Loading...
05 May 12, 2010 Commission89133 RECORDS Rive de County T n (omission MEETING AGENDA TIME/DATE: 9:30 a.m. / Wednesday, May 12, 2010 LOCATION: BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside 16• COMMISSIONERS .4% Chair - Bob Buster 1st Vice Chair - Greg Pettis 2nd Vice Chair - John J. Benoit Bob Buster, County of Riverside John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside Jeff Stone, County of Riverside John J. Benoit, County of Riverside Marion Ashley, County of Riverside Bob Botts / Don Robinson, City of Banning Roger Berg / Jeff Fox, City of Beaumont Joseph DeConinck / To Be Appointed, City of Blythe Ray Quinto / Jim Hyatt, City of Calimesa Mary Craton / Jordan Ehrenkranz, City of Canyon Lake Greg Pettis / Kathleen DeRosa, City of Cathedral City Eduardo Garcia / Steven Hernandez, City of Coachella Karen Spiegel / Steve Nolan, City of Corona Scott Matas / Russell Betts, City of Desert Hot Springs Robin Lowe / Eric McBride, City of Hemet Patrick J. Mullany / Larry Spicer, City of Indian Wells Glenn Miller / Ben Godfrey, City of Indio Terry Henderson / Don Adolph, City of La Quinta Bob Magee / Melissa Melendez, City of Lake Elsinore Wallace Edgerton / Darcy Kuenzi, City of Menifee Bonnie Flickinger / Jesse Molina, City of Moreno Valley Rick Gibbs / Randon Lane, City of Murrieta Malcolm Miller / Kathy Azevedo, City of Norco Richard Kelly / Jim Ferguson, City of Palm Desert Steve Pougnet / Ginny Foat, City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch / Al Landers, City of Perris Ron Meepos / To Be Appointed, City of Rancho Mirage Steve Adams / Andy Melendrez, City of Riverside Steve Di Memmo / Vacant, City of San Jacinto Ron Roberts / Jeff Comerchero, City of Temecula Scott Farnam / Bridgette Moore, City of Wildomar Raymond Wolfe, Governor's Appointee 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, May 12, 2010 BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, 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 my, 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. /n 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 May 12, 2010 Page 2 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — APRIL 14, 2010 6. PUBLIC HEARING — PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 1 1) Discuss, review, and provide guidance on the proposed FY 2010/1 1 Budget; and 2) Open the public hearing in order to receive input and comments on the proposed FY 2010/11 Budget on May 12, 2010, and on June 9, 2010, and thereafter close the public hearing. 7. 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. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR — All matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 8A. ANNUAL INVESTMENT POLICY REVIEW Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 21 1) Adopt the Annual Investment Policy; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. 10-010, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding the Revised Investment Policy". 8B. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS Page 36 Overview • This item is for the Commission to receive and file the sales tax • analysis for Quarter 4 (Q4) 2009. • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda May 12, 2010 Page 3 8C. RECURRING CONTRACTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 Page 43 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the recurring contracts for FY 2010/11. 8D. TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE PROGRAM FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS FOR STATE ROUTE 74/INTERSTATE 215 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR CONSTRUCTION AND RIGHT OF WAY Page 48 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-31-090-00 with Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) for $8.8 million in Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Central Zone funding for the construction phase of the 74/215 interchange improvement project; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; 3) Approve Agreement No. 05-31-566-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 05-31-566-00, with WRCOG to increase the right of way phase by $1.8 million to be funded with $900,000 of TUMF Central Zone funds and $900,000 of Measure A funds to address a cost increase; 4) Approve Agreement No. 10-31-092-00 with Southern California Edison (SCE) for the relocation and removal of utility poles and attached equipment; 5) Approve Agreement No. 10-31-093-00 with Time Warner Cable (TWC) for the relocation and removal of utility poles and attached equipment; and 6) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda May 12, 2010 Page 4 8E. AGREEMENTS WITH QUALIFIED CONTRACTORS TO PROVIDE ON -CALL RIGHT OF WAY APPRAISAL SERVICES FOR RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND AGRICULTURAL PROPERTIES Page 52 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award the following agreements to provide on -call right of way appraisal services for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreements, in an amount not to exceed an aggregate value of $950,000; a) Agreement No. 10-51-048-00 with Lidgard and Associates; b) Agreement No. 10-51-064-00 with Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers & Consultants; c) Agreement No. 10-51-065-00 with Donahue Hawran & Malm LLC; d) Agreement No. 10-51-066-00 with R.P. Laurain & Associates; e) Agreement No. 10-51-067-00 with Riggs & Riggs, Inc.; f) Agreement No. 10-51-068-00 with Hennessey & Hennessey LLC; and g) Agreement No. 10-51-069-00 with Robert Shea Perdue Real Estate Appraisal; 2) Authorize the Executive Director to execute task orders awarded to contractors under the terms of the agreements; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, including option years, on behalf of the Commission. • • • i Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda May 12, 2010 Page 5 8F. AGREEMENTS WITH QUALIFIED CONTRACTORS TO PROVIDE ON -CALL RIGHT OF WAY APPRAISAL REVIEW SERVICES FOR RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND AGRICULTURAL PROPERTIES Page 56 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award the following agreements to provide on -call right of way appraisal review services for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreements, in an amount not to exceed an aggregate value of $500,000; a) Agreement No. 10-51-051-00 with Donahue Hawran & Malm LLC; b) Agreement No. 10-51-070-00 with R.P. Laurain & Associates; c) Agreement No. 10-51-071-00 with Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants; d) Agreement No. 10-51-072-00 with Hennessey & Hennessey LLC; and e) Agreement No. 10-51-073-00 with Overland Pacific & Cutler Inc.; 2) Authorize the Executive Director to execute task orders awarded to contractors under the terms of the agreements; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, including option years, on behalf of the Commission. 8G. AGREEMENT FOR UTILITY RELOCATION FOR THE STATE ROUTE 60/INTERSTATE 215 EAST JUNCTION HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANES CONNECTOR Page 59 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-31-094-00 with AT&T for utility relocation for the 60/215 East Junction interchange project once the design and replacement location are finalized; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda May 12, 2010 Page 6 8H. AGREEMENT WITH RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY TO REPAINT THE • NORTH MAIN CORONA PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 61 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-25-091-00 for a right of entry and reimbursement agreement with Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) to allow for the painting of the North Main Corona pedestrian bridge for a total contract amount not, to exceed $175,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 81. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS FOR THE RISING STARS IN TRANSIT INTERNSHIP PROGRAM Page 78 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. 10-25-089-00 between the Commission and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for the Rising Stars in Transit — Internships for University Students program; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the MOU on behalf of the Commission. • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda May 12, 2010 Page 7 8J. AGREEMENTS FOR FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL TOW TRUCK SERVICE Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 91 1) Award Agreement No. 10-45-059-00 to Pepe's Towing Service for tow truck service on Beat No. 1 of the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreement, for a total contract amount not to exceed $1,453,000; 2) Award Agreement No. 10-45-060-00 to Pepe's Towing Service for tow truck service on Beat No. 26 of the FSP program for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreement, for a total contract amount not to exceed $969,000; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, including options years, on behalf of the Commission. 8K. AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL COSTS Page 94 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-45-085-00 with the State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) in various construction areas in Riverside County; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda May 12, 2010 Page 8 8L. FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL • FOR FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL SUPERVISION Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 105 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-45-084-00 with the California Highway Patrol (CHP) to provide overtime supervision and operation of a Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program in Riverside County; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8M. CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE/SOCIAL SERVICES TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE Page 112 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Renew the memberships of Michelle Anglin, Peter Benavidez, Jim Collins, Fortunato Penilla, and Eunice Lovi; 2) Appoint Lorelle Moe -Luna as the new Consolidated Transportation Service Agency representative from Riverside Transit Agency (RTA); and 3) Approve the memberships for the Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee (CAC/SSTAC) effective January 1, 2010. 8N. CITY OF CORONA JUMP START FUNDING FOR GRADE CROSSINGS Page 115 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Reallocate $500,000 in funding from the Smith Avenue and Rai►road Street to the McKinley Avenue grade separation project; 2) Approve Agreement No. 08-33-014-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 08-33-014-00, with the city of Corona (Corona) deleting Smith Avenue and Railroad Street from the project list; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda May 12, 2010 Page 9 80. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 118 1) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislative activities; 2) Approve the following bill positions: a) SB 1245 (Simitian) - OPPOSE; b) AB 1760 (Blumenfeld) - WATCH; c) AB 2098 (Miller) - SPONSOR and SUPPORT; and d) AB 2620 (Eng) - OPPOSE. 9. STATE ROUTE SO/INTERSTATE 215 EAST JUNCTION INTERCHANGE LOCAL MATCH REQUIREMENT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 122 1) Approve Measure A funds in an amount not to exceed $1,949,047, to match federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds programmed to the 60/215 East Junction interchange project; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director to execute the cooperative agreement amendment with Caltrans to include Measure A match funds. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda May 12, 2010 Page 10 10. AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE STATE ROUTE 74/INTERSTATE • 215 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN THE CITY OF PERRIS, AND CONSTRUCTION DESIGN SUPPORT Page 124 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 10-31-030-00 for the construction of the 74/215 interchange improvement project in the city of Perris (Perris) to Skanska USA Civil West (Skanska) for the amount of $ 13,439,004 plus a contingency amount of $ 1,343,996 for potential change orders during construction, for a total not to exceed contract authorization of $ 14,783,000; 2) Approve Agreement No. 07-31-122-04, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 07-31-122-00, with David Evans and Associates, Inc. (DEA) to perform additional design support during the construction of the 74/215 interchange improvement project in the city of Perris for the additional amount of $204,087 resulting in a revised not to exceed amount of $3,303,749; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 11. COLTON CROSSING UPDATE Overview This item is for the Commission to receive an oral report on the status of Colton Crossing. 12. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 13. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Overview This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and the Executive Director to report on attended meetings/conferences and any other items related to Commission activities. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda May 12, 2010 Page 11 • 14. CLOSED SESSION 14A. 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(s) Property Owner(s) 1 1 18-302-001 Li Li 2 118-160-058 Chris M. Bell and Joy L. Bell 3 1 18-160-057 Lynette Davis 15. ADJOURNMENT The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, June 9, 2010, Board Room, County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California. • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ROLL CALL MAY 12, 2010 • County of Riverside, District I County of Riverside, District II County of: Riverside, District Ill County of Riverside, District IV • County of Riverside, District V 'City of Banning -.:City of Beaumont; City of Blythe City of Calimesa •City of Canyon Lake • City of Cathedra l City City of Coachella City of Corona City of Desert Hot Springs City of Hemet City of Indian Wells City of Indio, City of La Quinta , City of Lake_Elsinore City of Menifee City of Moreno 1/alley • City of Murrieta • City of Norco . City of Palm Desert City of Palit Springs • City of Perris City of Rancfio i! City of Riverside City of San Jacinto • City of Temecula - City of V1 ciamir4 Governor's Appointee, Ca!trans District 8 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET MAY 12, 2010 NAM AGENCY E MAIL ADDRESS II i0vD 6OltS A-.hJJiitq x -C - )t b tau ti47: CSC _ v l /w2 1 F /4 `� i L � v' L /ti l cl tD1, : Cc -L7-x S / /�`r �CA O 1/`'` \ l 1 er N O V'cv, D-r-1- � -,..)-A ci,,, l..)• t t iTha v•-A p____ c / 5 �L z y K %7.� _ -6. %-vit �j i Al 6,0447:s 04-4 l� ee i�S^1:1df'es `a/&4.7d �� C�'IDY-a--- � e. FF � f6 n� Ares-siac Cot,c" /zj 8.11/45 b^1 m(uMbei'f 0-40-44-14S Pbfieiv*Y" eo 47` Q26P„/s ��L/42.4c_c fl-r-/ -7 K4.•-) 7- iSE-P0 it A 6z 7 , J T& Ue NS eR U%�°S 4 E- ,,46.s. _ �y GL/ � ec i , P(,//ne-�— �y CV � �/�� JC- -J��J NrwE ,' ,-/e/27,vG&-N2 /4,P =Na /7teczEY r -) -. - r L rc "61a. /#',(/V //tx7 i 4-ei Z(J�S p4c,.t .90,etNQ j graVE oUC�OF_ //P_ U (M0 �a ye -IL C ;!tiG ii-e_// �y L C -T I ,/l lSd1--r— S� S . Page 1 of 1 Tara Byerly - COMMISSION AGENDA - MAY 12, 2010 From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: Tara Byerly Byerly, Tara 5/5/2010 7:19 AM COMMISSION AGENDA - MAY 12, 2010 AGENDA 05.pdf Good Morning Commission Alternates: For your information, attached below is the May 12, 2010 Commission Agenda. If you would like to view the detailed information please go to our website at: www.rctc.ora. Thank you. Respectfully, Tara S. Byerly Senior Administrative Assistant Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 (951)787-7141 file://C:1Documents and SettingsltbyerlylLocal Settings\TempAPgrpwise14BE11COBRCT... 1/5/2011 • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, April 14, 2010 1. CALL TO ORDER The Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chair Bob Buster at 9:34 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 Steve Adams led the Commission in a flag salute. 3. ROLL CALL Commissioners/Aftemates Present Commissioners Absent Steve Adams Marion Ashley John J. Benoit Roger Berg Bob Botts Bob Buster Mary Craton Joseph DeConinck Steve Di Memmo Scott Farnam Bonnie Flickinger Steven Hernandez Richard Kelly Darcy Kuenzi Al Landers Robin Lowe 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS Bob Magee Scott Matas Glenn Miller Malcolm Miller Patrick J. Mullany Greg Pettis Steve Pougnet Ray Quinto Karen Spiegel John F. Tavaglione Ray Wolfe Terry Henderson Rick Gibbs Ron Meepos Ron Roberts Jeff Stone Anne Mayer, Executive Director, presented a five-year service award to Lupe Garibay, Senior Office Assistant. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 14, 2010 Page 2 Chair Buster announced there are public comments cards available if the public wishes to comment on the Perris Valley Line (PVL) draft environmental impact report (DEIR) without addressing the Commission. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — JANUARY 28 —29, AND MARCH 10, 2010 M/S/C (Benoit/Spiegel) to approve the minutes of January 28 — 29, and March 10, 2010, meeting. Abstain: Hernandez, Kuenzi, Landers, Pougnet, and Tavaglione on the January 28 — 29, 2010 minutes; and Abstain: Ashley, Craton, and Landers on the March 10, 2010 minutes. 6. PUBLIC HEARING — RESOLUTIONS OF NECESSITY FOR THE ACQUISITION OF FEE AND EASEMENT INTERESTS IN CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY, LOCATED IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CAUFORNIA, BY EMINENT DOMAIN, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS RELATED TO THE STATE ROUTE 91 HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANES FROM ADAMS STREET TO THE 60/91215 INTERCHANGE, IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA At this time, Chair Buster opened the public hearing and requested Anne Mayer to explain the nature and scope of the hearing. Anne Mayer announced that legal counsel has recused itself due to a conflict of interest and explained the nature and scope of the hearing. Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board, verified the proof of mailing that certifies notices were sent to the property owners of said parcel numbers. Min Saysay, Right of Way manager, stated the Commission is requested to determine and find that the full requirements for the adoption of resolutions of necessity have been met and satisfied. He explained this is for the construction and maintenance of the State Route 91 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes in the city of Riverside. Min Saysay explained the first requirement is public interest and the necessity requires the proposed project. The gap that exists on the SR-91 HOV between Adams Street to the 60/91 /215 interchange causes traffic congestion and this project will close that gap and create safer driving conditions. Min Saysay stated the second requirement is that the project is planned and located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. He explained the project is part of the original Riverside County improvement program implemented by Ca[trans. Min Saysay stated the third requirement is that the properties being • • • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 14, 2010 Page 3 acquired are necessary for the project. He described the properties being acquired and discussed the fourth requirement, which is the offer of just compensation to the property owner. Jennifer Harmon stated there were no written objections, protests, or requests to speak from the property owners. Chair Buster called upon any persons with an interest in the property who wish to be heard on this matter. There were no requests to speak. Chair Buster then called upon all other persons who wish to be heard on this matter. There were no requests to speak. At this time, Chair Buster closed the public hearing. M/S/O (Adams/Benoit) to approve to: 1) Make the following findings as hereinafter described in this report: a) The public interest and necessity require the proposed project; b) The project is planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury; c) The real property to be acquired is necessary for the project; and d) The offer of just compensation has been made to the property owner. 2) Adopt Resolutions of Necessity Nos. 10-007 and 10-009, Resolutions of Necessity for the Acquisition of Fee and Easement Interests in Certain Real Property, located in Riverside County, California, by Eminent Domain, More Particularly Described as Assessor Parcel Numbers 229-062-012 (CPNs 20402-1 and 20402-2) and 225-340-016 (CPNs 20412-1, 20412-2 and 20412-3), for the Construction and Maintenance of Improvements Related to the State Route 91 High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes, from Adams Street to the 60/91/215 Interchange, in Riverside County, California." Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 14, 2010 Page 4 7. PUBLIC HEARING - PERRIS VALLEY LINE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Edda Rosso, Capital Projects Manager, provided an overview on the Perris Valley Line (PVL) draft environmental impact report (DEIR), highlighting the following areas: • Environmental studies, public comment period, and public hearings; • Brief history of the PVL; • Map; • Project scope and schedule; and • Draft EIR viewing locations and written comment submission. Chair Buster announced there will be a second PVL public hearing held on April 22, at 6:00 p.m. in the city of Perris City Council Chambers. At this time, Chair Buster opened the public hearing. Barney Barnett, Highgrove Municipal Advisory Council (MAC), discussed an adopted resolution dated August 16, 2004, in support of a proposed Highgrove Metrolink station and an independent study that was to be conducted by Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for a proposed Highgrove Metrolink station, and was subsequently tabled. He expressed concern that the DEIR could not be viewed at the Highgrove library. He requested the Commissioners view www.highgrovehappenings.net for additional information. He discussed his concerns regarding the proposed Palmyrita Avenue Metrolink station, and expressed support for a proposed Highgrove Metrolink station. Denis Kidd, Highgrove MAC, expressed concerns regarding the availability of the DEIR and the proposed Palmyrita Avenue Metrolink station. He stated the proposed Highgrove Metrolink station would provide service on the PVL and the main line from San Bernardino County to Orange County. He referred to an article in L.A. Times titled Death on the Rails in Los Angeles that depicts the Southern California Metrolink route. He expressed support for a proposed Highgrove Metrolink station. Mike Croy, a Grand Terrace resident, expressed support for a proposed Highgrove Metrolink station as he believes it would serve a greater number of commuters than the Palmyrita Avenue Metrolink station. • • • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 14, 2010 Page 5 Austin Sullivan, representing the University of California, Riverside (UCR) Neighborhood Association, discussed his concerns regarding the noise mitigation measures being proposed in the DEIR for homes in the UCR Neighborhood area and how those homes were selected. He noted he will provide technical comments in writing. Guru Mantra Khalsa, representing the UCR Neighborhood Association, expressed concern that there are no grade separations proposed for the PVL, lack of mitigation of foreseeable events, and the need for safe access to local parks. He expressed support for a proposed Highgrove Metrolink station in order to expand ridership opportunities. Kevin Dawson, representing the UCR Neighborhood Association, discussed his concerns regarding the limited timeframe to review and comment on the DEIR and requested a public hearing in the evening at UCR; the air quality and noise impacts to the UCR Neighborhood area; lack of mitigation to access local parks; and need for quiet zones. Jeffrey McConnell, a Grand Terrace resident, expressed support for mass transit in order to relieve traffic congestion and suggested the Commission have the foresight to address future traffic impacts. Chair Buster requested staff place the DEIR at the Highgrove library. He stated that he will coordinate a PVL public hearing in the evening for the UCR Neighborhood area. 8. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS There was a revision to Agenda Item 9C, "Agreement for Environmental Document Preparation, Preliminary and Final Engineering Design, and Construction Support Services for the Riverside Downtown Metrolink Layover Facility Project." Anne Mayer requested the Commission add "Colton Crossing Update" to the agenda as a late breaking item. This item arose after the agenda was posted and mailed, and there is a need that this item be addressed by the Commission at this time. M/S/C (Craton/Botts) to add `Colton Crossing Update to the agenda. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 14, 2010 Page 6 9. CONSENT CALENDAR M/S/C (Pettis/Lowe) to approve the following Consent Calendar items: Abstain: Berg on Agenda Item 9C 9A. APPOINTMENT OF TOLL FINANCING UNDERWRITING TEAM Receive and file a report on the appointment of a toll financing underwriting team. 9B. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the six-month period ended December 31, 2009. 9C. AGREEMENT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT PREPARATION, PRELIMINARY AND FINAL ENGINEERING DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE RIVERSIDE DOWNTOWN METROLINK LAYOVER FACILITY PROJECT 1) Approve the consultant selection process and award Agreement No. 10-33-031-00 to HDR Engineering Inc. (HDR) to provide environmental document preparation, preliminary engineering, final engineering design, and construction support services for the Riverside Downtown Metrolink layover facility project in the amount of $2,140,325 plus a contingency amount of $259,675 to cover potential changes for a total not to exceed amount of $2.4 million; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; 3) Authorize the Executive Director to approve contingency work up to the total not to exceed amount as requested for the project; and 4) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute non -funding related agreements necessary for the design and construction of the project. • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 14, 2010 Page 7 9D. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH OWEN DESIGN GROUP, INC. TO PROVIDE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE NORTH MAIN CORONA PARKING STRUCTURE AND THE PERRIS MULTIMODAL FACILITY 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-33-011-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 08-33-011-00, with Owen Design Group, Inc. (Owen Group) for construction management services for the North Main Corona (NMC) parking structure and the Perris Multimodal (PMM) facility in a not to exceed amount of $490,000; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Approve an expenditure transfer of $490,000 from the Riverside Downtown layover facility right of way acquisition to the PMM facility construction management. 9E. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH LA ENGINEERING TO INCREASE THE CONTRACT EXPENDITURE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE PERRIS MULTIMODAL FACILITY 1) Approve Agreement No. 09-33-046-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 09-33-046-00, with LA Engineering to increase the expenditure authorization for the Perris Multimodal (PMM) facility. by $262,000, increasing the total not to exceed contract amount to $5.662 million; 2) Approve the addition of four external extra work requests: two by the city of Perris, one by Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), and one by Riverside Transit Agency (RTA); 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; 4) Authorize Executive Director to execute necessary contract change orders to implement these requests; and 5) Approve an increase to budgeted revenues of $140,000 and an expenditure transfer of $262,000 from the Riverside Downtown layover facility right of way acquisition to PMM facility construction. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 14, 2010 Page 8 9F. AGREEMENT WITH SUNESYS LLC FOR THE NO COST PROVISION OF FIBER OPTIC SERVICES IN EXCHANGE FOR A NO COST LICENSE AGREEMENT 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-25-086-00 with Sunesys LLC for the provision of no cost fiber optic services in exchange for a no cost license agreement; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 9G. AGREEMENT WITH EPIC LAND SOLUTIONS, INC. TO PROVIDE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SERVICES 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-51-074-00 with Epic Land Solutions, Inc. (Epic), for property management support services for Commission -owned parcels for two years in an not to exceed amount of $970,000, and one option year for an additional $485,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement, including the option year, on behalf of the Commission. 10. COLTON CROSSING UPDATE Anne Mayer provided an update for funding the Colton Crossing, the shared use agreement between the Commission and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF), and the negotiations with Union Pacific (UP). Chair Buster commended the progress made on this issue and noted an opportunity to begin evaluation of additional passenger service between Colton and Indio. Anne Mayer concurred with Chair Buster's comment and discussed the project cost and current funding split. Commissioner Greg Pettis expressed his gratitude for the efforts that have been accomplished on the Colton Crossing. He suggested UP commit to a schedule for the evaluation of additional passenger service between Colton and Indio, including an independent analysis, and that the CTC agree to review the potential future UP services. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 14, 2010 Page 9 Anne Mayer concurred with Vice Chair Pettis' comments. She clarified that all parties to the Colton Crossing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) will have to comply with the conditions of the MOU in order to receive an actual allocation of funding. Commissioner John Benoit discussed the importance of the Colton Crossing improvements due to the traffic congestion throughout each city. He commended staff for all its efforts on this project. Commissioner Steve Adams stated the Colton Crossing is an essential part of the solution to the overall problem of the goods movement throughout the region, but expressed concern for the existing grade separation improvements that will be affected. He expressed gratitude to staff for an outstanding job in protecting the essential grade separation projects in order to restore quality of life and public safety. Anne Mayer expressed the Colton Crossing in its current financial condition should not move ahead of existing grade separation projects. One of the key discussion points will be to ensure that none of these grade separation projects are financially impacted. Commissioner Roger Berg concurred with Commissioner Benoit's comments regarding the local cities being impacted by the slowing of the freight trains in addition to the air quality impacts. M/S/C to: 1) Receive and file an update on the status of Colton Crossing; and 2) Provide policy direction to staff for remaining negotiations regarding inclusion in the Trade Corridor Improvement Fund (TCIF). 11. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA There were no agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar. • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 14, 2010 Page 10 12. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 12A. Commissioner Karen Spiegel expressed gratitude to Anne Mayer for her efforts on the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement project. Anne Mayer thanked Commissioner Spiegel for her comments and discussed the unanimous approval by the CTC for the SR-91 CIP. She expressed her gratitude and acknowledged Commissioners Pettis, Spiegel, Tavaglione, Wolfe, CTC Commissioner Joe Tavaglione, and Assemblymen Kevin Jeffries and Jeff Miller for their participation and support. At this time, Commissioner Steve Adams left the meeting. Commissioner Tavaglione expressed his gratitude and admiration to CTC Commissioner Joe Tavaglione and suggested honoring him as he is a true leader for transportation in this region. • A number of Commissioners expressed their gratitude to CTC Commissioner Tavaglione, staff, and local partners for their support of • the SR-91 CIP. 12B. Anne Mayer announced: • 1-10/Date Palm interchange, 60/215 East Junction, and the California Oaks interchange projects could receive state funding due to bid savings; and • Bids for the 74/215 interchange project were approximately $6 million under the engineer's estimate. 12C. Chair Buster announced there will be a second PVL public hearing held on April 22, at 6:00 p.m. in the city of Perris City Council Chambers. At this time, Commissioners Botts, Flickinger, Landers, Lowe, Magee, G. Miller, Pougnet, and Quinto left the meeting. • • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 14, 2010 Page tt 13. CLOSED SESSION 13A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — INITIATION OF LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c) Potential Number of Case(s): One There were no announcements from the Closed Session items. 15. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 11:14 a.m. The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, May 12, 2010, in the Board Room, at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California. Respectfully submitted, )1MVISI•gs— Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 12, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2010/11 BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Discuss, review, and provide guidance and 2) Open the public hearing in order to proposed FY 2010/11 Budget on May thereafter close the public hearing. on the proposed FY 2010/11 Budget; receive input and comments on the 12, 2010, and on June 9, 2010, and BACKGROUND INFORMATION Staff has completed the initial budget preparation process, and attached is an executive summary for the proposed FY 2010/11 Budget. The policy goals and objectives approved by the Commission on March 10, 2010, were the basis of this budget. The policy goals and objectives considered during the preparation of the budget relate to mobility initiatives, goods movement, improved system efficiencies, environmental stewardship, economic development, intermodalism and accessibility, and public and agency communications as well as financial and administration policies. Staff will present highlights of significant items included in the budget and is seeking review of and input on the proposed FY 2010/11 Budget. Based on input received from Commissioners, staff will update the document, as necessary, and present the proposed budget for the opening of the public hearing and for the Commission's review on May 12, 2010. As a result of input received from the public and the Commission, staff will make any necessary changes to the budget document for final review, close of the public hearing, and adoption at the June 9, 2010 Commission meeting. Agenda Item 6 1 The executive summary document contains a summary of all departmental budgets and summarizes the information for the entire Commission. The department budgets present the goals and objectives, the resources needed to accomplish the goals, and the appropriations required to accomplish the tasks. Staff has also included the fund budgets that provide the budgeted revenues and expenditures from a fund perspective. At the June 9, 2010 Commission meeting, staff will present the entire budget with detailed narratives. A summary of the proposed FY 2010/11 Budget is as follows: FY 2010/11 Budget Revenues and other financing sources: Sales taxes -Measure A and Local Transportation Funds Reimbursements (federal, state, and other) Transportation Uniform Mitigation Funds, including reimbursements State Transit Assistance Other revenues Interest on investments Debt proceeds Transfers in Total revenues and other financing sources Expenditures and other financing uses: Personnel salary and fringe benefits Professional services Support services Projects and operations Capital outlay Debt service (principal, interest and costs of issuance) Transfers out Total expenditures and other financing uses Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Beginning fund balance (projected) Ending fund balance (projected) $ 174,809,900 43,057,100 10, 000, 000 0 178,000 1,740,000 185,000,000 212,164, 700 626,949,700 6,225,000 18, 568,400 4,465,500 428,194,400 587,600 106,205,000 212,164, 700 776,410,600 (149,460,900) 499,168, 700 349,707,800 Attachment: FY 2010/11 Proposed Budget Executive Summary Agenda Item 6 • 2 • • Executive Summary Introduction The budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2010/11 is presented to the Board of Commissioners (Board) and the citizens of Riverside County. The budget outlines the projects the Commission plans to undertake during the year and appropriates expenditures to accomplish these tasks. The budget also shows the funding sources and fund balances that will be used for these projects. This document will serve as the Commission's monetary guideline. To provide the reader a better understanding of the projects, staff has included descriptive information regarding each department and major projects. The discussion in each department includes a review of major initiatives and key assumptions. Staff used the goals and objectives approved at the Commission meeting on March 10, 2010, to prepare this budget. In addition to the Commission's long-term goals and strategic plan, the short-term factors listed below were used to guide the development of the budget: Operational • Complete projects and programs included in the 1989 Measure A. • Aggressively pursue completion of the environmental and design processes on the SR-91, 1-15, and 1-215 projects included in the Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan. • Continue development of the toll program including • executing toll program agreements with key partners. • Work closely with local jurisdictions to implement the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Regional Arterial Program and facilitate the delivery of arterial improvements in western Riverside County (Western County). • Continue the preliminary engineering and environmental clearance for the Mid County Parkway and SR-79 realignment projects. • Continue cooperation with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) regarding the Small Starts process to support activities for the Perris Valley Line Metrolink extension (Perris Valley Line) project. • Improve utilization and increase efficiency of commuter rail lines serving the County. • Support innovative programs that provide transit assistance in hard to serve rural areas or for riders with special transit needs. • Support cost reductions and promote operating efficiency for transit operators. • Maintain effective partnerships among commuters, employers, and government to increase the efficiency of our transportation system by encouraging and promoting transportation alternatives. • Continue to provide a motorist aid system that ensures safety and convenience to freeway motorists. • Maintain an active involvement in state and federal legislative matters to ensure that the Commission receives proper consideration for transportation projects and funding. • Maintain close communication with Commissioners and educate policy makers on all issues of importance to the Commission. 