Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout09 September 10, 2008 Commission85143 RECORDS RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA TIME: 9:30 a.m. DATE: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 LOCATION: PALM SPRINGS CONVENTION CENTER Primrose A 277 N. Avenida Caballeros, Palm Springs, CA Commissioners Chair: Jeff Stone 1$` Vice Chair: Bob Magee rd 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 Semen, 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 Scott Farnam / Bridgette Moore, City of Wildomar 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, September 10, 2008 Palm Springs Convention Center Primrose A 277 N. Avenida Caballeros, Palm Springs, CA In compliance with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials distributed 72 hours prior to the meeting, which are public records relating to open session agenda items, will be available for inspection by members of the public prior to the meeting at the Commission office, 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor, Riverside, CA, and on the Commission's website, www.rctc.org. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section 54954.2, if special assistance is needed to participate in a Commission meeting, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to meeting time will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility at the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS  Each individual speaker is limited to speak 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 September 10, 2008 Page 2 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 9, 2008 6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS - The Commission may add an item to the Agenda after making a finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and that the item came to the attention of the Commission subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the 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. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR - Al/ matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 7A. NEW FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 1 1) Receive and file information on Tyler Technologies' EDEN Financial Management solution; 2) Authorize staff to commence contract negotiations with Tyler Technologies to implement a new financial management software package; and 3) Approve an estimated budget adjustment to increase FY 2008/09 expenditures for $550,000. 7B. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 15 1) Receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the fourth quarter ended June 30, 2008; and 2) Approve a budget adjustment for the increase in Measure A local streets and roads expenditures of $6.729 million. • " " Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda September 10, 2008 Page 3 7C. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT Overview Page 22 This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended June 30, 2008. 7D. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT Page 35 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Single Signature Authority Report for the fourth quarter ended June 30, 2008. 7E. INTERFUND LOAN ACTIVITY REPORT Page 37 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Interfund Loan Activity Report. 7F. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS Page 39 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 1, 2008. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda September 10, 2008 Page 4 7G. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH KLEINFELDER TO PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL FIELD EXPLORATION, TESTING SERVICES, AND TECHNICAL EVALUATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED IRVINE TO CORONA EXPRESSWAY PROJECT Page 48 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 07-65-105-04, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 07-65-105-00, with Kleinfelder to provide geotechnical field exploration, testing services, and technical evaluations for the proposed Irvine to Corona Expressway project based on the negotiated project scope, schedule, and cost for a not to exceed amount of $743,652; 2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute amendments for non -cardinal changes to the scope of work up to a maximum of $250,000 for unforeseen optional tasks bringing this total request to $993,652; 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 4) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work of optional tasks as may be required for the project. 7H. TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE PROGRAM - MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AMENDMENT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 58 1) Approve Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. 04-72-002-01, Amendment No. 1 to MOU No. M23-002, between the Commission and Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) regarding the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF); 2) Authorize the Executive Director to execute the amendment on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Approve the TUMF Administrative Plan amendment. • • " " " Riverside County Transportation Commission. Agenda September 10, 2008 Page 5 71. MEASURE A REGIONAL ARTERIAL PROGRAM UPDATE Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update on the Measure A Regional Arterial (MARA) program. Page 89 7J. COMMUTER RAIL STATION REHABILITATION AND SECURITY PLAN CONTRACTS Page 91 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-24-050-07, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 08-24-050-00, with Tropical Plaza Nursery, Inc. to provide landscape maintenance services related to the rehabilitation plan in the amount of $200,000; 2) Approve Agreement No. 08-24-049-09, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 08-24-049-00, with Process Communication Developers Inc. to provide on -call general maintenance services related to the rehabilitation and security projects in the amount of $300,000; 3) Approve Agreement No. 04-25-962-05, Amendment No. 5 to Agreement No. 04-25-962-00, with Inland Vault and Security to provide maintenance and expansion of the closed circuit security system at the stations for the security project in the amount of $150,000; and 4) Approve Agreement No. 09-33-014-00 with Burlington Northern Santa Fe to provide for right-of-way related maintenance and support activities related to the rehabilitation and security projects in the amount of $150,000. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda September 10, 2008 Page 6 7K. AGREEMENT WITH BURLINGTON NORTHERN SANTA TO. PROVIDE RAILWAY FLAGGING SERVICES FOR VALLEY LINE PROJECT DURING PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING Overview This item is for the Commission to: FE RAILWAY THE PERRIS AND FINAL Page 94 1) Approve Agreement No. 09-33-013-00 with Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway to provide railway flagging services for the Perris Valley Line (PVL) project during environmental, preliminary engineering, and potential final engineering design, in the amount not to exceed of $150,000; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to approve amendments for potential additional work to the BNSF agreement from a general contingency fund in the amount of $40,000. 7L. AGREEMENT WITH AMMA • FOR THE PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL TRANSIT SUPPORT SERVICES Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 96 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-26-115-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 08-26-115-00, with AMMA to provide technical support services for an additional $100,000 related to the delivery of the Coordinated Plan, Universal Call for Projects, and the provision of general transit analysis services; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Approve a budget amendment of $100,000 for an increase in professional service expenditures. " Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda September 10, 2008 Page 7 7M. FISCAL YEAR 2009-13 MEASURE A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FOR THE CITIES OF CANYON LAKE AND NORCO Page 104 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 for the cities of Canyon Lake and Norco as submitted. 7N. CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED RAIL BALLOT PROPOSITION AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON RIVERSIDE COUNTY Page 114 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive a status report on Proposition 1  the Safe, Reliable High -Speed Passenger Train Bond Act for the 21 S` Century. 70. TRADE CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT FUND  WORKING GROUP Page 125 Overview This item is for the Commission to allocate $8,125 to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) to secure the services of Green Tech Coast, LLC in support of the Trade Corridor Improvement Fund (TCIF) projects. 7P. INLAND EMPIRE GOODS MOVEMENT INITIATIVES Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 130 1) Approve Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. 09-67-012-00 with the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for work related to advancing goods movement through the. Inland Empire; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda September 10, 2008 Page 8 7Q. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 133 1) Receive and file an update on the State and Federal Legislation; and 2) Adopt the following bill positions: a) H.R. 6052 (Oberstar) / S. 3380 (Clinton) - MONITOR; b) H.R. 6532 (Rangel) - MONITOR; and c) H.R. 6003 / S. 294 (Lautenberg) - MONITOR. 8. UNIVERSAL CALL FOR PROJECTS JOBS ACCESS REVERSE COMMUTE AND NEW FREEDOM CALL FOR PROJECTS GRANTS Page 140 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 09-62-018-00 to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) for the Homeless Work Trip Voucher program in the amount of $76,932 in Jobs Access Reverse Commute (JARC) grant funds; 2) Award Agreement. No. 09-62-019-00 to Desert Samaritans for the Elderly for the Last Resort transportation program in the amount of $31,807 in New Freedom grant funds; 3) Award the Commission $24,502 in JARC grant funds for the Coachella Valley Rideshare program; 4) Award Agreement No. 09-62-015-00 to SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine) for the Coachella TRIP program in the amount of $143,133 in New Freedom grant funds; 5) Award Agreement No. 09-62-016-00 to SunLine for the Extended Night/Guaranteed Service program in the amount of $245,020 in JARC grant funds; 6) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute agreements on behalf of the Commission; 7) Approve up to $427,961 of additional Western Riverside County Measure A Specialized Transit funds to the applicable Western County Specialized Transit providers identified in Attachment 2; and 8) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to extend the applicable Western County Specialized Transit provider contracts identified in Attachment 2 through December 30, 2008, to accommodate additional time for a staff recommendation and award of the Western County Universal Call for Projects grant funds. " " " Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda September 10, 2008 Page 9 9. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE Page 146 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update on the Commuter Rail Program. 10. COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS REQUEST FOR A MEASURE A TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AMENDMENT FOR USE OF MEASURE A STATE HIGHWAY AND MAJOR REGIONAL ROAD PROJECT FUNDS IN THE COACHELLA VALLEY Page 154 Overview This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 08-023, `A Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Initiating an Amendment to the Riverside County Transportation Commission Transportation Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance (Ordinance No. 88-1) and Making Findings of Necessity for Such Amendment therefore initiating an amendment to the Measure A Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). 11. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 12. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Overview This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and the Executive Director to report on attended meetings/conferencesand any other items related to Commission activities. 13. CLOSED SESSION 13A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: EXISTING LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (a) " Case No. RIC 443300 .a Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda September 10, 2008 Page 10 13B. 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) 279-030-003 279-030-004 279-030-005 279-030-006 1 279-030-008 279-190-034 Mike Kerr 279-240-001 279-240-008 279-240-009 282-040-003 14. ADJOURNMENT The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, October 8,. 2008, Board Room, County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET SEPTEMBER 10, 2008 NAME AGENCY E MAIL ADDRESS 2kvi ! -no, (,‘, 0/5. fik7lel Fl2,:1% 42 Z- --7;:vAA6eAAJ )--- Pt ad C,-r r-UE' 1�•bDA�w.S r10. C''�'�/ go ems..% l A/o c.r F c, Ft i o_fA c `-4.,4 &sc 1--(3 N/e �2 cJ1�s r.-) � 0 (c� r. b L th. isp �\ J � I f�v Lr— 7 y I .&qJ x%�iA �i GO �—�c7 1., d/` ivy •, ,•z , e / a gRe�\.s V-A--r,-;t-'62AL.Ct >�57`,`-- ��, 6S 13 S��S .r i A. �... �yk-1 U A L fMA k. a liN-Q. M(Sn i 11I gat -Fmn j ,. , L 0/4 A-4-l4-��"7 /237rAe. c—,,,Arel -f't.S"— F---R4ti1-f- wF 5-.7-- /no/?c A/o Ua-l‘---EY eyA-c.( A.10W I)� efAiijk.. G (PIS /4110(2(015l It �i.6,///„`e c v�,�r1 r fi � _ r; �iQ ' / fil I�.�1�1 4/4-,G-'1-'_'_. V� l // (/IL- RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ROLL CALL SEPTEMBER 10, 2008 Prese Absent County of Riverside, District I 0 County of Riverside, District II O County of Riverside, District III � 0 County of Riverside, District IV � 0 County of Riverside, District V /2r- 0 City of Banning 0 City of Beaumont 0 ,Er" City of Blythe eef 0 City of Calimesa ; O . City of Canyon Lake ,ir 0 City of Cathedral City err' City of Coachella O City of Corona 0 City of Desert Hot Springs ,r2v. 0 City of Hemet .17{- 0 City of Indian Wells ,171 0 City of Indio` ;Y 0 City of La Quinta (13' O City of Lake Elsinore � 0 City of Moreno Valley P--- 0 City of Murrieta 7 O City of Norco ,0r 0 City of Palm Desert 17K 0 City of Palm Springs � 0 City of Perris, 0 City of Rancho Mirage ) 0 City of Riverside � ; 0 City of San Jacinto ,Er 0 City of Temecula e ` 0 City of Wildomar err 0 Governor's' Appointee, Caltrans District 8 .,171" 0 CHECK IF PUBLIC COMMENTS: 0 AGENDA ITEM NO.: (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) ACH AND SUBMIT TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD SUBJECT OF 71111P11/1„„— PUBLIC COMMENTS: �/tJ%W/li"c�f/j/,¢ SUBJECT OF AGENDA ITEM: NAME: ���% %i/!N. ✓i/%/� ADDRESS: .Pt-7f? i' %5i24/H STREET REPRESENTING/i/L ,`'/71G CITY PHONE NO.: l‘." J25 //72 %Z2 �7 ZIP CODE PHONE NO.:,�J 5%6 NAMES OF AGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP q BUSINESS ADDRESS: r/ �`-- 09 /� !., `' '''`/`0/.--7 r"'/1//11/6;S / 2 7"4 -7 STREET CITY ZIP CODE RailPAC Rail Passenger aAssociation of California CALL 916-833-4218 PASSENGER TRAIN SERVICE FROM LOS ANGELES TO OUR COACHELLA VALLEY Panel discussion with political leaders, transportation officials, and interested community members. SATURDAY SEPTEMBER 20, 2008 TIME: 1:00 pm to 4:00 pm The event will be held at: UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, RIVERSIDE PALM DESERT GRADUATE CENTER AUDITORIUM 75-080 FRANK SINATRA DRIVE PALM DESERT, CA 92211 DIRECTIONS: COOK ST. EXIT (SOUTH BOUND) FROM INTERSTATE 10 TO FRANK SINATRA DR. BOB MANNING, director RaIIPAC. org " AGENDA ITEM 5 " MINUTES " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, July 9, 2008 1. CALL TO ORDER The Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chair Jeff Stone at 9:32 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 Marion Ashley Bob Botts Daryl Busch Bob Buster Chris Carlson John Chlebnik Mary Craton Joseph DeConinck Ginny Foat Frank Hall Terry Henderson Dick Kelly Robin Lowe PUBLIC COMMENTS Bob Magee Eugene Montanez Patrick J. Mullany Yvonne Parks Gregory Pettis Ron Roberts Jeff Stone Karla Sutliff John F. Tavaglione Frank West Michael H. Wilson Roy Wilson Commissioners Absent Steve Adams Roger Berg Eduardo Garcia Rick Gibbs Gordon Moller Barney Barnett, Highgrove area resident, provided a handout dated July 9, 2008, that was subsequently emailed to the Commissioners. Mr. Barnett expressed opposition to the proposed Metrolink station located at Palmyrita Avenue and suggested the Commission purchase the 35-acre property located in Highgrove for a proposed Highgrove Metrolink station. Denis Kidd, Highgrove area resident, suggested the proposed Metrolink station located at Palmyrita Avenue be relocated to the 35-acre property located in Highgrove. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2008 Page 2 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — JUNE 11, 2008 M/S/C (Carlson/Henderson) to approve the minutes of June 11, 2008, as submitted. 6. PUBLIC HEARING — FISCAL YEAR 2008/09 ALLOCATION OF FUNDING FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSIT SERVICES Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director, provided an overview of the FY 2008/09 allocation of funding for the Riverside County transit services. Commissioner Robin Lowe stated she concurs with the funding allocations and expressed concern about the rise in gas prices and asked if there is a contingency that could address the impacts. Robert Yates replied that at its September 2008 Commission meeting, staff will bring a recommendation on the Universal Call for Projects, which will help supplement staff's current recommendation, along with Job Access Reverse Commute (JARC), New Freedom funds, and Measure A Specialized Services funds. He explained that the funding requested in call for project applications received is significantly higher than previous requests due to the rise in gas prices. Chair Stone opened the public hearing at this time. No comments were received from the public and the Chair closed the public hearing. M/S/C (M. Wilson/Carlson) to: 1) Approve the FY 2008/09 Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) Section 5307 and 5311 Program of Projects (POP) for Riverside County; 2) Conduct a public hearing at the July Commission meeting on the proposed Section 5307 POP as attached; 3) Direct staff to add projects into the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan (RTIP); 4) Approve the FY 2008/09 LTF and State Transit Assistance (STA) fund allocations for transit as attached; and 5) Adopt Resolution No. 08-018, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Allocate State Transit Assistance Fund." • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2008 Page 3 • 7. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS There were no additions or revisions to the agenda. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR ,E- M/S/C (R. Wilson/Carlson) to approve the following Consent Calendar items: Abstain, Agenda Item 8G: Ashley, Stone, and Tavaglione Commissioner Terry Henderson, in reference to Agenda Item 8C, commended the Transit Policy Committee and expressed it was extremely effective and an excellent exercise for the various transit agencies to interface with the Commission. 8A. FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM AND PROPOSED GOAL FOR FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR 2008/09 1) Adopt 6.4% as its annual Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) goal for FFY 2008/09 from October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2009; 2) Adopt Resolution No. 08-019, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Adopting Its Federal Fiscal Year 2008/09 Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program and Goal /49 CFR Part 26) as Applies to Funding Received Directly from the Federal Transit Administration" 3) Post the proposed DBE overall annual goal for FFY 2008/09 and receive comments for 45 days; and 4) Submit the FFY 2008/09 FTA DBE program and annual goal to the FTA. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2008 Page 4 88. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION AND CALTRANS DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM AND PROPOSED ANNUAL ANTICIPATED DBE PARTICIPATION LEVEL FOR FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR 2008/09 1) Adopt 0.45% as its Annual Anticipated DBE Participation Level (AADPL) for FFY 2008/09 from October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2009; 2) Adopt Resolution No. 08-020, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Adopting its Federal Fiscal Year 2008/09 Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program and Annual Anticipated DBE Participation Level as Applies to Funding Received from the Federal Highway Administration Through Caltrans"; 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the Local Agency DBE Annual Submittal Form on behalf of the Commission for submission to Caltrans; and 4) Submit the FFY 2008/09 DBE program and AAPDL to Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Caltrans. 8C. DISBANDMENT OF THE TRANSIT POLICY COMMITTEE Disband the Transit Policy Committee and direct all transit agenda items to the Plans and Programs Committee. 8D. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT Receive and file the Single Signature Authority Report for the third quarter ended March 31, 2008. 8E. 2008 STATE ROUTE 91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN UPDATE Receive and file an update on the 2008 State Route 91 Implementation Plan. 8F. PUBLIC OPINION SURVEY RESULTS FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Receive and file the results of the Public Opinion Survey for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2008 Page 5 8G. AMENDMENT WITH KLEINFELDER TO DEEPEN COREHOLES DURING THE SUPPLEMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL FIELD EXPLORATION, TESTING SERVICES, AND TECHNICAL EVALUATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED IRVINE TO CORONA EXPRESSWAY PROJECT 1) Approve Agreement No. 07-65-105-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 07-65-105-00, with Kleinfelder for a not to exceed amount of $650,000 to deepen two coreholes during the supplemental geotechnical field exploration, testing services, and technical evaluations for the proposed Irvine to Corona Expressway project; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve optional tasks as may be required for the project. 8H. AMENDMENT WITH CIVIC RESOURCES GROUP - WEB -BASED PROJECT MANAGEMENT DATABASE 1) Approve Agreement No. 06-66-044-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 06-66-044-00, with Civic Resources Group (CRG) to increase the contract amount from $48,510 to $57,380 (increase of $8,870) to complete the project management database and extend the term of the contract to December 31, 2008; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission, 81. REQUEST TO ADVERTISE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS TO REFRESH AND EXPAND THE EXISTING ON -CALL LIST FOR CONSULTING SERVICES FOR MEASURE A HIGHWAY PROJECTS Approve allowing staff to develop a request for qualifications (RFQ) and conduct a selection process to refresh and expand the existing on -call consulting services list for Measure A highway projects. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2008 Page 6 8J. AGREEMENT WITH HDR ENGINEERING, INC. FOR RAIL DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE PROJECT FROM ADAMS STREET TO INTERSTATE 215/STATE ROUTE 60 INTERCHANGE 1) Approve Agreement No. 09-31-003-00 with HDR Engineering, Inca (HDR) for rail design services for the SR-91 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) project for a base of $198,582 and a contingency amount of $45,000 for a total not to exceed amount of $243,582; 2) Approve an adjustment of the project budget of an additional $243,582 for final design services and state reimbursement revenues; 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute an agreement with Ca!trans for reimbursement of the additional costs for the final design services; 4) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 5) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve the use of the contingency as may be required for the project. 8K. AMENDMENTS TO AGREEMENTS WITH AMTECH ELEVATOR SERVICES, CALIFORNIA COMFORT HVAC, INC., TROPICAL PLAZA NURSERY, INC., AND SPOTLESS JANITORIAL SERVICES TO PROVIDE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE SERVICES AT THE COMMISSION -OWNED METROLINK STATIONS 1) Approve Agreement No. 07-25-042-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-25-042-00, with Amtech Elevator Services to provide elevator repair services in the amount of $20,000; 2) Agreement No. 07-25-081-02, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-25-081-00, with California Comfort HVAC, Inc. to provide air conditioning system repair services in the amount of $15,000; 3) Agreement No. 08-24-050-05, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 08-24-050-00, with Tropical Plaza Nursery, Inc. to provide landscape maintenance and irrigation system repair services in the amount of $90,000; 4) Agreement No. 08-24-023-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 08-24-023-00, with Spotless Janitorial Services to provide additional cleaning and grounds maintenance services in the amount of $10,000; and 5) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. " Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2008 Page 7 8L. COMMUTER RAIL COMPREHENSIVE STATION SECURITY UPGRADE 1) Approve Amendment No. 1 to the Commission's Commuter Rail Program FY 2008/09 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) for the Comprehensive Station Security Upgrade Program to reflect the Proposition 1 B California Transit Security Grant Program  California Transit Assistance Funds (CTSGP-CTAF) and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds; and 2) Amend the Commission's FY 2008/09 budget for Rail Capital to include $347,852 in Proposition 1 B funds and $20,000 in LTF funds to be used for the Comprehensive Station Security Upgrade Program. 8M. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE Receive and file an update on the Commuter Rail Program. 8N. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS FOR JOBS ACCESS REVERSE COMMUTE AND NEW FREEDOM GRANT PROGRAMS Approve Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. 09-62-001-00 with the Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG) for the Job Access Reverse Commute (JARC) and New Freedom grant programs. 80. FISCAL YEAR 2008/09 MINIMUM FARE REVENUE RATIO FOR RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY AND SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY 1) Reaffirm the methodology used to calculate the required fare box recovery ratio; and 2) Approve the FY 2008/09 minimum fare revenue to operating cost ratio of 17.58% for Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and 17.82% for SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine). 8P. FISCAL YEAR 2008/09 MEASURE A COMMUTER ASSISTANCE BUSPOOL SUBSIDY FUNDING CONTINUATION REQUESTS 1) Authorize payment of $1,645/month maximum per buspool for the period July 1, 2008 to June 30, 2009 to the existing Riverside, Corona and Mira Loma buspools; and 21 Require subsidy recipients to meet monthly buspool reporting requirements as supporting documentation to receive payments. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2008 Page 8 8Q. FISCAL YEAR 2009-13 MEASURE A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FOR THE CITIES OF CALIMESA, COACHELLA, AND DESERT HOT SPRINGS Approve the FY 2009-13 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) for Local Streets and Roads for the cities of Calimesa, Coachella, and Desert Hot Springs as submitted. 8R. CALIFORNIA CONSENSUS REAUTHORIZATION PRINCIPLES Endorse the statewide California Consensus document. 9. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REQUEST FOR MEASURE A REGIONAL ARTERIAL FUNDS Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager, presented the request from the city of Lake Elsinore (Lake Elsinore) for Measure A Regional Arterial funds for the SR-74/1-15 interchange improvement project. Ken Seumalo, Lake Elsinore's Public Works Director, expressed support for the approval of the request from Lake Elsinore. He expressed appreciation to Commission staff that helped agendize this request on behalf of Lake Elsinore. Commissioner Bob Magee provided background information on the project, noting that this is the project that Garry Grant has been before the Commission repeatedly expressing concern about the traffic congestion. He thanked the Commission and staff for advancing this project. He recognized Ken Seumalo for ensuring the project was shelf ready in order to receive funding. M/SIC (Craton/Ashley) to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 09-72-004-00 with the city of Lake Elsinore for the State Route 74/Interstate 15 interchange improvement project in the city of Lake Elsinore in the amount of $2 million of Measure A Regional Arterial program funds; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2008 Page 9 10. PERRIS VALLEY LINE STATION DEVELOPMENT PRIORITY LIST Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director, provided an updated on the Perris Valley Line (PVL) project and presented the PVL station development opening day priority list. She discussed the potential impacts, benefits, and community concerns for the proposed UC Riverside Metrolink station. In response to Commissioner Ginny Foat's question regarding the construction of a park and ride lot in the UC Riverside area, Cathy Bechtel replied that this is one of the issues being studied. Commissioner Frank Hall asked for a comparison of the proposed Palmyrita Metrolink station and the proposed Highgrove Metrolink station being that the stations are within close proximity. Cathy Bechtel replied that the Commission has considered a proposed Metrolink station in Highgrove a number of times over the past several years. She explained that the staff recommendation does not preclude a Highgrove station, however there are significant issues related to Burlington Northern Santa Fe that would be triggered if the Commission were to construct a station in that location. She explained that the Palmyrita location serves the Hunter Park area and adjacent high-tech firms, industries, and research facilities as well as nearby residential and business communities. Anne Mayer emphasized that locating of Metrolink stations close to jobs is very important from a ridership prospective, referencing the Palmyrita station and Hunter Park area as an example. In response to Commissioner Mary Craton's request for clarification regarding the distance between the proposed Palmyrita and Highgrove Metrolink stations, Anne Mayer replied that she believes it is approximately one-half mile. Garry Grant, Meadowbrook area resident, expressed concern for the schedule of the Metrolink trains on the PVL. He suggested that the arrival and departure schedules should be observed prior to any expenditure. Chair Stone stated that schedules will be evaluated with respect to peak ridership times to meet the satisfaction of the Metrolink riders. M/S/C (Busch/Magee) to approve the Station Development Opening Day Priority List. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2008 Page 10 11. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION There were no agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar. 12. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 12A. Anne Mayer highlighted discussions taking place in Sacramento related to Proposition 42; 12B. Commissioner Craton reported on her visit to Sacramento related to Proposition 42. 12C. Chair Stone announced that the September Commission meeting will be hosted by the city of Palm Springs at the Palm Springs Convention Center. 13. CLOSED SESSION 13A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: EXISTING LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (a) • Case No. RIC 443300 • Case No. RIC 462975 13B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (c) Possible Initiation of Litigation: One Case 13C. 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) 279-030-003 279-030-004 279-030-005 279-030-006 1 279-030-008 279-190-034 Mike Kerr 279-240-001 279-240-008 279-240-009 282-040-003 • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes July 9, 2008 Page 11 Steve DeBaun, Legal Counsel, announced that Agenda Item 136 has been pulled from the closed session agenda. Abstain and left the room, Agenda Item 13A: Ashley, Buster, Lowe, Montanez, Stone, and Tavaglione Abstain and left the room, Agenda Item 13C: Lowe, Montanez, Stone, and Tavaglione 14. ADJOURNMENT 4,1 There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the meeting adjourned at 11:07 a.m. The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, September 10, 2008, in the Palm Springs Convention Center at the 277 N. Avenida Caballeros, Palm Springs, CA 92262. Respectfully submitted, OSUNi":1-494.— Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board AGENDA ITEM 7A RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation "Committee of the Whole" Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: New Financial Management Software BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION "COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE' AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive and file information on Tyler Technologies' EDEN Financial Management solution; 2) Authorize staff to commence contract negotiations with Tyler Technologies to implement a new financial management software package; and • 3) Approve an estimated budget adjustment to increase FY 2008/09 expenditures for $550,000. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission purchased and implemented the Fundware financial software package, designed for government and not -for -profit organizations in October 1995. At the time, Fundware was sufficient for the Commission's needs. Fundware's ownership has changed twice since the Commission's implementation of the software. The current owner, Kintera, has decided not to continue any new development or enhancements of the software at this time. Staff is concerned that support of the software will eventually terminate. Additionally, the ultimate weakness of Fundware is that it is not comprehensive and project financial information must be gathered from various software applications and paper files. Staff has been working with Leonard Stout, Information Systems and Technology Manager for Bechtel Infrastructure, over the last year. Mr. Stout has reviewed and assessed the Commission's current financial, project, and information systems and has provided his thoughts and concerns with the current environment. Ultimately, Mr. Stout's recommendation to staff was to assess alternative systems to Fundware and implement a replacement system. In addition, the replacement system should be capable of handling more information for better and more Agenda Item 7A 1 efficient financial and project management, human resources, and other information management.. Commission staff was fortunate enough to be invited to sit on the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) evaluation committee regarding a request for proposals (RFP) for a new financial software system. The SANBAG RFP process included 11 vendor inquiries to the proposal, but only four vendors submitted proposals in response to the RFP. The proposals submitted were from: 1) ComputerWorks NFP Solutions (AccuFund Accounting Suite); 2) Innoprise Software, Inc. (Innoprise Suite); 3) Protean Technologies (Microsoft Dynamics Navigator); and 4) Tyler Technologies (EDEN Financial Management). The proposals were evaluated by an evaluation committee consisting of SANBAG staff, a staff member from the county of San Bernardino's Information Services Department's Application Development Division, SANBAG consultant (Civic Resource Group), and Commission staff. The evaluation criteria included: firm qualification and product quality, staffing and project organization, work plan, cost and price, and references. Cost was not the deciding factor in determining the final successful proposal. Cost proposals ranged from $150,000 to $552,000. After the initial review, the evaluation committee short-listed the proposals to ComputerWorks NFP Solutions (AccuFund Accounting Suite) and Tyler Technologies (EDEN Financial Management). Product demonstrations were held in early June 2008 and the evaluation committee recommended the EDEN Financial Management solution. The EDEN Financial Management solution was determined superior when compared to the other proposers: • Firm qualification and product quality — Tyler Technologies is a leading provider of end -to -end information management solutions and services to local governments. Its local government client base consists of 6,000 nationwide, of which 70 are located in California. The product is of high quality and met all the required needs as outlined in the RFP and required the least amount of customization. • Staffing and project organization — Tyler Technologies is well staffed to meet the unique demands of the SANBAG implementation. • Work plan — Tyler Technologies was very thorough and took into account many of SANBAG's issues that may arise. • Cost and price - EDEN Financial Management System product had the second highest cost of the four proposers, however, the product is complete and can accommodatethe growing and changing needs of SANBAG. • References — All were from public agencies and they were all very positive about the product, services, and support. SANBAG staff conducted on -site visits with the cities of Loma Linda. and West Covina and participated in conference calls with staff from the cities of Petaluma and West Hollywood. Agenda Item 7A 2 " .ar In addition, SANBAG's consultant discussed in detail with several other cities in San Bernardino County as to their experiences with EDEN Financial Management System and all discussions were positive. On August 13, 2008, SANBAG's Administrative Committee approved the agreement with Tyler Technologies for $462,135 for software implementation, customizations and one-year maintenance; $257,400 for project management services provided by the county of San Bernardino for a 20-month period; and $60,000 for temporary help to assist with the day-to-day finance and accounting responsibilities during the transition and implementation to allow staff time to develop and implement the new product. SANBAG Board approval is anticipated in September 2008. Given the robust nature of the EDEN Financial Management solution, the Commission's management team asked for a product demonstration, which was conducted on August 6, 2008, by Tyler Technologies. The seven -hour demonstration for Commission staff proved that Tyler Technologies' focus is on the public sector, committed to long-term excellence, and meets the needs of the Commission, especially as it prepares for the commencement of the 2009 Measure A. The EDEN Financial Management solution incorporates all the various systems the Commission currently utilize with different software applications into one enterprise -wide system. Additionally, the EDEN Financial Management solution supports the Microsoft SQL server that will allow other Commission databases to share and read data between systems. With the sunset of the 1989 Measure A program on June 30, 2009 and the commencement of the 2009 Measure A program beginning on July 1, 2009, the Commission's responsibility to increasing needs and expectations from staff, vendors and consultants, and citizens requires improved access to information that will alleviate the strain of piecing together information from many sources. The expected efficiency gains from the EDEN Financial Management solution include an automated paperless workflow system, advanced project accounting, multi -year budgeting, multi -year contract management, grant tracking, payroll, and human resources and benefits management. Additionally, new technology enables detailed tracking, monitoring, and reporting of expenditures and revenues. The detailed background information to support each entry into the EDEN Financial Management solution is readily available as a scanned image and retrievable by all users. Staff is seeking approval to append on SANBAG's RFP process, given that the due diligence for procurement has been conducted appropriately and Commission staff was a significant participant of the evaluation committee. No federal funds will be used to fund the cost of the software. With the Commission's approval, staff would like to begin contract negotiations with Tyler Technologies and return back Agenda Item 7A 3 to the Commission for final contract approval. Staff is also requesting an estimated budget adjustment of $530,000 for the standard implementation as provided in the attached .Customer Price Quote and an additional $20,000 for procurement of a Microsoft SQL server for support of the new financial management software. Additional costs may be necessary to hire consultant support to help staff manage the implementation of the new financial software. If consultant support is needed, staff will include this with the final contract approval and a budget adjustment. It is staff's intent to have the new financial system software implemented by July 1, 2009. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: No Year: FY 2008/09 Amount: $550,000 Source of Funds: Measure A, LTF, Motorist Assistance Budget Ad ustment: Yes GLA No.: S 19 90101 P1001 01 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \Avaidtabtoi„, Date: 08/15/2008 Attachments: 1) Tyler Technologies - EDEN Financial Management Brochure 2) Tyler Technologies Estimated Customer Price Quotation - Standard Implementation Agenda Item 7A • 4 WHAT DISTINGUISHES TYLER'S EDEN FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SOLUTION? At Tyler,. being the bes: takes many forms. Our EDEN Financial Management solution offers besr-in-class product solutions to manage dara, systems and people in real time. EDEN was designed to meet the accounting sofrware needs of mid- to large - size local government agencies. And since 1981, that's exactly what it's done. The foundation of EDEN's success is built on powerful products, reliable results and superior services. The . result....our products feature impressive fanctionality and built- in flexibility that respond to the specific needs of cllenrs. Tyler is proud to be part of the elite Microsoft° Gold Certified Partner Program. In order to receive this award, our EDEN software had to pass the highest level of requirements from Microsoft and 'demonstrate the most robust efficient and scalable " implementations of Microsoft technologies. As a Microsoft Certified Partner, we encompass a broad range of expertise and vendoraffiliations.Our real -world perspective can help ocr clients prioritize and effectively deliver their technology solutions. POWERFUL PRODUCTS. RELIABLE RESULTS. SUPERIOR SERVICES. THAT'S EDEN. POWERFUL PRODUCTS MEN software places information at the user's fingertips. _.quickly and efficiently: That's because it was developed with three main goals in mind: functionality, flexibility and reliability. All delivered with a foals on excellence in client services. It's no wonder our products and services have earned a 91% overall product satisfaction rating: And, as a Microsoft° Certified Partner, we have the technology co provide a consistent Windows• -based user interface. Using leading technology, Tyler creates transaction efficiency and effortless access to information and reports throughout the system -all in a user-friendly format. RELIABLE RESULTS Results are what count. With an average annual growth of 15%i, EDEN software clearly delivers: EDEN software provides the reliability clients need for decision making, financial management and responding to citizen requests. Add to that Tyler's experience implementing efficient, cost-effective solutions to local govenanents, and the result is a proven, end -to -end financial management solution. Our deep understanding of the financial management needs of local governments means we have the necessary knowledge to anticipate our clients' needs. Our best practices, based on years of experience working exclusively with public sector clients, ensure quality training and support, and make implementation and conversion easier. SUPERIOR SERVICES Tyler extends the same care it takes creating quality sofnvate to helping the people who use it —our clients. We have die experience necessary to understand and respond to their needs. And we put it to use, offering EDEN product assistance in a number of ways.. Clients can contact our knowledgeable support team weekdays via a toll -free number, visit the support Web site to access the extensive knowledgebale or join a client forum. Its also possible ro make suggestions through our feedback surveys or to send us an e-mail. Our client service is a priority that works...for clients. SUCCESS BY DESIGN I.like the user friendly conceptthroughotu the EDEN program, which makes my job easier and allows me to quk%access prior entries." Irma Medrann, City eterritor, CA "7fx completeness ofthe various management modules proposed combined with high user acceptance and a solid structure, took EDEN to the top afoul- evaluation tise " —Bob Woods, Guy ofAtbanyt OR 8 INTEGRATED PRODUCTS AND RELIABLE SERVICES EDEN software applications combine flexibility and simplicity on the front end with sophisticated design behind the scenes. Each product is powered by advanced technology, exceptional integration and dynamic features. Success is designed into every phase of ptoduct development, client implementation, services and support Tyler delivers successful solutions for local governments. It's that simple. COMMON FEATURES All EDEN products offer comprehensive; universal features that provide quick access and easy i usability. These include: - • Full graphical user interface with familiar Microsoft° Windows° look and feel • Interface with e-mail management software, including Microsoft. Outlook° • Query by Example (QBE) for powerful data search capabilities • Look -up "zooms" and dialog boxes for easy data entry • Easy attachment of images or other files to any document • GASB 34 and GAAP compliance • Configurable menu structure for a simplified interface • Drill -down capabilities to access detailed information or to cross-tefetence data • Comprehensive security and audit functions • User -defined fields to track customized data • Multiple levels of online help • Standard or customized reports using Crystal Reports. by Business Objects FINANCIALS BEN Financial applications support fund and encumbrance accounting, providing agencies with contra! of their financial processes. Integration within these scalable modules reduces data entry, ensures accuracy, and simplifies reporting and information retrieval. • General Ledger • Budgeting • Purchasing • Fixed Assets • Project Accounting • Accounts Payable • Accounts Receivable • GASB 34 Reporter • Cashiering • Bid & Quote • Inventory • Contract Management • Web Extensions INTEGRATED SOLUTIONS EDEN Integrated Solutions serve as a link between EDEN data and other office -related tasks. • EDEN and GBA Interface • EDEN Voice Extensions DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT EDEN Document Management solutions give an agency the power ro streamline the way it manages documents.. • Tyler Content Manager LE • Tyler Output Processor (TOP) • CASS PERSONNEL EDEN Human Resource applications manage budgeting, pay- roll. and personnel information, including the hiring, employ- ment and training of employees. • Payroll • Applicant Tracking • Human Resources • Employee Training • Position Budgeting • Web Extensions CITIZEN SERVICES EDEN Gtiaen Services applications facilitate the management of constituent -related transactions, increasing an agency's overall responsiveness and the efficiency of its staff. • Utility Billing • Licensing _ — • Customer Requests • Permits & Inspections • Parcel Manager • Special Assessments • Web Extensions 9 CLIENT SERVICES...HELPING CLIENTS ACHIEVE SUCCESS ,,.a- ONLINE SUPPORT We've listened CO client feedback and applied it to significantly enhance our support Web site with a variety of new features: .,,,_User:Forums to give EDEN users a central location to exchange information and discuss issues • Crystal Reports Repositoty CO provide a place to share reports with other EDEN user • EDEN Knowledgebase to serve as a product information library for EDEN users • Video Tutorials to give clients the opportunity to watch online EDEN help videos • • Incident Tracking and Searching to allow EDEN users to view open calls and all calls associated with unresolved Tracker items ONSITE TRAINING The key co getting the most ouc of EDEN software is training.. Tyler has experiencedandprofessional implementation consultants who understand public sector agencies. Training programs are tailored to a client's needs and take place at the client's office, using their computers and their data. Our implementation consultants and project coordinators work together to resolve issues CO the clienes satisfaction: CUSTOM PROGRAMMING EDEN software functionality is so feature rich that many of our clients find customization isn't necessary. However, if a client would like to further enhance their EDEN experience, our team of programmers can help: They ate trained to work with clients to develop custom forms, as well as to create specialized reports or i ntetfaces to ocher applications. PROJECT MANAGEMENT Through a combination of Tyler's proven implementation meth- odology and years of experience working with public sector clients, mar staff ensures that the transition to EDEN software is a success. We understand that migrating to a new software system requires organization and it takes time. That's why we assign a dedicated Tyler employee to guide clients through the process. For larger, more complicated implementations, a client may opt to have a project manager available to work onsire with their own project manager. For more standard implementations, a project coordinator will be assigned to guide the project remotely. Either way, clients receive assistance from a Tyler professional who is skilled at keeping the implementation on track and within budget_ DISASTER RECOVERY SERVICES The thought of losing data and equipment need no longer signal panic. EDEN Disaster Recovery Services (DRS) can have a client back up and running their critical processes within hours. Tyler provides the servers, the operations staff and a client's data stored from the previous night. DRS gives EDEN clients peace of mind with the protection needed to bounce back from any disaster. OPERATING SYSTEMS DATABASE ADMINISTRATION OSDBA (Operating Systems Database Administration) provides additional support for our clients database engines. Tyler offers this separate, billable service to EDEN clients using Microsoft® SQL Server. OSDBA offers support to maintain database engines and provides assistance for common database administration tasks. There are a variety of options available with OSDBA contracts. 