Loading...
05 May 24, 2010 Budget & Implementation89192 RECORDS RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA TIME: 9:30 a.m. DATE: Monday, May 24, 2010 LOCATION: BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside s:9- COMMITTEE MEMBERS -V Greg Pettis, Chair / Kathleen DeRosa, City of Cathedral City Scott Matas, Vice Chair / Russell Betts, City of Desert Hot Springs 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 Eduardo Garcia / Steven Hernandez, City of Coachella Robin Lowe / Eric McBride, City of Hemet Bob Magee / Melissa Melendez, City of Lake Elsinore Terry Henderson / Don Adolph, City of La Quinta Rick Gibbs / Randon Lane, City of Murrieta Steve Adams / Andy Melendrez, City of Riverside Ron Roberts / Jeff Comerchero, City of Temecula John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside, District II Jeff Stone, County of Riverside, District III SP. STAFF eV Anne Mayer, Executive Director Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer SP. AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY dot' Annual Budget Development and Oversight Competitive Federal and State Grant Programs Countywide Communications and Outreach Programs Countywide Strategic Plan Legislation Measure A Implementation Public Communications and Outreach Programs Short Range Transit Plans Comments are welcomed by the Committee. If you wish to provide comments to the Committee, please complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board. 11.36.06 • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 9:30 a.m. Monday, May 24, 2010 BOARD ROOM County Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor Riverside, California In compliance with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials distributed 72 hours prior to the meeting, which are public records relating to open session agenda items, will be available for inspection by members of the public prior to the meeting at the Commission office, 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor, Riverside, CA, and on the Commission's website, www.rctc.orq. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section 54954.2, if you need special assistance to participate in a Committee 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 Committee may, either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote of the Committee, waive this three minute time limitation. Depending on the number of items on the Agenda and the number of speakers, the Chair may, at his/her discretion, reduce the time of each speaker to two (2) continuous minutes. Also, the Committee may terminate public comments if such comments become repetitious. In addition, the maximum time for public comment for any individual item or topic is thirty (30) minutes. Speakers may not yield their time to others without the consent of the Chair. Any written documents to be distributed or presented to the Committee shall be submitted to the Clerk of the Board. This policy applies to Public Comments and comments on Agenda Items. Budget and Implementation Committee May 24, 2010 Page 2 Under the Brown Act, the Board should not take action on or discuss matters • raised during public comment portion of the agenda which are not listed on the agenda. Board members may refer such matters to staff for factual information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — APRIL 26, 2010 6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS (The Committee may add an item to the Agenda after making a finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and that the item came to the attention of the Committee subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Committee. if there are less than 2/3 of the Committee members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote. Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.) 7. 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. 7A. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Overview This item is for the Committee to: Page .1 • 1) Receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the nine -month period ended March 31, 2010; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 7B. GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD STATEMENT NUMBER 54 FUND BALANCE REPORTING AND GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPE Page 7 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the Commission's new fund balance reporting policy; 2) Approve the commitment of unexpended fund balance at June 30, 2010, in the Right of Way Management Fund for right of way management services relating to rail and highway properties; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. • • • Budget and Implementation Committee May 24, 2010 Page 3 7C. RESOLUTION NO. 10-015, RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ESTABLISHING THE COMMISSION'S APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 Page 11 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1 } Approve Resolution No. 10-015, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing the Commission's Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2010/11"; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 7D. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT Overview This item is for the Committee to: Page 19 1) Receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2010; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 7E. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT Overview This item is for the Committee to: Page 32 1) Receive and file the Single Signature Authority Report for the third quarter ended March 31, 2010; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. Budget and Implementation Committee May 24, 2010 Page 4 7F. FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 MINIMUM FARE REVENUE RATIO FOR RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY AND SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY Overview This item is for the Committee to: Page 34 1) Reaffirm the methodology used to calculate the required fare box recovery ratio; 2) Approve the FY 2010/11 minimum fare revenue to operating cost ratio of 17.13% for the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and 18.14% for the SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine); and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 8. PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 Overview This item is for the Committee to: Page 38 1) Receive input on the proposed Budget for FY 2010/1 1; 2) Forward to the Commission to close the public hearing to receive input • on the proposed Budget for FY 2010/11; and 3) Adopt the proposed Budget for FY 2010/1 1. 9. AGREEMENT WITH ELITE ELECTRIC INC. TO PROVIDE LIGHTING MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR THE FIVE COMMISSION -OWNED METROLINK STATIONS IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY Page 249 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Award Agreement No. 10-24-082-00 to Elite Electric, Inc. for lighting maintenance services at the five Commission -owned commuter rail stations and the Perris Transit Center for a three-year period, and two one-year options, for a total contract amount of $550,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement, including option years, on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. • Budget and Implementation Committee May 24, 2010 Page 6 12. FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES • PROGRAM FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS Page 260 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the FY 2010/11 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program recommended funding as shown in the attached schedule; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 13. SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM REALLOCATION FOR THE CITY OF BEAUMONT Overview This item is for the Committee to: Overview Page 265 1) Grant the city of Beaumont (Beaumont) a reallocation of unused SB 821 funds from its FY 2008/09 SB 821 project to its FY 2009/10 SB 821 project; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 14. SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM EXTENSION FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA Overview This item is for the Committee to: Page 271 1) Grant the city of Temecula (Temecula) an extension to June 30, 2011 for approved SB 821 program funds for the Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge Overcrossing project; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 15. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislation; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. Page 278 • • • • Budget and Implementation Committee May 24, 2010 Page 7 16. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 17. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT Overview This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and staff to report on attended and upcoming meeting/conferences and issues related to Commission activities. 18. ADJOURNMENT AND NEXT MEETING The next Budget and Implementation Committee meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Monday, June 28, 2010, Board Chambers, First Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE ROLL CALL MAY 24, 2010 Present County of Riverside, County of Riverside, District III City of Beaumont City of Blythe City of Calimesa' City of Canyon Lake City of Cats City of Coachella City of City of Hemet City of Lake Elsinore City of La Quinta City of Murrieta City of Riverside City of Temeoul', Absent RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE SIGN -IN SHEET MAY 24, 2010 NAME E MAIL ADDRESS UUUVVV - Tel)e---- /46 Kliw5 V , A.4J..)14‘(ot-1.WC- �1 C'4 /L -.1 / £%i E C. V f..d t /ZP-otTs '2v sse l 1 2,C., 1 ` . t.s=cr- i' i� I ScrP av VIV\I e,-(t";&--- P Oar—.—r-.. rL4 6 e 1 _ i--, f; dLv c ) T7 _F-- ,684J1ost' • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE Monday, April 26, 2010 MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the Budget and Implementation Committee was called to order by Chair Mary Craton at 9:30 a.m., in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At this time, Commissioner Ray Quinto led the Budget and Implementation Committee in a flag salute. 3. ROLL CALL Members/Alternates Present Members Absent Steve Adams Mary Craton Rick Gibbs Terry Henderson Steven Hernandez Robin Lowe Bob Magee Scott Matas Greg Pettis Ray Quinto Ron Roberts Jeff Stone Roger Berg Joseph DeConinck John Tavaglione 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no requests to speak from the public. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - FEBRUARY 22, 2010 Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes April 26, 2010 Page 2 M/S/C (Henderson/Craton) to approve the minutes of February 22, 2010, as submitted. Abstain: Lowe 6. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS There were no additions/revisions to the agenda. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR - All matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. M/S/C (Adams/Craton) to approve the following Consent Calendar item(s): 7A. ANNUAL INVESTMENT POLICY REVIEW 1) Adopt the Annual Investment Policy; 2) Adopt Resolution No. 10-010, Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding the Revised Investment Policy'; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 7B. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS 1) Receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 4 (Q4) 2009; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 8. PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager, presented the proposed Budget for FY 2010/11, and discussed the following areas: • Budget process; • Commission policy goals; • FY 2010/11 Budget considerations; • Budget summary; • Sources by breakdown and comparison; • Expenditures by department, expenditures breakdown by department, and comparison; • Capital department expenditure highlights; • Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes April 26, 2010 Page 3 • Functional expenditures breakdown and comparison; and • Next steps. Commissioner Rick Gibbs commended staff for the proposed FY 2010/11 Budget, and expressed the Commission should be conservative with future budgets as it relates to reserves. Theresia Trevino clarified the reserves are for projects budgeted in the 1989 Measure A and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) programs. Commissioner Robin Lowe requested clarification regarding the increase in the FY 2010/11 support costs. Theresia Trevino explained there are a number of costs that have been included in the support category and staff will provide the details at its May Commission meeting. Commissioner Mary Craton expressed concern for the increase in professional costs for Executive Management and then referred to the Finance section about the recommended increase for the $500 million 2009 Measure A bonding cap and asked if it would go to the voters for approval this year. Michele Cisneros replied the Short Range Transit Plans are under review, therefore budget numbers for Public and Specialized Transit will increase by approximately $80 million. Theresia Trevino replied it is uncertain on the timing for the bonding cap and deferred to John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director, for an update. John Standiford replied staff will provide an update to the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan Ad Hoc Committee, as this is an option that should be considered. Commissioner Craton expressed with the current economic downturn the voters may not approve an increase in the Commission's debt and it should be looked at carefully. John Standiford replied a Western Riverside County Delivery Plan Ad Hoc Committee meeting will be held in May. Commissioner Craton expressed concern for the Public and Specialized Transit funding shortfall. • Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes April 26, 2010 Page 4 Michele Cisneros replied on the Executive Management's professional costs, which significantly increased are because of legal costs for the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway for the Fourth Main Track. M/S/C (Stone/Adams) to: 1) Discuss, review, and provide guidance on the proposed FY 2010/11 Budget; and 2) Forward to the Commission to 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. 9. RECURRING CONTRACTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 Greg Moore, Procurement and Assets Manager, provided a brief overview on the recurring contracts for FY 2010/11. Commissioner Ron Roberts expressed concern that Best Best and Krieger LLP (BB&K) only reduced its legal services by 5%. Commissioner Lowe stated there have been additional legal expenses concerning Metrolink and suggested the expenses should decrease with the newly hired Chief Executive Officer. John Standiford concurred with Commissioner Lowe's comment and explained BB&K has not raised its fees in a few years and discussed how the Commission and BB&K are managing the billable rates. M/S/C (Henderson/Lowe) to: 1) Approve the recurring contracts for FY 2010/11; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 10. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS FOR THE RISING STARS IN TRANSIT INTERNSHIP PROGRAM Henry Nickel, Staff Analyst, provided a brief overview of the Rising Stars in Transit — Internships for University Students program and the memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). • • • • Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes April 26, 2010 Page 5 In response to Chair Pettis' request, Henry Nickel explained the recruitment process for the internship program. Chair Pettis' asked if the announcement is submitted to campuses in the Coachella Valley. Henry Nickel replied staff will ensure the announcement for the internship program is submitted to the campuses in Coachella Valley. M/S/C (Lowe/Matas) to: 1) Approve MOU No. 10-25-089-00 between the Commission and the SCAG for the Rising Stars in Transit — Internships for University Students program; 2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the MOU on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 11. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager, presented an overview of the federal and state legislative activities and various bill positions. In response to Commissioner Henderson's question if the Commission has worked with Senator Joe Simitian on SB 1245 to introduce protective language, Aaron Hake replied staff has not yet approached Senator Simitian as staff wanted to initially bring the bill to the Commission. The Commission's lobbyist has made Senator Simitian aware that the Commission does have an interest and a concern with SB 1245. Commissioner Henderson suggested staff work with Senator Simitian on SB 1245 before the bill goes through additional committee cycles. Aaron Hake concurred. John Standiford stated there will be a unified effort to work with Senator Simitian on SB 1245. In response to Commissioner Lowe's question about educating the Legislature on the difference between design -sequencing and design -build related to AB 1760 and AB 2098, Aaron Hake discussed how the Legislature is being educated using the State Route 91 corridor improvement project and the 60/91 /215 interchange project as examples. Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes April 26, 2010 Page 6 Commissioner Lowe requested a presentation on the differences between design -build and design -sequencing at a future Commission meeting. Aaron Hake concurred. M/S/C (Henderson/Matas) 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; d) AB 2620 (Eng) — OPPOSE; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 12. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA There were no items pulled from the Consent Calendar. 13. COMMENTS BY COMMISSIONERS/STAFF There were no comments by Commissioners or staff. 14. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Budget and Implementation Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 10:12 a.m. The next meeting of the Budget and Implementation Committee is scheduled for May 24, 2010 at 9:30 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board 1. • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Quarterly Financial Statements STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 11 Receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the nine -month period ended March 31, 2010; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: During the last nine months of the fiscal year, staff has monitored the revenues and expenditures of the Commission. The attached financial statements present the revenues and expenditures for the first nine months of the fiscal year. Period closing accrual adjustments are not included for revenues earned but not billed, and expenditures incurred for goods and services received but not yet invoiced, as such adjustments are normally made during the year-end closing activities. The operating statement shows the sales tax revenues for the second quarter at 59% of the budget. This is a result of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 33. GASB 33 requires sales tax revenue to be accrued for the period in which it is collected at the point of sale. The State Board of Equalization collects the Measure A funds and remits them to the Commission after the reporting period for the businesses. This creates a two -month lag in the receipt of revenues by the Commission. Accordingly, these financial statements reflect the revenues related to collections through January 2010. On a cash basis, the Measure A and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) sales tax revenues are 14% and 13% lower, respectively, than the same period last fiscal year due to the continued economic downturn regionally and nationally. Staff continues to monitor the trends in the sales tax receipts and will report to the Commission any necessary adjustments to the budget for sales tax revenue. Agenda Item 7A 1 Federal, state, and local government reimbursements are on a reimbursement basis, and the Commission will receive these revenues as the projects are completed and invoiced to the respective agencies. During the FY 2009/10 budget planning process, the Commission took a conservative approach in estimating the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) receipts as a result of the housing crisis. Additionally, the TUMF budgeted revenues include $6.475 million in reimbursements related to the 74/215 interchange. The operating statement shows the TUMF revenues for the third quarter at 46% of the budget. TUMF revenues remitted by the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) did not include $530,354 for March 2010, which were received in April 2010. TUMF reimbursements through the nine -month period are $665,900. Other revenues include a property transfer agreement with the city of Riverside for proposed access easement on the State Route 91 /Van Buren Boulevard interchange project. The expenditure categories are in line overall with the expectations of the budget with the following exceptions: Salaries and benefits include a prepayment for the FY 2009/10 employer retirement contribution, which provides a discount of half a year's interest. Operating transfer in and operating transfer out are significant