3 Financial • Fund administrative costs with allocations from Measure A, LTF, FSP, SAFE, and TUMF funds. • Maintain administrative program delivery costs below the policy threshold of 4% of Measure A revenues; the FY 2010/11 Management Services budget is 2.16% of Measure A revenues. • Maintain administrative salaries and benefits at less than 1% of Measure A revenues; the FY 2010/11 administrative salaries and benefits is .69% of Measure A revenues. • Continue to maintain prudent cash reserves to provide some level of insulation for unplanned expenditures. • Maintain current positive bond ratings with rating agencies. • Move forward on Measure A projects for highways and regional arterials using sales tax revenues, TUMF revenues, and state and federal funding as well as financing alternatives such as commercial paper, sales tax revenue bonds, and toll revenue bonds. • Leverage and protect past Measure A investments in rail with state and federal funding for additional rail improvements, including the Perris Valley Line. • Prioritize the use of LTF reserves for transit operations and require transit operators to draw down their current capital projects list before requesting additional capital funds. • Consider actions to lessen the restriction of the $500 million 2009 Measure A bonding cap. • Complete the replacement of the financial software system to better integrate project accounting needs and improve accounting efficiency. Budget Overview Chart 1 — Sources: Major Categories to Debt Proceeds al Measure A Sales Tax 29% al Operating Transfers In 34% m Investment Income O% 17% • LTF Sales Tax 11% Y STA Sales Tax O% m Intergovernmental 7% TUMF Revenue 2% al Other Revenue O% Total sources are budgeted at $626,949,700, which is a decrease of 20% over FY 2009/10 projected sources and a 20% decrease over the FY 2009/10 budget. Total sources are comprised of revenues of $229,785,000, transfers in of $212;164,700, and debt proceeds of $185,000,000. The projected fund balance at June 30, 2010 available for expenditures (excluding reserves for debt service of $44,712,700 and advances receivable of • • • • • • $18,086,600) is $436,369,400. Accordingly, total funding available for the FY 2010/11 budget totals $1,063,319,100. Through FY 2005/06, the County had experienced significant growth corresponding to the national economic expansion and amplified locally by competitive advantages of Riverside County over other coastal counties (Los Angeles, Orange and San Diego): (i) housing that was (and remains) more available and affordable; and (ii) plentiful commercial real estate and available development land at lower rates. Moreover, both transportation and communication access to employment centers in Los Angeles and Orange counties improved. Riverside County's economy thrived, reflecting the area's competitive advantages over its neighboring counties, largely as a result of the County's continuing ability to draw jobs, residents, and affordable housing away from the Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego county areas. As a result, the County enjoyed more diversified employment and commercial base, and an increasing share of the regional economy. Today the local economy in Riverside County reflects the nationwide recession, as evidenced by increased unemployment; decreases in total personal income and taxable sales, residential building permits, and the rate of home sales and the median price of single-family residences; and high rates of notices of default on mortgage loans secured by single-family residences. The impact of the recession has been amplified in the Inland Empire due to its relatively greater recent growth and the relatively lower average income levels when compared to coastal areas. These factors have resulted in declines in Measure A and LTF sales tax revenues and TUMF fees as noted in Chart 2. While economic reports indicate that the nationwide recession has ended and economic growth has resumed, recovery in the local Inland Empire economy is expected to be protracted. The outlook for FY 2010/11 is guarded with some recent signs that the decrease in local economic activity has ended and an economic recovery may have begun. Should Measure A and LTF sales tax revenues continue to decline and the availability of federal and state revenues continue to be uncertain, the timing and scope of the Commission's projects and programs may be impacted. Chart 2 - Commission Sources Trend $350,OOo,00o $300,Ooo,0oo $250,000,000 $200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000,000 $50,Ooo,Ooo FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY O8/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 —0—Measure A Sales Tax ——LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax —+—TUMF --)ft—Federal, State, Local Revenues Operating Transfers In Debt Proceeds 5 The State Board of Equalization recently provided to cities and other agencies its projections that statewide taxable sales over the next fiscal year will increase 6.3%; however, given the tenuous local economy, the Commission considers this estimate to be extremely optimistic. The Commission is not basing its estimate of revenues on the State Board of Equalization's projection. After taking the state of the local economy and recent revenue trends into consideration, staff has projected that Measure A sales tax revenues will be unchanged from the FY 2009/10 revised projection of $106,000,000. On behalf of the County, the Commission administers the LTF for public transportation needs, local streets and roads, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The majority of LTF funding received by the County and available for allocation is distributed to all public transit operators in the County, and the Commission receives allocations for administration, planning, and programming in addition to funding for rail operations included in the commuter rail Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP). The LTF sales tax revenue received from the State is budgeted at $52,500,000, unchanged from the FY 2009/10 revised projection due to the economic concerns discussed earlier. Additional FY 2010/11 budgeted LTF revenues for allocations to the Commission's general fund include $700,000 for administration; $1,575,000 for planning and programming; $3,841,700 for grade separation jump-start funding award allocations to the cities of Corona and Riverside and the County; and $10,193,200 for rail operations and station maintenance. Intergovernmental revenues include reimbursement revenues from federal sources of $28,870,700, state sources of $13,355,700, local agencies of $676,900, and others of $153,800 for highway and rail capital, rail operations and station maintenance, commuter assistance, and motorist assistance programs as well as planning and programming activities. Reimbursement revenues vary from year to year depending on project activities and funding levels. STA funds generated from the statewide sales tax on motor vehicle fuel were allocated through FY 2008/09 by formula by the State Controller to the Commission for allocations to the County's public transit operators. The STA transit allocation for FY 2010/11 is $0 due to a continued suspension in the state's budget that began in FY 2009/10. As a result of an amended Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), the Commission will receive 48.7% of TUMF revenues (as updated by the most recent Nexus study). TUMF represents fees assessed on new residential and commercial development in Western County. FY 2010/11 TUMF fees are expected to remain flat at $5,000,000 based on the weakened housing market in the Inland Empire, and these revenues also include TUMF zone reimbursements of $5,000,000 for the 74/215 interchange project. Other revenue is projected to decrease 88% from the prior year's budget primarily because of the conclusion in FY 2008/09 of the annual debt service payments from Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) related to bonds issued for 1989 Measure A Coachella Valley regional arterial projects. Investment income is anticipated to decrease 49% in FY 2010/11 as a result of declining interest rates and declining cash balances. Staff continues to actively manage its resources and make appropriate investments to maximize the return to the Commission without sacrificing security and affecting short-term cash requirements. Transfers in relate primarily to the transfer of debt proceeds to Measure A highway and regional arterial projects and to retire outstanding commercial paper notes. Debt proceeds consist of the issuances of additional commercial paper notes and sales tax revenue bonds. • 6 • • • Table 1 — Sources FY 2009-2011 Measure A Sales Tax $ 119,688,300 $ 106,000,000 $ 106,000,0001:sssAil $ 0% LTFSales Tax 73,059,700 81,055,300 69,037,400 (12,245,400) -15% STASales Tax 4,860,800 WA Intergovernmental 104,666,400 78,773,600 41,904,500 (35,716,500) -45% TUMF Revenue 10,957,400 11,475,000 6,673,000 a a ,tt I ' (1,475,000) -13% Other Revenue 4,399,900 1,508,100 309,300 w I.:,a (1,330,100) -88% Investment Income 13,567,900 3,419,100 3,134,800 i a t l (1,679,100) -49% Operating Transfers In 46,541,200 244,211,600 268,635,100 IPI t (32,046,900) -13% Debt Proceeds 53,716,000 260,000,000 28$284,000 s I i I (75,000,000) -29% TOTAL Sources $ 431,457,600 $ 786,442,700 $ 783,978,100 . , F t „ g:; $ (159,493,000) -20% Chart 3 — Uses: Major Categories ■ Motorist Assistance 1% ■ Management Services 1% 11 Debt Service 14% O Commuter Assistance ■ Capital Lgal Streets and Roads 4% m Planning and Programming 1% • Public and Specialized Transit 10% • Rail Maintenance and Operations 1% ■ Capital Highway, Rail, and Regional Arterials 68% Total uses, including transfers out of $212,164,700, are budgeted at $776,410,600, a decrease of 16% from the prior year budget amount of $919,996,500. Program expenditures and transfers out totaling $665,406,400 represent 86% of total budgeted expenditures in FY 2010/11. Program costs have decreased by 7% from $715,872,700 in FY 2009/10. Commuter Assistance budgeted expenditures of $4,374,600 are 44% below FY 2009/10 due to the completion of the Inland Empire 511 system implementation. Ongoing operations of the Inland Empire 511 system are funded through SAFE, a motorist assistance service. Accordingly, Motorist Assistance budgeted expenditures of $5,714,000 reflect a 49% increase from the FY 2009/10 budget of $3,840,700. Debt Service of $106,205,000 has decreased 46% as a result of the refinancing of the 2008 bonds and retirement of a portion of the outstanding commercial paper program notes in connection with the commencement of forward starting interest rate swaps and issuance of variable rate sales tax revenue bonds in FY 2009/10. 7 The 18% decrease in Management Services budgeted expenditures of $4,799,200 is primarily related to the reclassification of financing costs related to Measure A from Finance to Capital Project Development and Delivery as well as the implementation of the new financial software system. Planning and Programming Department budgeted expenditures of $7,306,500 reflect a 34% decrease from the FY 2009/10 budget of $11,122,300 as a result of the completion of geotechnical borings in the Cleveland National Forest related to feasibility analysis of a future Irvine -Corona Expressway and a decrease in jump-start funding disbursements for grade separation projects. The $12,745,200 decrease in Rail Department budgeted expenditures of $11,533,900 is primarily due to capital funding disbursements to SCRRA for new rail cars in FY 2009/10. Table 2 — Program Uses FY 2009-2011 Capital Highway, Rail, and Regional Arterials $ 301,477,700 $ 547,571,000 $ 404,813,700 Capital local Streets and Roads 45,655,500 31,215,900 31,491,700 Commuter Assistance 6,161,600 7,795,200 9,744,800 Debt Service 45,673,400 198,255,000 193,050,200 Management Services 4,902,800 5,868,800 4,888,700 Motorist Assistance 2,623,200 3,840,700 3,819,800 Planning and Programming 8,051,200 11,122,300 5,448,100 Public and Specialized Transit 83,045,400 90,048,500 74,205,100 Rail Maintenance and Operations 8,667,500 24,279,100 13,590,800 TOTAL Uses $ 506,258,300 $ 919,996,500 $ 741,052,900 Note: Management Services include Executive Management, Administration, Legislative Affairs and Commission Personnel $ (16,871,900) (229,500) (3,420,600) (92,050,000) (1,069,600) 1,873,300 (3,815,800) (15,256,600) (12,745,200) $ (143,585,900) Communications, and Finance. -3% -1% -44% -46% -18% 49% 34% -17% -52% -16% The Commission's salary and fringe benefits total $6,225,000 for FY 2010/11. This represents a slight increase of 3% or $161,700 over the FY 2009/10 budget of $6,063,300; however, as a cost savings measure, there will be no merit -based salary increases in FY 2010/11. The Full Time Equivalent (FTE) of 40.0 FTE positions is below the FY 2008/09 level as a result of three retirements related to the implementation of an early retirement incentive, position reorganization, and maintaining a position as vacant. • • • 8 • • • Table 3 — Staff Summary by Department FY 2009-2011 Executive Management 0.7 Administration 4.7 4.2 Legislative Affairs and Communications 2.6 1.9 Finance 6.6 6.5 Planning and Programming 5.8 5.4 Rail Maintenance and Operations 2.9 3.2 Public and Specialized Transit 2.6 2.6 Commuter Assistance 1.8 1.8 Motorist Assistance 1.8 1.2 Capital Project Development and Delivery 15.5 13.8 TOTAL 45.0 41.0 Management continues to be firmly committed to the intent of the Commission's enabling legislation that called for a small staff. Staff will continue to be provided the tools needed, including state of the art technology, to ensure an efficient and productive work environment. However, it must be recognized that small is not viewed in an absolute context; it is relative to the required tasks to be performed and the demands to be met. Chart 4 — Personnel Salary and Benefits • Other Fringes 2% ■ Retirement 22% ■ Salary 64% The Commission provides a comprehensive package of benefits to all permanent, salaried employees. The package includes: health, dental, vision, and life insurance, short and long- term disability, workers' compensation, tuition assistance, sick and vacation leave, retirement benefits in the form of participation in California Public Employees Retirement System (CaIPERS), postretirement health care, deferred compensation, and employee assistance program. 9 Chart 5 — Salary and Benefits Costs $s,000,000 $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $- FY 06/07 Department Initiatives FY 07/08 FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 The preparation of each department's budget was based on key assumptions, accomplishments in FY 2009/10, major initiatives for FY 2010/11, and department goals and related objectives. Following are the key initiatives and summary of expenditures for each department. Executive Management • Continue project development and delivery as the key Measure A priority. • Obtain approvals from the FTA, railroads, and community related to the development of the Perris Valley Line. • Advocate for state investments in transportation and approval of a federal transportation bill to fund needed transportation priorities in Riverside County and stimulate the local economy. • Maintain regional cooperation and collaboration as a significant effort consistent with the philosophy and mission of the Commission. • Enhance external communications with media, business and civic groups, and the community. • Maintain an effective mid -sized transportation agency with a small and dedicated staff. Table 4 — Executive Management 41 Personnel $ 98,800 $ 93,700 $ 113,400 ` 99,400', $ 5,700 6% Professional 46,100 70,000 50,600 , if1,000 0% Support 49,000 51,600 47,800 50,200 (1,400) -3% TOTAL $ 193,900 $ 215,300 $ 211,800 , ,;. 19,600 $ 4,300 2% Administration • Provide high quality support services to the Commission and to internal and external customers. • Continue to strengthen the electronic records management system. • 10 • • Continue to provide timely communications to Commissioners with continued emphasis on the utilization of electronic mail. • Continue to update technology to streamline processes and provide easier access to Commission records. • Support and develop a motivated workforce with a framework of activities and practices that comply with employment laws and regulations. Table 5 — Administration Personnel $ 349,800 $ 357,700 $ 341,700 { $ 41,700 12% Professional 135,900 138,000 108,300 " : a (3,500) -3% Support 995,200 1,101,900 1,003,000+' (454,500) -41% Capital Outlay 100,100 20,000 20,000 (20,000) -100% Debt Service 18,900 - N/A TOTAL $ 1,599,900 $ 1,617,600 $ 1,473,000 ° .,r $ (436,300) -27% Legislative Affairs and Communications • Continue efforts to protect and seek greater state and federal investment in transportation infrastructure and goods movement. • Advocate positions in the State Legislature and in Congress that advance the County's transportation interests, especially those related to the implementation of Express Lanes on SR-91 and of the Perris Valley Line. • Continue to develop a broad public information program regarding the Commission's responsibilities and accomplishments through a variety of media formats and presentation opportunities. • Continue to place an emphasis on providing communications support related to major project development efforts. • Provide new Commissioner orientation meetings and other continuing education opportunities for Commissioners. Table 6 — Legislative Affairs and Communications Personnel $ 358,900 $ 314,700 $ Professional 364,900 666,000 Support 142,500 166,400 TOTAL $ 866,300 $ 1,147,100 $ Finance (23,500) -7% 22,000 3% 4,600 3% $ 3,100 0% • Continue appropriate uses of long- and short-term financing to advance 2009 Measure A projects of the Commission and CVAG. • Apply the sales tax revenue forecast update to develop a financing plan to support the Western County Highway Delivery Plan and CVAG highway and regional arterial projects, including consideration for a recommended increase in the $500 million 2009 Measure A bonding cap. • Develop and approve internal audit projects related to the organizational accountability program. 11 • Continue to keep abreast of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) technical activities affecting the Commission's accounting and financial reporting activities and consider early implementation of new pronouncements. • Continue the implementation of an enterprise resource planning (ERP) system to benefit all staff in the management of accounting and project information and automate a paperless workflow system. • Continue to implement a centralized procurements process in order to strengthen controls and ensure consistency in the application of procurement policies and procedures and adherence to applicable laws and regulations. • Maintain order, safety, and security at the Commission -owned operating properties, including the commuter rail stations. Table 7 — Finance Personnel Professional Support Capital Outlay Debt Service TOTAL $ 5,714,100 $ 9,388,800 $ 2,225,900 703,500 $ 694,600 $ 773,100 (21,600) -3% 1,331,300 1,779,600 757,500 m (933,100) -52% 30,800 59,100 494,300 515,000 871% 196,000 355,500 201,000 : a (201,000) -57% 3,452,500 6,500,000 (6,500,000) -100% $ (7,140,700) -76% Planning and Programming • Monitor funding authority and responsibility related to the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and impacts on the STIP caused by the state budget issues. • Ensure STIP and Proposition 1B funded projects are administered and implemented consistent with Califomia Transportation Commission (CTC) and California Department of Transportation (Ca!trans) policies. • Continue to strategically program projects and obligate funds in an expeditious manner for the maximum use of all available funding, including monitoring the use of such funding to prevent funds from lapsing. • Focus on interregional concerns and maintain effective working relationships involving various bi-county transportation issues, including goods movement. • Coordinate planning efforts with regional and local agencies relating to the development of regional transportation plans (RTP) and green house gas reduction implementation guidelines. • Secure funding through the federal transportation bill for goods movement -related needs. • Monitor and track the TUMF regional arterial projects. • Work cooperatively with member agencies to continue the work efforts on the new Community Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) corridors. • Continue the Congestion Management Program (CMP) update and traffic monitoring along urban and rural highway systems. • Administer the SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program. • Monitor the Port of Los Angeles and Port of Long Beach's (Ports) projects for impacts on Riverside County. • 12 • • • Table 8 — Planning and Programming Personnel $ 833,800 $ 854,300 $ 926,400 s t $ 65,400 8% Professional 513,100 704,300 313,800 ' + r $ (354,300) -50% Support 28,200 38,400 11400 — a e r (13,400) -35% Projects and Operations 6,676,100 9,525,300 4,196,500 : s; (3,513,500) -37% TOTAL $ 8,051,200 $ 11,122,300 $ 5,448,100 T,,��' $ (3,815,800) -34% Rail Maintenance and Operations • Continue the planning and implementation of capital improvements at the commuter rail stations in Riverside County, including multimodal facilities, security and rehabilitation projects, and a layover facility. • Continue project development and right of way acquisition activities related to the Perris Valley Line project. • Establish best approach to build, maintain, and operate cost effective and environmentally sustainable facilities that meet the public's transportation needs. • Continue efforts with local and state agencies to support intercity passenger rail service throughout Riverside County and a high-speed passenger rail system along an Inland Empire alignment. Table 9 — Rail Maintenance and Operations Personnel 2% $ 384,200 $ 439,400 $ 399,400 12% �� k � �" $ 51,800 Professional 226,800 409,300 208,500 ��„ (48,900) -12% Support 895,900 1,188,400 1,048,900� k� (195,000) -16% Projects and Operations 7,108,000 22,242,000 11,861,900, 2800" (12,569,200) -57% Capital Outlay 52,600 72,100 v& 16,100 N/A TOTAL $ 8,667,500 $ 24,279,100 $ 13,590,800 . $ 1i3,900',' $ (12,745,200) -52% Public and Specialized Transit • Support innovative programs that provide transit assistance in hard to serve rural areas or for riders having very special transit needs and monitor funding of these programs. • Approve specialized transit funding allocations for FY 2011/12 and FY 2012/13 following the development of a second universal call for projects. • Continue long-range planning activities to ensure that anticipated revenues are in line with projected levels of service by transit operators. • Monitor public and specialized transit operators' performance through the TransTrack program. • Provide availability for local matching funds to Western County applicants seeking FTA Section 5310 federal capital grants. 13 Table 10 — Public and Specialized Transit Personnel $ 297,800 $ 374,500 $ 336,100 aaa $ (17,300) -5% Professional 176,000 342,800 192,800 i (135,000) -39% SuPPod 8,900 29,100 11800 a _ < (1,500) -5% Projects and Operations 82,562,700 89,302,100 70,339,400 (15,102,800) -17% Transfers Out 3325,000 N/A TOTAL $ 83,045,400 $ 90,048,500 $ 74,205,100 ;§ $ (15,256,600) -17% Commuter Assistance • Improve the suite of services and outreach to rideshare participants and employer partners, including personalized information and electronic access and distribution. • Maintain and grow employer partnerships through value-added services and tools for ridesharing programs. • Continue to maintain and operate a five -county ridematching database system with partner agencies. • Maintain long-term partnership with SANBAG to manage and implement a "sister" Commuter Assistance program for residents and employers in San Bernardino County. • Optimize park and ride facilities to support car/vanpool arrangements and facilitate transit connections. Table 11 — Commuter Assistance Personnel $ 161,200 $ 215,300 $ 368,300$ _ 3086 $ (6,400) -3% Professional 386,900 1,483,500 1,977100 _ 5�8p�t` (887,700) -60% SupPort 391,000 524,300 549,800Z,$bq! 8,200 2% Projects and Operations 4,216,200 3,997,200 3,994,500 (1,176,800) -29% Capital Outlay 6,300 17,000 18,200 17,t 0% Transfers Out 1,000,000 1,557,900 2,836,900 ?IQ,Q®0, (1,357,900) -87% TOTAL $ 6,161,600 $ 7,795,200 $ 9,744,800 $; :+Ir34.M $ (3,420,600) -44% Motorist Assistance • Complete the implementation of the Automatic Vehicle Locator (AVL) system for tow trucks. • Implement a cost-effective and expandable radio system that addresses coverage issues and pending FCC narrowband regulations. • Operate and maintain the Inland Empire 511 system in partnership with SANBAG. 14 • Table 12 — Motorist Assistance Personnel Professional Support Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL 110,500 $ 141,000 $ 141,000 34,700 404,400 405,900 309,100 351,600 350,400 2,1E8,900 2,489,000 2,488,800 454,700 433,700 $ 2,623,200 $ 3,840,700 $ 3,819,800 (61,900) -44% (48,600) -12% 595,000 16996 580,000 23% 808,800 178% 1,873,300 49% Capital Project Development and Delivery • Continue project development, right of way, and construction activities on remaining 1989 Measure A projects including SR-74 curve widening, 74/215 interchange, SR-91 HOV lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 interchange, and 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connectors and funding support for operational improvements at local interchanges on SR-60, SR-91, and SR-111. • Continue project activities on the 1-215 bi-county highway and Perris Valley Line rail projects, which were included in both the 1989 Measure A and 2009 Measure A programs. • Continue project work on the Western County Highway Delivery Plan projects, including the 71/91 connectors, SR-91 corridor improvements, 1-15 corridor improvements, 1-215 corridor mobility improvement projects, SR-79 realignment, and Mid County Parkway. • Commence rail project activities for the Riverside Downtown station layover facility, La Sierra station parking expansion, and rehabilitation projects. • Provide Western County TUMF funding and support to local jurisdictions for regional arterial project engineering, right of way acquisition, and construction. • Provide advance funding and support of 2009 Measure A highway and regional arterial projects and for the acquisition for land as mitigation in the Coachella Valley. • Maintain a right of way acquisition and management program in support of capital projects. • Manage right of way acquisition schedules and budget control measures. • Maintain and manage the access, use and security of Commission -owned properties, properties in acquisition process, and income generating properties. Table 13 — Capital Project Development and Delivery Personnel Professional Support Projects and Operations Capital Outlay Debt Service Transfers Out TOTAL 2,149,700 2,388,900 491,300 295,978,300 583,800 42,202,000 45,541,200 $ 389,335,200 $ 2,578,100 10,948,500 1,585,000 320,758,300 718,000 191,755,000 242,199,000 $ 770,541,900 $ 2,406,000 $ 2,745,9 $ 127,800 6,593,600 54,959;60t1- 4,011,100 765,700 497,7(8t (1,087,300) 164,624,600 332,421,10Q 11,662,800 (124,000) 400,000 (318,000) 193,050,200 1U6205,000 (85,550,000) 262,039,500 20,70,20- (31,497,800) $ 629,355,600 $ 667,890,W $ (102,651,400) 5% 37% -69% 4% -44% -45% -13% -13% 15 Fund Balances The total fund balance as of June 30, 2010 is projected at $499,168,700. The Commission's budgeted activities for FY 2010/11 are expected to result in a $149,460,900 decrease of total fund balance at June 30, 2011 to $349,707,800. A significant portion of the decrease is related to the use of available fund balance for the Measure A, TUMF, and LTF special revenue funds to complete the 1989 Measure projects and programs and to fund approved TUMF projects and transit operations in a declining revenue environment. Table 14 — Projected Fund Balances by Governmental Fund Type and Program at June 30, 2011 ........._......_._. . Management Services Planning and Progamming Rad Maintenance and Operations Right of Way Management $3,450,000 100,000 4,317,400 202,600 MeasureA Western County: Bond Hnandng Commuter Assistance Economic Development Highways Nevi Corridors Public and Specialized Transit Rao Regional Arterials Measure A Coachella Valley: Highways and Regional Arterial Local Streets and Roads Specialized Transit $758,5F0 9,066,900 1,8303 O 87,014,400 17,181,100 9,028,100 28,122,900 12,286,700 858,400 1,100 NO Measure A Palo Verde Valley local Streets and Roads 400 Motorist Assistance State Transit Assistance Local Transportation fund TUMF 6,463,600 11,316,00D 56,326,200 41,610,400 Highways $11, '.,200 • 16 • • Table 16 — Budget Comparative by Summarized Line Item FY 2009-2011 Revenues Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements TUMF Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income TOTAL Revenues Expenditures Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional and Support Professional Services Support Costs TOTAL Professional and Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Engineering Construction Design Build Right of Way/Land Operating and Capital Disbursements Special Studies Local Streets and Roads Regional Arterials TOTAL Projects and Operations Debt Service Principal Payments Interest Payments Cost of Issuance TOTAL Debt Service Capital Outlay TOTAL Expenditures Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out Debt Proceeds Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) Beginning Fund Balance ENDING FUND BALANCE 119,688,300 73,059,700 4,860,800 50,692,700 52,670,300 1,303,400 10,957,400 4,399,900 13,567,900 331,200,400 $ 106,000,000 $ 106,000,000 81,055,300 69,037,400 40,755,000 17,370,600 36,896,800 22,169,800 1,121,800 2,364,100 11,475,000 6,673,000 1,508,100 309,300 3,419,100 3,134,800 282,231,100 227,059,000 5,448,200 6,063,300 5,604,600 3,341,900 8,946,500 11,586,400 50,287,600 79,794,400 105,901,600 90,044,700 4,799,700 45,655,500 10,640,300 398,710,200 33,646,500 12,026,900 45,673,400 938,800 459,717,100 16,946,400 5,095,800 22,042,200 12,824,300 60,730,050 65,043,300 21,425,000 123,605,650 117,475,500 2,232,800 31,215,900 13,761,400 448,313,900 182,395,000 12,610,000 3,250,000 198,255,000 1,110,500 675,784,900 6,158,500 11,103,100 4,413,000 15,516,100 11,430,900 51,308,000 25,969,300 1,200,000 42,059,200 83,769,700 1,412,200 31,491,700 8,864,700 257,505,700 184,111,000 7,939,900 999,300 193,050,200 187,300' 472,417,800 9,.. (128,516,700) (393,553,800) (245,358,800)i 46,541,200 (46,541,200) 53,716,000 53,716,000 244,211,600 (244,211,600) 260,000,000 260,000,000 268,635,100 (268,6'35,100) 288,284,000 288,284,000 �2i31f,�r70a_' 185,003000" _185,000,000'.' 0% (12,245,400) -15% N/A (11,884,300) -29% (23,541,100) -64% (291,100) -26% (1,475,000) -13% (1,330,100) -88% (1,679,100) -49% (52,446,100) -19% 161,700 3% 1,622,000 (630,300) 991,700 2,368,100 (8,287,450) 11,596,300 1,575,000 3,538,650 (30,447,000) (597,200) (229,500) 363,600 (20,119,500) (90,095,000) (205,000) (1,750,000) (92,050,000) (522,900) (111,539,000) 10% -12% 4% 18% -14% 18% 7% 3% -26% -27% -1% 3% -4% -49% -2% -54% -46% A7% -17% 59,092,900 -15% (32,046,900) 32,046,900 (75,000,000) (75,000,000) -13% -13% -29% -29% (74,800,700) (133553,800) 42,925,200 (149,460900)'.. (15,907,100) 12% 531,044,200 456,243,500 456,243,500 li 49946K700.'. 42,925,200 9% $ 456,243,500 $ 322,689,700 $ 499,168,700 $ 349,707,800` $ 27,018,100 8% 17 Table 16 — Operating and Capital Budget FY 2010/11 Revenues Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements TUMF Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income TOTAL Revenues Expenditures Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional and Support Professional Services Support Costs TOTAL Professional and Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Engineering Construction Design Build Right of Way and Land Operating and Capital Disbursements Special Studies Local Streets and Roads Regional Arterials TOTAL Projects and Operations Debt Service Principal Payments Interest Payments Cost of Issuance TOTAL Debt Service Capital Outlay TOTAL Expenditures Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out Debt Proceeds Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) Beginning Fund Balance $ 10,758,600 68,809,900 2,018,400 5,504,500 790,700 497,900 88,380,000 3,519,100 3,608,800 3,967,800 7,576,600 7,179,200 87,028,500 1,565,600 95,773,300 (18,676,600) 2,725,700 (1,463,500) 1,262,200 (17,414,400) $ 95,241,400 26,852,300 7,851,200 40,000 10,000,000 178,000 1,242,100 141,405,000 2,705,900 14,959,600 497,700 15,457,300 8,013,200 52,442,600 76,639,600 23,000,000 127,144,300 70,000 30,986,400 14,125,000 332,421,100 92,300,000 12,405,000 1,500,000 (315,784,300) 209,439,000 (210,701,200) 185,000,000 183,737,800 (132,046,500) 117,482,900 381,685,801 4 i 000R a00 ,pb6�f)00_: 499,168 708 ENDING FUND BALANCE $ 100,068,500 $ 249,639,301 $ 349,70 ,8136 18 • Table 17 Budget by Governmental Fund Type FY 2010/11 Revenues Measure A Sales Tax $ 2,700,000 $ 103,300,000 $ $ LTF Sales Tax 16,309,900 52,500,000 STA Sales Tax _ Federal Reimbursements 397,700 28,473,000 State Reimbursements 1,100,100 12,255,600 Local Reimbursements 178,000 652,700 - TUMF Revenue - 10,000,000 - OtherRevenue 178,000 - - Investment Income 40,200 1,402,600 55,200 TOTAL Revenues 20,903,900 208,583,900 55,200 Expenditures Personnel Salary and Benefits 3,088,700 3,136,300 Professional and Support Professional Services 3,219,400 15,349,000 Support Costs 2,729,100 1,736,400 TOTAL Professional and Support Costs 5,948,500 17,085,400 Projects and Operations Program Operations - General 1,340,300 Engineering Construction Design Build Right of Way/Land Operating and Capital Disbursements Special Studies Local Streets and Roads Regional Arterials TOTAL Projects and Operations Debt Service Principal Payments Interest Payments Cost of Issuance TOTAL Debt Service Capital Outlay TOTAL Expenditures Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out Debt Proceeds Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) (2,809,900) (139,762,200) (10,819,800) 3,931,000 _ (14%460,900) 13,852,100 52,442,600 70,139,600 6,500,000 23,000,000 50,000 120,824,300 6,270,000 12,849,200 74,179,300 1,545,600 90,000 30,986,400 - 14,125,000 15,785,100 399,639,300 12,770,000 83,300,000 9,000,000 1,305,000 11,100,000 1,500,000 -4;4 00,000 86,105,000 20,100,000 170,600 417,000 24,992,900 420,278,000 (4,089,000) (211,694,100) 2,049,100 98,026,600 (770,000) (26,094,700) • 1,279,100 71,931,900 98,875,000 20,100,000 'S6A,`245,900 4 (98,819,800) (19,858,000) 460,900) 83,300,000 28,789,000 }2I2, 64,700 (180,300,000) (5,000,000) 212,164,700) 185,000,000 - i8s 00;000'' 88,000,000 23,789,000 -Meow Beginning Fund Balance ENDING FUND BALANCE 10,879,900 421,658,100 21,918,000 44,712,700 498,168,700.- $ 8,070,000 $ 281,895,900 $ 11,098,200 $ 48,643,700 $ _349,707,800:; 19 Table 18 Highway, Regional Arterial, and Rail Programs FY 2010/11 Projects and Operations Bechtel Program Management SCRRA Program Management General TOTAL PROJECTS -GENERAL Highway Engineering 74/215 Interchange 60/215 East Junction HOV Lanes Connector 71/91 Connectors 1-15 Corridor Improvements 1-215 Bicounty HOV Interim Project 1-215 Bicounty Project 1-215 Mixed Flow Lanes/1-15 to Scott Road 1-215 Mixed Flow Lanes/Scott Road to Nuevo Road 1-215 Southbound to 1-15 Connector Widening Gap Closure Mid County Parkway SR-91 Corridor Improvements SR-91 HOV Lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 Interchange General SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY ENGINEERING Regional Arterial Engineering Various Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Projects SUBTOTAL REGIONAL ARTERIAL ENGINEERING Rail Engineering BNSF 4th Main La Sierra Station Improvements Perris Valley Line and Other Related Projects Riverside Layover Facility Station Rehabilitation Projects SUBTOTAL RAIL ENGINEERING TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL ENGINEERING Highway Construction SR-60/Valley Way Interchange 60/215 East Junction HOV Lanes Connector 74/215 Interchange 1-215 Mixed Flow Lanes/1-15 to Scott Road SR-111 City Project SR-74 Curve Widening SR-91/Green River Interchange Bridge SR-91/La Sierra Interchange SR-91/Van Buren Interchange Coachella Valley Projects SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION Regional Arterial Construction Various Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Projects SUBTOTAL REGIONAL ARTERIAL CONSTRUCTION Rail Construction La Sierra Station Improvements North Main Corona Station Parking Structure Perris Valley Line and Other Related Projects Riverside Layover Facility Station Rehabilitation Projects SUBTOTAL RAIL CONSTRUCTION TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL CONSTRUCTION Highway Design Build SR-91 Corridor Improvements TOTAL HIGHWAY DESIGN SUMO Highway Right of Way and Land 74/215 Interchange 60/21S East Junction HOV Lanes Connector 1-215 Mixed Flow Lanes/Scott Road to Nuevo Road 1-215/1-15 to Scott Road Mid County Parkway 5R-74 Curve Widening SR-74/1-15 to 7th Street SR-79 Realignment 5R-79/Thompson to Domenigonl SR-91 Corridor Improvements SR-91 HOV Lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/21S interchange Coachella Valley MSHCP SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND Regional Arterial Right of Way and Land Various Western County TOME Regional Arterial Projects SUBTOTAL REGIONAL ARTERIAL RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND Rail Right of Way and Land Perris Valley Line and Other Related Projects General SUBTOTAL RAIL RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND GRAND TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL PROGRAMS 20 Proposed Budget Fiscal Year 2010/11 Commission Policy Goals E ,rgicimiae Po1JOy iaQ�jS Budget Summary Beginning Fund Balance Revenues Debt Proceeds Transfers In Total Estimated Sources Expenditures Debt Service Transfers Out Total Estimated Uses Uses Over sources taker br 6eli nning m.e hnbncel Ending Fund Balance $. 349.70 ;Boo FY 2010/11 Budget Considerations •Ixrrnce of continental papal ad sale, tan revenue bends in FY 1010111 •parade, a/tall salsa hoods In PY 1011/11 •Lha of accumulated resents for project. and program. •stmdbnigm theme scope end dmins a/pmist. •Bmell.t.e dth heavy use almnsulbrN • laterbmd borrowing policy, if requital Sources by Breakdown FY 09/10 :FY 09/10 fY.10/11 Rodmd Budget Projected Budget Measure A Sales Tat $ 106,000PD $ ios,oc,00D $106,Oog000 LTF Sales Tax 81,055,300 E9,041,400 68,939,900 STA Sales Tar Intergovernmental Tlp60.evenue Other Revenue Investment Income Operan us -transfers In Debt Proceeds TOTAL Sources 78,273,600 41,304,500 43,051;100 11,439,000 6623,009 10.000,000 1,508,100 309,300 178,000 3,419,100 1,1Kaoo : 1,740,000 244,211S09 263,635.100 2/2,164,700 260,000.000 288,284000 - 185,000000 $ 786,442,700 $ 78,976400 $ 826,949;700 1 Sources Comparison •1139/101te,Aea Budget xrv09/10 Projected 'iv to/11BW9et Expenditures Breakdown by Department FT 09/10 Fy 09/10 FT10/11. Revised Budget Projected 9 eaageL:.'.. Capital Highway, Rail, and Regional Arterials $ 597.571,030 $ 404,813,700 $530,,699,103 Capital Load Streets and Roads 31,215,930 31,992700 30,966;100 Commuter Assistance 2795200 9,794,900 4,321.600 Debt Service 199,255,030 193,050,203 105,205,000 Management Services 5,868,800 0988,700 4,799,200 Motodst Assistance 3,810,700 3,819,800 5214000 Planning and Programming 11,122300 5,998,100 : 7,105,500 Public and Specialized Transit 90,09650D 76105,100 79,791,950. Rail Maintenance and Operatim 20.270.100 13 590 600 12534900' TOTAL Uses $ 919,996,500 $ 791,052900 $ 776,410603 Capital Department Expenditure Highlights Expenditures by Department Expenditures Breakdown Comparison Sam Sion , 51so 5100 550 : W019/16Pevraa LAW =Prmnarrdjeed w lone e.g. Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional Senices Support Costs Projects aM Operations Debt Service Capital Outlay TOTAL Expenditures 8409/10'. 86101 Piala4Lect 9048at $ 6,063,300 $ 0138,550 $ 6225,600' 18,946,400 11,103,100 18,568,440- 5,095,800 4,413,000 8465,500 448,313,900 257,505,700 420,144,400'- 198,255p0o 193,050200 106205,600. 1.110500 187.NO 587000 $ 015,784,900 5 472411,8110 S 564,245,900 2 Functional Expenditures Comparison -1 I azs Amer -.a- - S.-. .-^- -Ft e,,, 'We^ Next Steps 41111.11111111 b.oft.Ph. bgand11.161imv• trent4 ,Fu,*,144E.SPA a projacts Owl Irapuil open*. .111.11neue of1WW0•Msto,0•4•4131M*1 Itsimobakinput Oar tilxpeapesal butlodanti comea public tearing pottio-hosiivia ttod #441*--s. 4644 ibriavetneiling euepatelmit alas* Br pub& hearing, as otlopi Ine Intl eungol 3 • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 12, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Annual Investment Policy Review BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt the Annual Investment Policy; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. 10-010, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding the Revised Investment Policy". BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Section XIV of the Investment Policy requires an annual investment policy review and specifically states that the "Chief Financial Officer shall annually render to the Board a statement of investment policy, which the Board must consider at a public meeting. Any changes to the policy shall also be considered by the Board at a public meeting." Based on a review of the Investment Policy approved by the Commission on May 13, 2009, and consideration of changes to the California Government Code (Code) as of January 1, 2010, staff in consultation with staff from the County Treasurer's Office has determined that minor changes should be made to: 1) minimize exposure to individual non-U.S. Government or non -Federal Agency issuers, including direct and indirect commitments related to liquidity support, and 2) adjust limitations on U.S. corporate debt and commercial paper based on investment risks. Staff is recommending adoption of Resolution No. 10-010 and Investment Policy. Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 10-010 2) Investment Policy Agenda Item 8A 21 • RESOLUTION NO. 10-010 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION REGARDING THE REVISED INVESTMENT POLICY WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the "Commission") currently retains the authority to add, delete or otherwise modify the Commission's policies and procedures. NOW, THEREFORE, the Riverside County Transportation Commission does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. The Riverside County Transportation Commission hereby adopts the Investment Policy, as revised on May 12, 2010, and attached as Exhibit A. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 121h day of May, 2010. Bob Buster, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board 22 • INVESTMENT POLICY I. Introduction The purpose of this document is to identify policies and procedures that enhance opportunities for a prudent and systematic investment program and to organize and formalize investment -related activities. II. Scope It is intended that this Policy cover all funds (except retirement funds) and investment activities under the direction of the Commission. III. Delegation of Authority Pursuant to the Commission's Administrative Code, the Board's management responsibility for the investment program is hereby delegated for a one-year period to the Executive Director who shall monitor and review all investments for consistency with this investment policy. Subject to review, the Board may renew the delegation of authority pursuant to this section each year. The Executive Director may delegate these duties to his designee ("Chief Financial Officer"). The Commission may delegate its investment decision making and execution authority to an investment advisor. The advisor shall follow this Policy and such other written instructions as are provided. IV. Prudence All persons authorized to make investment decisions on behalf of the Commission are subject to the prudent investor standard. Investments shall be made with care, skill, prudence and diligence under circumstances then prevailing, including, but not limited to, the general economic conditions and the anticipated needs of the Commission that a prudent person acting in a like capacity and familiarity with those matters would use in the conduct of funds of a like character and with like aims, to safeguard the principal and maintain the liquidity needs of the Commission. Authorized individuals acting in accordance with this Policy and written procedures and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal Revised May -I312, 20092010 23 responsibility for an individual security's credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion. V. Objective The Commission's primary investment objectives, in priority order, shall be: 1. Safety. Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. Investments of the Commission shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure preservation of capital in the portfolio. 2. Liquidity. The investment portfolio of the Commission will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the Commission to meet its cash flow requirements. 