director Subject: Measure A Streets and Roads Capital Improvement Program and Maintenance of Effort Certification Enclosed are the City of Riverside's Streets and Roads Capital Improvement Program for FY 2009 through FY 2013 and a status report for FY 2008. The reports include mid -year appropriations and new projects. We are estimating $58,071,000 of Measure A expenditures for FY 2009-2013. Measure A revenue for this same period is estimated to be $32,298,000. Also enclosed is the City of Riverside's Maintenance of Effort Certification for FY 2008 accompanied by supporting calculations. The City's estimated eligible expenditures for FY 2008 total $30,261,388 as compared to our baseline amount of $12,449,203. If you have any questions, please contact Patrick Keeney at (951) 826-2406. Sincerey, Thomas J. Boyd Deputy Public Works Director — City Engineer Attachments G: ICommoelMensureofEffortlFY 07081RCTC08.11r 3900 Main Street • Riverside, CA 92522 • 951.826.5341 • fax 951.826.5542 • www.riversideca.gov ON COMMISSION MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the City of Riverside (the "Agency") that sales tax i transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 88-1 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. i Dated: May 12, 2008 Siobhan Foster Public Works Director Paul Sundeen Chief Financial Officer/Treasurer Approved as to Form: r ity Attomey Bradley Judson City Manager Attest: -April 11, 2008 City of Riverside Measure "A" - Maintenance of Effort Analysis 101 General Fund Estimated 2007-2008 Street Expenditures Total ST. Exp. Discretionary Funds Gen.Fd Traf. Safety Cost Cent Object !Description 112380 5ktOtiNt11;tng Service 422201 Street Light / Traffic Signal $4,003,835 $4,003,835 Force Account $271,348 $271,348 1412000 IPUbEIVVRITIT6ffidEOgWigifli3linIMIMIIIMiliMiliM11111M111M1111111HVIIIMION.,,, 421000 Services -Professional, Tech $29,535 $29,535 422200 Electric $69,385 $69,385 422201 Street Light / Traffic Signal $139,922 $139,922 462)00( Capital Equipment $297,000 $297,000 Force Account $2,388,559 $2,388,559 411600 PM.Mgnigititi000.0dilj$ONi0OHEMMIHiniligffi[11131111111.1HRIE:i: 42100X Services -Professional, Tech @ 50% Force Account @ 50% $162,186 $4,315,236 $81,093 $2,157,618 411000 PI9V$000 M4.0tOOMOtitigHEIRMIEUMNIMMBHNOHNICEM. 421000 Services -Professional, Tech $0 $0 Force Account $1,024,143 $1,024,143 411010 421000 Services -Professional, Tech $326,614 $326,614 424123 Contract Slurry $99,149 $99,149 424143 Force - Traffic Signs $209,000 $209,000 462)00( Capital Equipment $320,082 $320,082 Force Account $6,070,836 $6,070,836 41101.1. P/W Stree Landscape arid Tree Maintenance 421000 Services -Professional, Tech $349,034 $349,034 421203 Median Landscape Contracts $1,926,990 $1,926,990 421205 Street Tree Trimming Contract $1,911,747 $1,911,747 Force Account $1,079,686 $1,079,686 411030 IMIN:Off»,»Ot:01OHMOOt0:0000011111111MIHMIHMINIIMIIIMPRIMIHMIHMIHM;k1,, 421000 Services -Professional, Tech $0 $0 440301 Projects $0 $0 Force Account $462,903 $462,903 412100 Pub, Wks:. Photo Red Ligh 421000 Services -Professional, Tech $1,681,449 $1,681,449 440301 Projects $o $0 462XXX Capital Equipment $12,240 $12,240 Force Account $629,084 $629,084 419500 N1/ Capital Purchases 462XXX Capital Equipment $1,545,358 $1,545,358 540 Refuse Fund 413040 PM/ Stree Cleaning 421000 Services -Professional, Tech $2,306 $2,306 462100 Automotive Equipment $992,254 $992,254 Force Account $2,180,217 $2,180,217 Total $32,500,099 $30,261,388 $0 REPORTED MOE SUMMARY TO DATE Discretionary Expenditures Description General Fund Street Lighting Service 1987-88* 1988-89 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 2,968,956 3,009,762 2,831,221 2,951,998 2,809,972 3,152,213 3,154,836 3,063,147 3,109,458 3,112, 742 3,183,255 3,267,483 Pub. Wks. Traffic Eng. Subtotal 1,018,852 1,048,918 1,243,807 1,232, 517 1520055 1,527,692 1,228,414 1,236,225 1,400,359 1,145, 556 1,204,074 1,243,337 PNV City Engineering Services Subtotal 1,033,869 908,217 973,070 742,888 893810 802,045 780,248 643,397 685,025 1,152,713 1,069,884 1,129, 971 P/W Street Service Admin. Subtotal 561,908 383,328 447,124 529,604 595,446 504,362 472,534 503,051 503,084 548,381 536,743 558,838 PNV Street Maintenance Subtotal 3,527,611 3,761,081 4,035,730 3,183,180 2,963,048 3,708,649 3,309,897 2,612,251 2,827,745 2,382,265 1,931,737 3,999,218 Subtotal 931,926 825,523 1,029,306 1,124,813 1,155, 463 1,317,542 1,119,339 1,165,028 1,082,102 909,486 731,701 738,929 PNV StreetLandscape and Tree Main enance Subtotal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PNV Storm Drain Maintenance Subtotal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 P/W Photo Red Light,: Subtotal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PNV Capital Purchases Subtotal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Parks & Rec. Street Trees Subtotal 1,289,360 1,096,311 1,175,755 1,381,187 1,506,746 1,294,556 1,357,004 1,171,088 1,275,025 1,443, 310 970,108 921,706 Storm Drain Fund Subtotal 789,678 458,701 311,724 401,826 379,575 212,620 229,484 342,214 74,745 376,163 47,085 23,310 Capital Outlay Fund Subtotal 327,043 546,649 991,357 1,180,646 1,354,418 948,670 1,264,443 1,262,230 1,102,752 1,969,038 2,162, 730 2,133, 872 Refuse Fund - PNV: Street Cleaning Subtotal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 12,449,203 12,038,490 13,039,094 12,728,659 13,178,533 13,468,349 12,916,199 11,998,631 12,060,295 13,039,654 11,837,317 14,016,665 Deviation From Base Year -410,713 589,891 279,456 729,330 1,019,146 466,996 -450,572 -388,908 590,451 -611,886 1,567,462 Surplus or Deficit -410,713 179,178 458,634 1,187,964 2,207,110 2,674,106 2,223,534 1,834,626 2,425,077 1,813,191 3,380,653 " Base Year for MOE Calculations 04/11 /2008 MOE 2008 Estimated REPORTED MOE SUMMARY TO DATE • Discretionary Expenditures Description 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 General Fund Street Lighting Service 3,400,103 3,434,247 3,459,844 3,584,430 3,685,124 3,821,148 3,890,489 4,066,909 4,275,184 Pub. Wks. Traffic:Eng, Subtotal 1,377,076 1,432,510 1,415,304 1,539,828 1,665,739 1,662,878 1,853,413 2,607,365 2,924,401 P/W.City Engineering Services Subtotal 1,025,122 1,198, 335 749,632 1,474,387 242,316 1,336,677 1,669,463 1,716,067 2,238,711 PAN Street Service Admin. • Subtotal 470,036 565,093 608,851 744,350 839,818 681,489 766,802 1,137,851 1,024,143 P/W Street Maintenance Subtotal 3,988,772 4,019,440 3,978,121 4,220,556 4,753,218 4,787,904 5,459,114 6,818,919 7,025,681 P/W Street Cleaning Subtotal 811,246 784,056 1,026,621 1,395,084 1,243, 376 1,329,047 0 0 0 P/W Street Landscape and Tree Main Subtotal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,535,492 5,267,457 P/W Storm Drain <Maintenance . Subtotal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 422,677 462,903 P/W Photo Red Light Subtotal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,322,773 P/W Capital Purchases Subtotal 0 0 0 0 0 0 28,175 667,901 1,545,358 Parks & Rec. Street Trees Subtotal 996,482 1,383,654 1,502,431 1,969,272 1,910,981 2,111,674 2,643,976 495,746 0 Storm Drain Fund' Subtotal 1,197,113 0 145,870 431,468 406,226 756,046 636,366 0 0 Capital Outlay Fund Subtotal 998,694 952,248 280,833 154,121 32,525 57,520 249,084 0 0 Refuse Fund - P/W Street, Cleaning Subtotal 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,413,024 2,098,408 3,174,777 Total 14,264,644 13,769,583 13,167,508 15,513,497 14,779,323 16,544,383 18,609,906 24,567,338 30,261,388 Deviation From Base Year 1,815,441 1,320,380 718,305 3,064,294 2,330,120 4,095,180 6,160, 703 12,118,135 17,812,185 Surplus or Deficit Base Year for MOE Calculations 5,196,094 6,516,474 7,234,779 10,299,073 12,629,193 16,724,373 22,885,076 35,003,212 52,815,396 04/11/2008 MOE 2008 Estimated RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM STATUS FY2007-08 Agency: City of Riverside Page 1 of 5 Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: Apri118, 2008 Item No. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'$) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) STATUS 1 Arlington Widening - Victoria to Alessandro Street Widening and Improvements 16,500 100 Project on hold pending assessment of revenues/Measure A call for projects. 2 Central Avenue Medians - Chicago to Canyon Asphalt Rehabilitation and Median 1,374 *770 Project is complete. Crest Rehabilitation/Enhancement 3 Central Avenue Medians - SR 91 to Victoria Asphalt Rehabilitation and Median 4,179 *183 Contract to be awarded May 2008. Rehabilitation/Enhancement 4 Chicago Medians - Central to Le Conte Asphalt Rehabilitation and Median Rehabilitation/Enhancement 1,000 `1,000 Contract awarded November 2007. Project is complete. 5 Dewey Avenue Sidewalks Sidewalk Construction 921 *799 Project is complete. 6 Indiana Widening @ Pierce Street Widening and Improvements 500 500 Project to be completed with construction of new school, anticipated in 2009. 7 Irving Bridge at Gage Canal Removal and Reconstruction of Bridge 200 200 Project is complete. 8 Jurupa Avenue Underpass Street Underpass/Grade Separation 25,414 *3,043 Contract awarded April 2007, Estimated completion in September 2008. 9 Jurupa Ave. - Van Buren Blvd. to Tyler Street Extension 3,200 *41 Project on hold. Hazardous material found in right of way. Funds transferred to Van Buren Widening - Andrew to Garfield. 10 La Sierra Widening - Indiana to Cleveland Street Widening 7,082 - Project is complete. 11 La Sierra/91 Fwy. Reconstruction Interchange Improvements 45,853 '3 Contract awarded August 2007. Estimated completion in July 2009. " Prior years unexpended funds at July 1, 2007. Ocommon\maintenance of effort\FY 0708\measastatus2008 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM STATUS FY2007-08 Agency: City of Riverside Page 2 of 5 Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: April 18, 2008 Item No. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) STATUS 12 Major Street Rehabilitation 05/06 Street Resurfacing 1,043 - Project is complete. 13 Major Street Rehabilitation 07/08 (Mission Street Resurfacing and Signal 2,550 1,000 Design in progress. Inn, University and Lime) Modifications *1,331 14 Market Street/Rivera Improvements Street Widening/Curb, Gutter, Sidewalk 436 *241 Project is complete. & Wheelchair Ramps 15 Marlborough Avenue Rehabilitation Street Improvements 305 *184 Project is complete. 16 Martin Luther King - SR 91 to Chicago (study) Traffic Study 50 *50 Project is on hold pending revenue assessment. 17 Minor Street Rehabilitation 07/08 Phase II Street Overlay 2,800 *145 Contract awarded April 2008. 18 Miscelllaneous Railroad Project Management Grade Separations 300 *173 Ongoing project management. 19 Mitchell/Norwood Intersection Street and Storm Drain Improvements 1,020 *364 Contract awarded April 2008. 20 Overlook Parkway/SR 91 Connection Planning and Design 1,000 *100 Project on hold. 21 Pave Dirt Roads Street Paving 800 500 Project dropped, funds transferred to *300 Washington resurfacing. 22 Primrose Street Vacation Installation of Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk 102 *82 Prolect is complete. 23 Quiet Zone Quiet Zone for BNSF & UP Railroads 7,411 *30 Design in progress. 24 RR Grade Separation - Columbia Avenue Grade Separation - Columbia A BNSF 29,150 - Design and right-of-way acquisition in * Prior years unexpended funds at July 1, 2007. g:lcommon\maintenance of effort\FY 0708\measastatus2008 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM STATUS FY2007-08 Agency: City of Riverside Page 3 of 5 Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: April 18, 2008 Item No. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) STATUS 25 RR Grade Separation - Iowa Avenue Grade Separation - Iowa @ BNSF 32,056 *518 Design in progress. 26 RR Grade Separation - Madison Street Grade Separations - preliminary design 250 *2 Project on hold. 27 RR Grade Separation - Magnolia Avenue Grade Separation - Magnolia @ UPRR 54,460 *5,315 Design and right-of-way acquisition in progress. 28 RR Grade Separation - Mary Street Grade Separation - Mary @ BNSF 38,100 *600 Design in progress. 29 RR Grade Separation - Riverside Avenue Grade Separation - Riverside @ UPRR 30,300 *149 Design in progress. 30 RR Grade Separation - Streeter Avenue Grade Separation - Streeter @ UPRR 36,800 *149 Design in progress. 31 RR Grade Separation - Third Street Grade Separations - preliminary and final design 961 - Design in progress. 32 RR Grade Separation - Tyler Grade Separations - preliminary design 250 *250 Project is on hold. 33 Sidewalk Repair 06/07 Sidewalk Repair - Citywide 741 *96 Project is complete. 34 Sidewalk Repair 07/08 Sidewalk Repair - Citywide 400 400 Design in progress. 35 SR 60/Market Street Interchange Landscape Landscaping of Interchange Ramps 877 *405 Contract awarded May 2007. Project is complete. 36 University - Ottawa to Eucalyptus Medians 3,961 *247 Project is complete. 37 Van Buren Blvd. Widening -Andrew to Street Widening 22,750 1,100 Project is complete. Garfield (includes Magnolia to 91) *4,845 *Prior years unexpended funds at July 1, 2007. Ocommonlmaintenance of efforfiFY 07081measastatus2008 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION -COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM STATUS FY2007-08 Agency: City of Riverside Page 4 of 5 Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: April 18, 2008 Item No. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) STATUS 38 Van Buren Blvd. Widening - Garfield to Street Widening 14,840 *100 Design is planned for 2008/09. Jackson St 39 Van Buren Blvd. Widening - Indiana to South Street Widening 26,750 100 Design is planned for 2008/09. City Limit 40 Van Buren Blvd. Widening - Santa Ana River Street Widening 15,000 4,800 Design and right-of-way acquisition in to Jackson Street *212 progress. Construction is estimated to start in Summer of 2008. 41 Van Buren Blvd / 91 Frwy Interchange Interchange Improvements 41,000 *210 Right of way in progress. Construction is estimated to start in August 2009. 42 Washington Turn Lanes Addition of Turn Lanes 1,000 900 Design in progress. *100 43 Wheelchair Ramps 06/07 Wheelchair Ramps Construction 661 *290 Project is complete. 44 Arterial Interconnections Signal Coordinations 600 300 Project selection in progress. 45 Big Springs - Watkins Signal Installation 200 200 Design in progress. 46 CalTrans Ramps Coordination Signal Coordinations 53 *28 On -going signal coordination work. 47 Citywide Traffic Modifications Signal Modification 727 *727 Project is complete. 48 Iowa Interconnect - MLK to Palmyrita Signal Coordination 186 *117 Contract awarded August 2007. 49 La Sierra Interconnect - Victoria to Arlington Signal Coordination 314 *222 Contract awarded August 2007. Victoria to SR 91 is complete. 50 Magnolia Interconnect - Tyler to Buchanan Signal Coordination 233 *169 Contract awarded August 2007. * Prior years unexpended funds at July 1, 2007. gkommon\maintenance of effort\FY 07081measastatus2008 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM STATUS FY2007-08 Agency: City of Riverside Page 5 of 5 Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: April 18, 2008 Item No. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) STATUS 51 Main Street Interconnect - 1st to Columbia Signal Coordination 250 *250 Design in progress. 52 Miscellaneous Signal Revisions 07/08 Signal Modifications 250 250 Project selection in progress. 53 Mission Inn - Lime Signal Modifications - - Combined with Major Street Rehabilitation 54 Sycamore Canyon - Box Springs Signal Installation 290 *123 Construction planned for FY 08/09. 55 Sycamore Canyon - Eastridge Signal Installation 290 *128 Construction planned for FY 08/09. 56 University - Lime Signal Modifications - - Combined with Major Street Rehabilitation 57 Van Buren - Dauchy to Orange Terrace Signal Coordination 150 *56 Project is complete. 58 Van Buren - Magnolia Signal Modification 39 *2 Project is complete. 59 Transportation Planning Engineering Planning 100 100 Ongoing annual expenditure. 60 Pavement Management Program Ongoing Annual Expenditure 75 75 Ongoing annual expenditure. 61 Controller Assembly Replacement Ongoing Traffic Signal Maintenance 100 100 Ongoing annual expenditure. 62 Transportation Planning/Investigation Traffic Engineering 165 165 Ongoing annual expenditure. 63 Spread Spectrum Radio Replacement Ongoing Traffic Signal Maintenance 20 20 Ongoing annual expenditure. 64 Traffic Management Center Construction of Traffic Management 622 *42 Phase I is complete. Center- Phase I 65 Traffic Signal Battery Back Up Ongoing Traffic Signal Maintenance 500 250 Ongoing annual expenditure. 66 Traffic Signal Loop Replacement Ongoing Traffic Signal Maintenance 60 60 Ongoing annual expenditure. * Prior years unexpended funds at July 1, 2007. gAcommonlmaintenance of effort\FY 07081measastatus2008 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY2008-2009 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: May 12, 2008 Page 1 of 9 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) 1 Arlington Widening - Victoria to Alessandro Street Widening and Improvements 16,500 *100 2 Canyon Crest Widening - Country Club to Via Vista Street Widening and Improvements 6,000 400 3 Central Avenue Medians - Chicago to Canyon Crest Asphalt Rehabilitation & Median 1,374 *770 Rehabilitation/Enhancement 4 Central Avenue Medians - SR 91 to Victoria Asphalt Rehabilitation & Median 4,179 *183 Rehabilitation/Enhancement 5 Chicago Avenue Medians - Central to Le Conte Asphalt Rehabilitation & Median 1,000 *1,000 Rehabilitation/Enhancement 6 Dewey Avenue Sidewalks Sidewalk Construction 921 *799 7 Indiana Widening @ Pierce Street Widening and Improvements 500 *500 8 Irving Bridge at Gage Canal Removal and Reconstruction of Bridge 200 *200 9 Jurupa Ave. Underpass Street Underpass/Grade Separation 25,414 *3,043 10 Jurupa Ave. - Van Buren Blvd. to Tyler Street Extension 3,200 *41 11 La Sierra Widening - Indiana to Cleveland Street Widening 7,082 - 12 La Sierra/91 Fwy. Reconstruction Interchange Improvements 45,853 *3 13 Major Street Rehabilitation 05/06 Street Resurfacing 1,043 - 14 Major Street Rehabilitation 07/08 Street Resurfacing and Traffic 2,550 *2,331 Signal Revisions 15 Major Street Rehabilitation 08/09 Street Resurfacing 1,400 1,400 * Indicates Measure A funding in prior fiscal years and not expended at 7/1107. g:\common\measure of effort\FY 0708\measacip 0809 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE_ "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2008-2009 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: May 12, 2008 Page 2 of 9 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) 16 Market Street/Rivera Improvements Street Widening, Curbs, Gutter, Sidewalks and Wheelchair Ramps 436 *241 17 Marlborough Avenue Rehabilitation Street Improvements 305 *184 18 Martin Luther King - SR91 to Chicago Traffic Study 50 *50 19 Minor Street Rehabilitation 07/08 Phase II Street Overlay 2,800 *145 20 Misc. Railroad Project Management Grade Separation 300 *173 21 Mitchell/Norwood Intersection Street and Drainage Improvements 1,020 *364 22 Overlook ParkwaySR91 Connection Interchange Planning and Design 1,000 *100 23 Pave Dirt Roads - South of Van Buren; East of Wood Street Construction 800 *800 24 Primrose Street Vacation Installation of Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk 102 *82 25 Quiet Zone - BNSF & UP Railroads Railroad Quiet Zone 7,411 *30 26 Railroad Grade Separation - Columbia Grade Separation 29,150 - 27 Railroad Grade Separation - Iowa Grade Separation 32,056 *518 28 Railroad Grade Separation - Madison Grade Separation/Preliminary Design 250 '2 29 Railroad Grade Separation - Magnolia Grade Separation 54,460 *5,315 30 Railroad Grade Separation - Mary Grade Separation 38,100 *600 31 Railroad Grade Separation - Riverside Grade Separation 30,300 350 *149 * Indicates Measure A funding in prior fiscal years and not expended at 7/1l07. gAcommon\measure of effort\FY 0708\measacip 0809 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2008-2009 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: May 12, 2008 Page 3 of 9 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) 32 Railroad Grade Separation - Streeter Grade Separation 36,800 350 *149 33 Railroad Grade Separation - Third St. Grade Separation - Design 961 - 34 Railroad Grade Separation - Tyler Grade Separation/Preliminary Design 250 *250 35 Railroad Grade Separations Grade Separation 3,701 303 36 Sidewalk Repair 06/07 Citywide Sidewalk Repair 741 *96 37 Sidewalk Repair 07/08 Citywide Sidewalk Repair 400 *400 38 SR 60/Market Street Interchange Landscape Landscaping of Interchange Ramps 877 *405 39 University - Ottawa to Eucalyptus Medians 3,961 *247 40 Van Buren - Andrew to Garfield (includes Magnolia Street Widening 22,750 1,100 to SR 91) *5,945 41 Van Buren - Garfield to Jackson Street Widening 14,840 *100 42 Van Buren - Indiana to South City Limit Street Widening 26,750 400 *100 43 Van Buren - Santa Ana River to Jackson Street Widening 15,000 3,955 *5,012 44 Van Buren Blvd / 91 Frwy Interchange Interchange Improvements 41,000 *210 45 Washington Turn Lanes Addition of Turn Lanes 1,000 *1,000 46_ Wheelchair Ramps 06/07 Wheelchair Ramp Construction 661 *290 * Indicates Measure A funding in prior fiscal years and not expended at 7/1/07. gAcommonlmeasure of effort\FY 0708\measacip 0809 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2008-2009 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: May 12, 2008 Page 4 of 9 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'S) MEASURE FUNDS ($000'S) 47 Arlington Avenue @ Horace Street Traffic Signal Revision 80 80 48 Arterial Interconnections 07/08 Traffic Signal Coordination 600 *300 49 Big Springs - Watkins Traffic Signal Installation 200 *200 50 CalTrans Ramps Coordination Traffic Signal Coordination 78 25 *28 51 Citywide Traffic Modifications Traffic Signal Revisions 727 *727 52 De Anza @ Central Avenue Traffic Signal Revision 70 70 53 Iowa Interconnect - MLK to Palmyrita Traffic Signal Coordination 186 *117 54 La Cadena @ Columbia Avenue Traffic Signal Revision 70 70 55 La Cadena @ Spruce Street Traffic Signal Revision 70 70 56 La Sierra Interconnect - Victoria to Arlington Traffic Signal Coordination 314 *222 57 Magnolia Interconnect - Tyler to Buchanan Traffic Signal Coordination 233 *169 58 Main - First to Columbia Traffic Signal Coordination 250 *250 59 Mission Inn - Lime Traffic Signal Revision - - 60 Sycamore Canyon - Box Springs Traffic Signal Installation 290 150 *123 61 Sycamore Canyon - Eastridge Traffic Signal Installation 290 150 *128 * Indicates Measure A funding in prior fiscal years and not expended at 711/07. gAcommon\measure of effort\FY 0708\measacip 0809 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: May 12, 2008 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A'-' LOCAL -FUNDS -PROGRAM FY 2008-2009 Page 5 of 9 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) 62 Traffic Management Center Traffic Management Center - Phase I 622 *42 63 Traffic Signal Battery Back Up Ongoing Traffic Signal Maintenance 250 250 64 Traffic Signal Revisions 07/08 Traffic Signal Revision 250 *250 65 University - Lime Traffic Signal Revision - - 66 Van Buren - Dauchy to Orange Terrace Traffic Signal Coordination 150 *56 67 Van Buren - Magnolia Traffic Signal Revision 39 *2 68 Transportation Planning Engineering Planning 100 100 69 Pavement Management Program Ongoing Annual Expenditure 75 75 70 Transportation Planning/Investigation Traffic Engineering 165 165 71 Controller Assembly Replacement Ongoing Traffic Signal Maintenance 40 40 72 Spread Spectrum Radio Replacement Ongoing Traffic Signal Maintenance 20 20 73 Traffic Signal Loop Replacement Ongoing Traffic Signal Maintenance 60 60 Subtotal Project Costs 490,677 Subtotal FY 2009 Meas. A Funding 9,583 Subtotal Prior Meas. A Funding 34,541 * Indicates Measure A funding in prior fiscal years and not expended at 7/1/07. gkommon\measure of effort\FY 0708\measacip 0809 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: May 12, 2008 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2009- 2010 Page 6 of 9 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'S) MEASURE FUNDS ($000'S) 1 Canyon Crest Widening - Country Club to Via Vista Street Widening and Improvements 6,000 3,300 2 Major Street Rehabilitation 09/10 Street Resurfacing 1,400 1,400 3 Traffic Signal Improvements Traffic Signal Coordination/Revision 1,470 1,320 4 Traffic Signal - Prioritized Locations New Traffic Signal Installation 600 600 5 Tyler Street - Wells to Hole Street Widening 8,000 300 6 Van Buren - Andrew to Garfield Street Widening 22,750 1,100 7 Van Buren - Indiana to South City Limit Street Widening 26,750 300 8 Railroad Grade Separations Grade Separation 3,701 774 9 Transportation Planning Engineering Planning 125 125 10 Pavement Management Program Ongoing Annual Expenditure 75 75 11 Transportation Planning/Investigation Traffic Engineering 165 165 Subtotal Project Costs 71,036 Subtotal FY2010 Meas. A Funding 9,459 gAcommonlmeasure of effort\FY 07081measacip 0809 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: May 12, 2008 RIVERSIDE COUNTY_ TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2010- 2011 Page 7 of 9 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) 1 Arlington Widening - Victoria to Alessandro Street Widening and Improvements 16,500 500 2 Chicago Medians - Le Conte to Martin Asphalt Rehabilitation and Median 1,800 900 Luther King Rehabilitation/Enhancement 3 Major Street Rehabilitation 10/11 Street Resurfacing 1,400 1,400 4 Traffic Signal Improvements Traffic Signal Coordination/Revision 1,220 1,120 5 Traffic Signal - Prioritized Locations New Traffic Signal Installation 600 600 6 Van Buren - Garfield to Jackson Street Widening 14,840 3,300 7 Van Buren - Indiana to South City Limit Street Widening 26,750 13,800 8 Railroad Grade Separations Grade Separation 3,701 830 9 Transportation Planning Engineering Planning 125 125 10 Pavement Management Program Ongoing Annual Expenditure 75 75 11 Transportation Planning/Investigation Traffic Engineering 165 165 Subtotal Project Costs 67,176 Subtotal FY2011 Meas. A Funding 22,815 Ocommonlmeasure of effort\FY 07081measacip 0809 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2011- 2012 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: May 12, 2008 Page 8 of 9 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST 0000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) 1 Arlington Widening - Victoria to Alessandro Street Widening and Improvements 16,500 5,250 2 Major Street Rehabilitation 11/12 Street Resurfacing 1,400 1,400 3 Overlook Parkway Arroyo Crossing Street/Bridge Construction 5,379 1,300 4 Overlook Parkway Sr 91 Connection Interchange Planning and Design 1,000 900 5 Traffic Signal Improvements Traffic Signal Coordination/Revision 1,220 1,120 6 Traffic Signal - Prioritized Locations New Traffic Signal Installation 600 600 7 Railroad Grade Separations Grade Separation 3,701 891 8 Transportation Planning Engineering Planning 125 125 9 Pavement Management Program Ongoing Annual Expenditure 75 75 10 Transportation Planning/Investigation Traffic Engineering 165 165 Subtotal Project Costs 30,165 Subtotal FY2012 Meas. A Funding 11,826 Ocommonlmeasure of effortTY 07081measacip 0809 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2012- 2013 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: May 12, 2008 Page 9 of 9 ITEM NO. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) 1 Major Street Rehabilitation 12/13 Street Resurfacing 1,400 1,400 2 Traffic Signal Improvements Traffic Signal Coordination/Revision 1,220 1,120 3 Traffic Signal - Prioritized Locations New Traffic Signal Installation 600 600 4 Railroad Grade Separations Grade Separation 3,701 903 5 Transportation Planning Engineering Planning 125 125 6 Pavement Management Program Ongoing Annual Expenditure 75 75 7 Transportation Planning/Investigation Traffic Engineering 165 165 Subtotal Project Costs 7,286 Subtotal FY2013 Meas. A Funding 4,388 Total FY2009-2013 Meas. A Funding 58,071 gAcommon\measure of effort\FY 0708\measacip 0809 AGENDA ITEM 8H RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 11, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2008/09 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program Funding Recommendations STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the FY 2008/09 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program recommended funding as shown on the attached schedule. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In March 2008, Commission staff notified the cities and the county that an estimated $1,282,390 would be available for programming in FY 2008/09 through the SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program. This program is funded by an allocation of 2% of the total Local Transportation Fund apportioned to Riverside County by the state and funds carried over from prior years. Carryover funds available this year totaled $84,705 from previously approved projects, which either did not expend their full allocations due to lower than estimated actual costs or were subsequently abandoned by the applicants for various reasons. The SB 821 Ilproposals were due April 25, 2008. The Commission received 42 proposals: 36 sidewalk projects, three bike lane projects, two ADA related retrofit projects, and one multi -use trail bridge project from 17 agencies requesting a total of $4,163,518 in funding (Attachment 1). An evaluation committee comprised of four members from the Commission's Citizens Advisory Committee and three members from the Technical Advisory Committee reviewed the proposals on May 20, 2008. All of the applicants were invited to the meeting and requested to present their proposals to the committee and answer questions from the members. The proposals were evaluated and ranked based upon the. Commission adopted scoring criteria (Attachment 2). Seventeen projects are recommended for funding as indicated on Attachment 3. Agenda Item 8H 272 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2008/09 Amount: $1,367,095 Source of Funds: Local Transportation Fund Budget Ad ustment: No GLA No.: 601 62 86106 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \i/Lbw,vitiAt7 Date: 03/22/2008 Attachments: 1) SB 821 Program Submittals FY 2008/09 2) SB 821 Evaluation Criteria 3) SB 821 FY 2008/09 Recommended Funding Agenda Item 8H 273 RCTC SB 821 PROGRAM SUBMITTALS FY 2008/09 Agency J Project ATTACHMENT Total SB 821 Funds Local Cost Requested Match Banning (4) Hemmerling Elementary School Sidewalk $60,000 $45,000 $15,000 Lions Park Sidewalk 80,000 40,000 40,000 Woodland Ave. Sidewalk 72,000 36,000 36,000 Roosevelt Willams Park, George St. Sidewalk 56,000 42,000 14,000 Total $268,000 $163,000 $105,000 Beaumont Citywide Sidewalks & Access Ramps $448,200 $179,280 $268,920 Cathedral City (2) Whitewater Ne ghborhood Sidewalk Improve. $180,000 $108,000 $72,000 Cathedral Canyon Drive Sidewalk 320,000 160.000 160:000 Total 500,000 268,000 232,000 Coachella (4) Palm View School Vicinity Projects $76,180 $38,090 $38,090 Bobby G. Duke School Vicinity Projects $72,380 $36,190 $36,190 Valley View School Vicinity Projects $70,110 $35,055 $35,055 Bagdouma Park Vicinity Projects $72,620 $36,310 $36,310 Total $291,290 $145,645 $145,645 Corona Sidewalk Gap Closures $156,000 $117,000 $39,000 Desert Hot Springs West Drive Sidewalk & Bike Lane $227,000 $170,250 $56,750 Hemet Citywide Sidewalk & Access Ramp Project $357,000 $90,000 $267,000 Lake Elsinore (5) Campus Way Sidewalk Langstaff Street Sidewalk Mohr Street Sidewalk Poe Street Sidewalk Sumner Avenue Sidewalk Total 274 $108,000 $97,200 $52,000 $38,500 $97,900 $393,600 $54,000 $48,600 $26,000 $19,250 $48,950 $196,800 $54,000 $48,600 $26,000 $19,250 $48,950 $196,800 RCTC SB 821 PROGRAM SUBMITTALS FY 2008/09 Agency / Project La Quinta Coachella Canal Multi -use Trail Bridge ATTACHMENT Total SB 821 Funds Local Cost Requested Match $228,750 $114,375 $114,375 Moreno Valley (3) Bicycle Master Plan Comprehensive Update $43,750 $35,000 $8,750 Ped. Countdown Indications & ADA Pushbuttons 156,523 125,218 31,305 Gap Closure Ped. Wlkwys. (Skyrock Dr./Bright Star) 353.438 282,750 70,688 Total $553,711 $442,968 $110,743 Palm Desert Portola Ave. Sidewalk Realignment $256,000 $70,000 $186,000 Palm Springs (2) Farrell Drive "Missing Link" Sidewalk $117,500 $87,500 $30,000 Ramon Road "Missing Link" Sidewalk $123,900 $92,900 $31,000 Total $241,400 $180,400 $61,000 Perris Indian Ave. Sidewalk & Ramps $250,000 $80,000 $170,000 Riverside (6) Wheelchair Ramps $400,000 $200,000 $200,000 Central Ave. Sidewalk 200,000 100,000 100,000 Picker St., Ellen St. & Gramercy PI. Sidewalks 350,000 175,000 175,000 Orchard St. & Verde St. Sidewalks 300,000 150,000 150,000 Randolph St. & Lake St. Sidewalks 330,000 165,000 165,000 Orrenmaa School Footpath Access Project 200.000 100,000 100.000 Total $1,780,000 $890,000 $890,000 275 • • ATTACHMENT RCTC SB EN PROGRAM SUBMITTALS FY 2008/09 Total SB 821 Funds Local Agency / Project Cost Requested Match Riverside County (7) Krameria Ave. Sidewalk & Access Ramps Steve Ave. Sidewalk & Access Ramps Antelope Road, Sidewalk & Access Ramps So. Broadway Walkway Project Mayberry Ave. Sidewalk - Dartmouth to Stanford Jurupa Road Sidewalk & Access Ramps Mayberry Ave. ,Sidewalk - Peartree to Valle Vista Total San Jacinto Downtown Infill1 Sidewalk & Ramp Project Temecula Citywide Classl11I Bike Lane Striping Project Grand Totals -17 Agencies 42 Projects JR: 4/29/08 $128,200 $88,200 $40,000 94,400 75,500 18,900 84,300 67,400 16,900 180,000 180,000 0 131,000 104,800 26,200 171,900 137,500 34,400 278 000 222,400 55,600 $1,067,800 $875,800 $192,000 $400,000 $100,000 $300,000 $100,000 $80,000 $20,000 17 518.751 $4,163,,518 $3,355.233 Total SB 821 Funds Available $1 367,095 276 ATTACHMENT 2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SS 821 EVALUATION CRITERIA MAXIMUM FACTOR POINTS 1. USE 25 The extent of potential use of a bicycle or pedestrian facility is the most important factor. Emphasis of this factor helps ensure the greatest benefits will be derived from the expenditure of SB 821 funds. Relative usage is to be derived from analysis of trip generators and attractors adjacent to the project. 