as of the third quarter due to the one time transfers of bond proceeds in October 2009, from the Western County Capital Projects fund to the Debt Service fund and the Commercial Paper fund to establish a debt reserve fund and retire a portion of the commercial paper. In September 2009, the Commission issued $185 million of Series 2009 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds to refund the 2008 bonds and retire $53.716 million of commercial paper. In September 2009, the Commission issued $27 million in commercial paper notes. The Commercial Paper Capital Projects fund has a deficit fund balance of $18,360,666 as a result of recording $56.284 million of commercial paper notes as a current liability rather than as an other financing source (debt issuance proceeds) in the FY 2008/09 financial statements. Since the letter of credit supporting the commercial paper program has been extended from March 2010 to March 2012, the commercial paper notes are no longer a current liability and the amount is reflected as an other financing source in the third quarter financial statements. Agenda Item 7A • 2 • Listed below are the significant capital projects and the status. Capital project expenditures are generally affected by lags in invoices submitted by contractors and consultants, as well as issues encountered during certain phases of the projects. The capital projects budgets tend to be based on aggressive project schedules. Highway Engineering/Construction/Flight of Way/Land 91 /Van Buren Boulevard Interchange Project - The city of Riverside (Riverside) is the lead agency for this project. State funds were approved in October 2009 which allowed Riverside to proceed with advertising for construction. Construction was awarded in January 2010, and started in the third quarter of FY 2009/10. Therefore, invoicing is not expected until the first quarter of FY 2010/11. 60/215 East Junction Interchange Project - Resolution on permitting the project is required with the State Water Quality Control Board (Board) in order to proceed with advertising and awarding of construction. Comments were received, incorporated, and resubmitted back to the Board in January 2010. The Board accepted all requirements and issued permits in April 2010. The project team is waiting for right of way certification and funding approval from the California Transportation Commission. Construction is forecasted to start in FY 2010/11. 60/Valley Way Interchange Project - The county of Riverside, the lead agency, awarded construction in November 2009, and construction started in the third quarter of 2010. Invoicing is expected to be submitted to the Commission in June 2010. 1-215 HOV Lanes Scott Road to Nuevo Road Project - A limited notice to proceed was issued to the design consultant to attend meetings and determine the requirements of the project. The Commission has applied for funding of the design phase in the FY 2010 STIP application and anticipates approval in late FY 2010/11. The design phase can proceed fully after environmental clearance is received in FY 2010/11. 74/215 Interchange Project - Right of way certification along with the design was approved in November 2009. The project advertised for construction after Federal Highway Administration gave approval of funds, and a construction contractor was approved at the May 2010 Commission meeting. Construction is forecasted to start in July 2010. Agenda Item 7A SR-91 HOV Project — Caltrans is performing design and is on schedule; expenditures are within budget although billings from the state are lagging. Commission staff is performing right of way acquisition work on schedule with consultant assistance; right of way capital expenditures should accelerate through the remainder of the year. Mid County Parkway Project — Right of way acquisitions have been curtailed as property development has subsided, and the critical need to acquire property for protection has been delayed due to the substantial rescoping of the project. SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (design -build) — A pre -award audit of the project and construction manager consultant was conducted during the first quarter of FY 2009/10. A limited notice to proceed was issued in October 2009; a second limited notice to proceed is not anticipated until the fourth quarter of FY 2009/10. A full notice to proceed is not anticipated until the second quarter of FY 2010/11. Updating the toll feasibility financial model as well as Commission approval of the locally preferred alternative is being sought before a full contract notice to proceed will be awarded. Right of way acquisition work was delayed pending Caltrans approval of open market acquisitions. 1-15 Corridor Improvement Project — Work in the environmental phase continues. An update of the toll feasibility model started in February. Results are expected by summer 2010, which will likely influence the project scope definition or result in a phased construction approach. 71 /91 Interchange Project — The preliminary engineering and environmental phase is scheduled to be completed in late FY 2010/1 1. Rail Engineering/Construction/Right of Way/Land Perris Valley Line Project — The notice to proceed for engineering services was issued October 2009 and right of way acquisition has not occurred. Riverside Downtown Station Layover Facility Project — The consultant selection process was completed in March 2010, and a contract award for engineering was approved by the Commission in April 2010. A notice to proceed will be issued after a pre -award audit is completed during the first quarter of FY 2010/1 1. La Sierra Station Parking Expansion Project — Final design activities are in progress and the award for construction is scheduled for December 2010. Attachment: Quarterly Financial Statements — March 2010 Agenda Item 7A • • 4 • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANPORTATION COMMISSION QUARTERLY BUDGET VS ACTUAL 3RD QUARTER FOR NINE MONTHS ENDED 3/31/2010 Revenues Sales tax Federal reimbursements State reimbursements Local reimbursements Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Other revenues Interest Total revenues Expenditures Salaries 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 Interest Cost of issuance Total debt service Capital outlay Total Expenditures Excess revenues over (under) expenditures Other financing sources/(uses) Operating transfer in Operating transfer out Debt proceeds Total financing sources/(uses) Net change in fund balances Fund balance July 1, 2009 Fund balance March 31, 2010 FY 2009/10 BUDGET $ 187,055,300 40,835,000 36,906,800 2,273,800 11,475,000 506,100 3,419.100 282,471,100 6,063,300 16,949,400 5,107,800 22,057,200 12,834,300 61,250,050 65,772,300 21,425,000 122,346,650 117,475,500 2,317,800 31,215,900 13,761,400 448,398,900 182,395,000 12,610,000 3,250,000 198,255,000 1,110,500 675.884.900 (393,413,800) 244,211,600 (244,211,600) 260,000,000 260,000,000 (133,413,800) 406,095,000 3RD QUARTER ACTUAL $ 109,468,454 4,695,362 4,658,384 863,324 5,230,196 562,442 3,544,352 129,022,514 4,596,573 5,683,722 2,842,504 8,526,226 6,457,296 22,778,902 7,716,754 476,810 11,207,139 60,133,122 1,208,495 19,546,313 4,045,740 133,570,571 183,110,875 2,989,146 961,841 187,061,862 78,843 333,834,075 (204,811,561) 220,153,126 (220,153,126) 212,000.000 212,000,000 7,188,439 REMAINING BALANCE $ (77,586,846) (36,139,638) (32,248,416) (1,410,476) (6,244,804) 56,342 125.252 (153,448,586) 1,466,727 11,265,678 2,265,296 13,530,974 6,377,004 38,471,148 58,055,546 20,948,190 111,139,511 57,342,378 1,109,305 11,669,587 9,715,660 314,828,329 (715,875) 9,620,854 2,288,159 11,193,138 1,031,657 342,050 825 382,810,132 (24,058,474) 24,058,474 (48.000,000) 48,000,000 430,810,132 456,243,471 50,148,471 $ 272,681,200 $ 463,431,910 $ 480,958,603 PERCENT UTILIZATION 59% 11% 13% 38% 46% 111 % 104% 46% 76% 34% 56% 39% 50% 37% 12% 2% 9% 51% 52% 63% 29% 30% 100% 24% 30% 94% 7% 49% 52% 90% 90% 82% 82% -5% 112% 170% 5 9 0 LB'l C4'C91 S C99 292'L4 S (999'09C'et) S 8L1 LL91I2'9S/ Z41YLE'Z4 (91C1C0'0C) 62CSCL B211111'L 111189'9 6(1f9/911 (Lens L) S 900 951'96 S LLfi'9C8'92 S 919189'LS S 690'2Cti S S1l't S C091C1 1C2 S 699 1991 S 9901695 S L9645916 219191)1Z L00'LDC19 022.1011 L9219 CL1'99L CC2 909'9C19 619 SO VOL 199'1.61.1 (S/9'99:i) OSE'029'01) C991L01 (2CVL9) Unfit'[ 59E'C9E O9C 012'9) 000'00011Z 000'00011Z (921't91:022) 921191'022 00C19CL 6091/91L 99010Z OCL 000.000'a 000'000 991 (anent.) (tenet' l) (FOC189L61) LL1'/49'92 000/11/9 69E169101 (199'119•902) (6081592) (006669'L9) (L694CEOEL) 199'161'1 (2929L1'6) LCZ'99 ItC51'l9L'8) (OOL'159) IZLZ'SIO'L) 16C'L85'1 00d'959 SOS '190'4 (SL9'991't) ios'OZB'0U C98'SLO'2 I281'L8) uVas'9 S4ten (8e5'9SZ'4) 9L0'919 FEE 9L9COL'2 LOC LH 99 920PC091 96C'OD t BC9'612'l SZ9 ZCZ'Ce COI 1CL'01 S96'969 Lii'LLS'St at'089'L Ile CIL'OZ C9B'BL Z98'l91U91 111198 9111191 619'0111111 129'0/91E1 09L'S90'9 EIE119'BL 969902'l 2211E119 6C1'L0Y1L 019910 95L'9LL'L 20612/1L 96n991 9221291 9091991 2211991 CL9'98S'9 119120121 290.091 299299 961'0C2'S 92C'C99 96C858's. 29C9697 959899'601 S 11G912L1 89918619 4Z019C'OC1 000'1 991198 92912.21 99S192 000'91.ttS SL9'96C121 S69LL2'C1 • 299191.1 991591 L59'BOL 022'052'1 909'902'9 196'S11'1 9[0'196'2 89L'06 99L'901.1 EL9101 96 492 099'001.1 919101 91E'9L1 899'992 LOCG94 LZ111 9S2'129'S 199492 LOC199 LZ111 199'029 98 999'9 LLZ'S • L99'1E1 S - ?CS%11'1 885'BLB'1 529itZ11, SZVZCZC9 290'92/'91 998'589 09L 00'9 - 929'996'S 996569 8L 9BOSY Bl C91Cl 209' 1 2C2'01 2E2.01 609'1 1860'99) Z9VOZ1 991092' 19 198'969'24 109'IZ 198'226% 9E01/80 99E'11C 6L0'96LY 900./9914 9991On L8656C't 19616C'1 269'L 269'L 9BS'9t9C1 960'LA t'1 OZ919l'I l OWL 45C160'1 952156'2 6S6'9C2 091ZLL'9 8CD'O LC L99'912 9S9'LICZ OZZ1991 989'92 90298C4 214'06C'I C11169 6910001 C99YLl 91911902C 999 19'91 C10'929 C891C999 9L9'LZ01 S11'199 1 C90111 901'90C ZCZ'99 9S9 C999891 9[61E 11119 2L119C (SOO'C) 9194161 006'999 490191 022'19/ 218492 6001291 C99'699'1 2898L1 LSO'9e5't - 9Z9'9(9 S 62C9201C S 9W/9111 S 696'L29 S L12196'99 S- S 861'90111 S Iivanl)331 mind A3llVA 1V101 913dVd 9103C0tld 1V11e1V0 3ONV16199tl A3llVA A191000 3dV4 301Atl361930 N011tl0111W W90d980 NOI1V1110d3NVN1 3093/1 emultltl3N3D 03N19W00 ltlI0tl3WW00 Ammo Ntl31S3M NOI1tl1tlOdSNVtl1 1BNVtl1 IIV14 1tl001 tlll3H]tl0] Oltld N93163M Id9i LV1 saws V 39nSV3W OLOVIVC 090 N3 SHINOW 9MN 904 9319Vn0 09C O NOi Ae sivel0V 3n lamas A-91319900 N01691110100 NOI1V190d69tltl1 ammo 3016013N9 0102' LC 4malry aoueleq puns 6002'1 Are aoueleq pund saaueleq punyLu a8uego pry (sasn)Isamnas 6ul0ueuy leloy spaaomd IgaO Ina leysueq Buyelad0 ul lapueq Bullelad0 (seen)teaamos Bunueuy lauLO samppuedxs Oepun)le no senuenep ssanx3 salnoPuadn31elo1 Aepno leede0 aalmas lgeP 91101 aaue11991l0 POO Ismalul lediauud aolmae lga0 uogelaee pue sloe101d levy sleuaye Ru0Ba9 seem pue Slaads le00l esoms !wads sluewasingsry Rlldee pue eudelad0 puepAem to luOIO P1109 u6o00 uopongeue0 OupaauOu3 leaeua6 - suo0mado welSeld suapelado pue sloafoad eleol Peden pue le001asajold RIOy %sop LOdan9 1aal Nas Ruo!ssalald Uoddne pue leuolesalold spouaq pue eaueles samgpuede3 saw.. Roy Isamlul eanuanallag30 eai uope691W tumuli uoeeyadsuely aluetuavnqupaye0ol nuoulaslnqullal aleL9 eluawavngwlal shops xel sales sonuanay • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement Number 54 Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the Commission's new fund balance reporting policy; 2) Approve the commitment of unexpended fund balance at June 30, 2010, in the Right of Way Management Fund for right of way management services relating to rail and highway properties; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION. Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) has issued GASB Statement No. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions, that will be effective for fiscal years beginning July 1, 2010. This statement sets out new standards of accounting and financial reporting intended to improve the clarity and consistency of the fund balance information provided to financial report users. As a result of the new financial system, staff elected an early implementation of this statement. GASB Statement No. 54 establishes five fund balance classifications, which are designed to show the level of constraint governing the use of funds: • Nonspendable - Fund balance includes amounts that are not in spendable form or are required to be maintained intact (e.g., loans receivable and endowments). • Restricted - Fund balance includes amounts that can be spent only for the specific purposes stipulated by external resource providers, constitutionally or through enabling legislations. • Committed - Fund balance includes amounts that can be used only for specific purposes determined by formal action of the government's highest level of decision -making authority. Agenda Item 7B 7 • Assigned — Fund balance comprises amounts intended to be used by the government for specific purposes. In governmental funds other than the general fund, assigned fund balance represents the amount that is not restricted or committed. • Unassigned — Fund balance is the residual classification for the general fund and includes all amounts not contained in the other classifications. The Commission's fund balance classifications will need to be adjusted to comply with the new definitions and guidelines covered in GASB Statement No. 54. Staff believes the requirements of GASB Statement No. 54 will improve the financial reporting by providing fund balance classifications that will be more easily understood. Elimination of the reserved classification of fund balance in favor of restricted fund balance will enhance the consistency between information reported in the government -wide statements and information in the governmental fund financial statements, and avoid confusion about the relationship between reserved fund balances and restricted net assets. The new fund balance classifications will require governments to classify amounts consistently, regardless of the fund type in which they are presented. Therefore, an amount cannot be classified as restricted in one fund, but unrestricted in another. The fund balance disclosures will give users information necessary to understand the processes under which limitations are imposed upon the use of resources and how those limitations may be modified or eliminated. Specific changes to the Commission's fund balance classifications have been discussed with the Commission's auditors, McGladrey and Pullen. Staff is proposing the new fund balance classifications: Fund General - Administration Rail Operations Right of Way Management Planning and Programming Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) SAFE Measure A Local Transportation Fund State Transit Assistance Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Capital Projects Bonds Capital Projects Commercial Paper Debt Service Agenda Item 7B Old Classification Unreserved, undesignated Reserved Reserved Reserved Unreserved, designated Unreserved, designated Reserved Reserved Reserved Reserved Reserved Reserved Reserved New Classification Assigned Restricted Committed Restricted Restricted Restricted Restricted Restricted Restricted Restricted Restricted Restricted Restricted • 8 An important secondary effect will be the limitation of the number of special revenue funds that local governments establish to encourage the use of the General Fund to account for routine government operations. The following are key phrases from GASB Statement No. 54 on fund type definitions, followed by staff's assessment of the potential impact, if any, on the Commission's fiscal reporting: • General Fund - "The General Fund is used to account for and report all financial resources not accounted for and reported in another fund." Staff does not believe that this definition will have any impact on current definitions and the reporting of the General Fund. • Special Revenue Funds - "Special revenue funds are used to account and report the proceeds of specific revenue sources that are restricted or committed to expenditures for specific purposes other than debt service or capital projects. GASB Statement No. 54 states that the Special Revenue Funds must have a specific revenue source that is the foundation for the fund. Funds that have only specific expenditures requirements but don't have a specific revenue source may no longer be classified as special revenue funds." Staff does not believe that this definition will have any significant impact on the current definitions and the reporting of the Special Revenue Funds. • Capital Projects Funds - "Capital projects fund are used to account for and report financial resources that are restricted, committed, or assigned to expenditures for capital outlays, including the acquisition or construction of capital facilities and other capital assets." Under the new definition, GASB allows for the purchase or construction of capital facilities as well as other capital assets and also allows for the accumulation of funds to either purchase or construct capital assets. Staff does not believe that this definition will have any significant impact on the current definitions and the reporting of the Capital Projects Fund. • Debt Service Funds - "Debt service funds are used to account for and report financial resources that are restricted, committed, or assigned to expenditures for principal and interest." Staff does not believe that this definition will have any impact on the current definitions and the reporting of the Debt Service Fund. Agenda Item 7B 9 Under the new statement, an action must be taken by the governing body before the close of the reporting period to impose a commitment of fund balance. Therefore, staff requests that the Commission commit the fund balance representing Right of Way Management for the management of rail and highway properties. Agenda Item 76 • 10 i RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Resolution No. 10-015, Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing the Commission's Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2010/11 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve Resolution No. 10-015, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing the Commission's Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2010/11 "; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Section 7910 of the California Government Code implements Article XIIIB of the California Constitution by requiring each local jurisdiction to establish, by resolution, its appropriations limit for each fiscal year and to make documentation used to determine the appropriations limit available to the public 15 days prior to adoption of the resolution establishing the appropriations limit. Staff has performed the calculations necessary to determine the limit. The resolution and documents supporting the calculation are attached. The Commission chose to use the percentage change in the California per capita personal income and the populations change within Riverside County as the factors in determining the appropriations limit. As required, the adoption of the Commission's Gann Appropriations Limit was posted in the local newspaper. Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 10-015 2) California per Capita Income and Population, Riverside County - California Department of Finance Agenda Item 7C 11 • RESOLUTION NO. 10-015 "RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ESTABLISHING THE COMMISSION'S APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 " WHEREAS, Article XIIIB of the California Constitution places an annual limitation upon appropriations from proceeds of taxes by each local government of the State of California; and WHEREAS, in 1988, pursuant to Article XIIIB, section 4 of the California Constitution, the Riverside County Transportation Commission established its appropriations limit at $75 million for fiscal year 1988-1989 under ordinance No. 88-1; and WHEREAS, Section 7910 of the California Government Code implements Article XIIIB of the California Constitution by requiring each local jurisdiction to establish, by resolution, its appropriations limit for each fiscal year and to make the documentation used in determining the appropriations limit available to the public fifteen days prior to adoption of the resolution establishing the appropriations limit; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Senate Constitutional Amendment No. 1 approved by the voters of the State effective June 6, 1990, beginning with fiscal year 1990-1991 and for each fiscal year thereafter, the Commission's Board of Commissioners is required to select either the percentage change in California per capita personal income or the percentage change in the local assessment roll due to the addition of local non- residential construction, and either the population change within the Commission or the population change within Riverside County, as the two factors to be applied in calculating the appropriations limit for each fiscal year; and WHEREAS, this Board wishes to select, as factors in determining the Commission's appropriation limit for fiscal year 2010-2011 the percentage change in California per capita personal income and also the population change within Riverside County; and WHEREAS, this Commission has documented its calculations of the Commission's appropriations limit for fiscal year 2010-2011 and said calculations have been made available to the public at least fifteen days prior to the adoption of this resolution. 