3. Retum on Investment. The investment portfolio of the Commission shall be designed with the objective of maximizing return on its investments, but only after ensuring safety and liquidity. In order to maximize return on its investments, the Commission seeks an active rather than passive management of portfolio assets. The Commission may from time to time sell securities that it owns in order to better reposition its portfolio assets in accordance with updated cash flow schedules, yield curve optimizations, yield opportunities existing between market sectors, or simply market timing. VI. Investments California Government Code Section 53601 governs the investments permitted for purchase by the Commission. Within the investments permitted by Code, the Commission seeks to further restrict eligible investments to the investments listed in Section V1.1 below. Percentage limitations, where indicated, apply at the time of purchase. Percentage holdings with any one non-U.S. Ggovernmental issuer or non -Federal Agency issuer are further restricted to a maximum of 10% (direct and indirect commitments). Rating requirements where indicated, apply at the time of purchase. In the event a security held by the Commission is subject to a rating change that brings it below the minimum specified rating requirement, the Chief Financial Officer shall notify the Board of the change. The course of action to be followed will then be decided on a case -by -case basis, considering such factors as the reason for the rate drop, prognosis for recovery or further rate drops, and the market price of the security. Revised May 4412, 28092010 • • 24 • 1. Eligible Investments A. U.S. Government Issues. United States Treasury notes, bonds, bills, or certificates of indebtedness, or those for which the faith and credit of the United States are pledged for the payment of principal and interest. B. Federal Agency Securities. Federal agency or United States government -sponsored enterprise obligations, participations, or other instruments, including those issued by or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by federal agencies or United States government -sponsored enterprises. C. Municipal Bonds. Registered treasury notes or bonds of any of the other 49 United States, in addition to California, payable solely out of the revenues from a revenue -producing property owned, controlled, or operated by a state or by a department, board, agency or authority of any of the other 49 United States, in addition to California. Such securities must have ratings from at least two of three ratings as follows: "Aa3" by Moody's Investors Service, or "AA-" by Standard & Poor's, or "AA-" by FitchRatings; or as otherwise approved by the Commission. Registered general obligation treasury notes or bonds of any of the 50 United States. Such securities must have ratings from two of three ratings as follows: at least "A2" by Moody's Investors Service, or "A" by Standard & Poor's, or "A" by FitchRatings; or as otherwise approved by the Commission. Adjustable rate registered treasury notes or bonds of any of the 50 United States, including bonds payable solely out of the revenues from a revenue -producing property owned, controlled, or operated by a state or by a department, board, agency or authority of any of the other 49 United States, in addition to California. Such securities must have ratings from at least two of three ratings as follows: "P-1 " by Moody's Investors Service, or "A-1 +" by Standard & Poor's, or "F-1 +" by FitchRatings; or as otherwise approved by the Commission. Adjustable rate notes or bonds warrants, or other evidences of indebtedness of any local agency within the State of California with a minimum rating of either "P-1 " by Moody's Investors Revised May -1312, 20092010 25 Service, or "A-1 +" by Standard & Poor's, or "F-1 +" by FitchRatings, including bonds, notes, warrants, or other evidences of indebtedness payable solely out of the revenues from a revenue -producing property owned, controlled, or operated by either the local agency, a department, board, agency, or authority of the local agency, or of any local agency within this state. Taxable or tax-exempt bonds, notes, warrants, or other evidences of indebtedness of any local agency within the State of California with a minimum rating of either "Aa3" by Moody's Investors Service, or "AA-" by Standard & Poor's, or "AA-" by FitchRatings (the minimum rating shall apply to the local agency, irrespective of any credit enhancement), including bonds, notes, warrants, or other evidences of indebtedness payable solely out of the revenues from a revenue -producing property owned, controlled, or operated by either the local agency, a department, board, agency, or authority of the local agency, or of any local agency within this state. Investments in municipal bonds are further limited to 15% of surplus funds. D. Repurchase Agreements. Repurchase agreements are to be used solely as short-term investments not to exceed 30 days. The Commission may enter into repurchase agreements with primary government securities dealers rated "A" or better by two nationally recognized rating services. Counterparties should also have (i) a short-term credit rating of at least A-1 /P- 1; (ii) minimum assets and capital size of $25 billion in assets and $350 million in capital; Oil) five years of acceptable audited financial results; and (iv) a strong reputation among market participants. The following collateral restrictions will be observed: Only U.S. Treasury securities or Federal Agency securities, as described in V.1 A and B, will be acceptable collateral. All securities underlying repurchase agreements must be delivered to the Commission's custodian bank versus payment or be handled under a properly executed tri-party repurchase agreement. The total market value of all collateral for each repurchase agreement must equal or exceed 102 percent of the total dollar value of the money invested by the Commission for the term of the investment. For any repurchase agreement with a term of Revised May 4412, 20092010 • 26 • • more than one day, the value of the underlying securities must be reviewed on an on -going basis according to market conditions. Market value must be calculated each time there is a substitution of collateral. The Commission or its trustee shall have a perfected first security interest under the Uniform Commercial Code in all securities subject to repurchase agreement. The Commission shall have properly executed a PSA agreement with each counterparty with which it enters into repurchase agreements. E. U.S. Corporate Debt. Medium -term notes, defined as all corporate and depository institution securities with a maximum remaining maturity of five years or less, issued by corporations organized and operating within the United States or depository institutions licensed by the United States or any state and operating within the United States. Eligible investment shall be rated "AA" or better by one or more nationally recognized rating service. Investments in U.S. Corporate Debt are further limited to 3020% of surplus funds. F. Commercial Paper. Commercial paper rated in the highest category by one or more nationally recognized statistical rating organization (NRSRO). The entity that issues the commercial paper shall meet all of the following conditions in either paragraph (1) or paragraph (2): (1) The entity meets the following criteria: (A) Is organized and operating in the United States as a general corporation. (B) Has total assets in excess of five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000). (C) Has debt other than commercial paper, if any, that is rated "A" or higher by a NRSRO. (2) The entity meets the following criteria: (A) Is organized within the United States as a special purpose corporation, trust, or limited liability company. (B) Has program -wide credit enhancements, including, but not limited to, over collateralization, letters of credit, or surety bond. (C) Has commercial paper that is rated "A-1" or higher, or the equivalent, by a NRSRO. Purchases of eligible commercial paper may not exceed 270 days maturity nor represent more than 10 percent of the outstanding paper of an issuing corporation. Investments in commercial paper are limited to a maximum of 2430% of Revised May 1-312, 20092010 27 surplus funds. G. Banker's Acceptances. Banker's acceptances issued by domestic or foreign banks, which are eligible for purchase by the Federal Reserve System. Purchases of banker's acceptances may not exceed 180 days maturity. Eligible banker's acceptances are restricted to issuing financial institutions with short-term paper rated in the highest category by one or more nationally recognized rating service. Investments in banker's acceptances are further limited to 4O% of surplus funds with no more than 30% of surplus invested in the banker's acceptances of any one commercial bank. H. Money Market Mutual Funds. Shares of beneficial interest issued by diversified management companies that are money market funds registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. Sec. 80a-1, et seq.) and that invest solely in U.S. treasuries, obligations of the U.S. Treasury, and repurchase agreements relating to such treasury obligations. The Commission may invest in shares of beneficial interest issued by accompany shall have met either of the following criteria: (1) Attained the highest ranking or the highest letter and numerical rating provided by not less than two nationally recognized rating services. (2) Retained an investment adviser registered or exempt from registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission with not less than five years' experience managing money market mutual funds with assets under management in excess of five hundred million dollars ($ 500,000, 000) . The purchase price of shares of beneficial interest purchased pursuant to this subdivision shall not include any commission that the companies may charge. Investments in Money Market Mutual Funds are further limited to 20% of surplus funds. I. Riverside County Pooled Investment Fund VRCPIF"). The Commission may invest in the Riverside County Pooled Investment Fund. As on -going due diligence, the Chief Financial Officer shall obtain the information listed below: • A description of eligible investment securities and a written statement of investment policy. Revised May 1412, 20492010 • 28 • • • A description of the interest calculation, the frequency of interest distributions, and the treatment of gains and losses in the portfolio. • A description of how often the securities are priced, how the securities are safeguarded, and the audit arrangements. • A description of who may invest in the program, how often they may invest, and what size deposits and withdrawals are allowed. • A schedule for receiving statements and portfolio listings. • A fee schedule, and when and how fees are assessed. • The composition of the investment fund for each reporting period. J. State of California Local Agency Investment Fund ("LAIF"). The Commission may invest in LAIF. As on -going due diligence, the Chief Financial Officer shall obtain the information listed below: • A description of eligible investment securities and a written statement of investment policy. • A description of the interest calculation, the frequency of interest distributions, and the treatment of gains and losses in the portfolio. • A description of how often the securities are priced, how the securities are safeguarded, and the audit arrangements. • A description of who may invest in the program, how often they may invest, and what size deposits and withdrawals are allowed. • A schedule for receiving statements and portfolio listings. • A fee schedule, and when and how fees are assessed. • The composition of the investment fund for each reporting period. K. Certificates of Deposit. Negotiable Certificates of Deposit (NCD's): NCDs are money market instruments issued by a bank. They specify that a sum of money has been deposited, payable with interest to the bearer of the certificates on a certain date. NCDs are issued by nationally or state chartered bank or state or federal savings and loan association. All purchases must be from institutions rated by a nationally recognized rating organization, as designated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The maturity of Revised May -1-312, 20092010 29 NCDs shall not exceed 180 days to maturity, and purchases of NCDs shall not exceed fifteen percent (15%) of the Commission's investment portfolio. NCDs shall be evaluated in terms of the credit worthiness of the issuing institution, as these deposits are uninsured and uncollateralized promissory notes. FDIC -insured Certificates of Deposit: The principal amount of the investment must be federally insured through the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). No more than the prevailing FDIC insured coverage amount may be invested with any one deposit. Certificates of Deposit placed through the Certificate of Deposit Account Registry Service (CDARS) shall be considered fully insured, assuming that the total amount invested with any participating bank is limited to the prevailing FDIC insured coverage amount. Interest on the principal must be paid to the Commission at least annually. The placement of Certificates of Deposit with local banks that qualify in accordance with Government Code section 53601(h) is encouraged. The Commission, at its discretion, may invest a portion of its surplus funds in certificates of deposit at a commercial bank, savings bank, savings and loan association, or credit union using a private sector entity to assist in the placement of such certificates, provided that it complies with Government Code Section 53601.8. Such investments may not exceed in total twenty percent (20%) of the Commission's funds invested pursuant to Government Code Sections 53601.8, 53635.8 and 53601, and shall have a maximum maturity of one year from the date of the deposit. Collateralized Certificates of Deposit: For investments exceeding $100,000, there will be a waiver of collateral for the first $100,000 deposited and protected by FDIC insurance. The remainder of the deposit shall be fully collateralized by U.S. Treasury and Federal Agency securities having maturities less than five years. The District must receive written confirmation that these securities have been pledged in repayment of the time deposit. The securities pledged as collateral must have a current market value greater than the dollar amount of the deposit in keeping with the ratio requirements specified in Section 53652 of the Government Code. Additionally, a statement of the collateral shall be provided to the Commission on a monthly basis. Such investments may not exceed in total fifteen percent (15%) of the Commission's funds invested Revised May 1-312, 2001)2010 • 30 • pursuant to Government Code Sections 53601.8, 53635.8 and 53601, and shall have a maximum maturity of one year from the date of the deposit. L. Time Deposits. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insured money market savings accounts or time deposits which are deposited through depository institutions which are participants of the Money Market Insured Deposit Account Service ("MMIDAS"). 2. Eligible Investments for Bond Proceeds Bond proceeds shall be invested in securities permitted by the applicable bond documents. If the bond documents are silent as to permitted investments, bond proceeds will be invested in securities permitted by this Policy. With respect to maximum maturities, the Policy authorizes investing bond reserve fund proceeds beyond the five years if prudent in the opinion of the Chief Financial Officer. 3. Ineligible Investments As provided in California Government Code Section 53601.6, the Commission shall not invest any funds in inverse floaters, range notes, mortgage derived interest -only strips or in any security that could result in zero interest accrual if held to maturity. The purchase of any security not listed in Section VI.1 above, but permitted by the California Government Code, is prohibited unless the Board approves the investment either specifically or as a part of an investment program approved by the Board. VII. Maximum Maturities Maturities of investments will be selected to provide necessary liquidity, minimize interest rate risk, and maximize earnings. Current and expected yield curve analysis will be monitored and the portfolio will be invested accordingly. Because of inherent difficulties in accurately forecasting cash flow requirements, a portion of the portfolio should be continuously invested in readily available funds. Where this Policy does not specify a maximum remaining maturity at the time of the investment, no investment shall be made in any security, other Revised May 4412, 20692010 31 than a security underlying a repurchase or reverse repurchase agreement authorized by this section, that at the time of the investment has a term remaining to maturity in excess of five years, unless the Board has granted express authority to make that investment either specifically or as a part of an investment program approved by the Board no less than three months prior to the investment. VIII. Performance Standards The Chief Financial Officer shall continually monitor and evaluate the portfolio's performance. A comparison of the portfolio's performance against a performance benchmark shall be included in the Chief Financial Officer's quarterly report. The Chief Financial Officer shall select an appropriate, readily available market index to use as a performance benchmark. IX. Reporting The Chief Financial Officer shall prepare and provide to the Board and the Executive Director, within 30 days following the end of the quarter, a portfolio report, which includes the following information: • Type of investment • Name of issuer • Date of maturity • Date of purchase • Par value • Original purchase cost • Call date (if applicable! • Current market value of securities • Unrealized market value gain/loss • Coupon rate, if applicable • Yield to maturity • Credit quality, as determined by one or more nationally recognized credit rating services, of each investment • Average duration of portfolio • Listing of all investment transactions during the quarter • A statement that the portfolio complies with the investment policy, or the manner in which the portfolio is not in compliance • A statement denoting the ability of the Commission to meet its liquidity requirements for the next six months, or provide an explanation as to why sufficient money shall, or may not be, available. Revised May 4-312, 2 092010 • 32 • X. Investment Procedures The Chief Financial Officer, as the Board's designee, is responsible for ensuring compliance with the Commission's investment policies and establishing written procedures and internal controls for the operation of the investment program. No person may engage in investment transactions except as provided under the terms of this Policy and the written procedures established by the Chief Financial Officer. The written procedures should address: delegation of authority to subordinate staff members, control of collusion, separation of transaction authority from accounting and record keeping, written confirmations of transactions, reconciliation of custody statements, and wire transfer procedures and agreements. An independent analysis by an external auditor shall be conducted annually to review internal control, account activity, and compliance with policies and procedures. XI. Authorized Broker Dealers and Financial Institutions The Chief Financial Officer shall maintain a list of authorized broker/dealers and financial institutions which are approved for investment purposes. It shall be the Commission's policy to purchase securities only from those authorized institutions and firms. Separate lists shall be maintained for broker/dealers and financial institutions approved for repurchase agreements and those approved for the purchase of other securities. If an investment advisor is used, they may use their own list of approved broker/dealers and financial institutions for investment purposes. To be eligible, a firm must meet the following minimum criteria: (i) an institution licensed by the state as a broker -dealer, or from a member of a federally regulated securities exchange, from a national or state -chartered bank, from a federal or state association or from a brokerage firm designated as a primary government dealer by the Federal Reserve bank; and (ii) all broker/dealer firms and individuals must be properly registered with the NASD and/or SEC to transact business in the relevant geographic locations and product sectors. In addition, counterparties for Repurchase Agreements shall be limited to primary government securities dealers rated "A" or better by two nationally recognized rating services. Counterparties shall also have (i) a short-term credit rating of at least A-1/P-1; (ii) minimum assets and capital size of $25 billion in assets and $350 million in capital; (iii) five years of acceptable audited financial results; and (iv) a strong reputation among market participants. The Chief Financial Officer shall select broker/dealers and other financial institutions on the basis of the firm's expertise and credit worthiness. The Commission shall annually send a copy of the current investment policy to all Revised May -1312, 20092010 33 dealers approved to do business with the Commission. Each broker dealer or financial institution that has been authorized by the Commission shall be required to submit and annually update a Broker/Dealer Questionnaire which includes the firm's most recent financial statements. The Chief Financial Officer shall maintain a file for each firm approved for investment purposes, which includes the most recent Broker/Dealer Questionnaire. XII. Safekeeping and Custody To protect the Commission's assets, all securities owned by the Commission shall be held in safekeeping in the Commission's name by a third party bank trust department, acting as agent for the Commission under the terms of a custody agreement executed by the bank and the Commission. All securities will be received and delivered using standard delivery versus payment (DVP) procedures; the Commission's safekeeping agent will only release payment for a security after the security has been properly delivered. Physical delivery securities shall be avoided whenever possible, as book entry securities are much easier to transfer and account for since actual delivery of a document never takes place. In addition, delivered securities must be properly safeguarded. against loss or destruction. The potential for fraud and loss increases with physically delivered securities. XIII. Ethics and Conflicts of Interest The Commission adopts the following policy concerning conflicts of interest: 1. Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activity that could conflict with proper execution of the investment program or which could impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions. 2. 2. Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall disclose any material financial interest in any financial institution that conducts business with the Commission, and they shall further disclose any large personal financial/investment positions that could be related to the performance of the Commission's portfolio. 3. Officers shall refrain from undertaking personal investment transactions with the same individual with whom business is conducted on behalf of the Commission. Revised May 4412, 20(492010 • • 34 • XIV. Investment Policy Review The Chief Financial Officer shall annually render to the Board a statement of investment policy, which the Board must consider at a public meeting. Any changes to the policy shall also be considered by the Board at a public meeting. Revised May a312, 20092010 35 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: May 12, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Sales Tax Analysis BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 4 (Q4) 2009. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its December 2007 meeting, the Commission awarded an agreement to MuniServices, LLC (MuniServices) 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 findings that have been generated and submitted to the State Board of Equalization (SBOE) for review and determination of errors in sales tax reporting related to 125 businesses. Through Q4 2009 for October through December 2009, the SBOE has approved corrections for 76 of these accounts for a total sales tax revenue recovery of $696,382. If the SBOE concurs with the error(s) for the remaining claims, the Commission would receive additional revenues; however, the magnitude of the value of the remaining findings was not available. It is important to note that while the recoveries of additional revenues will be tangible, it will not be sufficient to alter the overall trend of sales tax revenues. Additionally, MuniServices has provided the Commission with the quarterly sales tax summary report for the fourth quarter of calendar 2009 for October through December. Most of the Q4 2009 Measure A sales taxes were received by the Commission in the first quarter of calendar 2010, during January through March due to a lag in the sales tax calendar. The summary section of the Q4 2010 report is included as an attachment to the staff report and includes an overview of California sales tax receipts, a performance review, a summary of the top 25 sales Agenda Item 8B 36 tax contributors, historical sales tax amounts, sales tax by business category, economic trends for a significant business category, and results. The following observations were noted in the Q4 2010 report: • The decline in sales tax revenues for Riverside County was less for Q3 2009 1-5.7%) compared to Q2 2009 (-16.6%), indicating a slowing in the economic decline in Riverside County as well as the state. The current sales tax level may likely be the new benchmark. • Over the last two-year period, the Q4 2009 sales tax levels were at or near the low points for all of the top 10 economic segments. • Over the last two-year period, the Q4 2009 sales tax levels for new auto sales, service stations, and building materials both retail and wholesale showed a significant variance from the high point, indicating that these segments continue to have been significantly affected by the slowdown in the economy and changes in gas prices. • Over the last two-year period, the high and low points related to sales tax levels in Riverside County for apparel stores have no significant differentiation. • Department stores, restaurants, and service stations continue to represent the three largest economic segments for Riverside County. • The transportation and construction economic categories have declined approximately 35.5% and 43.4%, respectively, in the benchmark year Q4 2009 compared to the benchmark year Q4 2007. Staff continues to monitor monthly sales tax receipts and other available economic data to determine the need for any additional adjustment to the revised revenue projections in FY 2009/10, as well as the final development for the budget for FY 2010/11. Staff will utilize the forecast scenarios included with the complete report and recent trends in such projections. Attachment: Sales Tax Analysis for Q4 2009 Agenda Item 8B • • • 37 District of Riverside Co RCTC Sales Tax Digest Summary FIRST Quarter Collection of FOURTH Quarter Sales Quarter 4, 2009 CALIFORNIA OVERVIEW Economic news from 4`h Quarter 2009 indicated a slowing in the economic decline. California hopes for the economy to stabilize during 2010, yet understands growth will come slowly. The current sales tax baseline is the new benchmark moving forward. Continued high unemployment, consumer uncertainty and housing problems continue to hold back growth and led to a statewide sales decline of —6.0% for the quarter compared to the same quarter a year ago. Northern California sales were down —6.6% for the quarter. Southern California sales were down —5.6% for the quarter. As for the District of Riverside Co Rctc, sales changed by -5.7%. General Retail Over the last year, retail consumers, led by the unemployed or underemployed, made a fundamental shift in the way they approach purchases. This new normal, lower level of consumer spending is not expected to change for a very long time. Retailers will need to change the way they deliver goods and in many cases will need to reduce inventories to accommodate reduced spending by consumers. Food Products Sales of Food Products continue to search for secure footing. Consumers are downgrading restaurant choices and more frequently cooking at home. Restaurants at all levels are lowering their price points with smaller meals or weekly specials. Grocery stores continue to experiment with various formats and price points with the larger chains reducing prices to compete with Wal-Mart and Target. Transportation Services Stations and New Auto Sales saw positive growth in the Transportation sector for 4`h Quarter 2009 compared to 4m Quarter 2008. Most of the growth is attributable to the extremely poor quarter the industry experienced last year. Construction Sales from construction activities will continue to seek for the market bottom. Banks continue to curb lending for residential housing and commercial construction. Continued economic uncertainty will lead home owners to delay home improvement purchases. Business to Business Businesses in the Business -to -Business sector continued to slide during 4th Quarter 2009. Business sales slowing, businesses closing and businesses leaving California to take advantage of more business- www.MuniServices.com (800) 800-8181 Page 1 38 District of Riverside Co RCTC friendly environments took a toll on the sector. Job losses and corresponding declines in productivity add hurdles to the Business -to -Business recovery. Net Cash Receipts Analysis Local Collections Share of County Pool 0.0% Share of State Pool 0.0% SBE Net Collections Less: Amount Due County 0.0% Less: Cost of Administration Net 4Q2009 Receipts Net 40.2008 Receipts Actual Percentage Change $30,332,347 0 0 30,332,347 .00 (365,500) 29,966,847 31,761,845 -5.7% Business Activity Performance Analysis Local Collections Less: Payments for Prior Periods Preliminary 4Q2009 Collections Projected 4Q2009 Late Payments Projected 4Q2009 Final Results Actual 4Q2008 Results Projected Percentage Change HISTORICAL CASH COLLECTIONS ANALYSIS BY QUARTER $30,332,347 (2,034,679) 28,297,668 1,013,515 29,311,183 31,705,010 -7.6% Net Receipts S40,000 S35,000 S 30,000 S25,000 $20,000 S 15,000 510,000 S5,000 S0 (in thoosa ods of S) FiTgli I i I 1 I i 1. 3Q 2007 4Q2007 1Q2008 2Q 2008 3Q 201)8 4Q 2008 102009 2Q 2009 3Q 2009 4Q2009 01♦Nes Reeeipb -41`SB O E A dm is Fees D ue S450 S400 S350 S300 S251) $200 6 9 4 5150 SIDO S50 SO www.MuniServices.com (800) 800-8181 39 Page 2 District of Riverside Co RCTC TOP 25 SALES/USE TAX CONTRIBUTORS The following list identifies Riverside Co RCTC's Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors. The list is in alphabetical order and represents the year ended 4th Quarter 2009. The Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors generate 23.8% of Riverside Co RCTC's total sales and use tax revenue. ALBERTSON'S FOOD CENTERS BEST BUY STORES CHEVRON SERVICE STATIONS CIRCLE K FOOD STORES COSTCO WHOLESALE DEPT OF MOTOR VEHICLES HOME DEPOT J C PENNEY COMPANY JACK IN THE BOX RESTAURANTS K MART STORES KOHL'S DEPARTMENT STORES LOWE'S HOME IMPROVEMENT MACY'S DEPARTMENT STORE MOBIL SERVICE STATIONS RALPH'S GROCERY COMPANY RITE AID DRUG STORES ROSS STORES SAM'S CLUB SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY SHELL SERVICE STATIONS STATER BROS MARKETS TARGET STORES VERIZON WIRELESS WAL MART STORES WALGREEN'S DRUG STORES HISTORICAL SALES TAX AMOUNTS The following chart shows the sales tax level for the year ended 4w Quarter 2009, the highs, and the lows for each segment over the last two years. S20,000 S 18,000 S 16,000 S 14,000 S12,000 S10,000 — S8,000 S6,000 S4,000 S2,000 - SO �S o� 4`S♦ `fie (in thousands ofS) i 04Q2009j 4.11 tgY i aoLow ♦9 09 4`.4.9, � .ce e{'4. S S¢ 4 Y yp ' *„ J Ao♦` c°Os `b4° has 4 + �A eoa C�` r�lo ° 4 $♦ate <fr �QQ www.MuniServices.com (800) 800-8181 40 Page 3 District of Riverside Co RCTC ANNUAL SALES TAX BY BUSINESS CATEGORY (in Ihe119end39f 5) 1 I ' I 4Q 2009 3Q 2009 1Q2009 4Q 2008 3Q 2008 1Q2008 iQ 2008 4Q 2807 3Q 21107..: 29,5.35 tP `�•:'t h"Y.,'�N ] I t - 25,165 ,, F t ^. . .- al330 I'l L:• _:,• 33,206 .. o rt- 3`re- '$4 t __ 36,329 - �ti 37.500- 'u.,i' -4 '. - � tiv'`. � Ja.,538 ^i�' -'. �:] j ;1;; 39,838 7'.`n _. ' _JL ' ^; phi ;.' � 39.814 a.:: .,� �.;-. _ ..? 50 520,000 540,060 560,000 S80,000 5100,000 8120,000 5140,000 516(1,000 5180,000 I®0 I R<tail ®P cad Prwdeels EMT enaspsrintion ®C ea "ruction DB wetness To fleshiest M93 iseellenewus FIVE-YEAR ECONOMIC TREND: General Retail I S14,000 I 512,000 1 510,000 I 58,000 56,000 - 54,000 - 52,000 50 - (in thousands of 5) " 1 rn "Tr! ni Hi I HllIllIl 1111 Ili9! E E E E § i a a a a a i www.MuniServices.com (800) 800-8181 41 Page 4 District of Riverside Co RCTC 3rd QUARTER 2009 FINAL RESULTS Local Net Cash Collections Less: Pool Amounts Less: Prior Quarter Payments Add: Late Payments Local Net Economic Collections after Adjustments Percent Change from 3'" Quarter 2008 MUNISERVICES' ON -GOING AUDIT RESULTS This Quarter $71,450 Total to Date $598,746 $27,050,242 ($-365,500) ($2,117,150) $1,725,596 $27,024,188 DOWN BY 16.3% www.MuniServices.com (800) 800-8181 42 Page 5 RCTC Conflict of Interest Form Purpose: This form is provided to assist members of the RCTC Commissioners in meeting requirements of and 87100 in documenting conflict of interests as related to RCTC RCTC Commission may be required to disclose and disqualify influencing, or voting on an agenda item due to personal income, real business positions, or receipt of campaign contributions. If applicable, the following information, for entry into the public record, prior to item(s) and turn in the completed form to the Clerk of the Board An RCTC member may not participate in any discussion or action if a campaign contribution of more than $250 is received in the past the conclusion from any entity or individual. Government Code Section 84308 Commission/Committee agenda items. Instructions: Under certain circumstances, themselves from participating in, property interests, investments, Commissioners must personally state consideration of the involved agenda prior to leaving the meeting. concerning a contract or amendment 12 months or 3 months following I. Board Member Information Boarg4 Member Name City/County Name Melting Date R l J 6-0 2---v-L1 5 I r2— ( 7t 0 1-1-"" II. Campaign Contributions 1. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution and therefore I am abstaining from participation 2. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution and therefore I am abstaining from participation 3. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution and therefore I am abstaining from participation 4. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution and therefore I am abstaining from participation of over $250 from ��/E::de,4.4'e... its,o ?':‘.." , dentify the name of the company and/or Individual) on Agenda item�,Subject: . of over $250 from , (Identify the name of the company and/or Individual) on Agenda item , Subject: . of over $250 from (Identify the name of the company and/or Individual) on Agenda item , Subject: . of over $250 from , (Identify the name of the company and/or Individual) on Agenda item , Subject: . III. Financial Interest 1. I have a financial interest of , from/in (State income, and therefore I am abstaining from participation 2. I have a financial interest of real property interest, investment or business position/ (Identify name of company or property location) on Agenda Item , Subject: , from/in (State income, and therefore I am abstaining from participation real property interest, investment or business position) (Identify name of company or property location) on Agenda Item , Subject: IV. Signature Board Member Signature: _,if Date: (� �� Please remember you must state the . ormation into the public record prior to consideration of the involved agenda turn in the completed form to the Clerk of the Board prior to leaving the meeting. item(s) and • • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: May 12, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM Budget and Implementation Committee Greg Moore, Procurement and Assets Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Recurring Contracts for Fiscal Year 2010/11 BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the recurring contracts for FY 2010/11. BACKGROUND INFORMATION. Thirteen years ago, the Commission evaluated all recurring contracts for selected mission critical professional services, in order to determine whether to hold a competitive process to renew each agreement. As a result of that review, most of the contracts were rebid. For the limited number of contracts that were not rebid, however, the Commission required those recurring contracts be approved at the beginning of each fiscal year. All other contracts for professional services are rebid on a periodic basis ranging from three to five years, depending on the nature and type of service. This year's list of recurring contracts includes consultants that are providing unique or specialized services and working closely with Commission staff on long term projects. Staff desires to retain a limited number of consultants on the recurring contracts list because of their historical knowledge, unique experience and understanding of the Commission, and specific Commission projects. Under limited circumstances, staff believes it is more efficient and cost effective to retain the consultants on the recurring contracts list rather than rebidding the services at this particular time. Approval of the recurring contracts list will allow the Commission to continue work on existing projects without interruptions and maintain consistency. Agenda Item 8C 43 Due to the current economic climate, staff requested that each firm on the recurring contracts list review its current pricing terms and work plan and reduce its proposed FY 2010/11 rates/fees. As a result of staff negotiations, the proposed FY 2010/11 rates/fees have been reduced to reflect the current market rate for the same services and/or level of work plan required. The Commission will realize significant savings due to a reduction in consultant billable rates or other contract revisions. In one case, staff was able to negotiate a 20% reduction in billable rates. Below is the list of proposed recurring contracts for FY 2010/11, followed by a summary for each consultant supporting its inclusion on the recurring contracts list: Schedule of Recurring Contracts for FY 2010/11 Consultant Name Description of Services Budget FY 09/10 Budget FY 10/11 Dollar Change Percent Change AMMA Transit Planning Consultant support for administration of Specialized Transit Program under Measure A and federal programs $ 100,000 $ 96,000 $ (4,000) (4%) Bechtel Infrastructure Program Management Services 5,316,100 4,861,000 (455,100) (9%) Best, Best & Krieger LLP General Legal Services 1,845,500 1,760,000 (85,500) (5%) Case Systems Inc. Call Box Maintenance 310,000 250,000 (60,000) ° (19/0) Fieldman Rolapp & Associates Financial Advisory Services 240,000 180,000 (60,000) (25%) Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP Bond Counsel Services 265,000 190,000 (75,000) (28%) Rahimian Management and Consulting, Inc. Project Management Services 150,000 50,000 (100,000) (67%) San Bernardino Associated Governments Call Answering Center Services for Riverside County Call Boxes 33,000 40,400 7,400 22% Schiermeyer Consulting Services Rail Consulting Services 185,000 150,000 (35,000) (19%) Total $8,444,600 $7,577,400 $(867,200) (10%) Agenda Item 8C • 44 • AMMA Transit Planning As a result of a request for proposal (RFP) process completed in February 2007, AMMA Transit Planning (AMMA) was selected to provide consulting services for the development and implementation of the Coordinated Public Transit -Human Services Transportation Plan (Coordinated Plan), as well as the nexus of the Coordinated Plan to the receipt of federal Jobs Access Reverse Commute and New Freedom grant funds. AMMA also advises staff regarding the implementation of operator reporting for the current Specialized Transit Universal Call for Projects and is assisting in the development of the application and eligibility guidelines for the Specialized Transit Universal Call for Projects pertaining to the next two-year funding cycle. Bechtel Infrastructure The Bechtel Infrastructure (Bechtel) contract for FY 2010/11 reflects a 9% decrease although the staffing level will remain the same. This is the result of a 6.5% reduction of the overhead rate associated with a corporate restructuring and cost cutting efforts. Bechtel is continuing program management activities of highway and rail projects for the 2009 Measure A program, as well as the wrap-up of delivery of the remaining 1989 Measure A program. Bechtel possesses the knowledge and background history of the Commission's capital projects, which is necessary to deliver the Commission's Measure A projects. The flexibility of obtaining additional support from Bechtel as needed for specific project requirements is also important and avoids the need to increase Commission staff. Best, Best & Krieger LLP The Best, Best & Krieger LLP (BB&K) contract for FY 2010/11 reflects a decrease of 5%, which is primarily attributable to a reduction in the anticipated level of continuing general legal services required for capital project activities related to highways and commuter rail under the 1989 and 2009 Measure A programs. In recent years, the Commission has engaged other .legal firms for specific matters involving potential conflicts of interest as well as specialized legal services. Case Systems Inc. Case Systems Inc. (formerly Comarco Wireless Technologies) provides for routine corrective and preventive maintenance of call boxes, including knockdowns and vandalism. Case Systems, Inc. was selected as a result of a competitive procurement in 2001, in which it was the only responsive bidder, and has provided these services since the inception of the call box program. An RFP process is not anticipated upon contract expiration on June 30, 2010, but will be conducted prior to contract expiration in June 2011. Agenda Item 8C 45 Fieldman Rolapp & Associates Fieldman Rolapp & Associates (Fieldman) was selected as the Commission's financial advisor in late 2003, following an RFP process, and has provided financial advisory services on general finance matters and specific financing transactions related to the 2009 Measure A program. Fieldman is currently involved in the planning for the toll financing activities, a bond issuance in 2010, and the potential increase in the Measure A debt limit. Based on current financing activities as well as Fieldman's knowledge and understanding of the Commission, staff believes it would be more efficient and cost-effective for continuity purposes to retain Fieldman through December 2011. Staff intends to solicit new proposals for financial advisory services following the conclusion of the anticipated financing transactions. Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP (Orrick) was selected as bond counsel in late 2004, following an RFP process, and has provided bond counsel services in connection with the financings and other matters related to the 2009 Measure A program. Based on Orrick's understanding of the Commission's 2009 Measure A program and its experience with other transportation agencies, especially self-help counties, staff believes that it would be more efficient and cost-effective to continue to retain Orrick through December 2011, in order to complete the proposed sales tax and toll financings. Staff intends to solicit proposals for bond counsel services following these transactions. Rahimian Management and Consulting, Inc. Rahimian Management and Consulting, Inc. (RMC) provides project management services for the Irvine -Corona Expressway project feasibility work. RMC has supported both the Orange County Transportation Authority and the Commission on this work effort, and the contract has been jointly funded by each agency. The feasibility report has been completed; however, the two agencies are considering a public private partnership workshop to gauge private industry interest in the project as well as continued coordination with the USDA Forest Service on water monitoring. RMC will assist in the planning, development, and implementation of this workshop and continue coordination with the USDA Forest Service. The execution of a contract with RMC is contingent upon a determination by the Commission in the next few months as to the continuation of work on the ICE project. Agenda Item 8C • 46 • San Bernardino Associated Governments In February 2002, the San Bernardino Associated Governments' (SANBAG) Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE), and the Commission's SAFE began to jointly operate a private call answering center through a SANBAG contract with Professional Communications Network (PCN) that was procured on a competitive basis. It has provided an outstanding level of service for both agencies. The $7,500 increase over the prior year contract amount reflects additional funds for one-time projects, as well as funding to replace antiquated computer equipment. The total SANBAG contract amount with PCN is $105,000; the Commission will reimburse SANBAG approximately 38% of the costs. Schiermeyer Consulting Services Schiermeyer Consulting Services (Schiermeyer) has provided valuable consulting services for the Commission's rail program since 1992. Schiermeyer has been directly involved in all rail service and station planning efforts including the initial development of the Perris Valley Line. Current projects include analysis of the impacts of current Metrolink routes in light of budget -required service reductions, support and development of Coachella Valley rail service, and support of the high speed rail project. Schiermeyer has the unique experience to support the rail program that cannot be easily found with other firms. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2010/11 Amount: $7,577,400 Source of Funds: Measure A, TDA, TUMF, FSP, SAFE Fees, Interest, and Other Reimbursements Budget Adjustment: No GLA No.: Various Fiscal Procedures Approved: \ ;,0 Date: 04/15/10 Agenda Item 8C 47 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: May 12, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program Funding Agreement with Western Riverside Council of Governments for State Route 74/Interstate 215 Interchange Improvement Project for Construction and Right of Way WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-31-090-00 with Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) for $8.8 million in Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Central Zone funding for the construction phase of the 74/215 interchange improvement project; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; 3) Approve Agreement No. 05-31-566-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 05-31-566-00, with WRCOG to increase the right of way phase by $1.8 million to be funded with $900,000 of TUMF Central Zone funds and $900,000 of Measure A funds to address a cost increase; 4) Approve Agreement No. 10-31-092-00 with Southern California Edison (SCE) for the relocation and removal of utility poles and attached equipment; 5) Approve Agreement No. 10-31-093-00 with Time Warner Cable (TWC) for the relocation and removal of utility poles and attached equipment; and 6) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. Agenda Item 8D 48 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The 74/215 interchange improvement project is ready to go to construction and the award of the construction contract is covered in a separate item. This is an important project as it is the final phase of improving SR-74 from 1-15 to 1-215 identified in the original 1989 Measure A program. This item is to execute the agreements needed for the TUMF funding that has been obligated by WRCOG for this project and associated utility agreements. Construction Phase Last year, WRCOG reserved $9.7 million of the original $14 million of TUMF Central Zone funds slated for the 74/215 interchange project. The decrease of available funds was a result of decreased TUMF revenues available in the Central Zone. The city of Perris adopted a resolution to contribute an additional $4 million to make up the difference and maintain the project's delivery schedule. Subsequently, the Commission allocated $16.1 million of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds to this project. The total cost of the construction phase, including construction management and contingencies, is $23.479 million. Due to the low bid and determination of federally eligible contract items, the funding summary is proposed as follows: Fund Source Amount (000's) ARRA (federal) $ 13,870 Surface Transportation Program (federal) 89 DEMO (federal) 720 TUMF (local) 8,800 Total Construction $ 23,479 Staff is currently working with Caltrans to determine if additional construction items can be funded with ARRA. If so, it would result in savings to TUMF funds. However, staff is requesting that the Commission approve Agreement No. 10-31-090-00 with WRCOG, in order to receive TUMF Central Zone funds so that the award of the project can take place at the May 12, 2010 Commission meeting. Since federal funds are being maximized on the project, the TUMF share is less than originally expected and below the 50% share of the earlier phases of work. Additionally, the $4 million fund contribution by the city of Perris is not included in the funding plan as a result of cost savings due to the low bid environment. Agenda item 8D • 49 • • • Right of Way Phase The Commission and WRCOG have an agreement in place for the pre -construction phases (engineering, design, and right of way) of the 74/215 interchange, which provides TUMF Central Zone and Measure A funds on a 50-50 basis. The latest estimate to complete the right of way phase shows an increase in the cost from $2.5 million to $4.3 million. The TUMF and Measure A shares increased from $1.25 million to $2.15 million. In order to fund the additional $1.8 million increase, staff proposes to maintain the 50-50 funding participation and increase the TUMF and Measure A amounts by $900,000 each. Therefore, staff recommends that the $900,000 in TUMF funds be moved from the $9.7 million originally planned for construction as follows: Proposed TUMF Funding $ (000's) Construction Phase $ 8,800 Right of Way Phase $ 900 Total $ 9,700 Staff is requesting that the Commission approve Agreement No. 05-31-566-02 to increase the TUMF and Measure A funds by $900,000 for a total of $4.3 million for the right of way phase. The TUMF administrative plan allows amendments to be executed by the Executive Director for actions that do not affect the total amount planned for the project. Utility Agreements The project will also require utility agreements with SCE and TWC for the relocation and removal of utility poles and attached equipment. The estimated cost for this work is approximately $83,000. This cost will be paid with TUMF funds should the Commission approve additional right of way funds previously mentioned in this item. This agenda item seeks to authorize the Executive Director to enter into agreements with SCE and TWC to remove and relocate the poles and attached equipment. Agenda Item 8D 50 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Yes N/A Year: FY 2009/10 FY 2010/11 FY 2011/12 + Amount: $ 1,090,900 $ 3,300,000 $ 5,309,100 Source of Funds: TUMF Central Zone Budget Adjustment: No No N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 003015 416 41607 0000 222 31 42110 Fiscal Procedures Approved: t44,440,1to. Date: 04/20/10 Agenda Item 8D • 51 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 12, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Min Saysay, Right of Way Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreements with Qualified Contractors to Provide On -Call Right of Way Appraisal Services for Residential, Commercial, Industrial, and Agricultural Properties WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award the following agreements to provide on -call right of way appraisal services for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreements, in an amount not to exceed an aggregate value of $950,000; a) Agreement No. 10-51-048-00 with Lidgard and Associates; b) Agreement No. 10-51-064-00 with Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers & Consultants; c) Agreement No. 10-51-065-00 with Donahue Hawran & Malm LLC; d1 Agreement No. 10-51-066-00 with R.P. Laurain & Associates; e) Agreement No. 10-51-067-00 with Riggs & Riggs, Inc.; f) Agreement No. 10-51-068-00 with Hennessey & Hennessey LLC; and g) Agreement No. 10-51-069-00 with Robert Shea Perdue Real Estate Appraisal; 2) Authorize the Executive Director to execute task orders awarded to contractors under the terms of the agreements; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, including option years, on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Federal and state regulations require that before the initiation of negotiations with property owners, the public agency shall establish an amount that it believes is just compensation for the real property. The amount shall not be less than the approved appraisal of the fair market value of the property, taking into account the value of allowable damages or benefits to any remaining property. In order to comply with regulations, the Commission can either hire staff appraisers or establish a list of on -call appraisers. Staff recommends the latter. Agenda Item 8E 52 Procurement Process Staff determined the weighted factor method of source selection to be the most appropriate for this procurement, as it allows the Commission to identify the most advantageous proposal with price and other factors considered. Non -price factors include elements such as experience, qualifications of firms and personnel, and the ability to respond to the requirements set forth under the terms of Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 10-51-048-00. RFP No. 10-51-048-00 was released by staff and advertised on December 23, 2009. Staff responded to all requests for clarifications submitted by potential proposers prior to the January 26, 2010, deadline date. Fifteen firms — BTI Appraisal, Donahue Hawran & Malm LLC, Hennessey & Hennessey LLC, Keith Settle & Company Inc., Lidgard & Associates, Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants, Overland Pacific & Cutler Inc., Reinhart-Fontes Associates Inc., Riggs & Riggs Inc., Robert Shea Perdue Real Estate Appraisal, R.P. Laurain & Associates, Smothers Appraisal, Valentine Appraisal & Associates, Villegas Appraisal Company, and Warren H. Neville — submitted proposals prior to the stated deadline. Fourteen of the fifteen firms submitted responsive and responsible proposals. One firm was omitted from the competitive process for submitting a non -responsive proposal. The remaining firms' proposals were evaluated and scored, based upon the evaluation criteria set forth in the RFP, by an evaluation committee comprised of Commission staff and a representative from Caltrans. The evaluation process was used to analyze the relative qualifications of each firm according to the stated criteria and, based on that information, the evaluation committee made its selection decision to recommend an award to six firms, based upon the anticipated workload during the course the contract term. Four of the firms that were not selected for award subsequently submitted a protest of the award recommendation, and staff reviewed the merits of each firm's claim. Staff review determined that only one of the protesting firms, Robert Shea Perdue Real Estate Appraisal, earned an evaluation score that merited reconsideration, scoring highest among the firms not originally considered for award. So, in the interest of providing a broader pool of expertise, and in accordance with the RFP, staff upheld the protest as to Robert Shea Perdue Real Estate Appraisal, but rejected the remaining firms' protest. The RFP limited the on -call bench to "six to seven firms" and therefore, the recommendation for award is to seven firms, which are listed in ranked order as follows: Lidgard & Associates, Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants, Donahue Hawran & Malm LLC, R.P. Laurain & Associates, Riggs & Riggs, Inc., Hennessey & Hennessey LLC, and Robert Shea Perdue Real Estate Appraisal. Agenda Item 8E • 53 • Committee Recommendation and Direction Cost/Price Analysis At its February 22 meeting, the Western Riverside County Projects and Programs Committee directed staff to re-examine the potential costs, fees and charges for this and a number of other items involving procurement for a ,reduction in the overall cost of the contract. The Committee's direction was based on the economic climate and challenges currently faced in Riverside County, which has led to employment losses, salary reductions, significantly lower and more competitive bids on construction projects. The purpose of this particular procurement is to provide the Commission with considerable flexibility in working with a variety of appraisers with different areas of expertise and knowledge. Establishing a "bench" of contractors also enables the Commission to react quickly, which will likely be necessary in readying future projects for construction. As a result, some of the cost proposals are based on job task basis where others are based on an hourly rate proposal. It will be the responsibility of the Commission's Right of Way Manager to select the proper contractor for the particular job and to do so in a cost-effective manner while ensuring that applicable state and federal procurement rules are being followed. Adequate management and cost control will be a priority in ensuring the overall value of all the contracts and will be kept under the not to exceed amount. The respective proposers' rates are considered fair and reasonable based upon adequate price competition in an open marketplace in which proposals from eight firms were rejected. Staff is confident that the identified firms will provide the Commission with an excellent level of quality at the best possible price. Work will be awarded to the firms on a rotating basis. The total not to exceed amount for all six agreements for a three-year term of performance, and two one-year options, is $950,000. Agenda Item SE 54 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2009/10 Amount: $115,000 N/A FY 2010/1 1 + 835,000 Source of Funds: Measure A Lease Revenues Budget Adjustment: No 105 51 81401 $ 70,000 105 52 81401 25,000 003001 81403 00062 0000 222 31 81401 45,000 GL/Project Accounting No.: 003005 81403 00062 0000 222 31 81401 330,000 003009 81403 00062 0000 222 31 81401 95,000 003023 81403 00062 0000 262 31 81401 145,000 003823 81403 00062 0000 221 33 81401 190,000 005123 81403 00062 0000 210 73 81401 50,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \141,4,4aijavz Date: 04/19/10 Agenda Item 8E 55 Procurement Process Staff determined the weighted factor method of source selection to be the most appropriate for this procurement, as it allows the Commission to identify the most advantageous proposal with price and other factors considered. Non -price factors include elements such as experience, qualifications of firms and personnel, and their ability to respond to the requirements set forth under the terms of Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 10-51-051-00. RFP No. 10-51-051-00 was released by staff and advertised on December 23, 2009. Staff responded to all requests for clarifications submitted by potential proposers prior to the January 26, 2010, deadline date. Six firms — Donahue Hawran & Malm LLC, First Service PGP Valuation, Hennessey & Hennessey LLC, Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants, Overland Pacific & Cutler Inc., and R.P. Laurain & Associates, submitted proposals prior to the stated deadline. Each of the six firms submitted responsive and responsible proposals. Accordingly, the firms' proposals were evaluated and scored, based upon the evaluation criteria set forth in the RFP, by an evaluation committee comprised of Commission staff and a representative from Caltrans. The evaluation process was used to analyze the qualities of each submitted proposal according to the stated criteria and, based on that information, the evaluation committee made its selection decision. First Service PGP Valuation was eliminated from the list of awardees based on its total evaluation score relative to the other proposers. The remaining firms are listed in ranking order, as follows: Donahue Hawran & Malm LLC, R.P. Laurain & Associates, Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants, Hennessey & Hennessey LLC, and Overland Pacific & Cutler Inc. Committee Recommendation and Direction Cost/Price Analysis At its February 22 meeting, the Western Riverside County Projects and Programs Committee directed staff to re-examine the potential costs, fees and charges for this and a number of other items involving procurement for a reduction in the overall cost of the contract. The Committee's direction was based on the economic climate and challenges currently faced in Riverside County, which has led to employment losses, salary reductions, significantly lower and more competitive bids on construction projects. The purpose of this particular procurement is to provide the Commission with considerable flexibility in working with a variety of appraisers with different areas of expertise and knowledge. Establishing a "bench" of contractors also enables the Agenda Item 8F 57 • Commission to react quickly, which will likely be necessary in readying future projects for construction. As a result, some of the cost proposals are based on job task basis where others are based on an hourly rate proposal. It will be the responsibility of the Commission's Right of Way Manager to select the proper contractor for the particular job and to do so in a cost-effective manner while ensuring that applicable state and federal procurement rules are being followed. Adequate management and cost control will be a priority in ensuring the overall value of all the contracts and will be kept under the not to exceed amount. The respective proposers' rates are considered fair and reasonable based upon adequate price competition. Staff is confident that the identified firms will provide the Commission with an excellent level of quality at the best possible price. Work will be awarded to the firms on a rotating basis. The total not to exceed amount for all five agreements for a three-year term of performance, and two one-year options, is $500,000. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2009/10 FY 2010/11 + Amount: $ 60,000 $ 440,000 Source of Funds: Measure A Lease Revenues Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 105 51 81401 $ 37,500 105 52 81401 12,500 003001 81403 00062 0000 222 31 81401 25,000 003005 81403 00062 0000 222 31 81401 175,000 003009 81403 00062 0000 222 31 81401 50,000 003023 81403 00062 0000 262 31 81401 75,000 003823 81403 00062 0000 221 33 81401 100,000 005123 81403 00062 0000 210 73 81401 25,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \1464,40.1b7.041 Date: 04/19/10 Agenda Item 8F 58 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 12, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Gina Gallagher, Senior Staff Analyst Min Saysay, Right of Way Manager Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement for Utility Relocation for the State Route 60/Interstate 215 East Junction High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes Connector WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-31-094-00 with AT&T for utility relocation for the 60/215 East Junction interchange project once the design and replacement location are finalized; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In June 2006, a cooperative agreement between Caltrans and the Commission authorized the Commission to identify and locate, protect, relocate, or remove any utilities that conflicted with the Project construction. The Project will require a utility agreement with AT&T to relocate an underground fiber optic line that conflicts with the Project. As a part of establishing liability for the cost of the utility relocation, a prior rights check is performed by the utility owner and verified by the Commission's utility coordinator. The relocation of the fiber optic line is scheduled to be completed prior to start of construction. As these facilities are located within an easement, the Project is responsible for 100% of the expense. The estimated cost for this work is $150,000 and the Commission previously approved right of way funding at its September 2007 Commission meeting. Staff is recommending the Commission authorize the Executive Director to execute the utility agreement on behalf of the Commission. Agenda Item 8G 59 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Yes Year: FY 2009/10 FY 2010/11 Amount: $150,000 $75,000 Source of Funds: STP/1989 Measure A Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 003017 81401 00068 0000 222 31 81401 $150,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: ,4, Date: 04/19/2010 Agenda Item 8G • 60 In order to fully integrate the transit center with the rail station, the project team has coordinated an effort to update the paint colors and repaint the entire structure to have a consistent look. The new color scheme has been coordinated and approved by the city of Corona, RTA, and Commission staff. The colors will change the existing yellow color to a softer granite gray and the existing shade of blue to a military blue. The Commission, as part of the station rehabilitation plan, was already developing a station repainting program and planned on repainting the bridge within the next year. The station rehabilitation plan has developed a new set of painting specifications to be used at the stations and these will be applied to this project. Staff recommends approval of the right of entry and reimbursement agreement with RTA for the repainting of the North Main Corona pedestrian bridge. This agreement identifies the terms and allows the current RTA construction contractors on site to oversee the repainting of the Commission -owned bridge and structures. It also clarifies the insurance requirements and procedures that need to be followed for safely painting the structure including extensive coordination with BNSF. In addition, the Commission will agree to reimburse RTA for the actual costs of repainting the bridge for a not to exceed amount of $175,000. The price for the bridge painting was determined using all appropriate FTA and agency procurement guidelines. Competitive quotes were used by RTA to reaffirm the fairness of the price for its contractor to perform the work. The funding for this project will come from previously received Commuter Rail Proposition 1 B funds. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Yes Year: FY 2010/11 Amount: $175,000 Source of Funds: Proposition 1 B Budget Adjustment: No No GL/Project Accounting No.: 221 33 81301 4011 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \141.1,1,4,,,v, Date: 04/19/10 Attachment: Draft Agreement 10-25-091-00 Agenda Item 8H • 62 • Agreement No. 10-25-091-00 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION RIGHT OF ENTRY AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY This Right of Entry and Reimbursement Agreement ("Agreement") is entered in this _ day of , 2010 by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, a public entity within the State of California ("Commission") and the RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY, a joint powers agency organized under the laws of the State of California ("Agency"). Commission and Agency are sometimes individually referred to as "Party" and collectively as "Parties". RECITALS WHEREAS, the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company ("BNSF") owns and operates the San Bernardino Subdivision rail line and rail corridor in the City or Corona, County of Riverside, State of California; and WHEREAS, BNSF and Commission have entered into that certain Agreement for Passenger Station and Pedestrian Overhead Crossing Improvements dated as of April 10, 2001 ("RCTCBNSF Agreement"), which provided for the construction of the improvements described therein, as well as a license for the Pedestrian Overhead Crossing Improvements; and WHEREAS, the Passenger Station constructed pursuant to the RCTCBNSF Agreement is commonly referred to as the "North Main Corona Station" and includes those certain property improvements owned and maintained by Commission commonly referred to as the "Pedestrian Bridge and Tower" and "Restroom Building," as shown on the attached Exhibit "A'; WHEREAS, Agency is constructing the "Corona Transit Station" in the same City of Corona adjacent to the North Main Corona Station; WHEREAS, in conjunction with completing the Corona Transit Station, Agency desires to obtain Commission's permission to enter onto a portion of the North Main Corona Station property, on a temporary basis, to paint the Pedestrian Bridge and Tower, and the Restroom Building (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Parties wish to enter into this Agreement whereby Commission shall allow Agency and its agents, employees, and sub -contractors to enter the Property, on a temporary basis, for the purpose of painting the Pedestrian Bridge and Tower, and the Restroom Building (collectively, the "Project"), as more particularly described in Exhibits "B", "C", and "D" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, Commission desires to reimburse Agency for costs associated with the Project; and 1 63 WHEREAS, the Parties wish to enter into this Agreement whereby Commission shall reimburse Agency for costs associated with the Project, of which a good faith proposal and estimate of expected costs is attached as Exhibit "D" and incorporated herein by reference. NOW, THEREFORE, Commission and Agency do hereby agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. Right of Entry. Commission hereby grants to Agency and its agents, employees, and contractors a temporary right to enter onto those portions of the Property and, specifically, to enter into and onto the improvements commonly referred to as the Pedestrian Bridge and Tower, and the Restroom Building, as necessary for the sole purpose of performing the Project. Agency shall be permitted to enter onto and use any portion of the Property reasonably necessary to access and perform the Project, under the limitations expressed in this Agreement. 2. Additional Approval from BNSF. Notwithstanding the right of entry granted in Section 1 above, prior to entering onto the Property to complete any work as specified hereunder, Agency shall also obtain any necessary approvals from and/or enter into any additional agreement required by BNSF. 3. Performance of Project. A. The Project shall be performed in such a manner so that it shall not unreasonably interfere with or be a source of danger to tracks, roadbeds, or other property of Commission, or use of the Property, generally. The Project shall also be performed in such a manner so that it shall not unreasonably interfere with or be a source of danger to persons present on the Property, or the safe operation of the railroad, trains or other activities on or adjacent to the Property. Agency shall obtain prior written approval from Commission and BNSF for any performance of the Project that may interfere with rail traffic or other uses on the Property beyond the scope and intent of this Agreement. B. Agency shall ensure that the Project is performed in a skillful and competent manner, consistent with the standards employed by professionals in the State of California in the same discipline as the professionals performing Project. Agency represents and maintains that any contractor performing the Project will be skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the Project, and will have all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Project. Agency shall perform or shall cause to be performed, at no cost to Commission, any work or services necessary to correct errors or omissions which are caused by the failure of Agency or Agency's contractor to comply with the standard of care provided for herein. 4. Commission Representative. Commission may require that a representative of Commission be present during some or all of the performance of the Project. If Commission's representative determines that the performance of Project is not being accomplished in accordance with this Agreement, he or she may, but shall not be required 2 • 64 • to, halt the work. Notwithstanding the presence of Commission's representative, Agency shall, at all times, retain full liability and responsibility for all aspects of the performance of Project. 5. Proiect Specifications. A. Technical Provisions. Agency shall perform Project in conformity with the paint and performance specifications of "TECHNICAL PROVISIONS — MAINTENANCE REPAINTING OF METROLINK STATIONS," as more particularly described in Exhibit "C" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. B. Notification. Agency shall notify both Commission's Property Agent George Salas at 951-453-5037, and BNSF Railway Company's Roadmaster Greg Rousseau 909-553-1736, at least five (5) days prior to commencing performance of Project. C. Roll and Brush Painting. The Project shall be completed by roll and brush painting instead of spray painting due to previous incidents with overspray on adjacent automobiles, facilities, and buildings. D. BNSF Flagging. To the extent that lifts and booms are necessary for completion of Project but would interfere with rail operations, as determined in the sole and absolute discretion of Commission and/or the BNSF, or if otherwise required by BNSF for any other reason, Agency shall provide a BNSF Flagger during all painting operations and during any other Project work, as may be required. Agency and its agents, employees, and contractors shall follow all directions of the BNSF Flagger. E. Plastic Sheeting. Plastic sheeting shall be placed over appropriate areas of the platform at the North Main Corona Station during painting operations in such a manner as to prevent paint from contacting the platform, patrons, other improvements, railways, or any other property at or adjacent to the North Main Corona Station. F. Restricted Area. Subject to Commission's prior approval, access to the area around the Pedestrian Bridge and Tower, and Restroom Building shall be barricaded where necessary to prevent paint from dripping onto station patrons. 6. Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence as of the date first specified above and shall automatically terminate upon the final acceptance of Commission of the work performed in connection with Project. unless earlier terminated as provided herein. The term may be extended by sending written notice to Commission, which may be approved in the sole and absolute discretion of Commission. This Agreement is subordinate to all prior or future rights and obligations of Commission in the Property, except that Commission shall grant no rights inconsistent with the reasonable exercise by Contractor of its rights under this Agreement. 7. Reimbursement. Commission shall reimburse Agency for pre -approved expenses incurred by Agency for work related to the Project on the Property, including equipment rental, materials and labor costs, BNSF flagging to protect rail traffic during the 3 65 performance of Project, bond costs, and for other reasonable expenses incurred by Agency on account of the Project, up to the total not -to -exceed amount of One Hundred Seventy -One Thousand, Eight -Hundred Ninety -Four US Dollars and Eighty -Five Cents ($171,894.85) ("Total Authorized Costs"). The Parties agree that reimbursement shall not exceed the Total Authorized Costs without prior written approval of Commission. The Parties represent and warrant that the proposal attached hereto as Exhibit "D" is a good faith estimate of the actual costs expected to be reimbursed by Commission, and any revision of the proposal attached hereto as Exhibit "D" shall be approved by Commission in writing before commencement of Project. Payment of approved costs shall occur within forty-five (45) days of receipt by Commission of a written invoice from Agency. OTHER PROVISIONS 8. Indemnification. Agency shall at all times indemnify and save harmless Commission against and pay in full all losses, damages, or expenses that Commission may sustain, incur or become liable for, resulting in any manner from performance of the Project and/or the use and maintenance of the Property during the term of this Agreement, by Agency or its agents, employees, and contractors including, but not limited to, any such losses, damages or expenses arising out of (a) loss of or damage to property, (b) injury to or death of persons, (c) mechanics' or other liens of any character, (d) taxes or assessments of any kind. It is the intention of the Parties that Commission's right to indemnity hereunder shall be valid and enforceable against Agency regardless of negligence (whether active or passive) on the part of Commission, its officers, agents and employees, unless such injury is a result of the sole negligence of Commission. 9. Assumption of Risk and Waiver. To the maximum extent allowed by law, Agency assumes any and all risk of loss, damage or injury of any kind to any person or property, including without limitation, the Project, the Property, Agency's personal property and any other property of, or under the control or custody of, Agency and/or its agents, employees, and contractors, which is on or near the North Main Corona Station, the Restroom Building, or the Pedestrian Bridge and Tower. Agency's assumption of risk shall include, without limitation, loss or damage caused by defects in any structure or improvement on the Property or any other portion of the North Main Corona Station, accident or fire or other casualty on the Property or any other portion of the North Main Corona Station, or electrical discharge, and noise or vibration resulting from transit operations on or near the Property. The term "Commission" as used in this section shall include: (i) any transit or rail -related company operating upon or over Commission's tracks or other property, and (ii) any other persons or companies employed, retained or engaged by Commission. Agency, on behalf of itself and its Personnel, as a material part of the consideration for this Agreement, hereby waives all claims and demands against Commission for any such loss, damage or injury of Agency and/or its Personnel. In that connection, Agency waives, for itself and its Personnel, the benefit of California Civil Code Section 1542, which provides as follows: "general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him or ITer must have materially affected his settlement with the debtor." The provisions of this section shall survive the termination of this Agreement. As used in this section, "Personnel" means Agency, or its officers, 4 • • 66 • • • directors, affiliates, or anyone directly or indirectly employed by Agency or for whose acts Agency is liable. 10. Defense. Upon written notice from Commission, Agency agrees to assume the defense of any lawsuit, administrative action or other proceeding brought against Commission by any public body, individual, partnership, corporation, or other legal entity or person, relating to any matter covered by this Agreement for which Agency has an obligation to assume liability for and/or'to indemnify or save and hold harmless Commission. Agency shall pay all the costs incident to such defense, including, but not limited to, attorneys' fees, investigators' fees, litigation expenses, settlement payments, and amounts paid in satisfaction of judgments. Any and all lawsuits or administrative actions brought or threatened on any theory of relief available at law, in equity or under the rules of any administrative agency shall be covered by this section, including, but not limited to, the theories of intentional misconduct, negligence, breach of statute or ordinance, or upon any theory created by statute or ordinance, state or federal. 11. Attorney's Fees. In any judicial or arbitration proceeding involving performance under this Agreement, or default or breach thereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to its reasonable attorney's fees and costs. 12. Prevailing Wages. By its execution of this Agreement, Agency certifies that it is aware of the requirements of California Labor Code Sections 1720 et seq. and 1770 et seq., as well as California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 16000 et seq. ("Prevailing Wage Laws"), which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements on certain "public works" and "maintenance" projects. Since the Project is being performed as part of an applicable "public works" or "maintenance" project, as defined by the Prevailing Wage Laws, and if the total compensation is $1,000 or more, Agency agrees to fully comply with such Prevailing Wage Laws. Agency shall defend, indemnify and hold Commission, its elected officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any claims, liabilities, costs, penalties or interest arising out of any failure or alleged failure of its Contractor to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws. 13. Insurance Requirements. Agency's Contractor, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain in full force and effect or shall require its contractor to maintain insurance as required by Commission in the amounts and coverage specified and issued by insurance companies as described on Exhibit "E". Prior to (i) entering the Property or (ii) performing any work or maintenance on the Project, Agency shall have its Contractor furnish Commission with the insurance endorsements and certificates in the form and amounts specified in Exhibit "E", evidencing the existence, amounts and coverage of the insurance required to be maintained hereunder. Such insurance shall be maintained in the amounts as specified in Exhibit "E" at all times during the term of this Agreement. 14. Compliance with Laws/Permits. Agency shall, in all activities undertaken pursuant to this Agreement, comply and cause its contractors, agents and employees to comply with all federal, state and local laws, statutes, orders, ordinances, rules, regulations, plans, policies and decrees. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Agency, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain any and all permits which may be 5 67 required by any law, regulation or ordinance for any activities Agency desires to conduct or have conducted pursuant to this Agreement. 15. Inspection. Commission and its representatives, employees, agents or independent contractors may enter and inspect the Property or any portion thereof or any improvements thereon at any time and from time to time at reasonable times to verify Agency's compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 16. Not Real Property Interest. It is expressly understood that this Agreement does not in any way whatsoever grant or convey any permanent easement, lease, fee or other interest in the Property to Agency. This Agreement is not exclusive and Commission specifically reserves the right to grant other rights of entry within the vicinity of the Property. 17. Revocable Right of Entry and Termination. Notwithstanding any improvements made by Agency to the Property or any sums expended by Agency in furtherance of this Agreement, the right of entry granted herein is revocable and may be terminated at any time by either party upon five (5) business day's prior notice in writing to be served upon the other party. In cases of an emergency or a breach of this Agreement by Agency, this Agreement may be terminated by Commission immediately. 18. Non -Exclusive Right of Entry. The right of entry granted by this Agreement is not exclusive and Commission specifically reserves the right to grant other rights of entry for the Property. 19. Restoration of the Property. Upon the termination or revocation of this Agreement, Agency shall, at its own cost and expense, restore the Property or any adjacent real or personal property effected adversely by Agency action to the same condition in which it was prior to Agency's entry including, but not limited to, all paint splatters, drops, drips, over -sprays, spills and the like, disposal of any and all excess materials, refuse, and trash, and removal of all equipment and tools. In case Agency shall fail to restore the Property or any adjacent real or personal property to its prior condition within ten (10) business days after the effective date of the termination, Commission may proceed with such work at the expense of Agency. 20. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. 21. Successors and Assigns. The covenants and provisions of this Agreement are binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the Parties. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, no Party hereto may assign any of its rights or obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the other Party. 