2. SAFETY Points are awarded on the basis of a project's potential to correct current safety problems. 3. IMPORTANCE AS A TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVE Points are awarded on the basis of a project's potential to attract users who would otherwise use an automobile. 4. MISSING LINK, EXTENSION, OR CONNECTIVITY Points are awarded to projects that link, are extensions of, or potentially connect to existing facilities. 5. MATCHING FUNDS This factor is used to help ensure that there is local funding participation in the project - not just an application for "free" money. One point would be awarded for each 5% of total project cost that lis financed by the local agency. 6. POPULATION EQUITY The purpose of this factor is to help ensure that one agency does not receive all the funds. The applicant receives the maximum 10 points if the amount of funds requested does not exceed what the applicant;iwould receive if the funds were allocated by population. Year to year totals are recorded so that an applicant could build up a "credit". (Calculated by RCTC) 7. PHYSICAL ACCESSIBILITY ENHANCEMENT The purpose of this factor is to enhance the physical accessibility of existing pedestrian projects. Applicant agencies may receive up to 10 "bonus" points for their project proposals which improve the physical access to existing facilities. 277 20 20 15 10 10 10 BONUS • • • Ran AeencV 1 Beaumont 2 Coachella 3 Perris 4 Hemet 5 Coachella 6 Banning 6 Riverside County 8 San Jacinto 9 Lake Elsinore 10 Palm Springs 11 Riverside County 12 Palm Springs 13 Riverside 14 Riverside County 15 Desert Hot Springs 16 Banning 17 Cathedral City 18 Riverside 19 Lake Elsinore 20 Lake Elsinore 21 Riverside 22 Coachella 23 Corona 24 Riverside County 25 Riverside County 26 Cathedral City 27 Lake Elsinore RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM FY 2008/09 RECOMMENDED FUNDING Protect Description Citywide Sidewalk & Access Ramps Palm View School S/W Projects Indian Ave. Sidewalk & Ramps Citywide Sidewalk & Access Ramps Bobby G. Duke School S/W Projects Hemmerling Elem. School Sidewalk Krameria Ave. Sidewalk & Access Ramps Downtown Infill Sidewalks & Ramps Mohr Street Sidewalk Farrell Dr. "Missing Link" Sidewalk So. Broadway Walkway Project Ramon Road "Missing Link" Sidewalk Orchard St. & Verde St. Sidewalks Mayberry Ave. S/W - Dartmouth/Stanford West Dr. Sidewalk & Bike Lane Woodland Ave. Sidewalk Whitewater Neighborhood Sidewalk Improv. Central Ave. Sidewalk Campus Way Sidewalk Langstaff St. Sidewalk Randolph St. & Lake St. Sidewalks Valley View School S/W Projects Sidewalk Gap Closures Steve Ave. Sidewalk & Access Ramps Jurupa Rd. Sidewal & Access Ramps Cathedral Canyon Dr. Sidewalk Sumner Ave. Sidewalk ATTACHMENT 3 Total SB 821 Funds Recommended Cummulative Average ___ Costs Requested- Allocation Funds Allocated Score 278 $448,200 $179,280 76,180 38,090 250,000 80,000 357,000 90,000 72,380 36,190 60,000 45,000 128,200 88,200 400,000 100,000 52,000 26,000 117,500 87,500 180,000 180,000 123,900 92,900 300,000 150,000 131,000 104,800 227,000 170,250 72,000 36,000 180,000 108,000 200,000 100,000 108,000 54,000 97,200 48,600 330,000 165,000 70,110 35,055 156,000 117,000 94,400 75,500 171,900 137,500 320,000 160,000 97,900 48,950 $179,280 $38,090 $80000 $90,000 $36,190 $45,000 $88,200 $100,000 $26,000 $87,500 $180,000 $92,900 $150,000 $104,800 $69,135 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $179,280 217,370 297,370 387,370 423,560 468,560 556,760 656,760 682,760 770,260 950,260 1,043,160 1,193,160 1,297,960 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 89,3 89.0 88,6 88.4 87,6 84.4 84.4 84.1 82.7 80,7 80.2 80.0 79.8 79.1 78.9 78.6 78.2 77,3 77.2 77.0 76.6 76,5 76.1 76.1 75.4 73.8 73.8 Rank 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 Aeencv Lake Elsinore Riverside Riverside Riverside Coachella Banning Riverside County Banning Temecula Riverside County La Quinta Moreno Valley Moreno Valley Palm Desert Moreno Valley Totals JR: 5/21/08 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM FY 2008/09 RECOMMENDED FUNDING Protect Description Poe St. Sidewalk Orrenmaa Sch. Footpath Access Project Wheelchair Ramps Picker St., Ellen St. & Gramercy Pl. S/W Bagdouma Park Projects Lions Park Sidewalk Antelope Rd. Sidewalk & Access Ramps Roosevelt Williams Prk, George St. S/W Citywide Class II Bike Lane Striping Proj. Mayberry Ave. S/W - Peartree/Valle Vista Coachella Canal Multi -Use Trail Bridge Pad. Countdown Indications & ADA Gap Closure Pedestrian Walkway Portola Ave. Sidewalk Realignment Bicycle Master Plan Update Total SB 821 Funds Costs Requested 38,500 19,250 200,000 100,000 400,000 200,000 350,000 175,000 72,620 36,310 80,000 40,000 84,300 67,400 56,000 42,000 100,000 80,000 278,000 222,400 228,750 114,375 156,523 125,218 353,438 282,750 256,000 70,000 43 750 35,000 $y 518'7g1. $4,163,518 Recommended Allocation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 • 0' ATTACHMENT 3 Cummulative Funds Allocated 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 1,367,095 Average Score 73.7 73.6 73.4 73.4 73,2 73.1 71.6 71,3 69.7 69.1 65.7 64.4 61.6 61.1 59.7 • I AGENDA ITEM 81 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 11, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program Extension for the City of San Jacinto STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to grant the city of San Jacinto an extension to June 30, 2009 to complete the De Anza Drive sidewalk and handicap ramps improvement project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In FY 2007, the Commission awarded $1,954,798 to fund 33 projects as part of its SB 821 Biciycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program. The agencies have until June 30, 2008 to complete the projects. The city of San Jacinto was allocated $75,000 for construction of the De Anza Drive sidewalk and handicap ramps project. The project is part of a larger capital improvement project, which includes street widening and major storm drain improvements. The storm drain part of the project is the responsibility of a developer, which is now on hold indefinitely. Therefore, the city is requesting a 12-month extension to June 30, 2009 to complete the project. The scope of the SB 821 project is the same; however, the street widening and storm drain elements have been revised to include the work without developer involvement. Attachment: Letter from City of San Jacinto Agenda Item 81 280 • Mentorcuidurn TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Jerry Rivera, Project Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd. Floor P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Habib Motlagh, City Engineer April 17, 2008 FY 06-07 SB-821 - DeAnza Road SJ-001 The City of San Jacinto received $75,000 towards implementation of sidewalk and handicap ramps along DeAnza Drive. This project is delayed since it is part of a bigger capital project which included street widening and major storm drain improvements. The storm drain part of the project is the responsibility of a developer, which is now on hold indefinitely. The City, at this time, is requesting a one-time (12 months) extension to complete this project. The scope of the SB-821 project is the same, however, the street widening and storm drain elements are now changed to include street widening and minor storm drain without developer involvement. We appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Please call if you have any questions or require additional information. Cc: Barry McClellan, City Manager City Engineer's Office P.O. Box 488 . San Jacinto, CA 92581 . Ph (951) 654-3592 . Fax (951) 654-3672 www.ci.san-jacinto.ca.us 281 u AGENDA ITEM 8J RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 11, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Tanya Love, Goods Movement Program Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan and Environmental Justice Analysis and Community Outreach Study Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 05-25-536-02, Amendment No. 2 to 05-25-536, with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) in the amount of $27,419 for consultant services provided by Wilbur Smith and Associates (WSA); 2) Allocate) $27,419 in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds to Metro; 3) Approve the Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan (MCGMAP); 4) Receive a status report on the Environmental Justice (EJ) Analysis and Community Outreach Study; 5) Allocatelr $2,000 in LTF funding to serve as local match support for the EJ grant; and 6) Approve Agreement No. 07-67-071-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-'i67-071-00, with Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), and San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG). for $4,000 in local funding in support of the EJ grant. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan At its January 12, 2005 meeting, the Commission approved participation in the development of the MCGMAP and committed $125,000 in funding to support the work effort. MCGMAP is the master plan for goods movement in the region and is intended to be used as a guide in the preparation of state, regional, and local transportation plans. MCGMAP provides an overall framework for improving freight mobility and reducing the environmental and community impacts of that freight. Although MCGMAP does not make any specific financial commitments on the part of the Commission or other transportation agencies, it does provide a framework that can be used for guiding more specific actions and commitments. As an Agenda Item 8J 282 example, the Commission was part of the regional effort to secure its fair share of the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF), which resulted in securing $162.7 million in Proposition 1 B funds for construction of 12 grade separations and the 1-215/Van Buren interchange project. MCGMAP represents an important partnership between county, regional, and state transportation agencies, which addresses the goods movement challenges faced by the Southern California Counties of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, San Diego, and Ventura. The MCGMAP work effort modeled goods movement growth trends, identified possible public -private partnerships, highlighted near to long-term strategies, and developed a list of potential projects to. be funded. In November 2007, consultant staff presented a status report on MCGMAP, and as a result, staff was directed to review the proposed project list for Riverside County, and where applicable, increase the number of goods movement related projects. The following table contains the revised project list: Project Description Project Cost (in millions) 11 /14l07 Project List 6/11 /08 Revised Project List Grade Separations - Riverside County $1,048 ✓ ✓ SR-86 NAFTA. Corridor Interchange Construction $150 ✓ ✓ March ARB Global Cargo Port I-215Nan Buren Interchange Project $97.6 ✓ ✓ 1-10/SR-60 New Interchange Construction $100 ✓ ✓ I-10/SR-60Truck Climbing Lane $55.3 ✓ ✓ SR-60 — Construct Truck Climbing Lane through Badlands to 1-10 $1 14 ✓ 1-215 Widening to San Bernardino County Line $1,400 ✓ SR-91 Widening to SR-241 to Pierce Street $1,000 ✓ 1-10/Riverside County Line to SR-60 $200 ✓ PROJECT TOTALS $4,164.9 As part of the body of MCGMAP, each county has a chapter profilingthe current goods movement challenges it faces as well as a list of specific actions and projects to help alleviate that condition. The entire MCGMAP document can be accessed at http://www.metro.net/projects programs/mcgmap. Staff is requesting that the Commission approve the. MCGMAP. Upon approval, staff will continue to evaluate projects and strategies that have been identified in the MCGMAP and seek new funding sources related to goods movement. Agenda Item 8J 283 • • Staff will continue to work with regional planning agencies to ensure that there continues to be a coordinated effort among the various agencies involved in goods movement. Request for Additional Funding Staff from Metro, acting as the lead agency for the MCGMAP effort, identified additional consulting costs of $137,086 required to cover project management, community outreach, media relations and draft project reports provided by Wilbur Smith Associates. Based on the additional services, Metro approached the county transportation commissions, with the exception of the Ventura County Transportation Commission, requesting that each contribute a proportionate share of the outstanding consultant costs. As a result, staff is requesting an allocation of $27,419 from LTF planning funds to cover the consultant's additional work effort as part of Riverside County's proportional share. Environmental Justice Analysis and Community Outreach Study In January 2007, the Commission entered into an agreement with Ca'trans for $200,000 in grant funds from the EJ Context -Sensitive Transportation Planning Grant program to supplement the work of the MCGMAP. In addition to committing $6,000 in local funds, the Commission entered into funding agreements with Metro, 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 ($6,000 from each agency). Since that time, OCTA has opted out of the EJ community outreach study and as a result, Commission staff is seeking an additional $2,000 in LTF planning funds to pay its proportionate share of the $24,000 match requirement. Both Metro and SANBAG have committed to providing an additional $2,000. Upon approval, the Commission's total match commitment would be $8,000 for the EJ work effort. The EJ study will undertake an approach that integrates technical analysis from developed transportation plans such as the MCGMAP and best practices and solutions for environmental justice issues. This will be coordinated with a broad - based community outreach approach involving technical experts and representative's of impacted communities. A technical advisory committee of these experts and community representatives, as well as community feedback groups from each of the participating counties, will guide the study team in developing a guidebook for local jurisdictions, the private sector, and community members on how to address the environmental impacts of goods movement. While the focus of the study is on EJ communities, the principles and practices developed through the study will app y to any community that is potentially impacted by the movement of freight. Agenda Item 8J 284 The consulting firm — Moore lacofano Goltsman, Inc. (MIG) — completed individual consultations with each county participating in the study. Representatives from local city planning departments, public works departments and staff from various agencies attended the consultation meetings to provide feedback on local issues and impacts related to goods movement activities. A copy of the county consultation notes for Riverside County is attached to this staff report. This information was also provided to the Commission's Technical Advisory Committee for review and feedback. Recommended Prototype Communities Based on the county consultations, the MCGMAP study effort as well as the approved TCIF projects, the MIG team recommends the following prototype communities for detailed study. Because the TCIF projects require the development of mitigation strategies, the EJ study offers a unique opportunity to support the approved projects. The guidebook that is developed as a result of this process will provide communities with practical ideas for mitigating impacts, as well as providing the broader region with a guidebook that features a set of strategies and solutions to consider in addressing similar impacts from specific goods movement projects: • Grade separations, Hunter Park and Riverside Junction Areas City of Riverside; and • NAFTA State Route 86 Corridor and Grade Separations — Coachella Valley Attached is a copy of MIG's Recommended Prototype Communities for Detailed Analysis. The document provides details on impact -sensitive communities based on low income and minority populations that are likely to suffer significant adverse impacts from regional goods movement investment decisions. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: No Year: FY 2007/08 Amount: $29,419 Source of Funds: Local Transportation Fund Budget Ad ustment: Yes GLA No.: 106 67 65520 Fiscal Procedures Approved: vUe4,4,01b ty Date: 05/20/2008 Attachments: 1) MCGMAP Executive Summary 2) MCGMAP Riverside County Chapter 3) EJ County Consultation Notes 4) EJ Recommended Prototype Communities for Detailed Analysis Agenda Item 8J 285 EXECLI nvE SUMMARY APRIL 2008 5ev1410011.1r5 az: Prepared for; Los Angeles County MetropolitanTransportation:Authority (Metro) <. Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) - San Bernardino. Associated Governments (SANBAG) Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC): California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Districts=7,8,11. & 12 San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) ' Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) .. Prepared by: ' Wilbur Smith Associates, Inc Arellano Associates Economics & Politics, inc. George'R. Fetty & Associates Gill V. Hicks & Associates, Inc Jones& Stokes: . The RNO Group Sharon Greene,& Associates `. Urban Solutions, LLC • Purpose The Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan (MCGMAP or Action Plan) represents an unprecedented partnership between county, regional, and state transportation agencies to address the goods movement challenge faced by the Southern California counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Ventura, and Imperial (See Figure 1). Collectively, these counties comprise the United States' premiere international commerce gateway, handling 44 percent of the Nation's containerized imports. This preeminence reflects Southern California's competitive advantage derived from its unique combination of large deep -water ports, the California/Mexico border crossings, the West Coast's largest population concentrations, one of the Nation's largest densities of transloading, consolidation, and distribution warehouses, and intermodal facilities. The region also has unparalleled connectivity by all-weather Interstate freeways and transcontinental rail lines to all points within the United States. However, the rising tide of goods moving through the region imposes multiple mobility, environmental, and community impacts that degrade the region's quality of life and threaten the continued growth of the Southern California freight movement industry on which most of the nation relies. The MCGMAP identifies actions ti be undertaken by the partner agencies, together with state and federal agencies and the private sector, to maintain Southern California's role as a center for international trade, commerce and manufacturing by planning for freight growth while simultaneously and aggressively mitigating environmental and local community impacts. The Action Plan sets forth a way to structure and understand the issues and defines actions that should be taken to address infrastructure needs, environmental concerns, and community impacts within the context of that structure. It incorporates and builds on existing studies and initiatives already in progress, and from them develops an integrated, comprehensive, regional approach. This Executive Summary provides an overview of the region's goods movement challenges, the MCGMAP vision, principles, plan approach, and recommended actions. Also included are the lists of goods movement projects needed to maintain mobility in the face of forecasted demand. Specific and detailed information is contained within the topical chapters of the Action Plan. Additional information is also provided within the contents of technical appendices and memoranda (Tech Memos) prepared throughout the course of this effort, which are available on the project website (http://www.metro.net/mcgmap). Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary MCGiVIAP - =The. Master pr. lfor Goods Movement`in Southern California The Action Plan is the master plan for goods movement in Southern California and is intended to be used as a guide in preparation of state, regional, and local transportation plans. The objectives of the MCGMAP are to develop strategies that: 1) address the goods movement infrastructure capacity needs of the region; 2) reduce goods movement emissions to help achieve air quality goals; and 3) improve the quality of life and community livability for Southern California residents: The Action Plan is regional in scope, so that the Plan's analyses of potential strategies and investments are at a corridor rather than a local or project -specific level. While detailed project -level analyses were not part of this effort, they are nevertheless critical and will be conducted as part of subsequent project development efforts. The MCGMAP is intended to be a living document that will be revised and updated when major changes occur and if resources are available. MCGMAP Partner Agency Roles Goods movement is a diverse industry with a broad and disparate group of public and private sector stakeholders, each with its own roles and responsibilities. The MCGMAP partners are the transportation and planning agencies that co -manage the development of the Action Plan: Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Orange County Transportation Authority, Riverside County Transportation Commission, San Bernardino Associated Governments, San Diego Association of Governments, Southern California Association of Governments, Ventura County Transportation Commission, and Caltrans Districts 7, 8, 11, and,12. The MCGMAP partners plan, fund, maintain, operate, construct and implement multi -modal transportation projects and influence the goods movement system through the regional planning and programming of funds to transportation projects. Other organizations, such as the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, have authority to plan and construct transportation and facility improvements within the Ports' jurisdiction, while the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) develops and implements plans to improve the region's air quality. Decisions regarding land use, arterial improvements and the permitting of warehouses and transloading centers are made by local municipalities. Regional; state, and federal agencies have varying regulatory authorities over the trucking and rail industries, but the MCGMAP partners have little ability to regulate the operations, business practices, or pollutant emissions of the private sector goods movement operators, and no authority to regulate shippers and ocean carriers. As a result, the MCGMAP partners have focused primarily on goods movement infrastructure while acknowledging the essential roles to be played by the regulatory agencies, the Ports Clean Air Action Plan (CRAP), and public or private technology initiatives. Given their defined roles and responsibilities, the MCGMAP partners cannot fully implement many of the plan's recommended strate- gies on their own. Therefore, to fully realize the benefits of this plan, continued collaboration and consensus building among the MC- GMAP partners and other public and private sector stakeholders will be critical. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary • • MCGMAP The 'Master Plan: for Goods Movement ;in Southern California Simultaneous and Continuous Improvement - An Overarching Strategy Thevisionof the Action Plan -a cleanerand healthier environment, alternative mobility strategies, and fair -share investment approaches - must be implemented through simultaneous and continuous improvement of the environment and infrastructure. Figure 2 depicts the concept and importance of a simultaneous and continuous approach. Environmental mitigation, including significant cleanup of emissions from ships, trains, and trucks, is critical to reduce the impact of existing and increased freight flows and to reach the region's air quality attainment targets. Expanded marine terminals, and inter -modal, rail, and highway infrastructure are needed to accommodate the growing freight volume. The freight growth that is accommodated through these actions provides the economic base for public and private investment in infrastructure and the environmental cleanup. The vision of the MCGMAP is to implement these elements in parallel - capacity, investment, and mitigation - each of which is necessary for the other to succeed. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary Figure 2: MCGMAP Simultaneous and Continuous Approach The project partners developed four core mandates and six implementation principles to provide the guiding framework for the develop- ment of the MCGMAP. CORE MANDATES ENVIRONMENT: Avoid, Reduce, and Mitigate Environmental, Community, and Health Impacts Environmental and community impacts must receive equal attention in the implementation of solutions. MOBILITY: Promote the Safe and Efficient Movement of All Transportation Modes and Reduce Congestion Existing and projected traffic growth will result in the significant deterioration of the region's highway and rail system's performance ca- pabilities. The region's transportation system presents significant safety concerns for the public, particularly at -grade crossings and truck accidents, and increasing truck traffic in neighborhoods. ECONOMY: Ensure the Economic Well -Being of the Region and the State Goods movement is an important segment of the MCGMAP region and the U.S. trade economy. Goods movement and the associated in- dustries (e.g., logistics) provide direct and indirect benefits to the region's economy. Each new logistics job supports two new jobs in the economy. FUNDING: Secure the Region's Fair Share of Public and Private Funds for Investment in the Freight Transportation System Although the region's goods movement system serves markets within and outside of California, these markets and associated system us- ers are not paying their fair share to offset the costs of regional freight congestion and related health impacts. While still advocating for dedicated federal and state funding sources, user -based public -private funding arrangements must be a major component of the financing for critical projects. Source: CALTRANS Dist Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary • IMPLEMENTATION PRINCIPLES The MCGMAP builds upon the principles set forth in the Statewide Goods Movement Action Plan (January 2007). The following represent implementation principles specific to MCGMAP: 1. Guideline: The Action Plan is the master plan for goods movement in Southern California and is intended to be used as guidance in the preparation of state, regional, and local transportation plans. The Action Plan can also be a tool for local jurisdictions to make informed land use decisions. 2. Investment: Investments in goods movement infrastructure will be implemented on a simultaneous and continuous basis with invest- ments in environmental/community mitigation. 3. Cost Distribution: A fair share of the cost of the impacts of goods movement on transportation infrastructure, environment, and com- munities must be borne by those benefiting from it. 4. Management: The need for institutional mechanisms for financing or implementing projects, will be defined as such needs are clearly identified. 5. Public Benefit: Projects supported by public/private partnerships and private projects supported by public funding should demonstrate a clear public benefit. 6. Land Use Compatibility: Partner agencies shall encourage land use decisions that will result in buffers - both open and developed - that separate goods movement infrastructure and sensitive receptors such as residential areas, schools, and hospitals. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary CHALLENGES FOR THE NATIONAL TRADE GATEWAY Figure 3: Major Container Port Gateways Major Container Port Gateway (2005) Currently, the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles (San Pe- dro Bay ports) accommodate more than 40 percent of all international containerized cargo into and out of the U.S. and were ranked 5th in the world in 2005 (see Figure 3). All indications point to a future demand in international freight flows that will exceed even the most aggressive efforts by the ports, railroads, and transportation agencies to accommo- date it. Container volumes through the San Pedro Bay ports are projected to nearly triple from 15.7 million TEUs (twenty - foot equivalent units) in 2006 to 42.5 million TEUs by 2030. These forecasts are constrained by anticipated port capac- ity at a level significantly below the TEU demand projected for the ports in federally sponsored analyses. A large portion of this trade is simply "through -traffic," degrading air qual- ity and impacting the region's quality of life, while providing limited economic benefit to the region. Approximately 77% of the container -based goods handled by the San Pedro Bay ports are consumed outside the Southern California region. Only 23% are consumed within the region. Freight flowing through the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, which to- taled $256 billion in 2005, reaches every state in the conti- nental U.S. as shown in Figure 4. j 25,000 w F 0 ci20,000 c 15,000 c 0 m 5,000 3 C C 0 5th Largest- •: 'Globally .