10 SPORT PLUS Tyler realizes the importance of maintaining long-term relationships with our dients and continuing to meet their needs long after EDEN software is implemented. We also understand the challenges dients face in receiving funding approval for additional training, User Conference registrations, and other billable items. Support Plus offers the convenience of technical support with the benefits of pre -paid training. Agegdes joining the Support Plus program will receive one paid registration for the EDEN User Conference and one of the following service options: • 4 on -site service days (includes all expenses for the nip) • 6 off -site service days (programming, ;sport creation, Web *inns& etc) TURNKEY IMPLEMENTATION Tyler recognizes the importance of customizing our implementation approach to meet the unique needs of each client_ We also understand that in the public sector fiscal needs are often a concern. That's why we offer the option of a guaranteed, fixed -fee pricing arrangement to ensure that the cost of implementation is determined up front. And, for clients with very large end -user staff, Tyler can provide additional assistance for comprehensive end -user training on standard or client -specific methodologies. We can even provide start -to -finish data conversion services to augment the technical staff, taking total responsibility for data extraction, convection and migration. Clients can select from these and ocher services to satisfy their needs, resulting in a comprehensive turnkey solution. 11 "I have found EDEN customer service representatives to be very tapahfr, responsive, and personabk. EDEN customer service is one of the strong: tattributes of* company" — Kay Drina, Oak Lodge Sanitary District, OR " INDUSTRY STANDARDS Tyler is committed exclusively to sewing local governments. That's why we have a deep understanding of industry standards, and how they're important to our clients. So, we've made our clients priorities our priorities. The EDEN system adheres to Government Accounting, Auditing, and Financial Reporting (GAAFR) and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) standards. EDEN also has full capability to produce GASB 34 Reports, as well as many other reports required by government agencies. All this because we'te committed to the success of our clients. FItiANCIAL MANAGEMENT r< IT'S WHAT WE DO Tile; TeC ncicgtes (NYSE: TIT), we have a singte " cnabie puhl.c scorer organizations -to be more te,and more responsivetothe needs ;s. Tixt's witar we do. And that's ail we do  in ..r_crst- wi:_a more than 6,000 customers, including :a garerr,:rer.t and schoo:, ofcces throughout all 50 Paerro Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and .P.e T';..twit ,made:-n. er Ted:no cg:es is a leading provide: of information ,- ._,nc solutions and services for the aablic Ty:et is tba largest company in the country solely zed =d to ?nos softwilre and IT services ro the = C'{esdsle Ave S1ti =:0:N Salct rtech..corn " tyler -114 s " 0 Tyler ternatogles; tun DatesdaleAve SW; Ream, WA WW2; enn 328431k edmsaksftkneehsam " " " Customer Price Quotation - Standard Implementation " " ' Customer Name: Riverside County Transportation CamlmhiSSiem Concurrent Users: 30 Date 2 2008 - wets' .. P:7T1RPFF'" !f - Pro.. Aaounti " Bid a 0uobt Mane " ement $ 32,100.00 $ 7.000.00 $ 13.800.0D $ .900.00 $ 21 100.00 $ 12.900.00 $ 12.900.00 $ 10.600.00 $ 10.600 00 $ 14 300.00 INIIMIEF-17-"ZSr NOME Web Extension - Contract Man -" " meet $ 6 " , h,00 $ 8,300.00 $ 7,600.00 P Web Extension - Benefit Enrollment. 03, 2008 CA State Pac e ler " , Processor On -Site Data Ms y,' � ,1" S 6,800_00 $ 3,800.00 $ 10.400.00 $ 40080 $ 4 400.00 3 5,000.00 $ S400.00 $ 15.000,00 S 35,200.00 $ 2.400.00 $ 0000.00 $ 2.400.00 $ 20.400.00 $ 12.000.00 $ 12j300:00 $ 4.000.00 $ 4.800.00 $ 000.00 $ 0000.00 $ 4.900.00 $ 850.00 $ 1,700.00 $ 850.00 $ 2,700.00 $ 2,200.00 $ 2200.130 $ 1,350.00 S 1,350.00 $ 1,750.00 $ 2.100.00 �M111111M - A 6.300.00 �ENIMEEE - s 7.000.00 �� MEM 8800.00 EMOMEMEM i 3.800.00 $ 10,400.00 $ 5,400.00 $ 4,400.00 IMM IMMO INNEN 5,000.00 8,400.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 7.200.00 $ 21.600.00 $- 1,350.00 $ 4,650.130 EMEIIIMEENME1 `EOM=��. �� LAMM S $ 2.40080 $ 2.400.00 $ 8.000.00 $ 0600.00 $ 32 100.00 S 7 000.00 s 13,800.00 $ - 6,900.00 S 21.100.00 $ 12.900.00 S 12 900.00 S 10,600.00 $ 10.600.00 $ 14,300.00 $ r ENIENIEEI 7,500.00 0300.00 111111011111111111 $ 9.600.00 __ $ 7,884.00 EMMEN [art .g �MEM- - MEN - EZEII=IN�MINELUI U are rode Assurance NICP Commodity " , - $ 7,884.00 $ 060080 000.00 $ 1200.00 IEMINEE $ 1,600.00 � $� 421 ' i- $ 3,600.00 $ 62,700.00- 10 n.00 $ 21.700.00 $ 10 `f_00 44,500A0 $ 2720000 $ 27 300.00 $ 16 850.00. $ 16,850,00 uENINF'imml 15.80000 6,000.00 $ 6,800.00 $ 8,1 .09 6.80000 $ 12.550.00 $ 35,650A0 a 59oul) $ 4.400.00 5 5 000.00 S - 10,800J10 $ 17,400.06 $ 8,000.00 7.600.00 $ 9400.00 S 9,800.00 $ 4,800,00 $ 4,800.00 $ 1 35000 $. 1,350.00 S 7,884.00 s 150.00 $ 6,150.00 SubTotal Grand Total en Standard Su -AO Products Direct Sm.,. " $ 50.762.00 $ 525.00 $ 7.00000 $ 247.358.00 $ 247,358.00 $ 1350.00 $ 6,150.00 $ 173.600.00 $ 173600.00. $ 35.800.00 $. 35,800.00 $ 459.058.00. $ 459,858.00 .. prices except for those narked as Estimated' are good for 120 days from the above date. 'Estimated' quotes are subject to immediate change without notice. Tyler firers software support on 8ems under the 'Eden' olegodes. Sottemie support begins upon onset of tra ning of the so0wae module. Support and maintenance on a8 other items is offered directly by the supplier or manufacturer. AN d lent computers must meet ere minimum client ha kyae and salmis requirements deified by Tyler. Saks taxes estimated above will be charged to Wadnngfon cNonhems per the puw7mskg agreement. E_r__._d costs ofTravel and Expenses includes estimated charges for Yawl 1s and from the customer site. 13 ty[er TECHNOLOGIES Tyler Technologies; 1100 Oansdale Ave sWi Reston, WA "" Estimated Training - Install Customer Name: Concurrent Users: Dare: Product Description <e4-G. 4,r . Cure On Site Trips 90057; glom 328-0314Z ass - Comrers1011 Days Ne Riverside County Transportation Commission d0 J 2001 Installation, Training, Ott - site Prop days Data Coral Days Other Consuhing Days -1111111111111111111'' 41111=1111111 1111111•11111E3 111111•11111MINI=1111111E1 Advanced ..,;.�.,. 21.0 -111MINNECI111111111-.11MILEI MIMEO sMIMES] s1111 1111111111111111 IMMO �� F 1111111111111013 ,1111.111111111111111•1111111111:13 ge,l -��� -IIIIMMIICLI-11111•1111M11111111111•103 11111•111ME1eil MIME! s�IMMIIIIIIIIa�IN1111111113]® Pa �IME11123� �i� r =;r, r-rj SINE MINN= 1111111MINI 11111111111•111111NIMIIKEI * ���111111111111123 i /1c b 8 Quote rta 4.0 =N Total 7 2 O® 30.0 108.0 44.0 150.0 • • , quotes for sevices ate madded Here as our best estimate of what g win take to popery train your personnel in a Van the babes' seeing, such quotations are .. a guarantee that quoted services will match the ski and requke eats or your staff and that additional services might net be needed Ford sevices quoted here yler wgl deriver the number or days for the dollars quoted. Ai additional services beyond those sham* In this qumtaron must fist be authorized by the sustainer and proYhded by Eden Systems at its then gonghourty rate. 14 " AGENDA ITEM 7B " RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation "Committee of the Whole" Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Financial Statements BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION "COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE" AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the fourth quarter ended June 30, 2008; and 2) Approve a budget adjustment for the increase in Measure A local streets and roads expenditures of $6.729 million. • BACKGROUND INFORMATION: During the past fiscal year, staff has closely monitored the revenues and expenditures of the Commission. The attached financial statements present the revenues received and expenditures incurred during the fiscal year. Accrual adjustments for revenue and expenditures have been made for June 30, 2008, and are reflected in these financial statements. The Commission will continue to make year end accrual adjustments depending upon materiality through August 31, 2008. The operating statement shows that sales tax revenues for the fiscal year at 100% 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 and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds and remits them to the Commission after the reporting period for the businesses. This creates a two -month lag in the receipt of revenues by the Commission. Accordingly, these financial statements reflect the revenues related to collections through June 2008. The final accrual of revenue will be made once the September payment is received, which includes the fourth quarter FY 2007/08 clean-up adjustment. Agenda Item 78 15 On a cash basis, the Measure A and LTF sales tax revenues are 7% and 5.2% lower, respectively than the same period last fiscal year. Receipts continue to remain flat through June 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. Revised Measure A and LTF budgetedrevenues were $135 million and $67 million, respectively. These adjustments to budgeted revenues are included in the attached June 30, 2008 financial statements. State Transit Assistance funds are included in sales tax revenues and are comparable to the budgeted amounts. 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 June 2008. TUMF revenues have declined 65% for the twelve . months ended June 30, 2008 compared to the 12 months ended June 30, 2007. 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 to $10 million for FY 2007/08. This budget adjustment is included in the attached June 30, 2008 financial statements. Interest income was slightly higher than budgeted due to higher cash balances. The administrative and program/project categories are in line overall with the expectations of the budget. The local streets and roads budget is based on estimated Measure A sales tax revenues. Since these revenues are slightly higher than budgeted, the related disbursement to the local jurisdictions exceeded the budget. The Commission will continue to accrue for Measure A sales tax disbursements to the local jurisdictions through September with the fourth quarter clean-up allocation received from the State Board of Equalization. Staff is seeking a budget adjustment of $6.729 million in order to disburse the Measure A local streets and roads payments to the local jurisdictions through September 2008. Operating transfers are over budget due to the one time transfers from the Western County Capital Projects fund to the Debt Service fund to establish a debt reserve fund and to retire the outstanding commercial paper as a result of the issuance of the 2008 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds in June. Agenda Item 7B 16 " .E " " Listed below are the significant capital projects and their 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 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Connectors - Design activities are on schedule. Federal obligation of funding was received at the end of June 2008, delaying the submittal of consultant invoices. SR-74 Curve Realignment - A decision to proceed with project development is pending. Commission and the city of Hemet are currently working with Caltrans to establish the scope of the project. No expenditures were incurred as of June 30, 2008, so the project was rebudgeted in FY 2008/09. 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. A hold has been placed on proceeding with preliminary engineering until SANBAG completes its strategic planning efforts for its program. SR-91 Van Buren Interchange - The city of Riverside is the lead agency and has experienced several delays during this fiscal year related to environmental issues, causing a late start with right-of-way acquisition. This has moved the start of construction into FY 2008/09. SR-91 HOV Lanes from Adams Street to 7th Street - Caltrans is the lead agency for the final design phase of this project. 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. This resulted in lower expenditures for the FY 2007/08. SR-91 High Occupancy Toll (HOT) and Mixed Flow Lanes - Project startup took longer to ramp up than anticipated. The scope of work was reevaluated in order to get the geometries between this project and the SR-91 /SR-71 connector project in place to commence the environmental studies. Agenda Item 76 17 SR-91 /SR-71 Connectors - Project was initiated following the completion of the pre -award audit in February 2008. The scope of work was reevaluated in order to get the geometries between this project and the SR-91 HOT and mixed flow lanes project in place to commence the environmental studies. 1-215 from Nuevo Road to Box Springs - Project activity has not been initiated. The project study report was completed by Caltrans in May 2008. 1-215 from Murrieta Hot Springs Road to Scott Road and Scott Road to Nuevo Road - These projects are proceeding on schedule, however, this project is under the budget for the fiscal year. 1-15 HOT lanes from SR-91 to SR-74 - Several .issues regarding findings in the pre -award audit had to be resolved, delaying issuance of the notice to proceed until April 2008. Project expenditures are below the budget through June 30, 2008. SR-91 Green River Interchange - Project billing from Caltrans is lagging. Invoices through the end of May were recently received and the June 30, 2008 invoice is outstanding. SR-91 La Sierra Interchange - Work on the interchange did not start until October 2007. The city of Riverside is the lead agency and elected to perform non -Measure A work first during this fiscal year and will start work on the Measure A funded portion of the work in FY 2008/09. SR-60 HOV Valley Way to 1-15 Interchange - Project has been completed and the final invoice to close out the project has not been received. Mid County Parkway and SR-79 Realignment Projects - A slowdown 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 and while the project is progressing, expenditures against the budget for FY 2007/08 are below the budgeted amount. Perris Multimodal Facility - Final design is complete and is now awaiting funding appropriation by the California Transportation Commission in July 2008. Construction is anticipated to start in October 2008. Agenda Item 7B • • 18 " " hlorth Main Corona Parking Structure - Construction started in January 2008. This was later than expected as the Commission was awaiting the appropriation of CMAQ funding. Fimancial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: No Year: FY 2007/08 Amount: $6,729,000 Source of Funds: Measure A sales tax Budget Ad ustment: Yes GLA No.: 227 71 86104 $5,114,140 254 71 86104 $1,480,380 233 71 86104 $134,480 Fiscal Procedures Approved: ,d,,c Date: 08/15/08 Attachment: June 2008 Quarterly Financial Statements Agenda Item 7B 19 RNERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION QUARTERLY BUDGET VS ACTUAL 4TH QUARTER FOR TWELVE MONTHS ENDED 06/30/2008 DESCRIPTION Revenues Sales tax Federal, state and local 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 Regional 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 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/bond premium Total financing sources/uses • Net change in fund balances Fund balance July 1, 2007 Fund balance June 30, 2008 FY 2007/08 BUDGET 224,388,600 49,450,700 10,009,000 12,722,000 17,096,700 313,658,000 1,887,566 103,001 1,776,493 390,000 1,256,405 4th QUARTER ACTUAL $ 224,368,718 11,850,334 14,0211,719 12,940,671 23,165,972 REMAINING BALANCE $ (19,882) (37,600,366) 4,028,719 218,671 6,069,272 286,354,414 (27,303,586) 1,734,019 65,626 1,298,889 350,221 987,124 5,413,465 4,435,879 5,701,835 1,454,900 5,229,619 15,936,500 66,963,505 99,370,000 166,751,100 50,087,500 12,511,600 3,298,300 101,103,676 4,974,000 4,603,400 549,500 8,591,600 6,203,200 3,669,505 1,037,082 1,713,507 3,901,879 29,555,644 36,788,814 72,255,829 54,816,016 9,906,096 2,653,733 80,534,636 3,872,676 1,767,689 134,248 8,340,804 5,281,395 153,547 37,375 477,604 39,779 269,281 977,587 2,032,330 417,818 3,516,112 12,034,621 37,407,861 62,581,186 94,495,271 (4,728,516) 2,605,504 644,567 20,569,040 1,101,324 2,835,711 415,252 250,796 921,805 553,330,235 316,229,553 1,351,600 992,460 707,000 305,246 142,017,100 9,933,800 1,230,000 141,870,000 6,657,505 1,077,514 153,180,900 149, 605,019 713,983,200 471,568,157 (400,325,200) (185,213,743) 77,940,600 77,940,600 217,000,000 164,362,390 164,362,390 160,249,021 217,000,000 160,249,021 (183,325,200) (24,964,722) 466,881,300 550,160,613 237,100,681 359,140 401,754 147,100 3,276,295 152,486 3,575,881 PERCENT UTILIZATION 100% 24% 140% 102% 135% 91% 92% 64% 73% 90% 79% 82% 64% 71% 33% 24% 44% 37% 43% 109% 79% 80% 80% 78% 38% 24% 97% 85% 57% 73% 43% 100% 67% 88% 98°% 242,415,043 215,111,457 86,421,790 . (86,421,790) (56,750,979) (56,750,979) 158,360,478 83,279,313 E 283,556,100 $ 525,195,891 66% -46°% 211% 211% 74% 74% 14% 118% $ 241,639,791 185% 20 " DESCRIPTION RWERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION QUARTERLY ACTUALS BY FUND 4TH QUARTER FOR TWELVE MONTHS ENDED 06/30/2008 MEASURE TRANSPORTATION PALO LOCAL STATE UNIFORM WESTERN COMMERICAL GENERAL ESP( WESTERN VERDE COACHELLA TRANSPORTATION TRANSIT MITIGATION FEE COUNTY PAPER DEBT COMBINED FUND SAFE COUNTY VALLEY VALLEY FUND ASSISTANCE (TUMF) CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM SERVICE TOTAL Revenues Sales tax $ 15,060,750 $ - $104,172,752 $ 980,873 $ 34,748,770 $ 69,385,573 $ - $ - E - $ - $ 224,368,718 Federal, stale and local government reimbursements 790.969 3,111,837 6,546,107 - - - 576,743 - 824,678 - 11,850.334 Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee(TUMF) - - 157.699 - - - - 13,871,020 - - 14,028,719 Other revenues 551,250 1,502 1,034,450 - 1,430,044 - 9,923,425 - - - - 12,940,671 Interest 454.455 237,513 8,934,549 5,256 591,875 3,05510E 1,161,421 5,833,613 3,394 819,544 2.073.294 23,165,972 Total revenues 16,877,424 3,350,852 120845,557 985129 36,770,689 72941,681 11E84646 20,281,376 3,344 1,639,222 2,073,294 286,354,414 Expenditures Administration Salaries and benefits 1,644,754 89265 - Geremllegalservices 60,845 3,088 - Professionaiservlces 813,915 39,371 - Office lease and utilities 333,305 16,916 - GeneraladminNrntiveexpendWres 934,717 47,127 5,280 Total administration 3,787,536 195,767 5,280 Program&projects Salaries and benefits General legal services Professional services General projects Engineering Construction Right of way(Land Local streets and roads Regional 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 1,862,732 220,649 747,097 2,848 66,072 1,767,689 134248 8,340,804 87.759 7,754 12,604 3,872,676 446,949 566,132 554,650 3,760,987 4,646027 23996999 2,201,557 41,669,774 2,653,733 1,840,561 17 8,841 8,178 40,520 324,473 1,000,000 980,874 12,165,368 13,142,139 3,980,793 82,838E69 980,89 992960 83,332 4,229 217,685 9,906,096 79,687,0 3,440,834 330 847,61 263207 184,943 460 100,372 13,742,680 8,240,275 32,229,154 26,894,310 79,687,026 847,940 54,761,091 1,693 445,603 447,296 49,426 398.366 10,837,616 4,052,040 37,759,046 53,096,494 1,734,019 65626 1,298,999 350,221 987 124 4,435879 3,669,505 1,037,082 1,713,507 3,901,879 29,555,644 36,788,814 72,255,829 54,816,016 9,906,096 2,653,733 80,534,636 3,872,676 1,767,689 134248 8,340,804 5,281,395 316,229,553 992,460 305246 Debt service Principal - - - - - - - - - 110,005000 31,865,000 141,870,000 Interest - - - - - - - - 144,592 2904,793 3E08,120 6,657,505 Cost of issuance - - - - - - - - 1E77,514 - 1,077E14 Total debt service - - - - - - - - 1,222,106 112,909,793 35,473,120 149,606,019 Total expentiWres 18E05,467 4,180789 63061,834 989891 26,894,310 79,687,026 847,940 54,761,091 1222,106 166,453,583 35,473,120 471,568,157 Excess ravenues over Curvier) expen6ares (1,128,043) (829,938) 37,783,722 5238 987E378 (7,245,345) 10,236,906 (34979,715) (1,218,762) (164E14261) (33,39E826) (185,213,743) Other financing sources/uses Operating transfer in 291,000 535,116 371,836 - - - 36,093 - - 110,005000 53,123,395 169,362,390 Operating transfer out - 490,000 26,548,016 - 7,897,894 - - 300,775 128,978,655 - 147,050 164.362,390 Bond proceeds/bond premium - - - - - - - - 130,249,021 3E000,000 - 160,249,021 Total financing sources/uses 291,000 45,116 (25176,180) - (7897594) - 36,093 (300,775) 1,270,366 14E005,000 52976295 160,249,021 Net change in fund balances (837,043) (784,821) 11,607,543 5,238 1,978,485 p,245,345) 10,272,999 (34,780,490) 51,604 (24,809,361) 1E576969 (24,964,722) Fund balance July 1, 2007 9,94E038 5,905,839 193,956,853 60,394 15,483,231 83,767,112 21,538210 159,336,112 112,207 2E797,558 31,255,059 550,160,613 Fund balance June 30. 238 $ 9,110.995 $ 5,121,018 $205,564,396 $ 65,632 $ 17,461,716 $ 7E521,767 $ 31,811,209 $ 124,555,622 $ 163,811 $ 3,988,197 $50 831,528 $ 525,195,891 21 " AGENDA ITEM 7C " " RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation "Committee of the Whole" Anne Hallberg, Accounting Supervisor Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Investment Report BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION -COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE" AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended June 30, 2008. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Attached are the quarterly investment and cash flow reports as required by state law and Commission policy. The county of Riverside's Investment Report for the month ended June 30, 2008, is also attached for review. Attachments: 1�% Quarterly Investment Report for the. Quarter ended June 30, 2008 2) County of Riverside Investment Report for the Month ended June 30, 2008 Agenda Item 7C 22 " wt Naturo Of prye,atrne,ntl. AB*F.nivamg" mx e.o.% Op.rstlnV Ru.tls M.N% p.W a..arr. TtiN FunW 11.0rt101.0 MatuvHy Vorttollo Irf eStrnant Type, u1F cw..y Pooecaan Ir...aal ner�......." " s_i u Statement of Compliance All of the above investments and any investment decisions made for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 were in full compliance with the Commission's investment policy as adopted on April 9, 2008. The Commission has adequatecashflows for six months of operations. Signed by'��ftrdc.4l J,W Chief Financial Officer 23 " 8/20/2008 10:02 AM Riverside County Transportation Commission Investment Portfolio Report Pedod Ended; June 30, 2008 RATING COUPON PAR PURCHASE MATURITY YIELD TO PURCHASE MARKET UNREALIZED GAIN FAIR VALUE MOODYS/FITCH S&P RATE VALUE DATE DATE MATURITY COST VALUE (LOSS) OPERATING FUNDS City National Bank Deposits 12,181 A3/BBB+ N/A N/A County Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund - 380,401,760 Aee/MR1/AAAN*1 N/A 3.95% Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) 3.452,196 Not Rated N/A NA 8ubloLal Operating Funds _ �� 385.886.137 $ E $ $ FUNDS HELD INTRUST County Treasurers Pooled Investment Fund: Loon Transportation Fund Subtotal Funds Held In Trust COMMISSION BOND PROJECT FUNDS/PEST RESERVE First American Treasury Obligations Fund Investment Agreements First American Government Obligation Fund Subtotal Bond Project FundslOsbl Reserve TOTAL All Cash and Investments 71,047,715 Aea-MR1/AAAN+1 N/A 3,95% 71,047,715 9,800,339 15,789,992 10,063,640 44 853 071 499,16/e22 Aaa/AAAm N/A Aaa/AAArn N/A 6.00% _$ 15,928,000. 05/24/05 11/28/06 2.02% $ 16,928,000 $ 15,789,992 S 036,008) N/A Investment Transaotlons for the Quarter Ended June 30, 3000 Purchases: None " Maturities: , Par Value at Maturity Maturity Date NONE Coupon Rate Portfolio SUMMARIZED INVESTMENT TYPE Banks 12,181 LAIF County Poo 451,449,474 3,452.191 Mutual Funds: First American Treasury Obligations Fund- Trust First Amerlcen Government Obligation Fund Sub - Total Mutual Funds Investment Agreements TOTAL 9,800,339 19,063,840 28,063,979 187$g69,82B9 499�� 24 V.'12008109 September1Budget & Implemematlon178,AMH.A2Comm.Att 18 Investment portfolio 06-08 25-Jun Durable Goods Orders (0% actual vs. 0% survey) 24.Jun Consumer Confidence (30.4 actual vs.56.5 survey) Unemployment Situation Rate (5,5% 03•Jul actual vs. 5,5% survey) Payroll change(• 62000 actuaivs.-50000 survey) "June Gloom a7 Those of us who live In the Inland Empire are far too familiar with June Gloom; the overcast weather Is caused by a phenomenon called a coastal eddy, which produces a thick marine layer by swirling up currents of moisture from out over the ocean eastward and. on to our coastline. It seems at this point there is no general direction to the swirling currents of our economy except uncer- tainty; home prices continue to drop, unemployment has risen to 5.5% and crude oil continues to rise. To make matters worse on the energy front, there Is speculation about a pre-emptive strike by Israel to take out Iran's nuclear capabilities. Top It off with an above average hurricane season forecast by NOAA and we now have the Ingredients for an economic storm. Mas- sive flooding In the Mid -West has placed additional pressure on grain and food prices, straining our already stretched pocketbooks and further dampening the economy. It Is easy to see why Consumer Confidence Is at Its lowest level in over 25 years. It would seem at this point with Inflation on the rise and an economic slowdown In the mix we have our aforementioned recipe for stagflation, or worse. Just as the gloomy weather mixed with the summer heat creates a sticky atmosphere, this dilemma places the FED In an even tougher situation as they really have no weapons to fight this war. June Gloom Is thick this year, and shows no signs of clearing anytime soon. autek �J Paul McDonnell Treasurer -Tax Collector i'�;�lt"�3i �:aac3 l3r�a�rit�£ V;.-] y€acrt (sr N .•,3in or E3 ¢A 6?Gi t_S3 t;.2 Cif') s'ie�i l tr9a"M S EPA.7 May 5,697,833,900.78 5,695,352,850.28 2,281,050.50 0.04%. 3.28 1.17 1,10 March 5,539,808,337.78 5,518,060,400.16 21,747,937.62 0.39% 3.95 1.04 0.97 January 5,426,226,441.66 5,400,694,361.87 s 25, 532, 079.79 0.47% 4.57 0.88 0.82 *Market values do not include accrued interest 25 The fed funds rate remained et 2.00 In June after being cut 25bps at the FOMC meeting on April 30. The next Fed meeting is scheduled for the beginning of August. The 2 year T- Note was yielding 2.63% (down 3bps). While the 10 year T•Note was yielding 3.99% (dawn 7bps.) For June, the Pool had a decrease of 8bps. In the average monthly yield. 3Mo US Treasury a01 1:9 0.01 6MoUS Treasury 3111 2.17 0.16 2 Yr US Trees ury Note 253 (0.03) S Yr US Treasury Note 3.34 (0.07) 12YrUS TreasuryNoie 3.99 (0.017 FED Fund Rate 2 • Crude Oil (barrel) 140.00 12.65 Gold (Ounce) 934,01 - 51.51 o ill 11350.00 S&P 500 1280.00 " SeA• 292. (1.*30 (-20.38) Page 1 Maturity Distribution 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 30 days or 30 - 90 90 Days - 1 1 - 2 Years 2 - 3 Years Less Days Year Over 3 Years eetor breakdown Ri ar Ref Valoe VU>2:ii (36ok Y iel Cash Equivalent &MMF 630,837,938 0.08 2.38 rr N:. otlabie CDs 209,000,009 0.29 2.48 .MunIcipel Bonds 104,705,264 1.31 1.04 Local Agency Obligation 8,760,000 2.36 3.32 TOTAL 5.335.791.573 1.22 3.15 A-1 ! P-1 or belle! 13.77%. F. aicnil Agency GB 39% • 11/2008 . 894.6 706.4 188.2 • 188:2 270,2 1t2009 626.7 1,316.8 (690,1) 177.3 (0.0) 354.2 5/2009 576.9 1,398.8 (821.9). 251,7 - 0.0 41.9. 26 • 1 heaturer's Institutional Money Market Index (TIM11,11) is compiled and reported by the Riverside County Treas- urer's Capital Markets division It Is a composite inda derived jkom the average of three multi -billion dollar AAA rated Prime (fiords that invest In a dtversjjied portfolio of U.S. dollar denominated money market instruments including U.S. Treasuries, government agencies, bankers' acceptances, commercial paper, certificates. of deposits, repurchase agreements, etc.) portfolios that the Treasurer tracks, Further details available upon request. The Pooled Investment Fund cash flow requirements are based upon a 12 month historical cash flow model. Based upon projected cash receipts and maturing tnvesonents, .there are sufficient funds to meet future cash flow disbursements over the next 12 months. • Z 40ed L!'0 lL'0 99'0 990 20'0 861 94.1 OL'0 69'0 9S'D 90'0 CL'2 9C'Z OL'L OWL t9'Z 0YI 991 (00'Oon I) 00l O9S'L) (00'009'el) (setoe•ees) 00090'019'9 00'OD9'Z96'9 00'099'966'b 00'OOP '600'9 00'000'000'S 00'091.32 BLE 29'66 09116'6E8.9 99'66 00'000'000'S 16'66 00'000'000'9 61'001 00000'6201 00'001 00'000'000'9 scess'OS6'6L2 LZ 600Z/L0/90 900 X109.1901.10.4 NM'S NV0131.'110H 03d 000009£9'9 6002/L1/20 OL'L 600LSZ20 600L22/LO 9002/9UL0 002 £1'C 09'9 XL06.190WA1 NNtl9 NV013010H 03d 00'00000D'9 X108490WAL NNVS NY013010H 03d 00'000'DOD 'S 0WA1 NNY6 NY0131,40H 03d 00'000'000'S X11A10WAENNVEINY0131,40H 03A 00'000'000'9 09'E 94'E 009 69'0 261 8LZ 9LZ 0 9L'L u'Z LTC 112 191 6S'Z 99'2 29'f 911 SZ'f (00'DOB '12 00'001'9/06 (00'006 02 C00'OOS'LL) 00'000bs) 00'00L'616'I 00'009'1909 00'000'096`6 9C66 00'000'000'01 BS'86 00'000'000'S 9L'66 00'000'000'9 OS'66 00'000'000'01 (0009L'CO) 00'052'996'6 21'66 DO'000'000'S L10219460 ZLOUOE/10 85'0 65'Z L21 09'E (0oaos'Le) 00'009'216'6 00'006'12 00'0011/6'6 21'66 00'00C 966'6 9L16 00'000'00014 00'000'000'OBZ 00'9 06.4C0NAAY ) NV6110330 Wtltld 03d 00'000'000'0 99' 140020/90 Z91 1102/41/00 Set JAlOWAt NNV91103210 Wtltld 03d AS' 'DWG NNV91103910 44121Yd 03d 00'000'000'2 OWCON+AC NNY9110380 WlNd 09d 00'000'000'01 910LX92LE S'ISOXEC4E OrAdXCE LE srsa CIE 96COXCEIC N679 NVOl 3910H 034• 91H1 ELOA1221C looncene 9L1A1CC10 640Al CC LE 110Z/10/90 92'E 410Z/10/P0 921 t 10U81/EO 99'2 OS'Z OL f 29'2 96'2 IZ'C 6Z'L 6L'2 90'Z 61Z 212 90Z 021 S8'6 00'S 06'l 09'9 tocrooepsf 100'009'ICI 00'00C996'I, 46'88 00000'000'9 00'009'2901 9286 00'000'000'S a hAi."?Ix�l' .:�Nli /ilyle malt?'^I 06002'1) 00'009'296'4 99'66 00'000'066'9 00'009'LL 00'000'090'01 09001 001092/6'5 00'000'S2 00106'6 00'000'SZO'9 000061001 OS'004 00000'000'9 61'001 00'000'000'9 00a 99'1 69'L 68'1 183 erl LL't Sal !E'l LSO LL'L 94'9 04'2 coast's 00'091'COO 9 90'001 00'000'000'9 (00005'LI) 00'009'496'9 9/06 00'000'000'9 9C'E 00'0011 00'001'COO 01. 20'001 00'000'000'01 90'E 29'4 0VC Coo '09Ne) I00'00t s) 00'099'066'9 00'006'9e6'e 1916 00000'0001 Le'66 00'000'000'01 12'1 OD'C 061991 00'090'006'Y 40'60 99'101'086Y ZE'1 09'2 YB'999'CEO 00'000'901'01 9Z'101 96109'96204 00'0 622 9910006S 10860•41,1120 11'9961C10129 62'0 02'0 01'0 19'918'29 00'000'10419 0916 00190 ZEE'61 C6'0 21'0 0L'0 90'0 CVO 99'L 00'000'910 00'000'999'69 Le 96 00'000'092'et 01'0 LS'0 01'0 900 szonsigimasoa 80'0 80'0 80'0 21'L SZ Z 601 80'0 lC'L 90'0 167 (9P201'Z841 ZiSal"1JAV fIlf10 IV LINW ti SS09/N1V9 —_ 00'922 040'89 227L992L'01 11'66 001291d919 LY'66 22'2191EL'66 0009Z106'84 19'86 00'O9Z'906 64 98'L6e'LC9'29 00'000'000'990 00'000'000'491 LIRTI VA'IV 00'000'00012 00'000000190 00'001 00'000'00WL91 HJ121d 1 EUTI VA )10011 410252120 10 4120 010222/01 040Zn4/01 D102/92/60 011190N+AC NNY9110333 WNYd 03d 00'000'000'9 091/9011JAC NNVS 1103tlo Wtltld 03d 00'000'000'01. 09'E 011E0N+AC NNV91103210 WHVd 03d 00'000'000'Ot 01E 921 A9'IOWAE)NV911103910 14/11tld 03d 00'000'000'9 JAION+AC N61V91103tl016191V'd 03d 00000000'S 01ZALCCIf 012AICCIC OSAA12212 ZOMI£C IC OSSA1201e 021 SL 9 90'S WCON+AS'2 NNV91103210 Wtltld 03d 00'Oo0'0o0'9 JA ON+AE NNtl91103tlo Wtltld 03A 00'000'000'01 JAL 9NJAC>NYS 1103110 Wtltld 03A 00'000'000'S 0102/0f/L0 09'9 XNAIONAE )NV31103210 Wtltld 03A 00100'000's 0102/60/L0 96'9 X14.10NAE NNVS 1103N0 Wtltld 03A 00'000'000'S 0102/92/90 01'£ /AL0N/A2 NNYS 11032101121Yd 03d 00'000000'9 1..Pa. >1.; 0102/02/90 OCT 016100WAZ M9111133210 WHVd 03A 00'000'00001 010L/61/60 90'2 010E41/00 LPL 6000/00/11 9L'2 600221/1/ 21'1 0002/61/14 911 BOOVOC/01 49'2 8000/21/80 99'Z 800U90/90 YL2 9002/00/L0 92'2 9002/1C/t0 12'2 Ad1110.1.VIV NOd00.3 016/20N+AZ NNV91103tl0 WMYd 03d 00'000'0001 0141E041AZ NNV91103tl0 W9/Vd 03d 00'000'00011 WAS1)NV9110930 WUYd 03d 00'000'000'9 OWAL>MVO 1103210 Wtltld 03d 00'000'000'01 00000'000099 14/4-W 110330 110101,1 V10A01 00'000'000'09 Id/9lY NY021090 dC 00'000'000'09 1dH1V ON106104 ONI 00'000'000'09 4d/•1V OONVd 3113M 00'000'000'09 14/*1Y 6131NY0831-109N 00'000'000'OS 090A1201f 9X9X122 LE 96/XIff40 CLNXLfELE C9NXlC£42 Y88ALf£L£ LS0A10ElE 1C0A10E LE 91AA10210 990A1fCLC BILOALEC4E MNY91107110 WYVi 0381 • 90dd ON100206P LMN0CLe99 C0H0ML6Y9 19H0dhet6 LM00806C0 1Nn00910 • 113dVd 1V1033181200. 0410 0010010010 ONnd ram 1401491BOL11Y0 •11110 00000100'99L IS 31911030YNYW Oo9n oaa00'o00'tsl N01d.d121JS'RI 21Vd 1910000V 1190d30 000n • HIM dISf1J 5 ooz, 'Q ' it l. Q)11114 )110141]SaA1ll pars " ed " 99'2 002 92'2 00'0221 00092100'9 C1'001 00'000'000'9 8Z 1402/32/10 SL'� +AtaN+AE NNVB NV013NOH 034 00'000'000'2 LOCAX2216 90'3 L22 00'6 (00'000'000 00'000'006'6 00'86 00'000'000601 01.02/6221. 00'2 +AIDN+ASL'Z NNVB NV013NOH 03d 00'000'000'01 9440XECIC 89'Z ZE'2 01'9 00'06912 622 62'2 Lt't 00'0E9'96 00099'9201 CS'001 00'000'000'9 01,03/2221 Ot't Xt+AtaWA� )NVB NV01311014 034 00'000'000'S CANV966LE 00'029 L1,011 69'001 00000'2l016 0102/61//1 69'I, X1+5,1041AC NNVB NV0131NOH 034 00'000'0001 LZXNXCEIE SC 2262 1,21 (00'0913'121 00'0919L6't 99'66 00'000'000'S 0102(20/it 12'E Xl+Al0NAS'2 NNV9 NV013120H 03A 00'000'000'S 69A0XCC LE 62'2 137 9Z'C (00'009'Sl) 00'000'490P 69'66 00'000'000'9 0102/92/01 9Z'E 1+A10N+A9'2 NNVB NV013NOH 034 00'000'0001 9)1A0XECIE 02'2 60'2 919 too '009'9Z1 o0'000066'6 06'65 00'000'196'6 0102/01/60 00'2 OWAS'Z NNW! 0:V013940H 034 00'000'000'01 owk0x661.6 00'Z Le 1 OS'9 00'006'021 00'00�6024'9 1t'201 00"000'000'9 0102R2/90 OS 9 +AZ>WAC NNVB NV0131NOH 034 00"000'000'2 + In -WEEK 46I 284 9Z'9 00'0021.01 00'00V/04'9 91'201 00'000'000'9 0102/11/90 92'9 X1+AZ0WAC NNVB NV0131NOH 03A 00'000'0001 OHL1x6f16 26'4 Ce'l �E1 00000'92 00'000'696'8 69'66 00'000026'5 O/OZ/L 10 00E 0N+A2 NNV3 NV0131NOH 034 00000'000601 9A2l1X2C LC 96'1, LS'1 CC 00'0012L 00'OOL1L6'9 69'66 00009'L991, 0102/1. v90 00'� 60142 NNVB NV0131090H 034 00'000'000'2 SAZWXECIC 96'4 Lel 911 CS' I, 9L'l 90'C L9'l 6L'I EPE 99't 1L'1 _- 90'9 CS' L Li 01'9 (00'016u) (00'o0Z'ez 00'022 Lt6'21 6S'66 00064'1.96'et 0INA 1/90 006 >N+AZ NNVB NV013NOH 03i 00'000'000'6l 00'000'0OP 9 00'901 00'002160's Ot02/01/50 69'G (0000911) 00'009'096'6 69'66 00'000'000'Ot 00'099'L6 00'099 L60'2 1900 00'000'000'21 AWL NNYB NV013N014 03i 00'o00'000'9 9A23X6611 9VfBN6E1C 010221/90 611 0402/L0/20 90'S XL+A10WA2 NNVB NV01301014 03d 00'000'000'01 Xl+A9't>NA6 XNve NV013C OM 034 00'000'00M 9i2)4X6C1C 210XX6C 1C 00091'Ll l ec 99'1 CD"S 000951e OVOSI'Ll1.11. 81 00L 00'000'000'91 OL02/02NO 011 +A91041.1E NNVB NV031NOH 03i 00000'000'SI 00'096'990'S 21101 00'000000'S 0102/9t/90 EO's XNAZOWAC NNVB NV0131NOH 034 00'000'000'S enoNXCCI� OLt 69'1 001 (00'092'0 00'099'060 ill 66 00'0000001 0102/14/E0 006 0N90WAL NNVB NV013117014 034 00'000'000'9 69"I E9'I 001 69'1 L4't SZ'6 Z9'1 S9'L 991 09'1 69'1 90C P 9'L it Of SC 'l LZ'L 92'9 22'1 fir l 90'2 OE 'l CZ 'l 00'9 001 62' 1 00'9 Sal 84't 92'9 61'1 2L'1 EE'S Or Lol se'2 90.1 00"1 so 90'1. ZO'L 02'C 90'1 -20'l OS 90"t 66'0 691 180 62'0 OS'L 99'0 68'a 92Z 99 0 es 0 99'2 . 69'0 29 0 69'2 Z7311.9Av a" itna w (00009'L) 00'002 366'1, t9'66 00'000'0009 0402/01/20 00'6 01N9aN+AZ NNVB NV01 3110H 034 00'000'000'9 91114X26 i f 9490XECtf 00 006 9 0000�'900'0l 90'004 00'00000013t (00'002'411 00'009'296'0 99'66 00'000'000'S 01022220 SZ"C 0N9004+AL NNVB Nv01 31NOH 034 00'000'000'0I 2104XCCI6 01062120 902 ONBaWASL1 NNVB NV013110H 034 00'000000'2 00'000'000'9 00001 00000'000'S 0102/9020 902 11160WA91'I NNVB NV013NOH 034 00'000'000'9 e8'�L0'19 00004'900'01 CO'001 to 920'2061 6002/4121 00C 1,9119aN+AVI NNVB NV013110H 034 00000'000'04 000921/ 00'O9L'CIO S 98'ODl 00'000'000'9 600220)11 222 Xt+A2>NtAE NNVB NV013NOH 03i 00'000'000'9 00'009'91. 00'009910'OL 91.'001 00'000'00001 o0'OOL'ez 0000L'6201 63001. 00'000'000'9 0000L'82 00'00226 00'000'09 (00'001'C) 00'0011 00'0S1'C 00'OS L'� 00'009'L 00"OOL'620'9 00'008'260'S 00"000'090'01, 00'006'966" ro 1'f00'0i 00051'COO S 69'001. 00'000'000'9 99'OOL 00'000too1 OS'001 OD'000'000'01 0066 00'000000'9 ea001 00'000'00001 90'001 00 000'000'S 600L/C2+Ol 90'2 Nlt3B+A1.04+A6NNV9 NVOl 31410H OU 00'000'000'01 6002/91X+1 009 XIVJALOWAC NNVB 0IV013110H 034 00'000'0001 6002/9l/04 6002/62/60 6002/90/60 6002/L0/90 6002/06/La 00'S 92'9 EC'S XI+AZaN+A�NNVB NV0131410H 03.1 00'000'000'9 NL+AZOWAC NNVB NV0131NOH 034 00'000'0001 9X03X66 LE 61211%66IC 94HIAXCC1t LINHx6216 XL+AZ>N+A6 NNve NVOl 3NOH 034 00'000'000'al 09iHXC6IC 9V4HX60 LC SVAHX66IC SACHXEC IE [MeneLC 09Nd%6616 99'2 So'C 01N9>N+A9 L NNVB NV0131NOH 034 0000060001 " I 00190N+A9t NNVB Nv013WOH 034 00'000'00001 9iidxCzl6. 600L/�2a0 0S'E 1N9>WA9 I NNVB NV0131.10H 034 DO'000'000'9 9i9dXCEt6 00'091'200'9 90001 00 Doo'000's 6002/OZ/d0 OS 01N9>WA9't NNVB NV0131,10H 034 00'000'000'9 00'0SL'Pt/ (00'092'9) too 'OSC'6) 100'006'IV 0.1X SSW/Nil/9 00009'L001 00'092'496'e 00'09G C800 00"099'066't 00'001'9460 91'001 0a 000'000'S 29'56 00'000'000'9 6o0Z0.L/CO 600L/9Z/50 f9'9 09'2 %L+AZ>N+AE NNve NV013NOH 034 00'000'000'9 9490XE61C 04BOXCEIC v X 19N99WAl NNVB NVOl 3110H 094 00'000'000'9 9966 00'000'000'S 6002/L050 SL'Z 9tl9BXCC if xl0NC0WA4 NNVB NV013N014 034 00'000'0001 9'66 00'000'000'S 6002/90/90 S9'L X10N9>N+AL NNVB NV013N0H 034 00'000'000'S 9L"66 00'000'000'01 zNZtlXECIC 9XX0X6C1� 6002/02/90 69'2 X1.91,4190N+AI NNVB NV013NOH 03i 00'000'000'01 9n'IVA'W 3J1111 19n1VA x0011 A.LnIn.LVW NO1110J NOLLdl8JSICI " ELMOXCEIC 1ISfiJ picl:l;uizir;san nq paja9(sd s;la9: L y good 961 /8't l8't 16'4 69'1 Ce' 1 `;9' 1 S9'1 1.9'l 4 Y'l LC 9E1 931 PO'l 004 fB'1 98'1 CB'1 ZI'9 932 CO 9E1 91'C 91'1. 60'C NA. 00'C 193 99't SO'S 00'C CS't BC'C CP'1 00'9 iv 00'9 2P'{ 90'9 LC 00'C £C'l 39' 1 SL'Z 00'05L'Li 4 00'OsL'Sll'S LE'Z01 00'00S'L66.0 00'009 00'009'000'9 - 10'001 00'000'000'S OC/9E06 00'00/'C1 100'000'0 00093 1/601 00000610'03 69'101 00399166'1/ L0'001 00'000'000'03 OD'003566'9 • 08'68 00'000000'9 I00'O9L'9) 00' ovae6'b 6218 00'091 966'0 00'059'29 00 O9P'ZE6'b 00'OOL'SG (come's) 00003 990'01 00 O6E'C66'0 99 BB 00'000 000'S 99 001 00'000'000 01 Le 68 00'000100'9 moos et) 00'001'1461 1L'66 00'000'000'01 00'004'931 00'00L'S31'01 00'001'191 00001 MS1 00'009'SiL 00'009'9t l'0 9Z'101 00'000'000'01 C3'101 00100'000'sl 61'10{ 00'000'000'01 (°Ton'0 DO'003966'0 99'66 00'000100'9 (00'009'et) (00004 £C) 03'1- 19'3 (0000C'91) 96'0 OC'9 B6'0 Of 10'1 000 00'009'IC6'6 mesas 3116 00'000'000'01 S9'66 00'000'666'6 0103/51/90 09'9 010060/90 SZ'f 0103/93/S0 010Z/93/90 0102/LZ/90 00'S 93E S 4'£ 0103/83/90 SOT 0103/E3/00 001 0103/3360 010Z2ZfZ0 90'9 XL/AZON+AC '163001601N• 611-d 60'000'0009 X1.01(1190NAZ'1613011610111• slid 00'000'0001 Xt+AZ0NA61630'01MOW- BINd 00'000'000'9 X1016E0N4316130116011• 911-14 00'000'000'03 X101660NA3'12130'0160V1• 81114 00'000'000'9 001C0NAL 1630 016012 • 6161d 00'0000001 >0.O1(1190123A3 1.6130'016012 slid 00000000''9 WAS l0NAC 1613001600 • BIHd 0000000001 Oa WC0NASL'L'11130 '016011- 911-1d 00'000'000'9 0103/90/30 93C 0103/3l/10 00'9 °LWOW10.,... OD'S 800080 31 90'S 6003/L3/4l 001 6005/E1/11 600Z/60/11 921: OCZ 00'003 Zee 6 3966 00'002'9666 00 00S'31 00'009610'01 000941 00191'900'9 LC'9, 00.001 10'1 06'0 SC _ 00'09C 66'0 L9'0 9!'0 LL'0 LB S91 C1101 00'000'00001 31'001 00100000'S 00'00L'00o'01 1000/ 00'000'000'01 00'OSC'0001 - 10'001 00'000'000'S (mot' a) 00'009'996'6 � 69'65 00'000'000'01 S9'0 09'3 (00'Ose sn) 00'091 C964 99'66 00'000'000'9 9L'0 OS 91'0 963 (0000916) 00'009'6966 0L'66 00'000'966'6 100009'W 00'000'398 a 39'66 00100'000'01 99'0 99'0 et (00'09292 EI't 89'0 931 03'E 96'3 9'Z l9'Z LL'2 EL'1 err 00'090'0901 93'101 00'00/'031'9 (trocteto0 erost'990'Let 90'9 01'0 00'000'6 00'006'600'01 COT 091 96'Z 09'C LCZ 09'6 19'089'191'L9L 60'001 00'000100'01 (00'00C'NO 0010L'6L9'/ 69'Le 00'000'000'9 00'099'1 00'090100'9 CO 001 00'000'000'9 fee too E0 0S191'Kat 00'66 90BOVILL'01 09'3 Ll'C 00'090'0 00'099'100'S CO 001 00005'466'0 99'3 39'L 001 00'C L'Z SS'Z 0C1 Z9'3 Z9:I11'9AV b'21O0 kV [,LV611 CUL SSOUNIVO 90'3 90e (across' LL) Do' OSL'991 00'OSt'938'0 00'093.1001/ 9906 00'000'000's C9'96 00'000'000'9 (00'OOP'*CO 00'009'999'6 99'96 00'000'000'01 00'099 1 (00'096'90 Oi4OCZ �k Ird 00'09S 1001 00'090'098'P CO 001 00'000'000 9366 00'000'000'S 6003/93/60 - 09'3 0W90NAZ'16130'016011• 911-1d 00'000'000'01 rc (AM AC16130'01dOW• 911-1d 00'000'000'01 /A30NA61930'01tl0W 611-1d 00'000000'91 /A1002A01620'016012 • alHd 00'000'0000 011CPWAS'l '162 01600•91142 00'000'000'9 01NC0NA9' l '16130116016 • 611-id .00'000'000'01 X1119012A61'1630'016100• 2111-id 00'000'000'01 061E0NA941'111130'01.1.10111• 9104i 00'000'0001i 6003/91/40 039 XIIAWNA3'1630'016011•91014 00'000'000'01 600Z/01/LO 00'9 Xl+ALON+AZ 114300l6012• 61Hd DO'000'000'9 900220/10 9C'S X14110NA2 '1630'0161012'13114d 00'000'00001 8003/30/LO DE X141041A3'1630'0111001• 91Hd 00'000'000'S 6003/10/90 SS'S 6003/E 1/50 OS'Z 6003/60/00 90'Z 6002/10/00 9C'Z 800300/C0 91'to C103/93/10 Ol'P 110Z/CO/01 110ZR 1/60 09'C X 1.0Wf0NAl '1630'011:1011• 811-I4 00'000'000'01 X102100NAI '1930'01801/1-611-1d 00'000100'9 0141E002A1'16301101011- 61Hd 00'000'000'01 X110190NA1'1660'wove slid 00000100'01 06141. 16301121012.6161d. 00'000'000'9 ZX09X931C 6VALX8Z LC 9d95X9Z I Er1LXeLLe Cil1LX931E 02HLX9ZIE POdLXBLIC 0919XBZ1£ 9110LX93 1C 9ZOBX9ZIE 9HALX9Z1E 00A9X9310 LM4x9ZlC 1d11X9L1C 9NSLX9ZIC 0201X931C ZSSLX9L1E 9V0919C 1E 0M09X9Z1E eavo0103'19L X101/19001/A9 XNVS NV01316061 03d 00'000'000'01 410011A9'C NN SNV013WOH 03d 00'000'000'0 09'E 100190011AS'E NNVIS NV013610H 03d 00'000000'2 LLO3/01/90 9f'f l OZ/s3/60 9L'C 1103/13/00 L 102/L0/00 00'C 001 1103/L1/Ea l0Z/StRO aC C 11001130 930 ONAC NNV9 NV01312061 03d 00'000939'01 /A1014/AC>MEI NV013160/103d 00'000'000'S XL1A10N1AC NNV9 NV01312014 034 00'000'0001 XL+AI0144C NNW NVOI 31(10H 03d 00'000'000'9 6Vd9X9Z LC eVd9X9LIC 93SLXSZIC 000LXBZIC 10HLX9Zlf 910LXIL1C ZOW3LCIC '11130'0101013 • 9111114 0134 119dxCSt£ OdrOXECIE 99XdXCEIC s9060aC IC 9SX0X Clf LHtlOXEC1C +A Man NNVE1 NV01 MOH 03d 00'000'coo 'Ol 009001(AS NMI NV0131(110H 03d 00'000 000'9 1A1012/AC NWT NV0131101-I 03d 00'000'000'S NOIdd1213S'7CI 21VJ ZWIOXCEL£ 010XCCIC HLdX£C LC SeldxeC LC J1SC1l " 0 (00'098'Ol) 00'090'898'0, 91'66 00'000'000'9 v` 0107./62/110, 50'E tOLy90NLAZ'006SV 01110131VN 1331 0000060005 SNOV96C1C el CI 926 (000011697 00'0014E8'6 4C88 00'009'L666 010Z/91//0 9L'Z 160189NLA2'OOSS30111013 111N 03d 00'000'000'01 964138601E 913 LL'1 Z9'Z (00'O90'ee) 00'0909060 26'96 00'0091L88'0 010Z/60/00 OS ONLAZ'OOSSV 0111001 13N 03d 00'000600'9 LAWW96CLC 99'1 19'1 906 I00'OOes) 00'006'9613t 48'66 00'000000'9 010Z/901C0 SVC 100190NLAZ'00SSV 013013 1VN 031 00'0000009 86410/96CI� 493 18/ 00'� (00'002 li) 0060016194 1618 00'00o'00o'9 0102/3120 00E 1411042AZ'OOSSV 0130/1 1VN 03d 00000'000'9 0033190t1C 99'1 15'1 63C (l00'OOL'9). 