22. Interpretation; Severability. To the maximum extent possible, each provision of this Agreement will be interpreted in such a manner as to be effective and valid under applicable law. If any provision of this Agreement is prohibited by, or held to be invalid under, applicable law, such provision will be ineffective solely to the extent of such prohibition or invalidity and the remainder of the provision will be enforceable. 6 • • 68 23. Assignment. This Agreement and the license granted herein are personal to Agency. Agency shall not assign or transfer (whether voluntary or involuntary) this Agreement in whole or in part without the prior written consent of Commission, which may be withheld in Commission's sole and absolute discretion. Any attempted act in violation of this section shall be void and without effect and give Commission the right to immediately terminate this Agreement. 24. Waiver of Covenants or Conditions. The waiver by Commission of the performance of any covenant or condition under this Agreement shall not invalidate this Agreement nor shall it be considered a waiver by it of any other covenant or condition under this Agreement. 25. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended at any time by the written agreement of Commission and Agency. All amendments to this Agreement shall be binding upon the parties despite any lack of legal consideration, so long as the same shall be in writing and executed by the parties hereto. 26. Revocation. If, at any time, Agency shall fail or refuse to comply with or carry out any of the covenants herein contained, Commission may, at its election, immediately revoke and terminate this Agreement unless a longer notice period is specifically provided for elsewhere in this Agreement. 27. Nondiscrimination. Agency certifies and agrees that all persons employed thereby and/or the affiliates, subsidiaries, or holding companies thereof and any contractors retained thereby with respect to Commission's property and the Project are and shall be treated equally without regard to or because of race, religion, ancestry, national origin, or sex, and in compliance with all federal and state laws prohibiting discrimination in employment, including but not limited to the Civil Rights Act of 1964; the Unruh Civil Rights Act; the Cartwright Act; and the California Fair Employment Practices Act. 28. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement. 29. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County. 30. Liens. Agency shall not permit to be placed against the Property, or any part thereof, any design professionals', mechanics', materialmen's, contractors' or subcontractors' liens with regard to Agency's actions upon the Property. Agency agrees to hold Commission harmless for any loss or expense, including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, arising from any such liens which might be filed against the Property. 31. Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Agreement by reference as though fully set forth herein. 32. Notice. Any notice provided for herein or conceming this Agreement shall be in writing and will be deemed sufficiently given when sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the parties at the following addresses: 7 69 Commission: Agency: Riverside County Riverside Transit Agency Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor 1825 Third Street Riverside, CA 92501-7141 Riverside, CA 92507 Attention: Sheldon Peterson Attention: V. Rouzaud/Chief Procurement & Logistics Officer Phone: 951-787-7928 Phone: 951-565-5180 Fax: 951-787-7930 Fax:951-565-5181 33. Survival of Obligations. All obligations of Agency hereunder not fully performed as of the termination or cessation of this Agreement, in any manner, shall survive the termination of this Agreement including, without limitation, all indemnification and defense obligations. 34. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including Exhibits and any other documents incorporated herein, is the full and complete agreement between the Parties with respect to the subject matter herein. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Agreement shall not supersede any related agreement referenced in the recitals hereto and shall be interpreted and enforced in conjunction therewith. 35. Captions. The Captions included in this Agreement are for convenience only and in no way define, limit, or otherwise describe the scope or intent of this Agreement or any provision hereof, or in any way affect the interpretation of this Agreement. 36. Exhibits. All of the Exhibits attached to this Agreement are described as follows: Exhibit "A": DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY; Exhibit `B": DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT; Exhibit "C": PAINTING SPECIFICATIONS; and Exhibit "D": REIMBURSEMENT SCHEDULE; and Exhibit "E": INSURANCE PROVISIONS. 8 • • 70 SIGNATURE PAGE TO RIGHT OF ENTRY AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date first written above. RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY By: Riverside Transit Agency APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Counsel to the Riverside Transit Agency RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: Riverside County Transportation Commission APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Best Best & Krieger LLP Counsel to the Riverside County Transportation Commission 9 71 • EXHIBIT "A" DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY [**Insert Legal and/or Other Pertinent Description of Property**] Exhibit A 72 • EXHIBIT "B" DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT [**Insert KDG Paint Color Presentation Board and/or Other Pertinent Project Descriptions* 1 Exhibit B 73 • EXHIBIT "C" PAINTING SPECIFICATIONS r*Attach: Technical Provisions — Maintenance Repainting of Metrolink Stations — Riverside County Transportation Commission) Exhibit C 74 EXHIBIT "D" REIMBURSEMENT SCHEDULE r*Insert Sea West Enterprises Proposal As Reference**] Exhibit D 75 • EXHIBIT "E" INSURANCE PROVISIONS Agency shall obtain, or shall require any consultant or contractor entering Commission's property on its behalf to obtain insurance of the types and in the amounts described below and satisfactory to Commission. A. Commercial General Liability Insurance. Agency and its contractors shall maintain occurrence version commercial general liability insurance or equivalent form with a combined single limit of not less then $5,000,000 per occurrence. If such insurance contains a general aggregate limit, it shall apply separately to this Agreement or be no less than two times the occurrence limit. Such insurance shall: 1. Include Commission and the Southern California Regional Rail Authority and its contractors and their officials, officers, employees, agents, and consultants as insureds with respect to the construction of the Project and Commission's property and shall contain no special limitations on the scope of coverage or the protection afforded to these insureds; 2. Be primary with respect to any insurance or self-insurance programs covering Commission, its officials, officers, employees, agents and consultants; and 3. Contain standard separation of insured provisions. B. Railroad Protective Liability. Agency and its contractors shall, in connection with any construction activities undertaken with respect to the Project either directly by Agency or by its contractors, acquire and keep in force during the period of such construction, railroad protective liability insurance with a combined single limit of $1,000,000 and a general aggregate of $1,000,000. C. Pollution Liability Insurance. If the Project is used to carry Hazardous Materials, Agency and its contractors shall maintain pollution liability insurance in the amount of $1,000,000. D. Workers' Compensation Insurance. Agency and its contractors shall maintain workers' compensation insurance with statutory limits and employers' liability insurance with limits of not less than $1,000,000 each accident. E. Certificates of Insurance. Agency and its contractors shall, prior to entering Commission's property, furnish Commission with properly executed certificates of insurance and, if requested by Commission, certified copies of endorsements and policies, which clearly evidence all insurance required under this Agreement and provide that such insurance shall be not canceled, allowed to expire or be materially reduced in coverage, except on thirty (30) days' prior written notice to Commission. The certificate shall also evidence the insurer's knowledge of the proximity of the operations of Agency and its contractors to active railroad tracks. Commission shall have the sole discretion to Exhibit E 76 determine whether the certificates and endorsements presented comply with the provisions of this Agreement. F. Coverage Maintenance. Agency and its contractors shall replace certificates, policies and endorsements for any insurance expiring prior to the termination of this Agreement. Unless otherwise provided for in this Agreement, Agency's contractors shall maintain such insurance from the execution of this Agreement until the construction of Project and all other work related to Project is complete and Commission's property fully restored, except as otherwise provided in this Agreement. Agency shall maintain the insurance required herein, unless otherwise agreed upon in writing by the Parties, until this Agreement is terminated. G. Licensed Insurer. Agency and its contractors shall place such insurance with insurers having A.M. Best Company ratings of no less than A:VIII and licensed to do business in California, unless otherwise approved, in writing, by Commission. ONTARIOULAM B1309407.5 Exhibit E • 77 • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: May 12, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Memorandum of Understanding with Southern California Association of Governments for the Rising Stars in Transit Internship Program BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. 10-25-089-00 between the Commission and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for the Rising Stars in Transit — Internships for University Students program; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the MOU on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In an effort to provide professional development opportunities for local university students, staff applied for and was awarded a Ca[trans Transportation Planning Grant. This is the second award for what has proven to be a successful program to recruit, train, and hire exceptional local talent. The project is entitled, Rising Stars in Transit — Internships for University Students, under the Transit Professional Development category of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) 5313(b) program. The grant is for $50,000 with a local in -kind match of $10,000 comprised of staff supervision time. The internship program will include recruitment/selection of the student interns, comprehensive overview of specific transportation planning functions, lunch bag sessions with senior management, and an evaluation of the program. This provides an opportunity to expose local students to careers in transportation planning. The grant funds will be spent directly on intern compensation and training. The in -kind match will be calculated by the staff time needed to recruit, train, and mentor the students. Agenda Item 81 78 SCAG is the administering agency for the planning grant project and the Commission will enter into a MOU No. 10-25-089-00 with SCAG for the grant funds. The program is scheduled to begin in May 2010, and continue for a two-year period. At the completion of the grant, the Commission may decide to implement an ongoing internship program. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2010/11 FY 2011/12 Amount: $30,000 $20,000 Source of Funds: Federal and Local Transportation Funds Budget Adjustment: No GLA No.: 103 25 41509 2401 $50,000 103 25 6XXXX 2401 $50,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 04/19/10 Attachment: MOU No. 10-25-089-00 Agenda Item 81 • • 79 • MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING No.10-25-089-00 BETWEEN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS FOR RISING STARS IN TRANSIT — INTERNSHIPS FO'_ RSITY STUDENTS (WBS # 10-SCG01239. This Memorandum of Understanding ("MOr"d entered between the Riverside County Transportation Com a"("RCTC"), 't gional Transportation Planning Agency, and the Souther E, fornia Associa of Governments ("SCAG"), a Joint Powers Agency. WHEREAS, RCTC, with the assis4. . other local colleges, seems to implem WHEREAS, SG total amount of $ for "Rising Stars in California at Riverside and hip program at RCTC; ona lopment Grant funds in the 2009-10 •verall Work Program (OWP), versity Students ("Program"); the total amount of $10,000 for the WHER�, the goal of €lr�,)�rogramjs to provide an educational resource to allow local students toy experience iOransporTation planning in a real world setting. In addition, successful copg letion of Program will result in RCTC institutionalizing the internship prograer WHEREAS, RCTC slam]' serve as the lead agency and implement the aforementioned Program in accordance with the Scope of Work, Exhibit A; WHEREAS, performance by RCTC shall commence on the date indicated in the notice to proceed which shall be provided to RCTC by SCAG ("Notice to Proceed") and is planned to continue through June 30, 2012. This MOU shall supercede and replace any previous agreements between SCAG with RCTC related to the Program described herein; WHEREAS, RCTC agrees not to begin the Program until SCAG issues a Notice to Proceed; and 80 WHEREAS, SCAG's Fiscal Year is from July 1 through June 30; NOW THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed that: 1. MOU This MOU is comprised of these terms and conditions and any attached Exhibits, and may be amended only by written agreement between SCAG and RCTC. 2. Scope of Work RCTC shall famish all technical and professio including labor, material, equipment, transportation, supervision, and ex ® nece to fully and adequately manage the Program as set forth in the Sco ork, "Exhi " attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 3. Term a. The Term of this MOU s Proceed. b. The Tenn of this M provided herei c. Reimbursem funding agency each Year. F,�.. All work un Managers. a. For purposes of mence o ate indicated in tie Notice to U shall tenrnless terminated earlier as e 30`h of e iscal Yeare subject to the inclusion and his Progratttm the Overall Work Program (OWP) for • Prog- is not approved in the OWP for each ma� ffective June 30`h of the Fiscal Year be coordinated with RCTC and SCAG through the Project U, SCAG designates the following Project Manager: Matt Gleason Assistant Regional Transit Planner (213)236-1832 SCAG reserves the right to change this designation upon written notice to RCTC. b. For purposes of this MOU, RCTC designates the following Project Manager: 81 • • • Sheldon Peterson Rail Program Manager (951)787-7928 RCTC may change the designation of its Project Manager by written notification to the SCAG Project Manager. 5. Funding a. The total value of the Program is $60,000, as follows: Grant Funds: $50,000 In -Kind Match: $10,000 b. The maximum reimbursement amount pr by SCAG r this MOU is FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($50,000). 6. In -Kind Match RCTC shall provide the requir' 1, in -kind m accordance with Scope of Work for In -Kind Match and In z tch Budge ,*tached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as "Exhibi KC" and `exhibit D „spectively. RCTC agrees to provide SCAG with Match Reports -,attach' -each Ti ce which shall meet the requirements descr l in Sectidtt 7(d) of, nd MatcWRe carts a. In pe j r�xung the se is ed in the Scope of Work, Exhibit A, RCTC may stated in the chedtile7and Funding Chart, "Exhibit B," attached hereto incorporated herein by this reference.Said costs shall comply with Section 9 st Principles) 'below, and be the only costs for which RCTC has a right to reiinsement by SCAG hereunder. RCTC shall submit monthly invoices to SCAG, Accou"ft,Payable, 818Nest Seventh Street, Floor 12, Los Angeles, California 90017. 7. Invoices, Pro% b. SCAG shall maii approval authority of Invoices submitted under this MOU. c. No indirect costs are authorized for this Program. d. RCTC shall submit the following relative to an Invoice: (1) Consistent with the attached Invoice Format, Exhibit E, an Invoice in duplicate with the following information included, but not limited to: the name of the Program, the applicable WBS Number as described below in Paragraph (4), description of services performed, period of the service performed, intern 82 ( 1 ) name, actual hourly rate, total hours worked, total cost incurred, and a statement that costs were funded with non-federal local funds accompanied by an authorized signature on behalf of RCTC. (2) A Progress Report that, in narrative form, describes progress toward completion of tasks provided in accordance with Exhibit A, conformance with project schedules, and reporting of all costs incurred for the applicable WBS Number as described below in Paragraph (4); (3) A Match Report that, in narrative form, describ of tasks provided in accordance with Exhi incurred in accordance with Exhibit D; (4) For the "Rising Stars in Transit" erns Program, SCAG WBS # 10-SC •.01 shall of the issuance of the Notice to ' $ d through Ju Upon request of SCAG, RCT documentation to sup days. Upon request of SCAG, SCAG Project Manager. the costs c 11 pro rogress toward completion and reporting of all costs for University Students erenced from the date ne i, 112; additionformation or _ e Invoice w 1 thirty (30) nthly progress update to the e. Year-end Inv des and supporting dofion n�gbe received by SCAG on or before July 3 s of each ViScal year. oices recur ed after July 31' for work completed in the precedin cal year (J 1 through June 30) shall not be paid. 8. Co RCTC agrees to coiijly wrti following: The Contract CosfPnncipl } d Procedures, 48 Code of Federal Regulations, Fateful Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Part 31, et seq. (Office of Management and rdget Circular A-87 "Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal faOV6ments)," shall be used to determine the acceptability of individual projeor cost items; and (2) The Federal administrative procedures in accordance with 49 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 18, "Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments." b. Any costs for which RCTC receives payment or credit that is determined by a subsequent audit or other review by either SCAG, Caltrans or other State or Federal authorities to be unallowable under, but not limited to, OMB Circular A-87; 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 31; or 49 CFR, Part 18, are to be repaid by RCTC within thirty (30) • • 83 • days of RCTC receiving notice of audit findings and a written demand for reimbursement from SCAG. Should RCTC fail to reimburse unallowable costs due SCAG within thirty (30) days of demand, or within such other period as may be agreed between both parties hereto, SCAG is authorized to withhold future payments due RCTC. c. All costs charged to this MOU by RCTC shall be supported by properly executed payrolls, time records, invoices, and vouchers, evidencing in proper detail the nature of the charges, and shall be costs allowable under the cost principles cited above in paragraph a. 9. Agreement Changes a. b. No alteration or deviation of the terms of writing and properly executed by both p SCAG may request, at any time, am regarding such changes. Within ten (1 RCTC shall notify SCAG the impact schedule, and budget. U changes, an amendment to t parties are unable to reach an the par ties may terminate this Section 19(a) o 10. Notices Any no pers cei ; mail, re Matt Gto Assistantional Transitlanner Southern Canf€i is Association of Governments 818 W. 7th Stre32th Flopt Los Angeles, CA (I017. t, Phone: (213) 236-1832' FAX: (213) 236-1803 otices eement be hall be p arding nce n the oth ;party ,oeipt . ested,to OU be valid unless made in ents to this MO U`= ill notify RCTC s fro„ a+e date of ritten notice, ges on the of Work, the parties as to '` a required ed regarding the same. If the anges requested by SCAG, e provisions set forth in e given pursuant to this MOU may be iving such notice, or may be served by lowing addresses: Sheldon Peterson Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3`d Floor Riverside, California 92502 Phone: (951) 787-7928 FAX: (951) 787-7920 84 i a. RCTC shall adhere to the requirements contained in SCAG's annual Certification and Assurances (FHWA and FTA "Metropolitan Transportation Planning Process Certification") submitted as part of SCAG's OWP, pursuant to 23 CFR 450.334 and the 23 U.S.C. 1234. This Certification shall be published annually in SCAG's OWP. Such requirements shall apply to RCTC to the same extent as SCAG and may include, but are not limited to: (3) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title VI Assurance executed by California under 23 U.S.C. 324 and 29 U.S.C. 79 Pub. Law 105-178, 112 Stat. 107 and a cessor thereto, regarding the involvement of disadvantaged business - in FHWA and FTA funded projects (Sec. 105(f), Pub. L. 970424," .. 21 tt- CFR part 26); and The Americans with Disabilities amended) and the United Sta implementing regulations (49 CFR 1990 (Pub. L. 1 epartment of Trans 7, and b. RCTC shall additionally co "$ ith the req "Certifications and Assurances e _° . Assist Assurances Required of Eacom' and compliance with 49 U.S.C. Cha assurances shal CTC to limited, the (1) Standard A (2) (5 (6) (7) (8) Other Drug Fre k Plate greeme Intergovern tal Rei Assurance "ondiscriminal Assurance No rimination the Basis of Disability Certtiielition and Budget 6, 104 Stat. 327, as ion (US DOT) is contained in the annual FTA " including "Certifications and obbying Certification" in in SCAG's OWP. Such and include but are not nsibility Matters for Primary Covered rances Required by the U.S. Office of Management and c. Federal Lobbying Activities Certification. (1) By signing this MOU, RCTC certifies, to the best of its knowledge and belief, that no State or Federal funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of RCTC, respectively, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any State or Federal agency, a Member of the State Legislature or United States Congress, an officer or employee of the Legislature or Congress, or any employee of a Member of the Legislature or Congress in connection with the awarding of any State or Federal contract, the making of 86 any State or Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, or the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any State or Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. (2) If any funds other than State or Federal funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an .officer or employee of any Federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal grant, RCTC, as applicable, shall comple d submit Federal Standard Form-LL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobb, r in accordance with those form instructions." (3) This certification is a material repres 't in of " far`' pon which reliance was placed when this MOU was ente a'. Submissir this certification is a prerequisite for making or ento this transact ��� � >, posed by Section 1352, Title 31, U.S.C. and by t i- oposed Master Fun • sfer Agreement between SCAG and the State. 14. Equal Employment Oppo In the performance of work unde and successors in interest, shall affi shall not unlawful/ _ ate, har applicant for ern ent se of se origin, physical ctl ility (iu ing HI marital status, dema amily N medical leave. t to thi ® U, RCTC and its assignees • e that mployees and contractors ainst any employee or try, religious creed, national AIDS), m ical condition (cancer), age, leave, and denial of pregnancy disability R fall ensure11m the eViluation an ment of its employees and applicants for emp'fi rent are free frn suchli scrimination and harassment. RCTC shall comply with the prP*ions of the Fi E,Emploent and Housing Act (Government Code, Section 12900 et "Se ), and the al;ble regPations promulgated there under (California Code of Regulatid Title 2, Seen 7285.0 et seq.). The applicable regulations of the Fair Employment an°4:0 ousing mmission implementing the Government Code sections referenced above, at-inc_ ated into this MOU by reference and made a part hereof as if set forth in full. RCTC shall give written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor organizations with which they have collective bargaining or other labor agreements. a. Noncompliance: In the event of noncompliance by RCTC with the nondiscrimination provisions of this MOU, SCAG may: (1) Withhold payments to the RCTC under this MOU until RCTC complies, and/or (2) Cancel, terminate or suspend the MOU, in whole or in part. • 87 • If required by DOT, additional or alternate sanctions for noncompliance may be imposed. 15. Conflict of Interest RCTC shall comply with Federal and State conflict of interest laws, regulations and policies. 16.Independent Contractor RCTC and its officers, employees and agents shall b endent contractors in the performance of this MOU, and not officers, employe ractors or agents of SCAG. 17. Disputes The parties agree to submit any disputes a rider this MOU to ral mediation before resorting to litigation. 18. Noncompliance In addition to such other remedied any grant condition or specific requin 19. Termination o.01 , a. Termination onvemen ta. Either party may term nne this MOU at any time by giving written nOtIon,,to the lher party of;_soch termination at least thirty (30) calendar day e_the effeCtivOnte.of such termination. In such event, all finished or " ments antiother materials as Tescribed in the MOU shall be returned CAG at it4Piion, and RCTC small lie entitled to receive compensation for all :factory work completed prior to the effective date of termination. a _ b. Termination for Cause. if through any cause, RCTC shall fail to timely and adequately fulfill itsligations under this MOU, or if RCTC violates any of the covenants, agreements;'�� �tstipulatiois of this MOU, SCAG shall thereupon have the right to terminate the MOI.J by.giving not less than ten (10) calendar days written notice to RCTC of the mtent'to terminate and specifying the effective date thereof. SCAG shall provide a reasonable opportunity for RCTC to cure prior to termination. In no event shall such opportunity to cure extend beyond the term of the MOU. In such event, all finished or unfinished documents and other materials as described in the MOU shall be returned to SCAG ant option, and RCTC shall be entitled to receive compensation for all satisfactory work completed prior to the effective date of termination. ed by law,A ftt MOU, e event of noncompliance with OU may be terminated. 20. Non -Assignment 88 a. Neither party shall assign this MOU, or any part thereof, without the written consent of each party to this MOU. Any assignment without such written consent shall be void and unenforceable. b. The covenants and agreement of this MOU shall inure to the benefit of, and shall be binding upon each of the parties and their respective successors and assignees. 21. Time of the Essence Time is of the essence for each and every provision of tit' es on Folio ;]edge] • 89 • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 12, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Brian Cunanan, Commuter Assistance Manager Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreements for Freeway Service Patrol Tow Truck Service WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 10-45-059-00 to Pepe's Towing Service for tow truck service on Beat No. 1 of the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreement, for a total contract amount not to exceed $1,453,000; 2) Award Agreement No. 10-45-060-00 to Pepe's Towing Service for tow truck service on Beat No. 26 of the FSP program for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreement, for a total contract amount not to exceed $969,000; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, including options years, on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission, acting in its capacity as Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE) advertises and awards contracts with tow operators for the FSP program that it administers in partnership with Caltrans and the California Highway Patrol (CHP). The purpose of FSP is to provide a continuous roving tow services patrol along designated freeway segments (beats) to relieve freeway congestion by facilitating the rapid removal of disabled vehicles and those involved in minor accidents on local freeways. Staff sought a competitive solution to award a tow services contract to a qualified firm for Beat Nos. 1 and 26 (Figure 2), two of the nine total beats administered by FSP. Beat 1 operates on the State Route 91 from the Orange County line to Lincoln Avenue in Corona and uses three tow trucks. Beat 26 operates on Interstate 15 from Hidden Valley Parkway to Temescal Canyon Road and uses two trucks. Agenda Item 8J 91 Procurement Process This procurement was conducted in accordance with established Commission procurement policies and procedures. Staff established certain minimum qualifications required of each potential proposer and developed a weighted evaluation criteria to select a qualified tow services contractor for Beat Nos. 1 and 26. Non -price elements of the evaluation criteria included experience, relative qualifications of the firms, proposed work plan, and the proposer's ability to respond to the requirements set forth under the terms of the request for proposals (RFP). The RFP was released and advertised by staff on January 25, 2010. A pre - proposal meeting was held on February 2, and was attended by approximately six firms. Commission staff responded to all questions submitted by potential proposers prior to the February 22, proposal deadline date. Four firms, Pepe's Towing Service (Pepe's), Hamner Towing, Navarro's Towing, and Hadley Tow, submitted proposals prior to the stated deadline. Each of the four proposers submitted responsive and responsible proposals for each of the two beats, and proposed hourly rates submitted by the firms ranged from $49.74/hr to $55.00/hr for Beat No. 1, and $49.74/hr to $56.50/hr for Beat No. 26. After an initial evaluation, preliminary scoring and interviews of the firms by the evaluation committee, staff requested best and final offers (BAFO) from each firm. Three of the four firms submitted revised pricing, lowering their proposed rates between $0.25 and $0.50 an hour. A single firm chose not to submit revised pricing under the request for BAFO. All proposals were scored by the evaluation committee based upon the evaluation criteria set forth in the RFP, and the contractor ranking, listed from highest to lowest total evaluation score for Beat Nos. 1 and 26 are as follows: Beat No. 1 Beat No. 26 Pepe's Towing Service Pepe's Towing Service Hamner Towing Hamner Towing Hadley Tow Hadley Tow Navarro's Towing Navarro's Towing Pepe's final proposed rate of $49.49 was the lowest proposed rate among the four bidders across both beats. After the BAFO, the final range of rates was $49.49 to $54.50 for Beat No. 1 and $49.49 to $56.00 for Beat No. 26. In addition, Pepe's cost proposal maintains the rate over the duration of the initial -three year term and into the two option years to follow, locking the $49.49 rate for a total of five years. Pepe's is currently an FSP tow service provider in good standing and has provided service for the Commission's FSP program on various beats since 1996. Agenda Item 8J • 92 • For the foregoing reasons, staff recommends award of a three-year agreement and two one-year options to extend the term, to Pepe's for tow truck service on Beat No. 1 of the FSP program for a total contract amount not to exceed $1,453,000; and award of a three-year agreement and two one-year options to extend the term, to Pepe's for tow truck service on Beat No. 26 of the FSP program for a total contract amount not to exceed $969,000. All obligations incurred by the Commission under the terms of this award are funded 80% from state funds and 20% from local SAFE fees and are subject to continued funding from the state of California for the Riverside County FSP program. Figure 2: Freeway Service Patrol Coverage Hours of Operation: Mon - Thur: 5:30am - 8:30am; 3pm - 7pm Fri: 5:30am - 8:30am; 1 pm - 7pm Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2010/11 FY 2011/12+ Amount: $484,500 1,937,500 Source of Funds: State of California - 80% SAFE DMV Fees - 20% Bud et Adjustment: gN/A No GL/Project Accounting No.: 201 45 81>014c Fiscal Procedures Approved: \ „4 Date: 04/19/10 Agenda Item 8J 93 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 12, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Brian Cunanan, Commuter Assistance Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement with the State of California Department of Transportation for the Reimbursement of Construction Freeway Service Patrol Costs WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-45-085-00 with the State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) in various construction areas in Riverside County; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. DISCUSSION: It is Caltrans' desire to provide FSP services for various construction projects in Riverside County to assist in transportation system management efforts and expedite the removal of freeway impediments in construction zones. The proposed Caltrans agreement provides up to $2.5 million in state funding to cover 100% of the costs associated with service provided by the Commission's contracted FSP tow operators and the Commission's administrative overhead costs over a five-year period. Service for each construction project would be initiated by a Caltrans task order, which would identify the project, its locations, and the hours and duration of service. In addition to providing traffic congestion relief and reducing accidents, this supplemental FSP service will also help improve the air quality in construction zones. Agenda Item 8K 94 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Yes N/A Year: FY 2009/10 FY 2010/11 FY 2011/12+ Amount: g 50,000 $2,450,000 Source of Funds: State of California Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 201 45 41510 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \44uda. Date: 04/20/10 Attachment: Draft Cooperative Agreement No. 10-45-085-00 Agenda Item 8K 95 AGREEMENT NO. 10-45-085-00 Riverside County Transportation Commission Agreement No. 08A1814 Page 1 of 9 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO ON April 1, 2010, is between the State of Califomia, acting by and through its Department of Transportation, referred to herein as CALTRANS, and the Riverside County Transportation Commission, hereinafter referred to as LOCAL AGENCY or COUNTY. RECITALS 1. CALTRANS and LOCAL AGENCY, pursuant to Streets and Highways Code section 130, are authorized to enter in this Agreement affecting State highways within the jurisdiction of LOCAL AGENCY. 2. The LOCAL AGENCY's governing body, under the authority of local ordinances is authorized to provide services pursuant to the LOCAL AGENCY's resolution, which is attached and incorporated into this Agreement as Attachment I. 3. LOCAL AGENCY has agreed to manage public traffic passing through State Highway construction projects by activating or enhancing a Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) Program within the limits of all construction projects within LOCAL AGENCY's jurisdiction, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 4. All services performed by LOCAL AGENCY pursuant to this Agreement are intended to be performed in accordance with all applicable Federal, State, and LOCAL AGENCY laws, ordinances, regulations, and CALTRANS encroachment permits, published manuals, policies, and procedures. 5. This Agreement is exempt from legal review and approval by the Department of General Services, pursuant to PCC section 10295. SECTION I LOCAL AGENCY AGREES: 1. To provide FSP services in construction zones on State Highways within District 8, County of Riverside, in excess of those routinely provided for traffic congestion relief. The types of FSP services to be provided will entail the assignments of towing vehicles, patrolling the construction zones and removing stalled vehicles to designated drop locations pursuant to CALTRANS authorized Task Orders (Attachment II). 2. LOCAL AGENCY shall subcontract towing companies to provide tow services in all construction projects within LOCAL AGENCY'S jurisdiction for the purpose of this Agreement. The Subcontracting Provisions/List and Tow Operator Scope of Work is attached and incorporated into this Agreement as Attachment III. LOCAL AGENCY must obtain at least three (3) competitive bids from responsible bidders for award of the towing subcontract(s). 3. Upon arrival at, and the conclusion of each assignment, all LOCAL AGENCY FSP Subcontractors shall check in with the California Highway Patrol (CHP) field supervisor. Check in shall be done verbally using a two way radio as provided by LOCAL AGENCY. 4. Upon receipt of a written request (Task Order, Attachment II) issued by an authorized CALTRANS representative, the LOCAL AGENCY Coordinator shall instruct its Subcontractor to provide FSP service within 36 hours. 96 Riverside County Transportation Commission Agreement No. 08A1814 Page 2 of 9 5. The LOCAL AGENCY reserves the right at its sole discretion to decline any Task Order request for FSP service made by CALTRANS due to primary and other operators being unable to fulfill the request due to workload, time constraints, or location of requested service. SECTION II CALTRANS AGREES: 1. To specify the nature of the work to be done, its location and manner of performing it. 2. To request FSP services for construction zones by issuance of a Task Order conforming to Attachment II, no later than eighteen (18) days prior to the date the service should commence. Each FSP Task Order will be executed by a CALTRANS District 8 FSP/Traffic Management Plan Coordinator or his/her designee. 3. To reimburse LOCAL AGENCY for the actual direct cost incurred for all Task Order FSP services, including the agreed upon administrative costs. 4. Task Orders (Attachment II) shall be completed and signed by a CALTRANS District 8 FSP/Traffic Management Plan Coordinator. The signed Task Orders are to be transmitted by facsimile machine to the LOCAL AGENCY Contract Manager who will complete, sign and transmit the Task Order to CALTRANS District 8 FSP/Traffic Management Plan Coordinator. SECTION III IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED: In consideration of the foregoing and the mutual promises of the parties hereto, LOCAL AGENCY and CALTRANS agree as follows: 1. Notification of Parties a. LOCAL AGENCY's Contract Manager is Brian Cunanan, (951) 787-7141. b. CALTRANS's Contract Manager is Al Afaneh, (909) 383-4917. c. All notices herein provided to be given, or which may be given, by either party to the other, shall be deemed to have been fully given when made in writing and received by the parties at their respective addresses: Riverside County Transportation Commission Attention: Brian Cunanan 4080 Lemon Street, 3'" Floor Riverside, CA 92501 California Department of Transportation Attention: Al Afaneh Traffic Operations, MS B20 464 Fourth Street, 61h Floor San Bemardino, CA 92401-1400 97 • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agreement No. 08A1814 Page 3 of 9 d. The Contract Managers during the term of this Agreement may be changed by prior written notice without the necessity of an amendment to the Agreement. 2. Cancellation a. In the event of a disaster or an unforeseen emergency or other good cause, as reasonably determined by the parties, both CALTRANS and LOCAL AGENCY may cancel a scheduled FSP service shift under this Agreement upon 24 hours prior written notice. b. CALTRANS shall not be required to reimburse costs for canceled service if the written cancellation notice is transmitted to the LOCAL AGENCY more than 24 hours prior to the beginning of that canceled FSP service shift. CALTRANS agrees that if cancellation is not made, in writing, at least 24 hours prior to the scheduled FSP service shift, and the FSP Contractor(s) are notified of such cancellation prior to commencement of service, the Contractor(s) shall be paid for three (3) hours of that shift. CALTRANS agrees that if cancellation is made after the tow operator begins the scheduled FSP service shift, and is then notified that the scheduled shift has been canceled, the FSP Contractor(s) shall be paid for the entire shift period, up to a maximum of eight (8) hours. LOCAL AGENCY agrees to make every reasonable effort to notify FSP Contractor(s) of cancellations prior to commencement of the FSP service shift. c. All cancellation notices to the LOCAL AGENCY must be transmitted by CALTRANS and received by the LOCAL AGENCY FSP Coordinator during normal business hours between 8:00 a.m, and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding RCTC holidays. 3. Period of Performance Work under this Agreement shall begin on April 1, 2010, contingent upon approval of this Agreement by CALTRANS, and will terminate on March 31, 2015, unless extended by amendment. 4. Changes in Terms/Amendment This Agreement may only be amended or modified by mutual written agreement of the parties. 5. Termination This Agreement may be terminated by either parry for any reason by giving written notice to the other party at least thirty (30) days in advance of the effective date of such termination. In the event of termination by said notice, funds reimbursed to LOCAL AGENCY will include all reasonable authorized non -cancelable obligations and prior costs incurred. 6. Insurance a. LOCAL AGENCY shall provide to CALTRANS proof of Worker's Compensation Insurance or LOCAL AGENCY self-insurance pursuant to Section 3700 of the Labor Code. A copy of this certificate shall be returned along with the Agreement after the LOCAL AGENCY'S governing body approves this Agreement. The final 98 Riverside County Transportation Commission Agreement No. 08A1814 Page 4 of 9 execution of this Agreement will not occur until this information is provided by the LOCAL AGENCY. b. LOCAL AGENCY shall notify Contract Manager of any injuries occurring on the worksite within 24 hours. Within 48 hours of the occurrence of the injury, LOCAL AGENCY will file with the Contract Manager a copy of the State Compensation Insurance Employer's Report of Occupational Injury or Illness. a It is understood and agreed that CALTRANS and LOCAL AGENCY, including Subcontractors maintain Comprehensive General Liability Insurance (CGL) and Automobile Liability Insurance, including any other insurance policies or self- insurance programs to fund their respective liabilities. The parties agree that such respective programs or policy coverage for Workers' Compensation shall contain a waiver of subrogation as to the other party and each of its officers, agents and employees. Evidence of Insurance, Certificates of Insurance or other similar documents shall not be required of either party under this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly required herein to be provided by LOCAL AGENCY regarding Worker's Compensation Insurance. 