@ rn 16 c m L N C L CO Z } Z R Y O m `s U CO 3 E 0 t0 Trucks traversing the California/Mexico border crossing area utilize three primary ports of entry (POE) - Otay Mesa, Tecate, and Calexico East. Mexico is California's number one export market and the fastest expanding component of the San Diego regional economy. The Otay Mesa -Mesa de Otay Port of Entry is the busiest commercial border crossing between California and Mexico, handling more than 1.4 million trucks and $28.6 billion worth of goods in both directions in 2006. This trade represents the third highest dollar value:of trade among all land border crossings between the United States and Mexico. Another $1.2 billion in merchandise and more than 140,000 trucks crossed at the Tecate -Tecate POE. For Imperial County, the Calexico East/Calexico II POE processed $11.3 billion in goods and 614,000 trucks in 2006. Nearly 80% of these truck trips stay within the state. Figure 4: Total Value of Containerized Trade Moving through the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, 2005 Northwest Imports $LB 8 Experts $8.4 B -Share of Total 1.2% Great Plains Inputs $16.6 B Exports $2.7 8 Share of Total 7S% Great f.altes Imports $45.6 B Exports $8.1 B Shay Total 21.0% Int'l Trade Total: $256 Billion Southwest bnporls $70.3 B Exports $11.7 B Shays of Total 32.1% South Central Imparts $27.3 B Exports $5.2 B Share of Total 12.7% Southeast Departs $32-5 B Exports $5-2 B Share of Total 14.3% Source: Port of Los Angeles, Port of Long Beach, and Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority pttan5ic Seaboard Imports $23.8 B Expert. $2.1 8 of •->710.1% Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary • The region is faced with multiple mobility, environmental, community impact, funding, and economic challenges: Mobility Challenge - The studyarea's ports, airports, rail lines and inter -modal terminals have existing capacity constraints that undermine the efficiency and productivity of the system as a whole. Furthermore, the existing roadway and rail networks are reaching capacity. As a result, the system today is susceptible to disruptions to the movement of goods, causing delays that reduce the quality of services and increase costs to consumers. !The mobility challenge is further exacerbated by the fact that the roadways, and rail networks that accom- modate the movement of goods are often the same as those utilized by motorists and passengers for the movement of people. Modeling for the SCAG regionl� (defined as Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Ventura, Riverside, and Imperial Counties) forecasts that truck vehicle miles of travel (VMT) will increase by over 110% by 2030, growing from a level of 22.4 million VMT in 2000 to 48.4 million VMT by 2030. Some freeways in the region currently handle up to 40,000 trucks per day, and it is projected that these freeways may have to handle up to 80,000 trucks; per day by 2025. As a result of the growth in passenger and truck traffic, the highway system's performance will deteriorate significantly. In fact, average speeds will drop from 35.9 mph in 2005 to 31.9 mph in 2030, resulting an average of 5.4 million hours of delay daily for all traffic. Furthermore, freight rail volume is projected to increase from 112 trains per day in 2000 to 250 trains per day in 2025 along the BNSF and Union Pacific mainline rail network. The current and future mobility challenges for the region are daunting and require immediate action as well as proactive steps to address future needs. it Environmental and Community Challenges - The goods movement system directly affects quality of life. This includes traffic congestion, truck intrusion into neighborhoods, safety, land use incompatibility, "poor air quality and related health impacts, restricted mobility and delay at rail crossings, noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. The dimensions of these impacts are staggering when viewed within the context of Southern California's designation as a non -attainment region for air quality. The use of bunker and diesel fuels, predominantly for the transport of freight by ocean going vessels, is a large con- tributor to the deterioration of the region's air quality. Furthermore, new health studies are drawing ever stronger conclusions about the association of air pollution with public health effects such as asthma, reduced lung function, and cancer risk that target the most vulnerable in the port communities and around other logistics centers - children. Implications of these findings are reflected in the estimated public • health impacts summarized by California Air Resource Board (CARE) in Table 1. Solving the challenge of moving freight is greatly complicated by the knowledge that failure to convert large proportions of the railroad en- gines and truck fleet to low -emitting or zero -emitting engines in the near future will result in missing the regional emission reduction targets needed by 2014 to meet the federal annual PM 2.5 standard, and by 2019 to meet the federal 24-hour PM 2.5 standard. Failure to meet the budget for the State Implementation Plan for air quality could result in a cessation of the flow of federal funds for highway projects. Thus, mobility and environmental challenges are heavily intertwined. Annual (2005) Health Effects of PM and Ozone Pollution from Freight Transport in California Health Outcome ° : per Year • aMillions)',; Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary Funding Challenges- The goods movement system is significantly underfunded. Projects and programs identified in this Action Plan show funding needs on the order of $50 billion over the next 25 years. Despite accommodating most of the nation's international trade volumes, Southern California has received a dispro- portionately low share of federal and state funding for goods movement. More- over, the private sector's role in funding regional and nationally significant goods movement projects to date has been limited. Economic Challenges- Despite its impacts, international trade provides significant benefits to the region. The logistics industry provides both direct and indirect benefits to the region's economy. Economic studies show that logistics activity is responsible for $90.7 billion, or 6.6%, of the nearly $1.4 trillion in economic activity annually in Southern California. The indirect or induced impact repre- sents another $170 billion or 12.4%. Each logistics job supports 2.2 new jobs in the economy. This contribution to the economy is significant and is important to achieving the MCGMAP vision. Conversely, the economic benefits of goods movement can be negatively impact- ed by delays and congestion. At the Otay Mesa and Tecate international border crossings, inadequate and aging infrastructure and more stringent security re- quirements caused the U.S. and Mexico binational economy to lose $3.9 billion and about 21,900 jobs during 2007. The border delays in freight movement result in increased transportation costs and interruptions in manufacturing and delivery cycles. In order to maintain the economic vitality of the region, the economic benefits of goods movement must be leveraged and expanded. One of the challenges for the region is to translate portion of these economic benefits into a stream of funding that addresses the infrastructure improvements made necessary by the increased movement of goods within and through Southern California. In addition, the eco- nomic growth attainable through increased logistics activity is needed to finance the cleanup of environmental problems that have been allowed to accumulate. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary d -o --- 4-4 Q 4-4 m m 0 Ln -.a o o E u aE Y ^, O > U I Y V N W Currently, goods passing through the Southern California seaports and land ports of entry with Mexico belong to one of three modal "market segments":1) On -dock and off-dock/near-dock; 2) distribution/delivery; and 3) transload. By identifying the modes of travel for goods, a market segmented approach can be developed that will allow for the region to better target improvements and funding sources for goods movement projects and associated environmental and community impact mitigation measures. Understanding the Market Segments Figure 5 depicts the three primary market segments: Note that the specific percentages listed may vary on a daily basis and do not account for domestic goods movement, which represents a significant share of truck VMT in Southern California. - Direct Shipment from on -dock and off-dock/near-dock - Approximately 40% of containers passing through the Ports of Los Ange- les/Long Beach leave the region by rail utilizing either on -dock rail at the marine terminals or off-dock/near-dock rail inter -modal facilities. These goods are destined for areas outside the MCGMAP region, including the central and eastern United States. As a result, funding sources for goods movement can be better targeted since the direct benefits to shippers and the nation can be clearly shown. This includes additional state and federal goods movement funding, as well as container fees levied on shippers who receive direct benefits from improved efficiency of the goods movement system. - Tronsload - Approximately 37% of containers passing through the Ports of Los Angeles/long Beach are either trucked directly out of the region or leave the region after an intermediate stop at a warehouse or distribution center- These goods may arrive at the ports as a single container, be transported to an inland distribution center by truck, be broken down into smaller units while at a warehouse or distribution center, then loaded onto either truck or rail to be moved to their final destinations. Such goods use more specific routes through the MCGMAP region and provide better opportunities for targeting of specific routes, users, or impacts relative to local distribution/delivery. This includes truck replacement/retrofit programs, the development of separated corridors that move between clustered warehouse and distribution centers, and concepts such as inland ports and virtual container yards (yard operations to reduce the number of unproductive container truck trips). - Distribution/De►ivery - Approximately 23% of containers passing through the Ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach stay within the Southern California region, with the associated benefits and impacts. Because the origins and destinations for these goods are as dispersed as the people and communities that rely on them, the trucks transporting these goods use various roadways and routes for travel and blend into all other vehicular traffic within the region. Domestic goods movement, such as local delivery, construc- tion, manufacturing, and service/utility trucking exhibit similar travel patterns. Because the users and shippers of this modal market are so widely varied, it is difficult to target individual users for funding without ignoring other users. Traditional funding sources for roadway improvements and alternative funding approaches for roadway tolling or congestion pricing will be needed to address this market segment. • 10 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary Understanding Freight Flows Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan , Executive Summary I 11 12 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary The MCGMAP is structured around four sets of actions, each of which is related to a component or segment of the goods movement market. Pages 10 and 11 discuss the concept of market segmentation of the goods movement flows within and through Southern California. It is a concept for structuring the problem in a way that lends itself to more targeted and cost-effective solutions. The three basic market seg- ments of freight flows are: • Direct intermodal rail shipment from on -dock and off-dock/near-dock to lo- cations outside the region • Transload (regional trips with an intermediate stopping point) • Local distribution/delivery by trucks The MCGMAP strategy distributes four "action sets" across the three basic market segments. This represents the basic structure upon which MCGMAP is built. The four action sets include: 1. Accelerate regional environmental mitigation 2. Relieve congestion and improve mobility 3. Improve operational efficiency 4. Develop equitable public/private funding strategy Table 2 illustrates the core elements of the MCGMAP strategy by identifying the types of actions appropriate to address the needs of each market segment. In some cases, such as the environmental strategies, similar actions cut across all the mar- ket segments, but the appropriate source of funding from which to draw resources may vary. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary 73 FREIGHT MODAL MARKET SEGMENTS ActionPlan Framework ACTION 1.-Accelerate Regional Environmental Mitigation Freight moves destined outside of Southern California (-520/o) -:No Stops within Region -. Intermodal Rail .r a E Freight moves destined outside of Southern California.(-25%Y- Willi at Least One Stop, within. Region - "Regional Trucks' Local freight moves within Southern California (-23°,0) - .Multiple Stops within Region - "Local Trucks" 74 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary ACTION 2 - Relieve Congestion and . ACTION 3 • Improve ACTION 4 - Develop Equitable Public/ Increase Mobility ' Operational Efficiency Private Funding Strategy Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary 15 Environmental MtigatjonAccelerate Goods movement imposes significant costs on community livability and the environment. Therefore, the MCGMAP partners consider air quality improvements and regional environmental mitigation an intrinsic part of a regional goods movement system. The Action Plan recognizes that a regional approach is necessary, with the focus on cleaning up emissions at the source (i.e.the powertrains of ships, locomotives, trucks, and harbor equipment) not one based simply on project -by -project mitigation. The simultaneous and continu- ous implementation of environmental mitigation strategies is a leading imperative for this Action Plan and will require action at two levels: 1) Region -wide approaches; and 2) project -specific mitigation measures. Region -wide Approaches A systems approach is required to reduce the air quality, community and environmental impacts of goods movement flowing into and through the region. This approach has three components - acceleration of the funding and implementation of air quality plans already prepared, strengthening of fuel and engine standards, and institutional policies. • Acceleration of funding and implementation of air quality plans - Some of the nation's most aggressive clean air improvement plans are now in place in Southern California: the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP), the 2007 South Coast Air Quality Manage- ment Plan (AQMP), and the California Air Resources Board (GARB) Emission Reduction Plan. The MCGMAP supports these plans and proposes to accelerate the implementation of the strategies in those plans. Accelerating the environmental cleanup from goods movement sources is one of the principle themes of the environmental actions in the MCGMAP. • Strengthening of fuel and engine standards- Regulations that promote the use of clean fuels and engine standards/technologies should be strengthened beyond those currently proposed. This will need to be supported by accelerated research and development of cleaner technologies by private industry, and by implementation assistance from state and federal regulatory agencies. These actions by pri- vate industry and regulatory agencies will allow regional and local strategies and incentive programs in the CAAP and AQMD to have greater effect. • Institutional policies - Cooperative and coordinated institutional and development policies enacted by local jurisdictions and the development industry could result in environmental and community benefits. Such policies could include: 1) Designating quiet zones for rail corridors; 2) amending zoning and land use regulations to better avoid non -compatible land uses (separating goods movement activities from residential areas; buffering); and 3) establishing mitigation banking and/or development of pooled funds for mitigation (e.g., land use changes, purchasing green space along freight corridors, diesel truck retrofits, funds for health clinics, etc.). The partner agencies have embarked on a collaborative effort with community stakeholders and the private sector to develop such guidelines (see first bullet under specific actions). Project Specific Mitigation Measures. While the proposed broader regional strategies will result in significant reductions in emissions for the study area as a whole, project spe- cific mitigation measures are often most effective at the local level, resulting in more tangible benefits for local neighborhoods 'and com- munities. Therefore, the Action Plan supports the use of project -specific revenue mechanisms to help fund mitigation efforts. Examples include: • Use of best available technology and best practices for project construction and operational impacts. • Compliance with' natural resource statutes (e.g., federal and state Endangered Species Acts and Clean Water Acts, Migratory Bird Treaty Act) • Inclusion of "smart" design and good planning principles, such as landscaped buffering, noise barriers, exterior light shielding and positioning, separation of incompatible land uses, and wetlands protection. • 16 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary Relieve Conger i.on and I• mprove Mobility Region -wide congestion reliefiand increased mobility cannot be achieved without significant investment in infrastructure, coupled with improvements in efficiency and productivity. Utilizing the market segmentation approach, various crucial capital improvements were iden- tified for each of the modes involved in the movement of goods. Increased Intermodal and Mainline Rail Capacity Increases in mainline rail capacity and on -dock rail'improvements at the ports are critical to the efficient transport of intermodal freight bound for destinations outside the region. The Action Plan recommends implementation of rail improvements in accordance with the San Pedro Bay Ports Master Plans es well as triple tracking the BNSF mainline from Los Angeles to San Bernardino and double tracking the two Union Pacific corridors. These improvements must be done in concert with the grade separations and safety improvements outlined in the multi -county Alameda. Corridor East (ACE) Trade Corridor program. Implementing the mainline rail capacity enhancements together with the grade separation of railroad crossings can maximize efficiency and cost-effectiveness while also providing an opportunity to maximize funding from federal and state sources and accelerate the delivery of the needed improvements. Grade separation of the rail -to -rail Colton crossing as well as other rail -roadway grade separations near the the Ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, Hueneme, and San Diego, and at other key Los Angeles County locations are also critical. I . Improved Highways/Roadways The Plan recommends three tiers of highway actions. The Tier one includes major improvements on roadways and bridges in proximity to the ports/border crossings and other major freight activity centers (examples include the Gerald Desmond Bridge replacement project, the SR-47 Expressway, 1-110 connectors, High Desert Corridor, SR-78 Brawley Bypass, and the San Diego Border Corridors). Tier two is comprised of corridor -level investigation of alternative technologies, separated mass flow appli- cations (e.g., the 1-710 Corridor Improvements) as well as dedicated freight guide- ways/truck lanes with the used of clean engine trucks and/or clean Long Combination Vehicles (LCVs), if such vehicles could be authorized to operate on dedicated facilities in California safely with minimal impacts on surrounding communities. Further con- •sideration of LCys will requireia.detailed analysis of potential capital and operational impacts. This tier focuses on new technologies as well as new application of methods not widely used in California. Consequently, these projects will require additional detailed analysis before they can proceed. Tier three projects encompass capital and operational improvements that in addition to assisting with the efficient movement of goods, are also beneficial to mixed flaw traffic. Such improvements include modifica- tion of key freeway -to -freeway interchanges to alleviate operational and geometric bottlenecks, addition of auxiliary lanes, shoulder improvements and other safety and operational improvements on roadways heavily used by trucks. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary 17 Any comprehensive strategy to address mobility, improve predict- ability and enhance safety needs to address system and corridor capacity. This includes improvements to the operational efficiency of the region's goods movement system. The operational efficiency of various segments of the goods movement system can be im- proved based on specific modal market segments. Improve Marine Terminal Productivity, Truck Turn Times, and Intermodal Operations In order to meet the future demand, the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach will increase their operational productivity from the existing level of 4,700 TEUs per acre per year to almost 11,000 TEUs per acre per year. The current focus is on increasing on - dock rail use and extending hours of operation to off-peak time periods (PIERPASS). Additional strategies include the transport of unsorted containers from the ports to inland railyards separated from residential areas for the creation of destination trains, as well as introducing new technologies such as optical character recogni- tion (OCR) and radio frequency identification tags (RFID), and the evaluation of the feasibility of a virtual container yard to reduce the number of unproductive empty container truck trips. Improve Highway Operations Increased implementation of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), weigh -in -motion (WIM) systems, highway pricing such as Open Road Tolling (ORT) collection systems, improved incident management, and enforcement of driver and operating restric- tions can improve highway operations. ITS solutions allow for truck routing, traffic control during construction or maintenance, as well as the shifting of truck movement to off-peak times. WIM bypass systems are an effective means of traffic management in the prox- imity of weigh stations. The system helps maintain normal traffic flow and prevents traffic backup onto the mainline freeway result- ing from commercial vehicles entering and exiting weigh stations. Open Road Tolling allows users to travel at highway speeds on the mainline while their tolls are collected electronically overhead, re- ducing congestion and travel times for passenger and commercial vehicles. California has established a statewide standard for use at all toll roads and bridges utilizing the "FasTrak" device. 18 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary ACTION SET 4 ®eve(op Equitable Public/- Private Funding Strategy • Funding and implementation of the recommended actions, projects, and programs and their associated mitigations will require a coordinat- ed effort by the private sector and public sector at all levels of government. It is critical that all beneficiaries of goods movement participate in funding infrastructure improvements as well as environmental mitigation. Beyond its value to the regional economy, the existing border crossings and commercial trade with Mexico are also critical to the regional and bi-national economies. Cross -border goods have origins and destinations to California/regional retail markets and manufacturers to shipping beyond California through the San Pedro Bay Ports and the Inland Empire Rail/Intermodal distribution centers. To illustrate the shortfall in public funding, the Alameda Corridor -East Trade Corridor, which would provide much needed grade -separation projects to reduce congestion 'and emissions throughout the region, has an 83% funding shortfall - $3.8 billion out of the $4.4 billion total. Maximize the Study Area's Fair Share of State and Federal Funds Federal assistance is essential to compensate for the disproportionate local and regional costs for the goods movement infrastructure (and associated regional environmental and community impacts and necessary mitigations) provided to the rest of the nation. The next national transportation funding reauthorization legislation must recognize the importance of funding a national goods movement system, establish appropriate levels of federal funding support, and provide further opportunity for flexibility in the use of federal funds. The four freight - related programs of key relevance are 1) Projects of National and Regional Significance, 2) National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Program, 3) Freight Intermodal Distribution Pilot Program, and 4) Truck. Parking Facilities Program. Though state and federal funds are needed, any funding for private infrastructure to increase capacity and facilitate the throughput of goods must ensure that public dollars are used in return for public benefits, not merely for benefits to the private logistics system. The development of public -private benefit as- sessments among the private beneficiaries and public agencies is one method to address this issue. Private Sector Contribution Recognizing funding shortfalls for infrastructure projects and the fact that private industry benefits from an improved goods movement system, the MCGMAP recommends efforts to secure private revenue sources including user fees. This could be done through pending leg- islative efforts or by other means such as ongoing efforts by the San Pedro Bay ports to negotiate cargo fees for infrastructure and environ- mental mitigation projects. The types of user fees that should be considered include congestion pricing, port -assessed cargo or container fees, industry -supported programs similar to PIERPASS, and VMT-based taxes or gas taxes for trucks. The Action Plan addresses the need to convert the value of improvements to the study area's goods movement system into revenue for improving infrastructure and mitigating impacts. Federal and state funds require local/private matching funds, thus private sector contributions will add strength to applications for leveraging federal and state funds. Stakeholders in San Diego and Baja California, Mexico are investigating the potential for use of public funds together with private financ- ing and toll fees for a new border crossing, highways, and federal inspection staffing at Otay Mesa East, California / Mesa de Otay II, Baja California. Similar pursuits for new border crossings or expansions are also projected along the Imperial County, California/ Mexicali, Baja California border. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary e Grad( Separat Figure 6: Map of Potential Future System California Regional Mainline Rail Capacity Increase Grade Separation Mainline Rail Capacity Increase Potential Inland Port Dedicated Freight Guideway Extra -Regional Freight Link 20 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary ;tee. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary 27 This section summarizes the stakeholder outreach efforts of the MCGMAP project, which occurred throughout the development of the Action Plan. The purpose of these outreach activities was to gather comments and input on the Draft Action Plan. Written and oral com- ments/questions about the Draft Action Plan along with topical responses are included in Appendix C of the Final Action Plan. Stakeholder participation was an essential component throughout the development of the MCGMAP. In doing so, the project partners attempted to reach as broad a cross-section of stakeholders as possible through the following outreach mediums: • Project Website; • Seven (7) Stakeholder Advisory Group (SAG) Meetings; -Two (2) Public Surveys; • Presentations to boards, committees and organizations; and • Twelve (12) Public workshops. Two survey instruments were utilized and a project website (http://www.metro. net/mcgmap) was established to inform and engage stakeholders. Meetings. and workshops were convened to gather input and share findings. The Stakeholder Ad- visory Group meetings were an important mechanism through which key stakehold- ers across region were informed and had an opportunity to vocalize concerns to the MCGMAP planners. Representatives from community advocacy and health organizations, air quality regulatory agencies, the ports, the trucking and railroad industries and other transportation agencies at all levels of government were invited to participate in the Stakeholder Advisory Group (SAG) meetings. Additionally, smaller one-on-one meetings were held with many of these groups to confirm data and obtain their individual perspectives on issues related to goods movement. Stakeholder Advisory Group meetings and county workshops provided a forum for stakeholders to comment on the con- tent of the action plan and to express concerns about the impact on local communities, air quality, the environment and the transportation system. In general, the stakeholders support a coordinated effort among the agencies and stakeholders to solve goods movement challenges facing the region. Stakeholders expressed the following specific concerns: • Having more aggressive environmental mitigation strategies to reduce current levels of goods movement impacts before any new infrastructure projects are built; • Dedicating new private/public funding sources to reduce health and environmental impacts of goods movement in the region; • Providing for more aggressive use of alternative fuels and alternative technologies to address goods movement impacts; • Questioning whether we need to meet unlimited goods movement demand - all costs and benefits should be studied first; and • Considering placement of limits on trade growth and diverting it to other ports and instead investing in clean industries as a more cost-effective approach. Some stakeholders indicated that re- gional environmental and commu- nity impacts must be addressed and mitigated to a level beyond existing air quality attainment goals. However, the authority to increase air quality attain- ment goals rests with regulatory agen- cies such as the SCAQMD and CARB, not the MCGMAP partner agencies. For more information, please see Chap- ter 2 - Stakeholder Outreach in the Ac- tion Plan. • 22 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary This section briefly describes the approach to evaluating goods movement projects and strategies. This approach included an analysis of three Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach container volume growth and two levels of infrastructure investment scenarios, a qualitative evalua- tion of goods movement projects/strategies, and a detailed analysis of twelve bundles of projects, including regional truck lanes. Analysis of growth scenarios Four scenarios encompassing three levels of Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach container volume growth and two levels of infrastructure in- vestment were analyzed to determine their economic impact. Table 3 provides a summary of the employment impacts of each scenario. In addition, an attempt was made to estimate the regional mobility impacts of the four scenarios; however, due to data limitations, the regional transportation demand model does not adequately project the linkage between regional truck trips and port container volumes. Conse- quently, the model could only be used for scenarios 1 and 4. 2030 Employment impact (number of jobs) San Pedro Bay port growth of 42.5 million TEUs by 2030; SCAG 2004 Regionial Transportation Plan baseline implementation E Sa�nPEdro Ba'gflOrtWinwl of Z�mtfit6h E p Qk t, 2fk04�ryf�tozaa�Tr�nsp€tron Pbfan�setmmpler€�n 7��'' San Pedro Bay port growth of 33 million TEUs by 2030; SCAG 2004 Regional Transportation Plan baseline implementation Change relative to Scenario 7 Evaluation of goods movement strategies A qualitative evaluation of goods movement projects/strategies was also conducted. This analysis grouped a comprehensive list of 249 projects/strategies (the comp ete list is included in the Action Plan) into 15 categories of projects ranging from increased highway and rail capacity to changes in operational and institutional practices. The 15 categories of projects were then qualitatively evaluated using 26 evaluation criteria. For more detailed information on this analysis, please refer to Technical Memorandum 6A. In addition, 12 bundles of potential freight improvements including nine dedicated truck lane bundles (bundles 2 through 9) and one dedicated freight guideway were modeled using the SCAG Travel Demand Forecasting model. The model was used to quantify truck volumes using the region's highway network and estimate the number of daily hours of delay reduced for both autos and trucks. Furthermore, for each bundle the potential cost (which was kept at a constant per mile basis), the number of warehouse acres in proximity to each corridor, the number of schools within 1/3 mile of each bundle, and the number of residential acres within 1/2 mile of each bundle was calculated. Results from this analysis are summarized in Table 4. When interpreting the analysis in Table 4, please note the following: • Due to the limitations of the analytical tools available, all bundles were modeled using a container forecast volume of 42.5 million TEUs by 2030. • All analyses were completed from a regional perspective. Analyses were completed with the understanding that further future de- tailed corridor -specific analyses would be required prior to project implementation. Future detailed analysis should quantify factors not included as part of this effort, such as design, right-of-way considerations including number of displaced properties, impact on commercial properties adjacent to corridors, etc. • The macro -level analysis of dedicated truck lane systems; advanced technology and other bundles rendered preliminary information that also warrants further; investigation and outreach to affected communities to be conclusive. Further information about the scenarios, project bundles and other model criteria and findings can be found in Chapter 6 of the Action Plan and the technical appendices. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary 23 Table 4: MCGMAP Bundle Analysis Results Bundle Description Distance Reduction of Daily Hours of Delay. Schools' Residential'. Warehouse' (mi) (vs. 2030 Baseline) (Acres) = (Acres) Autos Trucks 1 Operational and safety improvements 3 1-710 to I-10 to 1-15 5 1-710 to I-10 (W B) / SR-60 (EB)to 1-15 7 1-710 to SR-91 to 1-605 to I-10 to I-15 9 1-5 (U.S./Mexico Border to Kern County) N/A 98.7 100.1 96.1 204.6 -42,000 289,000 252,000 273,000 112,000 11 Alternative technologies N/A 98,000 (e.g. Shuttle Trains, Mag- lev) between POLA/POLB and inland destinations Note: *Data does not include San Diego County information. -1,000 83,000 81,000 83,000 122,000 N/A 60 77 57 78 N/A 11,329 16,702 11,177 12,806 23,000 N/A N/A N/A 3,135 6,767 2,691 3,054 N/A 24 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary • Project Identification Process In support of the actions and vision, and market segmentation approach, the partner agencies identified a regional and county specific list of projects or strategies, presented in Tables 5 and 6. Many of these projects can be implemented in the short-term while others require additional planning and project development. The projects on these lists are considered essential; neither list should be viewed as taking precedence over the other but rather as complementary efforts to address the effects of goods movement in the region. Given the multi - county nature of this study, th'e majority of the regional and county Goods Movement Projects/Strategies will require coordination among the multi -county partners and stakeholders. Table 5, the "Regional Goods Movement Projects/Strategies' represents a short-term to long-term vision for improving the system with pri- mary focus on region -wide projects that provide environmental mitigation or ground access {rail, highway, and intermodal) improvements to and from the international gateways and the multi -county goods movement distribution centers and corridors (existing and proposed) within the Southern California region, (i.e., the San Pedro Bay Ports, the Port of Hueneme, Inland Empire Rail/Intermodal Facilities, the Al- ameda Corridor and the California/Mexico Ports of Entry). This system is also graphically depicted and further described in Pages 18 and 19. Table 6, the "County -Specific Goods Movement System Projects/Strategies' includes improvements that are located within a single county and connect with the regional goods movement system of corridors and distribution centers and the statewide goods movement system as identified by Caltrans. Table 6 comprises a list of efforts that:1) Support the regional projects in Table 5; 2) mitigate environmental and/or community impacts in a shorter horizon; 3) correct short-term system deficiencies; and 4) are recommended in advance or in conjunction with the regional projects based on local needs and project readiness. The County -Specific list, in essence, fills critical gaps in the goods movement network. As can be seen in the two project lists, an investment of over $50 Billion over the next 25 years is necessary to accommodate the projected growth of freight within the region and to mitigate related impacts. This will require funding commitments from all levels of government as well as the private sector. in addition to this list, a series of actions focused on reducing congestion and environmental impacts are identi- fied in the Action Plan. Each of the County chapters also contains additional projects, strategies and vision for localized improvements identified for future implementation. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary Table 5: MCGMAP Preliminary Regional Goods Movement Projects/Strategies (REGIONAL AND COUNTY -SPECIFIC LISTS ARE BOTH CONSIDERED TO BE OF EQUAL PRIORITY IN MCGMAP. MODES AND PROJECTS ARE NOT LISTED IN PRIORITY ORDER. ALL PROJECTS WILL REQUIRE FURTHER STUDY PRIOR TO IMPLEMENTATION UNLESS ALREADY COMPLETED.) Environmental mitigation or Mode/System Mainline capacity enhancements INTERMODAL GROUND ACCESS Intermodal Yards/Facilities Haan ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGY, FREEWAY/HIGHWAY Border Crossing Improvements • San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan • Gateway Cities BNSF Mainline Grade Separations (on ACE list) q�a3l�aga�tty Irt�}'pjaV�'rvicnts:l(e ��loobieand iitplesrackingiC • Reconnect Santa Paula Branch Rail Line • Ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach Union Pacific Intermodal Container Transfer Facility Modernization4 r r:t-•ram T:'�#m • Further investigation of Inland Port Strategy (Southe • Alameda Corridor SR-47 Expressway �� W� pt� 1 • Replace/Reconstruct Gerald Desmond Bridge F%eL ,r•°S< , 11". G3''.:.cL$'+' • 1-5 Truck Lanes Projects - North Los Angeles County (2 Projects) - SR-58 Corridor Widening Projects (2 Projects) 2007Cost1 Committed Funds (in millions) $300 $265 S $337 S $12 S, M $0 M,M Total $39,081.3 $2,610 Notes: 1. All figures include environmental mitigation costs. 2. 5=Short-term (2007-2015): M=Mid-tern (2015- 2025): l=long-term (post 2025). 3. Project must demonstrate regional public benefit to qualify for public funds. 4. Private sector fund sources. 5. Require further analysis west of US-395, private sector primary fund source, with possible exception of short-term project to construct section between Phantom East and I-15 ($350 million) aer 26 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary Table 6: MCGMAP Preliminary County Goods Movement System Improvements (REGIONAL AND COUNTY -SPECIFIC LISTS ARE BOTH CONSIDERED TO BE OF EQUAL PRIORITY IN MCGMAP-.MODES AND PROJECTS ARE NOT LISTED IN PRIORITY ORDER- ALL PROJECTS WILL REQUIRE FURTHER STUDY PRIOR TO IMPLEMENTATION UNLESS ALREADY COMPLETED.) Mode/System County .; RAIL Description 2007 Cost' Time - (in millions) (rame2 VEN • Construct Rose Avenue/UP Grade Separation LA • Nogales Street (LA Subdivision) grade separation project : la s�= Mainline - Capacity LA • Relief siding (2 projects) and upgrade sidings (1 project) on the Enhancement Antelope Valley Line INTERMODAL GROUND ACCESS •efloe'c Maritime ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGY SD • Construct South Line Rail/Trolley • Build New BNSF Intermodal Yard in Victorville n_IritermadtGServ�ceto fnfar dmpre; tala tf T€i f SD • San Diego Port District Marine Terminal Ground Access LA • Wilmington ATSAC System in City of Los Angeles $45 TBD $29 $15 $328 TBD $Sty $822 $7 S S S, M TBD S, M TBD FREEWAY/HIGHWAY VEN • Reconstruct US 101/Rice Avenue IC tArt_er%if.inpr9v • Reconstruct SR-91/1-605 interchange it[St400-1tAtbi.'to • Reconstruct 1-605/1-10 interchange $75 $1,000 M Fl+PifZY.„9'3-i�"-+i:TVr.f#K.^£.'-241H"flYiNxs'Y..FN6`C.enPF'�"'+�Y$k�.F.�+' m '3 :3: ,.. _(.T, st:��"n""a.€C: U1k'..$t' .i�'F'T: �t✓i � '—t-. i?ve:?'.f_:..� LA • 1-110 8th/9th Street Interchange - Add Auxiliary Lanes and $39 TBD Modify/Reconstruct Ramps (Two Projects) .. 1t•� yUr�o an LA • Alameda Street Widening and Reconstruction in Los Angeles (101 $29 TBD Freeway to 7th Street; I-10 to 7th Street) ta$j+l?�Tay;;lrr LA • I-110 Connector Improvement Program (4 Projects) 8134 TBD ▪ 1-5 Reconstruct El Toro Road Interchange OR • 1-5 between the vicinity of El Toro "Y" to near SR-73 add new lanes in $315 M each direction Notes: 1. All figures include environmental mitigation costs. 2. S=5hort-term (2007-2015); M=Mid-term (2015-2025); L=long-term (post 2025). Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary 27. Table 6: MCGMAP Preliminary County Goods Movement System Improvements (Continued) (REGIONAL AND COUNTY -SPECIFIC LISTS ARE BOTH CONSIDERED TO BE OF EQUAL PRIORITY IN MCGMAP. MODES AND PROJECTS ARE NOT LISTED IN PRIORITY ORDER. ALL PROJECTS WILL REQUIRE FURTHER STUDY PRIOR TO IMPLEMENTATION UNLESS ALREADY COMPLETED.) Mode/System County FREEWAY/HIGHWAY (Continued) Description 2007 Cost' Time - (in millions) %rame2, OR • I-5 Northbound Extend Existing Truck Bypass Lane From Crown $240 Valley to EI Toro Road- Add Auxiliary lane where needed, OR • 1-5 Construct new interchange at Crown Valley (Saddleback) and reconstruct interchange at Avery Parkway with collector distributor road between Crown Valley and Avery !SR57NatthboundFroarrTbett,Roadgg addt OR • SR-57 Northbound From Orangethorpe to Lambert Road, Add $140• S Auxiliary Lanteu& 5th through lane OR hbound Dvectlon €zlert41,.G�Gtn�'RPU�Ga i 1�- .., §q . lwgen-,Oe nge roiiik,arid $04 iiidA ".44)iii' OR • SR-91 Westbound From SR-57 to I-5 - Add General Purpose Lane & $152 S Auxiliary Lane OR • SR-91 Eastbound Add a Lane Between SR-55 (Lakeview and SR-241 $96 S and Westbound From SR-241 to Imperial Highway). RIV • SR-60 Construct Truck Climbing Lane through Badlands to 1-10 )tAatt-rr'Jt)land.CargaPor[-Ariportl215/aVanBbrergBTvd'fi tf rr Qtr`linprfavemeM:tilect RIV • 1-10/SR-60 New Interchange Construction ',.,)"2'YS�W1dCEttriB,o56DIGo�untyiLmer�„s} SBD • I-15 Widening and Devore Interchange (al 1-215) Reconstruction SD • 1-5 Widen/Managed Lanes (From La Jolla Village Dr. to Vandergrift) tder'rndLasEifLtl'on pF SD • 1-805 Widen/Managed Lanes (From SR-905 to 1-5) '-�� 'rT�!��i1n'„n�...„ r)igriv`itBttkFAtE1t��~ SD • Pipeline Truck Access (Petroleum Terminal) to I-15 (Truck route/ Interchange improvements) Notes: l- All figures include environmental mitigation costs. 2.5=511ort-term (2007-2015); M=Mid-term (2015-2025); L=Long-term (post 2025). $114 L $1,801 Total $15,822.5 i 28 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary The MCGMAP is not an end point. Rather, it is the beginning of a more comprehensive regional approach to keep freight moving within and through the region and to; reduce the environmental and community impacts caused by the movement of that freight. Going forward, stakeholders will play an integral role in the next steps in the areas of partnership and advocacy, environmental and community impacts, mobility and funding. Based on feedback from stakeholders and Action Plan recommendations, the MCGMAP project partners are commit- ted to taking the following next steps: Partnership and Advocacy • Implement the Southern California National Freight Gateway (SCNFG) Cooperation Agreement among federal, state, regional, and other implementing agencies to maintain dialogue to address the challenges outlined in MCGMAP. • Request the incorporation of MCGMAP strategies and actions into other state, regional and local plans. • Continue to convene multi -county meetings to monitor the progress on the Action Plan and provide annual reports to the CEOs and to the boards of the partner agencies. • Support and propose legislation that:1) Provides funding mechanisms for goods movement projects/strategies; and 2) improves mo- bility and facilitates regional multi -county goods movement goals without undermining local community priorities and quality of life. • Support groups such as Mobility 21 andthe Coalition for America's Gateways and Trade Corridors in developing dedicated federal and state goods movement funding sources. • Continue to work closely with all stakeholders including the Councils of Governments, community groups, environmental regulatory agencies and academia. • Seek goods movement and logistics industry involvement throughout planning and project development phases. Environmental and Community Impacts • Through the SCNFG Cooperation Agreement and other related activities, develop a specific set of feasible actions to accelerate implementation of the strategies contained in the various air quality and emission reduction plans that are within the scope of respon- sibility.of the project partners. • In partnership with CARE, air districts, the logistics industry, and local governments, initiate an activity to generate public and/or pri- vate funds to accelerate implementation of air quality improvement strategies being undertaken by these and other entities. Examples may include: Container fees that provide a revenue stream to fund emissions reduction projects, impact fees paid by entities contrib- uting.to the goods-relateid air quality problem, supplemental transportation infrastructure project mitigation (to add to an air quality funding pool), mitigation banking, market -based strategies, and other vehicle -based fees commensurate with the impacts attributed to those vehicles. • Continue and Complete the Environmental Justice Analysis and Outreach for the MCGMAP in Fall 2007. This effort will develop a guidebook for local jurisdictions and the private sector to use in avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating the effects of goods movement infrastructure and to ass st local jurisdictions make informed land use decisions. Mobility • Initiate a study to investigate the linkage between industry supply chain trends and port and trade related transportation patterns and movements. • Continue project development efforts, including planning, design, funding, and implementation, of the regional and county -specific projects listed in the Acton Plan, including the mitigation of the impacts of those projects. • Initiate a Regionally Significant Transportation Investment Study (RSTIS) to evaluate the feasibility of implementing a Dedicated Freight Guideway System/Regional Truck Lanes (1-710 From Port of Long Beach to SR-60; East-West Corridor between 1-710 and 1-15; and 1-15 to Victorville) inclusive of potential non -freeway implementation. • Initiate localized studies, as appropriate. Funding • Pursue new avenues of goods movement funding for projects, including the region's fair share of state appropriations, federal funds, and private sector contributions consistent with the impacts of the benefits they derive from the use of the transportation system. • Continue fair share and user fee discussions with private sector stakeholders to seek their support in addressing goods movement impacts and filling funding gaps. Develop a clear and concise message on this subject and communicate this to the public, policy and funding decision makers'at all levels of government. • Establish structures to manage user fees and revenue that are acceptable to both public and private sector stakeholders. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Executive Summary Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Riverside County Action Plan Governments ';1•,r Prepared for: Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority California Department of Transportation Orange County Transportation Authority Riverside County Transportation Commission San Bernardino Associated Governments Southern California Association of Governments Ventura County Transportation Commission San Diego Association of Governments NaN, Nil 1111111 t_,)sst s Wilbur Smith Asspciates Prepared by: Wilbur Srnith Associates In association with: The RNO Group Gill V. Hicks & Associates, Inc. George R. Fetty & Associates Economics & Politics, Inc. Arellano Associates Jones & Stokes Urban Solutions, LLC Sharon Greene & Associates April 30, 2008 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN Table of Contents Table of Contents INTRODUCTION 1 Purpose 1 Background 2 Role 4 Ports/Airports 4 Rail 5 Trucks 7 Warehousing 10 COUNTY SPECIFIC ISSUES 12 Air Quality 13 Grade Crossings 14 Vehicle Congestion 16 Mainlinei,Rail Capacity 22 Distribution Locations 25 Funding 26 COUNTY ACTIONS 28 CONCLUSIONS 28 List of Tables Table 1— Year 2003 Truck ADT 8 Table 2 — Truck Tons Handled by Riverside County's Freeway Network, 2003 10 Table 3 — Summary of Warehouse and Industrial Space within the Inland Empire 12 Table 4 — Grade Separation Project List 14 Table 5 — Year 2003 and Year 2030 Truck Volumes Derived from Model Runs 16 Table 6 — Forecast Truck Volumes on Region's Highway System 18 Table 7 — MCGMAP Projects Riverside County 18 Table 8 — Peak -Day Rail Traffic for 2025 (Number of Trains per Day by Segment) 22 Table 9 — Total Passenger and Freight Train Movements 25 Table 10 — High Priority Grade Separation Projects 27 List of Figures Figure 1- Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Riverside County 3 Figure 2 — March Global Port 4 Figure 3 — Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Railroad Lines 6 Figure 4 — 2003 Percentage of Truck VMT in the MCGMAP Study Area by County 8 Figure 5 — Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan 2003 Truck ADT 9 Figure 6 — Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Warehouse Land Use 11 Figure 7 — Canceri Risk from Airborne Toxics with Diesel Emissions 13 Figure 8 — Truck Growth 2003-2030 17 Figure 9 — Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan 2025 Forecast Rail Freight Volume 23 Figure 10 — Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan 2025 Forecast Rail Volume 24 A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page TOG 1 319 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN Introduction Purpose This report outlines a Goods Movement Action Plan for Riverside County, Califomia, part of a broader Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan (MCGMAP) developed collectively by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG), San Diego Association of Govemments (SANDAG), Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC), Southem California Association of Governments (SCAG) and the California Department of Transportation (Ca!trans). The MCGMAP contains strategies to support the efficient movement of goods without disproportionately impacting local communities, neither the environment nor the transportation network. The MCGMAP is also a regional framework for goods movement initiatives. This report examines the key issues that impact Riverside County from a goods movement standpoint. It examines the plans and proposals that are being pursued to resolve the stated issues, and new specific actions and strategies that should become a focus for the county. It is important to note that this report builds on a large body of work that has been researched and developed over the past few years, all of which collectively address a comprehensive range of goods movement issues. The Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan has recommended four primary action sets for goods movement within the region. The action sets are: • Action Set 1: Accelerate Regional Environmental Mitigation • Action Set 2: Relieve Congestion and Increase Mobility • Action Set 3: Improve Operational Efficiency • Action Set 4: Develop Equitable Public/ Private Funding Strategy Current and future projects, relationships, and activities of Riverside County address these four primary action sets. The document concludes with an explanation of how the county's activities support these four action sets. Other efforts will likely address new and existing issues as they arise. This report is intended to focus on specific actions to address the most significant goods movement issues for the county that have been 'presented to date. This report is not intended to be a full and complete glossary of every issue. A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 1 of 30 320 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN Background Improving mobility has been a challenge to Riverside County due to rapid population growth and the imbalance of jobs and housing. This has increased commuter traffic between the Inland Empire, Los Angeles and Orange Counties. The growth in goods movement has exacerbated traffic congestion because trucks compete with passenger vehicles for space on roadways. The increase inwarehousingand the growth in goods flow for truck and rail will further strain current transportation infrastructure in Riverside County. Riverside County has participated in a number of goods movement -related studies in the past: These include the following: • San Bernardino and Riverside County Truck and Recreational Vehicle Count and Analysis Study, March 2004 • SR-91 Alternatives Analysis, January 2003 • SR-60 Truck Lane feasibility Study, February 2001 • Riverside County Bottom Line Goods Movement Report: Critical Goods Movement Issues for Riverside County, September 2006 • Grade Separation Funding Strategy: A Blueprint for Advancing Projects, September 2006 Figure 1 shows a map of Riverside County with major infrastructure features. Riverside is in the east -central portion of the MCGMAP region. It is bounded on the north by San Bemardino County, on the west by Orange County, and on the south by Imperial and San Diego Counties. Its eastern boundary is Arizona which represents a portion of the eastem MCGMAP region boundary. A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 2 of 30 321 4 ean6l j 9ooz demen :seomos Lmi.usAmilf V1 riaa. SLSIMNO?3 :kagl'1 wgz 4Hi.Y= 6I SN3JNi9e3 sal!W 09 zzsOs 94 Alunoo apisaani� uaid uopy Tuauaanow spooe AlunoolijnW seeay uegan Aenny6!H sAeMeei peomea SuOd 3 spodilV MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN 1-10 is the only major interstate highway that exits directly into Arizona. The major rail operators in the county are the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway and the Union Pacific (UP) Railroad. Limited access highways are 1-10, 1-15, 1-215, SR-60 and SR-91. These highways and infrastructure are in the western part of the county. UP's Yuma Subdivision mainline and SR-86are in the eastern part of the county. SR-86 is federally designated as a NAFTA corridor. Role i Ports/Airports] The landlocked county has no intemational border and two major airports. March Global Port is a commercial air cargo and distribution development site located on the south end of the March Air Reserve Base, in westem Riverside County. The March Global Port is an air cargo operation recently partnered with DHL in a 16-year operating agreement to run a domestic cargo distribution system. March Global Port consists of a 13,300 foot runway and more than 350 acres of runway - accessible property available for development, which is the longest civilian runway in California. DHL started with six flights a day and is currently flying eight planes per day. The company's plan is to have 12 planes per day including several international flights. Figure 2 March Global Port Source: March Global Port LLC., 2006 The other major airport in the county is Palm Springs International Airport in Palm Springs, CA, which is home to 14 airlines with 53 daily departures. In 2006, the airport experienced a 7.8 percent increase in passengers. A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 4 of 30 323 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN Rail The county has three rail mainlines owned by BNSF and UP as shown in Figure,3. These include the BNSF Transcon, the UP Los Angeles Subdivision (UP LA Sub), and the UP El Paso Line. The BNSF Transcon is the artery linking the Los Angeles basin to all midwestem, southwestern and eastem markets on the BNSF rail system. UP LA Sub connects to the Sunset Corridor at Colton in the Los Angeles basin. UP El Paso Line is part of the UP Sunset Corridor which extends to El Paso. This route is designated as the primary intermodal line between the Los Angeles basin and eastern markets. The UP lA Sub segment of the mainline connects with the UP El Paso Line via the BNSF Transcon Line between west Riverside and Colton. The UP El Paso Line exits south through Imperial, County towards Yuma, Arizona, and the eastern side of the Salton Sea. The BNSF Transcon has a route exiting to the north into San Bernardino County. In 2003, 68 million tons of rail freight passed through Riverside County with less than five percent originating or ending locally'. Currently 85 freight trains per day pass through Riverside County2. Critical Goods Movement Issues for Riverside County, ROTC, September 2006 2 Alameda Corridor East — Riverside County Impacts and Needs, www.rctc.org A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 5 of 30 324 Gin 6! j 900Z 6 oweIN goal dbW901A1 900Z deW1904S :s9o.tnoS 't1MIJU95M 1.14ivaSanCWAA SL'>IWONOD3 911iNNV}rl SN33NISN3 leuadwl o6a1� ues sei!w os s� 46 seun peoalied ueid uopy luawanow spoof eun osed13 do uoosueil dSN9 piS,1anlj uoosueJl dSN9 Boino uovo do eun lse00 do eun eipen elueS do AslleA lepue0 pue ldeyoeyel of eu11 do seeN uegifl peopeb �-•— s�od � spocUrV �. E.tu uen,._ MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN Metrolink commuter trains provide daily transportation to more than 9,000 passengers from Riverside to Los Angeles and Orange Counties. The Metrolink 91 Line service, from Riverside to Los Angeles via Fullerton, operates on the BNSF Transcon. The Metrolink Riverside Line service, from Riverside to Los Angeles via Pomona, operates on the UP Los Angeles Subdivision. Currently, UP operates a rail yard and automobile distribution center in Mira Loma. Activities at the yard include receiving inbound rail cars, switching cars, loading ,and unloading automobiles, departing outbound rail cars, and storing- automobiles. -Facilities within the yard include classification tracks, a gate complex for inbound and outbound truck traffic, loading and unloading tracks, and various facilities supporting railroad and contractor operations. Domestically manufactured automobiles purchased in the SCAG region are primarily distributed from UP's Mira Loma facility. This facility serves GM, Ford, Chrysler and some foreign manufacturers with production plants in the U.S., such as Isuzu and Toyota. Annual volume at Mira Loma is about 900,000 units and is transported on nearly 70,000 railcars3. Almost all freight rail traffic in the county is caused by passing trains. In 2003, three million tons of rail freight moved to or from destinations in the county, and 68 million tons of rail freight passed through the county4. The increase in rail freight traffic will have significant implications relating to safety, environmental issues, community impact, financial concems, and traffic congestion. The county has 61 highway -rail crossings that are not grade -separated. These crossings cause delay for drivers and result in pollution from idling automobiles and trucks. Trucks Figure 4 depicts the regional distribution of truck traffic by county, measured in truck miles of travel on the state highway system. Riverside County accounts for 18 percent of the total regional truck miles of travel ranking third after Los Angeles and San Bemardino Counties. 3 Per Honda North America discussions, 2005. 4 Critical Goods Movement Issues for Riverside County, RCTC, September 2006 A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 7 of 30 326 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN Figure 4 2003 Percentage of Truck VMT in the MCGMAP Study Area by County ■ San Diego 11% ® Ventura 3% ■ Orange 9% p San. Bemardino 24% Source: "Truck Miles of Travel Califomia Transportation (Caftans) 2005 State Highway ® Los Angeles 33% ® Imperial 2% ❑ Riverside - 18% System 1988-2003," Califomia Department- of Table 1 shows the 2003 truck volumes on the county's freeway segments. Some of the heavily used truck corridors in the county include SR-91, SR-60, 1-15, and 1-10 which are shown in Figure 5. Table 1 Year 2003 Truck ADT Route Segments County Year 2003 ADT NIE Trucks SAW Total ADT 2003 San 1-15 SR-60 to 1-10 BemardinolRiverside 8,512 9,446 17,958 1 15 SR-91 to SR-60 Riverside 9,877 8,081 17,958 1-15 SR-74 to SR-91 Riverside 5,946 4,040 9,986 - 1-215 SR-60 to 110 Riverside 5,167 ,..,. 5,849 11,016 SR-60 SR-57 to 1-15 Riverside 10,771 13,569 24,340 SR-60 115 to 1-215 Riverside 8,221 6,629 14,850 SR-60 1-215 to 1-10 Riverside 6,738 6,072 12,810 SR-91 SR-241 to! 15 Riverside 7,616 9,115 16,731 SR-91 1-15 to 1-215 Riverside 7,148 8,001 15,149 1-10 SR-60 to SR-86 Riverside 12,337 11,388 23,725 110 SR-86 to SR-78 Riverside 4,590 4,410 _ 9,000 1-10 SR-778 to Arizona State Line Riverside 4,508 4,692 _ _ 9L200_.___ _ SR-86 SR-195 to SR-111 Riverside 967 1,048 2,015 Source: Caltrans, Traffic and Vehicle Data Systems Unit, 2004 Truck; Wilbur Smith Associates, 2007 A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 8 of 30 327 g OanC)! j 900z VSM cooz oeos soot demeans ,n••_ _., :sao.nos seITI Ob 8Z£ OZ OL 0 4 !u�singj!%vl N lad Tonal COOZ Atik vnweNw, ems. ^y,SN3V�3i4WI ueid uoi.oy TuewenoW spooe Alunoa-mmi seany pew i,i spodw shod � sReMeeid Amp —�— 0000z uey ime.16 mom 0000z • 00094 , •••e 0009 - 00004 00004 - 0005 ----• 000S ueyy ssal -�— - MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN In 2003, 104 million tons of goods were shipped through Riverside County and 35 percent (36 million tons) was shipped via trucks. Table 2 shows the truck tons handled by the county's freeway network. These figures do not include local pick-up and delivery. Table 2 Truck Tons Handled by Riverside County's Freeway Network, 2003 Truck Tons (Million) Truck tons through County Inbound Truck tons to freight facilities Outbound Truck tons from freight facilities Subtotal Truck tons to or from a final origin or destination Total Truck Tons 36.3 8.4 5.1 49.8 58.5 109.4 Source: Critical Goods Movement Issues for Riverside County, RCTC, September 2006 Warehousing Figure 6 shows the location of warehouse facilities in Riverside County. As the map indicates, there is a large concentration of warehouses centered near the 1-15 between San Bernardino and Riverside Counties. There are also many warehouses along SR-91 between SR-71 and 1-15. A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates NO 10 of 30 329 9 ein6id esn Pei 000z wOs 900Z *mewls :seanos ilig§1641!M S1 giNViP p sE3NNW13 011671AA y sx3;wo�,a .aye+.. sem OZ 0ss 06 S 0 6u1sn0yamiw6ulleseicam ash puei esnoyaaeM mid uogoy i.uewenow spoon Awnoo-ninW seeay uespn AemL16!H s/emaai j su0d r MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN The Inland Empire (essentially defined as San Bernardino and Riverside Counties) has an especially strong warehouse and industrial market. This area is attractive to warehousing and distribution centers because it has land available for large (one million plus SF) facilities. Such areas are increasingly rare in counties to the west of the Inland Empire. Development of new warehousing and distribution centers is spreading from the west end of the county. The types and sizes of warehouses include large private and contract warehouses, as well as distribution centers. These facilities tend to range from 500,000 SF to 1.7 million SF. As land becomes scarcer in Los Angeles, large new facilities are being constructed farther east in cities such as Moreno Valley, Fontana, Perris, and along 1-15 toward Las Vegas. Table 3 below Ilustrates a summary of warehouse and industrial space in this area. Market Table 3 Summary of Warehouse and Industrial Space within the Inland Empire Net Rentable Area (SF) Vacancy Rate % SF Net Absorption SF Under Construction Avg. Asking Lease Rate/SF Availability Rate % Inland Empire. 5.0% East. Inland Empire 5.7% West TOTAL — Inland 5.5% Empire Source: NAIOPICBRE 302005 Notes: Inland Empire east include Rialto, San Bemardino, Redlands, Colton, Riverside, Corona, Moreno Valley and Perris. Inland Empire west includes Rancho Cucamonga, Ontario, Chino, Mira Loma and Fontana 93,228,068 2.1 % 2,332,258 12,758,664 $0.42 209,641,170 302,869,238 1.8% 1.9% County Specific Issues 3,193,453 5,525,711 9,074,069 21,832,733 $0.37 $0.39 The county has indicated a number of key goods movement issues. In general, these deal with air quality, grade crossings, congestion, passenger capacity, distribution locations, and funding. A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 12 of 30 331 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN Air Quality Negative impacts to air quality in Riverside County are generated from emission sources to the west, as well as sources intemal to the county. Prevailing winds carry the airborne pollution into the county. A primary concern is the community's well-being and the environmental effects of poor air quality. Goods movement emissions are a significant source of pollution in the study area. The goods movement industry is heavily dependent upon diesel fuel for mobility and operations. As discussed in Tech Memo 5b, diesel fuel results in the emissions of diesel particulate matter (DPM), which has been identified as a toxic air contaminant (TAC) by the state's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). Diesel fuel is also a significant contributor of nitrogen oxides (NOx), the primary pollutant for ozone formation. Both DPM and NOx are linked to various health issues for susceptible populations like the young and the elderly; as well as cancer, asthma, preterm births and low birth weight babies. Due to the current dependency of the goods movement industry on diesel fuel, this action plan focuses on emission reduction. Figure 7 displays the cancer risk from airborne toxics with diesel emissions. The largest impact is predominantly in the western regions of the county. Figure 7 Cancer Risk from Airbome Toxics with Diesel Emissions Source: SCAQMD, Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study II, March 2000 A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 13 of 30 332 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN The goods movement mobile sources targeted for emission reduction include Ocean Going Vessels (OGVs, or ships), On -Road Heavy -Duty Vehicles (HDVs, or trucks), Cargo Handling Equipment (CHE), Harbor Craft (HC), and Railroad Locomotives (RL). Grade' Crossings Train volumes are expected to increase due to projected volume increases at the ports of Los Angeles and tong Beach. BNSF estimates that the number of trains operating between west Riverside and Colton (the BNSF Transcon segment shared with the UP) will increase 37`percent by 2010. Currently, 85 freight trains pass through the county every day. By the year 2020, this number is expected to increase to 1695. flays to daily through traffic caused by freight trains are a major concern to the county. The 61 at -grade Alameda Corridor -East (ACE) crossings cause conflicts between rail and highway traffic and are located on mainlines of the UP and the BNSF Transcon railroads. The average rail crossing gate can be down for as long as two hours a day. In total, at -grade crossings delay Riverside County motorists 603 hours daily. This extra idling time is estimated to generate 45 tons of additional pollutants annually6. There are plans for grade separations in the Alameda Corridor -East Trade Corridor. Table 4 shows a grade separation project list that was updated in April 2006. The priority groups (1-5) indicated in the table below was identified with help from multiple jurisdictions. Factors including safety, delay, not _, .._ _....__._.._ .. ____._,.