12 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Riverside County Transportation Commission as follows: 1. For fiscal year 2010-2011, the factors selected for calculating the appropriations limit are (a) the percentage change in California per capita personal income, and lb) the population change within the County of Riverside. 2. The appropriations limit applicable to this Agency pursuant to Article XIIIB of the California Constitution for fiscal year 2010-2011 are hereby established and determined to be $ 318,967,208. 3. A copy of the documentation used in the determination of the appropriations limit for fiscal year 2010-2011 shall be affixed hereto and shall be available for public inspection. 4. Pursuant to Section 7910 of the California Government Code, any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the establishment of the appropriations limit as set forth herein must be commenced within forty-five days of the adoption of this resolution. ADOPTED this 9th day of June, 2010. Bob Buster, Chairman Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 13 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 2010-2011 APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT 2009-2010 Appropriations Limit $ 322,761,463 2010-2011 adjustment: Change in California per capita income = -2.54 percent Change in Population, Riverside County = 1.40 percent -2.54 + 100 = 0.9746 100 1.40 + 100 = 1.014 100 0.9746 x 1.014 = 0.9882444 $ 322,761,463 X 0.9882444 = $ 318,967,208 2010-2011 Appropriations Limit $ 318,967,208 Source: California per capita income - California Department of Finance Population, Riverside County - California Department of Finance 14 • 9 M � tiro DEPARTMENT OF ARNOLO SCHWARZENEGGER,,GOVERNOR 915 l STREET ■ SACRAMCNTO CA 93514-3706 www.COF.CA.00V May 2010 Dear fiscal Officer. Subject_ Price and Population Information Appropriations Limit The Califomia Revenue and Taxation Code, Section 2227, mandates the Department of Finance (Finance) to transmit an estimate of the percentage change in population to local govemments. Each local jurisdiction must use their percentage change in population factor for January 1, 2010, in conjunction with a change in the cost of living, or price factor, to calculate their appropriations limit for fiscal year 2010-2011. Enclosure I provides the change in California's per capita personal income and an example for utilizing the price factor and population percentage change factor to calculate the 2010-2011 appropriations limit. Enclosure II provides city and unincorporated county population percentage changes, and Enclosure IIA provides county's and incorporated area's summed population percentage changes. The population percentage change data excludes federal and state institutionalized populations and military populations. Population Percent Change for Special Districts Some special districts must establish an annual appropriations limit. Consult the Revenue and Taxation Code, Section 2228 for further information regarding the appropriation limit. You can access the Code from the following website:"htto:l/www.leainfo.ca.gov/calaw.html" check box: "Revenue and Taxation Code' and enter 2228 for the search term to leam more about the various population change factors available to special districts to calculate their appropriations limit. Article XIII B, Section 9(C),'of the State Constitution exempts certain special districts from the appropriations limit calculation mandate. Consult the following website: `httpl/wWW leginfo.ca_govt:consttarticle 1313" for additional information. Special districts required by law to calculate their appropriations limit must present the calculation as part of their annual audit. Any questions special districts have on this issue should be referred to their respective county for clarification, or to their legal representation, or to the law itself. No State agency reviews the local appropriations limits. Population Certification The population certification program applies only to cities and counties. Revenue and Taxation Code Section 11005.6 mandates Finance to automatically certify any population estimate that exceeds the current certified population with the State Controller's Office. Finance will certify the higher estimate to the State Controller by June 1, 2010. Please Note: Prior year's city population estimates may be revised. If you have any questions regarding this data, please contact the Demographic Research Unit at (916)323-4086. 15 May 2010 Enclosure 1 A. Price Factor. Article XII I B specifies that local jurisdictions select their cost -of -living factor to compute their appropriation limit by a vote of their goveming body. The cost -of -living factor provided here is per capita personal income. If the percentage change in per capita personal income is selected, the percentage change to be used in setting the 2010-2011 appropriation limit is: Per Capita Personal Income Fiscal Year Percentage change over prior year 2010-2011 -2.54 B. Following is an example using sample population change and the change in California per capita personal income as growth factors in computing a 2010-2011 appropriation limit. 2010-2011: Per Capita Cost of Living Change = -2.54 percent Population Change = 1.03 percent Per Capita Cost of Living converted to a ratio: Population converted to a ratio: Calculation of factor for FY 2010-2011: -2.54 + 100 = .9746 100 1.03 + 100 = 1.0103 100 .9746 x 1.0103 = .9846 • • 16 Enclosure II Annual Percent Change In Population Minus Exclusions January 1, 2009 to January 1, 2010 and Total Population, January 1, 2010 Total, County percent Change - Population Minus Exclusions - Population City 2009-2010 1-1-09 1-1-10 1.1-2010 Riverside Banning D.70 28,551. 28,751 28,751 Beaumont 5.45 32,448 34,217 34,217 Blythe 0.74 13,988 14,092 21,812 Calimesa 0.68 7,504 7,555 7,555 Canyon Lake 0.74 11,143 11,225 11,225 Cathedral City 0.63 52,455 52,788 52,841 Coachella 3.77 41,043 42,591 42,591 Corona 1.11 148,770 150.416 150,418 Desert Hot Springs 0.85 26,584 26,811 26,811 Hemet - 1.19 74,931 75,820 75,820 Indian Wells 0.88 5,009 5,144 5,144 Indio 1.64 82,325 83,675 83,675 Lake Elsinore 1.31 50,324 50,983 50,983 La Quinta 1.35 43,830 44,421 44.421 Menefee 1.60 67,819 68.905 68,905 Moreno Valley 1.08 186,515 188,537 188,537 Mur seta 0.65 100,835 101,487 101,487 Norco 0.69 22,820 22,977 27,370 Pain Desert 0.96 51,570 52,587 52,067 Palm Springs 0.81 47,653 48,040 48,040 Penis 1.37 54,387 55.133 55,133 Rancho Mirage 0.41 18,938 17,008 17,008 Riverside 1.09 300,769 304,051 304.051 San Jacinto 1.13 36,521 36,933 36,933 Temecula 2.25 102,713 105,029 105,029 Wildomar 1.70 31.374 31,907 31,907 Unincorporated 1.86 459,078 466,697 466,806 County Total 1.40 2,097,987 2,127,260 2,139,535 (') Exclusions include residents on federal military installations and group quarters residents in state mental Institutions, state and federal Correctional institutions and Veteran homes. Page 1 17 County Placer Incorporated County Total Plumas Incorporated County Total Enclosure 1la Annual Percent Change in Population Minus Exclusions (") January 1, 2009 to January 11, 2010 Percent Chemin «— Population llaione — 2009-10 l-109 l-0-10 2.09 230,400 235,225 1.70 341,304 347,102 -0.79 2,013 1,997 -0.84 20,802 20,428 Riverside Incorporated 1.32 1.638,909 1,660,563 County Total 1.40 2,097,987 2,127,260 Sacramento Incorporated 1,08 880,949 870,280 County Total 0.92 1,424,873 1,437,980 San Benito Incorporated 0.81 38,880 39,196 County Total 0.81 57,920 58,388 San Bemardino Incorporated 0.89 1.731.957 1,747.285 County Total 0.85 2,017,237 2,034,418 San Diego Incorporated 1.39 2,666.654 2.703,643 County Total 1.41 3.116.143 3,159.951 San Francisco Incorporated 1.12 846.518 855.999 County Total 1.12 846,518 855,999 San Joaquin Incorporated 0.98 541,926 547,212 County Total 0.97 683,579 690,188 San Luis Obispo Incorporated 0.24 151,897 152,267 County Total 0.87 263,391 265,688 C) Exclusions Include residents an federal military installations and group quarters residents in state mental correctional insuMions and veteran homes. Page 4 17utions, state and federal • 18 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Anne Hallberg, Accounting Supervisor THROUGH: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Quarterly Investment Report STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2010; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Attached are the quarterly investment and cash flow reports as required by state law and Commission policy. The county of Riverside's Investment Report for the month ended March 31, 2010, is also attached for review. Attachments: 1) Quarterly Investment Report for the Quarter ended March 31, 2010 2) County of Riverside Investment Report for the Month ended March 31, 2010 Agenda Item 7D 19 Nature of Investments Bond Projects Operating Funds 81.37 Cebt Fisservs 0.73 Trust ll Funds. ..cte Portfolio Investment Type Mutual Funds 4.28% 0.72729 % County Pool/Cash ,. 92.15 County Pool/Investment 2.85 Statement of Compliance All of the above investments and any investment decisions made for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 were in full compliance with the Commission's investment policy as adopted on May 12, 2010 The Commission has adequate cash flows for six months of operations. Signed by Chief Financial Officer 20 LZ 66►'4£Z'96P S ltllol 010'9££'12 9CL'1£C'SZ bLZ'£ l/9'99S'E 6£b'BZZ'bl Zl8'BZS'LSb LZE'la I. sluawaiAy pawpaw) spund Immo/ peal- gins pund uode8ggi0 luawwano0 ueouawy land IOJpen Aauon 66e9 SN :spund Lenlnie glen rygwlsanul load Nuno3 food Nuno0 slues 3 d A11N3W1S3AN 103ZI8ynWOS Ole uodno0 Heil /lumen Nunlgn le anleA Jed ;sapunleSs :saseusond 010Z'SE 4oJen papu3 JaNgn0 sill ,ol suopaesuell luawlsanul 696Y£Z 9� 60 S 6491,933E y/N u+yyylesy 9EL'1EE'IZ 8E9'8ZZ'bt Wei wyNllegy bLZ'E 6893E2'19 VON 1+ANYWILIH•eey 86S'9£Z'LS sluawlsanul pug gse0 0y 1y101 anrasey sgszespund laa(ad puoe Ielolgns pund uon0pgi0 ivawwano3 ueouawy Puld luawlsanw loud opisJame to NunoO sWawaaJ6y luawlsanul Ionian Aauon 4ue9 SN 3A83S381930/SONO3103POtid 0N08 NOISSIWW00 land ul PIaH sPund Isloi9^S pund UonsuodsuGl eool :pund luawlsanul palood slamseail Nuno3 1Sn81 NI 013H SONnd LEP'b£b'SOb spund ause.iad0'slows y/N Palsy loN L19'e9S'£ (d lyVpund luawlsanul Aoua6y Hopi Wel ssANWiiepugey CIES/LVOV pund luaugsanul palood gJasnsesil Nuno3 y/N iSS9/Ey LZE'la' L eiNoda0 Vela "Niue NO SONNA ONI1y83d0 (SS01) 3111VA 1300 A118fIlyn 31y0 31y0 arnvn 31y8 d'9S H011A/SA0001ei 3N1yA 81yd NEM 03ZI1y38NN 13N8y1N asvuaand 010131A A118nivw 3SyHOHNd Wel N0d000 ONI1y8 OI OZ'IE 4o1eW :p6pu3 pouad podaa opo)pod luawisanul uoissiwwoo uopepodsueu Awe: apls/ania • • • 1?pp, Kent Treeslax2r-.Tax Collectd Jon...Christ'e, eq A$#,T Tredsurer-t 4 pllecto.e ovans44 an meet /14 24-Mar Durable Goods Orders (0.5% actual vs. 1% survey) r,�.e Consumer Confidence (52.5 actualvs.50 "-Mar survey) Unemployment Rate (9.7%actuaivs. 