7. Cost Limitation a. The total amount payable to LOCAL AGENCY pursuant to this Agreement by CALTRANS shall not exceed $2,500,000.00. b. Rates for these services shall be: 1. FSP Service = $2,300,000.00 • FSP subcontractor service hourly rate, per tow vehicle will be $35.00 - $80.00 2. LOCAL AGENCY'S Administrative Costs = $200,000.00 • LOCAL AGENCY's Administrative Costs will be 8% of tow services c. It is agreed and understood that this Agreement fund limit is an estimate and that CALTRANS will only reimburse the cost of services actually rendered as authorized by the CALTRANS Contract Manager at or below that fund limitation established hereinabove. 8. Allowable Costs a. The method of payment for this Agreement will be based on actual allowable costs. CALTRANS will reimburse LOCAL AGENCY for expended actual allowable direct and indirect costs, including, but not limited to labor costs, employee benefits, and travel. b. CALTRANS will reimburse LOCAL AGENCY for all allowable costs for services provided under this Agreement no more frequently than monthly in arrears as promptly as CALTRANS fiscal procedures permit upon receipt of itemized signed invoices in triplicate. Invoices shall be signed and submitted to the Contract Manager at the following address: California Department of Transportation Attention: Al Afaneh Traffic Operations, MS B20 464 Fourth Street, 6th Floor San Bernardino, CA 92401-1400 • 99 Riverside County Transportation Commission Agreement No. 08A1814 Page 5 of 9 c: Invoices shall include be submitted in the format of the attached Sample Invoice (Attachment 1V), and shall include the following items: 1. Tow subcontractor name and monthly invoice 2. Copy of executed Task Order 3. Total hours worked in the report period d. For cancellations, a copy of the Task Order showing the cancellation information must be attached to the invoice. e. In the event that an invoice is disputed by CALTRANS, the invoice shall be returned to the LOCAL AGENCY along with a completed invoice dispute form, STD. 209 (Attachment V). 9. Cost Principles a. The COUNTY agrees to comply with Federal procedures in accordance with 2 CFR, Part 225, Cost Principles for State and Local Governments. b. The COUNTY also agrees to comply with Federal procedures in accordance with 49 CFR, Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments. c. Any costs for which payment has been made to COUNTY that are determined by subsequent audit to be unallowable under 2 CFR, Part 225 or 49 CFR, Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments, are subject to repayment by COUNTY to State. d. Any subagreement entered into as a result of this agreement shall contain all of the provisions of this article. 10. Americans with Disabilities Act By signing this Agreement LOCAL AGENCY assures CALTRANS that it complies with the applicable provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, as well as all applicable regulations and guidelines issued pursuant to the ADA. (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.) 11. Hold Harmless a. Nothing in the provisions of the Agreement is intended to create duties or obligations to or rights in third parties to this Agreement or affect the legal liability of either party to the agreement by imposing any standard of care with respect to the operation, maintenance and repair of State highways different from the standard of care imposed by law. b. Neither CALTRANS nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by LOCAL AGENCY under or in connection with any work, authority or conduct conferred upon LOCAL AGENCY under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, LOCAL AGENCY shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless CALTRANS and all of its officers and employees from all claims, -suits or actions of every name, kind and description arising out of this Agreement, including but not limited to, any tortuous, contractual, inverse condemnation or other theories or assertions of liability occurring by reason of 100 Riverside County Transportation Commission Agreement No. 08A1814 Page 6 of 9 anything done or omitted to be done by LOCAL AGENCY under or in connection with any work, authority or conduct delegated to LOCAL AGENCY under this Agreement. 12. Non -Discrimination During the performance of this Agreement, LOCAL AGENCY shall not unlawfully discriminate, harass or allow harassment, against any employee or applicant for employment because of sex, race, color, ancestry, religious creed, national origin, disability (including HIV and AIDS), mental disability, medical condition (cancer), age (over 40), marital status, denial of family and medical care leave, and denial of pregnancy disability leave. LOCAL AGENCY shall ensure that the evaluation and treatment of their employees and applicants for employment are free from such discrimination and harassment. LOCAL AGENCY shall comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Government Code section 12900 et seq.) and the applicable regulations promulgated thereunder (California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 7285.0 et seq.). The applicable regulations of the Fair Employment and Housing Commission implementing Government Code section 12990 (a-f), set forth in Chapter 5 of Division 4 of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations, are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference and are made a part hereof as if set forth in full. LOCAL AGENCY shall give written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or other agreement. 13. Funding Requirements a. It is mutually understood between the parties that this Agreement may have been written for the mutual benefit of both parties in order to avoid program and fiscal delays that would occur if the Agreement was executed only after ascertaining the availability of a congressional or legislative appropriation of funds. b. This Agreement is valid and enforceable only if sufficient funds are made available to CALTRANS by the United States Government and/or the California State Legislature for the purpose of this Project. In addition, this Agreement is subject to any additional restrictions, limitations, conditions, or any statute enacted by the Congress or the State Legislature that may affect the provisions, terms or funding of this Agreement in any manner. c. It is mutually agreed that if the Congress or the State Legislature does not appropriate sufficient funds for the program and Project, this Agreement shall be amended to reflect any reduction in funds. d. CALTRANS has the option to terminate this Agreement under the thirty (30) day termination clause or to amend this Agreement to reflect any reduction of funds. In the event of an unscheduled termination, CALTRANS Contract Manager may reimburse LOCAL AGENCY is accordance with the provisions of Article 4 of this Section III. 14. Records Retention For the purpose of determining compliance with Public Contract Code Section 10115, et. seq. and Title 21, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 21, Section 2500 et: seq., when applicable, and other matters connected with the performance of the Agreement pursuant to Government Code Section 8546.7, the COUNTY, shall maintain all books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to the performance of this Agreement, including but not limited to, the costs of administering the Agreement. All parties 101 • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agreement No. 08A1814 Page 7 of 9 shall make such materials available at their respective offices at all reasonable times during the Agreement period and for three years from the date of final payment under the Agreement. CALTRANS, the State Auditor, FHWA, or any duly authorized representative of the Federal government shall have access to any books, records, and documents of the COUNTY that are pertinent to the Agreement for audits, examinations, excerpts, and transactions, and copies thereof shall be fumished if requested. 15. Disputes a. Any dispute conceming a question of fact arising under this Agreement that is not disposed of by agreement shall be decided by the CALTRANS Contract Officer, who may consider any written or verbal evidence submitted by LOCAL AGENCY. The CALTRANS Contract Officer's decision shall be CALTRANS' final decision on the dispute. b. Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by the Contract Officer will excuse LOCAL AGENCY from full and timely performance in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. 16. Subcontractors LOCAL AGENCY shall perform the work contemplated with resources available within its own organization and no portion of the work shall be subcontracted without written authorization by CALTRANS' Contract Manager, unless expressly included (subcontractor identified) in Attachment III. Any subcontract in excess of $25,000 entered into as a result of this Agreement shall contain all the provisions stipulated in this Agreement to be applicable to LOCAL AGENCY'S subcontractors. 17. Druq-Free Workplace Certification By signing this Agreement, LOCAL AGENCY hereby certifies under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Califomia that LOCAL AGENCY will comply with the requirements of the Drug -Free Workplace Act of 1990 (Government Code section 8350 et seq.) and will provide a drug -free workplace by doing all of the following: a. Publish a statement notifying employees that unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited and specifying actions to be taken against employees for violations, as required by Govemment Code section 8355(a). b. Establish a Drug -Free Awareness Program as required by Govemment Code section 8355(b) to inform employees about all of the following: 1. the dangers of drug abuse in the workplace, 2. the person's or organization's policy of maintaining a drug -free workplace, 3. any available counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs, and 4. penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations. c. Provide as required by Govemment Code section 8355(c), that every employee who works on the proposed contract or grant: 1. will receive a copy of the company's drug -free policy statement, and 2. will agree to abide by the terms of the company's statement as a condition of employment on the contract or grant. 102 Riverside County Transportation Commission Agreement No. 08A1814 Page 8 of 9 Failure to comply with these requirements may result in suspension of payments under this Agreement or termination of this Agreement or both, and LOCAL AGENCY may be ineligible for the award of any future state contracts if CALTRANS determines that any of the following has occurred: (1) LOCAL AGENCY has made a false certification or, (2) AGENCY violates the certification by failing to carry out the requirements as noted above. 18. Relationship of Parties It is expressly understood that this is an agreement and is executed by and between two independent governmental entities and that this is not intended to, and shall not be construed to, create the relationship of agent, servant, employee, partnership, joint venture or association, or any other relationship whatsoever other than that of an independent contractor. 19. Interfacing with Pedestrian and Vehicle Traffic Pursuant to the authority contained in Section 591 of the Vehicle Code, the department has determined that within such areas as are within the limits of the project and are open to public traffic, LOCAL AGENCY shall comply with all of the requirements set forth in Divisions 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 of the Vehicle Code. LOCAL AGENCY shall take all necessary precautions for safe operations of the LOCAL AGENCY's equipment and the protection of the public from injury and damage from such property. 103 Riverside County Transportation Commission Agreement No. 08A1814 Page 9 of 9 ATTACHMENTS: The following attachments are incorporated into and are made a part of this Agreement by this reference and attachment. I. LOCAL AGENCY Resolution II. FSP Task Order III. Subcontracting Provisions/List and Tow Operator Scope of Work IV. Sample Invoice V. Invoice Dispute Form IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year first herein above written: STATE OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: Title: Contract Officer Date: By: Title: Date: By: Title: Date: By: Title: Date: 104 • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 12, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Brian Cunanan, Commuter Assistance Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Funding Agreement with the California Highway Patrol for Freeway Service Patrol Supervision WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-45-084-00 with the California Highway Patrol (CHP) to provide overtime supervision and operation of a Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program in Riverside County; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. DISCUSSION: At its June 2007 meeting, the Commission approved a three-year agreement in the amount of $203,443 with CHP for overtime supervision supporting the FSP program. This agreement expires on June 30, 2010, and staff is seeking approval for a new agreement with CHP for another three-year term. The agreement provides for a maximum of 840 overtime hours for FY 2010/11, 882 overtime hours for FY 201 1 /12, and 926 overtime hours for FY 2012/13 at a statewide rate determined each fiscal year by CHP Headquarters, which currently is $79.15 per hour. The total amount of the agreement for both regular FSP overtime and construction FSP overtime shall not exceed $209,590. In the event CHP Headquarters grants a rate increase, the Commission would be required to reimburse the CHP at the new hourly rate, but in no event shall the total amount exceed the maximum contract amount. The Riverside County FSP program is operated as a joint venture between the California Department of Transportation (Ca!trans), CHP, and the Commission in its capacity as the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE). The Riverside County SAFE is responsible for administering the program, and the CHP provides daily field supervision to ensure service performance. Agenda Item 8L 105 The CHP has assigned and staffed the program, for the dedicated purpose of supporting the Riverside County FSP program, with two full-time traffic officers. However, the nature of the FSP program (5:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.. [1:00 p.m. on Fridays] to 7:00 p.m.) may require the CHP officers to work overtime. Also, any time one of the two officers is on vacation, sick leave, or state mandated training, another officer must work overtime to cover the shift. The attached funding agreement provides for the reimbursement from the Commission to the CHP of those reasonable overtime expenses necessary to support the FSP program. An Inland CHP Lieutenant Commander provides direct supervision of the dedicated FSP officers and reviews and approves their reimbursed overtime expenses. Auditing of these reimbursable expenses is performed both at the local CHP division level and at the state level by the FSP liaison contracts unit. Staff reviews these expenses every six weeks and the current agreement is tracking to come in below the allotted contract budget. For the new CHP agreement, $66,487 has been included in the proposed FY 2010/11 FSP program budget. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2010/11 FY 2011/12+ Amount: $ 66,487 $143,103 Source of Funds: SAFE Budget Ad ustment: No N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 201 45 81016 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \y1©14zd,N�„ ; Date: 04/19/10 Attachment: Draft Agreement No. 10-45-084-00 Agenda Item 8L • 106 AGREEMENT N0. 10-45-084-00 FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL AND RIVERSIDE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 1st day of July, by and between the California Highway Patrol, hereinafter called CHP, and the Riverside County Transportation Commission hereinafter called ROTC. GENERAL INFORMATION: This agreement pertains to the overtime supervision and operation of a Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program in Riverside County. Section 2401 of the California Vehicle Code (CVC) states that the Commissioner of the California Highway Patrol (CHP) shall make adequate provisions for patrol of the highways at all times of the day and night. This section is interpreted to mean that the Commissioner is given broad discretion in determining the means of providing adequate patrol, including the use of Riverside County FSP vehicles. Section 21718(a)(7) of the CVC is a provision which specifically allows the CHP to be responsible for FSP stopping on freeways for the purpose of rapid removal of impediments to traffic. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (ROTC) has the ability to provide local matching funds as required by state Budget Change Proposal (BCP) for FSPs on freeways within Riverside County, which qualified the county to participate in the state FSP program. Riverside County FSP will assist in transportation system management efforts, provide traffic congestion relief, and expedite the removal of freeway impediments, all of which will have the added benefit of improving air quality. TERMS AND CONDITIONS A. GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. The Riverside County FSP program is intended to be funded with revenues derived from Safe and State Budget Change Proposal funds, known as BCP for the day to day contractor operation. In addition to this it is necessary to fund CHP overtime for operator field supervision, administrative duties, and other field duties required to maintain the expected high level of FSP operational service. 1 107 2. Should this agreement be terminated under paragraph 2 of section B, TERMS AND CONDITIONS, RCTC agrees to reimburse the CHP for those reasonable costs incurred and associated with the program overtime supervision and administrative duties as defined in this agreement up to the point of termination. 3. This agreement may only be amended by mutual written consent of the parties hereto. 4. The term of this agreement is from July 1, 2010, to June 30, 2013. 5. The Coordinators of this agreement are shown below: a) Riverside County Transportation Commission Brian Cunanan, Program Manager P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, California 92502-2208 (951) 787-7141 California Highway Patrol Research and Planning Section Statewide Coordinator P.O. Box 942898 Sacramento, CA 94298-0001 (916) 843-3400 RCTC agrees to reimburse CHP in accordance with the following schedule: 840 hours of available overtime during 10/11 fiscal year. Reimbursed at $79.15 per hour. For a total of $66,486.00 for 10/11 fiscal year. 882 hours of available overtime during 11/12 fiscal year. Reimbursed at $79.15 per hour. For a total of $69,810.30 for 11/12 fiscal year. 926 hours of available overtime during 12/13 fiscal year. Reimbursed at $79.15 per hour. For a total of $73,292.90 for 12/13 fiscal year. 6. In the event CHP is granted a rate increase, RCTC agrees to reimburse CHP at the new hourly rate, but in no event shall the total amount exceed $209,589.20. 2 • • 108 • 7. CHP shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless RCTC, its subsidiaries, and its officers, agents and employees from and against any and all liability and expenses, including, without limitation, defense cost and legal fees, and claims for damages of any nature whatsoever, including, without limitation, bodily injury, death, personal injury or property damage arising from the performance of the work described herein, but only to the extent such liability, expenses and claims for damages are caused by or result from the negligent or intentional acts or omissions of the CHP, its officers, agents or employees. 8. RCTC shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CHP, its subsidiaries, and its officers, agents and employees from and against any and all liability and expenses, including, without limitation, defense cost and legal fees, and claims for damages of any nature whatsoever, including, without limitation, bodily injury, death, personal injury or property damage arising from the performance of the work described herein, but only to the extent such liability, expenses and claims for damages are caused by or result from the negligent or intentional acts or omissions of the RCTC, its officers, agents or employees. 9. The contracting parties hereto shall be subject to the examination and audit of the State for a period of three (3) years after final payment under the contract in accordance with the Government Code Section 10532. In addition, RCTC and CHP may be subject to the examination and audit by representatives of either party. The examination and audit shall be confined to those matters directly related to this contract. B. RC -SAFE RESPONSIBILITIES: 1. RCTC shall reimburse CHP for those reasonable overtime expenses necessary to support the Riverside County FSP operations as outlined in paragraph 6 of Section A. 2. RCTC shall have the authority to cancel the funding of this program with 90 days written notification. CHP RESPONSIBILITIES: 1. CHP has assigned and staffed for supervision of the Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol with two full-time traffic officers as per the state BCP. The level of supervision conducted by the CHP under this agreement shall be at the discretion of the CHP. 3 109 2. All personnel providing services shall be State employees under the sole discretion, supervision, and regulation of the CHP. Said personnel shall work out of the appropriate CHP facilities as designated by the CHP. At no time shall any State employee assigned to the Riverside County FSP program be considered employees, agents, officials, or volunteers of RCTC. 3. CHP overtime duties shall include but not be limited to: a) The daily field supervision of FSP operators. b) Investigating complaints from the public regarding a Riverside County FSP contractor or operator. c) Performing all necessary driver's license and background checks on all Riverside County FSP operators. d) Inspecting all tow trucks on a periodic basis. e) Performing necessary daily project field supervision, program management and the oversight of the quality of the contractors' services. f) Provide training to all Riverside County FSP contractors and operators. g) Approve all contractor's billing prior to RCTC payment. h) Provide representation for the FSP Technical Committee. 4 110 RIVERSIDE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION HIGHWAY PATROL Bob Buster, Chair Administrative Services Officer Date Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: Best, Best & Krieger LLP General Counsel Date 5 111 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 12, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Renew the memberships of Michelle Anglin, Peter Benavidez, Jim Collins, Fortunato Penilla, and Eunice Lovi; 2) Appoint LoreIle Moe -Luna as the new Consolidated Transportation Service Agency representative from Riverside Transit Agency (RTA); and 3) Approve the memberships for the Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee (CAC/SSTAC) effective January 1, 2010. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Transportation Development Act (TDA) provides direction for administering both Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds and State Transit Assistance (STA) funds. Both fund types are used to support operational and capital expenditures for public transit. Section 99238 of the TDA regulations requires the Commission to have a CAC/SSTAC. The TDA regulations further require that the membership must contain the following categorical areas: 1. One representative of a potential transit user 60 years of age and older. 2. One representative of a potential transit user who is handicapped. 3. Two representatives of the social service providers for seniors. 4. Two representatives of the social service providers for the handicapped, including one representative of a social service transportation provider if one exists. 5. One representative of a social service provider for persons of limited means. Agenda Item 8M 112 6. Two representatives of the Consolidated Transportation Service Agency(s) designated as such pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 15975 of the Government Code, if one exists, including one representative from an operator, if one exists. As further defined in Section 99238, these members shall be appointed by the Transportation Planning Agency. Candidates are to be recruited from a broad spectrum of social services providers representing the elderly, handicapped and persons of limited means. Appointments are for a three-year term. DISCUSSION: The CAC/SSTAC serves the Commission by participating in the unmet transit needs hearings, if required, and as part of the review panel for SB821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program. The CAC/SSTAC also reviews the Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) developed by each public operator as part of the Commission's annual budget development process. The CAC is scheduled to meet on May 13, 2010 to review the draft SRTP documents. After presentations by each operator, comments made by CAC/SSTAC members shall be responded to and/or incorporated into the documents where appropriate. The memberships of Michelle Anglin, Peter Benavidez, Jim Collins, Fortunato Penilla, and Eunice Lovi expired on December 31, 2009. Staff contacted these members and all have indicated a commitment to continue service on the CAC/SSTAC. The appointment of LoreIle Moe -Luna representing RTA is to replace Scott Richardson who previously represented RTA on the CAC/SSTAC. Attachment: CAC Membership Roster Agenda Item 8M • 113 • Riverside County Transportation Commission Citizens Advisory Committee / Social Services Transportation Advisory Council Effective January 1, 2010 Name / Area Represented Term Categorical Membership Expiration Date Qualifications Michelle Anglin /Norco Social service provider for senior and disabled :Jan 2013 Provides senior and disabled services Peter Benavidez !Riverside Potential transit user who is disabled Jan 2013 Provides disabled services Jim Collins / Indio Potential transit user who is 60 years of age or older Jan 2013 Previous CAC/SSTAC member Eunice Lovi /Coachella Valley Consolidated Transportation Service Agency Jan 2013 SunLine Transit Agency staff Fortunato Penilla / Riverside Community member Jan 2013 Retired Inland Regional Center transportation coordinator. Actively attended CAC meetings providing assistance w/ FTA Section 5310 program. Andrea Puga / Corona Community member Jan 2011 Past member of RCTC, RTA, and Metrolink Lorelle Moe -Luna /Western Riverside Consolidated Transportation Service Agency Jan 2013 Riverside Transit Agency staff Cindy Scheirer / Pedley Community member Jan 2011 Involved in community issues and has attended Transportation Now meetings Sherry Thibodeaux / Riverside Social service provider for limited means Jan 2011 Interested in transit issues. Works for Community Access Center. Hosts support groups f p or women with disabilities and victims of domestic violence. Mary Venerable / Perris Social service provider for p seniors Jan 2011 Involved in community issues and a member of Lake Elsinore Transportation Now 114 RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 12, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: City of Corona Jump Start Funding for Grade Crossings WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Reallocate $500,000 in funding from the Smith Avenue and Railroad Street to the McKinley Avenue grade separation project; 2) Approve Agreement No. 08-33-014-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 08-33-014-00, with the city of Corona (Corona) deleting Smith Avenue and Railroad Street from the project list; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In July 2007, the Commission allocated $10 million of Western Riverside County Commuter Rail Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds to support the project development of 10 grade separation projects in western Riverside County. As identified on the attached list, agreements were subsequently entered into with the cities of Corona and Riverside and the county of Riverside. Of the $10 million allocation, the city of Corona received $2.5 million for the following four projects: Project Funding Auto Center Drive $ 500,000 McKinley Street 1,500,000 Railroad Street 250,000 Smith Avenue 250,000 Total Allocation $2,500,000 Agenda Item 8N 115 Since 2007, Corona has been aggressively moving forward on the Auto Center Drive grade separation and has expended all LTF funds allocated to that project. Once completed, the Auto Center Drive project will construct a grade separation over Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF) at an estimated cost of $32 million. The right of way phase for the project started in November 2009 and construction is scheduled to begin January 2011. Project completion is scheduled for June 2012. Corona has also made steady progress on the preliminary engineering for the McKinley Street/BNSF project; however, there has been minimal progress on the Railroad Street and Smith Avenue projects. When the original request was made for the Commission to allocate LTF funds to these projects, Corona anticipated that pending private development projects in the vicinity would drive the need for grade separations at these locations. Since that time, private development has virtually stopped and, with the regional economic situation in a downturn, Corona is unable to allocate any funding to these two projects in the foreseeable future. Corona also believes that with the completion of Auto Center Drive, the need for grade separations at Railroad Street and Smith Avenue may not be warranted for many years and as a result, Corona has decided to remove both projects from consideration to receive Section 190 funding from the California Public Utility Commission. Corona is requesting that the LTF funding allocated to Railroad Street ($250,000) and Smith Avenue ($250,000) be allocated to the McKinley Street/BNSF grade separation project. If approved, total LTF funding for McKinley Street would be $2 million. With the additional funding, Corona anticipates that it will have sufficient funds to complete environmental work in order to complete the project approval and environmental documentation (PA&ED) phase of McKinley Street. The McKinley project proposes to elevate the profile of McKinley Street over the BNSF railroad tracks and adjacent Arlington channel. The project will also include connector roads, signalized intersections, and slight modifications at the State Route 91 off -ramp. Although the increased funding will complete the PA&ED phase of the project; there is no funding available for the construction phase. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: 2010/2011 Amount: $500,000 Source of Funds: LTF - Commuter Rail Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 106 67 86103 P004008 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \ ,aa Date: 04/19/10 Attachment: Program of Projects Agenda Item 8N • 116 GRADE SEPARATION "JUMP START" TCIF PROGRAM APPROVED PROGRAM PROJECTS WESTERN COUNTY PA&ED AND PS&E: $8.5 MILLION PROJECT McKinley Street/BNSF Iowa Avenue/BNSF Riverside Avenue/UP Streeter Avenue/ UP Bellegrave Avenue/UP Jurupa Road/UP AGENCY City of Corona City of Riverside City of Riverside City of Riverside County of Riverside County of Riverside PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING: $1.5 MILLION PROJECT Auto Center Drive/BNSF Railroad Street/BNSF Smith Avenue/BNSF Center Street/BNSF AGENCY City of Corona City of Corona City of Corona County of Riverside COACHELLA VALLEY PA&ED AND PS&E: $3.0 MILLION PROJECT Avenue 52/UP Avenue 66/UP AGENCY CVAG CVAG *All projects require a 25% local match. PROPOSED FUNDING* $1.5 million $1.5 million $1.5 million $1.5 million $1.0 million $1.5 million PROPOSED FUNDING* $0.50 million $0.25 million $0.25 million $0.50 million PROPOSED FUNDING* $1.5 million $1.5 million Summary: City of Corona: City of Riverside: County of Riverside: $2,500,000 - (4 projects) $4,500,000 - (3 projects) $3,000,000 - 13 projects) 117 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: May 12, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: State and Federal Legislative Update BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislative activities; 2) Approve the following bill positions: a) SB 1245 (Simitian) - OPPOSE; b) AB 1760 (Blumenfield) - WATCH; c) AB 2098 (Miller) - SPONSOR and SUPPORT; and d) AB 2620 (Eng) - OPPOSE. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Federal Update After spending a year on healthcare reform, the next priority for Congress and the Administration is reform of the financial system. Also on the upcoming agenda is new climate change legislation named after its authors, "Kerry -Graham -Lieberman." At the time this staff report was written, the climate change bill had not been introduced; however, part of the plan may include a significant federal "gas fee" that would not go towards transportation purposes. Also, a second round of transportation spending associated with a jobs bill, as was speculated in early 2010, does not appear to be imminent. Meanwhile, the next six -year transportation authorization bill is not likely to become a major issue in Washington, D.C, until at least the end of 2010 or early 2011. Senate and House Committees have been holding hearings on transportation issues such as innovative financing and strengthening local -federal partnerships. These hearings keep dialogue going and allow Congress to receive policy input. Senator Barbara Boxer's Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW) is beginning to draft its own authorization legislation, dubbed Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21" Century (MAP-21). The Commission and its partners in Mobility 21, the Agenda Item 80 118 transportation advocacy coalition for Southern California, are preparing to submit its first set of written suggestions to EPW for crafting MAP-21. Reflecting the even -numbered year that we are in, House Democrats and Republicans have made pledges regarding earmarks they will not seek in the FY 2011 appropriations cycle. Democrats pledged to not seek earmarks on behalf of for -profit entities, while Republicans responded by pledging to seek no earmarks whatsoever. These moratoriums will apply for this year only. Neither caucus in the Senate has made any such pledge. The Commission submitted its earmark requests to its representatives in the House and Senate in February pursuant to Commission direction. Staff will work with member offices and Commission federal advocates on strategies to continue to promote Commission priority projects. In late March, Executive Director Anne Mayer and Government Relations Manager Aaron Hake traveled to Washington, D.C., to meet with EPW staff, Senator Dianne Feinstein's staff and Administration officials to discuss the Commission's innovative approach to financing and delivering the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP). The goal of these meetings was to offer the Commission as a resource to Washington, D.C., officials on issues relating to tolling, innovative finance, corridor management, and project delivery, as well as to elevate the awareness in Washington, D.C., of the significance of the SR-91 CIP to Southern California and future federal policies. State Update Following enactment of the gas tax swap in March, it is expected that transportation will remain off the table in upcoming budget negotiations. However, Commission advocates and staff will remain attentive to budget negotiations as the Legislature continues to grapple with a spiraling deficit. The Commission received a significant victory at the April meeting of the California Transportation Commission (CTC). The CTC unanimously approved the SR-91 CIP for best -value design -build authority under the SBX2 4 pilot program. The Commission's application for design -build authority received enormous support from trades unions and other regional transportation agencies. The SR-91 CIP is estimated to create approximately 20,000 jobs when it goes to construction. Design -build is estimated to save three years in delivering the project and is necessary to receive financing. Given the importance of design -build to the Commission's ability to deliver SR-91 CIP, the CTC's decision is a historic milestone for the project and the 10-Year Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan. Agenda Item 80 • 119 Staff Recommended Bill Positions and Analysis Meanwhile, the Legislature is churning through hundreds of bills to meet committee deadlines. Below are a few bills of interest to the Commission and staff recommended positions. SB 1245 (Simitian): High -Occupancy Vehicles (HOV's): Tolls Staff Recommended Position: OPPOSE This bill would prohibit agencies such as the Commission from charging a toll for the use of a high -occupancy vehicle lane (HOV) that does not have a toll in place as of January 1, 2010. The bill also prohibits occupancy requirements for HOV lanes to be increased. The Commission's SR-91 CIP will include the conversion of an existing HOV lane on SR-91 to a tolled lane. The project will also include the addition of new lanes, including a general purpose lane. Based on investment - grade traffic and revenue studies to be conducted prior to opening the new Express Lanes facility, future toll policies set by the Commission may necessitate establishing a 3+ threshold for drivers to receive a free or reduced toll. This bill would remove authority from the Commission to make decisions regarding the operation of its own facility. SB 1245 would hamper the Commission's ability to meet its financial obligations and would impinge on local control of the SR-91 corridor. SB 1316 (Correa, 2008) provided for the local governance of the SR-91 corridor in Orange and Riverside Counties. Staff believes that the Legislature should respect existing law for the SR-91 corridor. AB 1760 (Blumenfie1d): Design -Sequencing Contracts Staff Recommended Position: WATCH A number of years ago, state law created a design -sequencing pilot program in order to allow the use of this type of alternative project delivery for a limited number of projects. One such project happened to be the 60/91 /215 interchange in Riverside. Since the original bill was approved, the pilot program was expanded and the sunset date was extended. This bill would once again extend the sunset date to 2016. The Commission has no imminent plans to utilize design -sequencing, but the bill bears watching because design -sequencing, is often inappropriately compared to and thought of in the same way as design -build. The two forms of project procurement are substantially different, and it is important to make clear the outcome or existence of this bill or program should not alter or effect the need to expand and support the use of design -build procurements. Agenda Item 80 120 AB 2098 (Miller): Public contracts: Design -Build Contracts Staff Recommended Position: SPONSOR and SUPPORT Assemblyman Jeff Miller introduced AB 2098 to clarify existing law regarding the design -build pilot program approved by the Legislature in 2009. The pilot program allowed for design -build to be used on five projects nominated by local or regional agencies and 10 projects nominated by Ca!trans. All 15 projects must be approved by the CTC. The Commission's SR-91 CIP was the first project in the state approved by the CTC to be one of the five locally -nominated projects to use design - build. Professional Engineers in California Government (PECG) opposed the Commission's design -build application to the CTC and continues to raise concerns despite the CTC's action. AB 2098 may be amended throughout the legislative cycle as Riverside County legislators, the Commission, and PECG continue dialogue on SR-91 CIP and the design -build pilot program. AB 2620 (Eng): Transportation: Toll Facilities Staff Recommended Position: OPPOSE This bill would earmark a yet -to -be specified percentage of revenue generated from all highway toll facilities in California for the State Highway Operations, Preservation and Protection (SHOPP) account. AB 2620 would run roughshod over existing state law governing individual toll facilities, including the planned SR-91 and Interstate 15 CIP's, plus operational facilities in Orange and San Diego Counties and the Bay Area. On SR-91 and 1-15, tolls will be used to repay toll revenue bonds that will be used to finance construction of billion -dollar corridor improvements. AB 2620 would decrease the feasibility of financing these improvements and jeopardize the projects by carving away the revenue that would be necessary to pay bondholders. Furthermore, AB 2620 would strip away the Commission's ability to use toll revenue to make improvements along the SR-91 and 1-15 corridors in the general purpose lanes, adjacent public transit facilities, interchanges, or major arterials. Recent policy work by the Legislature has established a sound principle that toll revenue should be invested in the corridor where it is generated; this guaranteed that the users of the corridor benefit from tolls being paid to use it. AB 2620 would defy this principle by sending a percentage of revenue to SHOPP, which could be spent anywhere on the state highway system in California. While the Commission is supportive of the SHOPP program and bringing the state highway system to a state of good repair, it is inappropriate for the Legislature to raid local revenue to pay for its own backlog of projects throughout the state. The bill is sponsored by PECG. Commission staff has been in contact with transportation agencies throughout California who also plan to recommend an OPPOSE position to their respective boards of directors in May. Agenda Item 80 • • 121 • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 12, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: State Route 60/Interstate 215 East Junction Interchange Local Match Requirement WESTERN RIVERS/DE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Measure A funds in an amount not to exceed $1,949,047, to match federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds programmed to the 60/215 East Junction interchange project; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director to execute the cooperative agreement amendment with Caltrans to include Measure A match funds. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The 60/215 East Junction interchange project is scheduled for a construction allocation by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) at its May 19-20, 2010 meeting. The project consists of constructing two high occupancy vehicle connector lanes from SR-60 near Day Street to the 1-215 at Box Springs Road, and widening Box Springs Road from two to four lanes between Morton Road and Box Springs Road/Fair Isle Drive interchange. The CTC originally intended to allocate state dollars; however, state dollars are not available due to the state financial crisis. However, Caltrans has experienced cost savings on federal projects, which allows the CTC to allocate these federal dollars to STIP projects that are federalized and ready to list. Caltrans has prepared a list of qualified STIP projects that includes three Riverside County projects: 1-10/Date Palm interchange, I-15/California Oaks interchange, and the 60/215 East Junction. The 1-10/Date Palm interchange was scheduled for an allocation at the February 2010 CTC meeting. The project was not allocated due to lack of STIP funding and was placed on a list of projects totaling well over $700 million of STIP funded projects that could not be allocated. The above three Agenda Item 9 122 projects are in a good position to receive the allocation of federal funds at the May CTC meeting due to project readiness and compliance with federal regulations. Since the STIP portion of construction funds for the 60/215 East Junction interchange project will be federalized, the Commission cannot use the STIP funds to match the federal CMAQ funds as originally intended. The minimum local match requirement for CMAQ funds is 11.47%. The funding summary for construction of the 60/215 East Junction interchange project is proposed as follows: Fund Source Construction Cost $ (000's) CMAQ (federal) $ 15,044 Measure A (CMAQ local match) 1,949 STIP IIP (federal) 18,355 STIP IIP (state match) 2,378 Lease Proceeds 770 Total Construction Funding $ 38,496 Staff recommends that the Commission approve $1,949,047 of Measure A funds as the local match for the CMAQ funds. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A Year: FY 2010/11 + Amount: $1,949,097 Source of Funds: 1989 Measure A Highway Budget Adjustment: N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 003017 81301 00000 0000 222 31 81301 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \y4/44.aai Date: 04/26/10 Agenda Item 9 • 123 (Bugs!xe) peroid auet.piewi uogounr 4se3 91-Z/09 60/215 East Junction Project Map Of Existing HOV Lams Proposed HOV Lzms SR%0 38 r r a» � 9 I a_ > 7 mom! • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 12, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Lisa DaSilva, Capital Projects Manager Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement for Construction of the State Route 74/Interstate 215 Interchange Improvement Project in the City of Perris, and Construction Design Support WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 10-31-030-00 for the construction of the 74/215 interchange improvement project in the city of Perris (Perris) to Skanska USA Civil West (Skanska) for the amount of $13,439,004 plus a contingency amount of $1,343,996 for potential change orders during construction, for a total not to exceed contract authorization of $14,783,000; 2) Approve Agreement No. 07-31-122-04, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 07-31-122-00, with David Evans and Associates, Inc. (DEA) to perform additional design support during the construction of the 74/215 interchange improvement project in the city of Perris for the additional amount of $204,087 resulting in a revised not to exceed amount of $3,303,749; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The 74/215 interchange in Perris is one of the last remaining highway projects in the 1989 Measure A delivery plan. The preliminary engineering and environmental clearance phase began in April 2005 with DEA, and the contract for final design was awarded to DEA in July 2007. Since this action, DEA along with Commission staff, city staff, and Ca!trans oversight have developed an interchange design that will meet traffic demand and operational needs by correcting existing local street geometric deficiencies and providing more access capacity to 1-215. This design and the corresponding contract documents were approved for construction advertisement earlier this year. Agenda Item 10 124 The project was advertised for construction bids on February 18, 2010, with bid opening on March 30. Ten bids were received and opened. A summary of the bids received is shown in Table A: Table A 74/215 Interchange Improvement Project Bid Summary Firm (In order from low bid to high bid) Bid Amount Engineer's Estimate $21,691,249.25 1 Skanska USA Civil West $13,439,004.00 2 Riverside Construction $13,562,111.00 3 Sukut / Myers $14,067,865.80 4 Beador $14,096,700.00 5 Security Paving $14,676,151.38 6 Ortiz $15,122,641.00 7 Harris $15,162,030.00 8 SEMA $15,520,184.61 9 MCM $16,351,118.00 10 Griffith $16,356,570.50 The basis for award for a public works contract is the lowest responsive and responsible bidder as defined by Commission procurement policy and state law. The bid analysis is included as Attachment 1. The analysis shows the bid amounts of the five lowest bidders and shows the bid unit price, extended amount and percent variation from the engineer's estimate for each bid item. The bid price submitted by Skanska was 38% lower than the engineer's estimate and the fifth lowest bid was 30.7% lower. The Attachment 2 chart shows the trend of low bid vs. engineer's estimate and shows that the low bid has been declining as compared to the engineer's estimate over the past several years. Federally funded contracts that are administered by the Commission are subject to the requirements of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 26, Title 49 entitled Participation by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) in Department of Transportation Financial Assistance Programs. Pursuant to the relevant federal DBE provisions, the Commission established a 5.16% race conscious Underutilized Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (UDBE) participation goal and a 10.7% race neutral DBE participation goal in the construction bid advertisement for this project. Only a bidder meeting the established race conscious UDBE goal for this project can be considered fully responsive to the bid requirements. Agenda Item 10 • • 125 • • To meet this requirement, bidders must either achieve the UDBE goal, or, alternatively, meet the good faith efforts (GFE) requirements set forth in the invitation for bid. The low bidder, Skanska, did not meet the 5.16% race conscious UDBE goal; however, the firm was deemed responsive based on Commission's review of the GFE documentation package it submitted evidencing adequate good faith efforts to comply with the UDBE requirement. After analyzing the three lowest bids per the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)/Caltrans analysis process, staff and the construction manager, Jacobs, concluded that the Skanska bid in the amount of $13,439,004 is the lowest responsible and responsive bid received for the project. Staff recommends award of Agreement No. 10-31-030-00 for the construction of the project to Skanska for the amount of $13,439,004 plus a contingency amount of $1,343,996 to cover potential change orders encountered during construction, for a total not to exceed contract authorization of $14,783,000. Staff has prepared and submitted the FHWA contract award request through Caltrans District 8's Local Assistance and anticipates the contract award approval after the May Commission meeting. The project construction contract costs will be funded as shown in Table B: Table B 74/215 Interchange Improvement Project Construction Funding Summary $13,870,000 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) $720,000 DEMO (Federal) $89,000 Surface Transportation Program (Federal) $104,000 TUMF (includes DEMO and STPL match) $14,783,000 Total Contract Amendment for David Evans and Associates An amendment to Agreement No. 07-31-122-00 with DEA of $204,087 is also requested to increase the authorized amount for construction support services by the design team. During the construction phase of the project, DEA will need to be available to resolve construction contractor design questions and modify the design if necessary, and prepare as -built drawings at the conclusion of construction. The original scope did not include response and resolution of contractor requests for information (RFI) and clarification and assumed there would be 175 plan sheets in the design package. During the design phase, the number of plan sheets increased Agenda Item 10 126 to 310, requiring an increase in the cost to produce the as -built drawings. This amendment will cover the increase in scope for the contractor RFI resolutions and the additional 135 plan sheet as -built drawings. The original agreement with DEA for final design was approved by the Commission at its July 2007 meeting. Agreement No. 07-31-122-01 was approved by the Commission at its May 2009 meeting to perform additional right of way engineering and design work. The Executive Director approved Agreement No. 07-31-122-02 in January 2010 using contingency to include modifications to the wall structure locations, bridge aesthetics, and implementation of a recycled water irrigation system mandated by Eastern Municipal Water District. Agreement No. 07-31-122-03 was approved by the Executive Director in April 2010 for the scope increase for additional design, analysis, and technical review of the structure design, roadway plans, and drainage changes. Staff has completed negotiations with DEA and is in agreement with the estimated cost required for construction support. Cost details are included with the attached draft Agreement No. 07-31-122-04. The estimated construction support costs represent the total estimated cost, and staff will issue notices to proceed (NTP) to DEA in stages as construction is completed and additional funds are required. Staff recommends approval of Agreement No. 07-31-122-04, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 07-31-122-00, with DEA to perform additional work scope to complete the final engineering services associated with preparing final design for the construction of the project for the additional amount of $204,087, for a total authorized amount of $3,303,749. rFinancial Information-SKANSKA Yes FY 2009/10 $300,000 In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2010/11 Amount: $7,000,000 N/A FY 2011/12+ $7,483,000 Source of Funds: ARRA, STPL, DEMO, and Budget Adjustment: No No TUMF N/A GLA No.: 003015 81301 00000 0000 222 31 81301 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \Aft4,,d,,,ijit Date: 04/20/10 Agenda Item 10 • 127 • Financial Information-DEA In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Yes Year: FY 2009/10 FY 2010/11 FY 2011/12+ Amount: $75,000 $75,000 $54,087 Source of Funds: TUMF Budget Adjustment: No No N/A GLA No.: 003015 81304 00000 0000 222 31 81301 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \Att,„" Date: 04/20/10 Attachments: 1) Contract 10-31-030 Bid Analysis 2) Low Bid vs. Engineers Estimate Trend Chart 3) Model Agreement No. 10-31-030-00 with Skanska USA Civil West 4) Amendment No. 07-31-122-04 to Agreement No. 07-31-122-00 with DEA with attached scope of work and cost estimate Agenda Item 10 128 • • • JACOBS 74/215 Interchange Bid Analysis Contract No. 10-31-030-00 Local EA No. 08-464204 Federal Project No.: HPLUESPL-6054(063) Bid Date: March 30, 2010 2:00 P.M. ATTACHMENT 74/215 Interchange Improvements Apparent LOWEST BIDDER Apparent 2nd LOWEST BIDDER Appanerd 9rd LOWEST BIDDER Apparent 401 LOWEST B'DDER Apparent 5th LOWEST BIDDER Skanska USA Civil West Riverside Construction Sukul-Myers, JV Beador Construction Security Paving RBA No. REM DESCRIPTION UNIT ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE BID UNIT PRICE EXTENDED AMOUNT %VAR ENGR EST BID UNIT PRICE EXTENDED AMOUNT %VAR ENGR EST BID UNIT PRICE EXTENDED AMOUNT %VAR ENOR EST BID UNIT PRICE EXTENDED AMOUNT %VAR ENGR EST BIO UNIT PRICE EXTENDED AMOUNT %VAR ENGR EST QTY UNIT PRICE REM MOUNT 1 70012 PROGRESS SCHEDULE (CRITICAL PATH METHOD) LS 1 $7,500.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 33.3% $ 5,000.00 $ 5,003.00 -33.3% $ 50.000.00 568.7% $ 8,000.00 $ 6,000.00 -20.0% 2 74016 CONSTRUCTION SITE MANAGEMENT LS 1 $150,000.00 $ 150,000.00 $ 8.000.00 $ 100.000.00 $ 100,000.00 -33.3% $ 5,000.00 $ 75.000.00 $ 75,000.00 -50.0% $ 80,000.00 $ 80,000.00 -48.7% 3 74019 PREPARE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN LS 1 S10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 3,500.00 $ 3,500.00 -65.0% $ 5,000.00 $ 5,003.00 50.0% S 2,800.00 $ 2,800.00 -72.0% $ 3.000.00 $ 3,000.00 -70.0% $ 7,000.00 $ 7,000.00 30.0% 4 74028 TEMPORARY FIBER ROLL LF 2500 $3.50 $ 8,750.00 $ 2.00 $ 5,000.00 -42.9% $ 5.00 $ 12,500.00 42.9% $ 3.50 $ 8,750.00 0.0% $ 3.50 $ 8,750.00 0.0% $ 2.40 $ 6,000.00 31.4% 6 74029 TEMPORARY SILT FENCE LF 6800 $3.50 $ 23,800.00 $ 2.00 $ 13,600.00 -42.9% $ 5.00 $ 34,000.00 42.9% 1.8 $ 12,240.00 -48.6% $ 2.50 $ 17,000.00 -28.6% $ 1.30 $ 8,840.00 -62.9% 6 74032 TEMPORARY CONCRETE WASHOUT FACILITY EA 4 $3,500.00 $ 14,000.00 $ 2,100.00 $ 8,400.00 -40.0% $ 3,500.00 $ 14,000.00 0.0% $ 2,100.00 $ 8,400.03 -40.0% $ 2000.00 $ 8,000.00 -42.9% $ 950.00 $ 3800.00 -72.9°4.. 7 74033 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE EA 7 53,500.00 $ 24,500.00 $ 7,200.00 105.7% $ 5,000.00 $ 35,000.00 42.9% $ 4,000.00 $ 28,00.3DO 14.3% $ 2.300.00 $ 16,100.00 -34.3% S 800.00 -77.1% a 74035 TEMPORARY CHECK DAM (TEMP. GRAVEL BAG BERM) LF 3500 $4.00 $ 14,000.00 $ 4.00 $ 14,000.00 0.0% $ 5.00 $ 17500.DO 25.0% $ 5.25 $ 18,375.03 31.334 $ 4.00 $ 14,000.00 0.0% $ 1.60 $ 5600.00 -60.D% 9 74037 MOVE-DUMOVE-OUT (TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL) LS 1 $10,000.00 $ 10,000,00 $ 500.00 46;04 $ 1.500.00 435.0% $ 5,600.00 $ 5,603.03 -44.0% $ 3.000.00 $ 3,000.00 -70.0% $ 525.00 6% 10 74036 TEMPORARY DRAINAGE INLET/OUTLET PROTECTION EA 70 $400.00 $ 28,000.00 S 200.00 $ 14,003.00 -50.0°% $ 500.00 $ 35,000.00 25.0% $ 340.00 $ 23,800.00 -15.0% $ 250.00 $ 17 500.00 37.5% S 90.00 -77.5% 11 74041 STREET SWEEPING LS 1 $25,000.00 $ 25.000.00 $ 95,000.00 280.0% S 75.000.00 200.0% $ 50,000.00 100.3k 5 125,000.00 400.0% $ 109,000.00 109,000.00 336.0% 12 74065 TEMPORARY SOIL BINDER SOY° moo $0.50 $ 17.950.00 $ 1.20 140.0% $ 0.35 $ 12,565.00 30.0% $ 0.30 S 10,770.00 -40.0% S 0.35 $ 12,565.00 -30.0% $ 0.10 -80.0% 13 120090 CONSTRUCTION AREA SIGNS LS 1 $75,000.00 $ 75.600.00 $ 49,500.00 $ 49,500.00 34.0% $ 50.000.00 $ 50,000.00 33.3% $ 45,000.70 $ 45,000.70 -40.0% $ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 33.3% $ 52,000.00 $ 52,000.00 -30.7/ 14 120100 TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM LS 1 $750.000.00 $ 750.000.00 $ 130,060.00 S 150,000.00 S 130,000.00 $ 353.991.70 $ 353,991.70 52.8% $ 210,000.00 $ 210,000.00 -72.0% 15 120120 TYPE III BARRICADE EA 2 $100.03 $ 200.00 $ 45.00 $ 90.00 55.0% $ 150.00 $ 300.00 50.0% $ 50.00 $ 100.00 -50.0% $ 25.00 $ 50.00 -75.0% $ 77.00 $ 154.00 -23.034 16 120149 TEMPORARY PAVEMENT MARKING IPAINTI SOFT 600 $2.50 $ 1,500.00 $ 3.50 $ 2,100.00 40.0% $ 3.50 $ 2,100.CO 40.0% $ 3.50 $ Z100.00 40.0% $ 1.50 $ 900.00 -40.0% $ 3.15 $ 1,890.00 26.D% 17 120159 TEMPORARY TRAFFIC STRIPE (PAINTI LF 30000 $0.70 $ 21,000.00 S 0.50 $ 15,000.03 -28.6°% $ 0.15 $ 0.50 S 15,000.03 -28.6% $ 0.15 $ 0.32 $ 9,600.00 54.3 % 18 120165 CHANNELIZER (SURFACE MOUNTED) EA 61 $35.00 $ 2,135.00 $ 30.00 $ 1,830.00 -14.3°% $ 35.00 $ 2,135.00 0.0% $ 25.00 $ 1,525.00 -28.6% $ 28.00 $ 1,708.00 -20.0% $ 30.00 $ 1,830.00 -14.3% 19 120199 TRAFFIC PLASTIC DRUM EA 18 $100.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 100.00 $ 1,800.00 0.0°% $ 150.00 $ 2,700.00 50.0% $ 40.00 $ 720.00 -60.0% $ 40.00 $ 720.00 -60.0% $ 48.00 $ 864.00 -52.0% 20 120300 TEMPORARY PAVEMENT MARKER EA 290 $4.00 $ 1,160.00 $ 8.00 100. $ 8.00 100.0% $ 8.00 100.r`• S 3.50 $ 1,015.00 -12.5% $ 3.20 $ 928.00 -20.0% 21 DELETED 0 $25,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - 4 - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 22 120000 TEMPORARY RAILING (TYPE K I LF 19600 113.00 $ 253.500.00 $ 8.50 $ 165,750.00 34.6% $ 10.00 $ 195,000.00 -23.1% $ 8.30 $ 161,850.00 36.2% $ 6.75 $ 131,625.00 -48.1% $ 13.00 $ 253,500.00 0.0% 23 129100 TEMPORARY CRASH CUSHION MODULE EA 220 $220.00 $ 48400.00 $ 215.00 $ 47,300.00 -2.3% $ 200.00 $ 44,003.00 -9.1% $ 300.00 $ 66,000.00 36.4361 $ 200.00 $ 44,000.00 -9.1% S 182.00 $ 40,040.00 -17.3% 24 141101 REMOVE YELLOW PAINTED TRAFFIC STRIPE (HAZARDOUS WASTE) LF 890 $2.25 $ 2.002.50 $ 1.50 $ 1,335.00 33.3% $ 1.50 $ 1.335.00 33.3% $ 1.50 $ 1.335.00 -33.3% $ 1.00 $ 890.00 55.6% $ 0.60 $ 534.00 -73.3 % 25 15oz06 ABANDON CULVERT LF 53o $22.00 $ 11,660.00 $ 17.50 $ 9,275.00 2(1. $ 12.00 $ 6,380.00 -45.5% $ 18.00 $ 9,540.00 -18.2% ; 33.00 $ 17,490.00 50.0% $ 12.00 $ 6,360.00 $ 8,400.00 -45.5% --7_r 20.0% ze 1soe0s REMOVE FENCE LF n5o $10.00 $ 71,50D.00 $ 2.00 $ 3.00 $ 21.450.00 70.0% $ 2.00 80.0°/aL 2.30 $ 2.10 71 150862 REMOVE METAL BEAM GUARD RAILING LF 1000 $7.00 $ 7,000.00 $ 8.00 $ 8,000.00 14.396 $ 3.00 $ 8,000.00 14.3% $ 7.95 $ 7,950.00 13.6% 5 8.00 $ 8,003.00 14.3' • $ 8.443 28 150688 REMOVE IRRIGATION SYSTEM LS 1 $10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 -50.0% $ 7,500.00 $ 7,500.00 -25.0% $ 5,300.00 $ 5,300.00 -47.0% 5: 1,500.00 4 900.00 50.0% $ 6,000.00 $ 6,000.00 -40.0% 29 150710 REMOVE TRAFFIC STRIPE LF 1800 $1.00 $ 1,80300 $ 1.00 $ 1,800.00 0.0% $ 1.00 $ 1,B0000 0.0% $ 1.00 $ 1,800.00 0.0% $ 0.50 $ 0.55 $ 990.00 45.0% 30 150711 REMOVE PAINTED TRAFFIC STRIPE LF 4100 $0.50 $ 2,050.00 $ 1.00 100.0% $ 1.00 100.0% $ 1.00 100.0%_ $ 0.35 $ 1,435.00 -30.0% $ 0.45 $ 1,845.00 -10.0% 31 150742 REMOVE ROADSIDE SIGN EA 29 $110.00 $ 3,190.00 $ 90.00 $ 2,610.00 -18.2% $ 100.00 $ 2,900.00 -9.1% $ 100.00 $ 2,900.00 -9.1% $ 50.00 $ 1,450.00 -54.5% $ 105.00 $ 3,045.00 -4.5% 32 150760 REMOVE SIGN STRUCTURE EA 1 $3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 0.0% $ 3,500.00 $ 3500.00 16.7% $ 2,800.00 $ 2,800.00 -6.7% $ 5,700.00 90.0% $ 4,000.00 $ 4,000.00 33.3% 33 150609A REMOVE PIPELINE (8•WATER) LF 100 $100.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 40.00 $ 4,000.00 -60.0% $ 25.00 $ 29.00 $ 2,900.00 -71.0% $ 55.00 $ 5.500.00 -45.0% $ 40.00 4 4000.00 50.0% 34 150660 REMOVE BASE AND SURFACING SOFT 17700 $2.00 $ 35,400.00 $ 0.50 $ 8,850.00 -75.0% $ 0.50 _:', $ 1.03 $ 17,700.00 50.0% 5 0.70 $ 12,390.00 -65.0% $ 0.35 35 152353 RELOCATE IRRIGATION SYSTEM LS 1 $10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 20,000.00 100.0% S 25,000.00 150.0% $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 -50.0% $ 1,500.OD -85.0% $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 -70.0% 38 152390 RELOCATE ROADSIDE SIGN EA 12 $300.00 $ 3,800.00 $ 285.00 $ 3,180.00 -11.7% $ 300.00 $ 3,800.00 0.0% $ 225.00 $ 2,700.00 -25.0% $ 200.00 $ 2,400.00 -33.3% $ 210.00 $ 2,520.00 30.0% 37 152438 ADJUST FRAME AND COVER TO GRADE EA 4 $1,000.00 $ 4,000.00 $ 2,300.00 130.0% $ 650.00 $ 2,800.00 35.0%, $ 725.00 $ 2,900.00 -27.5% $ 750.00 $ 3,000.00 -25.0% $ 495.00 $ 1,980.00 50.536 38 153114 COLD PLANE ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT (.20' MAXIMUM) SOY° 2400 $2.50 $ 6,000.00 4 4.00 $ 9,600.00 60.0% $ 3.00 $ 7,200.00 20.03/1 $ 2.00 $ 4,800.00 -20.0% S 2.90 $ 6,960.00 16.0% $ 1.20 $ 2,880.00 52.0% 39 153215 REMOVE CONCRETE (CURB AND GUTTER) LF 1900 $10.00 $ 19,000.00 $ 4.50 $ 8,550.00 55.0% $ 4.00 $ 7,600.00 -60.0% $ 7.00 $ 13,300.00 -30.0% S 8.00 $ 15,200.00 -20.0% $ 2.50 $ 4,750.00 -75.0%i 40 153218 REMOVE CONCRETE SIDEWALK SOFT 2400 $4.00 $ 9,600.00 $ 1.10 $ 640.00 -72.5% $ 1.50 $ 3,600.00 -62.5% $ 1.00 $ 2,400.00 -75.0% r r r rr 57.5% $ 0.50 ;-87.5°% 20.0% 41 153221 REMOVE CONCRETE BARRIER LF B00 $10.00 $ 8,000.00 $ 21.50 $ 54,030.00 $ 99,003.00 115.044 -67.0% $ 10.00 $ 8,000.00 0.0% $ 25.00 150.0% 15.00 $ 12,000.00 50.0% $ 12.00 $ 9,600.00 42 157550 BRIDGE REMOVAL LS 1 $260,000.00 $ 260,000.00 $ 75,000.00 $ 150,000.00 $ 75,000.00 $ 150,00000 -71.2% -50.0% $ 50,000.00 1 20,000.00 $ 16,000.00 50,000 $ 16,000.00 808•• 60.000.00 75,000.00 $ 75,000.00 - $ 75,000.00 $ 75,000.00 -71.2% 43 160101 CLEARINGAND GRUBBING LS 1 $300,000.00 $ 300,000.00 5 99,000.00 -75.0% $ 110,000.00 $ 110,000.00 $ 386,000.00 -63.3% 150 ^'-.: 0.0% 44 170101 DEVELOP WATER SUPPLY LS 1 $40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 24,000.00 $ 24,000.00 -40.0% $ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 25.0% -60.0% $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 50.0% $ 100,000.00 45 190101 ROADWAY EXCAVATION CY 24400 $15.00 $ 366,000.00 $ 13.00 $ 317,200.00 -13.3% $ 10.00 $ 244,000.00 -33.3% $ 18.00 $ 439,200.00 20.0% $ 15.00 4 366,000,00 0.0% $ 15.00 48 190110 LEAD COMPLIANCE PLAN LS 1 55.003.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 50.0% $ 5.000.00 $ 5,003.00 0.0% $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 50.0% $ 5.000.00 $ 5,000.00 0.0% $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 0.0% 1a4 129 • • • JACOBS 74/215 Interchange Bid Analysis Contract No. 10-31-030-00 Local EA No. 08-464204 Federal Project No.: HPLUESPL-6054(063) Bid Date: March 30, 2010 2:00 P.M. ATTACHMENT 1 74/215 Interchange Improvements UNIT ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE Apparent LOWEST BIDDER Apparent 2nd LOWEST BIDDER Apparent Jed LOWEST BIDDER Apparent 4th LOWEST BIDDER Apparent 5th LOWEST BIDDER Skanska USA Civil West Riverside Construction Sukut-Myers, JV _ Beador Construction Security Paving REM N0. ITEM DESCRPTION BID UNIT EXTENDED AMOUNT XVAR ENCTR EST BID UNIT PRICE EXTENDED AMOUNT %VAR ENGR EST BID UNIT PRICE EXTENDED AMOUNT %VAR ENGR EST 1310 UNIT PRICE EXTENDED AMOUNT %VAR ENGR EST BID UNIT PRICE EXTENDED AMOUNT XVAR ENGR EST QTY UNIT PRICE REM AMOUNT PRICE 46A 190113 ASBESTOS COMPLIANCE PLAN Ls t $7,300.00 $ 7,300.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 65.8% $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 31.5% $ 5.000.00 $ 5,030.00 -31.5% $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 31.5% $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 -72.6% 47 (F) 192003 STRUCTURE EXCAVATION (BRIDGE) CY 1490 $125.00 $ 186,250.00 $ 68.00 $ 101,320.00 45.6% $ 75.00 $ 111,750.00 -40.0% $ 22.00 $ 45.00 $ 67,050.00 64.0% $ 63.00 $ 93,870.00 49.6% 48 (F) 192037 STRUCTURE EXCAVATION RETAINING WALL) CY 120 $160.00 $ 19,200.00 $ 84.00 $ 10,080.00 47.5% $ 15.00 $ 15,00 $ 50.00 $ 6,000.00 68.8% $ 34.00 49 IF) 193003 STRUCTURE BACKFILL(DRIDGEI CY 811 $100.00 $ 81,100.03 $ 55.00 $ 44,605.00 45.0% $ 85.00 $ 68,935.00 -15.0% $ 65.00 $ 52,715.00 35.09 $ 110.00 $ 89,210.00 10.0% $ 105.00 $ 85,155.00 5.0% 50 IF) 193013 STRUCTURE BACKEILL (RETAINING VLALL) CY 150 $110.00 $ 16,500.00 $ 76.00 $ 11,400.00 30,9% $ 25.00 $ 31.00 $ 4,650.00 -71.8% S 70.00 $ 10,503.00 -36.4% $ 84.00 $ 12,60900 -23.6% 51 (FI 197031 EARTH RE(AININO STRUCTURE (MECRANILALLY S TABILIGED EARTH WALL) SOFT 7460 $70.00 $ 522,200.00 $ 43.00 $ 320,780.00 38.6% $ 45.00 $ 335,700.00 35.7% $ 44.00 $ 328,240.00 37.1% 5 48.00 $ 358,080.00 31.4% $ 46.00 $ 343,160.00 34.3% 52 108001 IMPORTED BORROW CY 175000 $8.00 $ 1,400,000.00 $ 3.00 $ 525,000.00 62.5% $ 6.00 $ 1,050.000.00 -25.0% $ 8.25 $ 1,443,750.00 3.1% $ 6.50 $ 1,137,500.03 -18.8% $, 9.00 $ 1,575,000.00 12.5% 53 200001 HIGHWAY PLANTING LS 1 $571,300.00 $ 571.300.00 $ 295,000.00 $ 295,000.00 48.4% S 250,000.00 $ 250.000.00 56.2% $ 348,000.00 $ 348,000.00 39.1% $ 335,000.00 $ 335,000.00 -41.4% $ 250,000.00 $ 250,000.00 56.2% 54 268000 IRRIGATION SYSTEM Ls 1 $545,100.00 $ 545,100.00 $ 315,000.00 $ 315,000.00 42.2% S 400.000.00 $ 400,000.00 -26.6% $ 248,000.00 $ 248,000.00 54.5% $ 245,000.00 3 245,000.00 55.1% $ 400,000.00 $ 400,000.00 -26.6% 55 200114 ROCK BLANKET SOFT 8800 $15.00 $ 132,030.00; $ 7.00 $ 61,600.00 -53.3% $ 8.00 $ 70,400.00 46.7% $ 6.70 $ 58,960.00 55.3% $ 7.50 $ 66000.00 -50.0% $ 8.40 $ 73,920.00 44.D% se 203026 MOVE-INA ovE•oUT(EROSIONCONTROL) LS 1 $10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 750.00 924 $ 500.00 $ 3,40.0.00 $ 3,400.00 66.0% $ 500.09 +, $ 525.00 57 203031 EROSION CONTROL (HYDROSEED)(SOFT) SOFT 99001) $0.10 $ 9,900.00 $ 0.07 $ 6,930.00 30.0% $ 0.10 $ 9,900.00 0.0% $ 0.10 $ 9,900.00 0.0% $ 0.10 $ 9,900.00 0.0% $ 0.10 S 9,900.00 0.09E 58 IF) 208768 17 BI NM64OUS COAT ED CORRUGA TED Sr EEL PIPE CONDUIT 1.064'THICK) LF 690 $200.00 $ 138.000.00 $ 80.00 $ 55,200.00 60.0% $ 55.00 $ 37,950.00 -72.5% $ 60.00 $ 41,400.00 -70.0% $ 32.00 -84.0 . $ 18.00 59 220101 FINISHING ROADWAY LS 1 $50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 $ 7,000.00 $ 100,000.00 100.0% $ 21,000.00 $ 21,000.00 58.0% $ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00 0,0% $ - 60 250201 CLASS 2 AGGREGATE SUBBASE CY 560 $30.00 $ 16,800.00 $ 33.00 $ 18,480.00 10.0% $ 50.00 66.7% $ 72.00 1400' •. $ 28.00 $ 15,680.00 -6 7% $ 33.00 $ 18,480.00 10.0% 61 260201 CLASS 2 AGGREGATE BASE CY 16800 $30.03 $ 504,000.00 $ 25.00 $ 420,000.00 -16.7% $ 38.00 $ 638,400.00 26.7% $ 28.00 $ 470,400.00 6.7% $ 29.00 $ 487,200.00 -3 3% $ 30.00 $ 504,000.00 0.0% 62 300131 HOT MIX ASPHALT ((USE WIOC/OAI) TON 21900 $91.00 $ 1,992,900.00 $ 70.00 $ 1,533,000.00 -23.1% $ 67.00 $ 1,467,300.00 -26.4% $ 65.00 $ 1,423.500.00 -28.6% $ 60.00 $ 1,314,000,00 -34.1% $ 70.00 $ 1,533,000.00 -23,1% 83 390133 HOT MIX ASPHALT (TYPE El) TON 1600 $106.00 $. 169,600.00 $ 70.00 $ 112,000.00 34.0% $ 85.00 $ 136,003.00 -19.8% $ 68.00 $ 105,600.00 37.7% S 62.00 $ 99,203.00 -41.5% $ 70.00 $ 112,000.00 -34.0% 64 394071 PLACE HOT MIX ASPHALT DIKE LF 7200 $3.00 $ 21,600.00 $ 1.20 $ 8,640.00 -60.0% $ 1.50 $ 10,800.00 -50.0% $ 1.00 $ 7,200.00 66.7% $ 1.10 $ 7,920,00 63.3% $ 1.50 $ 10,800.00 -50.0% 85 394060 DATA CORE LS 1 $5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 7,300.00 $ 7,300.00 46.0% S 20,000.00 300.0% S 2,600.00 $ 2,600.00 48.0% S 5.000.00 $ 5,000.00 0.1•• $ 3,000.00 $ 3,030.00 40.0% 66 394090 PLACE HOT MIX ASPHALT (MISCELLANEOUS AREA) SOFT 1400 $30.00 $ 42,000.00 $ 8.00 $ 11,200.00 -73.3% $ 10.00 $ 14,000.00 66.7% $ 3.50 $ 13.00 $ 113,200.00 56.7% $ 7.00 67 395000 LIQUID ASPHALT (PRIME COAT) TON 13 $1,500.00 $ 19,500.00 $ 850.00 $ 11,050.00 -43.3% $ 1.100.00 $ 14,300.00 -26.7% $ 1,110.00 $ 14,430.00 -26.0% S 1,500.00 $ 19,500.00 0.0% $ 900.00 $ 11,700.00 40.0% sa 397005 TACK COAT TON 24 $470.00 $ 11,280.00 $ 800.00 70.A $ 500.00 $ 12,000.00 6.4% $ 600.00 $ 14,400.00 27.7% $ 1,225.00 160.6% $ 450.00 $ 10,800.00 4.3% 69 401050 JOINTED PLAN CONCRETE PAVEMENT CY tits $260.00 $ 245,700.00 $ 200.00 $ 189,000.00 -23.1% $ 240.00 $ 226,800.00 -7.7% $ 350.00 $ 330,750.00 34.6% $ 235.00 $ 222,075.00 -9.6% $ 270.00 $ 255,15000 18% 70 490603 24' CAST -IN -DRILLED -HOLE CONCRETE PIUNO LF 5557 $125.00 $ 694,625.00 $ 48.00 $ 266,736.00 61.6% $ 45.00 $ 250,065.00 64.0% $ 37.00 $ 205,609.00 -70.4% $ 27.00 $. 60.00 $ 333,420.00 -52.0% 71 496016 16" CAST -IN -DRILLED -HOLE CONCRETE PIUNG (SOUM3 WALL) LF 6800 $75.00 $ 510,000.00 $ 38.50 $ 261,800.00 48.7% $ 42.00 $ 285,600.00 -44.0% $ 42.00 $ 2135,600.00 •44.0% $ 49.00 $ 333,200.00 34.7% $ 45.00 $ 306,000.00 40.0% 72 498022 24" CAST -IN -DRILLED -HOLE CONCRETE PILING (SOUND WALL) LF 82 $110.00 $ 9,020.00 $ 67.00 $ 5,494.00 39.1% $ 50.00 $ 4,100.00 54.5% $ 80.00 $ 6,560.00 -27.3% $ 90.00 $ 7,380.00 -18.2% $ 61.00 $ 5,002.00 -44.5% 7a 500001 PRESTRESSING CAST-IN-PLACECONCRETE LS 1 $238,000.00 $ 238,000.00 $ 128,030.00 $ 128,000.00 46.2% $ 125,000.00 $ 125,000.00 47.5% $ 125,000.00 $ 125,000.00 47.5% $ 130,000.00 $ 130,000.00 45.4% $ 121,000.03 $ 121,000.00 49.2% 74 (F) 510050 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE CY 10 $4,000.00 $ 40000.00 $ 900.00 $ 50.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 13.000.00 -87.5% $ 1,a7o0o $ 18,700.00 53.3% $ 990.00 75 IF) 510051 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BRIDGE FOOTING CY 540 $375.00 $ 202,500.00 $ 215.00 $ 116,100.00 42.7% $ 300.00 $ 162,000.00 -20.0% $ 155.00 $ 83,700.00 56.7% $ 255.00 $ 137,700.00 32.0% $ 250.00 $ 135,000.00 33.3% 76 IF) 510053 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BRIDGE CY 2461 $800.00 $ 1,960.800.00 $ 530.00 $ 1,299,030.00 33.8% $ 460.00 $ 1.127,460.00 42.5% $ 612.00 $ 1,500,012.00 -23.5% $ 575.00 $ 1,409,325.00 -28.1% $ 490.00 $ 1,200,990.00 38.8% 77 (FI 510060 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, RETAINING WALL CY 60 $1,150.00 $ 69,000.00 $ 730.00 $ 43,800.00 -36.5% $ 400.00 $ 24,000.00 65.2% $ 615.00 $ 36,900.00 46.5% $ 550.00 $ 33,000.00 52.2% $ 850.00 $ 51,000.00 -26.1% 78 (F) 510061 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, SOUND WALL CY 21 $900.00 $ 18,900.00 $ 500.00 $ 10,500.00 -44.4% $ 350.00 $ 7,350.00 61.1% $ 260.00 $ 5,460.00 -71.1% $ 675.00 $ 14,175.00 -25.0% $ 470.00 $ 9,870.00 •47.8% 79 (FI 510072 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BARRIER SLAB CY 285 $750.00 $ 213,750.00 $ 475.00 $ 135,375.03 36.7% $ 335.00 $ 95,475.00 55.3% $ 310.00 $ 88,350.00 58.7% $ 280.00 $ 79,800.00 62.7% $ 430.00 $ 122,550.00 42.7% 80 (F) 510086 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, APPROACH SLAB (TYPE N) CY 240 $725.00 $ 174,003.00 $ 575.00 $ 138,000.00 -20.7% $ 365.00 $ 87,600.00 49.7% $ 600.00 $ 144,000.00 -17.2% $ 410.00 $ 98,400.00 43.4% $ 612.00 $ 146,880.00 -15.6% 81 (F) 510090 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, BOX CULVERT CY 106 $803.03 $ 84,000.00 $ 1,250.00 56.3% $ 700.00 $ 73,500.00 -12.5% $ 700.00 $ 73,500.00 -12.5% $ 580.00 $ 60,900.00 -27.5% $ 1,225.00 53.1% 82 (F) 510602 MINOR CONCRETE (MINOR STRUCTURE) CY 174 $1,650.00 $ 287,100.00 $ 1.375.00 $ 239,250.00 -16.7% $ 1,400.00 $ 243,60000 -15.2% $ 1,060.00 $ 182,700.00 36.4% $ 1,475,00 $ 256,650.00 -10.8% $ 1,840.00 $ 320,160.00 11.5% 83 (F) 511034A ARCHITECTURAL TREATMENT(RW-31 SOFT 360 $25.00 $ 9,000.00 $ 33.00 $ 11,880.00 32.0% $ 12,00 $ 4,320.00 52.0% $ 4.25 $ 35.00 $ 12,600.00 40.0% $ 41.00 64.0% 84 511047 ANTI -GRAFFITI COATING SOFT 84000 $1.35 $ 113,400.00 $ 1.50 $ 126,000.00 11.1% $ 1.00 $ 84,000.00 -25.9% $ 0.85 $ 71,400.00 37.0% $ 1.00 $ 84,000.00 -25.9% $ 1.10 $ 92,400.00 -18.5% 85 518002 SOUND WALL IMASCNRYBLOCK) SOFT 34300 $28.50 S 977,550.00 $ 15.00 $ 514,500.00 47.4% $ 10.00 $ 343,003.00 -64.9% $ 14.85 $ 509,355.00 47.9% $ 11.00 $ 377,300.00 61.4% $ 15.50 $ 531,650.00 45.6% 86 519100 JOINT SEAL (MR 7) LF 250 $85.00 $ 21,250.00 $ 105.00 $ 26,250.00 23.5% $ 70.00 $ 17,503.00 -17.6% S 60.00 $ 15,000.00 -29.4% $ 55.00 $ 13,750.00 35.3% $ 110.00 $ 27,500.00 29.4% 87 (F) 520102 BAR REINFORCING STEEL (BRIDGE) LBS 807600 W.90 $ 726,300.00 $ 0.70 $ 564930.00 -22.2% $ 0.65 $ 524,550.00 -27.8% $ 0.60 $ 484200.00 33.3% S 0.70 $ 564,900.00 -22.2% $ 0.80 $ 645600.03 -11.1% 88 (F) 520103 BAR REINFORCING STEEL (RETAINING WALL) LBS 3820 $1.50 $ 5,730.00 $ 2.70 80.0% $ 2.50 66.7% $ 2.50 66.79E $ 2.75 83.3% $ 3.10 108.7% 89 (F) 520105 BAR REINFORCING STEEL (SOUND WALL) LBS 5730 $1.50 $ 8,595.00 $ 0.60 $ 3,438.00 -60,0% $ 0.60 $ 3,438.00 60.09E $ 0.60 $ 3,438.00 60.0% S 0.60 $ 3,438.00 -60.0% $ 0.70 $ 4,011.00 53.3% 90 (F) 520107 BAR REINFORCING STEEL (BOX CULVERT) LBS 20057 $1.50 $ 30,085.50 $ 1.00 $ 20,057.00 33.3% $ 1.00 $ 20,057.00 33.3% $ 0.90 $ 18,051.30 40.0% S 0.90 $ 18,051.30 -40.0% $ 1.00 $ 20,057.00 -33.3% 91 560218 FURNISH SIGN STRUCTURE(TRUSS) LBS 8000 $5.50 $ 44,000.00 S 5.00 $ 40,000.00 -9.1% $ 5.00 $ 40,000.00 -9.1% $ 7.45 $ 59,600.00 35.5% $ 5.70 $ 45,600.00 3.6% $. 3.45 $ 27,600.00 37.3% 2of4 130 • • • JACOBS 741215 Interchange lmproventents UNIT ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE nEM 110 ITEM DESCRPTION OTT UNIT PRICE ITEM AMOUNT 92 560219 INSTALL SIGN STRUCTURE (TRUSS) LBS 8000 $0,50 $ 4,000.00 93 560244 FURNISH LAMINATED PANEL 13I044(1"-TYPE A) SOFT 190 $20,00 $ 3,800.00 a4 560249 FURNISH SINGLE SHEET ALUMINUM SIGN(0.080"-UNFRAMED) SOFT 180 $15,00 $ 2,703.00 95 561016 60" CAST -IN -DRILLED -HOLE CONCRETE PILE (SIGN FOUNDATION) LF 22 $1,250.00 $ 27,500.00 ae 566011 ROADSIDE SIGN - ONE POST EA 54 $350.00 $ 18,900.00 97 566012 ROADSIDE SIGN - TWO POST EA 9 $700.00 $ 6,300.00 98 568001 INSTALL SIGN 'STRAP AND SADDLE BRACKET METHOD) EA 5 $100.00 $ 500.00 99 568023 INSTALL ROADSIDE SIGN (LAMINATED WOOD BOX POST) EA 5 $1,400.00 $ 7,000.00 100 850018 21' REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE LF 160 $135.00 $ 20,250.00 101 650014 18" REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE LF 560 $120.00 $ 57,200.00 102 650016 24' REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE LF 590 $140.00 $ 82,600.00 103 650022 30" REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE LF 290 $150.00 $ 43,500.00 104 650022X DBL 30' REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE COLLAR EA 2 $2,000.00 $ 4,000.00 105 650026 36" REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE LF 270 $160.00 $ 43,200.00 106 650030 4T REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE LF 22 $170.00 $ 3,740.00 107 650030X DBL 42" REINFORCED CONCRETE PPE COLLAR EA 2 $3,000.00 $ 6,000.00 108 655212 JACKED 24" REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE (CLASS II) LF 630 $400.00 $ 252,000.00 109 881103 3' PLASTIC PIPE (EDGE DRAIN) LF 355 $10.03 $. 3.550.00 110 690117 16" CORRUGATED STEEL PIPE DOWNDRAIN (.07r THICK) LF 560 $125.00 $ 70,000.00 111 703460 24" WELDED STEEL PIPE CASING (BRIDGE) LF 140 $150.00 $ 21,000.00 112 705011 18" STEEL FLARED END SECTION EA 11 $650.00 $ 7,150.00 113 705204 1r CONCRETE FLARED END SECTION EA 6 $1,280.00 $ 7,680.00 114 705208 2C CONCRETE FLARED END SECTION EA 2 51,400.00 $ 2,800.00 115 705210 36'CONCRETE FLARED END SECTION EA 1 $1,600.00 $ 7,600.00 116 707472A FURNISH PRECAST RCS LF 456 $300.00 $ 136,800.00 117 707472B PLACE PRECAST RCB EA 2 $20,000.00 $ 40,000.00 118 707472C UNDER SIDEWALK DRAIN EA 9 $1,000.00 $ 9,000.00 119 721009 ROCK SLOPE PROTECTION (FACING, METHOD B) CY 810 $110.00 $ 89,100.00 120 721011 ROCK SLOPE PROTECTION (BACKING NO. 2, METHOD B) CY 39 $115.00 $ 4,485.00 121 721012 ROCK SLOPE PROTECTION (BACKING NO. 3, METHOD B) CY 43 $115.00 $ 4,945.00 122 721810 SLOPE PAVING (CONCRETE) CY 103 $600.00 $ 61,800.00 123 727905 MINOR CONCRETE (CHANNEL LINING) CY 110 $200.00 $ 22,000.00 124 731502 MINOR CONCRETE (MISCELLANEOUS CONSTRUCTION) CY 270 $530.00 $ 143,100.00 125 731504 MINOR CONCRETE (CURB AND GUTTER) CY 190 $530.00 $ 100,700.00 126 731507 MINOR CONCRETE (GUTTER DEPRESSION) CY 38 $900.00 $ 34,200.00 127 731517 MINOR CONCRETE (GUTTER) CY T $1,000.00 $ 7,000.00 128 731530A INTERLOCKING PAVERS SOFT 7000 $13.00 $ 91,000.00 129 (F) 750001 MISCELLANEOUS IRON AND STEEL LBS 14000 $3.00 $ 42,000.00 130 800360 CHAIN LINK FENCE (TYPE CL-6) LF 3600 $14.25 $ 51,300.00 131 800706A WROUGHT IRON FENCE LF 37 $60.00 $ 2,220.00 132 802520 16 CHAIN LINK GATE (TYPE CL-6) EA 5 $1,400.00 $ 7,000.00 133 832003 METAL BEAM GUARD RAIUNG (WOOD POST) LF 3200 $24.00 $ 76,800.00 134 832070 VEGETATION CONTROL IMINOR CONCRETE) SOFT 200 $80.00 $ 16,000.00 135 (F) 833000 METAL RAILING LF 288 $60,00 $ 17,280.00 136 (F) 63309A BICYCLE RAILING LF 289 $100.00 $ 28,900.00 137 (F) 833142 CONCRETE BARRIER (TYPE 26 MODIFIED) LF 317 $200.00 $ 133,400.00 138 (F) 839521 CABLE RAIUN3 LF 444 $30.00 $ 13.320.00 74/215 Interchange Bid Analysis Contract No. 10-31-030-00 Local EA No. 08-464204 Federal Project No.: HPLUESPL-6054(063) Bid Date: March 30, 2010 2:00 P.M. ATTACHMENT 1 Apparent LOWEST BDDER Apparent 2nd LOWEST BIDDER Apparent 3rd LOWEST BIDDER Apparent 4th LOWEST BIDDER Apparent 5th LOWEST BIDDER Skanska USA Civil West Riverside Construction Sukut-Myers, JV Beador Construct . Security Paving Bio uNIT PRICE E%TENDED AMOUNT %VAR ENOR EST BID UNIT PRICE EXTENDED AMOUNT %VAR ENOR EST BID UNIT PRICE EXTENDED AMOUNT %VAR DKR EST BID UNIT PRICE EXTENDED AMOUNT XVAR ENOR EST BID UNIT PRICE EXTENDED AMOUNT %VAR I ENOR EST $ 1.00 100.0% $ 0.50 $ 4,000.00 0.0% $ 0.60 $ 4,800.00 20.0% $ 0.BO $ 6,400.00 60.0% $ 0.50 $ 4,000.00 0.0% $ 20.00 $ 3,803.03 0.0% 5 20.00 $ 3,800.00 0.0% $ 22.00 $ 4,180.00 10.0% S 24.00 $ 4,560.00 20.0% $ 21.00 S 3,990.00 5.0% $ 20.00 $ 3,600.00 33.3% $ 10.00 3 1,800.00 33.3% $ 15.00 $ 2,700.00 0.0% S 16.00 $ 2,880.00 6.7% $ 14.00 $ 2,520.00 -6.7% $ 1,000.00 $ 22,000.00 -20.0% $ 800.00 $ 17,600.00 -36.0% $ 1,230.00 $ 27,060.00 -1.6% $ 800.00 $ 17,600.00 36.0% $ 700.00 1 15,400.00 -44.0% $ 310.00 $ 16,740.00 -11.4% $ 300.00 $ 16,200.00 -14.3% $ 330.00 $ 17,820.00 5.7% S 210.00 $ 11,340.00 -40.0% $ 290.00 $ 15,660.00 -17.1 % $ 705.00 $ 6,345.00 0.7% $ 700.00 $ 6,300.00 0.0% $ 800.00 $ 7,200.00 14.3% S 475.00 $ 4,275.00 32.1% $ 420.00 $ 3,780.00 -40.0% $ 170.00 70.0% $ 150.00 $ 750.00 50.0% $ $ 125.00 4.000.00 $ 625.00 25.0% 185.7% S 240.00 S 3,700.00 140. r ` 164. $ 240.00 $ 3,150.00 140.0% 125.0% $ 3,985.00 184.6% $ 4,000.00 185.7% 1 105.00 $ 15,750.00 -22.2% $ 100.00 $ 15,000.00 -25.9% $ 70.00 $ 10.500.00 -48.1% $ 67.00 $ 10,050.00 50.4% $ 93.00 $ 13,950.00 •31.1% $ 96.00 $ 53,760.00 -20.0% $ 90.00 $ 50,400.00 -25.0% $ 100.00 $ 56,000.00 -16.7% $ 91.00 $ 50,960.00 -24.2% $ 86.00 $ 48,160.00 28.3% $ 98.00 $ 57,820.00 30.0% $ 100.00 $ 59,000.00 -28,6% $ 70.00 $ 41,300.00 -50.0% S 75.00 $ 44,250.00 46.4% $ 90.00 $ 53,100.00 35.7% $ 118.00 $ 34,220.00 -21.3% $ 110,00 1. 31,903.00 -26.7% $ 85.00 $ 24,650.00 -43.3% S 93.00 $ 26,970.DO 38.0% $ 110.00 $ 31,900.00 -26.7% $ 1,600.00 $ 3,200.00 20.0% $ 2,500.00 $ 5,000.00 25.0% $ 2,200.00 1 4,400.00 10.0% $ 1.500.00 $ 3,000.03 -25.0% $ 900.00 $ 1,800.00 -55,0% $ 1130.00 $ 48,600.00 12.5 $ 120.00 $ 32,400.00 -25.1'• $ 105.00 $ 28,350.00 -34.4% $ 115.00 $ 31050.00 -28.1% $ 145.00 $ 39,150.00 -9.4% $ 200.00 $ 4,400.00 17.6% $ 130.00 $ 2,860.00 -23.5% $ 355.00 108.8% $ 295.00 73.5% $ 305.00 79.4 $ 1,650.00 $ 3,303.00 -45.0% $ 3,000.00 $ 6,000.00 0.0%) $ 2,800.00 $ 5,600.00 -8.7% $ 2,000.00 $ 4,000.00 33.3% $ 1,100.00 $ 2,200.00 -63.3% $ 450.00 $ 283,500.00 12.5% $ 140.00 $ 88,200.00 -65.0% $ 115.00 $ 72,450.00 -71.3% S 400.00 $ 252,000.00 0.0% $ 250.00 $ 157,500.00 37.5%, $ 10.00 $ 3,550.00 0.0% 5 35.00 250.0% $ 37.00 270.0% S 27.00 170.0% $ 20.00 1.111_113 $ 913.00 $ 54,880.00 -21.6% $ 130.00 $ 72.800.00 4.0% $ 70.00 $ 39,200.00 -44.0% S 80.00 $ 44,800.00 36.0% $ 53.00 $ 29,680.00 57.6% $ 155.00 $ 21,700.00 3.3% $ 160.00 $ 22,400.00 6.7% $ 220.00 S 30,800.00 46.7% S 190.00 $ 26,600.00 26.7%o $ 130.00 3 18.200.00 -13.3% $ 250.00 $ 2,750.00 -61.5% $ 400.00 $ 4,400.00 38.5% $ 550.00 $ 6,050.00 -15.4% S 520.00 $ 5,720.00 -20.0% $ 630.00 S 6,930.00 3.1% $ 400.00 $ _ 2,400.00 -68.8%_ $ 650.00 $ 3,900.00 -49.2% $ 800.00 $ 4,800.00 37.5% S 750.00 $ 4,500.00 r11.4% $ 1,400.00 $ 8,400.00 9.4% $ 475.00 1 950.00 -66.1% $ 750.00 $ 1,500.00 46.4% $ 900.00 $ 1,800.00 35.7% S 910.00 $ 1,820.00 35.0% $ 1,700.00 $ 3,400.00 21A% $ 915.00 $ 915.00 42.8% $ 1,200.00 $ 1,200.OD -25.0% $ 1,350.00 $ 1,350.00 -15.6% S 1,500.00 1 1,500.00 -6.331 $ 2,100.00 $ 2,100.00 31.3% $ 212.00 $ 96,672.00 29.3% $ 225.00 $ 102,600.00 -25.0% $ 215.00 $ 98,1340.00 -26.3% $ 215.00 $ 98,040.00 -28. ' • $ 176.00 $ BO 256.00 41.3% $ 28,500.00 $ 53,000.00 32.5% $ 28,500.00 $ 57,000.00 42.5% $ 42.000.00 110.0% 5 28.500.00 $ 57,000.00 42.5% $ 37,503.00 87.5% $ 1,200.00 $ 10,800.00 20.0% $ 2,500.00 150.0% $ 2,800.00 180.0% $ 3,500.00 250.0% $ 1,870.00 87.0% $ 50.50 $ 40,905.00 -54.1% $ 50.00 $ 40,500.00 54.5% $ 52.00 $ 42,120.00 52.7% $ 51.00 $ 41,310.00 53.6%_ $ 69.00 $ 55,1390.00 37.3% $ 69.00 S 2,691.00 -40.0% $ 125.00 $ 4,875.00 8.7% $ 190.00 65.2% $ 64.00 $ 2,498.00 -44.3% $ 195.00 69.6% $ 66.00 1 2,838.00 -42.6% $ 115.00 $ 4,945.00 0.0% $ 183.00 59.1% $ 64.00 $ 2,752.00 r14.3% $ 1132.00 58.3% $ 85.00 $ 400.00 $ 41,200.00 33.3% $ 465.00 $ 47,895.00 -22.5% S 410.00 $ 42,230.00 31.7% $ 363.00 $ 37,389.00 39.5% 5 410.00 105.0% $ 280.00 $ 30.800.00 40.0% $ 320.00 60.0% S 240.00 $ 26,400.00 20.0% $ 260.00 $ 28,600.00 30.0% $ 332.00 $ 89,640.00 37.4% $ 235.00 $ 63,450.00 55.7% $ 315.00 $ 85,050.00 40.6% $ 330.00 $ 89,100.00 37.7% $ 280.00 $ 75,600.00 47.2% $ 240.00 1 45,600.00 54.7% $ 285.00 $ 54,150.00 46.2% $ 360.00 $ 68,400.00 32.1% $ 320.00 $ 60,800.00 39.6% $ 266.00 $ 50,540.00 49.8% $ 240.00 $ 9,120.00 -73.3% $ 435.00 $ 16,530.00 51.7% $ 500.00 $ 19,000.00 -44.4% S 525.00 I. 19,950.00 -41.7% $ 227.00 $ 8,626.00 -74.8% $ 350.00 $ 2,450.00 -65.0% $ 500.00 $ 3,500.OD 50.0% $ 950.DO $ 6,850.00 -50% $ 1,425.00 $ 9,975.00 42.5% $ 250.00 $ $ 1,750.00 -75.0% $ 8.00 $ 56,000.00 38.5% $ 8.00 $ 56,000.00 38.5% $ 6.90 $ 48,301).00 .46.9% $ 8.10 $ 56,700.00 -37.7% $ 7.30 51,100.00 43.8% $ 1.50 5 21,000.00 50.0% $ 2.00 $ 28,000.00 33.3% $ 1.50 $ 21,000.00 50.0% $ 2.00 $ 28,000.00 33.3% $ 1.30 $ 18,200.00 56.7% $ 12.00 $ 43,200.00 -15.8% $ 12.00 $ 43,200.00 -15.8% $ 10.50 $ 37,800.00 -26.3% $ 11.50 $ 41,400.00 -19.3% $ 33.00 131.6% $ 60.00 $ 2,220.00 0.0% $ 60.00 $ 2,220.00 0.0% $ 60.00 $ 2,220.00 0.0% $ 62.00 $ 2,294.00 3.3% $ 65.00 $ 2,405.00 8.3% $ 1,100.00 $ 5,500.00 -21.4% $ 1,100.00 $ 5,500.00 -21.4% $ 1,320.00 $ 6,600.00 5.7% $ 1,160.00 $ 5.500.00 -21.4% $ 2,100.00 $ 10,50100 50.0% $ 18.00 1 57,600.00 -25.0% $ 18.00 $ 57,800.00 -25.0% $ 17.95 $ 57,440.00 -25.2% $ 18.00 $ 57,600.00 -25.0% $ 20.00 $ 64,000.00 -16.7% $ 17.00 -78.8 % $ 10.00 $ 3.10 $ 50.00 $ 10,000.00 -37.5% $ 20.00 $ 4,000.00 -75.0% $ 195.00 56,160.00. 2265.0 % $ 195.00 225.09E 3 200.00 233.3% $ 195.00 225.0% $ 370.00 516.7% $ 154.00 _ 5a.0% $ 155.00 55.0% $ 78.00 $ 22,542.00 -22.0% $ 155.00 55.0% $ 162.00 MO% $ 89.00 $ 28,213.00 55.5% 5 175.00 $ 55,475.00 -12.5% $ 280.00 5 88,780.00 40.0% $ 150.00 1 47,560.00 -25.0% $ 142.00 $ 45,014.00 29.0% $ 21.50 1. 9,546.00 28.3% $ 22.00 $ 9,768.00 -26.7% $ 23.00 $ 10,212.00 -23.3% $ 25.00 $ 11,100.00 -15.7% $ 25.00 $ 11,100.00 -16.7% 3 of 4 131 • • • JACOBS 74/215 Interchange Bid Analysis Contract No. 10-31-030-00 Local EA No. 08-464204 Federal Project No.: HPLUESPL-6054(063) Bid Date: March 30, 2010 2:00 P.M. ATTACHMENT 1 74/2151nterchange Improvements Apparent LOWEST BIDDER Apparent Riverside 2nd LOWEST BIDDER Apparent 3rd LOWEST BIDDER Apparent 4th LOWEST BIDDER Apparent 51h LOWEST BIDDER Skanska USA Civil West Construction Sukut-Alyers,JV Beador Construction S EXTENDED AMOUNT %VAR ENGR EST QTY UNIT PRICE ITEM AMOUNT PRICE 139 839541 TRANSITION RAILING (TYPE WED EA 3 $5,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 9,000.00 40.0% $ 3,000.00 $ 9,000.00 40.0% $ 2,960.00 $ 8,e50.00 40.8% $ 3,000.00 $ 9,000.00 -40.0% $ 3.300.00 $ 9,900.00 -34.0% 140 839581 END ANCHOR ASSEMBLY (TYPE SFT) EA a $800.00 $ 4.800.00 $ 650.00 $ 3,900.00 -18.8% $ 650.00 $ 3,900.00 -18.8% $ 650.00 $ 3,900.00 -18.8% $ 665.00 $ 3,990.03 -16.9% $ 735.00 $ 4,410.00 -8.1% 141 839584 ALTERNATIVE IN -LINE TERMINAL SYSTEM EA 7 $3,000.60 $ 21,000.00 $ 2,670.00 $ 18,690.00 -11.0% $ 2,750.00 $ 19,250.00 -8.3% $ 2,670.00 $ 18,690,00 -11.0% $ 2,715.00 $ 19,005.00 -9,5% $ 2,850.00 $ 19,950.00 5.0% 142 839585 ALTERNATIVE FLARED TERMINAL SYSTEM EA 3 $2,500.