00'00�9664 16'86 00'000'000S 010013120 00� 12AI/NLAZ'OOSSV 013013 1VN 031 00'000'000'5 CX01Y98f1C 09'1 L9'1 00'C !00'001'9) 00'00E660 " 18'86 00'000'0005 " 01006120 00'6 LLA10NLAZ'0096V 0130131301031 00'0001000'9 [X01396E10 99'1 26'1 ell 00'006'lt 00'0013120'01 L2'001 00'000'000101 010Z/8L/10 916 LAS'10NLAC 0066V 0141013 13N 031 00'000000'01 433919�16 99'1 St SZ'2 00'009151 00'009'91061 91601 00'000'000'01 010Z22/10 St1 XLA9'10NAC OOSSV 01110131104 031 00'000600'01 1" 100039f/0 C9'L lt't 90'S 00'000'4E1 00'00092101 92'701 00'000'1.61re 010090/16 SO'S XLLAZONLAC 0026V 013013 1VN 031 00'000'000'01 610919C1C 911'1 Z4'l Oft 00'096'St 00'0969C0'S LL'001 00'000'000'9 80009221 060 XLLALPNLAL'0099V 0112001 1301 1331 00'000'000'S SnXV96E1f St 91'1 9L'9 00'092'12 �inst.''co '9 �9'001 00'000'000'9 600LM060 92'9 XPAZ NLAC OOSSV 0130011VN 031 00'000000'9 L3L219E LC 91'1 80'1 00'5 00'006'09 00'006'090'91 11,601 00'000'000'91 80009090 04'9 X11AZ0NLAC'OOSS301301N 13N 03d 00'000'00051 869249C 1S 90'1 00'1 Pt 00'000'fL 00'00062691 (WOOL DO'000'000'91 800t/CL/LO PC3 XPAI0NLAZ 00623' 013013 133031 00'000'000'91 200919f 1� 90'1 00'1 ,00'9 00'0064 00'009'LOO'9 91'001 00'000600'9 600=0/0 04'S XPAlONLAt OOSSW 0111001 13N 03d 00'000'000'9 C00919f1C 960 9Z'0 4L'Z W046'010 00'000'Z9L'0� 99'920'00919C 0l'L CO 963 1131 sowe99C �even:west 99129000694 00991 0130W 1VN 03d " VWN41 00'000'000'O4 ',mono NV01.313014 03d" 0114i 00600'9910991 Z 1'0 101 (00'009'99) 00'000'9E0'61 99'66 00'000'Z66'61 C1000120 00'P X1013941aA9'11130'0111001" 813d 00'000'000'OL CC29X9L1� OL'C SE 91'E (00009'99) 00'009'Ill 01 10'66 00'000600'91 Z10E2180 SLf X11A104VAP'1330013013" 81141 0060060061 90997921C OL'C 48't SO'4 SL'190'L 00'00L'900'9 El'001 SL'91Z'688 IL 1L04/C1/60 SO '4 OWCONLA9111230'01110W" 91N1 00'000000S ZE49X9LIC 4L2 00, 00'009'9 00'009'900'9 Ct'001 00'000'000'S 110Z/60/90 00'b 0130001LA�'1/130'011:1001" 8131 00'000'000'9 09't {L'L 09'f coo '099'9) 00.091" 661, 0088 00'000'000'9 11009090 09'C %LLA04016'1330'0111001" 6131 00'000600'2 SL'L 9L't CI 142 99'Z 29'2 Z9'2 19'Z ES'L SZ'Z SZ'Z 096 506 Coo 'owes) 00'Os0'048'b 09'96 00'000'000'9 096 90'E (00'OSB'es) 00'090'046'P 09'96 00'0006006 99'Z L{'E (00'090'*SO 00'096199'P1 46'96 00'000'000'St 59'Z 90Z Of'f (00'Sb0'001) 00 998'66C 9 Z9'96 00'000'0099 110Z/t0//0 SO'� X101390NLAC'13331/13001" 6131 00'000'000'S 1106/10/00 SOT 110i/9220 116 1102121/f0 OC'E 700139041AC'1330'013013 " 8131 00'000'000'9 72I1AI0NLAC'1330'013001" 91011 00'000'000'91 9135 0116 '1330'013013' 6131 00'000'009'9 18ALX921C C91LXILtt 9d0LX9t LC 910019Ztf 928LX9LlC 0349X9Elt 09'C (00'00E 00 00'009'6966 0668 00'000'000'01 L1005020 09'C XLLAistHAC'133313111013" 6131 00'000'000'01 0109101Z1C 901 LE'C (00'00060 00'004996'6 L9'88 00'000'000'01 t/02/11/20 LC'E X100190NLAf 0130171" 91Nd 00'000'000'01 �0n9X9tlC 59'2 P9'Z PET 09 � (00'009'Li/ (00'OSO'OL) 00'002 996'6 00'096'6/63, 19'66 00'00�'468'6 0966 00'000'000'9 168 9C'9 017'091'1 00'0S1'100'9 t0001 00'000'000'S 91'L OD 2 90'2 001 coo '009'09) 00'OS6'9L 00'004'606'4 000909L0'S 8L88 00'0001e6'0 CS'00/ 00'000'000'9 11001120 ZE6 1102/90/20 OP'f 110E4080 960 OLOL110/Ol SLZ 001 X101390N1A�'1330'0111013" 81141 00'000'000'01 98n9X9Ll� 01390NLAC'11130'0111001" 813d 00'000'000'9 414190NLAE'1330'013001 " 6131 00'000000'2 1A l0411A4'Z'133013111001- 81141 00'000'0005 XPAL9NLAC'11233'013001. 6131 00'000'000'9 sumeZtC LOA9X9Z IC S03LXSZ LE L1W9X9L LC SZ'Z ZZZ 91'Z Z13 90'Z 00'S 00 OH 9E 006509Z0'S C9'001 00'006000'9 1'Z OD'L 108 El St'S STE 00'000'9E 006026C 00'099'12 Z3:111'9AV VIMUIV LIN IN Cat. SSOWN1VO 00'000698'6 00'002'9E0'01 0009P'926'9 Iimvn'w Z9 66 00'000'000'0 L6'001 00'000'000'01 LS'66 )1J1'Hd 00'000'000'S I 3111 VA HOOP 0100100 00'9 O LOi/�0/60 Ct t SZ S XLLA10131AE '/330'013001" 61141 00000'000'9 L1W9X9L LC LW80131A92'1333 013001 " 61141 00'000000'01 X1LAt0NLAC'11130'013013 " 6131 00'000'000'01 nleEith1, L" '," " . O LOW I/90 SOT 91360NLAS 2'1330'013013' 8131 00000'000's ,(.LI)In.1.VLU NOdnOJ 938 X8Z 1C 1119X9ZIE 85A9XONC NOI.331313S30 LV�� a11S1113 191134 )t/31.113s0Axle paglaf3J 13,11a21 B dad 019 61'4 001, 995 Zl'tr 99'4 1.11. SS/ 901 195 01'4 00'0 81, Z0.0 95'1 Mt 685 lL'9 00'£ 9L'Z 8E'9 967 9LZ 000 98 Z 69 Z SZ E CELT L95 SZ'E 181 99'L - 00 f St 195 00'£ SL'L 09 Z 915 9/5 I92 C15 il': • 99'Z 61eZ at Sin 90'L 09'E Z9'Z 91.5 LZ'£ trS'Z bE'Z 914 trS'Z 6£'Z 905 ZZ'Z 002 10'9 01'L PO 00E 0V5 002 005 wx5r .ls, 00'Z 061 00'0 96'1 99'1 SE'E 96'1 LS'14` ZE'£ 08'1 9B'1 9L'E I8'l 99'L BET E6'L S9'l ell E6'1 S9'1 EL E8'L 98'1 EVE 1.6.1 051 00'E I81 e8'1 915 al 6L'1 � OE'E Sti1 LL JL 95E f9' Ce L E8'1 CB ZL L 003 91'L ZZ-C (00'OOL'BZ) 00506'118'1 /1066 00500'0005 �e 0102/11/E0 00'0 101119049A5'009SY 0150101 LAN 034 00500.0005 00'0S9'L 00'095'1005 00'001 00'000'00D'S 00'OOL'9t) 00'000'1966 19'86 00'000'00051 050950Z 00'00959/5 00'09L'e9 00'009'LEO'S 1918 001100'196'6 9L'001 00'09/186'6 EIOZ/SUZO EIOZ/ZZ20 SZ'9 ' 10119014AS'OOSSV OlaOW 1VN 034 00500'0005 901, 10199010AS '005SVSINOW 1VN 034 00'000'000'01 910Z/9020 00'0 LIOZ/9Z ZI 051. PAI015AS'OOSSV01aOW1VN 034 00'000'00001 301ALDN+A9 OOSSV 0191019 1VN 034 00'000'000'9 190649ELE S1NV96£1C 1116949C LC L9d9X9it /X2949C 1f 00"00L'9L 00'09l Z P: l' 00 On 9 � J 00'099 90) 100'000 tr9) (00'OSe'LL) (00'00z' LBO I09'L9891 00'000 SZ 96581'9Z fame et) 00'09/'ELO'9 00 051'9ZO's 00 OSZ 9005 00 09l 99a Icy !vv{; 00 009 S t B 00'091118'1, L/'001 0009E'Le61, 95'00I WOOL 90 66 00 000 000 S 9166 00'000'000'01 00'000'000'9 95'96 00'000'000S ZIOZ/81/60 L IOZ/OE/90 11OZ/9L/90L/90 110Z/50/SO I1OZ/6Z/00 1LOZAZ/00 OZ'9 9£'9 SZ'E 00'E XlLALON+AS OOSSV 01210101 JAN 034 00'000000'9 1019961BLAC'0059Y O1a0W1VN 034 00'000000'9 0WE0411A£ OOSSV 0160 1+AZ0:WAE 0055V OlaOW 1VN 034 00 000'0009 VALON+AE OOSSV 01801411LN 034 00 000'00001 A2'1011+AE'0055V 01a0W1VN 034 00'0000009 OOS849CLE 0WX849£LC tra161964s ZAW649E1 000996E1C O1N849E LE 0.'1601 . 00'096'0E1 00'061'Z OSZ90'0Z (00'DOVez) 00'009'919 6 00 OSS'1S8'9 00'0005E0S 00 00£016V 00'00959BY 00'009'L66'0 00"051'ZOO'S 00'09008'V 00.006'LZO9 61'96 00500'0005 E066 095Etr866'0 05'001 00'000500'9 tit 66 9501345669. E168 91'66 000004000'9 00'OS/ 996'0 60.001 00'000'000'6 L6'96 00'09Z0661, 00501 05'L£051660 4 LOLt10/40 110Z/10/40 LLOZ/LOOD 11 OZ/SZ20 110Z2Z20 00'E lLAlON+Af'OOSSV 01501119N 034 00'000'000'01 21'C E L'S SET 09'E 110Z/11/Z0 Eve 110Z/IL/10 110U/1/10 010Z/1150 S1'0 00'E 00's 911141126611 PA 10/A E'OOSSV 0151019 1VN 034 00'000'000'9 +.l L0NIA9'E 0055V IaOW lb'N 034 00'000'000S 11A40N+AE -00SSV 0111011 1VN 034 00-000'000'S 01011E0N+Af 'DOSS{ 01aOW LVN 034 00000'000'9 .(, OA',MAE'OOSSV OlaOW 1VN 034 00'000'000S 144996E1E 62594901E P Srd:; 1NNV98C LE LLM9X9ZlE I ZONV98E LE 10W900YAE'OOSSV Ola0111'1N OSA 00'000'000'6 10N+ASVZ"0095V 01a0W1VN 034 000000009 ONI I01‘11'3055V OlaON.CVN034 00'000'000'9 6L0849E 1E 9Md649ELE 9559490L£ .f 100,�`'�... 91'1 SOT 9L'1 00'C 00'0595Z) 00'09L 9Z 001L8.9 00'099'9 00'001'C 00'009'91 00-00C'OLB'9 00'091'EL8'9 00 0915205 00 919'909 5 00'059'100'S 00'001'COO Di 00'009510'01 19"66 00'000000'S Lb'86 9S 001 00.000'000'S DO.0000009 EL'DOI 00'000509'9 .1e EL1001 00'000564 E0.00L 00'000'000'01 91 VOL 00'000'000'01 loo.osE'6) OD'099'068.V 19'66 00-000'0009 00049L 00'00E'l58'6 19'86 00'000'000'OL (00'O99'61 (00'001'ez) 00'000'6) 00'009'L lA;atj`� 00'0005 00'OOS'LE 00'096'9 00'006'LZ) (00'0901,0 Z3311 JAV b'2100 NI LIV W 0"IA. $SO7/NIV`J 00'099'060 00.006'Lai 00'009'096'6 DO 009 L00'S 00'000 60001 00'009 LEO'S 00'096596'0 00 00 l'9L6'6 F?d: 0'OS6'996 P I3n7VA W 18'86 00"0000009 00'66 Le 66 00'000'000'9 `.'{ 6A4 00'000'000'01 9L'00I. 00'000'000'9 80'001 00'000'000'al 61"001 00'000'000'9 Z 66 BL'66 ZL 66 3J121d W000'646'6 00'000'000'01 00 000 000 s f.ett+g. .. 13f)'1VA NOM 0103/0U90 00'E A1011LAS2 OOS5V 011401119N 034 00'000000S OIOZ/90/80 0L0Z/0C/90 0Ln/9i/90 0IMO I/90 010Z/80/90 010Z/6050 00'E ALON/ASZ'0059V 01910101 INN 034 00'000'000'9 00'4 101190N+AL'5039V 0121019 1910 034 00'000'000'9 90E LET 95E 95E MUNN° EVE 010U00/90 CI OLOZ/90/90 °Loma/90 OLOUBZ/90 010Z2t50 ", jalgi j 0tOZ/90/a0 010Z5Z/90 OI OZ/BZ/00 010Z/BZ/90 010Z/9Z/40 EVE ILA LON+AZ 0035V 019101/ 1VN 034 00500'005'9 L' EA9949EIE SEM949CI£ LVM649Ete Lf116499e LCLe ZVS649E1E 1+AIDNLIL'OOSSV 01910111VN 034 OD 000000S 1019E0N+AZ'005610111011 1VN 034 00'000'000'01 t 0119041AZ'00S9V 01a0W1VN 034 00'000'000'01 LU100.1/AZ'00S5V 014101011VN 034 00'0000009 Ora649E 1E 9551649E15 SaaVB6E1C VA 1081+AZ'00959011101011VN 034 00'000000'01 PA lOPPAZ'001B9V OlaOW 114N 034 00'000'0009 00'E 1+A1019+A2 0055V 01aOW 1VN 034 00'000'000'9 9 L'C 0E E 5E5 EI; ;p 1.IA1011IAZ'0065V SIVONI INN 034 00'000'000'01 9aaV96E LE Saa995E1E 9Xd649E LE C10849E19 1.110WAZ 0099V 0191011 1VN 034 00'000'000'9 NAlONIAL'OOSSV OLa0W 1VN 034 00 OM 000'01 LXN849E1E 1AN49E16 005 00'E .E 90"E XIA1011A9-Z 00959r 01a0011VN 031 00'000'000S 11,1101PAZ-0099V OlaOW 1VN 03d 00'000'000'9 1019901WAZ'OOSSV 01a0W1VN 034 00'000000bL I• onesoe 1f 941649E16 9110998E1E i t•rjTy 9d1649ELE 00'E kl.1N(1.LVD0 NOdf10J 1+ALDNIAZ'30559 NOLL.1121JS10 00'000'9 11Vd dISO) d1711.13 4.n Fruill wow. A Pap. " 9C'0 /6'0 61'0 Zl'0 80'0 90'0 91'9 00'S 90' 09'40901, 00'969091'9 0004L'110't 00'000'911'E 61'1 90'1 19'6 iret9'as 994908'669'806 991 61'1 1,06 00'006'1 00'o09eme LL'1 IL 01'L Et'001 09061'011'9 L1'101 0001,C110'1 00'001 00'000'911'6 1.9'LO V690006 16'66 00'0090660 9006/9In 06"E VYYRW 9-0.0111-9X1ViN to 00'000'091'9 1L11941106 9006/91/00 08'9 VVVRW 319XV1" 91019N3d 030a319 00'000'000'1 900Z/10/90 90'9 0106/01/90 91'� MMRW dWl 9313DNY 901 00'000'911 T 00'000'069'60C VWR2V d110 dY330 00'000'00001 srYetetos rM/890n 90N091Yd101N0P1 " INOW 69MD29696 (00'OOPL0 00' owseeet 18'86 00'000"000OZ 0106/4/10 9LZ VVVR9Y 1103110 a010W V10A01 DO'000'000'02 190deszea 99'1 99'1 OS 100'09Z00 0009e'8L6'PI L906 00'0000009G 010626/10 OS VYV/96Y 1103110 a010W V10A01 00'000'000'91 190696689 SS'I 99'1 99'6 " 100'006'49) 00096040S 60'001 00'OSB'611'9 0102/91/10 61'9 VVVRW AVMV011VH 3aIN9Xa39 o0'o00'000'9 61:1V099490 991 94'1 01'C Coo oee'er) 00'060'690'1 ee.004 wok's'1'1 owesHto et i" YYVRW AYMY141V113111419X338 00'000'000'1 64'1 SC'1 ZL'S (00009'L I) 00006196'61 18'86 00'000'DOO'OZ 96'0 660 OS'E (UO'0o9'Os) 46'0 66'6 T00908'SE) 09100'99V* 9L'0 EL0 SO'S 00008196 00'006 966'6 96'0 C00 L6'0 BL'0 6L'0 C1'0 Z1'0 90'0 90'0 90'0 90'0 661 69'L 90'9 L9'L 967 90'0 90'0 BO6 99'Z 26' 11 BZ'0 99'0 96'0 16'0 Z2'0 91'0 IWO 99'0 49'0 CPT 9L'6 191 . 96'0 19'0 ZE'C 99'6 BL'E 60'6 96'D 81'Z 96'0 11'L 1Z'0 91'0 LC'0 99'0 C9'0 99'0 SL'L 41'6 91'Z 69'6 Ll'Z 00'000'Vet �i962�11�� 99'896099 69'999'19 6C'906 08 00'009'166'0 00 699 9911'1 00'006'646'6 00000F00'116 00'000000'01 00'000'000'9 00'009'910'01 L1'001 00'00V/90'01 69'66 00'C16'lel0 96'66 00'00C'CP9'6 69'68 00'000199'9 LO'001 C8'1�6'EL l'L 61,06 00'006'6068 00'000'000'116 00'001 00000000'02 00'001 00'000'000'9 6006/60/61 60'9 VVVRtY 11033311010N Y10,101 00'00000006 600091/90 00'4 VVVRW d11040430 00'000'00001 600091/90 eooen R0 SVC 900L/OC/01. L2"C 9006/91/01 900091/90 900Z/16//0 961 09'4 9Z'6 YVV/ Y <IND dY0 30 00'000'091'0 YVVRW 8NO dY0 SO 00'000'000'01 YW/9W 4110 elY030 00'000'0009 YVVRW AYMVN1V91 3a1H9a38 00'000091'L +WNW'YN XNV9 en 00'000'000'01 OO'000'000'11E 1noo A31NV19 NYONON 00'000'000'01 9006116/L0 90'Z AON30V ONY 1A00 NY 00'000000'9 oo'oao'oselo - 00'00009/0 00'00009G 00'001 00'00009C 0606/91190 S9'E W199196'911 0000006600 00009'69/11 99'98 19'l61'61V141 L1'199'69600 C1'86 L9'162YBB'b2 1/'190906 00'000'919'60 9E'68 69'969'994'6r 16.1r9'L99 CC'CCP 69 69'269'69 61 609'68L'96 L9'149'669'60 191169119'019 00'000'06006 00'000'00E'69 Ll'68 6L001,08C06 600Z/80/10 SC'2 9006/901 01'6 9006R0/01 L l'Z 9006191/60 Ot'Z 00'00009i0 3Sf10Nienoo Iowan 9fl o0'Oo0'091 6aY999r90 L9Nd66669 96002969E 160069896 64N06969C 4CNOE969C SOY499b90 2MXN16C06 +t 9310N t9a3103VI' ON1W XXNAN V01119V ONfld MOWN ASNOW " MIN 9N0I1V01130 AON30Y 1VOOl " OYl 00000'01/11/ 10 da00 0110N NYO13NON lYN303i 00'000'000'09 ONL66616 10 d11000a0N NVO1311001 1V21303i 00000'000W 10 d11000110411 NV01 MOH 1Y913036 00'000'00009 10412100 ONON NV013WON 1Va303d 00'00000096 L1N966616 190966916 6909BCC 16 SZ'66 /9'149'669'60 9006/86/90 90'Z 10 d1:100 0a0W NY013NOH 1Y1:1303J 00'000'000'OS C8096E616 E4169096'609 99'96 L9'9901oe'BC 09'96 11'196'/96 64 6006/OZ/10 S00ZR1110 9C'L 11'6 66966'69 00'000'Ott, 89 69'98 L0999'90909 9006/ll2t 01'6 1E'0 16'0 6046 L9999'002 060 910 06'6 01'0 6Z'0 90'Z 9P0 91'6 91'6 S t'4 znit7 ".)AV VlIf1U I 691 04'4 o0 Oont LLVI11 (IAA. SSOUNIVO 00'000'OZ9'64 OB'690'960'6P L9 6/095'64 OE'E99'969'LLL 00009010'01 1an2VA'Iv 4606 CC'MC'619'69 98'26 OB'690'S60'84 s C 1'86 L9'16C995'8/ 96139'6909LL 61'001 00'000'000'01 9J121d 13OTVA 1,10031 soave= 9006/42/60 10 da00 0110 NY013WON 1V21303d " OWad 00'000091'/19 9310N 1Nnoo910 YNNI 00'000000'01 sum 1em 310 VWNd 00'000'000`OS 9310N 1Nnoosio VWNi 00'000'000'09 10'6 9310N 1Nf100910 VNNi 00'000'000'09 b0'6 2006/L6/90 11'6 C102111IE0 06'4 A.111If1INNI NOdf103 9310N 199100910 WINS 00'000109'60 9310N 1Nf100S10 VWNd 00000'000'0S 9AY699C1E 9"999616 691699916 09199991E P6N99BC LC 99099991C 9310N lenoo910 VWNd " OWNi 00'00090M/ 1e16190N/A9'0099V D1NON 1VN cm 00000'00001 00dY96019 NOILIINDSAU 21Vs1 dISf1J punt( 016.11 rtu�� palood s saalBseari 9 009d LL'l 911 Imo 9E'0 ee'0 900 94't BPI 94'L POS 90'0 Ltet 1C'L L'L 04'Z PO4 903 991L21114.4 9l'EL9'1.9e9C09 00'000'000'60L LP'6611,909tt'9 00'000'000'ne EC '66P 2411P ION 94111P000 P io uPI10mP 0901P014+ loyON 041 '96u0yo u9610 041 Lpn099 010 *Pump loud 000N0m00 041'uouun0 poppopi pod of peudi Yuodnoo 01u 01801»n 0A04 0uo0001140 Lou06y 1=01'C 'enplA 105119w Xs 0614919m'91Pn10W P p0wnlu 0110d1ouud Nun u00A 1P 11Pu1nu 0VI ti (41108u0ny .Z '0opd 0994omd uo 04990 u0 9•910096 Mutsu /auout 41u01.1/04010 PION Poi ODOM 1b8811 Ca' 1 00'00o'CCBY9C'9 006100'000'90L 91tl101 00000000'09 00001 00'000'000'02 BOOL/64/14 Wt 4d9tIV)INV809911 00'000000'09 9WAdLL8PL 00'000'000'9Z 00'004 00'000'000W 900Z/91/L0 L9'L PD'r (>e'199'CLt) wife soe'rot 91'0 (09'990'0I) OL'et8'991'1 or en'sze'r0I 09'96 00 000'0[4'4 CC 'Z 9P'C (09'61L'f94.) OP'OSZ'949'9 t9'16 00'000'099g 410Z/40/40 941, 191/+19 NNV609921 00'000'000W 00'000'OBB'POI 9"912/C0tl AS3110116 N00390 00'000'0[4'4 P6XiLL6P1 00111191.1001N • 00N LOLA10B99 040Z/5121 94'C f1r 66'4 1.9'C 00'4C9'L4) 00'894'090'1 90'004 00'OK 940'1 040Z/94/90 PC'b V Vd NO03 B 9)(1 11900 AN 00'000'049'9 V49/999 NOISN391 00310 NVS 00'000'000'1 60't 46'4 OL'9 99'990'OL 99'9/0'990'C 99'004 00'000'941'S 0I60/10/90 02'2 VVb/999&PI S3130N9 901 00'000'SPY C 9)1NZ06699 L1996CL6L savants; 00'Z eft CV (4L'PLL'B9) SL'SLL'998'C ISM 00'000'00'9 010Z/40/L0 fY'f 999/00913X1 VMS VO Ne0119 00'000'SLO'/ � 90914LPtte 00't 061. 90'P (004090Z) 00'009'000'4 60'004., 00'000'COO 4 040CM090 91'9 9919•69 N3d•SXl•90119 NOS WO 00'000'000'I 99.4 49'4 BC'l C4't 60'4 00't Z6'0 91.9 940 2/1 993 (00'004'9 L/' 4 LC't 90 40'1 06'0 99'0 CL'0 S4'o 29't l 4'r 05'0 40'5 90'9 90'S 091 So'f IOY95t'94) 0999L'1 99 PP9'99 SOZo9'9 00'O9L'SC 00'269E4 (04'L4Z'[) O4'9Cl'L 00'009'f68 9C'66 00'000'000't 010Z/40/90 99'C 99269 WO 1139.9X1 IN 00'000000'1 09142'99C'L 09119'LCSb L096 00000'02C'l 6166 04'49C 9E9'4 010Z/40/10 09'C 600Z/S1A1 LOC 999/009 Stl3M0911E ONV1X90 00'000'090'1 91,11/6999•0•0111'1%1 V!M 10 00'000'Oa PNit90999 9N9L9L61r LA9MLLLl9 seuroLzoe 06640'089S 951£9'500'Z 00'850'9EVZ OD'L69'LIZ'1 06'LB!'L49'b 01'9C4'Lie 8 Z7:I1X1'DAV d'11110W L.LVIN 09A SSO'1/NIV7 - - lilfl'IVA'IN It'66 S4'SLl'CCS'S 58'ZO4 00'68L'966't 49104 81'404 08'6.7' 49'66 00'908'002'Z 00'000'00Z't 00'000'550'P 90'004 00'000'048'9 i1312X1 L9(l7VA NO011 600t/St/90 600Z/40190 500Z/10/Z0 i os d yn�sFe': 600E30/90 600Z/10/80 BOOM 424 006 999/809 NOISN3d A1NO ONS391i 00'000'S99'9 05'9 VW 511Md 30113111400 00'000'056'L 90'5 yy0/e8V a sooe SX1 OSA 91 o0'a0o'oaZ'Z 90'9 OTC 90'E A.LIBfLLVW NOd110J Wtl/88)/ 613d 19 SXl A3a V3 00'000'00Z'l VYWC941 AH311011S N003tl0 00'000'991, 1(1 WY NO03 S SXL PINOO AN 00'000'019'9 fNS99Z99C 6HZN9500Z CYCP99999 CBVS610C4 1131/L[0989 t'rz;a Z49006669 N0I.1..1121 JSACI ltVd alS11J pun,S. ALIT polo lasLlsvadi. The. Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund was in FULL COMPLIANCE with the Treasurer's Statement of Investment Policy. The County's Investment Policy is more restrictive than the California Government Code. This policy is reviewed annually by the County's Investment Oversight Committee and approved by the County Board of Supervisors. Investment Category Maximum Maturity Authorized % Limit Quality S&P/ Moody's Maximum Maturity Authorized % Limit Quality Actual Riverside S&P/ Moody's Portfolio% AGENCY BONDS 5YEARS NO LIM IT A/A2/A 3 YEARS 15Yd $150M M A/A2/A 196% 3t LOCAL AGENCY OBLIGATIONS 5YEARS NO LIM IT 3 YEARS 2.50% INVESTM ENT GRADE 0.13% BILLS O EXCHANGE 270 DAYS 40%0) 130 DAYS 30% AYP $F1 CERTIFICATE 8 TIM E DEPOSITS 5 YEARS 30% 1YEAR 25%M AX AYP liF1 3.92% REVERSE REP OS 92 DAYS 20% 60 DAYS 'D%MAX N/A CSITRUST SHORT TERM FUND N/A N/A N/A DAILY LIQUID ITV 1% Board Approved 1.01% SECURED BANK DEPOSITS 5 YEARS NO LIM IT 1YEAR 2% LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUNDS NIA NO LIM IT 3 YEARS 0%M AX + No more than 30% of this category may be Invested with any one commercial bank 1 Mutual Funds maturity may be Interpreted as weighted average maturity not exceeding 90 days 9 Or must have an Investment advisor with not less than 5 years experience and with assets under management of $500,000,000. THIS COMPLETES THE REPORT REQUIREMENTS OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE 53646 34 Page 9 • • AGENDA ITEM 7D • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation "Committee of the Whole" Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Single Signature Authority Report BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION `COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE" AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and fife the Single Signature Authority Report for the fourth quarter ended June 30, 2008. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The attached report details all professional services and administrative contracts that have been executed for the fourth quarter ended June 30, 2008, under the Single Signature Authority granted to the Executive Director by the Commission. The unused capacity at June 30, 2008 is $354,487. Attachment: Single Signature Authority Report as of June 30, 2008 Agenda Item 7D 35 CONSULTANT AMOUNT AVAILABLE July 1, 2007 McCormlok•Busse, Inc. Keyser Manton Associates SuluUgns, AMOUNT USED AMOUNT REMAINING through June 30, 2008 • • SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY AS OF June 30, 2008 ORIGINAL CONTRACT REMAINING DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES AMOUNT PAID AMOUNT CONTRACT AMOUNT Agreement for video services with MoCormlck•Busse, Inc. Agreement for real estate consulting advisory services for the North Main Corona Metrolink Mellon . ASreeroeOt feraeeis18ncaHrlUftKe untireMelI2plk'for -• ... IINeatitlei'MeaioiIA SPep1kU7.6S Tr/Malt:SETA - AgteeMentTor;GeSgraphle inlmrjfli8on BYatem PIS `,. ,oanaulUnp ywieea for creatlod' and distribution; Tows Reabroi•DeMorat Michele Cisneros Prepared by Reviewed by Note: Shaded area represents new contracts listed In the fourth quarter. 36 $500,000.00 12,000,00 21,969.48 40.52 25,000.00 9,57810 15,121.80 48;008.99 . 44o70,00. 4,840.09 '44.920.01 . 145,513.00. 5964,487.00 84,886.76 60,820.24 J320013100 SeptembeNDAL.MC, 4N OR Single Signature Rptvle " AGENDA ITEM 7E " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation "Committee of the Whole" Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Interfund Loan Activity Report BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION "COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE" AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Interfund Loan Activity Report. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its April 14, 2004 meeting, the Commission approved the Interfund Loan Policy and adopted Resolution No. 04-009, `Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Authorize Interfund Loans". Subsequently, the Commission requested that the interfund loan activity be reported on a quarterly basis. The attached report includes all interfund loan activity through June 30, 2008. The total outstanding interfund loans aggregate $1,560,570 as of June 30, 2008. Attachment: Interfund Loan Activity Report Agenda Item 7E 37 June 30, 2007 • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Interfund Loan Activity Report For 4th quarter ended June 30, 2008 Loan Amount Repayment Amount Clete of Loan of Loan Begins Outstanding Lending Fund Borrowing Fund March 4, 2004 276,000 July 1, 2009 276,000 1989 Measure A • WC Commuter 1989 Measure A • WC Highway (222) Assistance (22e) 519,136 July 1, 2009 519,136 1989 Measure A • WC Highway (222) 2009 Measure A • WC Highway Improvements (282) June 30, 2007 766.434 July 1, 2009 Purpose of Loan Mame loos! match for the 8R•71 Widening/Animal Crossing Pro001 Advance 2009 Measure A 1.215 61Counly project (Maximum loan available of $2 million) (P3012 8 P3027) 766,434 1899 Measure A - WC Highway (222) 2009 Measure A - WC Highway Improvements (262) Advance 2009 Measure A working capital Total $ 1.560,570 $ _ _ 1,560,570 38 Date Commission Approved Deoember 10, 2003 April 8, 2003 June 13, 2007 " AGENDA ITEM 7F " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation "Committee of the Whole" Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Sales Tax Analysis BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION '"COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE' AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 1, 2008. 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 40 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. The SBOE has approved two of the findings that generated approximately $28,000 in additional Measure A sales tax revenues in FY 2007/08. If the SBOE concurs with the error(s), the Commission would receive the additional revenues; however, the magnitude of the value of the remaining findings was not available. Additionally, MuniServices has provided the Commission with the quarterly report for the first quarter (Q1) of calendar 2008 sales, which Measure A sales taxes were received by the Commission in the quarter ended June 30, 2008. This report includes 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 Q1 2008 report is included as an attachment to the staff report. Agenda Item 7F 39 Excerpts from the Q4 2007 report were presented to the Commission in June 2008 and included the following highlights: • 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 12.5% 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 Q1 2008 report to the Q4 2007 report 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 and continued economic influence on sales tax is the rising fuel costs that 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 at 23,1 % and 8.8 %, respectively. • The decline in auto sales in Riverside County in the Q1 2008 benchmark year was 15.7% compared to 12.5% in the Q4 2007 benchmark year. While department store sales growth remained positive, they decreased to 1.5% from the Q4 2007 report. Service station sales positively increased from 3.7% in Q4 2007 to 4.2% in Q1 2008. The reports also include a sales tax forecast based on pessimistic, most likely, and optimistic considerations. The Q1 2008 report forecast for FY 2008/09 ranges from $144 million to $147 million, with $145 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 with a year-to-date decline of 7.01 % through June compared to the prior year period. Based on the trend over the past six months, staff has estimated sales tax revenues for FY 2007/08 at $145 million, which was used in the bonds analysis Agenda Item 7F • 40 " presented to the rating agencies and is comparable to the most likely forecast provided by MuniServices. The actual sales tax revenues earned as of June 2008 were $143 million. This amount does not include the fourth quarter clean-up payment that will be received by the Commission in September 2008. 1 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A Year: FY 2007/08 Amount: N/A Source of Funds: Measure A sales tax revenues Budget Ad ustment: N/A GLA No.: N/A Fiscal Procedures Approved: \ 0/1, Date: 08/14/2008 Attachment: Quarter 1, 2008 STARS Report Agenda Item 7F 41 District of Riverside Co RCTC Sales Tax Digest Summary SECOND Quarter Collection of FIRST Quarter Sales Quarter 1, 2008 NISERVICES INTRODUCTION Every geographic region of California experienced declines in sales tax revenue during the year ended 1st Quarter 2008. Challenges in more than one economic sector press the California economy as it moves toward a year or two of fiat to negative growth. The purpose of this '£ summary is to provide Riverside Co ROTC with an overview of economic trends and pressures affecting the economy. The percent change in cash receipts over the prior year was (-1.0%) statewide, (-0.2%) in Northern California and (-I.6%) in Souther 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 1 S` Quarter 2008 by (-2.6%) statewide, (2.5%) in Northem California, and (-2.7%) in Southern California. KEY FACTORS Several key factors influenced the sales tax revenue during the year ended f n Quarter 2008. The following table outlines the major influences on sales tax. Economic lnfuences on S?'es?fix Fuel Costs • Increased sales tax from Service Stations. Housing Market Troubles • Decreased revenue from Building Materials as building, remodeling and cash -out refinancing slowed. Auto Sales • Significantly decreased revenue from New Auto Sales. General Retail • Declining consumer spending. Information prepared byMurvIerviceS LLC 42 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 region's sales tax The number on the right is the percent change from the prior year. Caifoniia Statewide S.F. Bay Area Sacramento Valley Central Valley South Coast Inland Empire . North Coast Central Coast General Retail %rota// 96 Change 286/-2.4 174/-L 6 283/-19 29.8/ 3 9 29.1/-2.0 26.4/-3.5 30.2/ :37 34.0/-3.9 Food Products % of Total/ 96 Change 16.6/2.7 15.4/3.6 15.3/0.3 16.0/2.6 17.5/2.8 15.1/ 1.5 15.7/0.7 26.1/ L2 Construction 96 of Total/ 96 Change 10.3/-11.5 103/53 12.7/46.1 13.1/-182 91/-9.5 13.6/49.4 16.0/44.6 10.9/-14.4 Transportation % of Total/ % Change 24.8/-4.3 22.6/-1.8 26.7/-6,7 26.4/-62 24.6/ 39 286/-7.8 28.4/-5.3 20.8/-4.7 Business to Business 96 of Total/ 96 Change MI5/04 23.2/ 1.8 15.8/10 13.9/21 18.6/-0.4 14.6/4.6 89/-6.9 7.3/8.1 Miscellaneous 96 of Total/96 Change 1.1/ 30 1.vas L1/-6.4 0..8/-9.9 1.1/ 3.2 L7/ 20 0.7/43.7 Q9/4.1.3 Total l00.0/:26 100.0/-O.5 1000/-4.8 100.0/-5.0 1000/-21 1000/-63 1000/58 1000/-3.4 _ Th -, L-tr -r,t E i1- S :1--f 't<. Cawromia Statewide -.is '`,- ;.,.r �. � �'4 S.F. Bay Area 1 ' .-.- Sacramento Valley Central Valley South Coast inland Empire North Coast Central Coast . Largest Segment 96ofTotal/ %Change Restaurants 11.2/1.9 Auto Sales - New ra.z/-/QO Department Stores 11.3/26 Department Stores 14.6 3.4 Restaurants 12.4/2.4 Auto Sales - New 12.3/438 Depanment Stores 14.1/-4.7 Restaurants 181/L3 2nd Largest Segment 96 of Total/ 96 Change Auto Sales - New 1128/d1.5 Department Stores 10.5/-1.6 Restaurants WO/26 Department Stores 9.9/4.5 Auto Sales - New IL1/-13.8 Auto Safes - New 106/-16.4 Service Stations 94/9./ Auto Sales - New 108/40.6 Department Stores 1Q0/-09 Department Stores 10.9j7S Service Stations 101/109 Bldg. Math.- Retail 9.5/-1.38 Department Stores la9/-7.0 Miscellaneous Retail MI/-L9 3rd Largest Segment %of Total/ 96Change Restaurants 9.5/-09 Service Stations 105/16 General Retail: Apparel Stores, Deparhnent Stores, Fumiture/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 Bung Materiats Remit 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 lnlnrmatonprepared byMuniSenice� CLC 43 District of Riverside Co RCTC PERFORMANCE REVIEW The following tables review the net cash receipts and the business activity performance for Quarter 2008. Net Cash Recef pts ,^ 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 102008 Receipts Net 102007 Receipts Actual Percentage Change $34,595,480 0 0 34,595,480 .00 (338,900) 34,256,580 36,818,393 -7_096 Business A( i °Or1712f1CC Ark,- ysis Local collections Less: Payments for Prior Periods Preliminary 102008 Collections Projected 102008 Late Payments Projected 1 Q2008 Final Results 33,494,454 $34,595,480 13,162,365) 31,433,114 2,061,340 Actual 102007 Results 38,506,401 Projected Percentage Change -13_0% HISTORICAL CASH COLLECTIONS ANALYSIS BY QUARTER fie t6aaaaada arS) i I S42,000 S40,000 S33,000 1 L1 V 536,000 CC ' z S34,000 S32,000 i S30,000 I�l�i�n�ll 4Q2005 IQ2006 2Q2086 3Q2006 4Q2006 1Q2007 24)2007 302007.4Q2007 1Q2008 I .115Nei Receipts —11.-5110 Adam it Fen Ore $600 S500 S400 u u S300 0 'e S200 a S100 S0 Information prepared hyMuniSe viCeg LLC 3 44 District of Riverside Co RCTC TOP 25 SALES/USE TAX CONTRIBUTORS The following list identifies Riverside Co RCTCs Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors. The list is in alphabetical order and represents the year ended 1st Quarter 2008. The Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors generate 21.7% of Riverside Co RCTCs total sales and use tax revenue. ARCO AM/PM MINI MARTS BEST BUY STORES CHEVRON SERVICE STAT1ONS CIRCLE K FOOD STORES COSTCO WHOLESALE DEPT OF MOTOR VEHICLES FERGUSON ENTERPRISES 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. SHELL SERVICE STATIONS STATER BROS MARKETS TARGET STORES WAL MART STORES HISTORICAL SALES TAX AMOUNTS The following chart shows the sales tax level for the year ended 1 s` Quarter 2008 and the highs and the lows for each segment over the last two years. fir tiorsaods of S) 525,000 515,000 51 um* E ss.000 50 +Ay 42" o`a`tc 4,4#9. ►►►o dim` OoC S;a4 0ee1ti V 4" ► 3 +�c 0 ni Q2sss *Risk 1, Low Information prepared byMuniSert cin LLC 4 45 District of Riverside Co RCTC ANNUAL SALES TAX BY BUSINESS CATEGORY IQ 3065 4Q 2007 3Q 2007 2Q 2007 IQ 2007 492006 30 3096 2Q 2096 19 2096 49 2905 (i• 014wwa•w0r wf 5y nommirminilimmonsimemmeismanimoni -11111191MMIMI SO S29,0019 54,11.000 560,940 S60,049 S194,901) 5I29,990 S149,001 5160,0.0 5190,090 I j01C ewea•1 Retail 97s.d law6■eb �T atie• INIC.utratilea IMa•siweaa Tw awalwtat 111101 iseelh,weeaal FIVE-YEAR ECONOMIC TREND: Construction (i• 91aa ra•aaaa moos 57.000 S6,000 S5,000 S4,000 53,000 33.000 I $1 .090 S0 3 8 g ffi g g CI a a $ a CI o a e Information prepared' byAluniServices, LLC 5 46 District of Riverside Co RCTC 4th QUARTER 2007 FINAL RESULTS • S37,319,822 Local net cash collections • S 338,900 Less pool amounts • S2,398,692 Less prior quarter payments • $2,552,183 Add late payments • S37,812,213 Local net economic collections after adjustments • DOWN 8Y 5.946 compared to 4t Quarter 2006. MUNISERVICES' AUDIT RESULTS MuniServices, LLC performs an on -going audit for the District of Riverside Co RCTC: This quarter, Riverside Co RCTC received SO in sales tax from MuniServices' audit efforts; bringing the total sales tax revenue produced by MuniServices to SO. Information pmparecl byMuniSendcm LLC 6 47 " AGENDA ITEM 7G " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director Mark Massman, Bechtel Project Manager Gustavo Quintero, Bechtel Project Coordinator THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT Amendment to Agreement with Kleinfelder to Provide Supplemental Geotechnical Field Exploration, Testing Services, and Technical Evaluations for the Proposed Irvine to Corona Expressway Project PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 07-65-105-04, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 07-65-105-00, with Kleinfelder to provide geotechnical field exploration, testing services, and technical evaluations for the proposed Irvine to Corona Expressway project based on the negotiated project scope, schedule, and cost for a not to exceed amount of $743,652; 2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute amendments for non -cardinal changes to the scope of work up to a maximum of $250,000 for unforeseen optional tasks bringing this total request to $993,652; 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 4) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work of optional tasks as may be required for the project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In 2006, the Commission executed a cooperative agreement with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency (TCA) to develop and manage geotechnical feasibility studies for a potential transportation and utility corridor linking Riverside and Orange Counties. The purpose of the agreement is to jointly exercise the common powers of its parties as the Riverside Orange Corridor Authority (ROCA). The Commission is charged with administering the cooperative agreement and is responsible for the Agenda Item 7G 48 receipt and expenditure of federal and state funds to accomplish the geotechnical studies. At its February 14, 2007 meeting, the Commission awarded Agreement No. 07-65-105-00 to Kleinfelder to provide supplemental geotechnical field exploration, testing services, and technical evaluations for the proposed Irvine to Corona Expressway project for a total not to exceed amount of $6,158,608. Administrative Amendment Nos. 07-65-105-01, 07-65-105-02, and 07-65-105-03 were issued within the currently authorized budget to Kleinfelder on August 2007, June 2008, and August 2008, respectively. Amendment No. 1 covered additional costs for the web -based management system. Amendment No. 2 covered the costs associated with bringing in fire monitors required by the Forest Service. Amendment No. 3 covered the cost associated with bringing in the Technical Advisory Panel to determine tunnel feasibility for this project. These three amendments did not increase the budget of $6,158,608 approved by the Commission at its February 14, 2007 meeting. At its July 9, 2008 meeting, the Commission authorized an additional $650,000 for the deepening of two corehole locations as requested by Congressman Calvert, ROCA Board and Metropolitan Water District. These additional funds (originally identified as part of Amendment No. 3) will be rolled into this requested Amendment No. 4. To date, two out of the five coreholes have been drilled to their projected depth. Two of the coreholes have been drilled to an approximate half way of their projected depth leaving one corehole that is scheduled to commence drilling during the week of August 25, 2008. Since at least half of the proposed work has been completed to date; staff and the consultant team have a better understanding of tasks and effort it will take to complete the geotechnical work. The actual drilling field work started in April 2008 at a rate of 27 feet per day. This rate was below the expected drilling rate of 35 feet per day. Due to this drilling rate, the duration of the drilling program is being lengthened, which in turn lengthens the duration of the field geologist and support staff. In addition, monthly meetings have been taking place with Forest Service staff to keep them informed on activities currently been performed on forest lands. At the request of Forest Service staff, additional water monitoring sites were added to the scope of work. These additional, sites required monitoring equipment and multiple visits to gather the requested water data. Table 1 (attached) describes other reasons for the extended duration for the completion of this project. Staff recommends that the Commission approve Amendment No. 4 to Kleinfelder for the continuation of the drilling of coreholes to provide geotechnical field exploration, testing services, and technical evaluations for the proposed Irvine to Corona Expressway project. This request for $993,652 brings the total contract amount to $7,802,260. Funding for this work is available from the federal funds Agenda Item 7G 49 " identified specifically for this geotechnical work. The Commission matching funds are available from state Planning, Programming and Monitoring funds. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: No Year: FY 2008/09 Amount: $993,652 Source of Funds: Federal, STIP, and Local Funds Budget Ad ustment: Yes 106 65 41501 P2310 STIP Revenues $99,365 GLA No.: 106 65 41203 P2310 Local Agency Revenues $99,365 106 65 41409 P2310 Federal Agencies $794,922 106 65 81501 P2310 Special Studies $993,652 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \itte,taLgotti.o, Date: 8/19/2008 Attachments: 1) Summary of Assumptions for Revised Basis of Cost 2) Project Cost Breakdown 3) Revised Schedule Agenda Item 7G 50 ATTACHMENT .E KLElNFEL1.7E74 Table 1 Irvine Corona Expressway Summary of Assumptions for Revised Basis of Cost rt 95_�:ff9��ze [eAy .-�� c.... 1 Adm F PM , .. �S.�T•`:.,\ ,.• M�� F§eit �Y zi 1� T� ri €,r�s;4 r'-� 3"T^y" [ �£.°v-�fiN.�`i 5�*:;�^ 14 1.2 Project Management and Control Begin 3-16-07; End 3-15-09 24 months Begin 4-24-07; End 1-31-10 (33 months). Increased participation by PM and assistance to cover project demands._' 1.3. Coordination Meetings with RCTC 12 Monthly; 24 Bimonthly; `PM and PM Assistant Attend (36 Mtgs total) 12 meetings thru 4-9-08; 21 more monthly plus 3 Bimonthly thru 1-31- 10; PM and PM Assistant Attend and Lead Principal Geol or Engr (36 Mtgs total).* 1.4 Quarterly ROCA Mtgs, PM Attends (6 Mtngs total) PM and Principal Engineer Attends (6 Mtrrgs total).* 1.5 Local, State, Fed Meetings, PM and PM Assistantattends(10 Mtgs Total) Monthly meetings from December 2007 through 12-24-09 (24 Mtgs Total), Includes some Water Monitoring Meetings: 1.6 Coordination with other Agencies Agency Coordination as needed No Change* 1.7 Document Control Document Control Set Up No Change 1.8 Web Based Management System; License fee and maintenance of Web Based Management System (21 months) License fee and maintenance of Web Based Management System (30 months). 2 Special Use Permit 2.1 Special Use Permit Assistance Assist Special Use Permit by October 1, 2007 Assist Special Use Permit, End in April 2008.* 3 Field & Testing 3.1 Existing Data Summary Report Includes existing RC-OC MIS Does, CPA , Tri-Tunnel Project Includes RC-OC MIS Docs, CPA. and CPA Tunnel Project including 2007 Data.* 3.2 Field Reconnaissance Five site visits; Four visits per hole for ICE team including PB America and ; coordinating with USFS and planning field Includes revisions to field USFS operation and exploration plan. No significant Change' 3.3 Field Exploration Plan Feld Exploration Plan to be Final after Special Use Permit Field Exploration Plan to be Final after Special Use Permit. Delay in USFS Special Use Permit. USFS Review and Comments to be included.* 3.4 Personnel Mobilization and Set Up Mobilizing Kleinfelder personnel and equipment to each drill site and coordination with drillers. Additional site visits for biological clearances 3.5 Alt 3, 5, 6 and 7 Drilling and Sampling Drilling 10 days followed by 4 days rest_ Site Security needed during drill crew absence. Drilling rate 035 ft per day Drilling Alt 1, 5, 6 and 7. Drilling 10 days followed by 4 days rest. Site Security needed during drill crew absence_ Deepening of Alt. 1 and Alt 84064fIRV8L0 Copyright 2008 Kleinfelder T1-1 August 13, 2008 51 i LEINFELOEfT 249M a . nphtSastiorm average 7 for sharing data wfth MWD tunnel Drilling rate @ 27 ft per day average; lengthened duration of drilling program. Revised 2008 Drilling Charges.** 3.6 Alt 3, 5, 6 and 7 Logging Logging of core in field. 10 days followed by 4 days rest. Aft 1, 5, 6 and 7 Logging 10 days followed by 4 days rest. Deepening of Alt. 1 and Alt 7 for sharing data with MWD tunnel. Lengthened duration for field geologists attending to drilling program.* 3.7 Alt 4 Drilling and Sampling Drilling 10 days followed by 4 days rest. Site Security needed during drill crew absence. Drilling rate @ 35 ft per day average. Drilling 10 days followed by 4 days rest for both day and night work shifts. Site Security needed during drill crew absence. Drilling rate @ 27 ft per day average, Lengthened Duration of drilling program.** 3.8 Alt 4 Logging Logging of core in field. 10 days followed by 4 days rest. Logging 10 days followed by 4 days rest for both day and night work shifts. Lengthened Duration for field geologists attending to drilling program. 3.9 Core Evaluation / Core Photography QC and documentation of core. Core Storage 12 months, 5,000 sq ft; RCTC to assume core storage afterward. Increased depths of Alt 1 and Alt 7 with increased core handling and OC efforts* 3.10 Corehole Video / Geophysics ATV or OTV to identify packer test locations and geologic structure. Two days per site with two senior geologists to assist. Increased depths of Alt 1 and Alt 7 with increased time and efforts for geophysics* 3.11 Hydraulic Conductivity Testing Approximately 140 Inflations @ 4 per day. Increased depths of Alt 1 and Alt 7 with increased number of tests (approx.155 inflations).* 3.12 Well and Transducer Installation 14 Pressure Transducers; Two or three in each hole with one additional in open easing hole at each site_ 18 Pressure Transducers due to greater depths of Alt Land Alt 7.* 3.13 Laboratory Testing Laboratory test schedule for per contract. Increased number of tests due to deepening of Alt 1 and Alt 7.* 3.14 Fire Monitor Two Fire Monitors as Optional but subject to USFS Special Use Permit conditions. Prevailing Wage applies. One Fire Monitor per drill rig per shift (Four with night shift) per USFS Special Use Permit conditions. Prevailing Wage increases implemented by State. 3.15 Geotechnical Data Report Summarize field investigations, laboratory testing, methods, and data_ Review comments on Draft within three weeks. Increased amount of logging data and test data due to deepened Alt 1 and Aft 7.* 84064flRV8L0 Copyright 2008 Kleinfelder Tl - 2 August 13, 2008 • 52 K4EHVFELDER �\ H Not soko..0. 3.16 Final GDR Addressing review comments will not require additional field investigations. Final report to be signed by California Civil or Geotechnical engineer and Engineering Geologist. GDR final to be issued four weeks following comments. 20 copies and one camera ready copy and one CD/DVD. Increased amount of logging data and test data due to deepened Alt 1 and Alt 7.* 3.17 Geotechnical Data Analysis Analysis of corehole video/geophysics surveys and hydraulic conductivity Increased effort due to deepening of Alt 1 and Alt 7.* 3.18 Draft Geotechical Analysis Report Geotechical Assessment Report to evaluate likely impacts of site conditions on geotechnical tunnel feasibility. Review comments on Draft by RCTC within four weeks. Increased effort due to deepening of Alt 1 and Alt 7.* 3.19 Final Geotechical Analysis Report Addressing review comments will not require additional field investigations. Final report to be signed by California Civil or Geotechnical engineer and Engineering Geologist. GAR final to be issued four weeks following comments. 20 copies Increased effort due to deepening of Alt 1 and Alt 7.* 3.20 Technical Advisory Panel Task is Optional. Implement Technical Advisory . Panel Participation. 3.21 Develop Groundwater Monitoring Plan. Locations of resources to be identified and develop map with coordinate measurements. One reproducible and 20 copies. Greater than anticipated number of potential water resources to be catalogued. Additional reviews by USFS. Closure of forest. 3.22 Set up Monitoring Program and Initiate first Monitoring. Groundwater resources limited to 50 for surveying. Initiate monitoring program. Automated data down bad at some sites; minimal site modifications. GeoPentech attends USFS meetings throughout project as needed (Assume 24 meetings). Coordination for developing access strategy. 3.23 Monthly Monitoring Surveys of water resources done in pairs for safety. Access by hiking. No Change. 3.24 Groundwater Technical Memorandum Water resources data to be summarized in Groundwater Technical Memorandum. Some data to be collected after the Memorandum completion due to schedule No Change. 84064/I1W8L0 Copyright 2008 Kleinfekler T1 - 3 August 13, 2008 53 L%NFELOER •\� �%�mnow.+�iwo..n 3.25 Groundwater Modeling to evaluate one or two No Change. Modeling construction methods. 3.26 4 QA/QC Biological Assessment Optional Task was eliminated. 4.1 QA/QC of all project documents Increased effort as requested by RCTC. Notes: *Ail Labor costs based on actual rates which included annual escalation per contract. ** Escalation of Driller rates due to field start delay into 2008. 84064JIRV8L0 Copyright 2008 Kleinfetder Ti - 4 August 13, 2008 54 TABLE, Irvine -Corona E ssea � y- Pr oejctCostsandWBSCost Breakdown 2007Corttract Budget3 t _ c1� e - Project Cost Summary $4,961,429.00 $686,895.11 $6,865,365 Task No., and W BS No. and Trtle TOOK 1 AtltnlillstratiOrl and Pro'ect Management Task Costs 1.1 Project Staffing 1.2 Project Management and Control $229,829.88 - $109,212.84 $370,260.76 (Project Management Plan Coordination and Administration of the Project 1.3 Bi-Weekly Coordination Meetings with RCTC $38,026.08 $20,405.56 $70,638.58 1.4 Quarterly ROCA Committee Meetings $4,617.36 $2,441.53 $17,374.69 1.5 Meetings with Local, State, Federal Agencies $7,695.60 $6,114.89 $54,777.21 1.6 Coordination with Other Agencies $17,913.20 $1,813.61 $14,976.69 1.7 Document Control $50,035.20 $41,985.98 1.8 Web -based a . , > ent S tem $35,000.00 $105,000.00 s', 2.1 2,Special Use S • - . .I Use Permit Assistance " Permit Assistance $24,844.20 $10,603.09 $8,249.10 ask 3.1 eotec mica to xplorationand Test ingSeryices ' Existing Data Summary Data Report $20,691.72 $18,640.74 $12,955.03 3.2 Field Reconnaissance $61,426.18 $29,023.15 $30,690.12 3.3 Field Exploration Plan $48,693.48 S38,741.83 $15,918.41 3.4 Personnel Mobilization and Setup $30,303.60 $25,736.63 $6,397.27 3.5 Alt 3, 5, 6 & 7 - Crux Drilling and Sampling $1,475,275.60 $181,171.00 $1,442,521.00 3.6 Alt 3, 5, 6 & 7 Kleinfelder Logging $402,374.70 $42,019.78 $503,050.90 3.7 Alt 4 - CRUX Drilling & Sampling $567,751.00 $557,599.00 3.9 Alt 4 - Kleinlelder Logging $108,681.94 $3,145.48 $151,105.46 3.9 Core Evaluation/ Core Photography $182,567.76 $1,489.81 $207,062.08 Video! Geophysical Surveys $100,951.64 $724,879.60 OilCoretwle Hydraulic Conductivity Testing $133,689.84 $178,022.82 Well and Transducer Installation $110,514.72 $180,413.16 3.13 Laboratory Testing $62,221.64 $87,057.66 #!..: t $54,978.06 $543,080.03 3.15 Draft Geotechnical Data Report $84,782.40 $100,572.77 3.16 Final Geotechnical Data Report $55,161.44 $66,362.48 3.17 Geotechnical Data Analysis $71,586.60 $92,308.00 3.18 Draft Geotechnical Assessment Report $117,158.00 $134,484.95 3.19 Final Geotechnical Assessment Report $63,656.32 - $71,856.82 N-ai',1gec1lnPj"lr2t..�>.�`., .?"*;1"1' .. ., .. .. , .., $165,524.65. 3.21 Develop Groundwater Monitoring Plan $34,954.67 $32,937.03 89,758.59 3.22 Setup Monitoring Program & Initial Month's Monitoring $262,338.03 $280,052.44 3.23 Progressive Monthly Monitoring $201,33752 $202,159.23 3.24 Groundwater Technical Memo $41,106.38 $42,003.85 3.25 Groundwater Modeling $116,729.96 $117,004.21 Authorized Funding for Deepening Arts 1 and 7 $650,000.00 ask "4 4.1 OA OC QAJQC $121,575.20 $23,848 28 $107,377.37 Administrative Fee on Subconsultant Labor (5%) $111,582.82 $7,585.82 $141,793.28 Admin strative Fee on laboratory Testing (3%) $1,354.11 $2,056.97 Sub Totals $4,961,429 $686,895.11 $6,865,365 • Approved Amount (2007) Board Approved Funding for Deepening Alts 1 and 7 Requested Budget Increase (Above Previously Board Approved Amount) 55 . ATTACHMENT2 $479,494 $91,044 $19,816 $60,892 $16,790 $41,986 $140,000 $18,852 $31,596 $59,713 $54,660 $32,134 $1,623,692 $545,071 $557,599 $154,251 $208,552 $124,880 $178,023 $180,413 $87,058 $598,058 $100,573 $66,362 $92,308 $134,485 $71,857 $165,525 $42,696 $280,052 $202,159 $42,004 $117,004 $650,000 $131,226 $149,379 $2,057 ID 1 VVBS T 1Po1m-inistra0on and Prelett Mana9ennen1 1.1 Project Staging 5 12 12.1 12.2 1.2. 