9.7% survey ) Payroll change1162000 actual vs.200000 survey) • "What's Next?" March economic numbers continue to show a glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel; non -farm payroll numbers in- creased by 162,000 instead of decreasing this period with 9.7% unemployment. Manufacturing employment numbers rose for the third month in a row. Growth in the manufacturing sector means companies are rebuilding inventories which are another good sign as the recovery needs to come from business and consumer de- mand, not from government bailouts. The bailout process is slowing, at least by one measure of the Federal Reserve's withdrawal of monetary stimulus as it discontinues it purchases of $1.25 trillion of mortgage related securities. Additionally, there is a little more evidence and talk about the possibility of raising the FED Funds rate later in the year. Lastly, as the most widely followed barometer of economic strength, the U.S. stock market continues its climb back and is within striking distance of Dow 11,000. Economists are watching consumer spending very closely as some expect it to cool sometime In the second quarter. Income tax refunds strengthened spending earlier this year but are unlikely to produce as much spending this spring and summer. Moreover, a risk for 2010 is that oil prices may continue to rise, sending gasoline prices higher at the pump, thus reducing dispos- able income. • Con- sumers and the broader econ- omy can with- stand the current $3+ per gallon gasoline but a resort back to anywhere near the price shocks of 2008 would be problematic with commodity, food and energy prices spiraling upward again. Finally, higher interest rates, while beneficial to fixed income investors could really put a crimp on the fragile real estate market. The yield on the 10-year Treasury note is creeping slowly towards 4% and is likely to move higher with the exponential rise in the national debt. We hope that April showers will bring some May flowers as well as more employment, and, that consumers continue to open their wallets. 'ieny Don Kent Treasurer -Tax Collector Month Did ')a Va=ua(1) The Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund is composed of County, Schools, Special Districts and other Discretionary Depositors 5,336,824,183.57 December 6,155,962,037.08 October 5,121,939,772.49 5,321,146,126.84 15,678,056.73 6,146,858,125.24 5,097,943,555.60 9,103,911.84 23,996,216.89 0 29% 1.02 1.00 0.99 0.15% 0.95 0.97 0.95 0.47% 1.22 1.09 1.06 22 The Fed maintained the target rate at a range of 0 to 25 bps. The 2 year T-Note was yielding 1.02%(up 21bps). while the 10 year T-Note was yielding 3.84% (up 23bps.) For March the Pool did not have a change in the average monthly yield. 3MoUS Treasury Bill 0.16 0.03 6MoUS Treasury Bill 0.24 0,05 2 Y r US Treasury Note 1.02 0.21 5 Y r US Treasury Note 2.55 0.25 10YrUS Treasury Note 3.84 0.23 FED Fund Rate 0.25 0.00 Crude Oil (barrel) 83.76 4.10 Gold (Ounce) 1,113.25 1.05 DJIA 10,856.60 531.30 S&P500 1,169.43 64.94 NASDAQ 2,397.96 159.70 Page 1 • Sector breakdown llMF 319,108,108 0.08 0.20 Negotiable CDs Municipal Bonds 104,430,612 0.41 2.03 Bond - U.S. Treasury 1 061.114,372 1.05 TOTAL 5,499,942,293 1.07 0.99 Federal Agency and U S_Treasury, 90 54 % Maturity Distribution 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 30 days or Less 30- 90 Days 90 Days - 1 Year 1- 2 Years 2- 3 Years Over 3 Years 1.2 Month Gross Yield Trends] Mar-09 Apr-09 May-09 Jun-09 Jul-09 Aug-09 8ep-09 0M-09 Nov-09 De9.09 Jan•10 Feb-10 Mar-10 Cash Flows2 9ioa1 ru 04/20 23 06/2010 08/2010 10/20I0 /2/2010 02/zon ND" 1,304.77 707.13 7 t6.41 746.70 1,530.09 927.00 to too 839.69 874.78 890.64 377,77 (423.87) (123.28) (128.08) 639.45 (386.97) • I:KR02 (2,1(241 560.00 946.97 423.87 123.28 128.08 460.34 639.45 406.42 559.00 242.01 225.00 85.84 386.97 140.00 I 50 08" ,. • Treasurer's Institutional Money Market Index (TIMMI) is compiled and reported by the Riverside Couno, Treas- urer's Capital Markets division. It is a composite index derived from the average of three multi -billion dollar AAA rated Prime (fiends that invest in a diversifier portfo- lio of US dollar denominated money market instruments including U.S Treasuries, government agencies, bankers' acceptances, commercial paper, certificates of deposits, repurchase agreements, etc) portfolios that dee Treasurer tracks. Fanner details available upon request. Current funds are ASTITGA, WFJXX (12/09), and MPFXX 2 The Pooled Investment Fund cash flow requirements are based upon a 11 month historical cash flow model. Based upon projected cash receipts and maturing Invest- ments, there are sufficient funds to meet Alm cash flow disbursements over the next 11 months. • L91 49'1. O9'L 091 0S'l L£' L 6Z1 6 6L L LP Lb'L Lb'L bZ L L 00'4 (00'00920 00'00S'L860 9966 00'000'000'01. bZ'L 0Zl 4Z' L OE'L 00'09Z'6 00'00E'S8 ao'aoe'LE 00'00£'L£ 00'099 00.00E'1E0'01. 00'099'SL0 00'008'890 00'00Z'Z66'4 99Z'4£4) 94'09L'Ef8'4 00'09L E86 4 00'00E 990 OL Z6'0 6L'O 49'0 SEO L E'0 94'0 OZ'0 Z4'0 O6'0 0£'0 920 6LO 20'0 09'Z 9E'E 92 E 00'Z 04'0 00090LELi OOOEO'ZBO'SL 00'OOP 'b9 00000'690'9 00'009 6£ 00'944 89 i�L;"s a.S:J3 94'4£9 Bl L mans 00'009'LSO'S 000L6'099'9 00'000 9Z0 9 00'000'000 S 00'o09'Z161r2 L£'OOL 00'000'000'01- Lem!. 00'000'OOObI L£'OOL 00'000'000'9 69'001 00'000'000'01. 49'66 00'000'000'9 ZO'SOL Z941,b'196'4 88'86 00'000'e00'9 99 001 00'000 LL6'6 9Z101 09Z9f'6LL'9 10'09L 61.401. 4EOOL 00064'6LZ'S 90'000'966'4 00'000'Z LO'S 46'00L 00'SZ9Z64'9 ()TOOL 4999L 906'9 00'00L 00'000'000'9 L1'40016812 tad L LOZ/O£ILL 00'L LOZ/92I6 9Z I.LOZ/BZ/8 0Z'L t 40Z/9Z/8 4Z'L 1 L0Z/4/6 OE"L u022u9 se'o LlOZ/Sl/G OS'S L LOZ/8l9 L L LOZ/9/9 9L L LLOZ/f/f 00'f �.. . t 1-02./4L/L BB'b 0LOZ/4L/Ol 99Z 01.00ere �ELY O LOZ/L Y OLOZLL/L OCT 9Z'Z OLOZ/L L/9 00'Z 08L0N-IAZ NNV91103810 WaV30y2�d�y�. 00''W000'000'Ol {{ryry 1, �Lyy0P0LSCLLyE ^_'r. .':3�'LA ���1��}T lad" 44:6 g4K O/APN/AZ NNV8110380 W21V3033 00'000'000'01. £LnO LEeLE ON, LoNJAZ NNV9110300 1181V3033 00'000'000'04 e noteete OLAtoNAZ NNV81103210 180V3038 00'000'000'9 EZnOLEELE 44.E ; ..W MINISMOI -;,,It`tlf1 1: 1 *PAZ NNV81103KIN 0V9033 00'000'000'04 96NOLEELE Oi IPTAIG INALT,'' MtM,NOtail.410440,t WEDNIA9' 4 NNV81103HO WaV3033 00'000'000'9 933f L£f t£ oNJAS'Z NNV81102 00 WaV3023 00'000209P OVV069LO£ V�#"AN80[408i40,),N4 n . 8'84i 1081#646t80'n l i l'1:'.. t '.i' . ; - . 9t4gAlt' NNV81103 LIOWaV3033 00000000'9 L390LEELE 4NJAZ NNV91103 aO WaV3033 00000'000'04 96XOLEELE 1.11A0442NKAIWINVIMI,OPPAIXili ^.cam 41,040i8 oNLAS /INV° 1103a0 1AaV3 02d 0000009L 9 IOMALECLE NNV81103 00 WaVd 033 00'000'00904 LVv269L0e 6.1tilA80r^,L'8MOffi0i. '> o8.0; 9144.-1i91i9,i3'tf V/:f- '94c0LDE-LD oNUAZ NNV91103 001A81 033 00'000'000'9 LOOOL£EL£ owns. NNV81103 00 LNaVd 02d 00'000'000'94 92ASLEELE 0004NWSOtfOMMU4 10140!;9iM'" r'' lifLUALEEtt oNJA2 NNV91103 00 W0V3033 00'000'009'9 2f1EALCELE 4NLA8'Z NNtl81103HOlWIIaV3033 00'000'0,0n,.0t'S 91AyALEELE t4'. ">�=�oL+Lrn.�om oNLAS'L NNV81102NO WaVd 02d 00'000000S ZSOOt£ELE 51Nv81103)10 14181V3 034. 80d4 00'000'000'SZ L0'0 L0'0 £L'0 L CHeL'8m* i veet'886'64 8310N 1Nn00s10 03a0 NAM • NO08 00'000'000'09 10'0 80'0 LT Z4'80L'80L a0'000b00Y9 80'0 80'0 80'0 00'000'000'00L 103 LL'L Ll't 90 t za•o Z8'0 Z6'0 48'0 OWL 9L'L 9 L'L LO'I L6'0 L6'0 £8'0 £B'0 08'0 08'0 OZ' L 99'0 lL'0 CB LO'l 99'0 BZ'OLO'rWi. 00'09L'988144 00'009'94L ZL'BL6'L9 00000'80Z'09 00'004'9ZL'O£ 00'096'94 00'00L Z90 5l 00'009 £80 02 00'006 09091. 00'00Z 6240E 00'a04 140 OL 00'9ZZ 661 9L'E68 9 LB' LL£ OS 00'911 09 00'008'£S 89'40Z'SZ 5Z'LEL'69 L8'94Z BE 00'004'Lb0'01 D0'00L'290'9L 00'00Z'040 at 00'00Z 040 01 00'000'000'69 00'000'000'001 ars/9'148'8w 24'001. 00'009'29009 Z4'OOL 92'1.24'L50'OE Z4'001 00'0SL'£46'44 Z4'OO1l 4 l4'OOLL lb'00l BB% SZ 906 £90'9 £L'BZ8'£LO'OE L4'001. 00'9Z9'066'6 14'OOL 00'009L96'6 69'40E'L90'9L 01,00L 9L'99b'096'6 1Nn03S10- 83d108 nv10a3WW00- Od° 00'000'000'99 ONnd W21311NONS Lsnarreo-a1�0 o0'000'000'Ooi LOZ/LE/9 I LOZ/LE/9 89'0 L LOZ/4£I9 88'0 L LOZ/LEIS LLOZ/OEIb LLOZ/BZ/Z LLOZ 9Z2 L L02192./2 L LOZI8Z2 LtOZ/LE/L 990 B8'0 ' 'wrk, P ai+YoTu 1N no00V iISOdad °ciao • NSv° 00'000bon m BB'0 SON09 Aansysal'S.n 00'000'Oooas enN8zezt8 ",M801..14. En88Z8Z LB AVattlif en8ez8Z16 : 06.. 890 00'0000000Z enNezeno 990 00'000000SL £10929Z16 — rill.ti. m 1 8.Z82Y6 99'0 00000000'0£ en8ezeLL6 041MIZT.PINIri&t.T.,MIALVA 0'0 88'0 S'n 00000OL 063NBZB21.EZLB Aansv3al'S'n 00000000'0L 63092E46 SON�0y8 AanStl3a.L''�s.n{9 oo0¢'j0y0�0'1' oo'SL 4 _ 63N8Z9246 .• V.�. �.''r�. ��%YY:.+MI�Y"AIKIIM nI'( NI`1Wii�_'.111]4 v lrtrgat.F4" SONoe Aansv381.'S'n onoo'0o0'OL LAf828246 SONOe A01-1SV301'S'n 00'000'Oont. LArezei L6 SONDE A8nsv3al.s'n o0'000onz EAf9ZBZ46 047NOWANWLisiOM4V..:WO. 8001S�'=T:i'Ipoi:14 4:111 011404 SON08 Aan Sv3a1's'n • °NOS _ ,-.... _ ....�........ s°NoeAanstl3ai SON 09 SON08 SON09 AanSV3a1 Aansv3al Aansvaal SON08 AanSV3a1 SONOB AanStl3a1 SON09 n `oo'aao oo6 s'n s'n sn 00'000'00094 23311'0AV an0 W ,1vW 01A SS01/NIVO 1.3111VA'IN 3010d L 301VA 8008 A11an1tlW NOd000 NOULIIaOS30 aVd dlsn0 LB'0 490 9L0 89'0 99'0 LS'0 0S'0 99'0 bb'0 EE'0 V 0E•0 6Z'0 ZZ'0 OZ'0 000 mow 0z'0 84'0 Lt'0 8Yl Z62 LB'Z SS'L 9>z OCT 0£Z ZZ'Z LO'Z LB't O6'4 49'4 Le L 691 09'0 09'0 bL'0 L9'0 99'0 49'0 09'0 E4'0 WO • EE'0 0E'0 8Z'0 LZ'0 8L'0 64'0 940 9tel L6'0 L0L I.4'0 06'0 00'E OZ'L 2 L 940 4L'0 99'0 £9'0 99'0 99'0 ££ £ 09'0 05'0 49'4 04411`L4 U-1''GI ZB'Z 13L'z 440 LE'Z 42'z 4Z'Z L9'4 LL'4 99'4 994 00'L 000 99' 4 95' OZ'4 9Z'4 SZ'L 001 00'80Z 94Z 00'004 4Z 00'004 6 00'004'8Z 01300E'OL 00 009 04 4l 999 9 00'0091SL 00'000'94 0009r9 0000L 09'929'99L 00'009 G£ 00'09Z' t£ 00 000 09 i 00009 Z9 00 096 04 L! 00'096 OL 00'096 atos rime 48 00 099 4£ 0000E 6 00'099 4 oo oet. Z 00'09£ 6 „LEM OlA 5501/N111B 00'008 00'006'986 4 00'000'000'01. 000S9 400 9 00'094 ZOO 8 00'099 066 9 43rnvA W 00'4Z9'9L405 00'009 L00 9 94'004 002£906909 94OM 00'OOP '996'4 0 S S2'004 00'000'000'9 woos O66'6 00'006 20 04 0000£ OLO'S 00'009 040 04 00'009 L00'9 00'00924101 00 WO 940'9 00409Z 900 S 00'000'000'04 0000L 400 S 00000 000 S 00 OW 4E6 6 00.0e1•L98Z4 00000'9L0'sz 00'000'000'OZ 94'09901.6'924 00009 Z964 00'09L996 4 00000'09004 00'009 Z90'04 4606 00'000'000'04 ZZ'004 00 008 Z68'8 49'404 00000000'9 44004 94 004 00'000'000'04 00'99E'4Z0'S 64'404 00'0001.98'8 8 t'OOL 00 WO 666'2 E 4004 00'000'000'5 00'004 60'004 00'000'000'04 00009 666 4 00004 00'000'000'9 4£188 00'009'9E86 9E'66 00009498'4 OL'66 000E4 496'Z4 0E004 00'000'9/0'9Z 00004 00000'000'0Z 99'4£9'G4t'eZb t40Z/01/4 L L0Z/0Z/4 040Z/6UL 040Z/E/Z4 r O40Z/BZ/04 040Z/2/01 0 OZ/OE/8 040Z/04/8 99'0 99'0 L4'0 99'0 00£ 0111E044AL NNV8 NVOl 3141041 03d 00'000'000'04 93ZXXEE4£ ON/Ast NNVBNVOl 314110H 039 00000'00909 manna L£ 0144A5'4 NNVB NV01 31411014 039 00'000'0�0y0''55 ,r �� bA88y11XCELE LEE, 01. IRMftk'kg0Z.a��'�.1.1 14�P1,,,i /al'NM'Ktkt*t NNVB NVOl 31110H 039 00000'000'{S}(g �p':stem ,µB�Zenn�Xyµ£�fyL£ . ,,yL;ICI'n�k;r 041193N114 4NV8 NV01 311101-1 039 00'000'000'04 43ZAX££l£ y 4goe E911XEELE XSOXEEt£ moinelE rionoppom 00'000'000'S 4M01XEELE 4XAOXEEIf 00'000'000'8 6011XEE4E .N, 1i ? 