__. Table 4 Grade Separation Project List Rail Line Cross Street Jurisdiction Priority Group UP (LA SUB) Jurupa Road Riverside County 1 BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Chicago Ave Riverside 1 BNSF (SB SUB) Magnolia Ave Riverside County 1 BNSF & UP (SB SUB) 3rd Street Riverside 1 BNSF (SB SUB) McKinley Street Corona 1 BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Columbia Ave (BNSF) Riverside 1 UP (LA SUB) Magnolia Ave Riverside 1 UP (El Paso) Sunset Ave Banning 1 UP (LA SUB) Riverside Ave Riverside 1 BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Iowa Ave (BNSF) Riverside 1 BNSF (SB SUB) Adams Street Riverside 1 BNSF (SB SUB) Auto Center Dr Corona 2 UP (El Paso) Hargrave Street Banning 2 5 Alameda Corridor East — Riverside County Impacts and Needs, www.rctc.org 6 !bid A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 14 of 30 333 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN Table 4 Grade Separation Project List Rail Line Cross Street Jurisdiction Priority Group UP (LA SUB) Clay Street Riverside County 2 BNSF (SB SUB) Smith Ave Corona 2 BNSF & UP (SB SUB) 7th Street Riverside 2 BNSF (SB SUB) Tyler Street Riverside 2 UP (El Paso) 22nd Street Banning 2 UP (El Paso) Ave 48/Dillon Road Indio/Coachella 2 BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Center Street Riverside County 2 UP (El Paso) San Gorgonio Ave Banning 2 UP (LA SUB) Streeter Ave Riverside 2 UP (LA SUB) Jurupa Ave Riverside 2 BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Palmyrita Ave (UP) Riverside 2 BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Spruce Street (BNSF) Riverside 2 BNSF (SB SUB) Madison Street Riverside 2 UP (LA SUB) Brockton Ave Riverside 2 BNSF (SB SUB) Mary Street Riverside 2 BNSF (SB SUB) Pierce Street Riverside 3 UP (El Paso) Ave 62 Riverside County 3 BNSF (SB SUB) Ratroad Street Corona 3 UP (LA SUB) Panorama Road Riverside 3 BNSF (SB SUB) Buchanan Street Riverside 3 UP (LA SUB) Bel!grave Ave Riverside County 3 UP (El Paso) Ave 66 Riverside County 3 UP (LA SUB) Palm Ave Riverside 3 UP (El Paso) Ave 52 Coachella 3 UP (El Paso) Califomia Ave Beaumont 3 UP (El Paso) San Timoteo Canyon Road Calimesa 3 BNSF (SB SUB) Washington Street Riverside 4 UP (El Paso) Apache Trail Riverside County 4 UP (LA SUB) Ruble Street Riverside County 4 BNSF (SB SUB) Jefferson Street Riverside 4 BNSF & UP (RIV) Cridge Street Riverside 4 UP (El Paso) Viele Ave Beaumont 4 BNSF (SB SUB) Cota Street Corona 4 UP (El Paso) Broadway Riverside County 4 UP (LA SUB) Mountain View Ave Riverside 4 UP (El Paso) Airport Drive Riverside County 4 BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Main Street Riverside County 4 BNSF (SB SUB) Jackson Street Riverside 4 UP (El Paso) Pennsylvania Ave Beaumont 4 BNSF (SB SUB) Joy Street _ Corona 4 A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 15 of 30 334 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN Table 4 Grade Separation Project List Rail Line', Cross Street-- Jurisdiction Priority Group BNSF (SB SUB) Harrison Street Riverside 4 UP (El Paso) Tipton Road Palm Springs 4 BNSF (SB SUB) Radio Road Corona 5 BNSF (SB SUB) Jane Street Riverside 5 UP (El Paso) Ave 54 Coachella 5 UP (El Paso) Ave 58 Riverside County 5 BNSF (SB SUB) Sheridan Street. Corona 5 BNSF (SB SUB) Gibson Street Riverside 5 Source: RCTC ACE Trade Corridor Grade Crossing Separation Need List, April 2006 Vehicle Congestion Congestion was classified as a critically important issue by representatives of Riverside County agencies in a survey conducted for the MCGMAP. Table 5 provides forecasts of truck volumes in 2030 derived from model runs conducted by SCAG: Table 5 Year 2003 and Year 2030 Truck Volumes Derived from Route Segments SCAG Model 2003 Truck Volume SCAG Model 2030 Truck Volume Model Runs Percent Change in Daily Truck Volume 1-215 SR-60 to 1-10 8,193 SR-60 SR-60 SR-91 SR-91 1-15 1-15 ' 1-15 SR-86 SR-57 to I-15 1-15 to 1-215 1-15 to 1-215 SR-241 to 1-15 SR-60 to 1-10 SR-91 to SR-60 SR-74 to SR-91 SR-195 to SR-111 19,548 11,117 11.449 22,320 11,912 10,666 11,009 7,231 20,070 27,634 19,744 24,319. 48,154 20,228 17,519 22,093 6,871 145°% 41 °% 78°% 112% 116°% 70°% 64°% 101°% w -5% Source: SCAG 2007 Draft Air Quality Management Plan, Wilbur Smith Associates, 2006 The following can be summarized from the above table: • 1-215 from SR-60 to I-10 shows an increase of 145 percent from 8,000 in 2003 to more than 20,000 daily volumes by 2030 A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 16 of 30 335 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN • By 2030, the daily truck volumes on SR-60 between 1-15 and 1-215 show an increase of more than 75 percent from 11,000 in 2003 to about 20,000 • Truck volumes on SR-91 from 1-15 to 1-215 and SR-241 to 1-15 increase to more than 100 percent by 2030 • 1-15 will experience significant increase in truck volumes between SR-74 and SR-91, an increase of more than 100 percent Figure 8 displays truck growth of more than 75 percent for freeway segments in Riverside County between 2003 and 2030. Percent. Change in Daily Truck Volume 160% 140% 120% 100% - 80% - 60% - 40% - 20% 1-15 to 1-215 SR-60 Figure 8 Truck Growth 2003-2030 SR 74 to SR-91 1-15 I 15 to End SA 91 SR-241 to I-15 SR 91 Source: SCAG 2007 Draft Air Quality Management Plan, Wilbur Smith Associates, 2006 SR-60 to I-10 I-215 Table 6 compares the truck volumes on the region's highway system projected for the Year 2030. The table below helps determine potential differences in future forecast volumes due to changes in existing volumes. A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 17 of 30 336 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN Table 6 Forecast Truck Volumes on Region's Highway System SCAG Model 2030 Trucks Post•Processed Year2030 Trucks Route Segments NIE SM NIE SM 1-15 SR-60 to F10 10,572 9,656 13,438 12,836 1-15 SR-91 to SR- 60 10,163 7,357 9,787 7,053 -15 SR-74 to SR- 91 14,194 7,899 13,584 7,485 1-215 SR-60to1-10 9,936 10,134 11,260 11,634 SR-60 SR-57 to 1-15 12,740 14,894 14,860 17,565 12,615 SR-60 1-15 to 1-215 8,796 10,948 10,862 SR-91 SR-241 to 1-15 22,131 26,023 19,587 22,978 SR-91 1-15 to 1-215 11,310 13,009 13,055 14,963 Source:1 SCAG 2007 Draft Air Quality Management Plan, Wilbur Smith Associates, 2006 Table 6 shows That the SCAG model carries lower truck volumes on 1-215, SR-60, SR-91 and 1-15. This indicates that SCAG forecasts are based on lower truck volumes than actually exist when compared to existing data. As shown in the County Project List in Table 7, a number of freeway improvement projects are planned within', Riverside County for corridors along 1-10, 1-15, SR-86, and SR-60. The projects range in scale from the widening of on/off-ramps along SR-60 and the addition of various auxiliary lanes along each corridor, to the construction of a new interchange at the intersection of 1-10 and SR-60. Thereare 31 projects in Riverside County dealing with freeway and roadway improvements, listed below. Table 7 MCGMAP Projects Riverside County Category County Description Cost pillions) Truck Lanes/Dedicated Freight Guideway System Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements A31418 RIV RIV 1-10 from San Bernardino County Line (R0.0) to Banning city limits (12.9) - Add eastbound truck climbing lane.$75.0 On I-10 at & E/0 Apache Trail - Construct new Morongo Pkwy IC (4 Ins, ramps - 2 Ins), construct aux lane, widen apache trail 3 to 5 Ins, widen seminole dr 2 to 5 Ins (ea: oa650g). Wilbur Smith Associates Page 18 of 30 337 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN Table 7 MCGMAP Projects Riverside County Category Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements A31418 County RIV RIV RIV RIV RIV RIV Description On I-10 near Rancho Mirage from 1.5 km east to 0.9 km west of Ramon Rd IC - Construct Bob Hope Dr extension (6 lanes) with a new diamond IC plus mods Ramon Rd IC and ramps. Cost ($Millions) 1-10 from Calimesa @ County Line Rd (R4.0) to 500 meters e/o Sandlwood Dr IfC (R4.3) - Replace Bridge, Ramps, Construct Auxiliary Lanes, and Realign Calimesa Rd. (EA 0A710K). $60.0 1-10 at Ave 50 - Construct new interchange. $19.5 I-10 McNaughton Pkwy (approx. 3.38 mi elo Dillon Rd) - Construct interchange. $20.0 1-10 at Portola Ave between Dinah Shore& Varner - Construct new IC (4 lanes) and ramps incl. bridge over UPRR & Varner reafignment. $19.8 1-10 at Monterey Ave - Reconfigure IC, add 1 NB lane, construct new WB entry loop ramp from Monterey & WB entry ramp from Vamer, realign/relocate WB exit ramp. $4.3 At I-15IWeirick Road IC in Corona - Widen ramps 1 to 2 lanes, widen Weirick Road 2 to 4 lanes from Temescal Canyon Rd. to 1-15, and install signals at RIV rampsAkeirick Rd. I-15/cajalco road, widen Cajalco rd i/c widen 2 to 4 Ins from Temescal Canyon Rd to Bedford Canyon RIV Rd and widen ramps 1 to 2 lanes. At 1-15/EI Cerrito Rd IC in Corona - Widen on/off ramps 1 to 2lanes, widen 2 to 4 lanes El Cerrito Rd between ramps, install signals, realign Bedford Canyon Rd and add soundwalls. On 1-15 at Ontario Ave, widen SB off & NB on ramps 2 to 3 Ins, & widen Ontario 4 to 6 Ins (Compton Ave to State St) & install signals. In RiversideCounty at I-15/Limonite Ave IC - widen is 4 to 6 Ins, ramps 1 to 2 Ins, & widen Limonite Ave from Hamner to Wineville 4 to 6 Ins _(ppprox 1 mi). RIV RIV RIV RIV At 1-15 and Clinton Keith Road widen overcrossing from 2 to 4 Ins and widen ramps from 1 to 2 Ins. Wilbur Smith Associates Page 19 of 30 338 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN Table 7 MCGMAP Projects Riverside County Category Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor, Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Condor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements County RIV RIV RIV RIV RIV RIV RIV RIV RIV Freight Corridor, Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridors Capacity Enhancement and Operational ImProvements RIV RIV RIV RIV A31418 Description. SR-86 S at Ave 50 Construct interchange. SR-86 S at Ave 52 btwn La Hernandez and Polk - Construct new interchange SR-86 at Ave 54 btwn SR-111 & Fillmore - Construct bridge/interchange w new SR-86. SR-86 S at Airport Blvd/Ave 56 btwn Orange & Fillmore - Construct new interchange (Spread - Diamond). SR-86S/Airport Blvd. (Ave. 56) construct new IC (three lanes OC: 1 lane each direction + 1 median lane) and ramps (1 lane) from approx. Desert Cactus Dr. Ave. 57. Cost ($Millions) $9.3 $19.7 $11.2 $17.8 $27.8 SR-86 S at SR-195 (Avenue 66) R10.63/R11.43 - Near Mecca, construct new interchange. _ $19.4 SR-86 S Tyler St w/o SR-86S Tyler St e% SR-86S Construct new interchange. $19.0 SR-60 at Etiwanda Ave btwn San Sevaine Wy & Iberia St - Widen ramps 1 to 2 lanes. 0.1 mi. $0.2 SR-60 from 0.4 mi e/o I-15/SR-60 IC to 0.2 mi elo Main St Add auxiliary lanes both directions. $5.0 On 1-10 at Indian Ave near Palm Springs - Widen overcrossing 2 to 6 Ins from 20th Ave North of I-10 & Gamet ave South of 1-10 & ramps 1 to 2 Ins (tea21-#377) (ea# 45570). On 1-10 at Date Palm IC in Cathedral City - Widen overcrossing from 2 to 6 Ins and ramps from 1 to 2 Ins. At 1-10 and Jefferson St IC, modify/widen existing IC from 2 to 6 lanes. 1-10 from Monterey Ave (44.5) to Dillon Rd (58.9) - Add 1 MF lane each direction (EA 0A030K). _ $71.0 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 20 of 30 339 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN Table 7 MCGMAP Projects Riverside County Category County Description Cost ($Millions) Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements RIV 1101SR-60 New interchange construction $100.0 RIV SR-60110 Truck Climbing Lane $55.3 Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements RIV _ SR-60 at Milliken Ave between Etiwanda Ave & Wineville Rd - Widen ramps 1 to 2 lanes. 0.1 mi. $0.1.. $97.6 Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements RIV March Inland Cargo Port Airport I-215Nan Buren Blvd Ground Access Improvement Project. _ _ _ _ Grade Separations _ Grade Separations RIV $11048.0 _$114.0 Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements RIV SR-86 NAFTA Corridor Interchange Construction ,__$150.0 Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements RIV SR-60 Construct Truck Climbing Lane through Badlands to 110 „ ntt w _ �- AA 1-215 Widening to San Bemardino County Line Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements RIV $1,400.0 $1,000.0 Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements RIV SR-91 Widening to SR 241 to Pierce Freight Corridor Capacity Enhancement and Operational Improvements RIV I-10 Riverside County Line to SR-60 $200.0 Source: Wilbur Smith Associates, 2007 A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 21 of 30 340 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN Mainline Rail Capacity According to the 2002 Los Angeles -Inland Empire Railroad Mainline study, there were 57 daily BNSF trains between Riverside and Colton in the year 2000. The table below shows that BNSF freight traffic could increase by over 100 percent (121 daily trains by 2025) on the same segment. Including UP freight trains and passenger train volumes (Amtrak and Metrolink), total daily trains will increase 69 percent from 103 in 2000 to 174 in 2025. Figure 9 shows the increase in rail freight volumes by the year 2025. Table 8 Peak -Day Rail Traffic for 2025 (Number of Trains per Day by Segment) Atwood - Riverside Riverside - Colton 113NSF through freight Passenger UP through freight _ Year 2025 Total 121 62 121 36 183 17 174 Source: "The Los Angeles -Inland Empire Railroad Mainline Advanced Planning Study', Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC), 2002. Note: UP volume between Riverside and Colton on the BNSF was updated to 73 trains in the 2005 "Inland Empire : Railroad Mainline Study Final Report", prepared for the Southem California Association of Governments (SCAG). Accordingly, total daily trains would reach 230 in 2025 on that segment. A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 22 of 30 341 g ein6U 900Z HSM 900Z deWleallS :seomos 4}11.6.:§ d6ii M ws ��ca sel!W 09 Zb£ 0£ ZlZ- L91.411/11111110 96 . 0 peolliea Jay* --� 091. -£llmom awnion pUfiiau iseoend SZOZ ueid uopv }uawanoW spoof s's�a6uy_so1 ` " e Z l l - 8£ enomm r L£-6l !ea Jed sureil seaiy uegifl suod s;Jo dJly �. 04 2in6w 900ZHSM 900Z deWlealls :seamos iiir�>nssr SENONOM Or SZIAN1 a inpi111 tsma SUi31,119W wrap. sel!W 09 SSZ' £9l OEM • 06 56 0 peoil!ejJay* ;- Z9l - lel mum ewnion Iseoend 5Z0Z ueid uoRoyluewenoW spooe Alunoo-mnW OE l - Ze emww l8-OS 6b - LZ •�- Lea Jed suiea seepy uegin sliod = suodny MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN UP plans to reroute the Riverside - Los Angeles commuter train service to the Alhambra Line at Pomona. The Riverside Metrolink service presently operates to Los Angeles on the LA Sub Line. In addition, UP would shift many of the freight trains now operating to Riverside on the LA Sub Line to the Alhambra tine at Pomona. These changes would create a freight -only route, and a mixed freight/passenger route, greatly increasing operational efficiency for UP. None of these changes are budgeted and the reroute of Metrolink trains will ,require a new agreement with the commuter train agency.? These operational changes would improve operational efficiency. Passenger service improvements would serve to maintain regional economic vitality by providing better access to Los Angeles employment centers. Distribution Locations Currently, UP operates a rail yard and automobile distribution center in Mira Loma. Activities at the yard include receiving inbound rail cars, switching cars, loading and unloading automobiles, departing outbound rail cars, and storing ;automobiles. Facilities within the yard include classification tracks, a gate complex for inbound and outbound truck traffic, loading and unloading tracks, and various buildings and facilities supporting railroad and contractor operations. Community groups and residents have expressed concern over the diesel emissions created by the yard and its proximity to the Jurupa Valley High School. The yard does represent a major intermodal facility. Total passenger and freight train movements for the UP Los Angeles Sub Line from Mira Loma to West Riverside are presented in Table 9. Table 9 Total Passenger and Freight Train Movements Line Segment Freight Total Through Train Movements per Peak Day (Year 2000) Passenger Total Through Train Movements per Peak Day (Year 2000) BNSF Hobart'- Fullerton Jct. 50 46 BNSF Fullerton Jct. — Atwood 50 5 BNSF Atwood — West Riverside 57 16 BNSF/UP West Riverside — Colton 92 11 BNSF/UP Colton -San Bemardino 121 11 Lines over Cajon Pass (including BNSF/UP Cajon Line and UP Palmdale Line) 93 2 UP Mira Loma—W. Riverside plus 64 14 UP West Colton — Colton UP El Paso Line 2 2 Source: Inland Empire Railroad Mainline Study, Final Report, June 30, 2005. 7 UPRR 2001 Presentation to SCAG A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 25 of 30 344 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN There are no projects in the MCGMAP region that directly relate to the Mira Loma facility. Any improvements to land use and pollution concerns would address the Action Set "Accelerate Regional Environmental Mitigation." Increasing cargo capacity at March GlobalPort should assist the Action Set "Improve Operational Efficiency." March GlobalPort can handle more than 1.2 million tons of cargo per year, which is about 14 percent of the regional volume and 20 percent of the intemational volume predicted for 20168. Funding The county has developed various funding strategies for advancing projects. The need for grade separation funding is particularly acute. The existing 61 railroad crossings were ranked into five priority tiers, out of which 28 crossings were ranked in the top two tiers as the highest priority for funding. The cost of constructing grade separations at these 28 locations is currently estimated at $815.8 million, with $199 million currently committed from various funding sources. This results in $616.8 million of funding deficit for all 28 projects. A plan to fund 18 of the 28 crossings for a total project cost of $560.8 million is underway. Among the 18 high -priority projects, eight are located on UP mainline tracks and 10 are on BNSF mainline tracks (five of which UP operates). The table below lists the 18 high -priority projects. MMarch Global Port LLC., 2006 A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 26 of 30 345 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN Table 10 High Priority Grade Separation Projects Cross Street Jurisdiction Total Project Cost (Millions) Priority Group Columbia Ave (BNSF&UP) Riverside $21.00 1 Sunset Ave (UP) Banning $21.00 1 Avenue 48/DiIIOn Road (UP) Indio/Coachella $16.10 2 Jurupa Ave (UP) Riverside County $21.70 2 Chicago Ave (BNSF &UP) Riverside $48.70 1 Magnolia Ave (BNSF) Riverside County $26.70 1 3rd Street (BNSF & UP) Riverside $31.70 1 McKinley Street (BNSF) Corona $109.20 1 Magnolia Ave (UP) Riverside $27.20 1 Iowa Ave (BNSF & UP) Riverside $19.00 1 Adams Street (BNSF) Riverside $24.00 1 Auto Center Dr (BNSF) Corona $27.00 2 Clay Street (UP) Riverside County $25.00 2 Center Street (BNSF & UP) Riverside County $36.30 2 Streeter Ave (UP) Riverside $33.70 2 Madison Street (BNSF) Riverside $19.00 2 Jurupa Road (UP) Riverside County $26.50 1 Riverside Ave (UP) Riverside $27.00 1 Total $560.80 Source: Grade Separation Funding Strategy, RCTC, September, 2006 Representatives from the Riverside County Transportation Commission have suggested adopting funding strategies similar to the Chicago Region Environmental and Transportation Efficiency (CREATE) Program. The CREATE Program is a partnership between the state of Illinois, city of Chicago, Metra (a Commuter Rail System in Chicago) and the nation's freight railroads. CREATE is a multi -modal program (freight rail, passenger rail and highway) to provide critical improvements to increase efficiency of rail infrastructure and quality of life for Chicago -area residents. A similar coordination of govemmental and private agencies within Riverside County could be employed in a holistic approach to address critical rail projects. To address the CREATE Program, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Illinois Division Office, in cooperation with the Illinois Department of Transportation and the Chicago Department of Transportation, developed the Systematic, Project Expediting, and Environmental Decision -making (SPEED) Strategy. The SPEED Strategy supports systematic decision -making, provides an expeditious method of moving low risk component projects forward, and assesses potential environmental impacts in a proportional, graduated way. Market -based mechanisms are currently being considered by different agencies to fund infrastructure and environmental improvement at ports. One such mechanism is a container fee A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 27 of 3 346 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN applied to each shipping container received at the port. This would generate funds to help pay for road and rail improvements and clean -air programs tied to port trade. One important potential source of funding is State General Obligation bonds from Proposition 1B, which was approved by California voters in November of 2006. The Trade Corridor. Infrastructure Fund (TGIF) within Proposition 1B is intended to fund "Trade Corridors of National Significance" and other corridors with high volumes of freight movement. Prop 1B requires the County Transportation Commission (CTC) to use plans adopted by regional transportation planning agencies, including MCGMAP. Funding issues and county plans address the MCGMAP Action Set "Negotiate Fair Share Public/Private Financing County Actions County actions related to the MCGMAP are provided in Table 8. A major focus in Riverside County is to "Relieve Congestion and Increase Mobility." Conclusions Riverside County plays a major role in moving goods through the MCGMAP region. Goods movement related impacts are currently disproportionately higher than benefits seen by the county at this time. As a result, the region has identified several major impact mitigation strategies as regional priority projects. Freight rail through traffic is an especially high priority problem in the region. Delays at grade crossings are significant, and competition between freight trains and commuter trains for limited rail capacity has a significant effect on county residents. Air pollution impacts from growing freight rail also need to be addressed. Riverside County has relatively high truck volumes on major east -west facilities. The county has a higher fraction of heavy -truck traffic than most of the other MCGMAP counties. If current trends continue, growth in warehouse and distribution land uses (and associated economic benefits) are likely to favor the 1-15 corridor in San Bemardino County as compared to Moreno Valley. Thus, Riverside County may benefit less from logistics activity in the region than its share of through traffic would suggest possible. Based on the above observations, several high priority regional projects are targeted for Riverside County. The projects and actions currently underway or being planned in Riverside County fall within the four actions of the MCGMAP. There is a relationship between county projects developed independent of a regional plan and the recommended primary actions of the MCGMAP. To reiterate, the four action sets in the MCGMAP include the following: • Action Set 1: Accelerate Regional Environmental Mitigation + Action Set 2: Relieve Congestion and Increase Mobility A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 28 of 30 347 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN • Action, Set 3:improve Operational Efficiency • Action! Set 4: DevelopEquitable Public/ Private Funding Strategy A brief description of each action set and how the county -specific actions serve their greater purpose is provided below. Action Set 1:, Accelerate Regional Environmental Mitigation seeks to mitigate environmental impacts at three levels: a broad regional approach, regional conformity, and project specific mitigation. The regional approach is for broad strategic policies and efforts focusing on further reducing region -wide impacts. Regional conformity holds emissions to caps set through aggressive actions and implementing high-level technology and best practices. The project specific mitigation requires project sponsors to consider and disclose environmental impacts when planning projects and to address how potential impacts will be resolved. This part of the project development process is specified in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Freeway lane and capacity improvements as well as operational and safety improvements will improve mobility and therefore reduce emissions. The proposed grade separation projects will also greatly reduces pollution from idling cars. These projects will assist Riverside County in continuing to meet conformity goals. Projects may have local impacts that are not addressed within this regional goods movement framework. Action Set 2: (Relieve Congestion and Increase Mobility focuses on improving all aspects of the transportation system to improve region -wide mobility and safety. This action set seeks to achieve the following: j • Increase intermodal lift capacity • Increase mainline rail capacity • Grade separate railroad crossings • Improve highways through comprehensive and innovative approaches • Continue with general purpose highway improvements 1 safety and operational improvements The freeway projects, the mainline rail improvements, and the intermodal facilities will provide congestion relief and increase mobility. All modes of freight transport benefit from these projects. The construction of railroad grade separations will help reduce traffic delay at crossings. Action Set 3: Improve Operational Efficiency addresses the following action categories: • Improve marine terminal productivity, truck turn times, and intermodal operations • Improve highway operations through the use of new technology These improvements would make existing infrastructure more efficient. Projects like improving freeway capacity and grade separations lead to improved operational efficiency. A31418 Wilbur smith Associates Page 29 of 30 348 MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAN Action Set 4: Develop Equitable Public/Private Funding Strategy recognizes that implementation of the actions, projects, and programs with mitigations will require a coordinated effort by private and public sectors. The action set seeks to achieve the following • Maximize the Study Area's Fair Share of State and Federal Funds • Identify Opportunities for Project -Specific User Fees • Establish Institutional Structure for Managing User Fees and Revenues • Initiate Supportive Legislation Riverside County is addressing these issues. Developing funding strategies for grade separations is a major step in addressing the distribution of funds. To adequately address fair share, it is important to increase the knowledge of agencies regarding the issues as this study has done. All the projects in the county ultimately are designed to insure that Southern California maintains, if not enhances, its economic position. Maintenance of the regions economic vitality will be enhanced by the actions being done in Riverside County. A31418 Wilbur Smith Associates Page 30 of 30 349 • Riverside County Transportation Commission Environmental Justice Analysis and Community Outreach Study 26 February 2008 Overview The Transportation land Land Use Collaborative as a sub consultant to MIG, Inc. completed individual consultations with each county: Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Riverside. Representatives from local city planning departments, police departments, public works departments, and county supervisors attended the consultations. They provided feedback on local issues and impacts related to goods movement activity. They prioritized top projects and facilities that posed impacts to communities of concern. In addition, local advocates and experts were identified for future participation Community Feedback Groups (CFGs). Riverside County Consultation, 12/11/2007 KEY FINDINGS The following table 'provides a brief overview of key findings from the consultation, which are summarized in more detail on the following pages. Goods Movement Facility Type of Impacts Community of Concern Mira Loma Multimodal Rail Yard and Warehousing Air Quality, Visual, Noise, Congestion, Public Health, Economic Impact Unincorporated: Mira Loma, Glen Avon, Pedley, Jurupa March Airport Air Quality, Noise, Public Health, Economic Impact City of Perris, City of Moreno Valley, Unincorporated: Mead Valley, Edgemont NAFTA SR86 Corridor Congestion, Economic Impact City of Coachella Environmental Justice Analysis and Community Outreach Study page 1 350 Riverside County Consultation KEY ISSUES AND IMPACTS Goods Movement Projects and Communities of Concern Mira Loma Multi -Modal Rail Yard and Warehousing Distribution Centers • Health Concerns • Pre -mature deaths from air quality • Observed lack of lung development in young children • Union Pacific Auto Distribution Center in Mira Loma, sits directly across a small road from the athletic field of the Jurupa Valley High School —the highest cancer risk in Mira Loma, estimated at 1500 in a million instead of 1 or 10 in a million. • Heavy duty diesel trucks make it impossible for residents to enjoy horseback riding on the trails throughout the community. • In 2004 at a warehouse, residents were held prisoner in their homes due to a toxic spill resulting in a mixture of two chemicals that could have killed hundreds. The County of Riverside had no idea of the contents in that warehouse. Since most warehouses are built on speculation without a tenant identified, no one knows what is in the hundreds of warehouses in the community. • Mira Loma Specific Air Study shows the increased cancer risk due to diesel emissions • Increased emissions of diesel PM due to warehouse operations in Mira Loma cause increased cancer risks. • The magnitude of the risk increase depends on .idling time, and specific truck routes. • Mira Loma has high cancer risks to start with (1265 maximum, 905 average); approximately 80% due to diesel emissions. • The average 12-grid increased risk ranged from 11 to 29. • Diesel emissions from truck routes in and from warehouses/distribution centers can have a greater impact on residential and high school exposure. • The maximum per -grid risk increase was 68 (increased cancer cases). • The Jurupa Valley High School area experiences the largest risk increases, up to 90. Impacted Communities - Mira Loma • University of Southern California Children's Health Study found children in the Mira Loma area to have the slowest lung growth and weakest lung capacity • Glen Avon • Adjacent community of Glen Avon has organized the Glen Avon Revitalization Committee (GARC). And they are working with CCAEJ; jointly they purchased 13 acres to build a community park and environmental education center • Pediey and Jurupa Environmental Justice Analysis and Community Outreach Study page 2 351 Riverside County Consultation • Adjacent community residents are 11% to 26% more likely to contract cancer from diesel emissions March Airport — Joint Powers Authority Meriden Warehousing development planned for airport expansion • +/- 2,400 Acres master plan business park • Warehouse and distribution centers for Kia Motors, Tesco, SafeCo, Walgreens • Large DHL distribution center • Congestion bad, and needs road widening • Noise pollution, times of the flights disturb the residents • 2003 Agreement reached with community to limit warehousing • For nearly a decade, "planners had been working on converting part of March into a 1,300-acre business park • Under the accord, , the JPA will limit warehouse space to 187 acres; keep the facilities away from homes and schools; create a 48- to 60-acre regional park with soccer, softball and football fields; set aside space for a police station and fire substation; restrict truck idling and traffic; and include an alternate fuel facility. Impacted Communities • Recommends contacting City Managers of Moreno Valley (Bob Gutierrez) and Perris (Richard Bellmutez) for info on more specific EJ communities in their area Edgemont and Mead Valley General Notes from Consultation and Future Issues County needs ability to identify established truck routes • Trucks cut through residential neighborhoods • County intrigued by establishing hours of operation for truckers • Interested in doing a Truck Shift Analysis for off peak hours What it does to interstate commerce? • Currently the State has control on the issue of designating truck routes • Need for legislation to allow counties to designate truck routes 5th County District currently looking at habitat conservation issues in the county • Potential to link this advocacy work with goods movement issues to advocate for buffer zone areas • Suggested looking at RAND study on conservation Environmental Justice Analysis and Community Outreach Study page 3 352 Riverside County Consultation Identified the need for grade separated crossings in the Western side of the County and the City of Coachella • 53 at -grade crossing in Western Riverside County; 8 at -grade crossings in the City of Coachella • Ambulances and Fire trucks do not have way to access the other sides of the County in case of emergency • In the City of Coachella, the UPRR railroad is a major barrier to circulation for all modes. Long freight trains result in significant delay and congestion at the limited grade - separated crossings. The tracks currently have about 60 trains per day and are expected to serve over 100 trains per day with added track capacity. 