12.4 6 Reuben I Surf F 949.33 days! Mon 42327; Fri 102709 r 949 edaysi Mon 423/071 Fd 112729 Project Management and Control- ---949.33 days; Mon 4/2307 Fr11127/09 µ Project Management Plan Preparafice 30¢days; Mon 42327; Wed 523/07 Project Management Plan Submillal 0dayss Wed 523/071 Wed 2232- RCTC Review d PEP 222-7-21 30 edays. .._....._... _.. Project Management Plan pnpleownlation 870 edays Wed SrLiNTi FO 6/22f0'7 Wed 7/1122 Fd 1127/09 12.51 Mmfedy Progress Reports 905 edays Wed 646/07' Fri112729 13 Bi-Weekly Coordination MeatIgs wBh ROTC 896 rtaiel: Wed 42527: Wed 10RM9 1A Quadery m ROCA ComBlee Meetings 644 days: Fri 6/8271 Fd 21226 1.6..**. with Loral, Shale, and Federal Agencies 449 edays: Mon 423271: Fd 112729 _..:. (.aMfk9'itlon vA0tO9er Agencies 949 ¢days. Mon 4129R17I - Fd it/27ioa ea 1.5 85 1.6 87 88 89 90 91 1.8 Web -Based Management(WO14) System 2,SP�I Use Permit Assistance _ I 905 edaysl Wed 66/07 Fri 1127/09 - 343 days Mon 4/231O7 Mon 3/3128 2.1 Special Use Permit Assistance 343 edays ^ 3 Deoterdmlcal Held Exploration and Testing Services 940-33 days: i 3.1t Existing Data Summary Data Report 303.33 days; Mon 423M Mon 301/08 Wed 52/07 Fd 1/2729 Well 6227 Fd 229A8 3.1./ Existing Data Coiledin and Review 93 3.12: Data Summary Report P: rem 75 edaysi Wed 52271 Mon 728/07 254.38 ectays' Wed 522071 Fd 125/O8 0 edays; Fri 125/08� Fd 12526 95 32 eoaysf Mon matOBi Fd 22928 317,edays Wed 52271 Fd 32428 304 days; Fd 6/I1571 Mod 32128 I li Field Exploration Planning 304 edays Di82/07 bon 313128 99 3-73.ir Oran Field Exporaton Plan Submittal 0 adapt Fn 125/Oe: Fd 1/2528 100 33.5 ka.T t. Review of Drab Field emlwallon Plan ffi0121 Msn 1128/06: Fd 22920 107 3.3.4! Finalization d Field Explaallon Plan 14 edaysi. 21220213; Fd 3/1429 102 33.51 Fetal Field Exploration Mat Submittal 0edaysi F11324/06 Fd 31428- 103 54. Personnel Mobdleationand Set Up 25 ¢days;. Mon 33128 _ Fd 42528 Data Seminary Repot Submital 3.tdj RCTC RevieewofData Summary Report. 321 Field Reconnaissance 1 3.3! Field Exploration Plat) I 104 3.5: AR 3,5, 687- Crux Drilling and SampFmg 155 days Mon 428281 Toe 913021/ 105 35.1AN 3 Dux Drilling and Sampling 79 edam! Mon 4281081 wed 77i8108 106 4SY. All 5 Crux Orlin and Sampling 66 edays Alone/282M 107 353: All 6 Crux Oieing and Sampling 70 edaysr, Tin 7/22/00 Oa 109 I 1 3541, A0.7 Crux Orillig and StereAg 3.6 Alt 3, 5, 687 KleiMelderLogging 3/3.11 Alt 3 Kleidelder logging 3.6.21 Alt KIe8deMertogprg 112 36.3' Ad 6 Klekdelder Logging 112 7/31013 Tue 9f3079 . 50-eiliiiii. SinT232 --Sun--9/21/O6 155 days' Min 42826' Tie 9130108 79 edaysi Mon 4/282e' Wed 72628 68 edayst 421425/0 12/7/308 70 edays Toe 7/2224 Tee 92028 3 4 115 116 95.4i AK 710eotelderlogg8g 70 edaysi Sun 72328, Sun 9212-5 _ ._ L__.._.._____.._._.._. 3.7' Alt 4-Preen Drilling B Sampling 130 ¢days b10-2-4 m 172Po08 3.8. Alt 1__._.__ 1 logging t30 ¢days; Mon428108- 3.9I Cote EvakraloniCore Photography 140¢days1: Mon52608 Mon 10/13Po6 3.10 Corekok .� __ Ydeo/GeaphysicelSuveys ... 88 edays; 7Fu7woet-- Min 92388 1 _________.____....__.._______.____._.......- _ 3.1 t, [{ydraerc CoMmtivdy "7esikg -. 144 edaysi 1.42529091 Fn 1O112et6 116 edaysl Tne7/828 Set 11/608 7 8 9 3_12 Web and Transducer Installation .. Fri 6/644 _ --Fn 9PW08 he+J'EMEM7M8"._:�=1 .,;., i.a'>r11:=717 7133!T!1=1.11 !•LvarM11 _. It"--.MICIL7A 4122 WO 6/77 7/15 13/12 92 102 11M 12/2 1220 1/27 224 -- _ ATTACHMENT 3 .l.Ltu Decent _ __ 5/18. 6/15 7/13 210 27 1f1l 112 11/30 1228 1125. 222- 322 4/19 5/17 a ac::n; 624 122 82 9/6 10V4 WI 1129 eu:tu3rtl'dr'.i%iW;-'c""D.» rear;tie, el3 inuttrnynei i.Giirn rut a12l {1'n(;i4121:12i11r_yyl sur MOmlf:B O 5M • ♦ ♦ O ♦ 6) O O O O• O O A O • O ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ • O • O O O • O O F iF - • t ::. 'N t _.. l i ltt :'IJw. :.r 1 - jl t - 1✓<:J 1 l; 1_ r S nl .. . to WbiiiiM815 pt1228:V512222.829F, r£-nii .aiS?t.drpan,`712. 21.2)12,,'2121,1062 9011W191211Wt1... 814511.N99>1 1901Iud91VlJ mro.8858W ugmq ♦ 1/25 E :99gN11[iL+>I u n 9r 1 m-9921 Ir91 ! 7195352 BPJOP&1.9a Lrla."J memrienomr 2911212211M26121!ti l'.IIiR' NE /9901820pfP.C9'S!!N"A 2511M51821111.212218 !n u:'seM.:'rdr"w'+1G:lu`tr�.;tkn f') Project PMPSc ed tesev9 Date: Fd 171826 Task SWg 1Y.1;:d. xtalp:a.:;151.1 Progress lededone • Strutrary Edema(Tasks =;ems221=1 Project Summary w-'-- * External MiteTask 0 1>er56 January `08 Update ro ! was ask Name Duration Stan i > June 120 3.13 LaematoyTesting 121 3.14 (opt) Fire Monitor 122 3.15 Draft GeMechnical Data Report 123 3.75.1E [raft GDR Preparation 124 3.152 125 3.153 126 3.16 Final GDR Draft GDR Submittal RCM Review o1 Draft GDR 159 mays( I 215215 Says( Mon 3311012 Sat 11/1/08 I 202 days' Trw 7221081 wen 2AM9 17/ eda s Tue 7 Fd 9/989 0 edays Fri Fd I/9/09 Mon 7pAM 31 efts. Fd 1 Mon 29109 Mon 218831 Mon WOO 28 days 127 a/61 Fkrei GDR Preparation 728 3.162T Fain GDR Sbiadvl 28 edam Mon219AB won 39A19 l ' 0 edaysE Mon 39A91 Mon 39/09 129 1313 131 132 133 134 135 3.1T RoLdnAd Data Analysis 163 edays' Mar 1T1/01108: Wed 4n2/09 3.18 Draft Geotechnial Assessment Report 168 Gays] 3.18.1 Draft GAR Reparation 3.182 Draft GAR Submits, 3.183 RCTC Review of Draft GAR 3.19 Final GAR a101l. Mal GAR r :vrra.a0.y 138 "` 3.1921 Final GAR SuMNtal Ovary Mon5asa91 eon 525109 Ron 11N01816 Mon 421M9 140edaystll Mon 11/1 Mon 3T30109 si 0edayMon Mon 3/30109 28 Sara Mon wm 427109 i 28 days Mona27MM Son 5/25109 28 edaysl Mon427KO Mon 525/09 • 137 320(oath TedadrafAd+fisory Pawl 138 a21T I 139 140 141 321.1 3212 i 421 ethyl g Develop Groundwater MonilaiPlan --. - 172 daya"1, GYwNAsala Monandry Harr Preparation 114 earls Grou dwater.Madlorblg Ran SmmMal 321.3 RCTC Review of GmuaMater MamloBy Pia1 142 143 a22r Setup Morii0019 Program and Mat Monids Moab/in: ! 323: Monody MoMrorilg 324Groundwater Technical Memo 158 324.1 Groundwater Technical Mara R.4.maton 157 3242 Groundwater Technical Memo SWmLat 158 159 160 324.3, RCTC Raider/ ofGrysdwNy Technical Metro 325! Gmurdaaler Modeling 3:26-74-01- Sun 3/3006 bon 525109 Mon mew; Fd 1/18/0'e Man 7130/09 wed 11n197 0 aisle Wed 112110-4 Wed 1121/07 Means! We11121A/i Fri 1118/00 31 Says; Fd 3/28/00 ton 428105 441 days. Mon 8/401 Mon 10/19/09 361 dispel Son 12M11181 Fr11127/09 333 etaya Mon 12/1/01 Fd 10/30/09 1 0 days': Fd 101d0109! Fd 11Y30109 28 edawg Fd 1013130:6 Fd 11/27/09 163 yaws! Mon 111100% Wed 422109 595days! Ron 3/4108! Mon30/1999 161 162 4301wGty COMrop4n11ty Assurance 4.11 DA0D 949 days' Mon 949adaysi Mon Fri 11/27/09 Fri 18279 422 6/i7 ( 915 t 5/ti2 Decan 11/4 t 122 12/30 Ftleuel March Jana 12T 224 4/20 18 16/15 I WM j 8PI0 917 1 • :A92r1!N8801111t OMPI40319 7m i 41E Nuven Decem 11f2 111311 12/28 Januar 25 1222 Jere 9 1 5/17 ! 8ry4 F 7/12 89 1 0".FW'4?oad Y3/30 'ul9r�F�181nW 1tlCJb01 MD Me MID Q� f9 I Oclobe Novanl Decem J 11/1 111/29 (1 • i Prcarch PUP Sdwdularav8 Date: Fri'mos Task SPM !fi 1C _ rd Progress M9edone Sammy P/CRc1 S:JIMM r O° External Tasks y SOK C7demal b9eTask • 8 January `08 Update i AGENDA ITEM 7H i RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation "Committee of the Whole" Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program - Memorandum of Understanding Amendment BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION `COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE" AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. 04-72-002-01, Amendment No. 1 to MOU No. M23-002, between the Commission and Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) regarding the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF); 2) Authorize the Executive Director to execute the amendment on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Approve the TUMF Administrative Plan amendment. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The 2009 Measure A program required each agency to participate in a TUMF program. The WRCOG was designated as the administrator of the TUMF funds and responsible for the development and implementation of the TUMF Zone program, and the Commission is responsible for the TUMF Regional Arterial program. Additionally, the 2009 Measure A Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) stated that the first $400 million would be made available to the Commission to equally fund the TUMF regional arterial system and the Community Environmental Transportation Approval Process (CETAP) corridors. In 2003, the Commission and WRCOG entered into a MOU to split the arterial revenue between both agencies in accordance with the TUMF Nexus Study until the 2009 Measure A took effect. The agreement further stipulated that if upon July 1, 2009 the $400 million was not repaid, 100% of the TUMF funds would then go to the Commission until the $400 million was satisfied. Given the current economic condition, the $400 million will not be paid to the Commission by July 1, 2009. In order to prevent a disruption of funding for TUMF projects, Agenda Item 71-I 58 Commission and WRCOG staff have met to discuss and resolve this issue. As a result, the Commission and WRCOG have agreed that the $400 million cap should be lifted and the Commission would continue receiving an equal share of the TUMF regional arterial revenue indefinitely. Therefore, both agencies will continue administering TUMF programs; the Commission's Regional Arterial program and WRCOG's Zone program.. A TUMF Gatekeepers Committee will be established consisting of elected leaders from both agencies. The above agreements have been reflected in the TUMF MOU amendment. The MOU amendment will replace the July 10, 2003 MOU. The TUMF Administrative Plan has also been amended to reflect the Commission's ,F role in administering the Regional Arterial program. The plan also reflects how the Commission and WRCOG committee structures will be coordinated so that recommendations from respective committees will be included and forwarded to each respective committee and board, including the TUMF Gatekeepers Committee. Attachments: 1) TUMF MOU Amendment 2) TUMF Administrative Plan Agenda Item 7H 59 Agreement No. 04-72-oo2-o1 REVISED AND RESTATED MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS CLARIFYING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MEASURE "A" AND TUMF THIS REVISED AND RESTATED MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING is made and effective this day of , 2008, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("RCTC") and the WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS ("WRCOG"). RCTC and VlVRCOG are sometimes collectively referred to herein as the "PARTIES". RECITALS A. On May 8, 2002, RCTC enacted Ordinance No. 02-001 for the purpose, among others, of imposing a 0.5% retail transactions and use tax (Measure "A" (2002)) the proceeds of which would be spent in accordance with the Transportation Improvement Plan attached to the Ordinance as Exhibit "B" ("TIP"). The collection of Measure "A" (2002) sales taxes shall commence upon the expiration of the existing Measure "A" sales tax on or about April 2009. B. On November 5, 2002, a supermajority of Riverside County voters approved Measure "A" (2002), including the TIP. By its terms, the TIP conditioned the expenditure of Measure "A" (2002) revenues in city and county jurisdictions with the requirement, among other things, that matching revenues be generated within such jurisdictions in the form of a "Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee", or "TUMF". C. WRCOG is a joint powers public agency consisting of the County of Riverside, fifteen cities, and two regional water districts situated in the wester end of Riverside County. WRCOG developed a TUMF ordinance and Administrative Plan that was adopted by its member agencies between December 2003 and April 2004 that would serve to implement the TUMF. The TUMF is expected to result in transportation improvements in Western Riverside County valued at about $5 billion, and the ordinance designates WRCOG as the program administrator. D. The TIP includes a requirement that $400 million of TUMF revenues (the "$400 Million TUMF Requirement") be transferred to RCTC to fund, equally, the Measure "A" (2002) Regional Arterial System and the CETAP Corridors System that are identified as part of the Regional System of Highways and Arterials. 1 60 E. Because the TUMF program was not finalized by the time Measure "A" (2002) was approved by Riverside county voters, the details necessary to fully coordinate the two revenue programs could not be worked out. F. On July 10, 2003 WRCOG and RCTC entered into an MOU (the "Original MOU") that established the process whereby the $400 Million would be transferred to • RCTC. The agreement stipulated that after WRCOG deducted the administrative component, the balance of the revenue would be allocated as follows: 48.1 % to RCTC for the RCTC regional program, 48.1 % for the WRCOG Zone program and 3.8% for the Riverside Transit Agency for regional transit projects. Further, the agreement stipulated that if the $400 Million TUMF requirement was not satisfied by April 1, 2009 then all TUMF revenues, excluding administrative cost, would be transferred to RCTC until the obligation had been satisfied. G. Between 2003 — 2007 both agencies adopted TUMF Transportation Improvement Programs with significant funding commitments. In order not to disrupt funding for existing project commitments both parties have agreed to revise the Original MOU to assure that funding will be available to support the delivery of projects programmed by WRCOG, RCTC and RTA. H. WRCOG and RCTC have agreed to this Revised and Restated MOU for the purpose of, among other things, of revising the Original MOU to 1) delete the requirement in the Original MOU that after April 2009 all TUMF revenues (excluding administrative costs) be allocated to RCTC until the $400 Million TUMF Requirement is satisfied; 2) remove the $400 Million cap on TUMF revenues to be allocated to RCTC under the TUMF program; and 3) to direct TUMF revenues (after deduction for administrative costs, transit funding and MSHCP funding) equally to the WRCOG Zone program and RCTC Regional Arterial TUMF Program. I. This Revised and Restated MOU supersedes the Original MOU as of April 30, 2009. Prior to April 30, 2009, the Original MOU shall control MUTUAL UNDERSTANDINGS NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing facts and mutual understandings, the PARTIES wish to memorialize, by this Memorandum, the following mutual understandings: 1. Allocation of TUMF Revenues from October 1, 2008 thereafter. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66000 et seq., WRCOG has prepared and periodically updates at Nexus Study (the "Nexus Study") to support the imposition of the TUMF. The Nexus Study will determine the percent allocation for each of the program components under the TUMF. After the set aside of funds for Program Administration and the Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan ("MSHCP"), TUMF revenues shall be allocated for the following purposes in accordance with the Nexus Study as follows: 2 • 61 a. Regional transit; and b. Equally to: 1) the ROTC Regional Arterial TUMF Program consistent with Measure "A" (2002) and the TIP; and 2) the WRCOG Zone Program, as more specifically provided for in the WRCOG TUMF Administrative Plan. The allocation of revenues set forth in this Section 1 shall continue until this Revised and Restated MOU is modified or amended in writing by the parties and shall not be capped at a total of $400 Million. 2. Satisfaction of the $400 Million TUMF Requirement. WRCOG and RCTC agree that the requirements of this MOU shall satisfy the $400 Million TUMF Requirement set forth in Measure "A" (2002). 3. RCTC Regional Arterial TUMF Program. The development and approval of the RCTC Regional Arterial TUMF Program of projects and funding priorities will be through the following integrated RCTC WWRCOG process: a. For the purpose of developing and updating the RCTC Regional Arterial TUMF Program, the western jurisdictions of the RCTC TAC will be combined with the WRCOG Public Works Committee into a single committee known as the TUMF Public Works Committee (TPWC). This Committee will be comprised of the Public Works Directors from each city in western Riverside County and the Transportation Director from the County of Riverside and will meet on a regular basis according to an adopted schedule. The TPWC will make recommendations regarding the RCTC Regional Arterial TUMF Program to the WRCOG TAC and RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee. b. WRCOG Technical Advisory Committee (WRCOG TAC), comprised of the City Managers, County Executive management, General Managers from two regional water districts, and the Executive Director of March JPA meets regularly according to an adopted schedule and will review the TPWC recommendations and forward the recommendations on the RCTC Regional Arterial TUMF Program with any revisions to the WRCOG Executive Committee for action. c. RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee, comprised of RCTC Commissioners, meets monthly according to an adopted schedule and will review the RCTC Regional Arterial TUMF Program along with the TPWC recommendations and any additional recommendations from the WRCOG TAC and forward their recommendation to the full RCTC Board for action. 3 62 d. WRCOG Executive Committee will review the RCTC Regional Arterial TUMF Program along with the WRCOG TAC recommendations and any additional information from the RCTC Budget and implementation Committee and forward their recommendations to the RCTC Board. e. The RCTC Board of Commissioners shall be presented with the proposed RCTC Regional Arterial TUMF Program along with any concerns raised by any of the RCTC or WRCOG Committees described above. If the Board of Commissioners desires to make any changes to the Program, the RCTC Regional Arterial Program shall be referred to the Coordinating Committee for resolution and approval. It is intended that steps a — e will be accomplished within a 30 day meeting cycle. This process is designed to move quickly and build better consensus for the two agencies for project delivery. In the event that approval of the RCTC Regional Arterial TUMF Program is not achieved within 90 days of presentation of the matter to the TUMF Public Works Committee, the Program shall be returned to the RCTC Board for final consideration and approval, or redirection to the appropriate committee. In such cases, the action of the RCTC Board of Commissions shall be final and not subject to further review under this MOU. 4. CETAP Corridors as TUMF Improvements. TUMF revenues shall not be used to develop new CETAP corridors that are not also designated on the Regional System of Highways and Arterials as established in the TUMF Nexus Study. 5. RCTC's Expenditure of TUMF Revenues. Accounting and expenditure of TUMF revenues shall be in conformance with the Nexus Study, the Administrative Plan and applicable state laws, including Government Code Sections 66000 et seq. 6. Allocation of Unclaimed Measure "A" (2002) Local Streets and Roads Funds. Section 5.D, of the "General Provisions of the Transportation improvement Plan" of the TIP establishes the method for allocating Local Streets and Roads Funds of agencies not participating in the TUMF. RCTC agrees that in allocating such funds, that it will consider, among other things: a. The zones created by WRCOG for the TUMF. b. The allocation to Regional Arterial improvements so as to allow the timely use of such funds. 7. Establishment of a Coordinating Committee. There is hereby established a six -member "Measure "A"/TUMF Policy Coordinating Committee", consisting of the Chairperson, Vice -Chairperson and the Second Vice Chairperson of RCTC, and the Chairperson, Vice -Chairperson and Second Vice Chairperson of the WRCOG Executive Committee. The Policy Coordinating Committee shall meet as necessary for the purpose of 4 63 coordinating the allocation and expenditure of TUMF and Measure "A" revenues or review the RCTC Regional Arterial TUMF Program as described herein. If any of the above listed positions at WRCOG or RCTC are vacant, the Chair of the respective agency may appoint a temporary member. 8. Amendment. This Memorandum of Understanding may be amended in writing by mutual agreement of the PARTIES. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Amendment to be signed as of the date first above written. RIVERSIDE COUNTY WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION OF GOVERNMENTS By: By Jeff Stone, Chairperson Jeff Stone, Chairperson Reviewed and Recommended Reviewed and Recommended for approval- for approval: By: By. Anne Mayer, Executive Director Rick Bishop, Executive Director 5 64 Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN Revised August 4, 2008 TUMF RCC, G PREPARED BY THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS RIVERSIDE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CENTER ANNEX 4080 LEMON STREET, 3RD FLOOR, MS 1032 RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA, 92501-3609 PHONE (951) 955-7985 FAX (951) 787-7991 Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOP Administrative Plan for the 65 " Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program Table of Contents Preamble 1. Purpose II. Authority III. Imposition of and Participation in the TUMF Program IV. Allocation of Funds V. Administration of Plans VI. Administration of Credits VII. Administration of Reimbursements VIII. Administrative Responsibilities IX. Administrative Costs X. Appeals XI. Arbitration XII. TUMF Program Amendments XIII. CEQA tlf: Sharedlupe`,WRCOG TUMF Administrative Plan (Adopted) (18f:4�8.000 2 66 Exhibits: A. Decision Making Process B. TUMF Credit/Reimbursement Eligibility Process C. Guidelines for the Administration of the Programming projects for the Zone Five Year Transportation Improvement Programs H-'cShe:edl�uW`tfRCOG TUtAF Administrative Plan (Adopted) 080408 DOD. 3 • 67 " " " Administrative Plan for the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program Preamble Future development within Westem Riverside County will result in traffic volumes exceeding the capacity of the Regional System of Highways and Arterials (RSHA or Regional System) as it presently exists. The Regional System needs to be expanded to accommodate anticipated future growth; current funds are inadequate to construct the Regional System needed to avoid the unacceptable levels of traffic congestion and related adverse impacts. The TUMF Program will provide significant additional funds from new development to make improvements to the Regional System, complementing funds generated by Measure A and the Reauthorized Measure A, local transportation fee programs, and other potential funding sources. By establishing a fee on new development in the sub -region, local agencies can establish a mechanism by which developers will effectively contribute their "fair share" toward sustaining the regional transportation system. This is a twenty-year program and will be influenced by a variety of market factors that could cause a shortfall or surplus in the revenue projections. The TUMF Program shall be reviewed at fewer than five-year intervals to ensure the integrity of the program with the first review occurring in June of 2005. The program is not designed to be the only source of revenue to construct the identified facilities, and it will be necessary for matching funds from a variety of available sources to be provided. It is the intent that TUMF requirements may be met by paying cash, building eligible facilities or through public financing, such as Community Facility Districts and Assessment Districts, or private financing vehicles consistent with local jurisdiction policies. General TUMF Program parameters, definitions and procedures are described in the TUMF Program Ordinance adopted by participating Western Riverside County jurisdictions. The Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) is designated as the TUMF Program Administrator, and as such will work closely with member jurisdictions, the Riverside County Transportation Commission, and the Riverside Transit Agency to coordinate transportation expenditure programs to maximize the effectiveness of future transportation investments. The Program Administrator, WRCOG, agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless any TUMF Program participant, and its respective agents, officers, members, officials, employees, and attomeys, whose TUMF Ordinance is challenged in court, from and against all claims, liabilities, damages, or costs of any kind whatsoever, including attomeys' fees and court costs; provided, however, that such indemnity and defense shall not extend or apply to challenges alleging procedural defects in the adoption of the TUMF Ordinance. "TUMF Administrative Plan" means the Administrative Plan for the Western Riverside County TUMF Program prepared by WRCOG dated March 24, 2003, in substantially the form approved by the WRCOG Executive Committee on April 7, 2003, as may be amended from time to time, provided that, any material amendments to the TUMF Administrative Plan shall be approved by WRCOG Executive Committee." This Administrative Plan serves as the guideline to implement the TUMF Program and will be amended as needed to address changing conditions over the life of the program. }-:Sha^edl sv COO PJtilF Administrative Plan (Adopted' 0�i)408.DOC 4 68 1. Purpose - The Purpose of this Administrative Plan is to provide those jurisdictions and agencies that are participants in TUMF Program with guidelines and policies for implementation of the TUMF Program. This Administrative Plan specifies implementation and responsibilities for the TUMF Program. TUMF Program funds may only be used for capital expenditures associated with the Regional System of Highways and Arterials and for capital expenditures for transit system improvements consistent with the TUMF Nexus Study. These purposes include expenditures for the planning, environmental review, engineering and design costs, right of way acquisition, and administrative costs. 11. Authority - The TUMF Program applies to those jurisdictions in Western Riverside County (County of Riverside and the Cities of Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon Lake, Corona, Hemet, Lake Elsinore, Moreno Valley, Murrieta, Norco, Perris, Riverside, San Jacinto, Temecula, Wddomar and the March JPA) that have adopted and are implementing the TUMF Program Ordinance. The TUMF Program has been developed pursuant to and consistent with authority provided in the requirements of California Government Code Chapter 5 Section 66000-66008 Foes for Development Projects {also known as California Assembly Bin 1600 (AB 1600 or the Mitigation Fee Act) which govems the assessment of development impact fees in Califomia. The Mitigation Fee Act requires that all local agencies in California, induding cities, counties, and special districts follow two basic rules when instituting impact fees as follows: A. Establish a nexus or reasonable relationship between the development impact fee's use and the type of project for which the fee is required; B. The fee must not exceed the project's proportional "fair share" of the proposed improvement and cannot be used to correct current problems or to make improvements for existing development. 111. Imposition of and Participation in the TUMF Program - Participating jurisdictions in Western Riverside County are responsible for collecting the fees on new development within their jurisdictions. To be considered a participant in the TUMF Program a jurisdiction must have an effective date for the TUMF Ordinance of no later than June 1, 2003 and adopt any amendment of the TUMF Ordinance within ninety (90) days of approval by the WRCOG Executive Committee unless otherwise directed by the WRCOG Executive Committee. The local jurisdictions must adopt the Model TUMF Ordinance and any amendments as prepared by WRCOG staff and approved by the WRCOG Executive Committee. Participating jurisdictions shall not modify the. Model TUMF Ordinance, except to meet local municipal codes and references. Further, in order to be considered a participating jurisdiction, local jurisdictions shall collect the full TUMF and transmit the fee to WRCOG as provided herein. Those jurisdictions that have ordinances with an effective date after June 1, 2003 or opt out of the TUMF Program and decide to participate at a later date must remit to WRCOG the amount of TUMF Program -fees for new development that were not collected by the jurisdiction. In order to verify the amount of revenue that would have been collected during the period in which a jurisdiction did not participate, said jurisdiction shall provide WRCOG with an annual report of building permit activity by the land uses identified in the Nexus Study. The remittance of the fee can be accomplished . either in a lump sum or through a separate MOU with WRCOG with a repayment schedule. Those jurisdictions that are not considered participants in the TUMF Program l- :SheredlureMIRCOG TUtvIF Al^tiC:isir2 ve Plan (Adopted) CSC40a.DOC rj 69 shall not be eligible to participate in the TUMF Program or the decision -making processes as more fully described in this document. Non -participating jurisdictions will be ineligible to vote on any TUMF Program item and to receive their share of an estimated $970 million in local streets and roads funds that will be allocated from the Reauthorized Measure A. A. Expiration Of Building Permits - If a building permit should expire, is revoked, or is voluntarily surrendered and is, therefore voided and no construction or improvement of land or construction has commenced, then the applicant is entitled to a refund of the TUMF (Fee) collected which was paid as a condition of approval, less administration. The fee payer shall submit an application for a refund to the local jurisdiction who will forward it to WRCOG for processing. The applicant must pay the appropriate TUMF in full if he reapplies for the permit. If a development project is partially under construction at the time of the effective date of the TUMF Ordinance, the TUMF shall be paid only on that portion of the development for which a building permit is next issued. B. Calculation of the TUMF - Each participating jurisdiction shall calculate and collect the TUMF for projects as outlined in the Fee Calculation Handbook. For residential, the fee is based on the number of units and for non-residential the fee is based on the square footage. This method of calculation may be different from how the local development impact fee is determined. The TUMF shall be calculated using the most current fee schedule in effect at the time the fee is due. Participating jurisdictions are prohibited from freezing TUMF by such means as "locking" a fee rate by paying a deposit or a portion of the fee prior to the date the fee is due or by entering into a Development Agreement or other agreement with a developer that freezes the fee at a certain level Partial Payments or Deposits: WRCOG discourages the use of deposits and partial payments as it will create additional reporting requirements for the jurisdictions and may give the developer the impression that the fees are not subject to change. However, if a jurisdiction allows for deposits or partial payments, it will transmit the partial payment/deposit to WRCOG in accordance with the TUMF ordinance along with a remittance report. In the variance column of the Remittance report, the jurisdiction shall indicate that the fee collected is a portion of the total due. When the balance is paid, the jurisdiction will calculate the total fee for the project based on the TUMF fee schedule in place at the time the balance is paid and deduct the partial payment against the total. The balance will be transmitted in accordance with the TUMF ordinance and this Administrative Plan. The variance column of the Remittance report shall indicate that the balance is paid If there is a fee adjustment between the deposit/partial payment and the payment of the balance, the fee which is required to be paid will. be based on the most current TUMF fee schedule. C. March Joint Powers Authority - The March Joint Powers Authority (JPA) has land use authority and will need to adopt the TUMF Program in the same manner as the cities and county. The March JPA will not have a separate vote at the WRCOG Executive Committee as it has representation by elected officials from the County of Riverside and cities of Riverside, Moreno Valley and Perris. The H Shared';LupO RCOC= TUMF Administrative Plan. (Adopted) 080408.DOC 70 Executive Director of the March JPA shall be a voting member of the WRCOG TAC for TUMF Program items only. IV. Allocation of Funds — After administrative costs are allocated as specified in Section IX herein, TUMF funds shall be distributed in accordance with WRCOG Executive Committee actions, the Nexus Study, this Administrative Plan and any future amendments thereto A. Allocation to Regional Transit Improvements - Of the TUMF funds received by WRCOG, 2.6% shall be allocated to the Riverside Transit Agency for making regional transit improvements. B. Allocation to Regionally Significant Transportation Improvements - Of the TUMF funds received by WRCOG, 48.7% shall be allocated to the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) for programming improvements to the arterials of regional significance on the Regional System of Highways and Arterials. C. Allocation to Zones - Of the TUMF funds received by WRCOG, 48.7% shall be allocated to the five Zones for programming improvements to the Regional System of Highways and Arterials as determined by the respective Zone Committees. The amount of TUMF funds allocated to each Zone shall be proportionate to the amount of TUMF revenue generated from the zone. V. Administration of the Plan - WRCOG shall administer the TUMF Program as described in the enabling Ordinance adopted by participating jurisdictions and further defined in this Administrative Plan. VI. Administration of Credits - Each jurisdiction shall be responsible for the administration of TUMF credit agreements. Each jurisdiction shall transmit all TUMF credit agreements to WRCOG within 60 days of execution by that jurisdiction. WRCOG may administer credit agreements upon written request from that jurisdiction. The credit agreements shall be in accordance with the following: A. Developer Credits - If a developer constructs improvements identified on the RSHA, the developer shall receive credit for all costs associated with the improvements based on approved unit cost assumptions for the RSHA. Typically, major infrastructure, such as rail grade separations, interchanges, transit projects, etc., is constructed by the local jurisdiction rather than the developer, and involves multiple parties, as such; this section makes the distinction between credit agreements for major infrastructure and the standard arterial improvements. The mount of the development fee credit shall not exceed the maximum amount determined by the most current unit cost assumptions for the RSHA, or actual costs, whichever is less. This shall be known as the maximum TUMF credit. The maximum TUMF credit shall be determined based on approved Improvement Plans and after Conditions of Approval have been determined. The maximum TUMF credit shall identify, at a minimum, the facility, the dimensions of the faciity, the number of lanes, and applicable unit costs components as identified in Appendix F in the adopted Nexus Study. The credit /reimbursement eligibility process is outlined in Exhibit "B of this document. F;:FSharedlLupe WRCOG TUMF Adrnini;lralive Plan (Adopted; 080408.DOC 7 • • 71 Any improvement made to the RSHA that is obligated through an existing fee district (prior to June 1, 2003) shalt not be eligible for TUMF credit. Should it be determined that a jurisdiction granted credits exceeding the maximum TUMF credit, that jurisdiction shall provide WRCOG payment in the amount equal to the excess credit amount. 1. Credits - Prior to receiving any credit, a written credit agreement shall be executed between the jurisdiction or and the developer. 2. Credit for Right of Way {ROW) Dedication — A developer may receive credit for dedication of ROW for RSHA improvements. This section addresses the crediting of ROW dedications which are not part of construction projects. The ROW component in the current Nexus Study determines the maximum share of credit available. An appraisal is required to determine the value of the ROW being dedicated. The appraisal of the ROW is determined by one of the following methods: a. The developer provides to the jurisdiction a current appraisal (no more than two years old), of the ROW to be dedicated. The jurisdiction reviews it and determines if the appraisal is valid and acceptable. or b. The developer accepts the appraisal of the jurisdiction. B. Local Development Impact Fees and other funding programs - The local jurisdiction shall compare facilities in local fee programs against the RSHA and eliminate any ovedap in its local fee program. 1. New Financing Districts and Bond Issues: For a financing district created or bonds or other evidence of indebtedness issued on or after June 1, 2003, the local jurisdiction may allow a property owner, in lieu of the payment of the TUMF, to participate in such a financing district for the following facilities: (i) a Regionally Significant Transportation Improvement, as defined as those facilities that typically are proposed to have six lanes at build out and extend between multiple jurisdictions, or discrete useable segment thereof, as determined by WRCOG, (ii) any interchange on an interstate or state highway with an estimated construction cost of fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000) or more, (iii) any railroad crossing with an estimated construction cost of more than ten million dollars ($10,000,000), and (iv) any bridge located on a regionally significant arterial as defined in (i) of this section. 1. Prior to excusing payment under this Section VI.B._ the local jurisdiction must do both of the following: (a) Sell bonds in an amount sufficient to construct the improvement for which the financing district is created; and (b) Receive written approval from the WRCOG Executive Director, or designee. (c) In the event that a local jurisdiction is unable to satisfy the I V:Sharedtupe" VRCOG T{UNIF AdminiatraUve Plan (Adapted) 08 408.DOC $ 72 requirements of section I (a), above, the local jurisdiction may still excuse the payment of bonds if the local jurisdiction enters into an agreement with WRCOG in which it commits to pay the full amount of any excused Fee, plus interest at the average rate earned by WRCOG over the past twelve months, in the event that the bonds maybe extended up to an additional 5 years with the approval of the WRCOG Executive Committee. 2. If a local jurisdiction proposes to excuse payment of the TUMF as provided in this Section VI.B, then the jurisdiction shall provide WRCOG reasonable information to account for the credit. 3. if payment is excused as provided in this Section VI.B, then the jurisdiction shall be responsible for construction of the improvements and those improvements shall not be eligible for TUMF Program prioritization or funding. 4. As used in this section, a financing district means a community facilities district, a local road and bridge district, or an assessment district. 5. Where there is an existing financing district or an existing fee program established prior to June 1, 2003, with bonded indebtedness, then the local jurisdiction may excuse payment of the TUMF for that portion of the facility identified in both programs. Notwithstanding the previous sentence, a local jurisdiction shall not excuse fee payment for any facilities for which bonds have been issued after February 4, 2008, regardless of when the financing district was first created. 6. Any dispute regarding this implementation of this Section VI.B. may be appealed by the local jurisdiction to the WRCOG Executive Committee for a final determination. 7. This Section VI.B is not intended to impact the administration of credits under Section VIA. of the Administrative Plan. C. Use of Credit by Developer — Any TUMF credit shall be used first by the developer to offset any obligation of the developer to pay TUMF impact fees of the same development project. - Credits may not be transferred or sold to other development projects. - Developers must exhaust all credits before they are eligible for reimbursements. - Credits shall run withthe sale of the land. VII. Administration of Reimbursements - Local jurisdictions/agencies and developers are eligible for reimbursement for construction of TUMF facilities. The processes for troth are different and are described below. 1. Developer Reimbursements: Each jurisdiction shall be responsible for the administration of reimbursement agreements. WRCOG may administer reimbursement agreements upon written request from the jurisdiction. 1-1:18hared`i_ope rIRCOG TUMF Administra'rve Ran (Adopted) 080408110C 73 Should the developer construct RSHA improvements in excess of the TUMF obligation the developer may be reimbursed based on actual costs or the approved unit cost assumptions, whichever is less at the time of the agreement. A development that is exempt from paying the TUMF is not eligible for a reimbursement. Reimbursements shall be made through an agreement between the developer, and the local jurisdiction, and contingent upon funds being available. In all cases reimbursements under such agreements must coincide with construction of the transportation improvements as scheduled in the five year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) adopted annually by WRCOG. The developer may enter into a reimbursement agreement with the jurisdiction to reimburse the developer/owner for the direct and verifiable costs of constructing improvements to the RSHA when all of the following conditions are met: a. All available credits are exhausted; b. The improvements received prior approval from the jurisdiction and WRCOG based on the review of the TUMF project priority list; c. The jurisdiction and WRCOG have reviewed and approved the scope of the project to be constructed. In no event shall the developer be reimbursed for improvements to the RSHA in excess of the most current approved unit cost assumptions for the TUMF at the time of the agreement. 2. Local Jurisdictions/Agencies: Local jurisdictions are exempt from paying TUMF as such there are no credits given for projects constructed by a local jurisdiction, however the contribution to the RSHA maybe considerable. In such cases where a local jurisdiction constructs TUMF facilities it is eligible for reimbursement up to the maximum share identified in the Nexus Study or actual cost whichever is less, in accordance with the prioritization schedule in the adopted Transportation Improvement Plan. Local jurisdictions are required to enter into a reimbursement agreement with WRCOG in order to be eligible to receive TUMF revenue. VIII. Administrative Responsibilities A. Program Administration - As set forth in Section II above, WRCOG is designated as the TUMF Program Administrator. As Administrator, WRCOG will receive all fees generated from the TUMF as collected by local jurisdictions. WRCOG shall invest, account for and expend such fees in accordance with the TUMF Ordinance and applicable state laws. For jurisdictions that are not participating in the TUMF Program, the representative for that jurisdiction shall not be eligible to vote on any matter related to the TUMF Program that goes before the WRCOG TAC and WRCOG Executive Committee. 1. The WRCOG Executive Director - Reporting to the WRCOG Executive Committee, the Executive Director shall be responsible for the following TUMF Program activities: i SharecflopeiWRCOG TUMF Admiruira ve Plan (Adopted 080408.00C 74 10 a. Administration of the TUMF Program, inducting development of credit and reimbursement agreements, fee collection process and processing Program appeals; b An independent fiscal audit conducted to report on the evidence that the expenditure of funds collected is in accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act. The audit shall be presented to the WRCOG Executive Committee and made available to the public. c. Establishment and management of the `TUMF Program Trust Fund" for the purposes of depositing TUMF revenues and income interest eamed on Trust Fund deposits; d. Preparation of an Annual Report for consideration by the WRCOG Executive Committee detailing the status of the TUMF Program including but not limited to fees collected and disseminated, capital projects planned for, prioritized, and built, reimbursement and credit agreements, appeals, and recommendations for TUMF Program adjustments; e. Preparation of periodic comprehensive TUMF program review reports that provide, in concert with requirements of the California Mitigation Fee Act, an analysis of the TUMF Program, including review of the various Nexus Study inputs and assumptions, and preparation of recommendations on potential TUMF Program revisions for consideration by the WRCOG Executive Committee. Such reports may include, but are not limited to recommended fee adjustments based on changes in the facilities required to be constructed, and revenues received pursuant to the Ordinance; f. Preparation of technical studies/analysis required to select and prioritize Regionally Significant Arterial projects; g. Development of a 10-year Strategic Plan that identifies long term planning goals and objectives for implementation of the TUMF Program; h. Development of a five year TIP that identifies projects that are scheduled and funded for construction over a specified period of time and is reviewed on an annual basis; i Staff support to and coordination with each of the TUMF Zone Committees as necessary; j. Other related activities as directed by the WRCOG Executive Committee. k. Approve Zone and RTA TIP Administrative Amendments; i. Execute all Amendments to TUMF reimbursement agreements. 