9ovnxe£te 11.41010142n 00'000000'04 9221XE£LE aaa$sF,. .....x?skkWW04M 00'000'000'5 9X90XfELE 99Z1X£E 4f SAZWEE 4C 039 00000'000'9 5,AZ8XEE1E OH 039 00000'00004 SAZBXEELE 4PAS'4NNVB NVOI 3141041 039 00'000'000'04 4014190N4A9'Z N44448 NVOI 314101-1 039 00000'000'5 .� i. e; OL0Zl8/8 OZ'l 000 OL'0 0407.I0E/L 99'0 0 OZ164/L £9'0 0LOZ/94/L 590 040Z/94/9 O LOZI 4/9 N/A9' NV8 NVO13410H 039 00'000'00004 NNV8 NVO13410H 039 04141.90 NNV8 NVOI 314.10H 029 00000'000'04 NNtlB NVOl 3410H 039 0414AL N109 NVOl 3410H 03d 00'000'000'9 NNV9 Ntl01 31NOH 039 NVB NtlOI 31410H 039 99'0 NNtl9 Ntl01 31110H 039 00'000'000'S 000 040Z/t 4/9 00£ �0 OZ/44/9 00E O40Z/2/9 040Z/4/9 0414A2 NNYS NVOI 344014 03d 00000'00004 ON4AZ NNVB NVOI 31/10H ONPAZ NVB NVO13W Jet( IttiNN : IOMO400;4�:i2,;.Z, �:11I1'3i�i�;1A.tii�{�'i"'kC� NNV8 NVOl 3WOH 039 00"000'000'SZ SOOIXEE4E L6'0 05'0 ... oN4A44NVB N" "'--x'."t'rh9?tli.!.'�=:,18 i'(, 8140Ei6 ,._s .a-,!rna a t1013WOH 039 00"000'000'OZ 9V81XEE4E andint Uty'Ykowf`�.:.:gosos"i'r'iokdx,}a,i4: tliX��l` E ON,AZ NNVB NV01 31110H 039 000000000 9VLBWEELE NNVB NV01 341101.1 039 • 81119 0000000£1194 4A414AE.t,NNV8p110380 W(JV90y395.�0g0�.'000'000'9 }� 9W 4N31"1EE�Ei£ s1kC3 `I;.t.`Yf v�+Ja 11 '�'`�.I rotmo Y4 ONE.£ NM'S 110380 1/4181V9039 00'000000'9 LlElf/EELS OOZ =LOWE NNV9110380 WNV9 039 0000000004 a t pp {{!!����$$ ee�����'��EySSyN�X3�O(�` L££ LE :.ilTfitl'IIIII"kak.� 1110NW,140 00'000'00004 94864EEL£ 9EZOL£EL£ 00'000'000'9 9fZOt£Et£ etas 00'0000tto'S 9E26 00'000'000'9 09004 0000000004 E9'004 00'000000'04 00'0960L0S ZZ'004 00'000'000'9 ZZ004 00'000'000'S 99'401. 00'000'686'P £0 Z04 4606 00'004 00 008 990 9 00 000 000'9 00'000'0000 90004 00'000'0009 CO 00 00'000000'9 Le•so ao'000'000'9 3318d 3nitlA N008 E LOZ/L/E E LOZ L LIL ZL0u94/04 49'4 99.4 ZLOZ/Ot/6 00'Z Z LOZ/84/L SS'4 Z l02/84/L S9 L ZLOZ/94/9 1.' ZLOZMZJ4 Z40244 £F ZLOZ/4Z/Z Z409/8NL • sj: g.l, ZLOZ/B4/t L LOZ/12 L EL'Z SZ Z Or 4 OZ'L 9"C 9Z' 4 411.0114,1£ NN4/8110380 11,18Vd 039 A4ON SLMINV141110380 W8499 03d 00'000'000'9 P414A9L'Z A14V8110380 NI843 039 01140 NNVB 110380 WBVd 039 NNVB 110380 418V9 03d lAPPP Z NNYS 110380 1,48V9 03d CONiASZ Z NNVB 110380 W8V9 039 90414,0'Z NNV8 110380 11,18V9 039 '4"" WeartanZZNNV81103810 W8V9 00 000 4 '6C 00 000 � I.b 00 000 000'9 000 9 000'S 00 000 000 04 00'000'000'9 00'000'000'9 00'4 OULON/ALNNVB 110380 W8 /9 039 00'000'000'9 A118n1VW NOdn03 NOI1d183530 avd F *MO BdAOI£EL£ 1117A1.14MPM 9ONOLEE4E 41M F:' 409f LE£4£ .iftagiAVO 1O404E£4E 9ZZOLEELE �Y BZZOL6£4E 9A40L££t£ • .117. i'4'' disn3 pulu wouLtsia.ttug gaagoed 4L'Z 99'Z S4'Z ZZ'Z ZZ'Z OZ'Z 6L2 80'Z O6'4 ELI EL'L 99L 99'l 98'L 91, • 9£'L LE'L 2£'L 0£'I. SZ' L a BL'L el'L el'L eL'L 91. 40' l 8£'Z BZ'Z 4L'Z 40'Z OL'L OL'L £9'L Z9'L Z9'1. bb'L LE 4E'L OE'L BZ'L BL'L BL'L 91,1 l9'Z OWL 00090 61 00'0990984 1.9'68 00'000000'9 £LOZ/9Z2 06't Z81 (moos LE) 00'005Z984 92'68 00'000'000'g SLOZ/922L Ze'L 0'05E6 00'0990664 'Fee Og000'ma5 ZLOZ/EZlll 1.9'l OS' l (00'001. BZ 00'0138'1188 ZL'66 00'000'000'04 ZLOZ/OL/6 09'1. 00' 00'0569864 00'0000009 ZLOZ/OLIB 00'0309'Z4L ..,0•., o'oaL'azL'oL ztauoue BE't l 00'001a86'4 ZL02/BZ/9 sE'L 08'L 00'009 S11 O1. ZLOZ/OZl9 OB'L 9 ZLOZ/OZ/9 a1B'L BE'4 00' • ZLOZ/LL/9 8E'L OL'2 09'l Z21. 00'L 90' L 90'1 LO'L BE'L BE OP ' L SO'L 9E' L L9'L 9Z'1 1't OE'L £9'0 Bb'L 090 4L 00'OOZ'L 00 004 4ZL 00 00Z Z9 00 OSL £ (00'099'01.) 00'00L £ ,00'008L) 00'098 OL OO'a9L[el 00'091 et 00'OOL DL 00'00£ 9 00'00E e 00'096 Ot 00 0oi e 00'6Z0 SL 00'008 L90 OS1. E00 S 00'09Z'900'S 00'00L'E00 OL 00'00ZZ864 00'098 OG0 9 00'09Z L96 0 0009Z' 486 4 00'004 OEM 8 00 00£ 900 al 00'00£ 900 00'0980L0 9 L 00'001. £00 Ot 00'4Z0 SLB 4 00'000'ZZL 00'009'ZL COL 00'096OE 00 00914 00 OOP 6 00•00Z 9 00004 Z2 L 00'096'a 00'095 9Z 91.'L £L'L 0000L £9 9L'L ES'0 (00'009'E9 09'0 00'OSL'L 0 1 00'OOL 0£ 60'L CO 49'0 L9'0 0009G8409 00,009 t40 9 00 OOP 600 9 oa'aoe ese e moot e90.Ot 00'099'9Z0'S ZL 68 9Z'LOL 00'009996'8 99'68 00'000'000'9 9t1.01. 00'00 L886 94'101 00 009566 4 90'00t 00'000000'S fl'OOL 00'OOL'La Ea 00'000'000U 48'68 --- 00'000 000'9 ZZ'OOL 00'0000005 E 000 000 S r <, 000 0009 9'66 00 E9'86 49'66 90'00t STOOL 00 00'009 B66'8 00000'000'oL 00'000 000'at ZZ'OOL 00 000 000 S EO'00L� 00'000000'0l LE OW. 00'000008'4 £1.'1.01. 00009'066'6 9E'OOL 00'OOe'Les'4 6Z'001. 00 0000009 fl ..a:ii 61. OM 00 000 0009 48'86 00'0000000/ £9001. 00 001'6£8'6.. £9'001. 00'009'0[8'P 0009S 9Z09 E9004 00'000000S 00'00L'£90'OL 00'05L L00 52 00'09ZZ66 4Z 00'0044800L ZB'£ZZ'EE) 80'L60'£8£'EZ 00 000 000 S E9'00L 00'000000'0L f00OL 0005Z'1•909Z L6'68 00'000'000'9Z 4800l 0000L'£90'0L ZZ'001. 001.Z£'91.4'£Z 00'001. 00 000 000'9 ZLOZ/8l9 902 ' 0 400.10MMLI'L i'.IL1l1 I8g4 '%h BLegt X LJAL oN1Ja NNVB NV013 WOH 033 00'000'000'9 6NZBXEIZLE on LoNrA9L2 NNVB NV013 WON 033 00'000'000'9 L6HXXE£L£ ra rm1„r.iuyr )15- ZONMX£ete OO'OOO000'm £A.LAXS£LE OSL 1/.160NrASL 2NNV8 NVO13WOH 033 00'0000009 EA1AX££LE t. ( Y•°, 0.' 10211W r ir14140/MIII1i'P!i 11;W O11k'Iai'rt`. WOla x PAZONAE NNV9 NVO13010H 03d 00000000'GL L6011XEE LE .,A0a3 000f0000Bt:1•18.r4Sq11111'19t'neereAtft NV013WOH 033 00000'000'9 OOZMX££LE 093 00'000'000'0L 6491X££L£ ilftta. 04 NVO13WOH 03d 000000009 6441XECLE 9E'L ZLOZ1L2/4 00'L Z LOZ/bZ2 SZL ZLOZ/LZ/L S6'l L LOU!.Z2t SO' L L LOZ/LZ2L 90'L LLOZ/SZ/LL L LOZ/6L/OL L LOZl81./01. LOZ/9L/6 I "rAlPli L LOZ/el/8 i 'rRi L LOZ/ZL/9 St I. XL111190N-SL'Z NNVB NV01 3NON 033 00'000'000'S oW6oNrASL2 NV9 NV01 3010H 033 NVOI 3WOH lMM. 1111!1; Q°iVOtt NVOl 3W0H 033 00'000'000'9 419MXEE LE NrAS'Z NNVB NV013010H 033 00'000'000'S Zf1NMX£ete { MP l QQr�f,�t1 it i,�,:.1�;i i.!:;. „'n'�"5','5voti` o xlole90N9'ZNNV8 NVOI 3WOH 033 00'000'000'04 400AXEELE ....._ IMMI �'rT;1 MIErla III W, P7r 033 00'000'000'9 4WZMXEELE 000'000'9 £ZfMXEE LE x100190NrAZNNV9 NVOl 3 WOH 033 00'000'000S EXMX£E LE xeongoNrAZNNV8 NVO13110H 033 00'000'000'9 EXAAX£ELE t,« .. E.' OO't 01N9oNrASL'L NNVB NVOl 31N01-1 033 00'000'000'Ol EM5XXEMSXX£ELE NNVB NVOI 31110H 033 00'000'000'0L 9N9AX£E4E NNV9 NVO13W011033 00'000'000'01 9N9AXEELE XLINrASZ'ZNNVEINVOl 30101-1 033 00'000'000'S 9N11XE£LE L001931‘0A92'04NVB NVOI 3 LBOH 033 00000'000EL SNAAXEE LE now LONrAZ NNVB NVO131/10H 033 00'000'009'P 0300XE£LE NNVB NVOI 31B1OH 033 00'000'000'04 4HX1X£EL£ ONIAZ NNV9 NVO136Y01-1 033 y000'000'000'9 9fLNX£EL£ B) i�9k�.lLailA'dt�fP1Mat11;.)1'1Wkai lle: rALoNrAZ NNVB NVOI 31/110H 033 00'000'000'9 94S8XBZL£ xlrAtoNrAZ NNVB NV0131/110H 033 000000009 60111XEE L£ v)4 £9'0 noNlgoN9 LHNVIA NVO13WOH 033 00'000000'0L� LZMXEEa Seaiku'r.:: " .I :ir9'S'iiJOliK NNVB NV01 3010H 033 00'000'0000L SVAIXE£LE oo'o00'000'S S4AIXEELE u 11 �,., w' 4$ 00000'000'9 sanlXe£Le ikN1OOHuCt03d 00'000'000'OL sanikete .. . , YiI!!t0.h iIIZ .r`. < W `t' S m7 tdkL ,l II Ii: ;'i:'1'-.14' 6 �li„6`.: NNVB NV013 INCH 033 00000'000'9Z 911AXEELE oNrAVOINV9 NVOlr3WOH 033 00'0000009Z OEOMXEE LE =0. il�.' Ia.+1 19'i't: OINNIC I I. i 4vi,x,41A oNrAZ NNVB NV013010H 033 00000'000'0L 49f1X£EL£ •:018, k4'�. �.�,1".e001140Vee0L,.r ''', = .:'. iMOO 4, 08'0 NNV9 NV01 3W041 033 00000'ZE£'£Z Z110AXEfLE t1Ml:i: Ii4, g?-,'IPOPW,*tdiOWLP1'4YfOfnVA;tMM{rk-4;;11Ii,:;..<_atNXxekk£ L90 01B1EONrA4 NNVB NV013WOH 03d 00'000'000'9 011NXXEE L£ BE 9£' L LOZ/LZ/L t LOZlet/L {rf LL02/6Z/9 Ar'r L Lat./St/9 1.40Zl0l19 L LOZ2l9 04'1. 90'l I E9' L £L'L 02'L OE'L EL'L LLOZ/£l9 CUL LL LLaz/ers eL'L L tOZ/LZ/9 k OL'0 L LOZ/EZl9 09'0 I LOZ/9l/98 L LOZ/9/S a L LOZ/E l/4 LoWgoNrA92 NNVB NNV9 NNV9 W90NrAS'Z NNVB on LONrAZ NNVB NVOI 301041 x10W90NrAZNNV9 NVO1311‘10H 033 00 14, t J1er NNVB NVOI 31110H 033 oNrAZ NNVB NVOI 31NOH 033 oNrAZ NNVB NVOI 3 Z3311'0AV ;am] VI) 1VW 111A SSOI/NIVO L301VA 1N 30121d L 30lnn>1008 A11a01Vw NO3003 NO114190539 avd dIS00 09'Z t5'Z OP L5'Z 04'Z 09.Z .. Z4Z L4'Z OC'Z LZZ 22'Z 1a 00'Z 48 0'1 ZB''t 29' L t8'L ILL 49'L 9E1. SZ'L LI'I LOL 90' L L8'0 LL'0 £4'O LE t L'0 9CL PP Eft Z BE'L 4Z'Z 919 bL'Z L8'L 48'4 89' L 8L'l LL'L 99'L 89' 4 4£'L 9L'0 Z4'0 LL'0 611 Z9'Z 009 00'Z 00'Z LO'Z 90'Z £9't SZ't 00'Z OE'l ££' L E L'L 0£'l ££'l 00' L 00Z 991 9E'0 02'0 Zb'0 LSl LO'Z 00'006'LP 00'009 L 00'008 L9 00'ODI a 00'09L O£ 00'009'L9 •.. to 00'099'LE 00'00E'0£ 00'OOL OZ 00.0SZ'9) 00'095 BL 00'098 E 00'094`E O'009 O'00E'BE 00 Mt OZ) 00'090 E 00'009 8L 00'009 42 00'096 4 00'099 OE 00'008'L40'OL 00'000 00'000 00'00£ 00'008 00009 00'001 00'09Z 00'009 000 9 000 9 900 5 IsO01 800 5 00094 995 4 00'00£'0E0'OL 00'00£ 8L8 4 00'09Z'Z68'Y 00'090 085 4 00'098 COO 9 00'0088L8PL 00'00Z BL5 00'000 098 DL 00'099'8E3 00 050 COO 5 00'009 PLO 0 00'0094L0 00'055 LZO 00'OSZ 990 00'099Z 00'099'ZOO 9 00'090801 000590119 1 0000£ £LO OL 00 '9l) 00'000'9L0'S 00'002 94 'COL 00'00Z'68 Z£'990'944'L Coo 'OSZ'0 OS4 8 00'00Z'680'OL L9'999'EL6'61. LL'56144Z'9914 00'09L'C68'4 D0'090 896 4 Z4'00 00'OOL 00'OOL WOOL Z900L 91,00L 00.000000'01 DO'000'000 9 00 000 000'9 00 005 L88'4 00'000'000 Ol 00'000 000 S LE'88 00'000'000'9 00001. 00'000'00001 ECM 00'000 000 9 89'86 00'000000'S 99'88 00'009'L88'0 09'66 00 000 000'S 80001. 00'000000'9 L9'66 00094'9L8'4L 99'86 00'000'986'P 4L'88 00'000'000SL 89'88 00'000'000'S 90001 00'000'000'9 9 L'001 00000566'6 6Z'OOL 00'000'000'9 99001 00 00S Z£0'9 EL'201 00004'SZO'S 90'OOL 00'000'000'9 LZ'ZOL 00'00S'Z28'4 EL'00 00'000oevo1 0900L 00'002'890'9 68'001. 000000000L L9'88 L9'998'Ea6L 99'0£b'EBL'49L'L 89'68 00'000'000'9 9L'86 00'009'986'0 ZLDZ/9/L1 ZLOZ/Ll01, ZLOZ/L/OL ZLOZ/8Z/8 ZLOZ/LL/8 ZLOZ/LL/8 ZLOZ/8L/L ZLOZ/9 ZIOZ/5Z/9 ZIOZISL/9 ZLOZ/9L19 ZLOZIOE/C ZLOUB/£ ZLOZ/ZIS;.:. Z402/9214 ZLOZ/81./L l LOZ/OORI 002 00'Z 00'Z 00'Z 90'Z 09' L C9' L 9Z' L xiMAC'la30 XL0W90N1,1E 1 XL01N90WAC %WAl0N1A£ H30 H30 91HOW-91Hd 1� OlaOW-91Hd OlaOW•91H 1a30'01a0W- 911-1d XLIAL0NIAE•1a30'OlaOW • 91H 00'000'0000I. 00'000'000'9 00'000'000'S d 00'000'000'9 00'000000'0L 01NON1A92Z 1a30'01a0W • 911-1d 00'000'000'M 1a30'01MOW 81Hd 00000'000'S BIHd 00'000'000'9 1111C0NJA9Z'Z'1a30'01NOW • 911-1d OD'000'000'OL 111190N1ASZ'Z'1830'01a01/11 • 91Hd 00'000'000'9 00'Z X L1APNJAE'1a30'01NOW • 911-1d o£l OE'L CI OE'I SZ'L L LOZ/LZLL SZ'L L LOZ/SL/ZL L LOZIOL/OL L LOZ/L 4/9 C9'L 00'L 00'Z ItOZ/8Z/9 OL'L ItOZ/1l9 fL'L L L07./9Z/4 E9't I LOZ/OZ/4 9L'L 40Z/L L/Z 9Z'£ LlOZ/1/L OLOZ/E/6 £4'1. OLOLILL/9 OLOZ/LL/9 £LOZ/9/8 ELOZIb/E 091. Z0 00'Z 0W601,11A97'1N30 JA 00'000'00001 9146X9Z4C 4Sd6X9ZLE 45d6X9ZtE ON08XBZLE EA06X9Z1E 43d6X8ZLE tgalleMINAV LAS6XBZtE LBd8X822£ LBd64E4E 'Jj' llsamm, ZLW8XSZ l£ AMMO ZDl8X8Z LC e440IW 01190N1AS'Z'1a30'01tl0W • 9lHA 00'000'000'5 91A1Z6X9Z LE 9f1A6X9Z L£ .. ArTIVAIMOOM 41,1ALDN1A£'183f0'0`1H1OW• 9lHd 00'000'0009LL _901849Z L£ x^L SY.1 Y i'l'�,�P'/a X. 3INX' ' YP9'i e�.S AFCii"YO ti�'H'.