2003 Derailment in Beaumont • A freight train, operating in double track territory, derailed 18 cars which were subsequently struck by a passing train resulting in the passing train derailing 3 locomotives and eight cars. • Damage to locomotives and nearly 1,500 feet of track transformed a mile -long section of the rural roadway into a crowded construction site, while hundreds of motorists were forced to take lengthy detours around the wreckage. NAFTA Corridor 86 • Killed small business on Old 86 when the highway was built • Once known as "the Killer Highway" because it behaves like a freeway and there were high number of accidents • Lack of adequate grade separated crossings or stop signs _ Installed traffic lights to reduce speeds and control traffic in 2004 • Has potential to attract industries and more trucks • Land adjacent to State Highway 86 is critical for industrial preservation. If this land is rezoned to residential, land further east cannot be used for industrial purposes because trucks cannot access parcels through residential areas • Making efforts to preserve industrial lands that sit adjacent to the 86 because many developers are trying to convert the areas to residential Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport (Mecca) • Airport is used for general aviation, which plays into trend of retiring CEO's to move their businesses to Coachella Valley • Looking to expand airport for commercial air freight for developing business community • Surrounded mostly by agricultural land and very little residential land • Buffer zones of non-residential areas surrounding the airport would need to be maintained • A high school sits 2 miles northwest of an existing runway Environmental Justice Analysis and Community Outreach Study page 4 353 • Riverside County Consultation • Coachella attempting to preserve industrial zoning in sphere of influence south of Avenue 54 and north of Airport • As of 2004, the immediate environs are mostly agriculture or undeveloped. However, urban areas of the city of Coachella are barely a mile north. Coachella, as well as La Quinta to the west, plan to expand their cities southward. Within the unincorporated county area, a major development —Kohl Ranch —is proposed immediately south of the airport. This urbanization will pose challenges for long-term airport/land use compatibility Avenue 56 and 66 Grade Separation on UPRR (Proposed for TCIF funding; please note there are 6 other grade separations identified for the City of Coachella) • Ave 56 provides important truck access to Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport and two distribution/ warehousing centers • Part of the Yuma UPRR Subdivision line that connects the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to the NAFTA freight corridor delivery system serving the manufacturing centers of Southern California and Mexico. • 8,600 grams per day (2030) of greenhouse gases and emissions generated by the idling trucks and automobiles delayed by the passing trains. City of Coachella exploring the possibility of an inland port KEY COMMUNITY LEADERS AND ADVOCATES Riverside County Integrated Project http://www.rcip.org/default netscape.htm Formed very active committees including: Moreno Valley to San Bernardino Policy Advisory Committee, Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee. General Plan Advisory Committee, Community and Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process Committee Clean Air Now http://www.clean-air-now.oro/home.html Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice http://www.ccaelorg/ Penny Newman, Executive Director, 951-360-8451, admin@ccaej.org Donna Charpied, Policy Advocate, 760-347-7586, donna.c@ccaej.oro The Valley Group http://www.valleygroup.org/ Well versed on the subject of goods movement Endangered Habitat League http://www.ehleague.org/index.html Environmental Justice Analysis and Community Outreach Study page 5 354 Riverside County Consultation Dan Silver, Executive Director, 213-804-2750, dsilverla@earthlink.net Solution Oriented and Balanced; well respected in Riverside The PASS Economic Development Association http://www.ecopac.org/ Morongo Band of Mission Indians Bill Landon, Public Relations Consultant, 951-852-9320 Riverside County Department of Public Health, Childhood Asthma Program Marsie Huling, Program Coordinator, (951) 358-4977, mhulingftco.riverside.ca.us Riverside County Department of Public Health Michael Tweedell, Deputy Director, 951-358-5074 mtweedel@co.riverside,ca.us Inland Congregation Unified for Change Zach Hoover, 951- 899-0544, zach@icucpico.orq Economic Development Agency of Riverside County Robin Zimpfer, 951-955-6664, rzimpfer@rivcoeda.orq Desert Alliance for Community Empowerment Jeff Hayes, Executive Director, 760-391-5050, jeff@dcez.org Coachella Valley Economic Partnership Nancy Markwardt, (760) 340-1575 Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) Allyn Waggle, Director of Transportation, (760) 779-8680 Community Alliance for Riverside's Economy & Environment http://www.careenews.org MCGMAP PRELIMINARY GOODS MOVEMENT PROJECTS/STRATEGIES/IMPROVEMENTS Grade Separation Projects • 61 At Grade Mainline Crossings • 53 in Western Riverside • 8 in Coachella Valley Freeway/Highway Projects • SR-60/I -10 - Truck Climbing Lane • I-10/SR-60 - New Interchange Construction • I-10 - Riverside County Line to SR-60 • I-10 - Add additional lane East of Monterey Environmental Justice Analysis and Community Outreach Study 355 page 6 Riverside County Consultation • March ARB/Inland Cargo Port - Van Buren Interchange Project • SR-86 NAFTA Corridor Interchange Construction • I-10 - Truck Climbing Lane • SR-60 - Truck Climbing Lane (Badlands) • I-215 - Widening to San Bernardino County Line • SR-91 - Widening 241 to Pierce • SR-91 and I-15 Widening Projects of Regional Significance Included in Overall Project List • Rail capacity''improvements (e.g. double and triple tracking: Colton Crossing) • Truck Lanes/Dedicated Freight Guide Way System (I-710 from Port of Long Beach to SR- 60; East-West Corridor between the I-710 to I-15 and I-15 to Victorville) • Brawley Bypass (project is part of Border Crossing Improvements Environmental Justice Analysis and Community Outreach Study page 7 356 • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Environmental Justice Analysis and Community Outreach Study Task 2: Recommended Prototype Communities for Detailed Analysis 15 May 2008 Overview As part of Task 2, the MIG Team, the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), and representatives within each county identified low income and minority communities that are likely to suffer significant adverse impacts from regional goods movement investment decisions. This process involved a quantitative analysis of minority and income data in the areas of major goods movement corridors and facilities, as well as a more qualitative analysis of community and agency knowledge of impacted communities based on consultations with key representatives in each county. Following are the MIG Team's recommended set of "impact -sensitive" communities --including at least one in each of the four SCAG counties involved in this study --that can serve as prototypes for detailed analysis under Task 3 and inclusion in the Guidebook in Task 6. Selection Process: Mapping Analysis and Consultations As explained in detail in the February 26, 2008 memorandum titled "Task 2: Criteria for Identifying Communities of Concern", the MIG Team developed and recommended selection criteria that would identify transportation analysis zones (TAZs) with low income and minority populations for use in the mapping analysis. These TAZs are "meaningfully greater" than the regional average to the high level of racial and ethnical diversity in the SCAG region, as well as the relatively high cost of living. In the SCAG region, the minority population is approximately 630/0 of the total population (2000 U.S. Census). Thus, we used the following criteria to identify three levels of minority TAZs: • 70-790/0 of the total population is minority; - 80-89%I of the total population is minority; and • Over 90% of the total population is minority. These criteria result in selection of 41% of all SCAG TAZs. The SCAG TAZ-level data on income identifies the number of households in each of four income categories: less than $25,000, $25,000 to $50,000, $50,000 to $100,000, and more than $100,000. Thus, the data does not directly relate to the current federal poverty levels, although the $25,000 threshold is relatively close to the federal poverty level for a family of four. We used the following criteria for identify three levels of low income TAZs: Task 2: Recommended Prototype Communities for Detailed Analysis Overview 357 • 30-39% of households have an income below $25,000; • 40-49% of households have an income below $25,000; and • More than 50% of households have an income below $25,000. These criteria result in selection of 380/0 of all SCAG TAZs Using the above criteria, the MIG Team created maps that show low income and minority TAZs as well as goods movement corridors and terminals, all of which were reviewed at the Technical Advisory Committee meeting of March 4, 2008. Not surprisingly, the maps illustrate that many goods movement facilities are located in close proximity to TAZs with high percentages of low income and/or minority residents. In particular, low income and minority communities surround many of the region's highways, seaports, rail lines, and rail yards. From December 2007—February 2008, the MIG Team conducted individual consultations with key agencies in each county: Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura. Representatives from localcityplanning departments, police departments, public works departments, and county supervisors attended the consultations and provided feedback on local issues and impacts related to goods movement activity. They prioritized top projects and facilities that posed impacts to communities of concern. Concurrently, the MIG Team reviewed the emerging data and recommendations from the Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan (MCGMAP), a multi -jurisdictional effort in the same study area. The MCGMAP will serve as a "Master Plan" for the study area, establishing a regional consensus -based framework for goods movement initiatives, including planned improvements, public policy and legislation regarding mitigation strategies, and funding and institutional arrangements. The MIG Team also reviewed the project applications for Trade Corridor Improvement Funds from each county transportation commission to assess their locations related to identified EJ communities. As these projects are imminent and require development of mitigation strategies, the EJ Study offers a unique opportunity to support those projects. Finally, through discussions at the March 4, 2008 TAC meeting and direct communications between the MIG Team and each county's transportation commission representative, a clear set of prototype communities for the study area emerged that will serve as case studies for identifying impacts and mitigation strategies for goods movement projects. Recommended Prototype Communities Based on this process, the MIG Team recommends the following prototype communities for detailed study. The outcomes of process will provide these communities with practical ideas for mitigating impacts, as well as provide the broader region with a guidebook that features a set of strategies and solutions to consider in addressing similar impacts from specific goods movement projects. Task 2: Recommended Prototype Communities for Detailed Analysis Overview 358 • Recommended Prototype Community: San Bernardino County Colton Crossing, City of Colton —This major rail intersection of two main rail routes serving Southern California cross at -grate in the City of Colton. As most trains entering or leaving the region pass through this location, significant rail congestion occurs and impacts the entire region. Of course, neighboring communities experience significant impacts as well, including congested roadways due to stopped trains at the crossing, emissions from idling cars and trains, and noise from rail operations and maintenance impacting adjacent homes, schools and community facilities. A unique opportunity exists to link the EJ Study with current local planning efforts to update the land use and circulation elements in the South Colton community, which would provide significant added value to that effort. These adjacent neighborhoods feature 30-39% of households with income below $25,000, and 80-89% of the population are minorities. Other projects considered for study in San Bernardino County included: • BNSF San Bernardino Rail Line: While this facility and neighboring communities have a similar set of impacts and demographics as compared to Colton Crossing, the significance of the Colton Crossing expansion and prominence in the goods movement network elevates the urgency of addressing its impacts. Certainly, strategies and lessons from studying the impacts and communities near Colton Crossing may be applicable to this facility. • Ontario Airport: Air freight will continue to grow in coming years, yet the surrounding communities continue to shift from a mix of residential and industrial to almost exclusively industrial. Additionally, the airport and local agencies implemented mitigation strategies for noise impacts in past years. • I-10 Corridor: The south side of the corridor in the City of Fontana experiences freight -related impacts in their communities such as mixed residential -industrial land uses and limited access to services that are based on the north side of the I- 10 freeway. However, such impacts are not a direct result of goods movement projects • Southern California Logistics Airport: An emerging facility, this airport is not projected to impact as high a number of residential areas, particularly environmental justice communities, as compared to other projects. Task 2: Recommended Prototype Communities for Detailed Analysis San Bernardino County 359 Recommended Prototype Communities: Riverside County The Riverside County Transportation Commission elected to identify and study two communities and associated goods movement facilities as part of the Study. Grade Separations, Hunter Park and Riverside Junction Areas, City of Riverside- These adjacent communities feature both BNSF and UPRR rail lines, with significant delays to local traffic resulting in high emission levels from idling vehicles. Grade separation improvements identified along the BNSF line at Iowa and Columbia Avenues and 3rd Street are projected to eliminate the potential for train versus truck/auto/pedestrian accidents and associated delays, particularly for emergency response units. Without these projects, the potential for accidents will increase as vehicular traffic is projected to increase by 200/0 and train volumes increase by 69% over the next 20 years. The communities feature TAZs with 30-50%+ of households with incomes below $25,000, and 70-79% of the population are minorities. NAFTA State Route 86 Corridor and Grade Separations, Coachella Valley —The majority of the corridor features over 900/0 minority populations and more than 50% of households with income below $25,000. As the corridor is projected to expand its freight operations, many stakeholders are concerned that the area will also develop more residential areas. Additionally, other stakeholders express concern about the growing speed of freight traffic on the corridor and the lack of traffic controls and grade separated crossings. Grade separation projects supported by TCIF funds at Avenues 56 and 66 along this corridor will contribute significantly to mitigating these impacts. Additional projects considered for study in Riverside County included: Mira Loma Multimodal Rail Yard and Warehousing —A range of health studies in the communities surrounding this facility —including Mira Loma, Jurupa, Glen Avon, Pedley, and Jurupa Valley High School —identify significant health disparities related to air quality including premature deaths, reduced lung development and capacity, and cancer rates. The facility's operations include diesel emissions from rail and trucks. The adjacent communities feature TAZs with 40-49% of households with incomes below $25,000, and other TAZs with incomes with more than 50% of households below $25,000, but there are no significant minority communities in the area. • March Airport —The Joint Powers Authority engaged the community in limiting warehousing operations and locating them away from residential areas, in addition to creating recreation areas and locations for community facilities. The agreement also restricted truck idling and traffic and identified an alternate fuel facility for trucks Task 2: Recommended Prototype Communities for Detailed Analysis 360 Riverside County • • • • Recommended 'Prototype Community: Los Angeles County Hobart Rail Yard land Washington Boulevard, City of Commerce —As the largest intermodal rail yard in the United States (by volume of throughput), the rail and truck traffic from the Hobart Rail Yard and the surrounding, dense grouping of warehouses have significant air, noise, health and light impacts on the surrounding communities. Additionally, Washington Boulevard in the City of Commerce is a major thoroughfare between the Yard, Interstates 5 and 710, and the Ports. Average daily traffic on Washington Boulevard is 36,000 vehicles, of which 25% is truck traffic. As a TCIF`-funded project, a widening and reconstruction of the thoroughfare with one new lane in each direction, upgraded traffic signals, street lights, and widened UPRR grade crossing at Commerce Way will increase truck traffic speeds, necessitating increased attention on traffic and vehicle ,safety measures. Some communities adjacent to portions of the corridor feature more than 190% minority population and 30-49% of household income levels below $25,000. Additional projects considered for study in Los Angeles County included: • Union Pacific Intermodal Container Transfer Facility —The proposed modernization of this facility will include the construction of additional working rail tracks, the construction of a new gate facility, the improvement of existing gate facilities, and additional parking. The proposed modernization project would more than double the throughput capacity of the ICTF from 725,000 to 1.5 million containers per year. The proposed project has identified environmental improvements including the use of electric overhead cranes, cleaner hostling tractors, and ultra low emissions locomotives. • I-710 Improvements —This corridor includes many impacted communities, but current improvement plans are entering the environmental review process with an ongoing, extensive public participation process in place. • Gerald Desmond Bridge —Slated for replacement with construction starting in 2010, the environmental review process will include a public participation process to consider mitigation strategies. Task 2: Recommended:Prototype Communities far Detailed Analysis Los Angeles County 361 Recommended Prototype Community: Ventura County U.S. 101/Rice Avenue Interchange, City of Oxnard —As the designated port access route between Port Hueneme and U.S. 101, Rice Avenue and its interchange with the highway (TCIF funded) are important facilities. Currently, congested traffic on Rice Avenue sometimes encourages trucks to divert to Oxnard Boulevard, which features more residential and commercial uses. The TCIF-funded improvements to the interchange °n- and off -ramps will improve traffic flow along Rice Avenue, but the interchange is located adjacent to communities with 30-490/0 of households below $25,000 and 80-90%+ minority populations. Additionally the communities along the corridor will experience faster truck speeds and increasing truck volumes over time. The communities along Rice Avenue feature a range of 70-90%+ of the population representing minorities and one TAZ in the middle of the corridor with more than 500/0 of households below $25,000. Additional projects considered for study in Ventura County included: • Santa Paula Branch Line —This stretches from the Port Hueneme to the City of Santa Clarita, The Port of Hueneme, the Union Pacific Railroad (UP), the Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC), the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA), and the City of Santa Clarita each own a separate segment of this rail corridor. The recent "Santa Paula Branch Line Rail Corridor Study" investigated the possibility of reconnecting this rail corridor for both freight and passenger use. The proposed reconnecting of the rail line and reactivation of rail service has caused concern with some interest in Ventura County, but no specific project is advancing at this point in time. Task 2: Recommended Prototype Communities for Detailed Analysis Ventura County • 362 • AGENDA ITEM 8K • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June-11, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Tanya Love, Goods Movement Program Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: - On -Call Goods Movement Consultant Services STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the list of pre -qualified firms for on -call goods movement consultant services and award agreements as follows: a) Agreement No. 08-67-1 19-00 to Cambridge Systematics, Inc.; b) Agreement No. 08-67-120-00 to [tens; c) Agreement No. 08-67-121-00 to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.; d) Agreement No. 08-67-122-00 to Moore lanofano Goltsman, Inc. (MIG); and e) Agreement No. 08-67-123-00 to Wilbur Smith Associates; with contract term of three years with two one-year options; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND, INFORMATION: The issue of goods movement has become a critical function for the Commission as goods movement issues in Southern California have become more visible in regional transportation, 'environmental, and community planning discussions. `The Commission is participating lin a number of regional goods movement efforts, which include, but are not limited to, ;the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF), the Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan (MCGMAP), and the Environmental Justice (EJ) Analysis and Community Outreach Study. Involvement in these efforts allows the Commission to help shape solutions and improvement programs that address major infrastructure needs of the region while addressing the unique goods movement issues in Riverside County. Staff is requesting approval to enter into on -call consultant agreements related to goods movement issues. The development of a pre -qualified list of goods movement consultants will provide various types of support to staff in order to meet goods Agenda Item 8K 363 movement planning challenges. The types of support anticipated through this award include: • Development, technical review, and analysis of goods movement po►icy recommendations and projects; • Support for project prioritization and analysis; • Intra-county agency outreach and education; • Goods movement data for the 1-15 and connecting corridors; • Financial and economic impact analysis of goods movement options; and • Environmental and community impact analysis. Selection Process As part of the selection process, staff released a request for proposal (RFP) to 170 firms on April 17, 2008. The RFP was also posted on the Commission's website. The Commission received eight proposals by the deadline of May 22, 20081. The proposals were reviewed by an evaluation committee comprised of representatives from Caltrans District 8, the Southern California Association of Governments, and the Commission. Interviews were subsequently held on May 28, 2008 for five firms. Two of the firms — Cambridge Systematics, Inc., and Kimley-Horn and Associates — have provided on -call goods movement services to the Commission for the past three fiscal years and have provided excellent service to the Commission. In addition to renewing their contracts, the evaluation committee recommends that three additional firms be approved for the pre -qualified list. All five firms represent various strengths and benefits to the Commission, including one firm that specializes in public outreach: • Cambridge Systematics, Inc. • lteris • Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. • MIG, Inc. (public outreach) • Wilbur Smith Associates Funding During FY 2008/09, $250,000 in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds is budgeted for on -call consultant services related to goods movement.. The contracts will be a multiple -award, on -call service contract, therefore no funds are guaranteed to any consultant. Pre -qualified consultants will be selected for specific tasks based on information contained in their proposals. Services will be provided through issuance of a contract task order (CTO). The maximum amount of a CTO is $50,000. Two additional proposals were submitted after the deadline; however, in keeping with Commission policy, the proposals were not accepted and/or reviewed. Agenda Item 8K 364 • • • Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2008/09 Amount: $250,000 Source of Funds: LTF Budget Adjustment: No GLA No.: 106 67 65520 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \IX€44, ita Date: 06/03/08 Agenda Item 8K 365 AG ENDA ITEM 8L RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 11, 2008 TO: Riverside County. Transportation Commission FROM: Sheldon Peterson, Program Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposed Southern California Regional Rail Authority Budget for Fiscal Year 2008/09 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt the preliminary FY 2008/09 Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metrolink) operating and capital budget; 2) Allocate the Commission's funding commitment to the Metrolink in an amount iInot to exceed $8,086,400 comprised of $6,529,700 in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds for train operations and maintenance -of -way, and $1,556,700 for capital projects to be funded by Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307 funds and State Transit Assistance (STA) funds as local match; and 3) Authorize Metrolink to apply $1.1 million of the Commission's prior year carry over funds to its FY 2008/09 operating budget. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: By virtue of tthe joint powers agreement, the five member agencies, which comprise the Metrolink, must formally commit to fund their proportionate shares of commuter rail operating and capital costs. Each member agency must approve the budget before! adoption of a final budget by the Metrolink Board, no later than June 30, 2008. Service and funding levels are limited by the policy and budget constraints of the member agencies and are negotiated each year. FY 2007/08 Notable Accomplishments • Continued growth on the Inland Empire Orange County Line (IEOC) with the latest April 2008 ridership 5% higher than April 2007. • Continued steady growth on the year round IEOC weekend service, with strong marketing cooperation from Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) and Metrolink. Agenda Item 8L 366 • A serious commitment from Union Pacific for better on -time performance on the Riverside Line with performance at or above the target level of 95% for most of the year. This provided increased reliability and led- to ridership growth. • Construction began on the Eastern Maintenance Facility in Colton. • Received delivery of first of 15 Motive Power locomotives with the cleanest diesel-electric technology available. Riverside County Service Impact Proposed for FY 2008/09 Three Metrolink commuter rail lines traverse Riverside County: the Riverside Line, the IEOC Line, and the 91 Line. The preliminary FY 2008/09 Metrolink budget proposes the following: • Riverside Line: No changes in regular weekday service or weekend service via extensions on the San Bernardino Line; • IEOC Line: No changes in regular weekday service, no change to the year round weekend service that currently has three round trips on Saturdays and two on Sundays; • 91 Line: No changes in regular weekday service; and • 5.5% average fare increase due to restructuring of fares from zone to distance based calculation and rising diesel fuel costs. The primary reason for no changes in service is that the current passenger car fleet is maximized and there are no opportunities for additional weekday service with the existing equipment. There is a current order for 107 new passenger cars that are expected to arrive and be put into service in 2009. Commission's FY 2008/09 Operating Subsidy to Increase 3% The Commission's proposed funding obligation to Metrolink includes $6,529,700 subsidy for operations and maintenance -of -way, which represents a $190,100 increase over the FY 2007/08 budget. The Commission has requested that Metrolink apply $1.1 million of prior year carry over funds to the FY 2008/09 budget. This will allow more flexibility for the Commission to utilize the designated commuter rail local transportation funds for station operations as needed. Operating Cost Increases The overall Metrolink FY 2008/09 operating budget is $12.1 million or 9.9% greater than the previous year. The following elements represent the majority of the increase: Agenda Item 8L 367 • • • • Increase in the cost of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel from $2.50 per gallon in the FY ',2007/08 budget to $3.25 per gallon projected for FY 2008/09, which results in an increase of $0.75 or 30%. This increase of almost $4.8 million represents 34% of the total operating budget increase. • Operating crew costs are increasing due to both annual contractual increases and two additional weekday trains on the San Bernardino Line. • Equipment maintenance expenses are increasing both as a result of contractually mandated cost escalation as well as the addition of new staff to support the maintenance of new locomotives rolling stock at the end of the fiscal year. This is a net increase of $2.9 million. • Increase in the cost of transfers to other operators by $1.6 million or 34%. These costs are the reimbursements to other transit operators that allow Metrolink riders to travel free on their routes by showing a valid Metrolink ticket. The main cause of the increase is the change in the Los Angeles County jOperators EZ Pass reimbursement rate from $0.75 to $1.10 per boarding. The Commission and Metrolink also provide reimbursement of $2.50 per boarding for the Riverside Transit Agency's CommuterLink servicesand $1.25 for the Corona Cruiser. Capital Contribution The Commission's new capital and capital renovation obligation for FY 2008/09 is projected at $1,556,700. Projects include rehabilitation and renovation of rolling stock and track project, initial funding for a new centralized maintenance of way facility, passenger sign rehabilitation, and an improved ticketing process to allow for access through Metro's proposed gating on the Red and Gold Lines. Summary Financial Subsidy Impact to Commission The proposed Commission operating subsidy of $6,529,700 represents 4% of the $159.1 million Metrolink operating budget. Of the $6,529,700 in operating subsidy, $1.1 million will be paid from Commission's prior year carry over funds held at Metrolink. Therefore, the net impact to the Commission's FY 2008/09 budget will be!$5,429,700. The resulting capital project subsidy of $1,556,700 represents 0.35% of the $441.7 million capital budget. The federally funded portion of the capital subsidy of $1,244,700 does not pass through the Commission's ,operations, as Metrolink will have direct access to these funds contingent upon Commission approval. The STA-funded portion of the capital subsidy of $312,000, which is the match to the federal capital funds, has been included in the Commission's FY 2008/09 budget. Agenda Item 8L 368 Systemwide In FY 2008/09, Metrolink will celebrate its 16' year providing Metrolink commuter rail service in Southern California. Opening with three lines and 12 stations in October 1992, Metrolink today operates over 512 route miles on seven lines, serving 55 stations in six counties. Average weekday ridership is projected to total over 43,000 one-way trips. The resulting fare box revenue is projected at $72.4 million or 7.8% over the current year budget, due to the combination of a proposed average fare increase of 5.5%, as well as the increase in ridership. Fare revenues represent 45.8% of total operating expenses. Member agency contributions of $72.3 million for operations represent approximately 45% of total operating expenses resulting in revenue recovery in the budget of 55%, one of the higher revenue recovery ratios among commuter rail properties nationwide. . In 2004, the Metrolink Board approved a 10-year fare restructuring program that began July 1, 2005 and changed the method for calculating fares to one based on the driving mileage between stations. The 10-year fare restructuring program included an underlying average annual fare increase of 3.5%. Accordingly, for FY 2008/09 a 5.5% increase is proposed effective July 2008, with the additional amount to help offset some of the diesel fuel increase. The preliminary FY 2008/09 combined Metrolink budget is $600.8 million. The operating budget is $159.1 million, an increase of 9.6% from the current year budget, comprised of $134.6 million for train operations and maintenance -of -way at $24.5 million. The capital budget is $441.7 million made up of rehabilitation and renovation at $83.0 million and a new capital projects budget of $358.7 million. Approximately 54% of the capital budget, or $235.6 million, represents resources to procure additional rolling stock. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2008/09 Amount: $8,086,400 Operations - LTF $6,529,700 Capital FTA & STA $1,556,700 Source of Funds: FTA Section 5307 — ($1,244,700- Budget Adjustment: No does not pass through Commission) STA — ($312,000) $6,529,700 103 25 86101 P4199 GLA No.: $1,244,700 221 33 86102 P3812 $312,000 221 33 86102 P3c8�12 Fiscal Procedures Approved: V y1,,Ity ° Date: 5/22/2008 Attachment: Metrolink FY 2008/09 Budget Operating Subsidy Allocation by County Agenda Item 8L 369 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY FISCAL YEAR 2008-09 BUDGET OPERATING SUBSIDY ALLOCATION BY COUNTY (ems) f Total FY 08-09 LACMTA Share OCTA Share r RCTC Share - SANBAG Share VCTC Share xpenses > - 1. Train Opemtions&Services S104,452.1 $54,216.4 $23,665.6 S8,499.1 S12,912.5 S5,158.5 Maintenance -of -Way 24,536.7 14,499.1 4,581.1 753.8 3,127.9 1,574.8 Administration & Services 18,666.5 9,397.8 3,415.0 1,908.0 1,978-5 1,967.1 Insurance 11,480.0 5,956.2 2,739.5 936.4 1,379.7 468.2 otal Expenses Ind. MOW 5159,135.2 $84,0695 $34,401.1 $12,0973 S19,398.7 S9,168.7 evenues Gross Farebox 72,410.2 38,205.0 16,333.1 5,415.7 10,153.0 2,303.4 Dispatching 2,982.3 1,507.3 952.6 29.4 110.3 382.6 Other Operating 1,066.7 5113 215.1 1225 I36-8 80.9 Maintenance -of -Way 10,367-7 6,544.6 2,110.2 0,0 1,040.9 671.9 Total Revenues S86,826.9 $46,7683 S19,611.1 $5,567.6 $11,441.1 $3,438.8 Total County Allocation $72,308A $37,301.2 $14,790.0 $6,529.7 $7,957.6 $5,729.8 FY 2007-08 Budget I 63,822.1 33,147.2 12,372.3 6,339.6 6,801.6 5,1611 Increase!(Deerease) ! 8,486.3 4,154.0 2,417.7 190.1 1,156.0 568.5 ercentage Change 13.30% 12.53%. 19.54% 3.00% 17.00% 11.01% 94 370 AGENDA ITEM 8M RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 11, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Sheldon Peterson, Program Manager Stephanie Wiggins, Regional Programs Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Amendment to Transfer Funding Partnership with Southern California Regional Rail Authority to Include Riverside Transit Agency's North Main Corona Metrolink Shuttle Service STAFF RECOMMENDATION. - This item is for the Commission to: 1) Authorize Agreement No. 03-25-303-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 03-25-303, with the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metrolink) for inclusion of the Riverside Transit Agency North Main Corona shuttle service as part of the Transfer Funding Partnership; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the September 2007 Commission meeting, staff was authorized to advertise for construction bids for the North Main Corona Metrolink parking structure. This $25 million structure will provide for 1,000 parking spaces and is anticipated to take 18 months to complete. During construction, half of the existing parking lot or approximately 239 spaces will not be accessible. To address this need, staff developed a parking strategy with significant outreach to the riders. At the October 2007 Commission meeting, staff was authorized to establish a lease for a satellite parking location and provide for a shuttle agreement with the city of Corona. As the planning progressed, it was identified that there could be a greater demand for shuttle service than the single shuttle available with the city of Corona. Staff approached the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) to provide for additional vehicles and frequency as a demonstration project. This added RTA service includes two 40-foot buses that can provide for five minute frequencies during the peak service. Agenda Item 8M 371 In January 2008, the Commission began construction of the North Main Corona Metrolink parking structure. With the implementation of the parking strategy program, there has been an increase in transit connections to the stations on both RTA and Corona Cruiser. Also, the alternative Metrolink stations at West Corona and La Sierra have seen an increase in ridership. The main component of the strategy is the satellite parking program at 351 W. Rincon Street in Corona which has proven to be a success. Since January, over 200 vehicles a day are using this site to park for the North Main Corona Metrolink station. The greater frequencies of the RTA service help morning commuters by providing quick and reliable connections in order to not miss their trains. The larger buses are especially helpful in the afternoons when the trains arrive and there is the need to move a lot of passengers quickly. Passengers are extremely happy with the level of shuttle service and there have been no complaints received for the shuttles or the satellite parking lot. At its April 9, 2008 meeting, the Commission approved an item allowing staff to enter into an agreement with RTA for providing this shuttle service. As part of the agreement negotiations, it was determined that the best funding mechanism for this service would be amending the existing Transfer Funding Partnership with Metrolink that is currently funding Metrolink transfers on the RTA lines. Staff at Metrolink agrees with this approach and will work to develop an amendment to the existing agreement that will allow the Commission to fully fund the RTA North Main Corona shuttle service through the existing agreement. The cost for the RTA service is $22,705.56 a month, or $408,700 for the duration of the project. Funds have been identified to cover the shuttle operating expenditures in both current and next years rail operations budget. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2007/08 FY 2008/09 Amount: $135,000 5273,000 Source of Funds: Local Transportation Fund Budget Ad ustment: No GLA No.: 103 25 86101 4006 $135,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \jitm izavi uz Date: 5/23/2008 Agenda Item 8M • • 372 AGENDA ITEM 8N RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 11, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Sheldon Peterson, Program Manager Stephanie Wiggins, Regional Programs Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Cooperative Agreement and License with Riverside Transit Agency for the Use, Operation and Maintenance for the Perris Multimodal Facility STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-24-1 17-00 with the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) to provide for a cooperative agreement and license for the use, operation, and maintenance for the Perris Multimodal Facility that will be constructed on Commission property; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its July 2003 meeting, the Commission approved MOU No. 23-001 for the pass through of Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding from RTA to fund the Perris Multimodal Facility. The Commission was designated as the lead agency for the facility development and has proceeded with project development. Now the project is in final design and the 100% design plans are being reviewed by the city of Perris. This first phase will provide for a bus transit station which will be followed up with Metrolink service once the Perris Valley Line begins service. The current project includes a passenger waiting area connected to eight bus bays, a 141-space parking lot, a temporary restroom facility for RTA drivers, and enhanced landscaping and pedestrian walkways. To maximize the utility of the facility, the Commission's Commuter Assistance Program will establish a park and ride lot for commuter carpools and vanpools at the site and will be responsible for the entire 141-space parking lot prior to Metrolink service. This provides a great partnership opportunity, since RTA does not have an immediate need for the parking spaces. Through research, it was determined that there is a high demand for a park and ride lot in the area. Agenda Item 8N 373 The cooperative agreement confirms RTA will have a license to conduct passenger bus operations on Commission property and will provide appropriate insurance coverage and indemnification. In addition, RTA assumes the responsibility for the costs associated with the operations and maintenance for the transit portion of the facility. This includes the driveways, bus bays, platform, shelters, pedestrian walkways, personnel restroom, and trash enclosure. The Commission's Commuter Assistance Program will be responsible for maintaining the parking lot and security cameras associated with it. Costs will be shared between- the two agencies for landscaping, maintenance of the storm drain treatment system, and utilities. This cooperative agreement will need to be in place prior to the start of operations. This agreement will have a positive financial impact, with RTA contributing its share of the operating costs of facility. This agreement serves to clarify roles and responsibilities for maintenance between the agencies and will make the Perris Multimodal Facility a success well before the first Metrolink train arrives. Agenda Item 8N • 374 AGENDA ITEM 80 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 11, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Henry Nickel, Staff Analyst Sheldon Peterson, Program Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Commuter Rail Program Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for Program. the Commission to receive and file an update on the Commuter Rail BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Inland Empire -Orange County Weekend Service Performance 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Q4 FY 07108 Passenger Trips IEOC Weekend Service �o 4`a� ^o. ^1. FY 06/07 --0—FY 07/08 Daily passenger trips on the year-round Inland Empire -Orange County (IEOC) Metrolink weekend service have continued to grow through the third quarter and into the fourth quarter, providing 9,749 passenger trips quarter to date. This is an increase of over 100% over the 4,870 trips provided at this point last year, attributed to the extraordinary ridership resulting from the May 17 Free Ride Day. The success of this service is due in large part to the coordinated marketing efforts among the Commission, Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and San Bernardino Associated Governments. Most all responsibilities for marketing of the service have transitioned to Metrolink, this has included revised seat drops, branding, and consolidation of the various weekend services under a single promotional umbrella. Agenda Item 80 375 Bicycle Facility Being Utilized at Riverside Downtown and North Main Corona Stations To mitigate the costs of ever increasing Metrolink ridership, it is important for the Commission to reasonably accommodate alternative modes of transportation to its stations. This includes connecting bicycle commutes. In order to accommodate and promote bicycle ridership, the Commission has invested in both bicycle lockers and racks at its West Corona, La Sierra and Pedley stations. The Commission has bike racks at North Main Corona but no facilities at Riverside Downtown. Demonstration of the BikeLid's clamshell design. In consideration of these concerns, the Commission purchased and installed six BikeLids at both the Riverside Downtown and North Main Corona stations. The facilities are now being used on a first come first served basis. Commission staff is monitoring usage and will determine the need for additional bicycle facilities according to demand at the two stations. May 17 Ride Free Day on the IEOC Line Exceeds Expectations In order to further promote the IEOC weekend service and stimulate increased ridership, the Commission partnered with OCTA to provide a free ride day for passengers who boarded the IEOC Line at the Riverside Downtown station on Saturday May 17th. Passengers who boarded at the Riverside Downtown station were provided one of 1,500 special tickets allowing roundtrip travel to any destination on the IEOC Line between Riverside Downtown station and Oceanside, departing on any of the two morning trains. The result was the single greatest IEOC Saturday ridership on record, with 4,658 total trips on the IEOC Line on Saturday. All 1,500 tickets were distributed. Commission; OCTA, Metrolink and security staff were on hand to distribute tickets and direct passengers. Pepsi provided 25 cases of soda distributed to passengers prior to boarding. The cost of this promotion is to be shared between the Commission and OCTA. Marketing activities will include newspaper advertisement, seat drops, station banners, and online promotion on the Metrolink website. In consideration of the overwhelming response, the Commission, OCTA, and Metrolink staff will evaluate the potential for an additional promotion to kickoff the summer leisure travel season. Agenda Item 80 • 376 • Riverside Line 6,000 5,600 a 5,200 'c 4,800 0 4,400 7k 4,000 3,600 3,200 Passenger Trips Riverside Line 01 p1 p1 01 �1, 01 4 01 01 PQc �a� hoc` ��� QJ� yob p°� �� �e5 Month oe 0 O� Daily passenger trips on Metrolink's Riverside Line for the month of April averaged 5,116, a decrease of 34, 1 % less than the month of March. Compared to one year prior, the line averaged an overall daily increase of 118 passenger trips. This is nearly 2% more than a year ago. a as U a) N a On Time Performance (95% Goal) Riverside Line 100 95 90 85 75 70� 01 01 01 Al 01 01 01 09 00 ov 02) QQc `Sad ��cc �� Quo' oc, �o Oec �a� Q�� mat Q- Month April on -time performance averaged 98% inbound (no change from March) and 92% outbound (-6% from March). There were 13 delays greater than five minutes during the month of April. The following are primary causes: Agenda Item 80 Signals/Track/MOW Dispatching Mechanical Operations 377 Inland Empire -Orange County Line • 5,000 4,800 in 4,600 H 4,400 c 4,200 at 4,000 3,800 3,600 Passenger Trips Inland Empire Orange County Line 1 �1 1 1 01 1 1 00Al l A�0 p0 O� o� PQ� �a�A °cQ °`A Qom' Sep o°~ �°, O4 Sam Qe 40- PQi Month Daily passenger trips on Metrolink's IEOC Line for the month of April averaged 5,008, an increase of 24 trips, less than 1 % more than the month of March. The line has increased by 217 daily trips or 5% from a year ago April 2007. Percentage On Time Performance (95% Goal) Inland Empire Orange County Line 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 01 01 01 Al 001 01 01 01 0� t (§ 0� PQt �a� �Jc �J� PJp; �eQ Oe,s � Oec; lac (<0 4,mc PQc Month April on -time performance averaged 98% southbound (+1% from March) and 95% northbound (no change from March). There were 22 delays greater than five minutes during the month of April. The following are primary causes: Signals/Track/MOW Dispatching Mechanical Operations Agenda Item 80 378 • • • 91 Line 2,800 2,600 2,400 z,zoo 0 2,000 u 1,800 1,600 1,400 Passenger Trips 91 Line 0A 01 AA Al 0A 0A 0A 0A A o00 04 9, o Qt 0� JC J\ G� pJ GA O P � PJ Se O � .s Q \Va eQ Month Daily passenger 'trips on Metrolink's 91 Line for the month of April averaged 2,369 a decrease of 31 trips, 1 % less than the month of March. The line has increased by 54 daily trips or +21'% from a year ago April 2007. m C, M_ d V a 10 s s II 8 7 7 On Time Performance (95% Goal) 91 Line I i o9) o?' 4:§3 PQ� 4,0 .30SJ\ PJA co O°� 04 peG �(7§Nv oA p^ oA oA pA 0A 0A A A Month April on -time performance averaged 96% inbound (+2% from March) and 95% outbound (-2% from March). There were six delays greater than five minutes during the month of April. The following are primary causes: Agenda Item 80 Signals/Track/MOW Dispatching Mechanical Operations 379 Connecting Transit Service Performance The Commission's role facilitating interconnectivity between Metrolink and connecting transit services is essential to ongoing viability of system. Such services address the needs of transit dependent riders as well as help mitigate congestion and the necessity for expensive parking capacity at the Commission stations. The Commission is working to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of transit connections. In order to meet these requirements, the Commission has worked with Metrolink and local transit operators to offer connecting services to and from Riverside County Metrolink stations at no cost for those with valid Metrolink tickets. Within Riverside County, services include free transfers to routes operated by Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), RTA's Commuter Link service and Corona Cruiser. The following graphs show total monthly Metrolink transfer passenger trips on each of the three services. Passenger Trips RTA Fixed Route 3,000 ,n 2,500 a ✓ 2,000 w 0 1,500 1,000 O\ 0 O\ O\ O' 6\ �,{� 0 5O� 01 ,is 0. ,J� �J� QJ� GjQ� V ~ �pJ Oor-' Month 0 O 00 O� )ate FP- ‘-‘<a� PQc Monthly Metrolink transfer trips on RTA's connecting fixed routes (1, 3, 15, 16, 21, 29, and 38) totaled 2,386 for the month of April, an increase of 45 trips, 1.92% more than the month of March. Monthly trips increased by 42 or 1.79% over last year. Agenda Item 80 • 380 • • Passenger Trips RTA Commuter Link 7,600 7,000 e 6,400 �- 5,800 5,200 4,600 4,000 o� o� oA � �oe 01 01 01 01 0� p1 0' o� Pic 47,1 �J� �o� Poi g�< 06- �6.% O(6; ,ace 4g� r PQr Month Monthly Metro! nk transfer trips on RTA's Commuter Link routes (202, 204, 206, 208, and 210) totaled 7,036 for the month of April, an increase of 775 trips, +12.38% from the month of March. This is primarily attributed to a steady increase in ridership on Route 210. Monthly trips have increased by 1,189 or 24.40% over the last year.. 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 PQ \1•13 Passenger Trips Corona Cruiser oY6\ �o� �o‘ 01 moo\ o� Month row �o`a ��� 1> Q0 4 PQ Monthly Metro! nk transfer trips on the Corona Cruiser totaled 682 for the month of April, an increase of 146, +27.24% from the month of March. Monthly trips have increased by 138 or +25.37% over the past fiscal year. Attachments: 1) Metrolink Average Weekday Passenger Trips 2) Metrolink Schedule Adherence Summary - Weekday Service Agenda Item 80 381 Waif) Rini 1A•IIMIN Pue emel uem B+Y zge 5/09 %PZ • %S %0 L %Z %S L %6 %L- %b LO AV SA SO ad'd a6ue40 % %L %L.- %0 %0 %I.- %Z %Z %L %0 901ew SA SO ady aBue40 % %L Z6L4r4 69£'Z SOO'S £9L'L 91.1'9 LLL 98Z'£L £E9'9 LbZ'b g0idy %£ 06b'bb OOb'Z 1796'4 E6L'L 091'9 091 966'n 9LL'9 ££3'4 BOJew %0 SSE'Eb 96E'Z lZB'4 92.9'9 S00'S 6bL 439'Zl 499'9 91.Z'4 SO Rad %L ZZ£'Eb OOE'Z L99'4 ZOO' L £9L'S 1.4L EU ZL 949'9 9LL'4 BO uep %L- 0E9'O1? 00L'Z ZZ9'4 l£S'9 466'b 11£9 9LE'LI. LEtr'9 046'E LO30O %Z SS9'E4 ZEE 1.66'4 b90'L 99Z'S bLL 6S£'ZL £LL'9 6b1.'4 LOAoN %I. LSL'Zb bZ£'Z Z6L'4 9E9'9 ZEZ'S OZ./ 0£E'ZL EL9'9 9L0'4 L0PO %Z ELCZb 46l'Z S4L'4 9L9'9 £9Z'S Z69 Z00'ZL 64L'9 £50'4 LOdes %I.- LSE'Lb ELl`Z bb2.'4 6LS'9 LSO'9 099 17Z9'LI. 4ZS'9 Z40'4 LOBny %£- 099'14 £ZO'Z 99S4 61.5'9 £60'9 999 0/9'1.1. L£L'L 496'E LOInp %L- 6gg'Zb SLl'Z 9LL'b L9L'9 LbL'S OL9 b96'LL 99£'L 901.'b LOunP %L LLb'Eb Bb£'Z ELB'b £999 WE'S 9L9 SOL'ZI. S£E'1 ELZ'4 10AIM %L 6S9'Z9 SL£'Z 16L'b 68b'9 966b 9L9 OLL'ZL £4£'L LLO'b LOidy Se ' ` a R;S ; f ` �y jE .aY03q''r•C I. 3�;t 1 Rf1 _dW 'A.S ' „ rpyy�ylf. 7t: a"I`. `:c l_NW%. SL�, . w.,n...Y _ n iiy kF1 .+M �.�.....:a1i ',-:.. yy k�+$l:fvl .''� Q3 0} _+ ✓�, �4 , T • ;ice " a'•:i , M' ..9L4.. u 6= �f.' . {rryy�_,+, ... a '' a� 4dratk13,.uR....$.vti ' iE'''' E+' xsa. a $ �s7.r_ .: i a�S .r., �: a`ntb�i; ., I11 ri,,?. t P -I' a � F� �� \t d1S_ 1fa�CB3iRR-`.�4.a� t"f ,. T�x^��: ; 7 ,i rd ' '..&#',I. '' fr'4 r 5 °L, L u�p3y'o p':i {yil �M{{, 1t;: 3d'as51224.^'.4� 'Ebl '$ I h . .• �)_ r NnflBmC Y54u�� s fiir �xg Gz i{iFitlir I+ :+ vTuL,.n3 •+ t'" ' - ° t ; �$ ep, F4;,Fyy t.. 'v e :q • • aaisn av AvanOH - MOaN►M H1NOIN N331211H1 Sd1211213JN3SSdd AVC1)133M aovaand wsino2i13W • n''BNOWe1,10 %L6 %56 %96 %96 %OO I. mall egs worin0!eo ewp-uo 991 ul pepnpu! lou ale suleq pei!nuuy woeeu!uuel;o lulod le awg-uo SAM/tow 1! 10 paiap euoe e e sule.e paleu!w.tei sdeiep eigenegai Jo; spew uaeq snag sfuawlsnfpe oN %96 %96 %£6 %96 ri. %Z6 %66 %COL %66 %96 %66 %46 %96 %96 %OOl sup4 Pound need eo KA( ewll pan:4409 Lo seteullp g u14AM pored )lead %96 %96 %16 54L6 %L6 %46 %96 %E6 %96 %Z6 %86 %66 %66 %LS %n96 %£H %E6 %86 %OOl SO)dv %L6 %L6 %96 %66 %66 %Z6 %L6 %Le %l6 %96 %86 %96 %66 %66 %°96 %96 %£6 %96 %96 90 AIN %L6 %L6 %L6 %96 %96 %56 %86 %96 %£6 %96 %56 %66 %00L %Be %96 %Se %LS %COL %66 80Qed %96 :: %56 %96 %LB %b6 %Se %L6 % Le %L6 %96 %96 %86 %96 %86 %96 %LB %96 %46 %L6 80 uef %96 • %96 %96 %OOL %46 1/4E6 %46 %L6 %L6 %96 %Be %66 %Be %96 %96 %68 %E6 %L6 %66 LO090 %96 %56 %56 %96 %96 %Z6 %S6 %96 %96 %86 %96 %86 %OOl %96 . %96 %06 %BS %66 %Le LO noN %46 • %46 %56 %L6 9'096 %E6 %/6 %96 %Z6 %Z6 4.L6 %L6 %96 %96 %96 %£6 %L6 %£6 %96 L0100 %46 %46 %46 %L6 %LS %96 %96 %46 %Z6 %66 %96 %96 %66 %06 %Z6. %96 %Z6 %96 %96 LO des %46 %Z6 9'096 %Be %66 %56 %96 %56 %L6 %C6 %96 %96 %16 %69 %96 %ES %le %46 %66 LO 6nV %96 %96 %96 9'eL6. %96 %£6 %86 %86 %L6 %be %L6 %66 %96 %86 %56 %06 %96 %96 %OOL LO Or %L6 %LB %L6 %66 %86 %96 %96 %96 %56 %46 %86 %001. %DOI. %86 %96 %46 %L6 %B6 %66 LO wir %96 %96 %L6 9696 %86 %£6 %Le %56 %L6 %L6 %86 %L6 %66 %L6 %96 %VS %b6 %L6 %L6 LO Ae4V %96 %96 %1.8 %De %00L %E6 %Z6 %96 %96 %86 %66 %L6 %66 %96 %66 %ES %£6 %Le %66 101dy i n° LI v>t• 11 � F d F : t M frF i,1i4• , �� ,7=:c�.�Wr�`x �;� s r s, "` f �.��►� , `, : �+i �p ems...' f FF 1' 1&0 S !� J'f tx� i. �f � �;r _ : t ..e; xu. L � ,. i:Ml ai �r ,�4�Yy"`L,a:r-.�- F'pptt�� ] ��}}� tlfi FSaMIVG1Y Yl�ci ,.. ,M,.F.ikaPse � ° .� �fiC'. "31 ! :e. v rr, '" ���,:�=�!s Y: 1 2L1.L.�`..�,,,yvn�uv�.R:.ft �'GeHV Rh3° .ASPA•eiallEd}• ' � i � .i:.r1 F f*.:. r,. r l il..n, S��P Y' � {.Q ''�.1S".�'."i tFflfx." ! i. F k, ,,f .. "� n { �l �.i Xir:.>,.�vi• �}y�� in" MH "�M�„L. �Ffr. �Eb f�Vl 4.a� :Hf:F. r a r., 4 wf p • k+ fli Ll' . •Y'I:::e"fC'. ..l.h 3•c r ... r. IN � t: � ✓k� F 1.. e:iiY H. Fl, - ° CI'.�'�` n:' fj . —'ym f�i9ir�[t: xft .. °;":i,icp ""'f'a., i SHINOIN £L 1S31V1 awl l pelnpa4oS to semum S 1.114lIM Buinilly swell;o edewewed 331A213S Avamaam- ANvinoins 33N32113HGV TIM:3HOS NNnoul3W • AGENDA ITEM SP • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 11, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposition 1 B Fiscal Year 2007/08 California Transit Security Grant Program - California Transit Assistance Fund and Supporting Resolution STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 08-016, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Approving the Allocation of Proposition 1B California Transit Security Grant Program - California Transit Assistance Funds (CTSGP-CTAF) Government Code 8879.58(a)(2) - Population Funds," totaling $1,553,822 to the following lead project sponsors: Western Riverside County - • City of Banning $ 14,850 • City of Beaumont $ 9,008 • City of Corona $ 32,376 • City of Riverside $ 29,235 • Riverside Transit Agency $849,938 • RCTC Commuter Rail $263,832 Coachella Valley - • SunLine Transit Agency $330,343 Palo Verde Val ey - • Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency $ 24,240 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006, approved by the voters as Proposition 1 B in November 2006, includes a program of funding in the amount of $1 billion to be deposited in the Transit System Safety, Security, and Disaster Response Account (TSSSDRA). The FY 2007/08 Budget Act includes $100 million for the TSSSDRA. Sixty percent of those funds are being made available for eligible transit system safety and security projects under the CTSGP-CTAF. Agenda Item 8P 384 The CTAF is administered by the Governor's Office of Homeland Security (OHS). Of these funds, fifty percent shall be allocated by the state controller to eligible transit agencies using the formula in Section 99314 of the Public Utilities Code (Operator Allocation), and fifty percent shall be allocated by the state controller to regional transportation agencies the Commission using the formula in Section 99313 of the Public Utilities Code (Population Allocation), subject to the provisions governing funds allocated under those sections. For the current fiscal year, the Commission will receive $1,553,822 in population funds per Section 99313. The Commission is responsible for calculating eligible amounts for each project sponsor under its authority. The following eight transit agencies within Riverside County will receive the following CTAF operator funds totaling $231,221 directly from the state controller per Section 99314: Western Riverside County - • City of Banning $ 1,182 • City of Beaumont $ 717 • City of Corona $ 2,577 • City of Riverside $ 2,327 • Riverside Transit Agency $ 67,652 • RCTC Commuter Rail $ 84,020 Coachella Valley - • SunLine Transit Agency $ 71,808 Palo Verde Valley - • Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency $ 938 These funds are designated to be used for transit capital projects that provide increased protection against a security or safety threat including, but not limited to, the following: • Construction or renovation projects that enhance security of public transit stations or other transit facilities; • Explosive devise mitigation and remediation equipment; • Chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear explosives search, rescue or response equipment; • Interoperable communications equipment; • Physical security enhancement equipment; • Installation of fencing, barriers, etc. to improve security at transit stations or other transit facilities; • Capital expenditures to increase the capacity of transit operators to develop disaster response transportation systems that can move people, equipment, etc. in the aftermath of a disaster; or • Other security related projects approved by the Office of Homeland Security. Agenda Item 8P • 385 • Funds will be allocated directly to the project sponsors upon receipt of approval from the Commission. Project sponsors have three years to complete all eligible projects. Attachment 1 provides the recommended list of transit capital security projects for which population funds will be made available. Included in the attachment is the use of each eligible operator's allocation of operator funds. The OHS is also requiring a resolution from the Commission regarding population funds per Section 99313. Attachment 2 is Resolution No. 08-016 to approve and authorize the project sponsors to apply for the CTSGP-CTAF population funds through the OHS. Financial Impact Since the funds are directly allocated to the project sponsor, the only Commission financial impact is for the allocation of funds to the Commuter Rail/Metrolink Program in R verside County, estimated at $347,852 which is comprised of $263,832 of population funds per Section 99313 and $84,020 of operator funds per Section 99314. These funds have not been included in the FY 2008/09 Commission budget as the ultimate use of the funds has not been finalized. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A N/A Year: FY 2008/09 FY 2009/10+ Amount: $1,205,969 $347,853 Source of Funds: prop 16 CTSGP-CTAF Population Funds Budget Adjustment: N/A N/A GLA No.: N/A 221 33 41509 other state revenue Fiscal Procedures Approved: \44,4f,„t Date: 05/22/2008 Attachments: 1) FY 2007/08 Recommended List of Transit Security Projects 2) Draft Resolution of Approval and Authorization Agenda Item 8P 386 L8£ Lsanbey lenmeveigenenV s revary LuawuoapaddV Rq uoeeoow Buipund AlphoSS'81 doLd' L Lloa11V'MSLV'de %gg' L 1.9£'0£ 46ijieA apieA oled %9Z'1.Z 1,6e91.17 LalleAellegoeop Vogl 'LL 999'105'1. wa;sem % uopelndod east( (9O4/0 !lull yodeasaa oNdegiowaa 'aoueuld;o luawuedap elwo;pep :eodnog uollelndod L9S'09L' L E40'S9L' l 9L L'SZ ell'9Z L5L'ZOb I 191'Z06 6£Z1£5E' 4 9LL'L9£'L bbL'9ZZ LZZ'L£Z 8£6 809A , 909'LL OZO;tiB -- Z59�19 666'£BL' ,4,£L` 9/ £L9'lb ll £E8"£9Z'! L0b'S£6 OZO"49 Z59'L9 LZE'Z LLS'Z LLL Z8 L' L Ilea Jalnwwop s,ploa )(misfit( !!sued aplsienla aplsianla;o l4lp sumo;o Also luowneag;o Lllo 6upueg;o /ylp SLb'94l 9£6'6b9 9EZ'6Z 9L£'Z£ 900'6 099'bl Aou96y llsue.l aplsianla eplsianla;o Lllo euaop;o Allo luowneeg;a )qlo 6uluueg;o Li!o E£9'en LOb'S£6 °A2Z :seoPueg!lea %gL :saovues sng ZZS'E95'14 ZZ8'£SS' 1 04Z'rb OPZ'bZ £4£`0£E £b£'0E£ 0bZ=661' LI 04Z'66l' l (no; palldd (alV) ' (io; papddy lF ie19 e ienV) ;ao; pait :1y ' le1e lenV) (}o; p6ifddV Ie-,(aIQ e enV) lunowV) 1e301 ieloi AiiiiA AelleA leo�i�110A AepeA aPsii,� eplsanla sp7sn oled ;;ePAA oled '2 ejayoeo el101.10e00 uissa wa;saM� SOOZ'9 Aeyy :peggugnS uolleollddy AUinoes esue)1• fit dad Uvio-do 510) Pund aouelsissV glued ulwogle° J we)Bad weAo Awnoeg lisue)180/LOOZ Ad Atunoes puelewoH40 eoy}p SAowenoo 1104E0011t( 6ulpung L dodd 80/LOOZ Ad L1N3WHOV11V 9010Z15 :Pea!ney (VIOZWb 'Aaleap • • • • • ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO.08-016 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION APPROVING THE ALLOCATION OF PROPOSITION 1B FY 2007/08 CALIFORNIA TRANSIT SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM- CALIFORNIA TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUNDS - POPULATION FUNDS WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) is the designated regional transportation planning agency for Riverside County, and is therefore, eligible to receive and allocate funds under Government Code 8879.58(a)(2) based upon population; and WHEREAS, RCTC has been identified as the recipient of Proposition 1B CTSGP-CTAF Population Funds in the amount of $1,553,822; and WHEREAS, RCTC approves the allocation of the Population Funds to eight local transit agencies for the purpose of enhancing safety and security on public transit systems throughout Riverside County; NOW, THEREFORE IT BE RESOLVED, that the Board of Directors of the Riverside County Transportation Commission hereby finds that: RCTC approves the allocation of $1,553,822 in Proposition 1B CTSGP-CTAF Population Funds to the following entities and following amounts: Western Riverside County - • City of Banning $ 14,850 • City of Beaumont $ 9,008 • City of Corona $ 32,376 • City of Riverside $ 29,235 • Riverside Transit Agency $849,938 • RCTC Commuter Rail $263,832 Coachella Valley - • SunLine Transit Agency $330,343 Palo Verde Valley - • Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency $ 24,240 388 APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Riverside County Transportation Commission at its meeting on June 11, 2008. Jeff Stone, Chair Riverside. County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 389 AGENDA ITEM 8Q • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 11, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Transit Policy Committee Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Council Fina Clemente, Staff Analyst John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Years 2008/09 - 2010/11 Short Range Transit Plans TRANSIT POLICY COMMITTEE, CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE/SOCIAL SERVICES TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COUNCIL, AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to review and approve, in concept, the FY 2008/09 - FY 2010/11 Short Range Transit Plans (SRTP) for the cities of Banning, Corona, Riverside, Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency (PVVTA), Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine), and the Commission's Regional Commuter Rail Program, as presented. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Riverside County FY 2008/09 - FY 2010/11 Short Range Transit Plans (SRTP) cover the three apportionment areas of the county and are comprised of plans for the municipal operators, the PVVTA, the RTA, SunLine, and the Commission's Regional Commuter Rail Program. Staff is requesting that the SRTPs be approved in concept on y, as requests for financial allocations will be made at the July Commission meeting and the Productivity Improvement Plan (PIP) calculations are not complete. The Commission oversees transit service in Riverside County primarily through the approval of SRTPs, which detail the operating and capital costs that are planned for transit services. The SRTPs provide detailed information about existing services and facilities, financial forecasts and plans, as well as planned and proposed improvements to be implemented in FY 2008/09. Each operator adopts such a plan and then provides data to the Commission on performance. The SRTPs were developed to meet the Commission's PIP, which was adopted as part of a comprehensive effort to work with the county's eight public transit Agenda Item 8Q 390 operators to provide better service and improve efficiency. Under state law, the Commission is tasked with the responsibility to identify, analyze, and recommend potential productivity improvements for transit operators. The process requires the transit operators to address recommendations that are made by regular performance audits. The performance indicators that are evaluated through the PIP include operating costs per revenue hour, fare box recovery ratio, subsidies, passengers per revenue hour, and passengers per revenue mile, which are critical in ensuring that service can be maximized in an efficient manner. While reviewing and analyzing individual route productivity will remain with the transit operators and their governing boards, the Commission has a fiduciary responsibility to ensure that transit operators are utilizing Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds efficiently and effectively. The Commission implemented TransTrack, a transit performance manager software application and training package which assists staff in compiling, tabulating, and reporting transit operating information for use in the SRTP preparation. TransTrack software assists the Commission's policy board in complying with the PIP requirements of the Public Utilities Code (PUC) and state -mandated requirements to effectively use TDA funds. PIP calculations will be analyzed and reported with the requests for financial allocations. A summary of each operator's proposed plan is provided below: City of Banning The city of Banning (Banning) works closely with the city of Beaumont (Beaumont) to provide a seamless transit system serving the residents of Banning, Beaumont, the unincorporated areas of Cabazon and Cherry Valley as well as the commercial area of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians Reservation. Banning Transit provides both dial -a -ride and fixed route services. Highlights of planned services for FY 2008/09 include the following: • No changes in service or service hours will occur in FY 2008/09 but minor schedule changes will be made to improve frequency, eliminate duplication and improve service coverage; • Banning Transit will focus on improved capital assets needed for transit operations and will close out all outstanding capital projects from prior fiscal years; • Develop a comprehensive marketing program to promote ridership growth; • New Transit Operations Procedure Manual will be developed and a detailed bus stop inventory on all Pass Transit routes operating in Banning and Cabazon will be conducted; Agenda Item 8Q 391 • • • • Staff will evaluate potential fare changes for FY 2008/09 to ensure 10% farebox ratio compliance; and • Banning will continue coordination with Beaumont to study the feasibility of a single transit agency. City of Corona. The city of Corona (Corona) operates a general public dial -a -ride program and operates two fixed routes known as the "Corona Cruiser." Corona closely coordinates al transfers with both RTA and the Commission's Commuter Rail services. Highlights of p anned services for FY 2008/09 include the following: • Corona will continue its transition outreach training program to increase public awareness of the convenience of the fixed route bus system as compared to DAR service; • Tie existing Automatic Vehicle Locator (AVL)/Mobile Data Terminal (MDT) transit technology into the city's Traffic Management Center(TMC) for real- time tracking of buses on -screen with the ability to monitor traffic; • The city plans to promote the "Gateway Pass" using an innovative payment method similar to smart card technology; • Implement prioritized marketing strategies to attract new riders; and • Possible re -alignment of Corona Cruiser routes to better serve the needs of current users. City of Riverside — Special Services Riverside Special Services (RSS) operates a 24-hour advance reservation dial -a -ride for seniors and persons with disabilities within the Riverside city limits. The special services program functions as an alternative to RTA's fixed route system for seniors and persons with disabilities unable to use fixed route service. All services operated by RSS are closely coordinated with RTA. Highlights of planned services for FY 2008/09 include the following: • RSS plans to market the Special Transit Program through new advertising mediums including television. Tickets and punch cards will be sold online by the end of FY 2008/09; • During the year, eight new dial -a -ride vehicles will be received as part of the bus replacement program; • RSS will install mobile data computers (MDC) in all its vehicles to allow data collection in real time; and Agenda Item 8Q 392 • RSS plans to expand service solely to transport dialysis patients pending application for Section 5310 vehicles. Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency PVVTA provides a multitude of services including fixed route, dial -a -ride, and a transportation reimbursement program for individuals who cannot ride the public bus system. The fixed route can deviate up to % of a mile away from the actual' fixed route. Service is provided within the city of Blythe (Blythe) and surrounding unincorporated county areas in the Palo Verde Valley. Highlights of planned services for FY 2008/09 include the following: • Transit service continues to be provided by contract with Transportation Concepts; • Proposing fare increase on both dial -a -ride and fixed route in FY 2008/09; • A new fixed route known as Green Route 4 Ripley Rider will be implemented; • PVVTA will start construction of its new Transit Facility; • Passenger amenities (benches, shelters, trash receptacles) will continue to be installed at strategic locations; • Agency will actively continue to pursue additional funding for a Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) fueling station, in partnership with. Blythe and county of Riverside; and • With the construction of a CNG fueling station, the agency will start to purchase CNG vehicles. Riverside Transit Agency RTA is the Consolidated Transportation Service Agency for Western Riverside County and is responsible for coordinating transit services throughout the approximately 2,500 square mile service area, providing driver training and assistance with grant applications. RTA provides local, intercity and regional transportation services. Highlights of planned services for FY 2008/09 include the following: • RTA projects a ridership increase of over 3% in FY 2008/09, particularly in the areas of express routes; • Route changes in FY 2008/09 will be modest with the exception of the addition of a new Harveston trolley service; • Operating budget reflects an 11.4% increase (excluding the GASB pre -fund); and • Capital budget of $7,725,784 has been identified. Agenda Item 80 393 • SunLine Transit Agency SunLine is the Consolidated Transportation Service Agency and is responsible for coordinating transit services in the Coachella Valley. SunLine's service area consists of approximately 1,120 square miles and provides both local and regional transportation services with 12 fixed routes and demand response dial -a -ride services known as SunDial. Highlights of planned services for FY 2008/09 include the following: • Service improvements vvill be implemented as a result of the agency's completed comprehensive operational analysis; • Acquire 13 replacements and expansion vehicles and 10 support vehicles; • Continue installing more transit amenities throughout the service area and continue working with local jurisdictions on bus stop issues; • Evaluate feasibility of rehabilitating facility at Indio; • Continue work on environmental assessment, preliminary and final engineering for new administrative building; and • Examine the feasibility of conducting a site selection study to select potential locations throughout the valley for a transit center, transfer locations and sites for park -and -ride lots. Regional Commuter Rail The Southern California Regional Rail Authority operates seven commuter rail lines with 39 locomotives and 155 commuter rail cars. Three routes, the Riverside to Los Angeles Line, the Inland Empire to Orange County (IEOC) Line, and the Riverside to Los Angeles via Fullerton Line (91 Line) directly serve Western Riverside County with connecting service available to destinations on the other four lines. Highlights of planned services for FY 2008/09 include the following: • Implementation of the revised fare structure with an average 5.5% fare increase in FY 2008/09; • Preliminary engineering and final design of the Perris Valley Line (Riverside — Moreno Valley — Perris) Metrolink extension project; • Facilities to accommodate new equipment and expansion of service; • A 3% increase in the Commission's operating subsidy due to an updated cost allocation formula that more evenly distributes the costs among member agencies; • Improved FY 2008/09 operating revenue hours forecast to more accurately account for previously added services and adjust for potential train delays. Agenda Item 80 394 City of Beaumont Due to staffing changes at Beaumont, the SRTP has not been submitted. Upon submittal by Beaumont, staff will review and provide a recommendation to the Commission. Attachments: Short Range Transit Plans Posted on Commission Website 1) City of Banning 2) City of Corona 3) City of Riverside 4) Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency 5) Riverside Transit Agency 6) SunLine Transit Agency 7) Commuter Rail Program Agenda Item 8Q 395 CITY OF CORONA Short Range Transit Plan Fiscal Years 2008/09—2010/11 Page 1 of 41 City of Corona Short Range Transit Plan for FY 2008/09-2010/11 May 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………2 2. Service Characteristics......................................................................................5 Service Information: Corona Dial-A-Ride Service Information: Fixed Route 'Corona Cruiser' 3. Rider Characteristics........................................................................................ 9 4. Passenger Amenities.......................................................................................11 5. Service Related Issues.................................................................................... 12 6. Regional Services and Adjacent Transit Systems........................................... 16 7. Public Participation.......................................................................................... 17 8. Key Performance Indicators............................................................................ 17 9. New Service Implementation and Evaluation.................................................. 17 10. Regulatory and Compliance Requirements................................................... 18 Exhibit A: Dial-A-Ride Service Area Map.............................................................20 Exhibit B: Corona Cruiser (Bus) Service Area Map............................................. 21 Table 1: Fleet Inventory....................................................................................... 22 Table 2: SRTP Service Summary…………………………………………………… 23 Table 2(a): Corona DAR SRTP Service Summary…..........................................24 Table 2(b): Corona Bus SRTP Service Summary……………………………….…25 Table 3: SRTP Route Statistics........................................................................... 26 Table 3A: Individual Route Descriptions……………………………………………. 27 Table 4: Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2008/09..................................... 28 Table 4A: Capital Project Justification for FY 2008/09........................................ 29 Table 5: Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2009/10 & FY 2010/11.............. 32 Table 5A: Capital Project Justification for FY 2008/09........................................ 33 Table 6: Progress to Implement Triennial Performance Audit............................. 38 Table 7: Service Provider Performance Targets FY 2007/08.............................. 39 Table 8: SRTP Performance Report……………………....................................... 40 Table 9: Highlights……………………………........................................................41 Page 2 of 41 City of Corona Short Range Transit Plan for FY 2008/09-2010/11 May 2008 1. INTRODUCTION The Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) sets the objectives and strategies for FY 2008/09 for the City of Corona Transportation Division, by evaluating current transit system performance, projected demographic changes, capital and operating funding needs, anticipated funding from federal, state and local sources, and other factors to create a reasonable projection of conditions over the next three years (FY 2008/09 - 2010/11). Population Served The U.S. Census Bureau 2006 population estimate indicates that from 2000 to 2006, Corona added 25,287 people reaching a population of 150,253. The area within the City boundary measures 39.2 square miles. Corona, like most Southern California cities, is an ethnically diverse community. According to the 2007 Riverside County Progress Report, Corona’s ethnic make up consists of Caucasian (47.0%), Hispanic (35.7%), African American (6.2%), Asian (7.7%), and All Other Races (3.5%). According to the 2006 American Community Survey, the City’s median household income of $72,162 was well above the $53,508 for Riverside County. Corona’s residential home market has reflected a median pricing drop for new homes at $585,000 as of March 2007 per the 2007 Riverside County Progress Report. The City’s demographic characteristics are indicators of the potential demand for transit services in future years. The City’s changing demographics will be incorporated into transit-related strategies developed for the City’s transit system. System Overview The City of Corona operates a general public demand responsive Dial-A-Ride (DAR) service designed to provide curb-to-curb transportation for area residents and a fixed route system called the ‘Corona Cruiser.’ Both services have been operated by a private contractor since their inception. The City has operated the DAR service since April 1977. The DAR service area includes City of Corona and the adjacent unincorporated Riverside County areas of Home Gardens, El Cerrito, and Coronita, as well as popular satellite destination points in the City of Norco (Exhibit A). Corona Cruiser fixed route service began on February 5, 2001. The service operates along two routes, Blue Line and Red Line within City limits (Exhibit B). The Corona Cruiser can take passengers to or near many of the City’s popular destinations. Page 3 of 41 City of Corona Short Range Transit Plan for FY 2008/09-2010/11 May 2008 Fares The City’s transit system will not be raising fares in FY 2008/09; however, the system will continue to monitor its neighboring system, the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), as to whether they implement a fare increase over the next few years as a result of their fare study in 2008. Corona’s general practice is that fares are in line with RTA for cohesiveness. Fares for FY 2008/09: DIAL-A-RIDE CORONA CRUISER (PARATRANSIT) (FIXED ROUTE) FARE TYPE Per Ride Per Ride (up to One Loop) Day Pass 31 Day Pass General $3.00 $1.25 $3.75 $43.00 Students $1.50 $1.25 $3.75 $32.00 Seniors (60+) $1.50 $0.60 $1.85 $21.00 Persons with Disabilities $1.50 $0.60 $1.85 $21.00 Medicare Card Holders $1.50 $0.60 $1.85 $21.00 Children (46" tall or under) $0.50 $0.25 N/A N/A Buddy Fare (offer for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities on Dial-A- Ride) ½ off fare N/A N/A N/A Note: Current Fare Structure implemented on July 18, 2005 Metrolink passengers ride free on Corona Cruiser and Corona DAR with proof of a valid Metrolink ticket or pass. Per a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the City, Metrolink reimburses the City for trips to and from Metrolink stations. Fleet Characteristics The City’s transit system operates a total of fourteen vehicles for both the DAR and fixed route. All vehicles are fueled at the City’s CNG and Gasoline fueling station. Table 1 describes the fleet inventory. Additionally, all vehicles are ADA compliant with wheelchair lifts and tie-down stations. The DAR service consists of nine vehicles. The fleet is a combination of five Goshen and four El Dorado National, Ford model, Type II gasoline powered buses. In April 2007, two new DAR transit vehicles replaced buses that had reached the end of their service life. Three Goshen vehicles have already been approved for replacement funding through Proposition 1B funding (PTMISEA) to be received in FY 2007/08. It is anticipated that two more Goshen vehicles will meet its 150,000 mile useful life during FY 2008/09, with the remaining two El Page 4 of 41 City of Corona Short Range Transit Plan for FY 2008/09-2010/11 May 2008 Dorado National vehicles meeting the threshold in FY 2009/10. Moreover, the procurement process to replace these vehicles is planned to be completed during FY 2008/09 and FY 2009/10, respectively. Each of the DAR replacement vehicles will feature a new painting scheme to commemorate 30 years of DAR service. The City also operates five fixed route Corona Cruiser vehicles that were placed into service April 2007. All fixed route buses are CNG powered El Dorado National Chevy model Type VII buses. The City’s transit services program procured larger and more comfortable buses for fixed route service to better serve the needs of its transit patrons. Fixed route transit vehicles are also equipped with bicycle racks. Facilities Corona’s transit system is centralized at a new facility located at 735 Corporation Yard Way, Corona, CA 92880. The City’s contractor operates at this facility with Administrative and Dispatching offices adjacent to where the vehicles are stored and fueled. The facility also provides the general public access to purchase clean fuels with a CNG fueling station located at the front of the City’s Corporation Yard complex. This facility became fully operational on September 2, 2003. Page 5 of 41 City of Corona Short Range Transit Plan for FY 2008/09-2010/11 May 2008 2. SERVICE CHARACTERISTICS System-Wide Current Level of Service: System-wide ridership in FY 2006/07 was 208,392. During the first nine months of FY 2007/08, the City’s transit system experienced an increase of 9.6% in ridership compared to the same period in FY 2006/07. For FY 2007/08, projected year-end ridership is expected to be 225,000, representing an 8.0% overall increase in ridership. The increase in ridership reflects improvements in operations that have taken place during FY 2007/08 such as more focused management effort from our contractor and additional outreach which has brought new riders and returning riders since the last fare increase. Planned ridership for FY 2008/09 is 232,873 reflecting a 3.5% overall increase from projected ridership for the current fiscal year. This increase is due to schedule improvements to accommodate Metrolink passengers, improved marketing, improved communications at bus stops and improved customer service. A. SERVICE INFORMATION – Corona Dial-A-Ride (Demand Response) DAR provides service to the general public, seniors, persons with disabilities and individuals certified for complementary paratransit service under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Passengers are requested to call from one to fourteen days in advance; however, same day service may be accommodated if space is available. DAR operates within the unincorporated Riverside County areas of Home Gardens, Coronita and El Cerrito. Service is also provided to selected satellite points in the City of Norco: Department of Motor Vehicles, the Department of Public and Social Services, Riverside Community College – Norco Campus, Target store, and the California Rehabilitation Center. DAR service also conveniently offers Metrolink connections, drop-off or pick-up at popular connecting RTA route bus stops and Park and Ride lots in Corona. For individuals certified for ADA complementary service, service hours are expanded to match fixed route hours. ADA complementary service also provides priority service for reservations made in advance (1 to 14 days). Trips are scheduled within 1 hour of requested time. Voicemail message reservations are accepted for ADA clients on Sundays and Holidays for next day service. At a minimum, the ADA service area includes all origins and destinations in the City of Corona within a ¾-mile on each side of fixed route. Page 6 of 41 City of Corona Short Range Transit Plan for FY 2008/09-2010/11 May 2008 Service hours for the Corona Dial-A-Ride are: General Public ADA Complementary Monday - Friday 6:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m. 4:30 a.m. – 9:15 p.m. Saturday 8:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. 7:30 a.m. – 7:30 p.m. Sunday N/A N/A Corona Dial-A-Ride service does not operate on the following holidays: January 1, Memorial Day, July 4, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day. In FY 2006/07, DAR ridership was 57,577. For FY 2007/08, ridership is projected at 64,053 which represents an increase of 11.2% in ridership from the prior fiscal year. Ridership for FY 2008/09 is planned at 66,615 which represents an 4.0% increase in ridership from current fiscal year due to better utilization of AVL and dispatch. The general public DAR service is required to meet a minimum 20.0% farebox recovery ratio. The City of Corona makes up the farebox recovery deficiency by augmenting fare revenue with the City’s local funds. B. SERVICE INFORMATION - Fixed Route ‘Corona Cruiser’ The Corona Cruiser Blue Line serves the McKinley Street retail area then travels on to Magnolia Avenue and Main Street to the River Road area. This route passes by many trip generators such as hospitals, medical facilities, public service agencies, library, Civic Center, and commercial/retail areas. This route also serves the unincorporated area of Home Gardens. The Corona Cruiser Red Line connects the densely populated residential areas of West Corona with commercial areas along Sixth Street and the Ontario Avenue/California Avenue retail area. The Red Line also covers South Corona along Ontario Avenue/Temescal Canyon Road to serve the county area of El Cerrito and “The Crossings” shopping complex at Cajalco Road/Temescal Canyon Road. To increase ridership, a possible route change or realignment of the Red Line with an extension or branch service to the Promenade Shops at Dos Lagos may be contemplated. Other options under consideration are branch service or route realignment to or near businesses and large manufacturing facilities built in the northwest and northeast area of Corona in recent years. Service could be extended to these areas if demand warranted. Bus deviation of up to one-half mile is available on the Corona Cruiser with two hours advance notice. Page 7 of 41 City of Corona Short Range Transit Plan for FY 2008/09-2010/11 May 2008 Corona Cruiser Fixed Route Service Hours: Blue Line Red Line Monday - Friday 4:49 a.m. – 8:21 p.m. 5:04 a.m. – 9:00 p.m. Saturday 7:50 a.m. – 7:09 p.m. 8:07 a.m. – 7:05 p.m. Sunday N/A N/A Frequency Every Hour Every 54 minutes Corona Cruiser service does not operate on the following holidays: January 1, Memorial Day, July 4, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. In FY 2006/07, the Corona Cruiser provided 150,815 passenger trips. Based on ridership for the first nine months, fixed route ridership is projected to increase by 6.7% for a total of 160,947 passenger trips for FY 2007/08. Ridership is projected to increase by 3.3% to 166,258 in FY 2008/09. Fixed route service is required to meet a minimum 20.0% farebox recovery ratio. Since inception of fixed route service in February 2001, route changes implemented in 2002 through 2004 have extended Corona Cruiser’s exemption from the minimum required 20.0% farebox recovery ratio. The fixed route exemption expired on June 30, 2006. The City of Corona is committed to make up any current or future farebox recovery deficiency for fixed route service by using the City’s local funds. A comprehensive operational analysis (COA) in FY 2008/09 will review current routes and recommend route and/or operational changes. As changes are implemented, a determination will be made whether to take the exemption or include the route according to recently modified RCTC farebox policy. Page 8 of 41 City of Corona Short Range Transit Plan for FY 2008/09-2010/11 May 2008 System-wide Improvements During FY 2005/06, the City’s Transit Services implemented new transit technologies that included a scheduling/dispatching application and installation of Automatic Vehicle Locator/Mobile Data Terminals (AVL/MDT) system in all its14 transit vehicles. An on-board digital video surveillance system was also installed on all vehicles. The surveillance system also has voice recording capabilities. The vision of the City is to implement the best available technologies to achieve the following goals: • Enhance customer satisfaction; • Increase overall safety and security; • Enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of transit services; and • Better manage the system’s on-time performance. Automatic Vehicle Locator (AVL) Mobile Data Terminal Dispatch Software Page 9 of 41 City of Corona Short Range Transit Plan for FY 2008/09-2010/11 May 2008 3. RIDER CHARACTERISTICS Rider Characteristics by Fare Type The following table lists the rider characteristic information derived from the types of fare collected for FY 2006/07 for both the DAR and fixed route service: The ridership characteristics tabulated above illustrate that nearly 75% of the DAR riders are persons with disabilities and ADA certified and less than 9.0% are seniors without disabilities. Almost 10.0% of DAR passengers use the service to link to Metrolink. Approximately 44.0% of the fixed route riders purchase the general fare type at full fare. Nearly 22.0% of fixed route passengers are seniors (age 60+) and less than 3.0% of fixed route riders are persons with disabilities and/or ADA certified. Major Destinations Major trip destinations within the City of Corona include: commercial/retail areas along McKinley Street and Sixth Street; medical facilities along Magnolia Avenue; regional transit facilities near Main Street; retail services along Main Street; Public Library; local government offices; and shopping complexes located at Cajalco Road/Temescal Canyon Road and Dos Lagos/Temescal Canyon Road. Trip Purpose Many fixed route riders use the service for multiple shopping stops, making stops at pharmacies and grocery stores. Some use the service to get to or near their place of employment. Many Dial-A-Ride riders use the service to visit their doctors for regular office visits or for shopping. Others use DAR service to go directly to the North Main Metrolink station. A detailed COA will provide the City’s transit services with better insight on trip purpose. DIAL-A-RIDE FARE TYPE FIXED ROUTE FARE TYPE General 6.2% General 43.5% Disabled 2.4% Student 4.8% ADA 6.4% Senior 19.1% Senior 6.7% ADA 1.9% Child 1.0% Wheelchair 0.8% Buddy Fare (General) 1.5% Child 8.3% Buddy Fare (SR, ADA, DIS) 4.7% Metrolink Pass 3.0% Attendant (Free) 2.7% Cruiser Day Pass (General) 3.7% Metrolink Pass 9.3% Cruiser Day Pass (Senior) 1.9% Regular Ticket 0.2% RTA Month Pass 4.6% Senior Ticket 2.1% RTA Day Pass 2.1% Disabled Ticket 31.4% Cruiser Day Sold (General) 0.5% ADA Ticket 25.5% Cruiser Day Sold (Senior) 1.0% Cruiser 31 Day Pass 4.9% Page 10 of 41 City of Corona Short Range Transit Plan for FY 2008/09-2010/11 May 2008 On-Board Transit Survey Results from an on-board transit survey conducted in April 2007 indicated that the typical Corona Cruiser rider is a Hispanic female with a household income of under $20,000. Ninety-eight percent of riders surveyed rank the Corona Cruiser as “Good to Excellent.” Thirty-six percent of total riders surveyed rate the Corona Cruiser as “Excellent.” Transit survey results were as follows: 18% 11% 57% 10% 2%2% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% White Black Hispanic Asian Native American Other Rider Ethnicity 56% 21% 13% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Under $20,000 $20,000 to $44,999 $35,000 to $49,000 $50,000 or more Rider Household Income Type of Fare Payment 31 Day Pass, 12%Cash, 52% Metrolink Ticket, 3% RTA Day Pass, 3% S/D Day Pass, 11% Regular Day Pass, 16% RTA Monthly Pass, 4% Gender Breakdown of Typical Rider Femal e 64% Male 36% Overall Satisfaction Rating 0% 2% 0% 0% 5% 9% 11% 22% 16% 36% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 1 Poor 2 3 4 5 Good 6 7 8 9 10 Excellent Page 11 of 41 City of Corona Short Range Transit Plan for FY 2008/09-2010/11 May 2008 4. PASSENGER AMENITIES Fixed Route Bus Stops Improvements to the 181 bus stops in Corona will continue in FY 2008/09. The goal is to have a bench at each of the stops where feasible by June 2009. Bus stops that need a concrete pad to be ADA compliant will be addressed. All of the existing bus stops that can be brought to compliance will be completed by end of June 2009. Kiosks that display the Cruiser’s route map and schedule located at all Corona Cruiser bus stops will be updated at a minimum of every six (6) months or sooner if necessary or when major changes are made. Currently, there are 33 bus shelters citywide. Twenty-three of these shelters are Corona Cruiser bus stops and the remaining 10 are located at RTA bus stops in the City, some of which are shared. Shelters will be added at various locations throughout Corona. The goal is to increase the number of bus shelters to 45 citywide or 25.0% of the total number of bus stops by end of FY 2008/09. Continued placement of various shelters will be done as funding allows over the next three years as well as maintenance to existing shelters such as painting or removal and replacement. FY 2007/08 improvements to the bus stops included: 10 benches, route directional decals, 30 trash cans, new or replacement signage, poles, and concrete pads. The directional route decals signify how the bus travels and the route line at that particular stop. These decals will increase passenger awareness and provide a better understanding of how to ride the bus. Recent improvements are shown below: New directional route decals Bus stop along Magnolia Avenue for westbound (WB) travel on Red Line shown with newly added bench New trash cans at various bus stops route as shown above Page 12 of 41 City of Corona Short Range Transit Plan for FY 2008/09-2010/11 May 2008 5. SERVICE RELATED ISSUES Fixed Route ‘Corona Cruiser’ On-Time Performance In the past, the most frequently cited service-related issue identified by Corona Cruiser riders was on-time performance. On-time performance in FY 2006/07 was 99.0% and for the first eight months of FY 2007/08, on-time has been maintained at or above 98.9%. Corona Dial-A-Ride Dispatching/Scheduling Application In an effort to improve DAR operations, reservations, and maximize the efficiency of available resources, the City procured a new dispatching and scheduling software application developed by RouteMatch Software, Inc. This application was fully implemented in June 2006. The City transit team is committed to monitoring performance monthly in FY 2008/09 to confirm the software is being fully utilized and the hardware is performing effectively. Additional training on how to use the software will be offered to dispatchers and drivers on a continuous basis. Corona Dial-A-Ride – Transition Training Program A transition training program will continue in FY 2008/09 to increase public awareness of the convenience of the fixed route bus system in comparison to DAR service. Staff and/or contractor will conduct ongoing outreach campaigns throughout the year at community events, busy shopping centers, Metrolink stations, etc. to promote the fixed route system. Currently, DAR patrons are routinely encouraged to take advantage of the fixed route system by promoting its benefits of reliability, no required advance reservations, and that it is an affordable alternative at half of the cost of using DAR. Systemwide Automatic Vehicle Locator (AVL)/Mobile Data Terminal (MDT) New transit technologies were fully deployed in June 2006. The AVL/MDT equipment was installed in all 14 transit vehicles. As part of the AVL/MDC implementation program, an interface was developed to make real time wireless communication between the vehicles and the new dispatching and scheduling software possible. Page 13 of 41 City of Corona Short Range Transit Plan for FY 2008/09-2010/11 May 2008 The operational and user-related benefits associated with deployment of enhanced transit technologies has resulted in system improvements in the following areas: • Dispatching and scheduling capabilities; • Adherence to schedule – improved system-wide on-time performance; • Accurate, up-to-date in-vehicle information; • Efficient use of available resources – potential to increase vehicle productivity by facilitating more trip combinations which will result in reduced waiting time; and • Customer communications. Staff will continue to monitor and utilize the added technologies effectively, as well as keep current on improved technologies or software updates for improved system performance. Additional training in FY 2008/09 on how to use the equipment will be offered to dispatchers and drivers on an ongoing basis to ensure proficient use of this equipment among contractor staff. The FY 2008/09 goal is to tie-in existing technology into the City’s Traffic Management Center (TMC) for real-time tracking of buses on-screen with the ability to monitor traffic. Digital Onboard Video Surveillance/Recording System Onboard Video Surveillance/Recording System equipment was installed in all 14 transit vehicles and completed by June 2006. This allows increased security and peace of mind for passengers. Farebox Recovery The Ci