2. The WRCOG Executive Committee - The WRCOG Executive Committee shall be responsible for reviewing and acting on recommendations for project selection and prioritization of the Regionally Significant Arterials, 10-year Strategic Plan, and the TIP. The WRCOG Executive Committee shall review and consider recommendations on projects from the Public Works Committee and WRCOG TAC. The WRCOG Executive Committee shall also be responsible for approval of the TUMF Program Administrative Plan and any subsequent amendments thereto. From time to time, the WRCOG Executive Committee shall recommend changes to the Ordinance for consideration by participating jurisdictions. H:tsharadlupeNWRCOG TUMF Administrative Plan (Adopted) 080408_00C 11 75 to developing recommendations on Regionally Significant Arterials for consideration by the WRCOG Executive Committee, WRCOG staff and the Committee structure shall work with RCTC to coordinate compatibility with Measure A project priorities and schedules of area transportation improvements. WRCOG staff and the WRCOG Executive Committee. shall also work with WRCOG jurisdictions and each Zone Committee for the same purposes. For jurisdictions that are not participating in the TUMF Program, the WRCOG Executive Committee representative for that jurisdiction shall not be eligible to vote on any matter related to the TUMF that goes before the WRCOG Executive Committee. 3. The WRCOG Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) - The WRCOG TAC shall review the technical documents and recommendations for Regionally Significant Arterials developed by the Public Works Committee and other committees that may be convened by the WRCOG Executive Committee. The WRCOG TAC shall forward any recommendations to the WRCOG Executive Committee for its consideration. The WRCOG TAC shall also provide additional assistance to the TUMF Program as requested by the WRCOG Executive Committee. For jurisdictions that are not participating in the TUMF Program, the WRCOG TAC representative for that jurisdiction shall not be eligible to vote on any matter related to the TUMF Program that goes before the WRCOG Executive Committee. 4. The Public Works COmmitteelTUMF PWC (PWC) - The PWC shall be comprised of the Public Works Director or designee from each participating jurisdiction of WRCOG, RCTC, RTA and WRCOG and shall be responsible for the following: a. Developing objective criteria for project selection and prioritization including but not limited to the following factors: traffic safety issues potentially created by growth, regional significance, availability of matching funds, mitigation of congestion created by new development, system continuity, geographic balance, project readiness, and completed projects with reimbursement agreements; b. Providing additional assistance to the TUMF Program as requested by the WRCOG Executive Committee, RCTC andfor the WRCOG TAC; c. Preparing the 10 year Strategic Plan; d. Preparing the five year TIP which will be reviewed annually and amended every two years;. e. Review and recommend the RCTC Regional Arterial TUMF Program of Projects; to the WRCOG TAC, WRCOG Executive Committee and RCTC; f. Select a lead agency for each of the projects in the TIP; g. Review Annual Report prepared by WRCOG; h. Review and revise the RSHA as may be necessary {at a minimum every 5 years); i Review and revise Unit Cost Assumptions to the RSHA as may be necessary (at a minimum every 5 years); HASharedLup-eWRCOG PJMF AdmiPlairauve Ptah iAdopted; C8C 08.DOC 12 76 B. Regional Arterial Administration - RCTC, through an MOU with WRCOG (effective October 1, 2008) is the responsible agency for programming and delivering the Regionally Significant Arterials as defined in the Nexus Study. WRCOG and RCTC have established a committee structure that incorporates the Public Works Directors, City Manager and WRCOG Executive Committee and the RCTC Board for the development, review and approval of the Regional Arterial TUMF Program of projects. 1. The RCTC Executive Director- Reporting to the ROTC, the Executive Director shall be responsible for the following TUMF Program activities: a. Establishment and management of the "TUMF Program Trust Fund" for the purposes of depositing TUMF revenues and income interest eamed on Trust Fund deposits; b. Development of the RCTC Regional Arterial TUMF Program that identifies projects that are scheduled and funded for construction over a specified period of time and is reviewed on an annual basis; c. Staff support to and coordination with the TUMF Committees as necessary; d. Other related activities as directed by the ROTC Board. 2. The RCTC Board -The RCTC Board shall be responsible for reviewing and acting on recommendations for project selection and prioritization of the RCTC Regional Arterial TUMF Program. The RCTC Board shall review and consider recommendations on projects from the TUMF Public Works Committee, WRCOG TAC and WRCOG Executive Committee. C. Zone Administration - Each Zone shall establish a committee structure, similar to the one outlined in Exhibit A, for the purpose of developing a Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) consistent with the Strategic Plan for the project prioritization scheduling, and construction of zonal RSHA projects using TUMF funds retumed to each zone. Each zone shall also be responsible for selecting a lead agency for each project listed in the TIP. All zones shall approve their TIP by consensus and forward their recommendations to WRCOG for review and approval to ensure compatibility with the intent of the 10 year Strategic Plan. Zone dollars are to be allocated by the Zone Committee only and can not be utilized or borrowed for projects located outside the zone unless such projects are: 1) proposed and approved by the Zone Committee and 2) it is consistent with the Nexus Study. to furtherance of this Section VIII.B, each Zone shall abide by the Guidelines set forth in Exhibit "C". The Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan approved by Riverside County voters on November 5, 2002 states "Funding which is not allocated to a city or county because it is not a participant in the TUMF Program in the Coachella Valley area and the TUMF and MSHCP in the Western County area shall be allocated to the Regional Arterial Program in the geographic area in which the city or portion of the county is located". Each City and a portion of the unincorporated area of Riverside County are assigned to each of the zones. The five Zones are as follows: I :IStianedtLupekINF2COG TUMF Administrative PM iAdopted) 080408.DOC 77 13 1. Northwest Zone The Cities of Riverside, Corona, Norco and the County of Riverside, March JPA; 2. Southwest Zone — The Cities of Temecula, Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, Canyon Lake, Wildomar and the County of Riverside; 3. Central Zone — The Cities of Moreno Valley and Perris, and the County of Riverside, March JPA; 4. Pass Zone — The Cities of Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, and the County of Riverside; 5. Hemet/San Jacinto Zone — The Cities of Hemet and San Jacinto and the County of Riverside. D. Local Administration - As described in the TUMF Ordinance, participating jurisdictions are responsible for collecting the TUMF. Fees collected and a corresponding Remittance Report are required to be transmitted to the Executive Director of WRCOG. In accordance with the TUMF Ordinance and the Mitigation Fee Act, WRCOG will deposit, investment, account and expend the transmitted fees. Participating jurisdictions are required to transmit reports as set forth below to WRCOG which shall include, but not be limited to the following information regarding the TUMF Program status. 1. Monthly Remittance Reports — Participating jurisdictions are required to submit the standard Remittance Report to WRCOG by the close of the month for the previous month's activity, for example; June's Remittance report is due August 1. The report will contain information necessary for WRCOG to determine the total amount of fees collected within each fee category as it relates to the number of building permits, certificates of occupancy, or final inspections issued during the same period of time. Remittance reports are required even when no fees have been collected, provided building permits or certificates of occupancy have been issued. In addition the participating jurisdiction shall provide WRCOG the following information: the name of the developer or payee, project address, APN, total square feet, credits issued, and such other information as requested by WRCOG. This information will assist WRCOG in tracking new development, total revenue received and revenue projections for purposes of program audits and program updates., 2. Remittance Delays - If a participating jurisdiction does not transmit the fees along with a corresponding Remittance Report by the close of the month for the previous month in which fees were collected, the following fiscal policy shall be applied: On the first working day after the close of the month WRCOG staff will notify, in writing, the delinquent jurisdiction of the delinquency and request that said jurisdiction remit by the fifteenth (15t), the fees and the required Remittance Report; If fees and Remittance Report have not been received, by the forty-fifth (45th) day, WRCOG staff will invoice the jurisdiction for the approximate HAShared p2tWRCOG TUMF Admriaira ve Plan: iAdopied; 080408-OOC 14 78 amount owed plus interest and penalties from the first day of the month following the closing of the month being reported; WRCOG staff will continue this notification until sixty (60) days after the close of the month. At which time, WRCOG will determine if an audit is necessary of the jurisdiction's TUMF account, general ledger and any other financial data. If an audit is conducted, WRCOG will investigate the amount owed and the cause of delay. Upon completion of the audit, WRCOG staff shall make any recommendations to resolve any outstanding issues; If an audit is required due to reporting and remittance irregularities, the jurisdiction could incur the cost of the audit. E. Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) — In accordance with the Nexus Study 2.6% of funds received will be made available to the RTA to make capital facilities improvements for transit purposes as identified in the Nexus Study. The RTA shall provide a report to the WRCOG Executive Committee each year, which has been reviewed by the City Managers/County Executives and the technical committees, detailing its expenditures of TUMF Program funds received, as well as future commitments for transit facilities using TUMF Program revenues as determined by the RTA Board of Directors. IX. Administrative Costs. The TUMF Ordinance authorizes WRCOG to expend funds generated from TUMF that are necessary and reasonable to carry out its responsibilities. The WRCOG Executive Committee adopted a series of policies that clarify the expenditure and retention of program funds for the Administration of the Program and they are as follows: 1. WRCOG will budget no more than one percent (1%) of the TUMF Program revenue for administration salaries and benefits; 2. Administration costs will be budgeted at whatever is reasonable and necessary, but not to exceed four percent (4%) of the TUMF revenues (inclusive of the one percent administrative salaries and benefit cap). 3. Beginning July 1, 2006, WRCOG shall take the administrative component from the revenue collected based on the total fee obligation inclusive of executed credit agreements. 4. Beginning July 1, 2006, all CFD's, SCIP and other financing mechanisms will pay the maximum (4%) administrative component in cash to WRCOG. When the administrative component is less than 4% then the surplus revenue will be allocated in accordance to their adopted percentages to the Multi -species Habitat Conservation Plan, ROTC, RTA and the Zones. 5: For refunds, whether it is because the project is no longer going forward or expiration of building permits (where no construction has commenced), the applicant is entitled to a refund less the administrative component. Appeals. Appeals shall only be made in accordance with the provisions of this Section X. A. Persons or Entities Who Having Standing to Appeal. No person or entity shall have standing to avail themselves of this Section X, except those persons or individuals who are responsible for paying the TUMF and have an unresolved appealable issue or matter. Ft °Shared;Lupe WRCOG TUMF Administrative Plan (Adopted) 080408.DOC 15 79 " " Appealable Issues and Matters. No issue or matter shall be heard or reviewed under this Section X unless the issue or matter is appealable. An issue or matter is appealable, if a qualified person or entity ("Appellant") has a good -faith dispute directly related to Appellant's Property ("TUMF Dispute") regarding (i) the amount of Appellant's TUMF obligation; (ii) the administration of TUMF Credits; (iii) exemption of Appellant's property from the TUMF Program; (iv) administration of TUMF reimbursements; or (v) TUMF refunds. C. Appeal Process. 1. If a qualified person or entity has a TUMF Dispute, he or she shall first attempt to resolve the dispute informally with the staff of the local jurisdiction. If the TUMF Dispute remains unresolved after a reasonable attempt to address it at the local level, the qualified person or entity may submit a written appeal to the appropriate department of the local jurisdiction. The written appeal shall thoroughly identify the TUMF Dispute. If the staff of the local jurisdiction determines the issue or matter is not a TUMF Dispute, the written appeal shall be rejected. Staffs decision shall be provided in writing to the Appellant. In such cases, if the Appellant desires further review from the Board of Supervisors/City Council of the affected local jurisdiction, the Appellant must submit a written request for review to the Clerk of the Board/City Council within five (5) days of receiving staffs written decision. The decision of the Board/City Council shall be forwarded to the WRCOG Executive Committee in the same manner set forth in Paragraph 3 of this Section. 2. If the written appeal identifies a TUMF Dispute, the Appellant and staff from the local jurisdiction shall attempt to resolve the issue within thirty (30) days of the local jurisdiction's receipt of the appeal. At the request of the local jurisdiction, or on its own accord, WRCOG staff may also participate in such discussions. At the conclusion of the thirty (30) day period, staff of the local jurisdiction shall render a written decision on the appeal. 3. The issue or matter shall be heard by the Board of Supervisors/City Council of the affected local jurisdiction; provided, the Appellant submits a written request for further review to the Clerk of the Board/City Council within five (5) days of Appellant's receipt of the local jurisdiction's written decision regarding the Appellant's appeal. The Board/City Council shall forward its written decision to WRCOG for review and concurrence. If the WRCOG Executive Committee disagrees with the decision of the City Council/Board of Supervisors the WRCOG Executive Committee shall determine a proper course of action and notify the jurisdiction of its findings. XI. Arbitration. When there is a dispute among the Zone members that can not be resolved and prevents the adoption of a project prioritization schedule, the matter shall be forwarded to the WRCOG TAC and WRCOG Executive Committee for a determination. Once the WRCOG Executive Committee takes action on the issue the decision is final. If there is a dispute at the WRCOG Executive Committee level regarding project prioritization of a specific project(s) and a consensus cannot be reached, that project b ASharetaupeNRCOG TURF Adrnani; Va"ve P#ar (Adopted; Q8v408.DOC 16 80 shall be tabled until such lime as new information is presented and the matter can be resolved. XII. TUMF Program Amendments. WRCOG shall undertake a review of all components of the TUMF Program in accordance with AB 1600 and other applicable laws, and, if necessary, recommend Program amendments and/or adjustments. Amendments to the Administrative Plan will be subject to the approval of the WRCOG Executive Committee. Amendments required to the TUMF Program Ordinance shall be approved by each participating jurisdiction, acting on recommendations provided by the WRCOG Executive Committee. The review shall consider whether future administration costs to participating jurisdictions are needed. XM. CEQA. The TUMF Program currently is a financing mechanism dependent on future actions of the WRCOG Executive Committee for improvements to the RSHA. WRCOG and its associated committees will be prioritizing and scheduling improvements on the RSHA, as such, the appropriate environmental documentation, shall be completed before a project can commence construction. The TUMF Program was developed to mitigate the cumulative impacts of future growth on the RSHA. It was not developed to mitigate project -specific traffic impacts. Accordingly the program does not relieve any development project of the responsibility to mitigate project -specific impacts identified in the environmental analysis prepared for the project. When a development project is required to construct RSHA facilities as project -specific mitigation, it shall be eligible for credit and or reimbursement KlSharedlupew iRCOG TUMF Administrative Plan (Adopted) 080408.00C 17 81 EXHIBIT "A TUMF Decision Making WRCOG WRCOG Executive WRCOG TAC PWC Arterials of Regional Significance ZONE (Example of a single zone) Elected Officials a Management • Technical Zone Improvements H:':Shared`lope)WRCOG TUMF Administrative Plans (Adopted) t:80438.DOC 18 82 EXHIBIT "B" TUMF Credit / Reimbursement Eligibility Process 1. Prior to the construction of any TUMF Improvement, Developer shall follow the steps listed below: a. Prepare a separate bid package for the TUMF Improvements. b. The plans, cost estimate, specifications and contract document shall require all contractors to pay prevailing wages and to comply with applicable provisions of ,f the Labor Code, Government Code, and Public Contract Code relating to Public Works Projects. c. Bids shall be obtained and processed in accordance with the formal public works bidding requirements of the City/County. d. The contract(s) for the construction of TUMF improvements shall be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder(s) for the construction of such facilities in accordance with the City's/County's requirements and guidelines. e. Contractor(s) shall be required to provide proof of insurance coverage throughout the duration of the construction. 2. Prior to the determination and application of any Credit pursuant to a TUMF improvement and Credit Agreement executed between City/County and Developer ("Agreement"), Developer shall provide the City/County and WRCOG with the following: a. Copies of all information listed under Item 1 above. b. Surety Bond, Letter of Credit, or other form of security permitted under the Agreement and acceptable to the City/County and WRCOG, guaranteeing the construction of all applicable TUMF Improvements. 3. Prior to the Citys/County's acceptance of any completed TUMF Improvement, and in order to initiate the construction cost verification process, the Developer shall comply with the requirements as set forth in Sections 7, 14.3 and 14.4 of the Agreement, and the following conditions shall also be satisfied: a. Developer shall have completed the construction of all TUMF Improvements in accordance with the approved Plans and Specifications. b. Developer shall have satisfied the City's/County's inspection punch list. c. After final inspection and approval of the completed TUMF Improvements, the City/County shall have provided the Developer a final inspection release letter. d. City/County shall have filed a Notice of Completion with respect to the TUMF Improvements pursuant to Section 3093 of the Civil Code with the County Recorder's Office, and provided a copy of filed Notice of Completion to WRCOG. e. Developer shall have provided City/County a copy of the As -Built plans for the TUMF Improvements. f. Developer shall have provided City/County copies of all permits or agreements that may have been required by various resource/regulatory agencies for construction, operation and maintenance of any TUMF Improvements. g. Developer shall have submitted a documentation package to the City/County to determine the final cost of the TUMF Improvements, which shall include at a minimum, the foNowing documents related to the TUMF Improvements: HAS aredit_upeNWFICOC TUMF Administrative ?Ian (Adopted) 080408_00C 19 • 83 i. Plans; specifications, and Developer's Civil Engineer's cost estimates; or Engineer's Report showing the cost estimates. ii. Contracts/agreements, insurance certificates and change orders with each vendor or contractor. iii. Invoices from all vendors and service providers. iv. Copies of cancelled checks, front and back, for payments made to contractors, vendors and service providers. v. Final lien releases from each contractor and vendor (unconditional waiver and release). vi. Certified contract workers payroll for City/County verification of compliance with prevailing wages. vii. A total cost summary, in spreadsheet format (MS Excel is preferred) and on disk, showing a breakdown of the total costs incurred. The summary should include for each item claimed the check number, cost, invoice numbers, and name of payee. See attached sample for details. 4. The amount of the development credit shall not exceed the maximum amount determined by the most current unit cost assumptions for the RSHA in the adopted Nexus Study, or actual costs whichever is less. This shall be known as the maximum credit. The maximum TUMF credit shall be determined based on an approved Improvement Plan and after the Conditions of Approval have been determined. HftSharerittupetWRCOG TUMF Administrative pa, (Adopted) 080448D0 20 84 Exhibit "C" Guidelines for Administration of Programmed Projects in Zone's Adopted 5-Year TIP Once each Zone's 5-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee, said TIPS shall be incorporated into and governed by these guidelines, the Administrative Plan, and 10-Year Strategic Plan in accordance with AB 1600. Annually, WRCOG staff meets with the Zone Technical Advisory Committees to review the status of all programmed projects on the 5-Year TIPs and bring the subsequent project adjustment requests to the Zone Committees for approval. The goals of the annual review process are as follows: (i) to update project cost estimates; (ii) to review project status; (iii) to determine the continued viability of projects; (iv) review the backlog of reimbursement .E projects;(v) to address local jurisdiction issues; and (vi) address compliance with AB 1600. Adjustments: In accordance with the 10-Year Strategic Plan and the original reimbursement agreement entered into with the lead jurisdiction, all approved projects' funding and schedules are directly tied to critical milestones. As such, requests to change a project's funding or schedule shall necessitate an amendment to the original agreement and the adopted TIP. Annual 5-Year TIP adjustments could include, but are not limited to: • Scope of work reductions or additions, • project or phase delays, • project or phase cancellations, • new shelf -ready network projects being added as replacement projects, • project or phase advances, and • request to transfer funding beyond a programmed project's limits within a Zone Levels of Approval: A. Zone Committee/WRCOG Executive Committee The following shall be approved by the Zone Committee and adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee as required in the Administrative Plan: 1) Annual updates to the Zone TIP. 2) Requests to increase total TUMF funding allocations to projects in the Zone TIP. These requests may be made by the local jurisdiction administratively outside of the annual TIP update cycles if deemed necessary by one of the Zone participating jurisdictions and WRCOG management due to unforeseen circumstances that necessitate immediate action. Such unforeseen circumstances shall include, but not be limited to, higher than expected bid prices, Might want to give more examples] WRCOG staff will obtain action from the Zone Committee in these cases either by calling for a Special Zone Committee meeting or through individual consultation. R:Whare��Lupe WRCOG PJMF Admira>tra ive Fiat; (Adopted) Op408.DOC• 21 85 3) Administrative requests to advance funds or adjust project schedules on TIP approved projects, upon the recommendation of the Public Works Committee. Such advancements are subject to: • Jurisdiction's proof of readiness to move forward with project, • Zones current cash flow can support the advancement or change. B. WRCOG Executive Director The WRCOG Executive Director shall be responsible for the review and approval of the following changes to an approved Zone TIP, including the review and approval of any agreements, for: 1) Change in Lead Jurisdiction, with the written consent of the transferring and accepting Lead Jurisdiction. Cancellation of project upon request of the local jurisdiction. In the event of cancellation, all funds shall revert to the Zone TIP Trust account. 3) Approval of final completion of the project. Upon notification from the Jurisdiction that the Project has been completed, all unused funds programmed for that Project shall revert to the Zone TIP Trust account. All other administrative requests, upon consultation with the Public Works Committee. C. Public Works Committee The Public Works Committee shall be responsible for the review and approval of the following: 1) Requests to move funds within project categories (environmental, design, etc.) administratively, contingent upon participating jurisdiction's certification of viability of all phases. 2) Provide recommendations to the 1NRCOG Executive Director on any other requests that are deemed administrative in nature by the Director. All administrative adjustments will be submitted to the WRCOG Executive Committee as part of the next Annual Review Report for final adoption. D. Obligating Programmed Funds The TUMF Program has established the policy that construction projects take priority and therefore WRCOG limits the obligation of TUMF dollars. WRCOG has two options by which to obligate TUMF. In both options, steps 1, 2 and 3 (Option A) or 6 (Option B) must be completed by the local jurisdiction to ensure TUMF funding can be made available for use on an eligible project. Since TUMF project funds are generally obligated on a first come first served basis, failure to follow the prescribed steps for either option may preclude a project sponsor from receiving TUMF payments for completed work until sufficient funds are available to be obligated. f-i:;wharecflopelWRCOG TUMF Mministratwe Flan (Adopted; 08f-408.00C 22 86 Option A: Funding for a project programmed on Zone 5-Year TIPs is not considered obligated by WRCOG until certain steps outlined below have been accomplished by the local jurisdiction. 1. Ensure that funding for the project phase is programmed in the current year of an adopted 5-Year TIP. 2. Ensure that there is a signed (executed) reimbursement agreement that matches the funding amount with the funding amount of the project phase in the adopted TIP. 3. Submit an invoice for TUMF eligible work prior to the end of the fiscal year to obligate the project phase funding. At the time of submitting the first invoice, the project sponsor will be required to submit all necessary supporting documentation (not previously submitted) in accordance with the provisions of the reimbursement agreement. 4. WRCOG will obligate the entire phase of the project if there is available revenue at the time the invoice is submitted. Option B: Funding for a project programmed on Zone 5-Year TIPs is not considered obligated by WRCOG until the steps outlined below have been accomplished by the local jurisdiction. 1. Ensure that funding for the project phase is programmed in the current year of an adopted 5-Year TIP. 2. Ensure that there is a signed (.executed) reimbursement • agreement that matches the funding amount with the funding amount of the project phase in the adopted TIP. 3. Send WRCOG a letter of notice of intent to issue RFP, solicit bids, make offer to purchase ROW or other similar action to verify that sufficient funding is available and that funds are obligated and reserved exclusively for the particular project phase. 4. Receive a notice of obligation from WRCOG within fourteen working days of receipt of the notice of intent confirming the amount of funding that is obligated and reserved exclusively for the particular project phase. Altematively, the project sponsor will receive a notice of deferred obligation if WRCOG determines that insufficient funds are currently available for the project phase to be obligated. 5. Award the project and execute a contract within four months of receipt of the notice of obligation from WRCOG and send a letter of confirmation of award to WRCOG including evidence of a Board/Council action relating to the project award and contract execution. 6. Commence project work and submit the first invoice for payment within nine months of receipt of letter of obligation by WRCOG to preserve fund obligation. At the time of submitting the first invoice, the project sponsor will be required to submit all necessary supporting documentation (not previously submitted) in accordance with the provisions of the reimbursement agreement. if a contract has not been executed within four months of receipt of the notice of obligation from WRCOG (step 5), there will be a review of the project status. Based on the review of project status, WRCOG will either: i) extend the fund obligation for up to a total of nine months from the notice of obligation if the project sponsor can demonstrate a realistic expectation that the project will be awarded and a confirmation of award can be provided to WRCOG within that time frame; or ii) de -obligate the funds. t;:evharedlupeWRCOG TUNIF Adrninistra_ve ?!an (Adopted, 080408.00C 23 87 " Similarly, if the first invoice has not been submitted to WRCOG within nine months of receipt of the letter of obligation (step 6), there will be a review of the project status. Based on the review of project status, WRCOG will either i) extend the fund obligation for up to an additional nine months if the project sponsor can demonstrate a realistic expectation that the project work will commence and a first invoice is submitted within that time frame; or ii) de -obligate the funds. Ft: \SharediLupe WRCOG PJMF Administra ve an (Adopted) 080408.DOC 24 88 " AGENDA ITEM 71 " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation "Committee of the Whole" Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Measure A Regional Arterial Program Update BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION "COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE- AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update on the Measure A Regional Arterial (MARA) program. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Staff has been working with the Westem Riverside County Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) members in reviewing and evaluating projects submitted for 2009 MARA program funds. Staff anticipated presenting programming recommendations to the Commission at the September 2008 meeting. However, the outcome of the 2008 state budget negotiations could have a significant impact on transportation funding if Proposition 42 funds are redirected or borrowed to resolve budget issues. If this occurs, currently funded projects in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) could be at risk of losing funds or delayed. Therefore, staff recommends waiting for the passage of the state budget to analyze the impacts before proceeding on committing additional funds to projects. The Commission anticipates presenting a recommendation for the MARA program of projects in December 2008. Regardless of the outcome of the state budget on transportation funding, staff is supportive of funding projects that are ready for construction. At its July 9, 2008 meeting, the Commission approved $2 million for the city of Lake Elsinore's State Route 74/Interstate 15 interchange project, which was ready for construction. The project was advertised on July 16, 2008. Staff has informed local agencies that submitted projects for MARA funds to notify the Commission if their project(s) advances to the construction stage prior to approval of the MARA program of projects for funding consideration. Agenda Item 71 89 Following is an overview of the MARA call for projects: October 2007 December 2007 March 2008 Commission approved guidelines and released call for projects for $300 million. 35 projects were submitted, totaling $660 million. Staff revised Measure A revenue projections as a result of the downturn in the economy and informed Commission that TUMF Regional Arterial program revenues, project costs, and schedules were being re-evaluated. April - June 2008 Commission/WRCOG staff collected updated project costs and schedules of TUMF projects to ensure the viability and deliverability of the TUMF program. Staff also worked with Western County TAC members to complete MARA project rankings based on evaluation criteria and updated schedules. July 2008 Commission approved $2 million MARA funding for Lake Elsinore's SR-74/I-15 interchange improvement project. Staff presented updated project schedules/ranking to Western County TAC members for discussion/input purposes. December 2008 Estimated date of MARA program recommendations. Agenda Item 71 • 90 " AGENDA ITEM 7J " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Commuter Rail Station Rehabilitation and Security Plan Contracts PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE. AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-24-050-07, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 08-24-050-00, with Tropical Plaza Nursery, Inc. to provide landscape maintenance services related to the rehabilitation plan in the amount of $ 200, 000; 2) Approve Agreement No. 08-24-049-09, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 08-24-049-00, with Process Communication Developers Inc. to provide on -call general maintenance services related to the rehabilitation and security projects in the amount of $300,000; 3) Approve Agreement No. 04-25-962-05, Amendment No. 5 to Agreement No. 04-25-962-00, with Inland Vault and Security to provide maintenance and expansion of the closed circuit security system at the stations for the security project in the amount of $150,000; and 4► Approve Agreement No. 09-33-014-00 with Burlington Northern Santa Fe to provide for right-of-way related maintenance and support activities related to the rehabilitation and security projects in the amount of $150,000. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its April 8, 2008 meeting, the Commission approved the "Green" Metrolink Station Rehabilitation Plan to upgrade the stations using $2,477,714 of Proposition 1B Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) funds. This was followed by a separate action on July 9, 2008 with the Commission approving the Comprehensive Station Security Upgrade Plan using $347,852 of Proposition 1 B California Transit Security Grant Program — California Transit Assistance Funds (CTSGP-CTAF). With this funding in place for the plan, contract amendments with current contractors, as well as new contracts to be awarded competitively, are required to commence the rehabilitation and security project. To expedite the rehabilitation project and meet the Proposition 1 B grant funding emphasis on utilizing the funds Agenda Item 7J 91 in a timely manner, staff identified the following competitively awarded contracts as candidates for amendments in order to immediately begin implementing the station rehabilitation plan. Staff plans to issue several competitive solicitations for additional rehabilitation work, such as glass replacement, and bring these contract awards to the Commission at a future date. Tropical Plaza Nursery, Inc. In January 2008, as a result of a competitive solicitation, the Commission entered into an agreement with Tropical Plaza Nursery, Inc. (Tropical) to provide landscape maintenance services at the five Metrolink stations. The current agreement is for a single year term with options for a value of $225,000, which includes $135,000 for monthly maintenance and $90,000 for repairs on an as needed basis. The work performed to date by Tropical has been satisfactory; therefore, it is requested to increase the Tropical contract to address the landscape rehabilitation needs for a not to exceed amount of $100,000 a year for the first year and $100,000 for the second year if the option is exercised. The new total amount of the contract after the proposed increase and if all the options were exercised would be $650,000. Process Communication Developers Inc. In January 2008, as a result of a competitive solicitation, the Commission entered into an agreement with Process Communication Developers, Inc. to provide for on -call general commuter rail station maintenance for $100,000 a year for three years. Since that time the contractor has demonstrated an ability to be responsive and perform quality work. Staff has deemed this contractor to be vital to the successful implementation of the rehabilitation and security plans for this project and as such, is recommending that its contract be amended for an increase of $300,000 to account for the additional work. Process would provide the type of maintenance activities currently being performed under the existing contract such as, installation of fencing, bollards, lighting upgrades, window replacement, station access and platform improvements, signage, and a variety of other general requirements identified in the plan. The new total amount of the contract after the proposed increase and if all the options were exercised would be $600,000. Inland Vault and Security Since June 2004, the Commission has utilized Inland Vault and Security as the primary contractor to maintain, repair, and expand the commission's closed circuit security system (CCTV). The original contract for CCTV maintenance was for $30,000 a year and since then it has been amended four times, due to the contractor's quality work and the need to increase the scope to address additional repairs. This contractor has intimate knowledge of the commission's complex CCTV system and would be the most capable vendor to provide for an expanded Agenda Item 7J 92 CCTV network as identified in the security plan. This contractor will be utilized for the security plan and the contract will need to be increased for a not to exceed amount of $150,000, with the work performed before the contract expires in June 2009. The work this contractor would perform includes installation of video cameras, upgrade of recording and monitoring equipment, upgrade of fiber optic connections, and redesign of the entire video monitoring configuration. The new total amount of the contract after the proposed increase would be $360,000. Burlington Northern Santa Fe A new contract needs to be developed with Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) to provide for assistance for security and rehabilitation projects that fall within its right-of-way. Because BNSF is the only entity permitted to work within its right-of-way, award of a sole source contract with BNSF is requested to provide for certain projects along its property. One of the major projects identified for BNSF to perform is expansion of the track fencing the keeps pedestrians from crossing the track in and around our stations. This work was identified in the Commission's security plan and BNSF has provided direction that its maintenance crews are willing and able to do the work. In addition, BNSF maintenance crews will be required for flagging services to protect workers completing other aspects of the security and rehabilitation projects. The proposed agreement with BNSF will be for a term of two years in an amount not -to -exceed $150,000. The work this contractor would perform includes installation of track fencing, pedestrian crossing upgrades, flagging services and rail related improvements as needed. Financial Impact There is no budget adjustment required for these actions as both of the Proposition 1 B funding sources have been included the current FY 2008/09 budget and the expenditures for property improvements and repairs. The proposed contracts total $800,000, which is 28% of the $2,825,566 in Proposition 1 B funds. The remaining contracts for implementation of the rehabilitation and security plans will be competitively bid and brought to the Commission for approval at a later date. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year FY 2008/09 Amount: $800,000 Source of Funds: Prop 1 B CTSGP-CTAF funds Prop 1 B PTMISEA Budget Adjustment: No GLA No.: 221 33 73304 P4011 $800,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \Y otte,414., Date: 8/15/2008 Agenda item 7J 93 AGENDA ITEM 7K • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation "Committee of the Whole" Edda Rosso, Capital Projects Manager Erik Galloway, Bechtel Project Coordinator Richard Bryan, Bechtel Perris Valley Line Design Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement with Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway to Provide Railway Flagging Services for the Perris Valley Line Project During Preliminary and Final Engineering BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION "COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE" AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 09-33-013-00 with Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway to provide railway flagging services for the Perris Valley Line {PVL) project during environmental, preliminary engineering, and potential final engineering design, in the amount not to exceed of $150,000; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to approve amendments for potential additional work to the BNSF agreement from a general contingency fund in the amount of $40,000. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its September 12, 2007 meeting, the Commission awarded Agreement No. 07-33-123-00 to STV Incorporated (STV) to provide planning, environmental, and preliminary engineering service for the PVL project. STV has commenced the environmental and preliminary engineering services for the project. This work requires STV to enter the railroad right-of-way to perform environmental and geotechnical soil sampling and field survey of the railroad tracks. The field work to be performed by STV will require the use of vehicles, equipment, and personnel that will cross the tracks and that have the potential to foul (block or fall upon the railroad tracks) the rail. BNSF requires, per the shared use agreement entered on October 30, 1992, that a BNSF flagger be present during the Agenda Item 7K 94 performance of any work that has the potential to foul the tracks. The BNSF flagger has direct contact with the train engineers and can alert them to the work being performed and control the movement of the trains through the work zone. This provides a safe and secure area for STV's field crews to work and reduces the potential for conflicts between the field crews and the train movements. BNSF requires that only trained BNSF employees perform flagging and will not allow outside consultants to perform the work. On March 24, 2008, the Commission issued Purchase Order (PO) No. 2965-01 in the amount of $25,000 to BNSF to provide BNSF flagging services for the PVL. This PO was subsequently amended on August 14, 2008, to increase the amount an additional $25,000. The PO and its amendment were issued so that the project would not be delayed during the development of the flagging agreement between the Commission and BNSF. This agreement will provide an additional $110,000 to cover the remaining work. The typical cost for a BNSF.flagger is $1,000 per day, therefore this agreement will provide approximately 110 days of flagging during the environmental and preliminary and final engineering design work performed by STV and its subconsultants. A contingency amount of $40,000, approximately 40 days, will be established to address the potential need for additional flagging services beyond what is currently anticipated. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: I Yes (Year: I FY 2008/09 Amount: I $150,000 Source of Funds: I Rail Measure A Budget Ad ustment: I No GLA No.: 1221 33 65520 P3800 Fiscal Procedures Approved: v4.64,14, L7 Date: 08/15/2008 Agenda Item 7K 95 AGENDA ITEM 7L • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation "Committee of the Whole" Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement with AMMA for the Provision of Additional Transit Support Services BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION "COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE" AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-26-115-01, Amendment No. 1 to. Agreement No. 08-26-115-00, with AMMA to provide technical support services for an additional $100,000 related to the delivery of the Coordinated Plan, Universal Call for Projects, and the provision of general transit analysis services; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Approve a budget amendment of $100,000 for an increase in professional service expenditures. BACKGROUND INFORMATION At its April 2008 meeting, the Commission approved the Coordinated Public Transit — Human Services Transportation Plan, which then made the Commission eligible to receive certain types of federal funding such as Jobs Access Reverse Commute (JARC) and New Freedom funds. Additionally, with the approval of the Coordinated Plan, the Commission also adopted a strategy for developing and conducting a Universal Call for Projects which also includes Specialized Transportation Services to be funded by Measure A_ Due to the limited experience of the region in the application for and use of these new funds, AMMA was hired under a single signature contract, Agreement No. 08-26-115-00 in the amount of $29,977, to assist the Commission in the provision of technical support for the Coordinated Plan and the Universal Call for Projects processes. Agenda Item 7L 96 DISCUSSION: The Universal Call for Projects proposals were submitted to the Commission on June 16, 2008 with an evaluation period that continued through August 5, 2008. AMMA has been assisting both the Commission and proposers during this time with the provision of technical support on issues of eligibility and rules interpretation as well as the facilitation of the overall evaluation process. Given the level of technical assistance in the preparation of proposals requested by applicants during the call for projects, staff is expecting to experience a similar level of need as implementation of the approved projects begins. Issues such as federal reporting by recipients who lack experience in working with the federal requirements, working with the pass through of the funds from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), which will occur under a separate and previously approved memorandum of understanding, project invoicing, and technical rules interpretation will be on -going for the near term as recipients ramp up its knowledge base and begin service provision. Additionally, due to Commission staff transition, AMMA's technical knowledge of transit issues is also crucial to maintaining the high quality of staff work. Accordingly, staff is recommending with this report that AMMA's contract be extended for a period of six months, the scope of work increased as identified on the attachment and its contract value increased by $100,000 to a total not to exceed amount of $129,977. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: I No IYear: I FY 2008/09 Amount: I $100,000 Source of Funds: !Measure A and LTF Budget Ad ustment: I Yes GLA Na.: 225 26 65520 $50,000 106 62 65520 $50,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \se.140 Date: 08/15/2008 Attachment: Draft Amendment with AMMA Agenda Item 71_ • 97 " Agreement No. 08-26-115-01 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT ASSISTANCE FOR FTA SECTION 5310 SERVICES WITH AMMA 1. PARTIES AND DATE This Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement for Contract Assistance for FTA Section 5310 Services is made and entered into as of this day of , 200_, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("Commission") and AMMA. ("Consultant"). 2. RECITALS 2.1 The Commission and the Consultant have previously entered into Agreement No. 08-26-115-00 dated May 27, 2008 for the purpose of providing contract assistance for the processing of FTA 5310 grants applications. 2.2 The parties now desire to amend the Master Agreement in order to revise the Scope of Services, to include the provision of 3. TERMS 3.1 The Scope of Services for the Master Agreement shall be amended to include additional tasks for the provision of transit support services related to the delivery of the Coordinated Plan, Universal Call for Projects and the provision of general transit analysis services, all as more fully described in Exhibit "A" attached to this Amendment and incorporated herein by reference. 3.2 The term of the Master Agreement shall be extended for a period of six months resulting in a revised Contract Completion date of April 30, 2009. 3.3 The maximum compensation for Services performed pursuant to this Amendment shall be $100,000, as further set forth in Exhibit "B" attached to this Amendment and incorporated herein by reference. 3.4 Except as amended by this Amendment, all provisions of the Master Agreement, the indemnity and insurance provisions, shall remain in full force and effect and shall govern the actions of the parties under this Amendment. RV PUEMSHANEl714371.1 1 98 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed the Agreement on the date first herein above written. RIVERSIDE COUNTY [insert name of Consultant] TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: Jeff Stone, Chair Signature APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Best, Best & Krieger LLP General Counsel RVPUMHSHANE17143711 Name Title 99 EXHIBIT "A SCOPE OF SERVICES Scope of Work for Technical Assistance On Transit Issues and Universal Call for Projects/ Coordinated Plan Program Implementation Specifically, assistance is offered in three general areas: • First, to continue to augment staffing so as to ensure RCTC's commitment to successful conclusion of the Universal Call for Projects application and award phase, and to move into program implementation of the specialized transportation program. • Secondly, to provide analytic support that extends the capabilities of RCTC personnel in conducting current business with the County's public transit operators. • Thirdly, to assist with some particular activities which may include updating the SRTPs, supporting RCTC's oversight role on the two statewide awards from Caltrans (the Hope Bus and the Blythe mobility manager), restructuring transit advisory groups, assisting with the annual unmet needs process and participating in some early shaping of RCTC's implementation of its Transit Vision. SCOPE OF WORK ACTIVITIES The efforts outlined above are generally detailed here in relation to six tasks. Descriptions of each follow and a budget is presented as Exhibit 1, at the end of this subsection. Task 1 - Conclusion of Universal Call for Projects' / Awards Processes The Universal Call for Projects for Job Access and Reverse Commute (§ 5316), New Freedom (§ 5317) and Measure A has been successful in that it generated 26 projects requesting funding that was about equivalent to the dollars available in the Coachella Valley and were almost double that available in Westem Riverside. RCTC did write a contract with A-M-M-A to bring the agency and applicants completely through the grant award process, including preparation on final reports. The task proposed here does involve some assistance on final activities in closing out the Call due to the fact that A- M-M-A resources were used early in this process to prepare two Rural/Small Urban grants (the Hope Bus and the Blythe mobility manager grant) for FY 06 JARC and New Freedom funding requests to Caftans. 100 This task then anticipates some close-out assistance to staff in reporting and documentation of the grant review process. It anticipates considerable assistance around negotiations with the applicants and development of contracts that will be acceptable to RCTC and the applicants and conform with applicable Federal law. Task 2 — implementation of Coordinated Plan/ Universal Call Program Concurrent with the activities of Task 1, closing out the Universal Call application and contract negotiation process, is the launching of the program itself. Specifically, A-M-M- A support is proposed in relation to review and refinement of the reporting tools to reflect the range of projects participating, as called for in the Coordinated Plan. This will include the planning and conduct of initial Universal Call workshops for all successful applicants; anticipating that one will be held in Westem Riverside and one in the Coachella Valley. The design of these start-up workshops will help to shape efforts countywide to strengthen and develop relationships between the grantees in support of future coordination efforts. Some early reporting on Universal Call projects undertaken is anticipated, following the recommendation of the Coordinated Plan for a preliminary six-month report on the Call implementation. This speaks to the shaping of reporting by the grantees in order that they will collect and supply that information in a sufficiently timely way to make such reporting possible. Additionally, there may be some unanticipated issues around implementation where additional technical assistance will be helpful. Recent issues included: eligibility of selected projects or functions within projects; the ability of the transit operators to count project funding as farebox and other human services agency questions surfacing Such technical assistance to research other or related issues is offered not only to RCTC staff but to the grantee agencies as well. Task 3 — RCTC Oversight of Ca!trans Statewide $ 5316 and $ 5317 Awards in Riverside County Riverside County was awarded two projects in the April 2008 grant process. for Rural and Small Urban areas for § 5316 and § 5317 funding. This task anticipates a modest level of support to the partner agencies around the Hope Bus project in the Hemet area and to Palo Verde Valley Transit mobility manager for Blythe. Such assistance may involve participation in initial planning meeting(s) and ongoing telephone support to any of the various players involved which indude: RTA, Hemet office of Dept. of Public Social Seances, central office of DPSS, Care -A -Van, Palo Verde Valley Transit and the TRIP program. 101 " " Task 4  Support to RCTC Staff with Transit Planning Functions This task anticipates support to RCTC transit personnel around any number of possible areas, with several identifiable at this time. During the initial months of this Call, such areas may include assistance and support around analysis of state statue and requirement related to transit operator reporting, to analysis of their operating expense in relation to revenues as for example with regard to rising fuel costs, and to other special areas of inquiry. One in particular may involve activities in support of the Transit Vision process, with those to be detailed as they emerge. This task though provides staffing support that will enable RCTC transit personnel to plan for and undertake key efforts. Tools may be prepared, such as cost analyses, work scoping for competitive consultant assistance or other written products that will extend RCTC staff capabilities. In the first two months of this effort, weekly meeting with staff are anticipated to further identify and refine these activities. Task 5  RCTC Transit Operators/ Citizens Advisory Group Meetings As a component of its Transit Visioning process, RCTC staff anticipate developing a transit operators working group and potentially reviewing and reformatting the existing Citizens Advisory Committee. Both groups stand to play critical roles in forming and strengthening a fabric of transit resources for Riverside County. But to garner the greatest benefit of these groups, both for the participants and for RCTC, some revisiting of the structure, mission and membership is indicated. Building upon significant experience in staffing similar groups in various counties in Souther Califomia and elsewhere, A-M-M-A proposes to work with RCTC staff to design the role and function of these advisory groups, to introduce to them the direction that is most consistent with RCTC purposes and to assist RCTC personnel during this transitional period in conducting these meetings. Two meetings of each group  essentially quarterly  are proposed. Prior to that however, we will work with RCTC staff on developing a rationale and necessary written materials to describe those for a restructuring of these advisory bodies. Task 6  Support Annual Unmet Transit Needs Hearing Process We propose to assist RCTC, either by taking the lead or by supporting staff in the conduct of the Palo Verde Valley unmet transit needs public hearing. Subsequent activities will include documenting the hearing testimony, and performing the necessary analysis to determine whether there are unmet transit needs that are reasonable to meet. Necessary written materials to support any recommendations to RCTC with regards to such needs will be prepared. 102 ear EXHIBIT "B" Compensation and Time The total reimbursable cost of Amendment No.1 will be $119,976.52 and includes a six (6) month time extension to the Contract term. The revised Contract Completion Date will be April 30, 2009. Exhibb 1, A-M-M-A Transit Planning —Technical Assistance to RCTC On Transit Issues and Universal Calif Coordinated Plan Program Implementation - nerhn tPiniod seamy' Demo Brooks, a.hewaa WPM 4a bang r.rtrslFhs s.h.a grime, /ra.it wan�aa:a Da Boy* adore rai.e.hr cs aranhkig assistance Task 1 Conclusion of Universal Cat For Protects Awards Process 1.1 Complete award docrnunation process wth ROTC staff. 12 Assist RCTC with contract negotiations win snaffled projects. Task 2 implementation of Coordinated Ptah Universal Call Program 2.1. Revised repotting lams to comply with Urdanmffi Cad 5316 S 5317 rims. 2.2 Assist staff in designing and conducting kick-slimeemrgs(2)(W. ISr Coachella) 2.3 Receive and analyze quarterly repose from providers. 2.4 Prepare initial se -month report to RCTC board 2.5 Research key issues as they emerge, assist staff in detenuking program daemon Task 3 RCTC Oversight of Caftans Statewide 5318 it 5317 Awards to Riverside County GI 3.1 Participate n Planning meetings with Hope Bus and Blythe parkhers 32 Assist project panbsrs, as requested. with i pkmenptiph issues. Task Asssist RCTC staff with transit planning functions; 4.1 Provide back-up analytic support around assigned topics. 42 Participate In SRTP update and prepare budgct Unifications for po4nfslcharges 4.3 Assist with analysis °reversion.' budgd-tereve nn, los near-temh and long ten. 4A Assist vial special analyses as deeded. 4.5 Support RCTC staff in preparhg necessary mole, such as RFP.Save of Wark 4.6 Schedule and attend RCTC staff meetings, weekly(Aug—sopr biweekly thereafter) Task 5 RCTC Transit Operators( Citizens Advisory Group ateeWnas 5.1 Planning with RCTC staff around rationale, approach, meebg rniau/or transit operators TAC and far coolest. membership, mission of Citizens Advisory Group. 52 Assist staff in conducting 2 kanst TAC meetings. 5.3 Assist staff in anduUkg 2 Citizens Advisory Comrades meetings Task 6 Assist RCTC staff with unmet needs hearing process 6.1 Assist with updsng hearing process notification and updating mating kart 6,2 Paricpate in hessian. 6.3 Prepare analysis of unmet needs and assess needs for reasmnbbpmeet 72 80 40 225 ed 28 40 40 100 40 Providing 4erhara#nomad wound key mon. as rlraanaay RCM omit Direct Expanses Hourly Base Rate MaSig Expense $281 A4A-11-A Benefits/01 Printing Expense $400 646574 Mileage/Travel Expense $2,000 ew+".d wady maw Misc. Meeting Expense 6300 - 981 Labor Cod sby Pkraen 79.00 51.00 as 130.00 $68,250 35.00 2275 ran 57.75 $12,705 TOTAL ALL COSTS sigs- 54.000 $143 $4.576 SIM $4.928 Sao 52,580 Taal Urea Labor Total Direct Expenses �aoRll� 103 " AGENDA ITEM 7M " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation "Committee of the Whole" Jerry Rivera, Motorist Assistance Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2009-13 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans for Local Streets and Roads for the Cities of Canyon Lake and Norco BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE' AND 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 for the cities of Canyon Lake and Norco 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 Five -Year CIP. The agencies were asked to submit their CIP's by May 12, 2008 for submission to the Commission on June 11, 2008. The Commission has previously approved the plans for all but three cities. Staff has received the CIP from the cities of Canyon Lake and Norco and is requesting Commission approval of their Plans. The city of Murrieta has been informed that no disbursement of Measure A funds for local streets and roads will be made until all of the required documents have been received and approved by the Commission. Attachment: Measure A Capital Improvement Plans for Canyon Lake and Norco Agenda Item 7M 104 " " 099 000'9 2urcip4S 28 `uonrompow TeuVFS `$uTuamm luamaoaIdag luatuaned p'eog uoXueo veo riFe2i 3o uluapTM puu uonua ilg121PU I (9,000$) spund y aanssaiN (s,000$) 19o0 mos, add, Toaroad salmn / aczreN loa(road um.' oN " 800Z/� T/9 T7099-9176 (T96) uftpopsI gTquH ax-eq uaituvo jo S4T0 � rot - 600E Ad* Aryg002Id SQNO?I amv SISSZILS =07  V aNf2SNsm NOISSII01100 NOL.LVectSN6'tll AINI100 ffalS2IUART :wee :# auogd pazeda.rd T 3o I aftd :ttauay " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A #LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2007 - 2008 Completed Projects Agency: CITY OF NORCO Page _La _11_ Prepared by: WILUAM R. THOMPSON Phone * 951-270-5607 Dat0: MAX 15, 2008 A ATTACHMENT 2 " Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 1. Valley View Ave.  Second St. to Third St. Overlay/Reconstruction 410 410 2. Unspecified Street Overlays Reconstruction 100 100 3, Street Striping  Various Locations StHping 25 25 4. Traffic Signal Improvements  Sixth St. Overlay/Reconstruction 150 150 5. Misc. Pavement Repairs Asphalt Maintenance 50 50 6. Misc. Seal Coats Seal Coats 50 50 7. Western Ave.  Fifth St. to south end Rehab/Overlay 70 70 8. 9. 10. 106 w.io}Ngywnsasw/g#AN/ 'LE 'TZ 'oZ IT IT IT '9T 'ST 'PT '£T 'ZT 'TT 0,0000 spund (locos) Wk. paEad silWfl / aweN PoGad tom d annsesw 3903 Ism wan L09S-OLL•TS6 # 91101 NOS:MORI 'V WVITIIM Pe adsid 41alard PaRldule0 SOW-100r.c� hl dtlOp?fd SOWN ONV.5133a115' 70007d„ 3b17SMI NOISSINHOO NOZI VII/OdSNOW1 AI N/t00 3015113AZU � Jo "r abed 03210N d.O.AIM dou989 " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TR4NSPORTA770N COMMISSION MEASURE 'A'LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY2008 - 2009 Agency: CITY OF NORCO Page _2_ of Prepared by: WILLIAM R. THOMPSON Phone # 951-270.5607 Date: DULY 35, 2008 Item Total Cost Measure A No. Pmject Name / Limits Project Type ($000's) Funds ($000's) 1. Rocky View  Hilltop Lane ' 1 Overlay 125 125 2. Hillside Ave.  Sixth St. to River Dr, OVerlay 200 200 3, Unspecified Pavement Overlays Overlay 10D 100 4. Sierra Ave.  Third St. To Fourth St. Overlair/Reconstruction 200 200 5. Hillside Ave.  Second St. to Third St. Overla jr/Reconstruction 100 100 6, Golden Gate Circle, Hilltop Lane Overlay/Reconstruction 25 25 7. Pikes Peak  Sixth St. to Mt Shasta Overlay/Reconstruction 200 200 8. Parkridge Ave.  Second St. to Kips Komar Overlay/Reconstruction 150 150 9. Misc. Reconstruction Projects Reconstruction 50 50 10. Reservoir Dr.  Corona Ave. to Temescal Ave. Overlay/Reconstruction 100 100 11. River Dr.  Center to Hillside Reconstruction 50 50 12. Traffic Signal Improvements  Filth Signal 150 150 13. TUMF Projects Match -Hidden Valley Street Maintenance 25 25 14. Corona Ave.  First St to Second St. Overlay/Reconstruction 275 275 / Mve ra i me a surett5vrform 108 - .. 461a4Wny7InrWsauMI rillA1+! 'st 'tZ ,sz • It 'TZ SEE t3£Z 3g4,0 solmeS 3g00 'OZ 0 0 Aspen0 AeNanO pue uone3111ge4011 peupedsun '6T SE SE buldWS buldlxtS pails VT OS OS 3e03 lees sue* lees snuaue . il�lW 'Li OS OS aaueuaquleW pa4S Medan 3uauseAed snoeuellanill 49T OS OS (eu61S snq.:0A — sattautanoadwI leuSIS *weal 'ST (6,0°00) spun is.000$) edAl Peroild s;lwf7 I awaK Per044 .0/4 V ainseeN 3'0D 10141. wa3I SOOZ 'ST Alnc:Kea LO9S-OLZ-TS6 # 0004d NOSdWOHJ. WVITUM :Aq Pendluld 8 40 -r abed ONION dO A1.13 tA7ua6V 600Z - SOOZ. NW/DOW SOWN/ OA1V 11332I15 71007d d, 32112W31+1 NOISSMINO0 NOILV.904,11021.1 •UM700301Sd13A1af " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A " LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY2009 - 2010 Agency: CITY OF NORCO Page _a_ of _a_ Prepared by: WILLIAM R. THOMPSON Phone # 951.270.5607 Date: 3ULY 15, 2008 Item Total Cost Measure A No. Project Name / Limits Project Type ($000's) Funds ($000's) 1. Unspecified Pavement Overlays Overlay 200 200 2. Unspecified Rehabilitation and Overlay Overlay 100 100 3. Crestview Ave. - North Dr. to Sixth St. Overlay 50 50 4. River Rd.  Santa Ana River to Corydon Overidy/Reconstruction 150 150 5. Misc. Reconstruction Projects Overlay/Reconstruction 200 275 6. Miscellaneous Pavement Repairs Street Maintenance 50 50 7. Traffic Signal Improvements I Signal 50 50 8, Miscellaneous Seal Coats I Seal Coat 50 50 9. Street Striping 1 Striping 30 30 10. Norconian Dr.  Fifth St. to Norco Dr. Overla'y/Reconstructlon 200 200 ' II. Hillside Ave.  Second St to Third St. Overlay/Reconstruction 200 200 12. TUMF Projects Match -Hidden valley Street Maintenance 25 25 ifrlvera imeasureA5vrform 110 f RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A "LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2010.2011 Agency: CITY OF NORCO Page of $ Prepared by: WILLIAM R. THOMPSON Phone # 951.270-5607 Date: 311LY 15, 2008 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 1. Unspecified Pavement Overlays Overlay 200 200 2. Unspecified Rehabilitation and Overlay Overlay/Reconstruction 200 200 3. Misc. Reconstruction Projects Reconstruction 200 200 4. Miscellaneous Pavement Repairs Street Maintenance 50 SO 5. Traffic Signal Improvements Signal 50 50 6. Miscellaneous Seal Coats Seal Coat 50 50 7. Street Striping Striping 30 30 B. Crestview Ave. — North Dr. to Sixth St. 600 600 9. 20. 11. 12. 111 " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY2011 - 2012 Agency: CITY OF NORCO Page 7 *La_ Prepared by: WILLIAM R. THOMPSON Phone # 951.270-5607 Patel JULY 25, 2008 Item No. Protect Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 1. Unspecified Pavement Overlays Overlay 250 250 2. UnspeciRed Rehabilitation and Overlay Overlay/Reconstruction 250 250 3. Misc. Reconstruction Projects Reconstruction 200 200 4. Miscellaneous Pavement Repairs Street Maintenance 50 50 5. Traffic Signal Improvements Signal 50 50 6. Miscellaneous Seal Coats Seal Coat 50 50 7. Street Striping Striping 30 30 O. 9. 10, i 11. 12. went /Minn reASwrrorm 112 ��r RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A "LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAM FY 2012 - 2013 Agency: CITY OF NORCO Page  A of _L. Prepared by: WILLIAM R. THOMPSON Phone* 951.270-5607 Date: JULY 15, 2008 Item No. Project Name J Limits Project Type Total Cost (5000's) Measure A Funds (6000'0 1. Unspecified Pavement Overlays Overlay 250 250 2. Unspecified Rehabilitation and Overlay Overlay/Reconstruction 500 500 3. Misc. Reconstruction Projects Reconstruction 200 200 4. Miscellaneous Pavement Repairs Street Maintenance 50 50 5. Traffic Signal Improvements Signal 50 50 6, Miscellaneous Seal Coats Seal Coat 50 50 7. Street Sbiping Striping 0 0 S. g. 10. 11. 12. 113 " " AGENDA ITEM 7N " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: California High -Speed Rail Ballot Proposition and Potential Impacts on Riverside County PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive a status report on Proposition 1  the Safe, Reliable High -Speed Passenger Train Bond Act for the 21' Century. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Proposition 1, or the Safe, Reliable High -Speed Passenger Train Bond Act for the 21 st Century will appear on the November 2008 ballot and asks voters to approve the issuance of $9.95 billion of general obligation bonds. This would partially fund a $40 billion, 800-mile high speed train under the supervision of the California High -Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA). The train would run between San Francisco and Los Angeles, with Anaheim designated as the southern terminus of the initial segment of the high-speed rail system. Estimates are that the rail system would be completed in 2030, and that it would take passengers between San Francisco and Los Angeles in about 2 hours and 40 minutes. A total of $950 million of the bond proceeds would be available for capital projects on other passenger rail lines to provide connectivity to the high-speed rail system and for capacity enhancements and safety improvements to those lines. Proposition 1 came about from the Legislature's approval of SB 1856 back in 2002. That bill directed that the .bond measure be put forward to the voters in 2004. Subsequent legislation pushed the election off until 2006 and another postponement moved the item to this years General Election ballot. The delays were the result of various state budget problems in 2004 and the effort was nixed in 2006 because of the Governor's concern that it would divert attention. and support away from his infrastucture bond program. Legislative intrigue has not been limited to the two postponements. This year, Assemblywoman Cathleen Galgiani (D-Stockton) introduced AB 3034, which Agenda Item 7N 114 amends and expands descriptions of route segments of the high speed rail system, makes the $9 billion for high-speed trains available on all of the 800 mile high-speed rail route, limits the amount of bond funds that can be spent on preconstruction and preliminary engineering activities, requires detailed funding plans for each corridor or usable segment, and establishes peer review and legislative oversight and approval. Opening up the entire route for funding eligibility means that extensions to San Diego which would likely include an alignment through Riverside County, would make funding available for local rail improvements. This would be especially true regarding the $950 million that is being made available for complementary rail services. Without the amendments provided by AB 3034, high-speed rail bond proceeds would only be made available for the initial, priority segment between Anaheim and San Francisco. The Commission took a SUPPORT position on AB 3034 at its June Commission meeting primarily because of the liberalized funding eligibility and because the bill requires greater accountability and oversight over the CHSRA. While the bill has garnered widespread support, prompt action from the Legislature was necessary given the impending election in November. The Legislature finally approved the bill on Wednesday August 13 and immediately sent it to Governor Schwarzenegger, who reneged on his vow to veto all bills from the Legislature until a budget is passed and signed AB 3034 on August 26. Memorandum of Understanding Sought - Action Postponed Although passage of a $9 billion bond is far from certain and possible construction still years off into the future, that hasn't stopped some interests from quickly` acting to capitalize on the potential opportunities that this bond act could create. The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) is keenly interested in evaluating the high-speed rail alignments that could serve San Diego County and has been in communication with the CHSRA, San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG), the San Diego Regional Airports Authority, and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) to develop a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for planning studies for what is dubbed as the "Los Angeles to San Diego via Riverside Corridor." While there was limited staff contact, the Commission never received a formal invitation or proposal to develop an MOU. One meeting that would have included the executive directors from the various agencies was scheduled in Los Angeles in June and was cancelled on the morning of the scheduled meeting. Still, a draft MOU was placed on SCAG's Transportation Committee Agenda on August 7. A copy of the agenda item is attached to this staff report. SCAG Transportation Committee voted to postpone action on the MOU until December Agenda Item 7N 115 " when the fate of the bond issue will be known. This action was recommended by Commissioners Ron Roberts and Robin Lowe who were surprised by the proposal. Commissioner Roberts also pointed to a number of studies that have been completed regarding this high-speed alignment. A great deal of work has been completed in prior years regarding this alignment and the Commission has previously taken action to support this particular alignment along with a provision suggesting a neutral position regarding the kind of rail technology that might be used. The MOU in and of itself does not bind the Commission financially with the exception of the staff time that would be involved. The proposed MOU also has a strong emphasis on San Diego County's need to develop a Regional Air -Rail Network Study. That was required by state legislation and the county agencies are interested in possible rail links to an airport location. Staff agrees that the Commission needs to be at the table regarding these discussions because of its impact on Riverside County. The MOU could provide a framework for cooperation between various agencies. However staff is also supportive of the action that was taken by the SCAG Transportation Committee to postpone consideration of the MOU until December. Voter approval of this bond measure is far from certain especially if AB 3034 is vetoed. Even with the amendments provided by AB 3034, it is prudent to consider the potential fiscal impacts of issuing more than $9 billion in debt during trying economic times for the state. Yet another issue to consider regarding the MOU is whether approval of it would be construed as Commission support for this particular bond act. The Commission has not taken a formal position regarding the Safe, Reliable High -Speed Passenger Train Bond Act for the 21' Century and the issue should be considered by the Commission. Staff recommends that a recommendation on the bond act return to the next meeting of the Budget and Implementation Committee in September for full Commission action in October, an action that was supported by the members of the Budget and Implementation Committee who were present for the September meeting. Legislative items are often under the purview of the Budget and Implementation Committee, although consideration of the MOU can return to the full Commission in November if the Proposition is approved. Attachment: SCAG's Transportation Committee Agenda Item  August 7, 2008 Agenda Item 7N 116 " MEMO DATE: August 7, 2008 TO: Transportation Committee FROM: Andre Darmanin, Regional Transit Planner, 213-236-1851, darmanin(a r,cag cagov SUBJECT: High Speed Rail  Preparation of Studies Memorandum of Understanding BACKGROUND: The Regional Council is being requested to authorize staff to negotiate a Memorandum of Understanding for Preparation of Studies for High Speed Rail Corridor. SCAG, SANDAG, SANDAG, RCTC, California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) and San Diego Regional Airports Authority (SDRAA) will be parties to a Memorandum of Understanding to conduct technical studies for a high speed rail line within the Riverside Corridor connecting Los Angeles and San Diego. CHSRA will be the lead. In conjunction with this study, will also be a Regional Air -Rail Network Study in which SANDAG will be the lead. Both studies will have significant input by SCAG staff. " FISCAL IMPACT: Staff work within this task is budgeted in the FY-08-09 OWP under WBS 09-140SCGS00121.01 Reviewed by: Reviewed by: Reviewed by: " 0,4 SsTM��wAorww wssocmtmn eeeoregwsrTs 8 117 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BY AND BETYVEEN CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED RAIL. AUTHORITY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS SAN BERNARDINO ASSOCIATED GOVERNMENTS RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION b SAN DIEGO COUNTY REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY REVISED DRAFT 6129/08 FOR PREPARATION OF STUDIES FOR THE LOS ANGELES TO SAN DiEGO VIA RIVERSIDE PROPOSED HIGHSPEED PASSENGER RAIL CORRIDOR AND THE REGIONAL AIR -RAIL NETWORK The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is entered into by and between the California High - Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA), Southern California Association Of Governments (SLAG), San Diego Association Of Governments (SANDAG), San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG), Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC). and San Diego Regional Airport Authority (SDCRAA), referred to herein individually as a'PARTY" and collectively as the 'PARTIES', regarding the preparation of technical studies for the Los Angeles to San Diego via Riverside Highspeed Passenger Rail Corridor and a Regional Air -Rai Network Study (collectively hereinafter referred to as 'PROJECTS' and ind'nridualiy as PROJECT': RECITALS: VVHEREAS, CHSRA in partnership with the Federal Rairoad Administration (FRA) has completed and certified a Program Environnnental impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) for a proposed California High -Speed Train (HST) network linking the major metropolitan areas of the State of Califomi. The HST system approved by CHSRA includes the Nos Angeles to San Diego via Riverside corridor (referred to herein as the -Corridor); and WHEREAS, the authority and respornsthility for the planning, construction, and operation of high- speed passenger train service at speeds exceeding 125 miles per hour in Californiais exclusively granted to CHSRA by Public Utilities Code Section 185032.a.2, and WHEREAS, CHSRA has the authority to accept grants, fees, and allocations from the state, from political subdivisions of the state and from the federal government, foreign governments, and private sources (Public Utilities Code section 185034(4); and DRAFT MOU: LA to SD via Riverside Corridor = 6/29/08 9 118 WHEREAS, SANDAG adopted the 2007 Regional Transportaton Plan (RTP) to identify the facilities, services and programs necessary to meet the San Diego County region's travel needs through the year 2030, and that document recognizes the need for highspeed ground transportation to serve these needs; and WHEREAS, SCAG. adopted the 2008 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) to identity the facilities, services and programs necessary to meet the SCAG's region's travel creeds that documentttrougfn. � year 2035, and recognizes the need for high-speed ground transportation to serve these needs; and WHEREAS. SANDAG is considering pursuing a high-speed passenger train service between San Diego and facilities with forecast aviation capacity in neighboring regions including the international border. These services are not included as part of CHSRAs preferred alignment but would be part of a Regional Air -Rai Network Study.. Such a potential service could complement the statewide HST system and help to integrate it with other transit services, such as by providing a -feeder" service with potential multi -modal connections in the Corridor to the statewide system. CHSRA involvement in assessing the feasbility of these services will foster and facilitate coordination in design and planning, and review of potential environmental impacts for these different rat services; and WHEREAS, SANDAG, SCAG, RCTC, and SANBAG are involved in the planning for, or operation of andtor considering pursuing commuter train services as well as HST service; and WHEREAS, SANDAG and the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority are required by state taw (SB10) to develop an Airport Muitmodal Accessibility Plan and Regional Aviation Strategic Plan by 2013 and 2011 respectively. The Regional Ai -Rail Network Study wig be Phase 1 of the Airport Mutimodai Accessy Plan; and WHEREAS, t is the intent and purpose of this MOU to demonstrate the continuing desire of the PARTIES to cooperate, to coordinate, and to share the results of their studies and to share their respective views on the subject of proposed hmprovements and enhancements to the cos Angeles to San Diego via Riverside HST Corridor in a manner which best enhances state and regional transportation networks, and in a manner which reduces or eliminates unnecessary duplicative efforts. NOW. THEREFORE. It is mutually understood and agreed to by the PARTIES as follows: 1. The PARTIES intend to work together for Corridor improvement and to twdd upon the initial phases of work to complete planning and technical studies, and environmental review, for HST service in the Corridor. 2. The PARTIES agree to form a project working group administered by the CHSRA to complete the necessary work related to the PROJECTS, including providing technical and policy input, reviewing deliverables and providing cnmrnents and approvals and providing technical support it a timely manner. The PARTIES agree that staff for each PARTY will cooperate fully in the exchange of information and will work together, under the oversight of CHSRA. 3. Unless otherwise agreed in writing as an amendment to. this RIOU, and authorized by competent authority. each PARTY shah bear any costs t incurs in relation to this MOU without expectation of reimbursement or subsidization by any other PARTY, subject to the foNowhng understanding: DRAFT MOU: IA to SD via Riverside Corridor- 6/29108 10 • 119 (1) The CHSRA will be the lead agency and bear the cost of tthe preparation and adoption of the Los Angeles to San Diego via Inland Empire Region HST System Environmental/Engineering Work (including the cost of the public involvement program and project EIR/EIS documents and related technical studies for the Corridor defined in the CHSRA's certified Final Program BR/EIS for the Proposed HST System). (2) SANDAG will be the lead agency and bear the cost of additional tasks required for the Regional Air -Rail Network Study. (3) The San Diego Canty Regional Airport Authorely and SCAG will develop the regional aviation demand forecast, regional aviation capacity analysis, and regional aviation facilities requirements tasks as such are related to the Regional Air -Rail Network Study and will bear the proportional costs of these tasks. (4) All PARTIES will have the option of requesting additional tasks related to the PROJECTS and each PARTY agrees to bear the costs of the additional work it has requested. (5) If additional tasks are requested by more than one PARTY, those PARTIES agree to pay an equal share of the costs of such additional work, unless they agree to a different allocation of costs among or between them for such work. 4. CHSRA wiR take into account and coordinate with, to the extent k is appropriate to do so, the other technical studies and proposed improvements which have been prepared, and will be prepared, by other PARTIES or other agencies with reference to the Los Angeles to San Diego via Riverside Corridor. CHSRA will be responsible for obtaining the necessary documents to do such. Each other PARTY hereto shall inform CHSRA of such studies and proposed improvements of which it has knowledge during the term of this MOU. 5. The PARTIES recognize that realistic planning for the future of the Corridor requires recognition of existing constraints along this Corridor and also requires recognition of the need for cooperation and coordination among an of interested agencies which have responsibilities to address public transportation needs in and along that Corridor. 6. All PARITES will participate and support CHSRA in seeking federal and state funding for HST studies and environmental and engheering work within the Corridor to the extent appropriate to do so. All PARTIES will provide technical and policy input and technical support, review and comment on documents in a tamely manner, and staff of each PARTY will for Corridor Improvement actively work together with other PARTIES 7. Each PARTY agrees to encourage public awareness of and involvement in the PROJECTS and decision processes concerning the Corridor in which the PARTIES, or any of them, are engaged• 8. Each PARTY agrees that the primary purpose. intent and spiril of this MOU are to continue and to expand cooperation and coordination among the PARTIES and to develop the framework for future Cooperative Agreements. To this end, the PARTIES agree to share the results of their work, including technical studies, and to confer at regular and frequent intervals. DRAFT MOU: LA to SD via Riverside Corridor - 6I29/08 }1 120 9. Each PARTY intends to use the products of the technical studies as it determines is appropriate, consistent wAh its respective authority and to the maximum extern possible. 10. Each PARTY to this PAW is responsible for making its own- determination as to the usefulness or as to the propriety of ks use of or reliance upon the work product of any other PARTY to this. MOU. It is not intended by this MOU that any PARTY to this MOU represents or warrants that its work product is sufficient for the purposes to which any otter PARTY may wish to apply that work product This MOU does not reduce. expand, transfer, or alter in any way, any of the statutory or regulatory authorities and responsbilkies of any of the signatories. 11. It is noted that there may be differences in the nature of what CHSRA is studying and that which other PARTIES will be considering. This MOU does not constitute a decision by CHSRA or by us staff regarding the selection, timing. or phasing of one HST corridor or segment, or any part of such a segment, over another as part of the HST system defined in the certified Program EIRIEIS and approved by CHSRA. This MOU is not intended to constitute and does not construte any limitation on the CHSRA's decision making, or MA of any PARTY. 12. Each PARTY shall idenffy and inform each other PARTY of the name of and Contact information for a technical lead person to exchange information between the PARTIES concerning the PROJECTS. 13. Each PARTY agrees to cooperate and coordinate with each other PARTY, ils staff, contractors. consultants, and vendors, providing services required under this MOU to the extent practicable in the performance of the PROJECTS and in conjunction with each PARTY's other respective responsibilities in the Corridor under this MOU. 14. The PARTIES agree to work dfigently together and in good faith, using their best efforts to resolve any unforeseen issues and disputes arising out of the performance of this MOU. 15. This MOU may only be modified or amended in writing. . All modifications, amendments, changes, and revisions of this MOU from time to time, in whole or in part, and from time to time, shall be binding upon the PARTIES, so long as the same shall be in wrtiing and executed by each of the PARTIES. 16. This MOU shall be governed by and construed in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and Local laws. The PARTIES warrant that in She performance of this DAM each shalt comply with all applicable Federal, State, and Load laws, statutes and ordinances and all lawful orders, rules and regulations promulgated thereunder. 17. This MOU, including all exhibits and documents incorporated herein and made applicable by reference, constitutes the complete and exdusive statement of the term(s) and condition(s) of the MOU between the PARTIES and k supersedes all prior representations, understandings, and communications. The invalid'dy in whole or part of any term or condition of this MOU shall not affect the validity of other tangs) or condition(s). 18. Each PARTY shall be excused from performing Ks °Wagons under this MOU during the time and to the exbnt that k Is prevented from performing by an unforeseeable Cause beyond its control, including but not !biked to: any relevant incidence of fire, flood or other emergency, acts of God; commandeering of material, products, plants or facilities by federal, state or local government; or a DRAFT MOU: LA to SD via Riverside Corridor - 6129108 12 121 " " material act or omission by any PARTY, when satisfactory evidence of such cause is presented to the other PARTIES, and provided further such nonperformance is unforeseeable, beyond the PARTY'S control and is not due to the fault or negligence of the PARTY not performing, and does not impair the PARTY's continued participation in the MOU. Additionally, each PARTY shall be excused from performing its obligations under this MOU during the lime and to the extent that it is prevented from performing by reason of the lack of an adopted State Budget, the lack of sufficient appropriation in the adopted State Budget for work under Mis MOU, or the lock of sufficient appropriation of funds for the continuation of this MOU from a PARTY's applicable funding agencies. 19. Any notice sent by first lass mad, postage paid, to the addresses and addressees listed below shall be deemed to have been given when in the ordinary course it would be delivered. The representatives of the PARTIES who are primarily responsible for the administration of this AAOU, and to whom notices, demands and communications shall be given are listed below: California High -Speed Rail Authority 925 t Street, Suite 1425 Sacramento, CA 95814 Attention: Dan Leavitt, Deputy Director (916) 324-1541, dieavittithsr ca.gov. San Bernardino Associated Governments 1170 W. 3'd Street, ed Floor San Bernard's)�, CA 92410-1715 Attention: Michael Bair, Director of Transit/Rail Programs (909) 884-82 76, mbatAsanban.ca.00v Southern California Association of Governments 818 W. Seventh Street 12th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 Attention: Andre Darmanin, Regional Transit Planner (213) 236-1800, darnraninftscag.ca.gov DRAFT MOU: to to SD via Riverside Corridor - 6129f08 13 122 San Diego Association of Governments 401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA92101 Attention: Linda Culp, Senior TransportaTion Planner (619) 699-6957, lcu@sandap.orq Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 lemon Street, 3'd floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attention: Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager (951) 787 7928, speterson@rctc.org San Diego County Regional Airport Authority P.O. Box 82776 San Diego, CA 92138-2776 Attention: (619) 400-2400, If any of the names and/or information listed above should change, the PARTY making such changes shall notify each other PARTY in writing of the changes within five (5) days of effective date of such changes. 20. This MOU may be executed in counterparts. This MOU shall be effective upon the date of full execution of this MOU by all the PARTIES. This MOU shall continue in tuN force and effect through December 31, 2011, unless terminated earlier by mutual written consent of all the PARTIES. Any PARTY may withdraw from and terminate its participation in the MOU upon providing 30 days written notice to each other PARTY hereto. provided that the terminating PARTY shall bear the reasonable oasts of terminating worts it has requested ender this MOU through the date of its withdrawal from the MOU. The term of this MOU may only be extended upon mutual written agreement by the PARTIES. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES hereto have caused this Memorandum of Understanding No. ??? to be executed as of the date opposke their signatures. DRAFT MOO_ lA to SD via Rhrerside Corridor - 6/29/08 14 • 123 ,£ Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: DRAFT MOW LA to SD via Riverside Corridor 6/29/06 15 124 AGENDA ITEM 70 • • " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside; County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Trade Corridor Improvement Fund  Working Group PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to allocate $8,125 to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) to secure the services of Green Tech Coast, LLC in support of the Trade Corridor Improvement Fund (TCIF) projects. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In July 2007, $162.7 million in Proposition 1B funds were awarded by the California Transportation Commission for 12 grade separation projects and the I-215/Van Buren Interchange  all projects located in Riverside County. Since that time, Commission staff has been working closely with staff from the cities of Banning, Corona, and Riverside and the county of Riverside (project sponsors) to finalize the TCIF baseline agreements and supporting documents. A parallel activity has been continued discussions with the Southern California Working Group (Working Group), which consists of agency staff from the Commission, SCAG, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Orange County Transportation Authority, San Bernardino Associated Governments, Port of Los Angeles, Port of Long Beach, Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority, and the Alameda Corridor East Construction Authority. The Working Group was instrumental in securing the TCIF funds for the Los Angeles/Inland Empire Corridor. Since that time, the Working Group has identified a need to provide follow-up activities related to the TCIF funding, including potential assessment of additional data needs as well as continuous outreach activities critical to fully documenting and supporting the TCIF submittals. SCAG, acting as the lead agency, is securing the consultant services of Green Tech Coast at a total not to exceed cost of $70,000. Green Tech's principal, Walter Baker, was a former senior executive with the Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC). While at LAEDC, Mr. Baker worked with four of the past governors of California to establish the Southern California Leadership Council  Agenda hem 70 125 enabling business leaders from six Southern California. Counties to address public policy issues critical to the Southern California economy and quality of life. To support the consultant services, staff is requesting an allocation of $8,125, which represents the Commission's proportional share of the consultant work. Following are the highlights of the proposed scope of work: 1) California Public Utilities Commission: Green Tech will develop an expedited utilities relocation process for TCIF projects; 2) Working with the California Air Resources Board, Green Tech will obtain air emission reduction mitigation support letters required for the TCIF environmental clearance process as identified in the project baseline agreements; 3) Preparation of the TCIF project's Economic Benefit 2010 report summary; 4) In support of the TGIF submittals, Green Tech will provide support and work to facilitate publication and distribution of editorial(s); and 51 Green Tech will provide assistance to the Los Angeles/Inland Empire Corridor in the next state budget post appropriation process to coordinate the corridor's interest between the railroads, the Department of Finance, Controller and the Administration's finance staff. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: No Year: FY 2008/09 Amount: $8,125 Source of Funds: LTF Budget Ad ustment: Yes GLA No.: 106 67 65520 P4008 Fiscal Procedures Approved: vihtAi;a Date: 8/15/2008 Attachment: Scope of Work Agenda Item 70 126 " PRIME CONSULTANT: CONTRACT PERIOD: TIER I: QUALIFICATIONS TCIF FOLLOW-UP SUPPORT TASKS CONSULTANT SCOPE OF WORK GREEN TECH COAST, LLC DATE OF NOTICE TO PROCEED JUNE 30, 2009 RECOMMENDED TASKS DUE TO TIMING/URGENCY/UNIQUE TASK 1 Task Consultant will serve as a liaison and coordinate work between the TCIF Working Group and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to develop an expedited utilities relocation process for TCIF projects. Specific Task I activities/deliverables are as follows: Deliverables 1. Meet and organize utility providers, CPUC staff and Caltrans due by Sept. 1, 2008 2. Develop an expedited problem solving process for relocations --due by Oct. I, 2008 3. Draft MOU between project sponsors, State and utility providers --due Nov. t, 2008 Allocation of costs amongst participating agencies for Task 1 activities/deliverables is as follows: Cost1Hr Total Cost AgarcyShare' Tack 1 110 $225Air+ $230 Expense $25.003.00 $3,125,00 ' Each parlicipatinyagency share only-POtll will not pabopate in Task I. Task 2 Consultant will coordinate with the California Air Resources Board (CARD) and CARB staff to obtain 43 letters of air emission reduction mitigation support from CARB for the TCIF nominating agency environmental clearance submittal as specified in the Baseline Agreement and guidelines (consistent with CEQA/NEPA). Specific Task 2 activities/deliverables are as follows: Total Hours POLA Share" $(100 Deliverables 1. Meet with appropriate parties and develop an agreed upon process  ongoing thru June 30, 2009 per agency request 2. Collect data and studies to reach agreement with appropriate parties  ongoing thru June 30, 2009 per agency request 3. Coordinate clearance as specified and walk through process  ongoing thru June 30, 2009 per agency request Task 2 activities will be conducted on an as needed basis per participating agency requests. Hours are not to exceed the estimated allocations by agency as illustrated below unless negotiated amongst participating agencies to shift hours in accordance with actual needs. Final agency share of costs will be based upon actual allocation of hours for Task 2 activities. Task Total Hours Cost'l+ Task 2 110 $225/11r+ $250 Expense ' Est. padlcipating agency share only. Final agency share subject b actual hours alocated perageney needs. Total Cost Est. AgencyShare* $25,00000 $2.777.78 127 Task Estimated Shares 8 Houts $2,777.78 $2,777.78 $2,777.78 $2,777.78 $2,777.78 $2,777.78 $25,000.00 12.22 12.22 12.22 12.22 12.22 12.22 12.2_2 12.22 12.22 110.00 'Hours are not to exceed estimated allocations per agency unless negotiated by participating agendes to shift in accordance with needs. Task 3 The LAEDC will prepare a TCIF Projects Economic Benefit 2010 Report summarizing findings and make a presentation to the CTC, if requested. Deliverables The report will have three components: 1. Economic impact of construction on an ongoing basis 2. Overall economic climate and growth potential related to the overall regional economic impact of the corridor improvements 3. Analysis of the number of jobs, businesses and households affected by improvements to air quality and traffic circulation Note: This Task Deferred until FY2009-2010. Task Total Hours Cost1Hr Total Cost Agency Share Task 3 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Task 4 Consultant will provide support and work as directed by the TCIF Agencies with the regional, state, and national editorial boards, the Govemor's office staff and others as directed. Specific Task 4 activities/deliverables are as follows: Deliverables I. Assemble experts to sit with editorial boards at Southern California media outlets to discuss goods movement issues as needed —ongoing activity through June 30, 2009 2. Facilitate publication and distribution of editorial(s) by prominent Southern California leaders regarding urgent topics related to goods movement and trade corridors ongoing activity through June 30, 2009 3. Expand to other state, national and trade publications as appropriate —ongoing activity through June 30, 2009 Task 4 activities will be conducted on an as needed basis. Hours are not to exceed the budgeted allocations for this Task 4. Final agency share of costs will be based upon actual total allocation of hours for Task 4 activities. Task Total Hours Cost/Hr Total Cost Est. Agency Share` Task 44 $'225t1-k+$100Expense $10,000_00 $1,111.11 ' Est agency share based upon total hours budgeted for Task 4. Final agency share subject to actuat total hours allocated per Task 4 activulies 128 i Task 5 In order to better position TCF funding for the Los Angeles/Inland Empire Corridor in the next state budget post -appropriation process, Consultant will assist in developing competitive intelligence and coordinate corridor's interests as directed by the TCIF Working Group between the railroads, the Department of Finance, Controller, and the Administration's finance staff. Consultant work under Task 5 will assist in successfully completing post process work. Deliverables I. Develop a presentation around the corridor projects and their meaning to the state economy —ongoing through June 30, 2009 2. Develop fact sheet(s) as a leave behind —ongoing through June 30, 2009 3. Make presentations to state agencies and private entities involved in post - appropriation funding of Southern California projects —ongoing through June 30, 2009 Task Task 5 Total Hours Cost'Hr Total Cost Agency Share $225lHr+$100 Expense $10,000.00 $1,111.11 Tier 1 Summary and Guiding Principles 1. Amount of contract not to exceed $70,000 at an estimated $7,778 per agency, under normal circumstances. 2. On a prorated basis, since POLA is not participating in Task #1, each agency share (other than POLA) would increase by $347 for a total of $8,125 per agency. POLA's share is estimated to total $5,000. Refer to the summary table below. 3. TCIF Working Group reviews deliverables and approves work plan. 4. Consultant will report in writing on activities. Consultant may be requested to make oral reports. 5. Contract Administrator. Invoicing of 9 agencies will be done by SCAG. 6. Nine agencies are: Metro, OCTA, ROTC, SCAG, SANBAG, POLB, POLA, ACTA, and ACE ' Final age. Total Hours 110 Total Cost $25,000.00 CostlHr $225lHr+$250Expense Est. Agency Share $3,125.00 Est. POLA Share $0.00 110 $25,000.00 $225lHr + $250 Expense $2,777.78 $2,777.78 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 44 $10,000.00 $225lHr+$100Expense $1,111.11 $1.111.11 44 $10.000.00 $225lHr+$100Expense $1,111.11 $1,111.11 308 $70.000.00 $8,125.00 $5,000.00 ' share subject to aduat hours altmatart ..arr Amami, naarfa "' Final agency shale subject to actual total hours allocated per Task 4 activities. 129 AGENDA ITEM 7P • " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Inland Empire Goods Movement Initiatives PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. 09-67-012-00 with the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) and the Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG) for work related to advancing goods movement through the Inland Empire; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In September 2006, WRCOG organized a "first -ever" effort in the Inland Empire to bring together leaders (mayors and members of the Board of Supervisors from Riverside and San Bernardino Counties) in signing a statement of purpose emphasizing the impact of goods movement on the region, and reemphasizing their commitment to regional collaboration with neighboring counties who are, and will be impacted, by the significant growth from increased port activities at the Long Beach and Los Angeles Ports. With more than 70% of the containers coming through the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach traveling through the Inland Empire, leaders from the two counties and more than two dozen of the cities met to sign an Elected Officials Statement emphasizing that goods movement must become Southern California's overriding priority. Based on the event, the Boards of Supervisors from both counties passed joint resolutions in support of the effort. Since that time, the Commission, working in partnership with members of the Southern California Consensus Group', has taken a lead role in the goods ' Consists of staffs from the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority, Alameda Corridor East Construction Authority, Riverside County Transportation Commission, San Bernardino Associated Governments, Orange County Transportation Authority, Agenda Item 7P 130 movement arena for Riverside County. To date, efforts include the 2006 grade separation funding strategy, the completion of the Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan — a master plan for goods movement in the region_, and the on -going Environmental Justice Analysis and Community Outreach Study effort — a three -county study reviewing the impacts of goods movement. An additional work effort was the submittal of applications to the California Transportation Commission securing $162.7 million in Proposition 1B funds for 12 grade separations and the I-215/Van Buren interchange project. Discussion: WRCOG recently received a grant of $70,000 from SCAG to advance the work it started in September 2006. To avoid duplication of work efforts, WRCOG approached the Commission to enter into a MOU to promote goods movement through the Inland Empire. In a letter dated May 30, 2008 from SLAG, SCAG confirmed WRCOG's request to coordinate work efforts by the two agencies and to include SCAG in a three -party MOU. Through preliminary discussions with WRCOG and SCAG, it is anticipated that the work product for the Inland Empire goods movement' initiative will include the following elements: • Compendium of studies and accomplishments on goods movement as it relates to the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach and other points of entry in Southern California; • Workshop on goods movement to include an overview of goods movement projects, project status, and potential future funding sources from federal, state and local sources; and • Update of the Commission's 2007 goods movement video and circulation of the video to key federal legislators. Over the next several weeks, it is anticipated that the scope of work will be finalized to further refine agency responsibilities. Commission staff is requesting approval to enter into an MOU with WRCOG and SCAG to receive $56,000 of the $70,000 in SCAG funds as a "pass through" to conduct the work. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Ventura County Transportation Commission and the Southern California Regional Rail Authority Agenda Item 7P 131 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: No Year: FY 2008/09 Amount: $56,000 Source of Funds: SCAG grant funds Budget Ad ustment: Yes GLA No.: 106 67 65520 $56,000 106 67 41204 $56,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \P","ott Date: 8/15/2008 Agenda item 7P 132 " AGENDA ITEM 7Q " " .E- • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation "Committee of the Whole" Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: State and Federal Legislative Update BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION "COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE" AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive and file an update on the State and Federal Legislation; and 2) Adopt the following bill positions: a) H.R. 6052 (Oberstar) / S. 3380 (Clinton) — MONITOR; b) H.R. 6532 (Rangel) — MONITOR; c) H.R. 6003 / S. 294 (Lautenberg) — MONITOR. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State Update Commission Legislation Nears Governor's Desk AB 1954 (Jeffries), the Commission's bill to authorize high -occupancy toll (HOT) lanes on Interstate 15 was approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee by a 9-2 vote on August 4. Senator Dennis Hollingsworth (R-Murrieta) will present the bill on the full Senate floor any day now. AB 1954 will then go to back to the Assembly floor for a concurrence vote to adopt the amendments that were added to the bill in the Senate this summer. This vote must take place by August 31. After final Assembly approval, AB 1954 will be sent to Govemor Schwarzenegger. Complicating matters is the Governor's declaration to not sign bills until the Legislature completes a budget. It remains to be seen if the Governor will follow through on this threat and begin to veto bills, or vvhat other approaches the Legislature may take to prevent bills from being returned by the Governor without his signature. Budget politics aside, the Governor is likely to view AB 1954 favorably. Agenda Item 7Q 133 .E- SB 1316 (Correa), the Commission and Orange County Transportation Authority's (OCTA) joint legislation regarding State Route 91 improvements is on a similar path as AB 1954. The full Assembly unanimously approved SB 1316 on August 12 and is scheduled for a concurring vote by the full Senate any day now. It will then be forwarded for Governor Schwarzenegger's consideration. As with AB 1954, signs are positive that the Governor is supportive of SB 1316. Still No State Budget With the summer nearly over, the state of California remains without a budget for FY 2008/09. The Governor has signed an executive order reducing all state employees to minimum wage and has threatened to not sign bills until there is a budget agreement. The Legislature continues its regular business of debating bills according to pending legislative deadlines. While Senate Pro-Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland) has declared that he opposes raiding Proposition 42 transportation funds, the California transportation community remains on guard against last-minute maneuvers that could jeopardize gas tax dollars that are already committed to transportation projects. The Commission has been communicating to local and state leaders regarding the $208 million at risk for Riverside County projects if Proposition 42 is suspended. Federal Update FY 2009 Appropriations Stall In July, the Senate Appropriations Committee unveiled its spending 'legislation for FY 2009, which includes $50 million for the Perris Valley Line (PVL) Metrolink extension. This funding matches the Bush Administration's request for the PVL. Senators Feinstein and Boxer were the sponsors of this funding and mark the third year in a row that Senator Feinstein has championed funding for this project. The House Appropriations Committee has yet to move forward on its spending bill for transportation. That committee has been mired in partisan gridlock in recent months, after Republican maneuvers to insert language in support of domestic oil drilling into appropriations bills. It is not expected that much progress will be made in appropriating FY 2009 funds until the next Congress and new President are swom-in in January. Any funds for the PVL will not be available until a final appropriations act is signed by the President. Commission staff and lobbyists will continue to monitor the status of the appropriations process. Agenda Item 7Q 134 " " Second Economic Stimulus Package Could Include Infrastructure Spending Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) are pushing for a supplemental appropriations bill to be taken up by both chambers of Congress when it returns from the August recess. This supplemental act would be considered a second economic stimulus package, following the rebate checks issued earlier this year. Democrat leaders are pushing for infrastructure spending to be part of the stimulus package, an idea that came up during negotiations in the first stimulus bill, but was deferred to a potential follow-up bill such as what .is being considered now. Details are few on what types of investments would be considered for an infrastructure stimulus; however, the emphasis will be on investments that create jobs. Republican Congressional leaders and the President are opposed to infrastructure being included in a stimulus package, as they have stated that infrastructure does not yield enough of a near -term benefit to the economy. This discussion will develop further in the fall as the general election nears. H.R. 6052 (Oberstar) / S. 3380 (Clinton)  "Saving Energy through Public Transportation Act of 2008"  Recommended Position: Monitor H.R. 6052 by House Transportation and Infrastructure. Committee Chairman Jim Oberstar (D-MN) would provide $1.7 billion over two years to transit operators to help pay for the increased costs of energy, reduce fares, and provide additional transit service. The bill has been passed by the full House of Representatives and will now be considered in the Senate in the form of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's (D-NY) S. 3380. According to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, these bills would authorize the following funding amounts for transit in Riverside County for FFY 2009: Riverside -San Bernardino $9,608,984 Indio -Cathedral City -Palm Springs $1,216,442 Temecula-Murrieta $1,007,678 Hemet $ 651,608 While these funds would be authorized under H.R. 6052 and S. 3380, Congress would have to make appropriations before the money would be available for expenditure for local projects. As previously mentioned, the current appropriations process is stalled. Also, these additional transit funds are outside of the budget that Congress has already agreed to for FFY 2009. Agenda Item 7Q 135 .r- Although the bills would provide several million dollars for transit in Riverside County, given that time is winding down on this Congress and the fiscal challenges facing Washington, staff recommends a MONITOR position on the bill. H.R. 6532 (Rangel) — "Fixing" the Highway Trust Fund — Recommended Position: Monitor This bill provides a one-time fix to the shortfall that is beginning to hit the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) by transferring about $8 billion from the general fund to the HTF. This proposed transaction is being framed as a "restoration" of funds transferred out of the HTF to the general fund in 1998. This is a challenging maneuver given the rising federal deficit that is projected for FFY 2009. The American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO), estimates that the HTF shortfall is about $3.3 'billion for FFY 2009, which could lead to a 34% reduction of federal investment next year. The impact to California if the HTF shortfall is not addressed equates to about $928 million of transportation funding and a projected 32,315 jobs lost in the state. H.R. 6532 has cleared the House of Representatives and awaits action in the Senate. It is not known when the bill will be heard in Senate committees. Commission staff and lobbyists will continue to monitor this bill and any other legislation that is introduced to address HTF insolvency. H.R. 6003 (Oberstar) / S. 294 (Lautenberg) — Amtrak Authorization Recommended Position: Monitor Congressional work on a five-year Amtrak authorization bill is nearing the finish line as the House appointed its conference committee in late July. The bill increases federal capital and operating grants for Amtrak. Although much of the focus of these grants is likely on the Northeast Corridor, the funds are supposed to benefit the entire system. Of note is the creation of a new state capital grant program (similar to the New Starts program for transit) that encourages the development of new and improved intercity passenger rail services. This competitive program has been authorized for $2.5 billion. The bill also authorizes $1.75 billion for grants to states and/or Amtrak to finance the construction and equipment for 11 authorized high-speed rail corridors. California could potentially compete for these funds pending the outcome of the high-speed rail bond on the November statewide ballot. Further, the Amtrak authorization provides $520 million to alleviate rail choke points where freight and passenger trains conflict and cause congestion. Given the high volume to freight trains that travel through Riverside County and impact passenger rail operations, such a program may be of interest to the Commission, depending on how the program is eventually structured. Finally, the bill creates a forum at the Surface Transportation Board (STB) to facilitate stalled negotiations between railroads and commuter rail operators. The forum is a venue for non - Agenda Item 7Q 136 " binding arbitration when rail negotiations reach an impasse. No such venue currently exists. Several of the provisions in the Amtrak bill could be helpful to Commission objectives, although it is difficult to identify specific benefits to this region until these new programs are implemented. If anything, the bill creates an opportunity for future investment in the passenger rail system in the region. Attachment: Legislative Matrix Agenda Item 7Q 137 RIVE', COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION -POSITION STATE AND FEDERAL LEG yyy�M 9C ffifo .:-' R ✓' w z_a..,: STATE- LEG/SLAT/ON 4}... 4 +4; r; t, M`• �"y Yid^ tl '.�'i;,,?: � Xeb ..s ,.ao?- ,5�w'Faa,n.><w.,..®w..✓ -.& +' — .ss�.-.f.w SvvM''.L.�®'�'nt�.""A$g)ft " L�uA .,u' �# ^. �x ✓.,,?S+$.b. �e+v_+c'w> . Lw,'4`�•u �Y- � �{se+zi'. n'•k .-+h�-_.4.. -- AB 353 (Carter) This bill allows the PUC to grant $15 million to the top five priority projects in California. From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56. - 02(01 /08 Support 01/28/08 AB 660 (Galgiani) This bill provides "clean-up" language to the PUC Section 190 program's statues, generally modifying the law to reflect the changing circumstances of delivering grade separation projects In Read second time. To third reading. - 08/07/08 Oppose unless Amended 01 /28/08 AB 996 (Spitzer) This bill would allow the Commission to recoup revenues from toll violators who are enrolled in the CRP program. Senate amendments concurred in. To enrollment. - 08/07/08 Support with Amendments 06/11/08 AB 1854 (Duvall) This bill would delete the California Public Utilities Commission's Section 190 grade separation funding program. May 8 Referred to Com. on PUB. S. - 05/08/08 Work with Author 04/28/08 AB 2650 (Carter) This bill extends Caltrans pilot program that allows California (and other states) to streamline the environment approval process for transportation projects. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 248, Statutes of 2008 - 0$!04/08 Support 03/24/08 AB 3021 (Nava) This bill would create the California. Transportation Financing Authority (CTFA) for increased construction of new capacity for the state highway system through the issuance of revenue bonds. Joint Rule 62(a), file notice suspended. (Ayes 21. Noes 12.) - 08/07/08 Support 04/28/08 AB 3034 (Galgiani) This bill deletes the requirement that bond funds must first be used to build the "trunk" line from L.A. to San Francisco, and allows the High Speed Rail Authority to prioritize segments of the statewide system which are more feasible and can benefit the most from bond In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 10 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77. - 08/07/08 Support 06/11/08 SB 375 (Steinberg) This bill would require regional transportation planning agencies to adopt "preferred growth scenarios" that reduce vehicle miles traveled per household. The amount of reduced vehicle miles traveled to be reduced would be part of an emissions inventory to be completed by CARB. Additional provisions would require the CTC to adopt guidelines for the use of travel demand models that meet a number of standards and would require the state to ensure that projects that are included in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program reflect this orientation toward "preferred growth scenarios." From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 11. Noes 4.) - 08/08/08 Oppose 06/13/07 138 SB 1507 (Oropeza) SB 1846 (Padilla) This bill would prohibit the California Transportation Commission (CTC) and Caltrans from constructing or expanding a state highway within %. mile of a school boundary, with exceptions for safety improvements or for carpool lanes. Set, second hearing. Failed passage in committee. Reconsideration granted. - 06/23/08 Oppose 06/1 1 /08 FEDERAL LEGISLATION H.R. 1475 (McGovern, D- MA) H.R. 2701 (Oberstar, 0- MN) H.R. 5102 (Calvert, D-CA) This bill would reauthorize the existing Clean Fuels program indefinitely so that SCAQMD can continue collecting the $1 fee and make more of clean fuels investments. SCAQMD is careful to point out that the legislation does not authorize an increase in fees, it merely continues them. This bill equalizes the fringe benefit employers may offer their employees tax-free for transit reimbursement and parking. reimbursement to $200/month. Presently, employers may reimburse parking up to $175/month while transit may only be reimbursed up to $100/month. This bill provides and addresses ways that transportation policy can help mitigate climate change and improve energy efficiency. The bill includes additional transit funding and an increased federal share of CMAQ projects. A new mechanism for negotiating with railroads is also part of the legislation From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 4.1 - 08/08/07 Support 06/1 1 /08 Referred to House Ways & Means Committee; Referred to House Oversight and Government Reform Committee - 03./12/07 Support 04/1 1 /07 This bill directs the Secretary of Transportation to establish and collect a fee based on the fair market value of articles imported into the United States and articles exported from the United States in commerce and to use amounts collected from the fee to make grants to carry out certain transportation projects in the transportation trade corridors for which the fee is collected, and for other purposes. 139 • Markup scheduled in Transportation & Infrastructure Committee for 06/20/07 Referred to the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials. - 01 /24/08 Monitor Support in Concept 07/1 1 /07 06/1 1 /08 • " AGENDA ITEM 8 " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation "Committee of the Whole" Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Universal Call for Projects Jobs Access Reverse Commute and New Freedom Call for Projects Grants BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION -COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE" AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 09-62-018-00 to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) for the Homeless Work Trip Voucher program in the amount of $76,932 in Jobs Access Reverse Commute (JARC) grant funds; 2) Award Agreement No. 09-62-019-00 to Desert Samaritans for the Elderly for the Last Resort transportation program in the amount of $31,807 in New Freedom grant funds; 3) Award the Commission $24,502 in JARC grant funds for the Coachella Valley Rideshare program; 4) Award Agreement No. 09-62-015-00 to SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine) for the Coachella TRIP program in the amount of $143,133 in New Freedom grant funds; 5) Award Agreement No. 09-62-016-00 to SunLine for the Extended Night/Guaranteed Service program in the amount of $245,020 in JARC grant funds; 61 Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute agreements on behalf of the Commission; 7) Approve up to $427,961 of additional Western Riverside County Measure A Specialized Transit funds to the applicable Western County Specialized Transit providers identified in Attachment 2; and 8) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to extend the applicable Western County Specialized Transit provider contracts identified in Attachment 2 through December 30, 2008, to accommodate additional time for a staff recommendation and award of the Western County Universal Call for Projects grant funds. Agenda Item 8 140 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its April 2008 meeting, the Commission approved the Coordinated Public Transit — Human Services Transportation Plan, which then made the Commission eligible to receive certain types of federal funding such as JARC and New Freedom funds. Additionally, with the approval of the Coordinated Plan, the Commission also adopted a strategy for developing and conducting a Universal Call for Projects for both the Coachella Valley and Western County using the JARC and New Freedom funds. The Western County portion of the Universal Call for Projects as approved, also includes specialized transit services to be funded through Measure A. The Universal Call for Projects proposals were submitted to the Commission on June 16, 2008 with an evaluation period that continued through August 5, 2008. The evaluation panel consisted of citizen members, partner agencies and Commission staff. The scoring criteria were developed from the goals and objectives analysis that was generated during the development of the Coordinated Plan. Following the initial evaluation, some project proponents were then invited to appear before the evaluation panel to defend their proposals with the scores and ranks of the applications revisited by the panel for the last time.. DISCUSS/ON: The Coordinated Plan approved by the Commission identifies a breadth of specialized transit needs, which staff believes can only be met through the award of a wide range of projects operated by a wide range of providers. This belief coincides with the spirit and intent of the federal circulars defining the use of JARC and New Freedom grant funds. The staff recommendation for the Coachella Valley area includes a two-year award to all applicants except for the ADA Extended Night Service proposal from SunLine. Specifically, to pay for ADA complementary paratransit service for the additional hours of an expanded fixed -route service is not an eligible expense as cited via Federal Transit Administration Circular 9045.1, May 1, 2007 , p III-8 Section III- 11(a)(1), which identifies eligible public transit activities that may be funded with New Freedom funding for "New Public Transportation Services Beyond the ADA". As such, the ADA service application was deemed ineligible. SunLine is however recommended for an award for the Coachella TRIP program as well as the Extended Night/Guaranteed Ride program. Lastly and with regard to the award of Coachella Valley projects, since the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is still refining the final apportionment numbers for the JARC and New Freedom funds, the grant awards as recommended herein may be subject to minor changes that will be reflected in the final agreement amounts. Agenda Item 8 141 " " While a staff recommendation for the award of projects in the Coachella Valley is included with this report and Attachment 1 to this report identifies the Coachella Valley requests as well as the recommended award amounts, the circumstance surrounding the Western County applications is more complex. With the submission of proposals on June 16, it became clear that for Western County, twice as much funding was requested as compared what was available. Given this situation and prior to making a funding recommendation, staff requested additional information from the current providers as well as new applicants. This request was deemed necessary in order to supply staff with additional financial and operating information that would enable staff to present a solution that identifies and prioritizes the need in conjunction with the amount of funding available. This process would also provide staff with a platform in which to begin negotiations with the applicants. This negotiation beyond a simple evaluation was deemed necessary in order to deal with the over -subscription of funds by project applicants. The downside to this process is that more time is now required to complete the approval process. Given the evaluation process and the need to identify negotiated solutions to the funding requests, staff is recommending that one additional interim quarterly extension and funding allocation be approved for current Western County providers. This is to ensure that services can continue without disruption during the final negotiation of the Western County proposals. For FY 2007/08, the Commission funded 14 Specialized Transit service providers through Measure A. The agreements which were originally approved in 2006 expired on June 30, 2008. Prior to their expiration, the Commission at its June 2008 meeting approved a staff recommendation that extended the term of the agreements to September 30, 2008. The recommendation conditioned the extension and allocation of additional funds for service directly to the submittal of a Universal Call for Projects application by a current provider on or before the June 16, 2008 deadline. There are 12 providers as identified on Attachment 2 that meet the criteria. The interim funding amount for those 12 providers is $427,961 and is included in the FY 2008/09 budget. In summary, staff is working toward bringing a Western County recommendation for award of the JARC, New Freedom, and Measure A Specialized Transit funds to the Commission at its October 2008 meeting. Next steps upon receiving Commission approval will be the development of contracts for Coachella Valley providers and amendments for current Western County providers. Agenda Item 8 142 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2008/09 Amount: $427,961 Source of Funds: Measure A Specialized Transit Budget Adjustment: No GLA No.: 225 26 86101 $427,961 106 62 41409 $ 24,502 106 62 86101 $ 24,502 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \14,424,:41 Date: 08/15/2008 Attachments: 1) Coachella Valley Request and Award Summary 2) Measure A Provider Interim Funding Summary Agenda Item 8 143 900Z/0Z/9 eousgegjp 00: 019Jellla 494'04- ' eouaneijlp 9'49 '<pep s sin.1oi sueluewes;rased 9.89 (aoliues peelueJenoALAN pepuelx3) Aoue6y eununs 000`06$ 9'46 (dNI. e11e40e00) doue6yfilisue�l eunung sdo MOOS 9'49 LpePl3 941 Jo) $41310eweg Uesap 9'69 (eovues peelueieno/1461N PePuelx3) Aoue6y,tlleueij. eununs 9' 46 (dN1 el1e40e00) /oue6y Allsueu eununs sexos wopaa id meN - nmeA ells yoaoo 0' 49 sluewuJanop )0 uone1009sy AelleA elleuoeoo 9'69 (solves peelueJen9/1461N PePuslx3) Foue6y Allsueu eunung L'06 uoisslwwoo uoneyodsmi Awnoo eplsieN11 seioas 0'49 siuewwen0010 000e100134y,telleA e11e40009 9'69 (eovues peeluslensmeiN pepuelx3) Aoue6y dllsueu eununs L'06 uolsslwwoo uonepodsuell Alunoo eplsaeN 17tl 046`bLb$ :elgelleneaeaAoml tte.06$000'044$ 6u}pury, a19!3ile Ny 000'0 4 4$ 000'06$ 000'06$ slelol ennelnwno 000`o44$ OOObL 4$ 0oo'oeS 000'06$ slelol ennelnwno 000'03 1epdeo ewopeem meN 000'03 000'06$ le1ldeo sdo swopeeid meN ege94e$ :OM/lane IBM 044.1 99IVo9:G$ 84L'9L4$ 94L'9L4$ o09'LE4$ 009'Z 4 $ o$ s1e101 ennelnwno 94L'9L4$ 94L'9L 4$ 009'LE 3 009'ZL$. 0$ eulpand slelol /si/deo sdo elgelleny ennelnwno Darr 94Z'L$ 000'ZE$. 000'sz4$ 009`Z4$ leudeo sdo aayr 84Z'L$ 000'ZE$ 000'SZ4$ oos`Z 4$ °dbl.-amen ellayoaop " MEASURE A SPECIALIZED TRANSIT FY 07/08 APPROVED FUNDING ATTACHM. 2 PROJECTS RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING, FY 07108 ALLOCATION BY QUARTER Anolicant FY 2007/08 Qtr1 Qtr2 Qtr3 MN Total Beaumont Adult School Agreement No: 06-26-051-00 20,814 5,204 5,204 5,203 5,203 20,814 Blindness Support Services Agreement No. 07-26-023-00 75,114 18,779 18,779 18,778 16,778: 75,114 Bovs and Girls Clubs of Southwest County Agreement No. 06-26-052-00 74,896 18,724 18,724 18,724 18,724, 74,896 Care -A -Van Transit, Inc. , Agreement No. 06-26-053-00 245,025 71,382 57,881 57,881 , F 57t88 h 246,028 175,000 Care Connexxus, Inc. Agreement No. 07-28-073-00 175,000 43,750 43,750 43,750 44;50 CASA Agreement No. 07-26-072-00 30,000 7,500 7,500 7,500 . , -: 7Am 30,000 City of Norco Agreement No. 06-26-059-00 73,116 18,279 18,279 18,279 1,278- 73,116 Friends of Moreno Valley Agreement No. 06-26-054-00 47,773 11,944 11,943 11,943 ?.:1 4 47,773 Inland AIDS Project Agreement No. 06-26.055-00 100,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 - ` 25 100,000 Operation SafeHouse, Inc. Agreement No. 06-26-056-00 5,000 5,000 5,000 Independent Living Partnership Agreement No. 06-26-057-00 416,598 104,150 104,150 104,149 1Q4,141 416,598 Riverside County Regional Medical Center Agreement No. 06-26-058-00 274,665 68,667 68,666 68,666 68,666 274,665 Volunteer Center of Riverside County Agreement No. 07-26-021-00 192,353 48,089 48,088 48,088 - 46,088 192,353 Whiteside Manor, Inc. Agreement No. 07-26-024-00 22,082 5,521 5,521 5,520 . t2- 16,562 TOTAL 1,752,436 451,989 433,485 433,481 427,961 1,746,916 145 suonepuawwoDapaenny spa[oad AoileA esIlayppo3 �isueal poz!lepads spaCoad aoJ He° 12SJOAR.In .aunt ui enp suopoudde He ullinn 6upds sm. speraid J01. lleo lesaanW-1 NI. peseelaa uoiss!wwoo swewaainbaa ioy saimesid uiinn sueopewv NT puoiCeq o6 ieyl sdpi 6upoddns senThgesip upnn suosaad Joj. (L I,E5 uopes) wopaaad MaN .sdpi palelakvonn Jo )pone poddns of ewooui-nnol to suosaad aoj (o�ldf -g 1,Eg uonoes) agmuop asaanad ssaaad qor Z .L Aunoo episaanN aol algeuene 6u!wooeq semunpoddo 6uipunj !awed nnau onni. ui pallnsaa g00Z jo ipdd ui uoiss!wwoo Aq ueld paieuipa000 ayuo lenoaddy • • seamos &wound meN '�alle/1 ellayoeoo eqi aoi spefoid g Jol 6uipunj jo uonepuewwooal aye ui pallnsaa sseooad s!qi . .sioefaid lle .101 ss030.1d uoRenlene pue nnaina.a Toefoad Aq pefoad enisuaixe ue palonpuoo `sepue6e seovues uewnq pue opgnd 6uiluesaadaa saagwew Jo 6uRsisuoo (Callen ellayoeop auk ua0a4 eniieluesaidai a 6uipnloui) een! woo uoRenlene uy • '(Z£6`92$) 6umeal-qof pue snnainaalui )laonn `)laonn aoj. slenmpui ssalauaoq of sdpi aaoua apinoad o; uomeoo s!ql jo Amciedeo eql 6uipuedxe `sew itallen ellapeo0 anon d!gsaauped ui — Lue.thom aayonon dpippoM ssalauaoH odA3 (ZOS`VZ$) 'senilueoui aaeysepp paennaa uaaa} 6uol pue step/Z$ NI jo Ameliene ay} 6uipuaixe - pe oad anysemi AelleA ellayoeo3 313m .sdpl aloiyan i7 6uippe we 61,:Z I. Hlun aovues spuaPx3 - 61.14 eui1 . sdpl eloNen Z 6uippe wd 0Z:01. 01 papualx3 - 11.6# Gun . sdpi. aloNan Z 6uippe wd L 1,:01. 01 Papualx3 - 06# aui7 . sdpi aloNen £ 6uippe We OZ:Z I. 01 paPualx3 - 17I4 min (OZO`SVZ$) sa}noa anoj uo suna alown leuomppe pue aoinaas 6quane Jam 6uippe Alt" savoy 6uReaado 6uipuedxa - Gown ;ON pepue;x3 eununS • • • spunk oHyr papuauauaooaH spafoad (Los` 1.3) sienmpui esegi. Joj. )Iaonn 1.0u ium sea mosaa uoRepodsueij eneHene °Jew senmgesip Lop suosJed pue &blues Bale of «pose.' Tsel„ sdp1 epinoid — weaBoad aagonon suelpewes pasea . "(EC 1 `E171-$) seovues lisueaieaed fuelueweidwoo yay ao ainoa-pexg eneuene esn iouueo oqm saNciesip Lop suosaad pue &lopes ewe aol waa6ad wewesingw!ai e6eevw e — weAcud dl2il ellagoeo3 . spund wopaau meN papuewwooeH si.oafoad y6nong 6upodaa ssaa6oid pue eovues lueweldwi *saapinoad pepuewwooaa ylinn sweweaa6e noel ainoex3 .spunj wopaaa j nnaN pue oeyr ayl Jo luewesmngsip ail of Toedsaa y4inn (uoi6aa spun] aui to Tuaidpai paleu6isep eqi se 6unoe si uoiynn) sivauauaan00 Jo uoRepossy epolgeo wegmoS Lap aieuipa000 enuiluo0 •6u!ieew 800Z aagoioo uope uoissiwwoo ao� uoRepuewwoow gels Alunoo weisaM luesaad • • • • " f&=7 AGENDA ITEM 9 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Henry Nickel, Staff Analyst Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Commuter Rail Program Update PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update on the Commuter Rail Program. BACKGROUND INFORMATION_ Inland Empire -Orange County Weekend Service Performance Q4 FY 07/08 & Q1 FY 08/09 IEOC Weekend Passenger Trips 5000 — 4000 — 3000 — 2000 — 1000 — 0 sag Last Year —I—Current Year SOS �p�' asp `A� p� 5% 00 00 00 Ao e oa A� o0 00 O� 00 4j NI h9 ti6 , f •• ^O fit, ��, �.,, Nth c,• � 4-1�R Apt Daily passenger trips on the year-round Inland Empire -Orange County llEOC) Metrolink weekend service have continued to grow into the first quarter, providing 15,028 passenger trips quarter to date. This is an increase of over 32.36% over the 11,354 trips provided at this point last year, attributed to increased gasoline prices and continued promotion. The success of this service is due in . large part to the coordinated marketing efforts among the Commission, Orange County Transportation Authority 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 ttem 9 146 Riverside Line 6,000 5,600 a 7: 5,200 I- p 4,800 4,400 4,000 Passenger Trips Riverside Line o'l .zS‘ OAl 1 0� 0 � b oi6 ���` qg tS> e 9� j�� �0� Oar PQc �a� ��<° s3°Y Month Daily weekday passenger trips on Metrolink's Riverside Line for the month of July averaged 5,516, an increase of 102, 2% more than the month of June. Compared to one year prior, the line averaged an overall daily increase of 525 passenger trips. This is nearly 10% more than a year ago. On Time Performance (95% Goal) Riverside Line 100 m 95 m 90 c 85 m u 80 it) a 75 70 o`Ql '4 a= oAA1 (PA acAR�,00w a`o� Q`ow a�A4' Jcp. o\p) PJ 5e O NO� s 4` v- ql` 5 Month July on -time performance averaged 98% inbound (no change from June) and 95% outbound (-1 % from June). There were 9 delays greater than five minutes during the month of July. The following are primary causes: Agenda Item 9 Signals/Track/MOW Dispatching Mechanical Operations TOTAL 1 5 0 3 11% 56% 0% 33% 147 " " Inland Empire -Orange County Line N O. 1- w A 6,000 5,600 5,200 4,800 4,400 4,000 Passenger Trips Inland Empire Orange County Line `A1 0eci 1 01 z, Al cpA pg, ep o0 0o A Ab pg Month Daily weekday passenger trips on Metrolink's IEOC Line for the month of July averaged 5,181, a decrease of 141 trips, 3% less than the month of June. The line has increased by 593 daily trips or 13% from a year ago July 2007. 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 On Time Performance (95% Goal) Inland Empire Orange County Line J55,1 01 ��01 ��oA ,p�� 4pA a oe oo A`��' Sib A$ Qyo, 9e O�� ��� Qo ��a ������{ ��Qr PQi 4.a�� Month July on -time performance averaged 94% southbound (-4% from June) and 91 % northbound (-3% from June). There were 25 delays greater than five minutes during the month of July. The following are primary causes: Agenda Item 9 Signals/Track/MOW Dispatching Mechanical Operations TOTAL 2 7 4 12 8% 28% 16% 448 % 148 91 Line 2,800 2,600 °- 2,400 f- 2,200 2,000 1,800 Passenger Trips 91 Line \o P (<6. „. Month Daily weekday passenger trips on Metrolink's 91 Line for the month of July averaged 2,441 an increase of 40 trips, 2% more than the month of June. The line has increased by 418 daily trips or 21 % from a year ago July 2007. On Time Performance (95% Goal) 91 Line 100 �...i.. J� 1' 90 = as s0 a 75 70 NO coO ? Qe 4 �` P 4. Month July on -time performance averaged 94% inbound (-1 % from June) and 96% outbound (no change from June). There were 9 delays greater than five minutes during the month of July. The following are primary causes: Agenda Item 9 Signals/Track/MOW Dispatching Mechanical Operations TOTAL 2 5 0 2 22% 56% 0% 22 % • 149 " Connecting Transit Service Performance The Commission's role facilitating interconnectivity between Metrolink and connecting transit services is essential to ongoing system viability. 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 Transportation 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. 3,500 3,000 M Q 2,500 F- p 2,000 at 1,500 1,000 )J�� Passenger Trips RTA Fixed Route 4:56 P( CP (to�� (p% ��01 ����A�� o��o�� )a Fg �� 49���� eQ`p0 erg ��)�� Month Monthly Metrolink transfer trips on RTA's connecting fixed routes (1, 3, 15, 16, 21, 29, and 38) totaled 3,417 for the month of July, an increase of 542 trips, and 18.85% less than the month of June. Monthly trips increased by 816 or 31.37% over last year. Agenda Item 9 150 10,000 9,000 o. 8.000 t- 7,000 o 6,000 5,000 4,000 Passenger Trips RTA Commuter Link J�o‘ �01 e �o� 0 0 A (<o4 � t� t° -Vrp "1 sPw le CP 0.4 0 a Qg9 ‘-va PQ 4`3 Month Monthly Metrolink transfer trips on RTA's Commuter Link routes (202, 204, 206, 208, and 210) totaled 9,376 for the month of July, an increase of 367 trips, and 4.07% more than the month of June. Monthly trips have increased by 4,754 or 102.86% over the last year. 700 600 • 500 r 400 w ° 300 200 100 01 A. ,J� PJ6i Passenger Trips Corona Cruiser e� p4�Al 04�1 i'A� Oe �a `b F0 erat� P PQ )�p� Month Monthly Metrolink transfer trips on the Corona Cruiser totaled 616 for the month of July, a decrease of 67, -9.81 % from the month of June. Monthly trips have increased by 122 or 24.70% over the past fiscal year. Attachments: 1) Metrolink Average Weekday Passenger Trips 2) Metrolink Schedule Adherence Summary — Weekday Service Agenda Item 9 151 4du9 Oue Sigel Bien end %9 L A %bZ %£ 4 %EZ %0 4 %4Z %L 4 %ll %b L LO Inf SA 80 Inf e6ueNJ % %L %Z %V- %Z %Z %Z %l- %E %b 80 tint SA 80Inf 9641e40 % %L 68Z'84 1.vvZ L84.9 4E0`8 819'9 908 4LL'£4 Z46'1 999'b 90Inf %9 086'14 4017'Z US'S 998'L 9LVS 46L ZL6'£l Z4L'L 18E'4 80unf %4 most, 89Z`Z 01.6'4 44L'L 6B£'S 9SL zest l LSZ'L 69L'4 80 Am %L 461.117 69£'Z 800'S £9L`L 9LL'S • LLL 99Z'El E£8'9 1.4Z12 80 Jody %S 064'44 OOb'Z 486'4 £6l'L 094'S 09L 966.ZI. 9LL'9 net 90 JeW %0 85£`Sb S6.E'Z 4Z8'4 U8'9 SOO'S 64L bZ9'ZL L99'9 9LZ'4 90 gad %1 ZZ£'£4 00£'Z L98'4 ZOO'1 £8L`S LPL £OZ`ZL 848'9 SLl'4 80uef %Z• 0£9'04 OOL`Z ZZ9`4 l£8'9 466'4 4£9 8L£'4I. 4E4'9 01,6'E LO *ea %Z 899'£4 ZEE'Z 466'4 480'L 99VS 4LL 69£'ZL £LL'9 64417 LO ADM %L L81'Z4 bZE'Z Zen? 9E9'9 NZ'S OZL 0££'Z4 EL9'9 8L0'4 LO PO %Z ELE`Z4 176l'Z SbL'4 SL9'9 Sn'S Z69 Z00'ZL 64L`9 £SO'b 10 des %L- 18£`44 £4 4'Z 441.`4 6L9'9 LSO'9 089 bZ9` L L 4Z9'9 Z40' 7 L0 6ny %E' 089'44 EZO'Z 889'b 6L9'9 £60'S 999 OL9'LL L£L'L 486'£ LOhf ^`01m,� . f �3' �0. �y]G�r /{H ••Y °N` W :... ... t �•Y ' �t•NI)�.R ./Y'YM f ... ) ..i: iV�' r i) ' � � ny� � 1�<JYJn � � b � .Y •��yQj{1 Y a ! ii�Y i1�1V' " r' 4�# � �� ° � '•. O'Oit I. {, `tf 4i V, aRisn atl AVOI1OH • MOamm H1NOW N331211H1 Sd18.1. 