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 2,190.00 $ 6,570.00 -12.4% $ 2,200.00 $ 8,600.03 -12.0% $ 2,200.00 $ 6,603.03 -120% $ 2.203.00 $ 6,600.00 -12.0% $ 2,550.00 $ 7,653.00 2.0% 143 839701 CONCRETE BARRIER (TYPE 60) LF 800 $50.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 60.00 $ 48,000.00 20.0% $ 60.00 $ 48,003.00 20.0% $ 30.00 $ 24,000.00 -40.0% S 70.00 $ 56,000.00 40.0% S 91.00 82.0% 144 (F) 839720 CONCRETE BARRIER (TYPE 732 MODIFIED) LF 304 $110.00 $ 33,440.00 $ 72.00 $ 21,886.00 34.5% $ 85.00 $ 25,840.00 -22.7% $ 190.00 72.7% S 59.00 $ 17,936.00 46.4% $ 144.00 $ 43,776.00 30.9% 145 (F) 839727 CONCRETE BARRIER(TYPE 736) LF 690 $110.00 $ 75,900.00 $ 71.50 $ 49,335.00 35.0% $ 80.00 $ 55,200.00 -27.3% $ 110.00 $ 75,900.00 0.0% 5 95.00 $ 65,550.00 -13.6% $ 103.00 $ 71,070.00 -6.4% 146 839734 CONCRETE BARRIER (TYPE 736SV) LF 21300 $150.00 $ 390,000.00 $ 97.00 $ 252,200.00 35.3% $ 100.03 $ 260,000.00 33.3% $ 122.00 $ 317,200.00 -18.7% S 117.00 $ 304,200.00 -22.0% $ 73.00 3 189,800.00 51.3% 147 840504 4" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC STRIPE LF 28400 $0.37 $ 10,508.00 $ 0.50 $ 14,200.00 35.1% 5 0.30 $ 8,520.00 -18.9% $ 0.50 $ 14,200.00 35.1% $ 0.25 $ 7,100.00 32.4% $ 0.40 $ 11,360.00 8.1% 148 84E3505 V THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC STRIPE LF 11300 $0.613 $ 1,188.00 $ 0.50 $ 900,00 -24.2% $ 0.50 $ 900.00 -24.2% $ 0.65 $ 1,170.00 -1.5% $ 0.45 $ 810.00 31.8% $ 0.85 $ 1,530.00 28.8% 149 840508 8- THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC STRIPE LF 8000 $0.76 $ 6,080.00 $ 1.00 $ 8,000.00 31.6% $ D.75 $ 6,000.00 -1.3% $ 1.00 $ 8,000.00 31.6% $ 0.65 $ 5,200.00 -14.5% $. 1.05 $ 8,400.00 38.2% 150 840508 8' THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC STRIPE (BROKEN 123) LF 300 $0.98 $ 294.00 $ 0.75 $ 225.00 -23.5% $ 0.65 $ 195.00 317% $ 0.75 $ 225.00 -23.5% $ 0.65 $ 195.00 33.7% $ 2.10 114.3% 151 840516 THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT MARKING SOFT 4000 $3.40 $ 13,600.00 $ 3.50 $ 14,000.00 2.9% $ 3.50 $ 14,000.00 2.9% $ 3.50 $ 14,000.03 2.9% $ 2.75 $ 11,000.00 -19.1% $ 3.15 $ 12,600.00 -7.4% 152 840525 4" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC STRPE (BROKEN 36-12) LF 960 $0.45 $ 432.00 $ 0.30 $ 288.00 -33.3% $ 0.30 $ 286.00 33.3%4 $ 0.30 $ 2e8.00 -33.3% $ 0.30 $ 288.00 33.3% $ 0.40 $ 384.00 -11.1 % 153 840526 4' THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC STRIPE (BROKEN 17-7) LF sew $0,25 $ 1,725.00 $ 0.30 $ 2,070.00 20.0% $ 0.30 $ 2,070.00 20.0% $ 0.30 $ 2,070.00 20.0% $ 0.25 $ 1,725.00 0.0% $ 0.35 $ 2,415.00 40.0% 154 850111 PAVEMENT MARKER(RETROREFLECTIVE) EA 1200 $3.50 $ 4,200.00 $ 3.50 $ 4,200.00 0.0% $ 3.50 $ 4,200.00 0.0% $ 3.50 $ 4,200.00 0.0% $ 3.50 $ 4,2(0.60 0.0% $ 315.00 8900.0% 155 880251 SIGNAL AND LIGHTING (LOCATION 1) LS 1 3176,000.00 $ 176,000.03 3 108,500.00 $ 106,503.03 -39.5% $ 105,000.00 $ 105,000.00 40.3% $ 105,000.00 $ 105,000.00 -40.3% S 106,000.00 $ 108,000.00 38.6% $ 110,000.00 $ 110,000.00 37.5% 156 660252 SIGNAL AND LIGHTING ILOCATION2) LS 1 $216,000.00 $ 216,000.00 $ 124,000.00 $ 124,000.00 42.6% $ 125,000.00 $ 125,000.00 42.1% $ 126,000.00 $ 126,000.00 41.7% S 125,00000 $ 125,000.00 -42.1% $ 140,000.00 $ 140,000.00 35.2% 157 860253 SIGNAL AND LIGHTING (LOCATION 3) LS 1 $169,030.00 $ 169,000.00 $ 112,000.00 $ 112,000.00 33.7% $ 110,000.00 3 110,000.00 34.9% $ 122,000.00 $ 122,000.00 -27.8% $ 113,00000 $ 113,000.00 33.1% $ 128,000.00 $ 128,000.00 158 860259 SIGNAL AND LIGHTING (LOCATION 4) LS 1 $170,000.00 $ 170,000.00 $ 120,000.00 $ 120000.00 -29.4% $ 110.000.00 $ 110,000.00 35.3% $ 120,000.00 $ 120,000.00 -29.4% $ 110,000.CO $ 110,030.00 35.3% $ 125,000.03 $ 125,00).00 -24.3% -28.5% 159 86070t INTERCONNECTION CONDUIT AND CONDUCTOR LS 1 $40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 -62,5% $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 -62.5% $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 -62.5% $ 15,00000 $ 15,000.00 -62.5% $ 31,500.00 $ 31,500.00 -21.3% 160 861101 RAMP METERING SYSTEM(LOCATICN1) LS 1 $78,000.00 $ 78,000.00 $ 58,500.00 $ 58,500.00 -25.0% $ 60.000.00 $ 60,000.00 -23,1% $ 61,000.00 $ 61,000.00 -21.8% $ 59,000.00 $ 59,000.00 -24.4% $ 42,000.00 $ 42,000.00 -06.2% 161 861102 RAMP METERING SYSTEM(LOCATION 2) LS 1 $78,003.00 S 78,000.00 $ 55,600.00 $ 55,600.00 -28.7% $ 55.000.00 $ 55,003.03 -29.5% $ 60.800.00 $ 60,800.00 -22.1% $ 56,000.00 $ 56,000.00 28.211 $ 84,000.00 $ 84,000.00 7.7% 162 861504 MODIFY LIGHTING ANOSIGN ILLUMINATION LS 1 $304,000.00 $ 304,000.00 $ 155,000.00 $ 155,000.00 -49.0% $ 155,000.00 $ 155,003.00 -49.0% $ 170,000.00 $ 170000.03 -44.1% $ 155.000.00 $ 155,000.00 -49.0%$ 176,715.00 $ 176,715.00 -41.9% 163 868007 REMOVE LK3HTING STANDARD LS 1 $1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 6,200.00 313.3% .91.6% $ 6.000.00 $ 980,000.00 300.0% $ 4,200.00 $ 1,106000.00 te0.r' -44.2%, $ 6,500.00 $ 1,250,000.00 333.3 -36.6% $ 7,400.00 $ 21,000.00 $ 105.00 $ 650,000.00 $ $ 21,000.00 650,030.00 393.3^ -73.8% -67.0% 164 869074A WIRELESS DATA CCIMMUNICATIONSYSTEM LS 1 $80,000.00 $ 80,000.00 $ 6,700.00 S 6.500.00 -91.". „-96.0% 50.3% $ 4,500.00 5 80.00 S 1,100000.00 $ 7,00.2.00 165 869043 REMOVE PULL BOX EA 2 $5,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 140.00 -97.2 $ 200.00 $ 150.00 $ 1,250,000.00 166 999990 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $1,971,931.75 $ 1,971,931.75 $ 1,200.000.00 $ 1,200,000.00 39.1% $ 980,000.00 167 CONTRACTOR PURCHASED STATEMATERtN_S LS 1 $60,000.00 $ 60.000.00 $ 60,000.00 $ 60,000.00 0.0% $ 60,000.00 $ 60,000.00 0.0% S 60,000.00 $ 80,000.00 0.0% $ 60,000.00 $ 60,000.00 0.0% $ 60,030.00 $ 60,000.00 0.0% 168 511036 ARCHITECTURAL SURFACE (HARRIER) SOFT 912 $27.41 $ 25.003.02 $ 21.50 $ 19,608.00 -21.6% $ 10.00 $ 9,120.00 -63.5% 5 1.15 $ 17.00 $ 15,504.00 38.0% $ 26.00 $ 23,712.00 5.2% 169 597600 PREPARE AND PAINT CONCRETE SOFT 912 $10.96 $ 9,999.99 $ 5.00 $ 4,560.00 54.4% $ 5.00 $ 4,560.00 54.4% S 2.50 $ 6.00 $ 5,472.00 45.3% $ 6.03 $ 5,472.00 45.3% 170 WA CONNECTIONS TO SCE SERVICEPOINTA LS 1 $25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 $ 8,000.00 $ 8,000.00 -68.0% $ 8,000.00 $ 8,000.00 -68.0% S. 8,000.00 $ 8000.00 -88.0% $ 2,200.00 -91.2% $ 5,300.00 $ 12,000.00 $ 12,000.00 52.0% 171 WA CONNECTIONS TO SCE SERVICE POINTS LS 1 $25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 -60.0% $ 5,000.00 -80.0% $ 44,000.00 76.0% $ 2,200.00 -91.2% 172 WA CONNECTIONS TO SCE SERVICE POINT LS 1 $25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 0.0% $ 5,000.00 - $ 5,300.00 $ 2,200.00 -91.2% $ 11.000.00 $ 11,000.00 56.0% . A /////-.. TOTAL RID REM AMOUNT»» : 21,691,251.76 .,l I f /- ; 13479,006.00 �,//.7 f f 4 ; 13,562,111,00 f" ././ / $ 14,067,855.00 er / // $ 15,033,525.00 - f TOTAL BID ITEM AMOUNT AT PUBLIC READING »» Bid Variation from Engineer's Estimate >» Percent Deviation from Engineer's Estimate »> Bid Opining: No. of Contract Items: Proposals issued: ()OBE Goal: 30-Mar-10 111 54 5.16% $ 13,470,704.00� -3504% (8,252247 76) -36 04 % $ 13,562,111.00 ; (8,129,140.76) 37.48% -3 7 4816 Difference Between #t A #2 >» 5 123,107.00 Difference Between #2 8 #.3>» $ 505 754.83 ___„,a,ar Considered Significantly Unbalanced by Wisconsin DDT, <-75% Considered Significantly Unbalanced by Wisconsin DOT,>+50% 4of4 132 14,067,865.80 S (7,623.385.96) 35.14% -35.14% S 14,096,700.00 $ (7,592,701.76) 45.00% -35.00'h Difference Between 103 8 #4 »> $ 30,68420 Difference Between #4 S 115 »> $ 4 5.00 L14,676,151.38-30.69% $ (6,657,726.76) 30.69% • 4,500 4,250 4,000 3,750 3,500 3,250 F 3,000 W w 2,750 z z 2,500 F 7, jai. 2,250 v 0 o 'ICJ2,000 a 21,750 z 1,500 Co• 1,250 ca 1,000 750 500 250 0 94/95 95/96 96/97 DIVISION OF ENGINEERING SEk-VICES - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY LOW BID VS ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE NUMBER OF PROJECTS & AVERAGE NUMBER OF BIDDERS 94/95 STATE FY THRU 09/10 ATTACHMENT. 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 STATE FISCAL YEAR 04/05 05/06 Engineer's Estimate Low Bid Number of Projects -Average Number of Bidders 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 C 6.0 m N y Zuj z uj 5.0 w 0 • o � m 40 > a 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 ATTACHMENT 3 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ************** CONTRACT ************** FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE STATE ROUTE 74 AND INTERSTATE 215 INTERCHANGE PROJECT, IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, IN THE CITY OF PERRIS, CALIFORNIA RCTC Agreement No. 10-31-030-00 FEDERAL AID PROJECT NO. HPLUESPL — 6054(063) February 18,2010 BETWEEN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND (Add Contractor Name) Contract-1 134 • • • CONSTRUCTION OF THE STATE ROUTE 74 AND INTERSTATE 215 INTERCHANGE PROJECT, IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, IN THE CITY OF PERRIS, CALIFORNIA RCTC AGREEMENT NO. 10-31-030-00 FEDERAL AID PROJECT NO. HPLUESPL — 6054(063 I. PARTIES AND DATE. This Contract is made and entered into this day of 20 by and between the Riverside County Transportation Commission (hereinafter called the "Commission") and (Add Contractor Name) (hereinafter called the "Contractor"). This Contract is for that Work described in the Contract Documents entitled CONSTRUCTION OF THE STATE ROUTE 74 AND INTERSTATE 215 INTERCHANGE PROJECT, IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, IN THE CITY OF PERRIS, CALIFORNIA. 2. RECITALS. 2.1 The Commission is a County Transportation Commission organized under the provisions of Sections 130000, et seq. of the Public Utilities Code of the State of California, with power to contract for services necessary to achieving its purpose; 2.2 Contractor, in response to a Notice Inviting Bids issued by Commission on February 18, 2010, has submitted a bid proposal for CONSTRUCTION OF THE STATE ROUTE 74 AND INTERSTATE 215 INTERCHANGE PROJECT, IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, IN THE CITY OF PERRIS, CALIFORNIA. 2.3 Commission has duly opened and considered the Contractor's bid proposal and duly awarded the bid to Contractor in accordance with the Notice Inviting Bids and other Bid Documents. 2.4 Contractor has obtained, and delivers concurrently herewith, Performance and Payment Bonds and evidences of insurance coverage as required by the Contract Documents. 3. TERMS. 3.1 Incorporation of Documents. This Contract includes and hereby incorporates in full by reference this Contract and the following Contract Documents provided with the above referenced Notice Inviting Bids, including all exhibits, drawings, specifications and documents therein, and attachments thereto, Contract-2 135 all of which, including all addendum thereto, are by this reference incorporated herein and made a part of this Contract: a. NOTICE INVITING BIDS b. INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS c. CONTRACT BID FORMS d_ FORM OF CONTRACT e. PAYMENT AND PERFORMANCE BOND FORMS f. ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR SECURITY DEPOSITS g. CONTRACT APPENDIX PART "A" - PART "B" - PART "C" - PART "D" - PART "E" - PART "F" - PART "G" - Regulatory Requirements and Permits General Conditions Special Provisions (under separate cover) Contract Drawings (under separate cover) Contract Compliance Provisions/DBE Requirements Federal Minimum Wage Requirements Federal Requirements for Federal Aid Construction Contracts h. ADDENDUM NO.(S) (N/A or Add Addendum Numbers) 3.2 Contractor's Basic Obligation. Contractor promises and agrees, at his own cost and expense, to furnish to the Commission all labor, materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidental and customary work for the construction of a new overcrossing structure to replace the existing State Route 74 (SR- 74) and Interstate 215 (I-215) Separation, realignment, reconstruction, and widening of ramps, reconfiguration of the 4th Street/Redlands Avenue Intersection, widening of 4a' Street (SR-74) between G Street and Redlands Avenue, widening of Redlands Avenue between the I-215 and San Jacinto Avenue, and the construction of retaining walls and sound walls, (the "Work"). Notwithstanding anything else in the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall complete the Work for a total of ($ ), as specified in the bid proposal and pricing schedules submitted by the Contractor in response to the above referenced Notice Inviting Bids. Such amount shall be subject to adjustment in accor- dance with the applicable terms of this Contract. All Work shall be subject to, and performed in accordance with the above referenced Contract Documents. 3.3 Period of Performance. Contractor shall perform and complete all Work under this Contract (excluding plant establishment work) within 498 working Days of the effective date of the Notice to Proceed, and shall perform and complete all Work under this Contract (including plant establishment) within 747 working days of the effective date of the Notice to Proceed and in accordance with any completion schedule developed pursuant to provisions of the Contract Documents. Contractor agrees that if such Work is not completed within the aforementioned periods, liquidated damages Contract-3 • 136 • will apply as provided by the applicable provisions of the General Conditions, found in Part "B" of the Contract Appendix. The amount of liquidated damages shall equal Eight Thousand Seven Hundred dollars ($8,700) for each day or fraction thereof, it takes to complete the Work, or specified portion(s) of the Work, over and above the number of days specified herein or beyond the Project Milestones established by approved Construction Schedules. 3.4 Commission's Basic Obligation. Commission agrees to engage and does hereby engage Contractor as an independent contractor to furnish all materials and to perform all Work according to the terms and conditions herein contained for the sum set forth above. Except as otherwise provided in the Contract Documents, the Commission shall pay to Contractor, as full consideration for the satisfactory performance by the Contractor of services and obligation required by this Contract, the above referenced compensation in accordance with Compensation Provisions set forth in the Contract Documents. 3.5 Contractor's Labor Certification. Contractor maintains that he is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and agrees to comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Work. A certification form for this purpose is attached to this Contract as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, and shall be executed simultaneously with this Contract. 3.6 Attorneys' Fees. If either party commences an action against the other party arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing party reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit. 3.7 Successors. The parties do for themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns agree to the full performance of all of the provisions contained in this Contract. Contractor may not either voluntarily or by action of law, assign any obligation assumed by Contractor hereunder without the prior written consent of Commission. 3.8 Notices. All notices hereunder and communications regarding interpretation of the terms of the Contract or changes thereto shall be provided by the mailing thereof by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid and addressed as follows: Contract-4 137 Contractor: (Contractor Name) (Contractor Address) (Contractor City and Zip Code) Attn: (Contractor PM Name) Commission: Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, California 92502-2208 Attn: Executive Director Any notice so given shall be considered received by the other party three (3) days after deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid, addressed to the party at the above address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service. CONTRACTOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY (Contractor Name) TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: By: Name Title Anne Mayer Riverside County Transportation Commission Tax 1.D. Number: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Best Best & Krieger LLP Counsel, RCTC Contract-5 138 ATTACHMENT 4 Agreement No. 07-31-122-04 AMENDMENT NO.4 TO AGREEMENT FOR PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND ESTIMATES FOR THE SR-74/1-215 INTERCHANGE PROJECT IN THE CITY OF PERRIS 1. PARTIES AND DATE This Amendment No. 4 to the Agreement for professional engineering services for the preparation of plans, specifications, and estimates on the SR-74/I-215 Interchange Project is made and entered into as of this day of , 2010, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("Commission") and DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ("Consultant'). 2. RECITALS 2.1 The Commission and the Consultant have entered into an agreement dated December 28, 2007 for the purpose of obtaining Plans, Specifications, and Estimates for the SR-74/ 1-215 Interchange Project (the "Master Agreement'). 2.2 On June 11, 2009, the parties amended the Master Agreement by Amendment No. 1 to revise the Scope of Services and to provide additional compensation to address additional design work identified during final design, including additional mapping, right-of-way engineering, and modifications to approved project features. The additional work was performed in order to reduce the right-of-way impact and construction costs, and to reduce the project delivery schedule. Amendment No. 1 increased the total contract value in an amount of Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($700,000). 2.3 On January 28, 2010, the parties further amended the Master Agreement by Amendment No. 2 to revise the Scope of Services and to provide additional compensation to address additional design and project management services requirements, including additional coordination with the Eastern Municipal Water District ("EMWD") regarding the establishment of two irrigation service connections, services associated with the relocation of Sound Wall #1, and additional structure aesthetic review. Amendment No. 2 RCTC Agreement 07-31-122-04 SR74/1215 Interchange Project in the City of Perris Page 1 139 increased the total contract value in an amount of Ninety -Four Thousand, One Hundred Dollars ($94,100). 2.4 On , 2010, the parties further amended the Master Agreement by Amendment No. 3 to revise the Scope of Services and to provide additional compensation to address additional design, technical review, and project management services necessary to incorporate design changes, including additional design exception efforts, additional structure efforts for MSE walls and sound walls, additional structure aesthetics efforts, and additional work for final Plans, Specification & Estimates for the SR-74/I- 215 Interchange Project. Amendment No. 3 increased the total contract value in an amount of Two Hundred and Thirteen Thousand, Nine Hundred Dollars ($213,900). 2.5 The parties now desire to amend the Master Agreement to revise the Scope of Services to provide additional compensation to address additional design and project management services not included under the Master Agreement, as amended, including coordination, project administration, attendance at meetings, and provision of meeting minutes during funding, bidding, and construction, as well as services associated with "Phase 2" of continued coordination and implementation of irrigation plans with EMWD. 3. TERMS 3.1 The Scope of Services for the Master Agreement shall be amended to include "Services", as that term is defined in the Master Agreement, required to complete additional design and project management services, as more fully described in Exhibit "A" attached to this Amendment No. 4 and incorporated herein by reference. 3.2 The Services described in this Amendment No. 4, which services integrate and supplement the Consultant's existing Services under the Master Agreement, shall be performed expeditiously, within the term of the Master Agreement, and shall be completed on or before June 30, 2013, unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the Commission. 3.3 The maximum compensation for Services performed pursuant to this Amendment No. 4 shall be Two Hundred and Four Thousand, Eighty -Seven Dollars ($204,087), as further set forth in the cost detail included in Exhibit "A" to this Amendment No. 4. 3.4 The total not -to -exceed contract value of the Master Agreement, as herein modified, is Three Million, Three Hundred and Three Thousand, Seven Hundred and Forty -Nine Dollars ($3,303,749). RCTC Agreement 07-31-122-04 SR74/I215 Interchange Project in the City of Perris Page 2 • 140 • • 3.5 Except as amended by this Amendment No. 4, all provisions of the Master Agreement, as amended by Amendment Nos. 1, 2, and 3, including without limitation the indemnity and insurance provisions, shall remain in full force and effect and shall govern the actions of the parties under this Amendment No. 4. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed the Agreement on the date first herein above written. RIVERSIDE COUNTY DAVID EVANS AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ASSOCIATES, INC. By: Bob E. Magee, Chair APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Best Best & Krieger LLP General Counsel Signature Name Title RCTC Agreement 07-31-122-04 SR74/1215 Interchange Project in the City of Perris Page 3 141 • EXHIBIT "A" Scope of Services and Cost Details [Attached behind this page] Note that references in the attached document to Amendments #11 and 8B are for internal reference purposes, and all of the Services described in the attached document are part of this Amendment No. 4 to the Master Agreement. RCTC Agreement 07-31-122-04 SR74/1215 interchange Project in the City of Perris Exhibit A • 142 • • REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT #11, #8B March 2, 2010 Mr. Marlin Feenstra Capital Projects Program Delivery Director Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Agreement No. 07-31-122-00 Amendment No. 07-31-122-01 Amendment No. 07-31-122-02 Subject: Request for Amendment #11, #8B (Master Amendment 4) Additional Design Support during Funding, Bidding, and Construction SR-74/1-215 Interchange Project Dear Mr. Feenstra As you may know, the "PS&E" Agreement 07-31-122-00 was negotiated and signed between RCTC and David Evans and Associates (DEA) in December 2007. Several significant design changes occurred between December 2007 and June 2008 that were reflected in the 6/28/08 Geometric Approval Drawing (GAD) and the 6/28/08 Draft Project Report (DPR). These significant design changes have caused DEA to perform additional work effort to incorporate these changes into the project design and could not have been anticipated by December 2007. This request for amendment is for additional work not included within or not anticipated at the time of Request for Amendment #1 (request transmitted 4/15/09, NTP granted 7/16/09). Based on 12/10/09 internal coordination meeting and based on the 1/08/10 Change Order Negotiation Meeting and subsequent meetings between RCTC and DEA, we submit this Request for Amendment. Please note that we have combined previous Requests #11 and #813 into one Request for Master Amendment 4 for convenience. The cost breakdown and backup documentation are as follows and as attached: • Request for Amendment #11 for a total of $184,787. • Request for Amendment #8B for a total of $19,300. • Total = $204,087. Please process these Requests as a Change Order to our original Agreement No. 07-31-122- 00. Please contact us with any comments or questions for immediate resolution. Sincerely David Evans and Associates, Inc. Don Bloodworth, PE, PLS ,62- Project Manager / Project Engineer 619.400.0624 Page 1 of 7 143 • REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT #11 Subject: Request for Amendment #11 Additional Design Support during Funding, Bidding, and Construction SR-74/I-215 Interchange Project Based on 12/10/09 internal coordination meeting and subsequent meetings at ROTC, RCTC and DEA discussed strategies for delivering the Task for providing Design Support during Funding, Bidding, and Construction. This task includes the following items: • Responding to questions for Contract Bidders. • Responding to questions during the Funding Process. • Responding to Requests for Information (RFIs) during construction. • Reviewing Shop Drawings • _ Preparing As -Built Drawings • Continued Coordination, Attending Meetings, and Preparing Meeting Minutes. As we discussed, the original budget to perform this work appeared insufficient to complete the work currently anticipated. The primary reason for this difference between originally anticipated need and current need is that the Sheet Count drastically increased during the. PS&E process. The originally anticipated Sheet Count (as shown on Original Contract, page 10 of 11) was 200 plan sheets. The final PS&E Sheet Count was 305 plan sheets. Further discussion itemized the following needs to complete this task: Construction Support Analysis 600 Construction Support 270 Construction Support Construction Support RE Book Bid Questions RFIs Shop Drawings 295 As Builts Totals Original Estimated Amendment Budget Total Need 11 $99,872 $200,000 $100,128 $25,000 $99,872 $25,000 $110,000 $40,000 $40,341 $125,000 $84,659 $140,213 $325,000 $184,787 Therefore, please see attached our Request for Amendment #11 for a total of $184,787 to be included into a Master Amendment 4. Please review and approve. Page 2 of 7 • 144 • • • REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT #8B Subject: Request for Amendment #8B — Continued Coordination with EMWD Phase 2 — Incorporate the Resolutions as Determined by the RWUE Process into an EMWD Submittal Process and an Updated Set of Caltrans PS&E Irrigation Plans SR-74/I-215 Interchange Project As discussed at the Change Order Negotiation Meeting conducted on 1/08/10 and subsequent meetings between RCTC and DEA, Request for Amendment #8B or "Phase 2" of this work is pending on -going negotiations between RCTC and EMWD. Pending the outcome of on -going negotiations between RCTC and EMWD, DEA would perform Phase 2 of this work. The fee estimate for this task would be for a total of $19,300. Therefore, please see attached our Request for Amendment #8B for a total of $19,300 to be included into a Master Amendment 4. Please review and approve. Page 3 of 7 145 • EXHIBIT "A-11" SCOPE OF SERVICES AMENDMENT11 Task A11-6.2 Additional Design Support during Funding, Bidding, and Construction $184,787 This task includes performing additional Design Support during Funding, Bidding, and Construction for a level of effort not anticipated during the time of original contract negotiations or during Amendment 1. This task includes continued coordination, performing project administration, attending meetings, and preparing meeting minutes. Additional Responding to Requests for Information (RFIs) This task includes receiving, reviewing, interpreting, and responding to Contractor RFIs. It is anticipated that Responses to RFIs will be of a clarifying nature for interpretation of the design intent of the Contract Plans and Specifications. Changes to design intent, or updates to Contract Plans and Specifications as a result of Contractor RFIs, are not included within this task. An organized list of Contractor RFIs and subsequent responses will be maintained as a part of this task. This task includes continued coordination, performing project administration, attending meetings, and preparing meeting minutes. Additional Reviewing Shop Drawings This task includes receiving, reviewing, interpreting, and responding to Contractor Shop Drawings. It is anticipated that Reviewing Shop Drawings will be include verification of the design intent of the Contract Plans and Specifications. Changes to design intent, or updates to Contract Plans and Specifications as a result of Shop Drawing Review, are not included within this task. An organized list of Contractor Shop Drawings and subsequent status will be maintained as a part of this task. This task includes continued coordination, performing project administration, attending meetings, and preparing meeting minutes. Additional As -Built Drawings This task includes receiving, reviewing, interpreting, and transcribing a Contractor marked -up Contract Plan Set. It is anticipated that the Contractor will provide regular notices of updates regarding field changes and a complete marked -up set of Contract Plan set for incorporation into an As -Built Drawing Plan Set. Changes to design intent, or updates to Contract Plans and Specifications as a result of Contractor marked -up Contract Plan Set, are not included within this task. This task includes continued coordination, performing project administration, attending meetings, and preparing meeting minutes. Page 4 of 7 146 Request for Amendment #11 - Additional Design Support during Funding, Bidding, and Constrl Additional Design Support during Funding, Bidding, and Construction Final Engineering PSE for 1215-74 RCTC Agreement Number 07-31-122-00 Additional Design Support during Funding, Bidding, and Construction Estimated Cost • Rate Hours Dollars 1. LABOR NAME Bridge Engineer Landscape Architecture Design Engineer Landscape Designer Principal in Charge Bridge Designer Engineer V Engineer IV Principal Engineer' PM/PE Design Engineer Designer QC Project Manager QC Project Manager Landscape Architecture Engineer II Office Administrator Administrative Assistant Landscape Architecture QC Project Manager Irrigation Designer Bridge Technician Survey Chief Drainage Engineer Controller Project Accountant Administrative Assistant Certified Party Chief Office Administrator Project Surveyor Engineering Technician Design Engineer SWDR Engineer Sr. Project Accountant POSITION Bridge Engineer Landscape Architecture Design Engineer Landscape Designer Principal in Charge Bridge Designer Engineer V Engineer IV Principal Engineer! PM/PE Design Engineer Designer QC Project Manager QC Project Manager Landscape Architecture Engineer II Office Administrator Administrative Assistant Landscape Architecture QC Project Manager Irrigation Designer Bridge Technician Survey Chief Drainage Engineer Controller Project Accountant Administrative Assistant Certified Party Chief Office Administrator Project Surveyor Engineering Technician Design Engineer SWDR Engineer Sr. Project Accountant SUBTOTAL LABOR $48.00 $38.50 $31.75 $24.00 $85.00 $29.00 $64.90 $49.00 $86.50 $57.50 $34.50 $28.00 $63.00 $95.00 $44.00 $33.25 $25.00 $25.00 $46.00 $65.00 $34.00 $22.00 $60.00 $58.00 $48.00 $25.50 $23.00 $43.31 $29.75 $35.98 $25.00 $36.00 $38.50 $30.00 100 24 140 24 8 50 50 56 100 140 140 40 8 8 24 32 8 8 24 8 24 100 8 64 8 8 40 20 20 20 20 20 40 8 1392 $4,800.00 $924.00 $4,445.00 $576.00 $680.00 $1,450.00 $3,245.00 $2,744.00 $8,650.00 $8,050.00 $4,830.00 $1,120.00 $504.00 $760.00 $1,056.00 $1,064.00 $200.00 $200.00 $1,104.00 $520.0 $816. $2,200.00 $480.00 $3,712.00 $384.00 $204.00 $920.00 $866.20 $595.00 $719.60 $500.00 $720.00 $1,540.00 $240.00 $60,818.80 2. OVERHEAD 175.16% $106,530.21 3. FIXED FEE 10% $16,734.90 4. EXPENSES Reimbursibles, Travel, Deliveries EXPENSES SUBTOTAL $703.00 $703.00 5. SUBCONSULTANTS Additional Design Support during Funding, Bidding, and Construction $184,78111 1 of 1 Request for Amendment 11_100302 .xls 147 i EXHIBIT "A-8" SCOPE OF SERVICES AMENDMENT Possible Future Task 2 (A8-5.2) Incorporate the Resolutions of the RWUE Process into the Onsite Recycled Water Irrigation Plans (EMWD) and Updated Set of PS&E Irrigation Plans (Caltrans) $19,300 After RWUE Irrigation Exhibit is approved by EMWD, Caltrans, and RCTC, DEA would submit the Onsite Recycled Water Irrigation Plans for review and comment. DEA shall receive RCTC written approval before beginning work on this task. DEA would undergo the EMWD Submittal Process for Onsite Recycled Water Irrigation Plans (prepared in AutoCAD format). DEA anticipates three submittals of the Onsite Recycled Water Irrigation Plans during this submittal process, coordination with EMWD and RCTC, and two (2) meetings with agencies. DEA anticipates minor updates/modifications to currently -approved (Caltrans) PS&E Plans, Specs, and Estimate for construction purposes. These updates/modifications would reflect agreements between EMWD, Caltrans, and RCTC, generated during the EMWD Onsite Recycled Water Irrigation Plans Submittal Process. This task would include coordination, attending meetings, and preparing meeting minutes. Page 6 of 7 148 Request for Amendment #8 - Additional Coordination with EMWD TASK 2 - Incorporate the Resolutions as Determined by the RWUE Process into an Updated Set of PS&E Irrigation Plans Final Engineering PSE for 1215-74 RCTC Agreement Number 07-31-122-00 TASK 2 - Incorporate the Resolutions as Determined by the RWUE Process into an Updated Set of PS&E Irrigation Plans Estimated Cost Rate Hours Dollars 1. LABOR NAME Landscape Architecture Design Engineer Landscape Designer Survey Project Manager PM/PE Design Engineer QC Project Manager Landscape Architecture Landscape Architecture Irrigation Designer Landscape Architecture Controller Project Accountant Administrative Assistant Sr. Project Accountant POSITION Landscape Architecture Design Engineer Landscape Designer Survey Project Manager PM/PE Design Engineer QC Project Manager Landscape Architecture Landscape Architecture Irrigation Designer Landscape Architecture Controller Project Accountant Administrative Assistant Sr. Project Accountant SUBTOTAL LABOR $37.00 $31.75 $24.00 $85.00 $57.50 $34.50 $63.00 $44.00 $44.00 $34.00 $55.00 $45.00 $24.00 $23.00 $30.00 10 8 36 2 8 8 2 30 8 36 12 1 2 2 2 167 $370.00 $254.00 $864.00 $170.00 $460.00 $276.00 $126.00 $1,320.00 $352.00 $1,224.00 $660.00 $45.00 $48.00 $46.00 $60.00 $6,275.00 2. OVERHEAD 175.16% $10,991.29 3. FIXED FEE 10% $1,726.63 4. EXPENSES Reimbursibles, Travel, Deliveries $307.08 EXPENSES SUBTOTAL $307.08 TOTAL COST THIS TASK $19,300.00 1 of 1 Request for Amendment 8_091214 .xls • 149 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AGENDA ITEM 11 13) Metro METROLrNK OCTA 4 LONG BERGH w THE PORT U( lfl6 MIOEiES ' V.", Seen1, MNffi(M Governments SAN BAG %bridal; Together May 11, 2010 Mr. James Earp Chairman California Transportation Commission 1120 N Street Room 2221 (MS-52) Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Chairman Earp: As requested by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) at its April meeting, members of the Southern California Consensus Group (SCCG) were tasked to work with representatives of the Union Pacific Railroad Corporation (UP), the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF), on a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), a Baseline Agreement (BA), and other supporting documents regarding the San Bernardino Associated Governments' (SANBAG) request to program $91.3 million of Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF) for the Colton Crossing project in San Bernardino County. As you are aware, there are three major allied issues regarding the allocation of funds for Colton Crossing including a full funding plan for positive train control (PTC); the impact of programming TCIF funds on Colton Crossing has on other currently programmed TCIF projects in the Los Angeles/Inland Empire Corridor; and the degree of public benefit derived from the project. Below, please find the status of each of the aforementioned issues. PTC Full Funding Plan: Recently, Caltrans submiiied a programming request to the CTC for $47.5 million in state Proposition 1A funds for the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) PTC project. In addition, the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) is requesting the CTC program an additional $17.5 million in state Proposition 116 funds for PTC. The SCCG anticipates that these two programming actions will be approved by the CTC at its meeting on May 19-20 in Sacramento. Based on these actions, SCRRA now has $157.4 million of committed funds for this project. With a total project cost of $202 million, this leaves a $44.6 million shortfall. To fund this shortfall, there are a number of funding opportunities at the federal level, including Federal Railroad Administration Technology funds ($25 million), High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail ($13.5 million) and a fiscal k,41 irEl?iwn year 2011 appropriations earmark ($10 million) that SCRRA is currently AssOtlAiloidoYE mums pursuing. We are also confident that SCRRA has the ability to fully fund any shortfall with its share of state Proposition 1A funds should local or federal funding not be realized. Mr. James Earp May 11, 2010 Page 2 To further solidify funding for PTC, the SCCG respectfully requests that the CTC support its efforts to work with the State Treasurer's Office and the State Department of Finance to make PTC funding a priority of any future Proposition 1 B bond issue. Programming of Funds to Colton Crossing: At its March meeting, the CTC denied programming TCIF funds for the Colton Crossing project. By this action, the available TCIF programming of funds was transferred to the Los Angeles/Inland Empire Corridor. While $91 million of programming was available, an equivalent amount of funds was not transferred. With TCIF projects for the corridor already over programmed, the addition of Calton Crossing, without funds, exacerbated the situation and placed projects currently programmed in the corridor in jeopardy. This was of concern to the SCCG. In order to help resolve this issue, SANBAG staff, working with CTC and Caltrans' staff, developed an alternative funding plan that allows Colton Crossing to be included in the TCIF program without jeopardizing other currently TCIF-funded projects. The plan consists of replacing the $118 million of TCIF funds programmed on the 1-15/1-215 (Devore) Interchange with State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) funds. While both CTC and Caltrans' staff concur with this plan, the SCCG respectfully requests written assurances by the CTC that this proposed funding plan will in no way jeopardize any TCIF and SHOPP funded projects in the L.A./Inland Empire Corridor. Further, per the provisions of AB 268, if the Colton Crossing Project does not meet the requirements or delivery schedule contained in its project BA, the project's funding will be available for programming in the Los Angeles/Inland Empire Corridor. Public Benefit: Over a period of several weeks, members of the SCCG and representatives of the UP and BNSF have been discussing the issue of public benefit associated with the Colton Crossing project. There has -been general agreement amongst and between the parties involved in these discussions regarding the merit of Colton Crossing as an important goods movement project and the potential public benefit it can bring to our region. However, the issue of assigning public or private benefit to any project is to some degree subjective. The public benefit that can be ascribed to the Colton Crossing project falls into two categories, monetized and non -monetized. Monetized benefits are those based on calculations as a result of negotiations with the UP and the BNSF. For example, local rail improvements in the City of Colton, based on railroad Mr. James Earp May 11, 2010 Page 3 contributions to the project are estimated at $13 million. Another example of a public benefit is traffic time savings, vehicle operating costs reductions and environmental benefits attributed to the Colton Crossing Project. These public benefits have been calculated at an estimated $189,200,000. The total estimated monetized public benefit for the Colton Crossing project is $299,241,000. Non -monetized public benefits are those whose value are inexact, but do add value to a project. For example, in the case of the Colton Crossing project, the addition of Metrolink service between Riverside and San Bernardino Counties and the elimination of easements on a rail line, represent non -monetized benefits. Nonetheless, it is clear that the private railroads will benefit greatly from construction of these improvements as well, and considering this significant private benefit, it has been difficult to reach a consensus on whether the public benefit is commensurate with the amount of public investment. In spite of some continuing concerns, the member agencies of the SCCG, after deliberation within the group as well as a result of negotiations with the UP and the BNSF, have reached a consensus to support the execution of SANBAG's MOU and BA for the Colton Crossing project. Sincerely, Rick Richmond/ Chief Executive Officer Alameda Corridor -East Construction Authority Oka — Arthur T. Leahy Chief Executive Officer Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority J. n Doherty, PE C ief Executive Officer Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority Will Kempton Chief Executive Officer Orange County Transportation Authority Mr. James Earp May 11, 2010 Page 4 Richard Steinke Executive Director Port of Long Beach „ Anne Mayer Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission Hasan ikhrata Executive Director Southern California Association of Governments Geraldine Knatz, Ph.D Executive Director Port of Los Angeles 4,e\11.41/d- "441.“/At Deborah Robinson Barmack Executive Director San Bernardino Associated Governments /Width) John Fenton Chief Executive Officer Southern California Regional Rail Authority Darren Kettle Executive Director Ventura County Transportation Commission Mr. James Earp May 11, 2010 Page 5 c: California Transportation Commissioners Bimla Rhinehart, Executive Director, CTC Dale Bonner, Secretary, BTH Cindy McKim, Chief Deputy Director, Caltrans Will Kempton, Chief Executive Officer,OCTA Arthur T. Leahy, Chief Executive Officer, Metro Anne Mayer, Executive Director, RCTC Deborah Barmack, Executive Director, SANBAG Darren Kettle, Executive Director, VCTC John Doherty, Chief Executive Officer, ACTA Rick Richmond, Chief Executive Officer, ACE Geraldine Knatz, Executive Director, POLA Richard Steinke, Executive Director,POLB Hasan Ikhrata, Executive Director,SCAG John Fenton, Chief Executive Officer,Metrolink