839N3SS`dd A`damaaM 391(83AV >1NI108.131N i .ueNoyyEL-10 •uonelnoieo auip•uo ayI N papnyoui IOW OM sup'. pannuuy •uoneuluuay po pod ye ewn•uo eiam AaylA 10 peiepisuoo aye suleA payeuuuel .s/Sepap amenem Jo; spew um! eney syuapen(pa oN _ %96 %96 %96 - %96 %96p %69 %Le %96 %48 %96 %Be' %98 %98 %96 %PO %£8 %96 %96 %66 51011 •. d...+:?yrl_(f, a:4.,n V�.ru:'A',..fA M�< OWLV ti!',,'. i�llYr :.u•4d. t l ,r ).:3 ; ':v.) V e... Jt Ns..., ..tP �r"%'.v;f; ds ' i_ R ,.. POInd Yied BC IOp wit PoiPPa408fo synulW 9 ti14�IM poped Heed 5/656 796 %96 %96. %Pe %I.6 %46 %96 %46 %96 %96 %96 %SS %96 %96 %1.6 %aS6 %St %L6 90Inf %RI %98 %96 %96 %96 %48 %98 %L6 %48 %98 %98 %68 %OOl %NI %98 %08 %L8 %LB %WS 90 tins, %S6 %98 %96 %46 %98 %96 %98 %ZS %46 %6e %9B %OOl %OOL %98 %98 %L8 %Z8 %L8 %96 go Lew %96 %96 %LB %L8 %L6 %46 %98 %£6 %98 Vt28 %96 %86 %66 %L6 %96 %ea %E6 %96 %001. SOgiti %46 %L6 %96 %66 %68 %Z8 %Le %L6 %LB %86 %98 %96 %66 %66 %96 %96 %£6 %96 %96 90MN %LB %°LB %L6 %96 %96 3526 %96 %96 %°£6 %96 %S6 %68 %OOL %96 %98 %96 %L8 %00L %68 9oQed %96 %96 %98 %4.8 %Oa %96 %LB %LB %L8 %98 %9lI %98 %96 %98 %98 %16 4098 %46 %L8 90 uer %98 %98 %98 %DOL %98 %E8 %MS %L6 %LS %98 %96 %66 %86 %96 %96 %a %E6 %L6, %66 LOOKI %98 %Se %96 %96 %96 °An %96 %BB %96 %96 %98 %BB %ODl %96 %OS %06 %69 %88 %L8 LOnON %Pa %48 1/048 %LB %96 %ES %L6 %96 %ZS %ZB %L6 %L8 %98 %Pe %98 %E6 %L6 %£8 %96 LOPO %46 %46 %48 %LB %L8 %96 %96 %46 %26 %86 %96 %96 %68 %06 %Z8 %96 %Z6 %98 %98 10 des %46 %ZS %98 %96 %68 %96 %96 %96 %L6 %£8 %98 %98 %L8 %89 %98 %£9 %Le %PS %66 L0 Bny %98 %98 %98 %L6 %96 %E6 %96 %96 %16 %48 %L6 %86 %96 %96 %96 %06 %56 %96 %OOL 10Inf ? o qF TY.... 'A' N'Y.' 1 M Y .n C\; a6yy4.Y {X .:v u ��v .qe .�p(� -. ".! ''.:� X Ivo Y _ ..`I f�'x (1f' .,.... .... •Y r+ yp�y��y ': �� .yy�./��Wp,�Y MO" "'i'.I. V . � P���q{ . �4M. 41.I 't¢AiQ .! .' ... .. .. ... r. _Y .w ... SHINOW El 1931V'1 aulll palnBayoS;o somulW S u1y31M BulAPAI suleu x el3mueo,ed 30IA213S AVCD433M - A21` INIA 1S 30N3213HOH 31l1a3Hos NN11021131A1 • alppdn �ip� aalnuivaop 'u'd'w 14 (%L+) V£6`Ll7 Z£ 9t 9.17[ Z[9 99 L (sdois Lap .H.d.W) !Deeds walsAs e6eJany sielaN Iui!oa}aW Aep peAA a6eaany poi Aepunsmaleaado sup' abaieny Aepunneslpaleaadp sup' a6eaany Aep peAmpelmado suieal a6eaany sapW ainol eovues ui suoReis saTnoJo aagwnN 'T661 ui pauaaoj MUDS) AlPou1ny Hei ieuoi6aeponeo uaa1-14110S worY41l1lAvs loa1a111 411041ntl 11 ell leua6ay elWo111e]lua4anos (Aengns) auk wUnd (wiae4 — Me11146!1)Jun P1o9a1aW --- (!eM 146!V au{l uaal9 ollaV4 — (IIed146Nauflar4gaiary — (AensgrtS) aurl MI 011,01 — (»an Ag Palelado 1oPilo) Ord Z ley • • • • Apo 1au111nS )111)ed 4e4ulq (V7 UM01WOO • UOMalri • apwaga) awll6 au rl Aluno] a6ue10-80.u3 Puepi aun Alum)) a6uelo rrm ei1W131m aul aprAaNN ammo aul oupxu ae ues am. '�:► aul MIRA adoR14`p wom. aur7 Hunop elnluaA su00.e1S 1U10( (NMI Z IR13eALLIWN404all jou'V lagwaldes an111a )INI10111301 a 11Y1113101/10 smarmy) 1131100s E eaq,eg elue5 {a 4uuN micas 3emuy saeo qeo 01, pue saeo Javaij 01, ieuowppe eseyamd of uovio. suguow 17I, 6uinn01104 an Jano pale/map saeo qeo £E pue saeo _mail vg. 800Z `LZ aagweoap Onono paaanuep 6upq samow000l mau 9I,• Ainc ui apuew.lopod awa-uO %L6• L00Z AInC WOJJ aSaa lDU! %OT+• Apr ui Sdp4 9TS'Se µavow 42, ,aa ,e� poi JQC o� Co? „`0 jst �� s, ONSJanib 009 0/096) aaueuUJoiJad awil up DL 9L 09 99 O6 96 001 m c+ m m to Lwow �c� osS FeS� �� ��� boa A e° �° 4 � ‘4 �O g`' oa pC 1� y� �� 4� 1� 19 ONSJania ScIpl JaBuassed 000'4 004`4 009'4 OOV9 009'9 000`9 03ueuaJopad aurl apisaanw tawny <` Je( Fe3� is4 �e`� 4 ae� JeC � cow tio° gym°' Ica cC 0\ 0:5 0 0 09' 0 0 155 y55 19 19 155 155 our' 66 (Ieue %96) eouetwoped aural u0 OL SL 08 98 O6 96 006 ui aDuewmpad awa-u0 %S6• LOOZ Apr aseanui %TZ+• Apr ui sdp1 TiWz. L1WOIN �� JeC he`d �aa ��� �e� JeS ,e0 co+ _fp OF° e �„ 0. 0� 0$5 05) 0� 0� �� o �� V� 0 V� V\ 008' L 000' Z eun 1,6 sdn ieBuessed 009' Z 008' Z Apr ui apueLuJojaad aw!1-u0 %£6* LOOZ WOJJ aS2a1Dui %£T+• �C�n� ui sdia� -MT'S• Wow \p� JpC 1y gad ?eAsh Jl,C ��� `) /2 Sca rs , 0 0 0 0 �o �o �5 \d �o ti° do tiS OL 9L 08 98 06 96 00L aun Aunop a6ue.ip aaidua3 puqui (moo %96) aaueuuopad atuu up 43uoW Fas• �aa �e`i �s� e� °a0 °� °0 am°' a'a cC aun Alunop a6uelp &Oita puqui sdulJaBuassed 000'4 00V 4 008'4 00V9 009'9 000`9 03ueuia01.1ad aun 3031 swjja leuonowa d pue sappd aunose6 o4 paingP14V• aeaA 4sei lupd WOJJ aseanui %9e'ZE+• 60/80 Ad ib ui sdP18Z0'sT• ti� A �ti �� ti �� �ti cti ti� c) ��c ��c `mac' Jcc JcC JoC Joc' �� �� �� 0.s' bq �aa ,aa ,aa ,aa Co Co Co Co <V•Qcs CP cb5 4o 'CP cP cbd %d Co Co (o CP JeaA ;uauno —•— ROA ;setMAN 0 - 0001. - 000Z - 000£ - 0004 - 0009 sdpi aaBuessed pualaaM 0031 60/80 AA 10'8 80/L0 AA 170 aoimas puevem 3031 LON Apr aano mci7z+• Apr ui sdpi 9T9• LOOZ AInC aano %9870T+• AFT ui sdP19L£'6• LOOZ APE aano %L£'T£+• Apr ui sdP4 LTA'£• glum TIC J°c FeS% 9> �e1� am>i `1'c �yb e <3- Amy �c-d 001. occ o0r 009 009 , m- a ,- -- 1 Jesrup euwoo sdpi Ja6uassed 7.--n cc c Fyd' ad mS' 0. Esc S lull aa3nwwoo vim sdpi Jabuassed AmfO Ca oc o t. V° 4� 4a 000'4 000'9 000'9 000/ 000'8 000'6 000'0L 41LaW °c ›°c F.A i6-4 mS� am N6 � cm� {� Am° �cd �°c 000'L 009'L 000.Z 0o9'Z 000'£ 009'0 amim pax! j vim sdpi iaBuassed y �isueal Bulloeuuo3 LsNais3no " AGENDA ITEM 10 " " RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: September 10, 2008 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation "Committee of the Whole" Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Coachella Valley Association of Governments Request for a Measure A Transportation Improvement Program Amendment for Use of Measure A State Highway and Major Regional Road Project Funds in the Coachella Valley BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION "COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE" AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 08-023, `A Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Initiating an Amendment to the Riverside County Transportation Commission Transportation Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance (Ordinance No. 88-1) and Making Findings of Necessity for Such Amendment; therefore initiating an amendment to the Measure A Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its June 11, 2008 meeting, the Commission approved a request from the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) to amend the Measure A Transportation Expenditure Plan/TIP to add the following highway and roadway segments to the TIP, so that such segments will be eligible for the Measure A Coachella Valley highway funds: 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 Goff 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). Agenda Item 10 154 .v< According to legal counsel, the process to amend the TIP for inclusion of the new segments (as outlined in Section 240302 of the Public Utilities Code) involves initiation of an amendment to the TIP by the Commission, reciting the findings of necessity for the amendment. In this case, an amendment to the TIP is necessary because the TIP is no longer current as it applies to Highway 111 due to changes in the alignment of this highway. In order for funds to be effectively expended in carrying out the voter intent for state highway and major regional road project improvements in the Coachella Valley, the adoption of an amendment to the TIP is necessary. The attached resolution includes the required findings for initiation of an amendment to the TIP. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) staff, with advice of legal counsel, has determined that the proposed TIP amendment is not a project subject to environmental review because the amendment merely creates a government funding mechanism and does not commit the Commission to any specific project. Therefore, a Notice of Exemption has been prepared for adoption in conjunction with the adoption of the resolution. Projects on Highway 111 will comply with CEQA individually. Additionally, for the amendment to the TIP to become effective, it will have to be approved by a majority of the cities constituting a majority of the incorporated population in Riverside County and by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors. A model resolution approving the amendment to the TIP and a model Notice of Exemption have been prepared for use by the local jurisdictions, which will need to be adopted at their respective council meetings. Legal counsel has also prepared the following templates: Model City/County Cover Letter (Attachments 3 and 4); Model City/County Resolution (Attachments 5 and 6); and Model City/County Notice of Exemption (Attachments 7 and 8). Staff will present the TIP amendment information at each respective council and board meeting. Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 08-023 2) Commission Notice of Exemption 3) Model Cover Letter to Cities 4) Model Cover Letter to the County 5) Model City Resolution Approving an Amendment to the Measure A TIP 6) Model County Resolution Approving an Amendment to the Measure A TIP 7) Model City Notice of Exemption 8) Model County Notice of Exemption 9) Highway 111 Alignment Recommendation Agenda Item 10 155 ATTACHMENT RESOLUTION NO. 08-023 A RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION INITIATING AN AMENDMENT TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TRANSPORTATION EXPENDITURE PLAN AND RETAIL TRANSACTION AND USE TAX ORDINANCE (ORDINANCE NO. 88-1) AND MAKING FINDINGS OF NECESSITY FOR SUCH AMENDMENT WHEREAS, 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 in November of 1988. WHEREAS, the purpose of Measure A is to help relieve traffic congestion, increase safety, improve air quality, provide funds to match developers' fees and State and local moneys for transportation and plan adequately for traffic by providing essential countywide transportation improvements. WHEREAS, 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. WHEREAS, the TIP identifies State Highway I 1 I from Ramon. Road to Indio Boulevard as one of the projects in the Coachella Valley for which Measure A State highway and major regional road project funds are to be appropriated and expended ("Measure A Highway Funds"). A map depicting the then -current Highway 111 designation between Ramon Road to Indio Boulevard (the "Original Alignment") was part of the TIP. WHEREAS, 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. Additionally, Highway 111 was realigned in the city of Palm Springs and now is located on Vista Chino Drive between Indian Canyon Drive and Gene Autry Trail, as well as the segment of Gene Autry Trail from Vista Chino Drive to South Palm Canyon Drive. WHEREAS, changes to the alignment of Highway 111 have raised questions regarding the eligibility of segments relinquished by the State to local agencies for Measure A Highway Funds. Furthermore, additional segments of Highway 111 not included in the Original Alignment have been requested to be eligible for receipt of Measure A Highway Funds. WHEREAS, pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 240302(d), the TIP may only be amended by the following process: (1) Initiation of amendment by the commission, reciting findings of necessity. (2) Approval by the board of supervisors. 1 156 (3) Approval by a majority of the cities constituting a majority of the incorporated population. WHEREAS, the changes to the designation of Highway 111 have created the necessity for the adoption of this amendment to the TIP, as the TIP is no longer current as applies to Highway 111. Furthermore, in order for Measure A Highway Funds to be effectively expended to carry out the voter intent for highway and roadway improvements an amendment to the TIP is necessary. WHEREAS, Public Utilities Code section 240302, under which Measure A and the TIP were adopted, states that generated tax revenues may be expended "for the planning, environmental reviews, engineering and design costs, and related right-of-way acquisition." WHEREAS, the TIP states that the "scope of highway and commuter rail projects to be implemented is to be determined through required environmental analysis and full consideration of alternatives" including "public participation during the environmental analysis process." WHEREAS, the amendment to the TIP does not approve construction of any transportation improvements but amends the TIP to reflect current conditions in the Coachella Valley. WHEREAS, under California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15378(b)(4), the amendment of the TIP is not a "project' subject to environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because the amendment merely creates a government funding mechanism and does not commit RCTC to a specific project. WHEREAS, under California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15004, the amendment of the TIP is not subject to CEQA because RCTC lacks enough information about the transportation improvements to conduct meaningful environmental review at this time. WHEREAS, pursuant to the TIP, all appropriate environmental review will be completed prior to any future approval of a specific transportation improvement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSIONERS OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: A. Incorporation of Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by reference as though fully set forth herein. B. Inclusion of Segments to Coachella Valley Portion of TIP. The Commission hereby initiates an amendment to that portion of the TIP entitled "Coachella Valley". Section 1, entitled "State Highways and Major Regional Road Project", of the aforementioned portion of the TIP, located on page 183-07 of Measure A, shall be amended to include the segments of highway, and/or roadway described below and as shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated' herein by reference. The total amount of funding allocated to the Coachella Valley shall not be changed. -2- 157 1. In Palm Springs, from the intersecfion 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; 2. In Indio, from the crossing of Golf Center Parkway over Indio Boulevard, northerly on Golf Center Parkway to Interstate 10; and 3: 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). C. Revision to Map Included as Part of TIP. The map attached as part of the TIP shall be amended to include those segments of highway and/or roadway as shown in the map attached to this Resolution as Exhibit "A". D. Findings of Necessity. The Commissioners of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Commissioners") hereby find that changes to the designation of Highway 111 have created the necessity for the adoption of an amendment to the TIP, as the TIP is no longer current as applies to Highway 111. Furthermore, in order for funds to be effectively expended to carry out the voter intent for highway and roadway improvement the adoption of the TIP amendment is necessary. E. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be effective on the date of its adoption. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the amendment to the TIP set forth herein shall not be effective unless and until approved by the Board of Supervisors of Riverside County, and a majority of the Cities within Riverside County. F. Notice of Exemption. The Commissioners hereby finds that the amendment of the TIP is not subject to CEQA and authorizes and directs RCTC staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk of Riverside County and the State Clearinghouse within five (5) days following adoption of this Resolution. This Resolution is PASSED; APPROVED AND ADOPTED this th day of , 2008. Ieff Stone, Chairman of the Riverside County Transportation Commission -3- 158 A 1 !'EST: Clerk of the Board APPROVED AS TO FORM: BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP General Counsel - 4 - • 159 " Exhibit A Map depicting new segments of highway and/or roadway to be included in the TIP RVPOB\750633.3 [attached behind this page] Exhibit A 160 ATTACHMENT Notice of Exemption (California Environmental Quality Act) To: Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 222 P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 Attn: State Clearinghouse Riverside County Clerk's Office P.O. Box 751 2720 Gateway Drive Riverside, CA 92502-0751 From: Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Phone: (951) 787-7141 Fax: (951)7487-7920 Title: Adoption of Resolution Initiating an Amendment to Coachella Valley Portion of Transportation Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance No. 88-1 Location — Specific: In Palm Springs, along Gene Autry Trail, Vista Chino Drive, and Highway 111. In Indio, along Golf Center Parkway, Indio Boulevard, and Highway 111. Location - City: Cities of Palm Springs and Indio. Location — County: Riverside County. Description of Nature, Purposes, and Beneficiaries: The Riverside County Transportation Commission Transportation ("RCTC") Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance, Ordinance No. 88-1 (the "Plan") was approved by 78.9 percent of the voters in Riverside County in 1988. The purpose of this Plan is to relieve traffic congestion, increase safety, improve air quality, and provide funding for essential countywide transportation improvements. The Plan listed the locations of anticipated improvements in Riverside County, including the Coachella Valley area. Due to unanticipated realignments in roadways and the relinquishment of State control over other madways and highways in. Coachella Valley, the Plan must now be amended to reflect current conditions and specify the current roadway segments which are eligible for funding. The amendment to the Plan initiated by RCTC on , 2008 does not approve the construction of any transportation improvement, but instead makes funding available for the planning and environmental review of future transportation improvements. The beneficiaries of these improvements include the residents of Riverside County, particularly those of the Coachella Valley area. Name of Public Agency Approving: Riverside County Transportation Commission Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out: Riverside County Transportation Commission 1 of 2 161 Exempt Status: (check one) Ministerial (Sec. 21.080(bx1); 15268); Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269(a)); Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(6)(4); 15269(b)(c)); _ Categorical Exemption. State type and section number: Statutory Exemptions. State code number: X Other. Not a "Project" (State CEQA Guidelines §§ 15378(b)(4); 15004) Reasons why exempt: The proposed amendment of the Plan does not approve the construction of any transportation improvements. Instead, the amendment revises the Plan to accurately state current conditions and specify the transportation system improvements which are .E eligible for funding under the Plan. Only those improvements specified in the Plan are eligible for funding. The Plan states that "the scope of highway and commuter rail projects to be implemented is to be determined through required environmental analysis and full consideration of alternatives. Public participation during the environmental analysis is required." Likewise, Public Utilities Code section 240302 states that the tax revenues available under the Plan are to be expended for the purposes of "planning, environmental reviews, engineering and design costs, and related right-of-way acquisition." Accordingly, the Plan must be amended before available tax revenues can be expended on the planning and environmental review of anticipated future transportation improvements. As such, amendment of the Plan is merely "the creation of [a] government fimding mechanism or other government fiscal activit[y] which do[es] not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment." (State CEQA Guidelines § 15378(bx4).) Additionally, the scope, nature, and construction schedule of the improvements listed in the amended Plan are currently unknown and initial technical and engineering studies for the improvements have not yet been completed. Thus, there is not. yet "enough meaningful information for environmental assessment" of anticipated transportation improvements, and the amendment of the Plan is merely the "designat[ion] of a preferred site for CEQA review." (State CEQA Guidelines § 15004.) Accordingly, the amendment of the Plan is not a "project" and is exempt from environmental review under CEQA. Any future approval of specific transportation improvements would be subject to all required environmental review. Lead Agency Contact Person: Shirley Medina Phone: (951) 787-7141 Signature: Date: Title: R V PUBIC..SCHILLER1752219.2 2of2 • • 162 ATTACHMENT 3 [TO BE PLACED ON RCTC LEI 1'ERHEAD] [insert date] [Insert City address ] Attn: City Clerk RE: Resolution Approving an Amendment to the Riverside County Transportation Commission Transportation Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance (Ordinance No. 88-1) ("Measure A") To the City Clerk of the City of The Riverside County Transportation Commission ("RCTC") recently adopted a resolution initiating an amendment to the Measure A Transportation Improvement Plan (the "TIP"). In order for the amendment to the TIP to become effective, the Board of Supervisors of Riverside County and a majority of the cities within Riverside County constituting a majority of the incorporated population must approve the proposed amendment. RCTC is therefore asking for your City to support the amendment to the TIP by adopting the enclosed resolution. For your convenience, we have also enclosed a Notice of Exemption which, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), State CEQA Guidelines, should be filed within five (5) business days of the adoption of the enclosed resolution. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Shirley Medina at (951) 787-7141. Sincerely, Shirley Medina 1 163 .E • ATTACHMENT [TO BE PLACED ON RCTC LETTERHEAD] [insert date] Nancy Romero Riverside County Clerk of the Board 4080 Lemon St., 1st Floor Riverside, CA 92501 RE: Resolution Approving an Amendment to the Riverside County Transportation Commission Transportation Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance (Ordinance No. 88-1) ("Measure A") Dear Nancy Romero: The Riverside County Transportation Commission ("RCTC") recently adopted a resolution initiating anamendment to the Measure A Transportation Improvement Plan (the "TIP"). In order for the amendment to the TIP to become effective, the Board of Supervisors of Riverside County and a majority of the cities within Riverside County constituting a majority of the incorporated population must approve the proposed amendment. RCTC is therefore asking for the Riverside County Board of Supervisors to support the amendment to the TIP by adopting the enclosed resolution. For your convenience, we have also enclosed a Notice of Exemption which, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), State CEQA Guidelines, should be filed within five (5) business days of the adoption of the enclosed resolution. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Shirley Medina at (951) 787-7141. Sincerely, Shirley Medina 164 ATTACHMENT S RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TRANSPORTATION EXPENDITURE PLAN AND RETAIL TRANSACTION AND USE TAX ORDINANCE (ORDINANCE NO.88-1) WHEREAS, 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 in November of 1988. WHEREAS, the purpose of Measure A is to help relieve traffic congestion, increase safety, improve air quality, provide fimds to match developers' fees and State and local moneys for transportation and plan adequately for traffic by providing essential countywide transportation improvements. WHEREAS, 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. WHEREAS, the TIP identifies State Highway 111 from Ramon Road to Indio Boulevard as one of the projects in the Coachella Valley for which Measure A State highway and major regional road project fiords are to be appropriated and expended ("Measure A Highway Funds"). A map depicting the then -current Highway 111 designation between Ramon Road to Indio Boulevard (the "Original Alignment") was part of the TIP. WHEREAS, 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. Additionally, Highway 111 was realigned in the city of Palm Springs and now is located on Vista Chino Drive between Indian Canyon Drive and Gene Autry Trail, as well as the segment of Gene Autry Trail from Vista Chino Drive to South Palm Canyon Drive. WHEREAS, changes to the alignment of Highway 111 have raised questions regarding the eligibility of segments relinquished by the State to local agencies for Measure A Highway Funds. Furthermore, additional segments of Highway 111 not included in the Original Alignment have been requested to be eligible for receipt of Measure A Highway Funds. WHEREAS, pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 240302(d), the TIP may only be amended by the following process: (1) Initiation of amendment by the commission, reciting findings of necessity for the amendment. (2) Approval by the board of supervisors. (3) Approval by a majority of the cities constituting a majority of the incorporated population. 2 165 WHEREAS, the changes to the designation of Highway 111 have created the necessity for the adoption of an amendment to the TIP, as the TIP is no longer current as applies to Highway 111. Furthermore, in order for Measure A Highway Funds to be effectively expended to carry out the voter intent for highway and roadway improvements, an amendment to the TIP is necessary. WHEREAS, at its meeting on the Board of Directors of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Commission Board") adopted a resolution initiating an amendment to the TIP, including the required fmdings of necessity for the amendment. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of ("City Council") has considered the proposed amendment, and approves said amendment to the TIP. WHEREAS, Public Utilities Code section 240302, under which Measure A and the TIP were adopted, states that generated tax revenues may be expended "for the planning, environmental reviews, engineering and design costs, and related right-of-way acquisition." WHEREAS, the TIP states that the "scope of highway and commuter rail projects to be implemented is to be determined through required environmental analysis and full consideration of alternatives" including "public participation during the environmental analysis process." WHEREAS, the amendment to the TIP does not approve construction of any transportation improvements but amends the TIP to reflect current conditions in the Coachella Valley. WHEREAS, under California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15378(b)(4), the amendment of the TIP is not a "project' subject to environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because the amendment merely creates a government funding mechanism and is not a commitment to any specific project. WHEREAS, under Califomia Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15004, the amendment of the TIP is not subject to CEQA because there is insufficient information about the transportation improvements to conduct meaningful environmental review at this time. WHEREAS, pursuant to the TIP, all appropriate environmental review will be completed prior to any future approval of a specific transportation improvement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by reference as though fully set forth herein. Section 2. Approval of Amendment to the TIP. The City Council hereby approves the following amendment to the TIP, as initiated by the Commission Board: A. Inclusion of Segments to Coachella Valley Portion of TIP. That portion of the TIP entitled "Coachella Valley". Section 1, entitled "State Highways and Major Regional Road Project", of the 3 166 " aforementioned portion of the TIP, located on page 183-07 of Measure A, shall be amended to include the segments of highway, and/or roadway described below and as shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. The total amount of finding allocated to the Coachella Valley shall not be changed. 1. 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; 2. In Indio, from the crossing of Golf Center Parkway over Indio Boulevard, northerly on Golf Center Parkway to Interstate 10; and 3. 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). B. Revision to Map Included as Part of TIP. The map attached as part of the TIP shall be amended to include those segments of highway and/or roadway as shown in the map attached to this Resolution as Exhibit "A". Section 3. Approval of Findings. The City Council hereby approves the findings of the Commission Board related to adoption of the amendment to the TIP. Section 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be effective on the date of its adoption. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the amendment to the TIP set forth herein shall not be effective unless and until approved by the Board of Supervisors of Riverside County, and a majority of the Cities within Riverside County. Section 5. Notice of Exemption. The City Council hereby finds that adoption of this Resolution is not subject to CEQA and authorizes and directs City staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk of Riverside County and the State Clearinghouse within five (5) days following adoption of this Resolution. This Resolution is PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _th day of , 2008 by the following vote: 4 167 Vote: Ayes: Nays: Abstain: AI IEST: , City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney City of by , Mayor 5 • • 168 " Exhibit A Map depicting new segments of highway and/or roadway to be included in the TIP [attached behind this page] Exhibit A 169 ATTACHMENT 6 • RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TRANSPORTATION EXPENDITURE PLAN AND RETAIL TRANSACTION AND USE TAX ORDINANCE (ORDINANCE NO.88-1) WHEREAS, 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 in November of 1988. WHEREAS, the purpose of Measure A is to help relieve traffic congestion, increase safety, improve air quality, provide funds to match developers' fees and State and local moneys for transportation and plan adequately for traffic by providing essential countywide transportation improvements. WHEREAS, 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. WHEREAS, the TIP identifies State Highway 111 from Ramon Road to Indio Boulevard as one of the projects in the Coachella Valley for which Measure A State highway and major regional road project funds are to be appropriated and expended ("Measure A Highway Funds"). A map depicting the then -current Highway 111 designation between Ramon Road to Indio Boulevard (the "Original Alignment") was part of the TIP. WHEREAS, 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. Additionally, Highway 111 was realigned in the city of Palm Springs and now is located on Vista Chino Drive between Indian Canyon Drive and Gene Autry Trail, as well as the segment of Gene Autry Trail from Vista Chino Drive to South Palm Canyon Drive. WHEREAS, changes to the alignment of Highway 111 have raised questions regarding the eligibility of segments relinquished by the State to local agencies for Measure A Highway Funds. Furthermore, additional segments of Highway 111 not included in the Original Alignment have been requested to be eligible for receipt of Measure A Highway Funds. WHEREAS, pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 240302(d), the TIP may only be amended by the following process: (1) Initiation of amendment by the commission, reciting findings of necessity for the amendment. (2) Approval by the board of supervisors. (3) Approval by a majority of the cities constituting a majority of the incorporated population. 2 170 WHEREAS, the changes to the designation of Highway 1 I 1 have created the necessity for the adoption of an amendment to the TIP, as the TIP is no longer current as applies to Highway 111. Furthermore, in order for Measure A Highway Funds to be effectively expended to carry out the voter intent for highway and roadway improvements, an amendment to the TIP is necessary. WHEREAS, at its meeting on _ the Board of Directors of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Commission Board') adopted a resolution initiating an amendment to the TIP, including the required findings of necessity for the amendment. WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Riverside County (the "Board of Supervisors") has considered the proposed amendment, and approves said amendment to the TIP. WHEREAS, Public Utilities Code section 240302, under which Measure A and the TIP were adopted, states that generated tax revenues may be expended "for the planning, environmental reviews, engineering and design costs, and related right-of-way acquisition." WHEREAS, the TIP states that the "scope of highway and commuter rail projects to be implemented is to be determined through required environmental analysis and full consideration of alternatives" including "public participation during the environmental analysis process." WHEREAS, the amendment to the TIP does not approve construction of any transportation improvements but amends the TIP to reflect current conditions in the Coachella Valley. WHEREAS, under California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15378(b)(4), the amendment of the TIP is not a "project" subject to environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because the amendment merely creates a government funding mechanism and is not a commitment to any specific project. WHEREAS, under California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15004, the amendment of the TIP is not subject to CEQA because there is insufficient information about the transportation improvements to conduct meaningful environmental review at this time. WHEREAS, pursuant to the TIP, all appropriate environmental review will be completed by the appropriate agencies prior to any future approval of a specific transportation improvement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by reference as though fully set forth herein. Section 2. Approval of Amendment to the TIP. The Board of Supervisors hereby approves the following amendment to the TIP, as initiated by the Commission Board: A. Inclusion of Segments to Coachella Valley Portion of TIP. That portion of the TIP entitled "Coachella Valley". Section 1, entitled 3 • 171 " Section 3. "State Highways and Major Regional Road Project", of the aforementioned portion of the TIP, located on page 183-07 of Measure A, shall be amended to include the segments of highway, and/or roadway described below and as shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. The total amount of funding allocated to the Coachella Valley shall not be changed' 1. 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; 2. In Indio, from the crossing of Golf Center Parkway over Indio Boulevard, northerly on Golf Center Parkway to Interstate 10; and 3. 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). B. Revision to Map Included as Part of TIP. The map attached as part of the TIP shall be amended to include those segments of highway and/or roadway as shown in the map attached to this Resolution as Exhibit "A". Approval of Findings. The Board of Supervisors hereby approves the findings of the Commission Board related to adoption of the amendment to the TIP. Section 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be effective on the date of its adoption. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the amendment to the TIP set forth herein shall not be effective unless and until approved a majority of the Cities within Riverside County. Section 5. Notice of Exemption. The Board of Supervisors hereby finds that adoption of this Resolution is not subject to CEQA and authorizes and directs staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk of Riverside County and the State Clearinghouse within five (5) days following adoption of this Resolution. This Resolution is PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _th day of , 2008 by the following vote: 4 172 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: Nancy Romero, Clerk or the Board APPROVED AS TO FORM: County Counsel 5 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RIVERSIDE COUNTY Chairperson 173 Exhibit A Map depicting new segments of highway and/or roadway to be included in the TIP [attached behind this page] Exhibit A 174 ATTACHMENT Notice of Exemption (California Environmental Quality Act) To: Office of Planning and Research From: The City of (the "City") 1400 Tenth Street, Room 222 P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 Attn: State Clearinghouse Riverside County Clerk's Office P.O. Box 751 2720 Gateway Drive Riverside, CA 92502-0751 Phone:(951) Fax: (951) Title: Adoption of Resolution Approving an Amendment to Coachella Valley Portion of Transportation Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance No. 88-1 Location — Specific: In Palm Springs, along Gene Autry Trail, Vista Chino Drive, and Highway 111. In Indio, along Golf Center Parkway, Indio Boulevard, and Highway 111. Location — City: Cities of Palm Springs and Indio. Location — County: Riverside County. Description of Nature Purposes, and Beneficiaries: The Riverside County Transportation Commission Transportation ("RCTC") Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance, Ordinance No. 88-1 (the "Plan") was approved by 78.9 percent of the voters in Riverside County in 1988. The purpose of this Plan is to relieve traffic congestion, increase safety, improve air quality, and provide funding for essential countywide transportation improvements. The Plan listed the locations of anticipated improvements in Riverside County, including the Coachella Valley area. Due to unanticipated realignments in roadways and the relinquishment of State control over other roadways and highways in Coachella Valley, the Plan must now be amended to reflect current conditions and specify the current roadway segments which are eligible for funding. The resolution approving an amendment to the Plan adopted by the City on 2008 does not approve the construction of any transportation improvement, but instead approves an amendment to the Plan in order to make funding available for the planning and environmental review of future transportation improvements. The beneficiaries of these improvements include the residents of Riverside County, particularly those of the Coachella Valley area. Name of Public Agency Approving Resolution: The City of Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out: Riverside County Transportation Commission 1 of 2 175 Exempt Status: (check one) Ministerial (Sec. 21080(b)(1); 15268); _ Declared Emergency (Sec. 210800)(3); 15269(a)); _ Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b)(4);15269(b)(c)); Categorical Exemption. State type and section number. Statutory Exemptions. State code number: X Other: Not a "Project" (State CEQA Guidelines §§ 15378(6)(4); 15004) Reasons why exempt: Approval of the proposed amendment to the Plan does not approve the construction of any transportation improvements. The proposed amendment revises the Plan to accurately state current conditions and specify the transportation system improvements which are eligible for fimding under the Plan. Only those improvements specified in the Plan are eligible for funding. The Plan states that "the scope of highway and commuter rail projects to be implemented is to be determined through required environmental analysis and full consideration of alternatives. Public participation during the environmental analysis is required." Likewise, Public Utilities Code section 240302 states that the tax revenues available under the Plan are to be expended for the purposes of "planning, environmental reviews, engineering and design costs, and related right-of- way acquisition." Accordingly, the Plan must be amended before available tax revenues can be expended on the planning and environmental review of anticipated future transportation improvements. As such, amendment of the Plan is merely "the creation of [a] government funding mechanism or other government fiscal activity] which do[es] not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment" (State CEQA Guidelines § 15378(b)(4).) Additionally, the scope, nature, and construction schedule of the improvements listed in the amended Plan are currently unknown and initial technical and engineering studies for the improvements have not yet been completed. Thus, there is not yet "enough meaningful information for environmental assessment" of anticipated transportation improvements, and the amendment of the Plan is merely the "designat[ion) of a preferred site for CEQA review." (State CEQA Guidelines § 15004.) Accordingly, the amendment of the Plan is not a "project" and is exempt from environmental review under CEQA. Any future approval of specific transportation, improvements would be subject to all required environmental review by the appropriate agencies. Lead Agency Contact Person: Shirley Medina Phone: (951) 787-7141 Signature: Date: Title: 2 of 2 • 176 " E: Notice of Exemption (California Environmental Quality Act) To: Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 222 P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 Attn: State Clearinghouse Riverside County Clerk's Office P.O. Box 751 2720 Gateway Drive Riverside, CA 92502-0751 ATTACHMENT 8 From: The Board of Supervisors of Riverside County c/o Riverside County Clerk of the Board 4080 Lemon St., 1st Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Phone: (951) 955-1060 Fax: (951)955-1071 Title: Adoption of Resolution Approving an Amendment to Coachella Valley Portion of Transportation Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance No. 88-1 Location  Specific: In Palm Springs, along Gene Autry Trail, Vista Chino Drive, and Highway 111. In Indio, along Golf Center Parkway, Indio Boulevard, and Highway 111. Location  City: Cities of Palm Springs and Indio. Location  County: Riverside County. Description of Nature, Purposes, and Beneficiaries: The Riverside County Transportation Commission Transportation ("RCTC") Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance, Ordinance No. 88-1 (the "Plan") was approved by 78.9 percent of the voters in Riverside County in 1988. The purpose of this Plan is to relieve traffic congestion, increase safety, improve air quality, and provide funding for essential countywide transportation improvements. The Plan listed the locations of anticipated improvements in Riverside County, including the Coachella Valley area. Due to unanticipated realignments in roadways and the relinquishment of State control over other roadways and highways in Coachella Valley, the Plan must now be amended to reflect current conditions and specify the current roadway segments which are eligible for funding. The resolution approving an amendment to the Plan adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Riverside County on , 2008 does not approve the construction of any transportation improvement, but instead approves an amendment to the Plan in order to make funding available for the planning and environmental review of future transportation improvements. The beneficiaries of these improvements include the residents of Riverside County, particularly those of the Coachella Valley area_ Name of Public Agency Approving Resolution: The City of Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out: Riverside County Transportation Commission 1 of 2 177 Exempt Status: (check one) Ministerial (Sec. 21080(b)(1); 15268); _ Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269(a)); Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c)); Categorical Exemption. State type and section number: Statutory Exemptions. State code number: X Other: Not a "Project' (State CEQA Guidelines §§ 15378(b)(4); 15004) Reasons why exempt: Approval of the proposed amendment to the Plan does not approve the .� construction of any transportation improvements. The proposed amendment revises the Plan to accurately state current conditions and specify the transportation system improvements which are eligible for funding under the Plan. Only those improvements specified in the Plan are eligible for funding. The Plan states that "the scope of highway and commuter rail projects to be implemented is to be determined through required environmental analysis and full consideration of alternatives. Public participation during the environmental analysis is required." Likewise, Public Utilities Code section 240302 states that the tax revenues available under the Plan are to be expended for the purposes of "planning, environmental reviews, engineering and design costs, and related right-of- way acquisition." Accordingly, the Plan must be amended before available tax revenues can be expended on the planning and environmental review of anticipated future transportation improvements. As such, amendment of the Plan is merely "the creation of [a] government funding mechanism or other government fiscal activity] which do[es] not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment." (State CEQA Guidelines § 15378(b)(4).) Additionally, the scope, nature, and construction schedule of the improvements listed in the amended Plan are currently unknown and initial technical and engineering studies for the improvements have not yet been completed. Thus, there is not yet "enough meaningful information for environmental assessment' of anticipated transportation improvements, and the amendment of the Plan is merely the "designat[ion] of a preferred site for CEQA review." (State CEQA Guidelines § 15004.) Accordingly, the amendment of the PIan is not a "project' and is exempt from environmental review under CEQA. Any future approval of specific transportation improvements would be subject to all required environmental review by the appropriate agencies. Lead Agency Contact Person: Shirley Medina Phone: (951) 787-7141 Signature: Date: Title: 2of2 178 'Jaen WI )o Allinsuodoeu slot NA act limo u0lspWtl pus A08111000 of bedew wee Innpmtl sly) to Ben Ato deul elyl uo peulaluoo uopeuelope sy1 JOJ AIpeesuodeel repel ou Rawness pee'paplead *pep inn Aua sesueupdwoo Jo Yssullawp'Aoanooe'(Ayed pJpp Pap q sane eyl) wapuo> eye of se equaen0 Ja AlyaIJBM ou Reeew owy o'Imputes dupaauldue Jo euIAatene 01 elanooe Alpeeeeoau Iou ua pue'elawpadde eJe awls% dory 'Arlo faaodmd eourusim Jol peen aq of ue amp pue sdery eaueelosl0 slueu.wenoe;o uogepossy A nsi\ elesuoeoo 'Med sepUOIN Aq den OVA3 speoa Jo(eyy selnoa Asmg61H — 96L ABANLAH ele1S came olpulAenntAl * � 01.1 of pis olpul P2i uouea of 01. •1. ""'"°P" LLL AeMU61H pN9 opul oIPM uowea LLL leMU61H 8861. luetuonv LLL AeAALAH IeuI61�0® Puttee-1 • Z6 sepw E S' l 0 3ar�Fx��e� 2s�A7^�j�J, uo epueunuooad;uacuuBily 61N3WHOV_LIV " Gkl 4014yB!H • L.1.1;c2 3f (A[_ CJ lil. LiC 312.E CL .... C717 L' Watch for your invitation and ticket next week , Please RSVP via anal to Evelyn French A Evelyn _fren[heclot ca,Pov by Today, September 6. cast c%e�c«ssi/�f$Lcrt�....fii.f�m>< L�s►czLi�iL