+ilt11 .. +", .S 0'WE3NIAZ'1H30'01HOW• 911-id 00'000'000'9 Z418X8Z LE 0WE0N1AZ'1a30'01801N- 911-d 00'000'000'9 DAe L4d8X9Z LE XL0W90N1AZ'1a30'0121001 • 911-d 00'0000009 ZE06X9Z1£ 00'000'000'9 8518X8ZL£ gotaamalim; 91Hd 00000'000'9L OSSBXBZ LE `t1AVAlw 00'000'000'9 4Md6X9ZLE 00'000'00091 50d6X9Z LE x 1.41L0N1AZ'1a30'01HOW• 9-1Hd 4100/90N1AZ1a30'O1aOW' 0NIf0fIJAZ'1830' 01HOW • 91H xl 1a30'01a011-91Hd ALoioxi`laao81HA t1AL0w1.92.1a30' 01a01N ' NJASZ'Z'1a30 01HOW • D0060 0009 9lHd 00'000'000'S OIHd 00'000'000'0 JAl0N.1 Z'1830'01801,1- 911-d 1830'01a0W- 91Hd 1a30"01a0111•91Hd uAL0N1AZ'1830'91HOW - 81H4 x 10 W g0N1A£ ' 1630 ' 01H OW /H30'01HOW-911-14 lAZ'C1a30'OlaOW-9lHd 9lHd '1a30'01HOW-911-1d 0W 10NJA99 MVO 00'000'000'9 00'000'000'9 00'000'0009 00'000'0009 00'000'000'9 00000'000'0 00'000'000'9 00'00000001 000'000'oZ Sf L£ vane LE i0 9fA9X6Z LE 9Z09X8Z L£ AMOR 5468X8ZLE ZZd9X9ZL Z9V3L£LE 3i ZOMBXBZL£ r=40200,A044 92A9X9ZLE 9M9V3LELf L ON8X8ZLE 09X9X a pp yY�g89A9X9ZL£ .rill=`ii911Yd [YMC 9LIML6£EL£ *114001100. 'DM'Ola OW • 9lHd • OIHd 00'000769991'I 03.1 00000'0009 90WCON-£ NNV9 NVO13WOH 03d 000000009 3WOH LLZMXEELE NEXXEE LE Z3dll'0AV ana w „1VW a1A SSOTNIVO L3nivt, 301ad L 30lVA MOOS A11a01Vw NOdn 00 NOI1dIaOS30 Wel dIS00 I ]1E-3, plaud s,�arns 12'Z 41'Z 4 L'Z b L'Z L 0 t'Z 1 LO'2 91'Z LO'Z LO'Z 9E4 DO'L 00'Z too'ooe'ze) 001:10e2961/ 4£'68 00'000'000'S Mint/9 00'099'4 00'099'400'91 EO'001 00'000'000'91 00'000'92 00'0009L09 00'Z 00'000'091 00'000091 01 09'101 00'0000009 OS'L0L 00'000'000'01. 00'00V01 00'008'100'9 9t'00L 00130V26611/ 00'002 4 00'002 400 S 86't L9' l LL' l 99 1 49' l £9' 1 E9 1 01' 1 90'1 80' L 00'1 81'0 ZL'0 ZO'Z 98'L 4L' L C91 09' L 65' L 69'1 901. 90'1. 90't 10'L 98'0 81'0 ZL'0 911. E se t 19' 1 99 1 SZ E 02'1 ZE't ZL'Z 00'Z BE'E LVO 00'059 9Z 00 Ogg 9Z 00'092'6 00'0S9'ZE L9'991 E 00'009 8 00'001 £ 00092 81 00'009'L 00'OSS'9Z 00'00E'OZ 80'001 00'000 000 S 00'096'£28'4 26'66 00'000'000'9 OD'094 £L6'4 L4'88 00'000'0001 00'099 066 4 18'68 00'000'000'9 00'00r41.011 OS'4E4 860 S 00008 £66 6 00'008966'4 00•052810 SL 00'009 L00 9 00'00VOZO'S 00'000 MO s 00'009'n 0000SrZ10'S 00'002 1, 00'0SL'9E 00'OSL'£ L8'999'9 00'0021,00'S 00'00Z'Z40'9 00'091'COO 'S DO 000'000'S 00'000'000'51 94'484'1.06'9Z4 80'00L 00p'0Ltq92y�'1196'41 28'66 E9'99Z SIKe9 66'68 00'000'9966 66'66 00'000'000'S £1'001 00'00000091 91'001 00'000'000'9 O'001 00'092160'4 16'001 00'000'000'S sz'oot 00'000'000'9 80'001 00'000'000'9 48'001 00 OS4'SOO'S 90'001. 00'0000009 00'001 DO'000'000'S 00'001 DO'000'000'Sl 9L art/WM ZI.OZ/LZ/9 Se' l 0k/01139E1C fire bl9ELE 9C1 LiLC'i^x�� Blbf3it!1:-r ENE4 00'Z oWEONIAf'OOSSV O180W 1VN 033 00'000'000'9 4AOHd9£LE 01/1E0N/AE'OOSSV 01801N1VN 033 OD 000'000'9 4AOH39Ete xLOWEONLAE'OOSSV 0180W DIN 033 00'000'000'Ol 4A01-1i9E1E /Atom,tz'OOSSV 01801/l 1VN 03i 00'000'000'S 9XN1VB6CLE � "� IIIy ;t471IIlK11.!If'pH3iWNEo E. oW9oN1ADZ'OOSSV 0180W 1VN 033 00'000'000'9 6nZV86£lE OOSSV OlaOW 1VN 033 00'000'0001 1013W39£re ombN/AZ'005SV 018001 1VN 03i 00'000'0001 0501439E1E ?: ,. w,S,'1MMMtfttg ."- 4tM4WIN! aPM1!I'Ii 04.8*!880tr. 60NpASt2'005SV OlaOW 1VN 033 00'000'000'9 ZMS1'39E L£ ONDt'E $P10440?I ON0,1U.LVLOWDOC'1Id/'111'4l!!111.li4A?i$E 9£l£ 0099V 01.80A 1VN 033 00'000'000'SL 6A1Nfd9C L£ A IoNLASZ'Z'OOSSV O180W 1VN 033 00'000'0901 LOff3BC l£ 1/001+ S n��sl.f4'. )'� 1&Isg,t:'t4044Ii" 'WI i ilH:AilIII;i:85OL39CLC x10w90N/AZ'OOSSV 018.01N 1VN 033 00'0000000L BSOf39f LE O iftWA ��hi a 1; ���#tom. 1:' II - i l iTyPT!'[' SWAM -Lc xlow90N/120059V 0180A 1VN 053 00'0000005 B90fd9Ct£ SZ'l ZOOSSV 0180A 1VN 03d 00'000'000'SL ZSn1-1390LE xL,A10N9'Z'00SSV 0180A 1VN 033 00'000'000'9 L8MH39e LE AloN/ASZ'Z'OOSSV 0160A 1VN 033 00'000'000'S OVVHi9C1£ $'d ' MpCt'A PMI7�f"�'-t'tWiIi •"'-004400„E= AL0NU9Z'Z'OOSSV 0180W 1VN 03d 00'000'0001 OV4Hd9E1E xLiA2060AE 00SSV 0180W 1VN 033 00 000'000'9 ZAW639E L£ xL/A10N/AZ'OOSSV 0180A 1VN 03d 00'000'000'9 4AM'veeeK ;Mgr " tMit s.- .... I " f—;I: t' 1 i irJ04Y!10t '005SV 0180W 1VN 03i 00'000'000'S lOMV86ELC xLL110N-1AZ'OOSSV 0160A 1VN 033 00'000'000'9 SAAVB6ELC rnb!x41 . _S�t ��IE'1 a3a`.iti;,. ,6.-air^ i*AallE' 00'Z xl,Atonunz oOSSV 01610W 1VN OSA 00'000'000'S 6MAV86£l£ 11 11=140b4DEI xloWEONIAZ'OOSSV O180W'p1Vy�N 033 DOp'000L�'{0L00'SL 53 g 5N 863�9y�Ea LE WT.iR .5]IY ao,mt41��ti rest Hmwvuo?1 '00SSb 0180W 1VN 033 • VWNA 00'000'0001Z1 00'Z ZLOZ/LZ/9 OD'Z i1Yl ZIOZM/S SCZ ZIOZ/0£/6 E9'L ZLOZ/EZ14 Z10ZIZZl£ SL £1't 21.02./0IIZ OS'L ZLOZ/LZ/ Z102/9/1 EL l 1k zlous/i 110Z/BZ/Lt LLOZ/LZ/LL LLOZ/Ll/L1 'l 110Z/LL/ L OZ/9/9 L LOZ/8Z14 L IOZ/8Z/4 L10Z/91ro r+ l LOZ/ L b F 010Z/01/9 4 El 1 SS 99'1 SZ e 02'1 8E't el BE 9014/ASZ'Z'0095V 0180W 1VN 033 00000'000'9 1111/90WA9'Z OOSSV 018011V 1VN 033 00'000'00091 olN80N //LPN/AS LB't 091 (0419Z101) 161160144'469 00'OSZ 5 00'092 666 4 ZO'E 99' 1. 00'006 ZZ 00'09Z L00 S 00'OS2 0264 001Z9'Z44 E 56'4 Ere 98'Z BL'Z 927 Z3311 'OAV 01.0E 1E,P,PJ' 850 SL'Z 48'Z 00'Z 00'0SL'SZ coo sLe.a 00'0019 00'006'f66'b L£i9£'L491,49 06'86 00'0000001 SI'OOL 00'OS9'488'4 Z4'66 00'00S'868'4 89'66 00'000'009'C1 £LOZISZ SL'Z ELOZ/St/E 89'1 89'66 00'000'000'9 E 07JL L/E 197 08'1 (00'09E611 00'099086'4 19166 00'000'0001 89'Z ECZ 00'00009 00'00069001 49001 00'000 000 01 OL-Z lV I. 00'00489 00'006 LZ88 ZZ'88 00'00£'066'6 E OZ/SZ/Z ELOZ/41n. £l OZ/6/l 1Nn00510 NV013WOH 033 00'000'000'OSy' 18ASB££�,L�£a testa tll: ; is ylt�.:;,. .I113'.0�114 �l':I:!�it: IO 1NnOOSIO NVOl 3WOH 03i -OIHd 00'000'0E9149 SIOZ/OLI£ 01/1190NIAS1830 01230A•81H3 00'0000005 6E36X82re IM049,3004:RB'se-5+1:q: :.xt1' 04000000}'1W ', . .. .'44400E: 10Z/5119 09'1 iAL061iA4'1830'0180A- elH3 00400'000'9 S5LZ3£C It 0WEoN/A6'1830'0180W- 91H3 00'000'000'9 0596X8ZL£ owmw 1 00ae ''E oDDl ook ,£ P ;wa4,41'1:';;'ccH4:4,tt t 144004,tag$404MA' t:rftatI 9i'Mthtii'iil, . ,.� H.00 0E: t 0t0Yy2 3;. °AM/AC'18t3f0'0180JA- 81H3 k0i004'00000a'/0�0000'9 490088VXd8Z L£ il.�t Orittf v I i i�r'''f4itFA���':1�LP.ywi 4.00,Y5'c�'F.�, E�.'M`P100' 'F 0tH I i. ,: .: 070 w'I+Wi4Z t, OB'1 HA loN1Af'1850'0180A- 1311-13 00000'0001 6N26XBZLE CL'Z xl/A10N/AC 1830'0180N4• 911-1i 00'000000'01 ONI6XBZL£ g1,140400104111! '#9391E'Eii:.`SMWOO.' t.— -.� �.-.: -_._ _014160D-4 1830'0180W- 91143 00'000000'Ot Z00V3 a Le _ . N8 ue A11an1VW NDdn00 N0ua180930 abd d15n0 ._ ,•. Wind }LLOLINSCLAUt potoo s lalnsoo 9Z0 6Z'0 ZZ 0 ZL'0 oro ES 0 BZ'0 ZZ'0 z 0 S'0 6E 0 6Z'0 nessismsonsow 9L'0 9L'0 9£'L Z21 00'9 bL'4 E6'4 96Z 6137 BL'Z 692 6£Z 68'Z 8LZ s9'Z VIZ L9'Z NUENku L4'Z L4'Z 94'Z 292 Lf'Z srz La LL'0 LZO LZ'0 LZ 0 LC•0 BZ'0 ZZ'0 E4'0 L6'L 00'Z 88860'LLL L9'L6CLL9'4L4 6LZ081340lb 000St £E 00'000'99664 £6'60 0009Z'L£6'6b Ef'B0Z bf £C'90L'9LL b4'044 L£ IL'199'9E 00'000 9(6 64 £9 BOZ'L46'64 00'00 £s 4 L L'49NB40'844 00'000 OM B4 96'86 29'L620666b 6206 £E'BOZ'L46'64 49'86 00'005'0E6'6P 8LZ99'L68'844 99'S9S'Z99'64 00'000 926 64 S8'66 69'9EL9E660 b4'444'BLS 64 b9'88 bb'44bBL8'64 L9116'LZ984 99'66 L9'9L6'LZ9'64 48Z£9'668'L Lo'699'L£9bL9 (00'096'99) 00'090'4436'0 CZ•9Z8'LCLZL9 92'66 00'000'000'9 (00'009'LE) 00'009'Z96% 99'66 00'000'000'OL Z E 0LZ 0009L'99 00'091A/05 99'LOL 00'000'086'4 0 OZSL/4 00'Z 92'E 90'Z 00'009'SL 00'004'0960 69'66 00'000'000'9 ELOZ9Z/9 SO LL't �00'Z 0'009 00'009 2968 95'66 00'000000'0L E1.0218Z19 00'Z Al0NlA9E'OOSSV 06'Z OS'L 00009'ZL .00009 L966 _ _ 88'66 00'000'000'01 CLOZ/BZ/9 08'L 01711901*AE'OOSSV OLOZ/L1/9 ZZ'0 OLOZbL/L LZ'0 OLOZ/LZ/9 LZ'0 0 L0Z/01/9 LZ'0 mozrZL/OL 9Z'0 0L03/4LIL ZZ'0 shad. 3:• 0 OZ9Z/5 E4'0 0 LOZ6L/9 Z4'0 S LOZ/OE/£ 00'Z SNOI1V01180A V001. On 09'000'000'9LP 10 da00 08001NVOI 3410H 1tla303d 00'000'000'OS 10 da0001:101i1 NVO131^41-11Va3033 00'0000000 IO da00 Oa0W NV0131NOH lVa3033 00'000'000'09 4fAL6££l£ 10 da00 OaOW NV01 3WOH 1Va3033 698L699LE :., . LH2L6EE LE F :_ i4g0 *RNI 00y�000000'05 j {h Lf1n/\ 1.£ 10 81100 Oa0W NVO1 3WOH 1V733033 • 016113 00'000'0000SP S31ON 1NnooS10 VWN3 00'000'000'OS 9310N 1N000510 MINA 00'000'000'09 S310N 1NnooS10 VWN3 00'000'000'09 9310N iNnooS10 VWNA 00'000'00009 90)699ELE 6HZ69S£LE LfX68SEl£ ZZM69SELC 5310N iNnoost0 VWNd • OWN3 00'000Z98ZL9 /ALONJAS OOSSV OlaOW INN 03A 00'000'000'9 91'Z 004 00'008'96S 000069690L L6'SOL 00'000'000'000'000'01 1.9Z Le 000940 00009'Z88b 99'66 0009Z'L601, se' L 00099'6 00'099066'b L9'66 00'000'000'9 09'L - 00'000 000 9 WOOL 00'000'0009 00'0000009 0000L 00'000'0009 00'Z (00'099'L) 00094866V 26'68 00'000'0005 O8L f L'Z O'0069 O'0o9'L 00'009'066 6 00'00Z'Z66'4 00'006'LZ 00'006 LZO'OL 000SZ'LL 00'09Z'SOO'9 99'6 9L'1 00'009 Zl 00'00S'ZLO`S ES L9'1. 00009L 00'002'2664 04'Z SS'L 000SZ'LS 00'0929�984 OP 99'1 00'009 Z9 001XVLEfi'6 ZE'Z 4z•z Z3311'OAV ;amen 05L scL 0009Z LEI 00'092 89614 00'092 896 b 00'028 SB64 00'050bL 00'009 „WIN 01A SS01/NIV9 L6'68 00'0052566 4B'66 00'000'000'9 ZZ'OOL 00.000'0000 EL'OOL 00'000'966'6 SZ'OOL 00'000000'9 SLIM L/£ 00'4 EL021922 92 'L £LOZI6l2 98'l £LOZ6L/Z 09'L ElOZIBI/Z 08'l ELOZ/6l/Z OOZ £LOZ/B2 £LOZ/9/2 CLOZ/9Z/L 08'L £L Z ELOZ/SL/L 00'Z Z LOZ/9Z/ZL SC'L 178'66 00'000000'S ZLOZB/lL OE'66 00'000'000'9 Hfi'BB 00'000000'0L 9£'66 00000'000'9 j 8££138 00.009'888 4 ZL'66 00000000'9 89'68 00'00000M L3 NiVA'W WIN L. 3111VA MOOS b03W39ELE raffn"tev�-umrnssm:, ZXVW39E LE ZNfH39E LE d1ei 1:k: z ae� E39E39E LE IC -:ga40041 i31 OlaOW 1VN 033 00000000'0L 2ZZ1'39E LE 01a0101 1VN 033 00'0000000L L514139EL£ xloW9ows OOSSV 01a001 1VN 033 0000000001. 21306390LE 03d 00'000'0005 083V86E LE 01790N�AE'009SV 0180W 1VN 03d 00000'000'S OA4f39ELE , 1Mr,ig VVg0N9?NV*kb8816010909 1;:. a.%;.. '{` L i�:vllit4i' Bf6E: 01/493NJA£'0099V 01a0W 1VN 033 00'000'000'9 4dEfd9EL£ 01019011+A0'0099V 01801A11VN 033 00000'0009 4dEP39ELE 01190NAE'OOSSV 01HOW 1VN 033 00'000'000'S 6b3V8694E x L0W90NIA£'OOSSV 01801N1VN 03d 00'0000000L £Z3V96f Lf r?Pk.Prvolti4E, 4Fig x L0W90N/AE'OOSSV OlaOW 1VN 033 00000000'9 13Z1'39E LE xLlALONIAVOOSSV OlaOW 1VN 033 00'000'000'1:L EEOV96£LE 014190NiAE•0096V 0180161 1VN 033 00000'0009 080V860l£ ins'oN/nvooSSV 9ia0w 1VN 033 00'000'000'9 9Z0V86ELE m <;: I £ ri-fi r•,N.L; L5'L 101631VA92200SSV OlaOW1VN 033 00'000 OOOS E01,1'39EL£ OOSSV OlaOW 1VN 033 00000 000'S 6£HV86f LE 01N9o11/A9 OOSSV 01a0W 1VN 033 0000000004 xL/AZONIAS OOSSV 01a011,1 1VN 03d 00600.000.s 90NIA S'E'OOSSV 01NOw 1VN 033 00'000'000'9 0W90NIAE ZLOZIL4/6 SS'L 1619'3NASZ ZLOZLL/6 'OOSSY OlaOW 1VN 99'L 119oNlA9Z'OOSSV 0180161 1VN 033 00'000 ZLOZ/LL/6 99'1 ZLOZ/01/6 OS'1. ZLOZ/9149 09'1 ZLOZ/OZ/L SL'L A1I801VW NOd NOO 000'01 6EHV86£LE , 11190NIA9'Z OOSSV 0180W 1VN 033 00'000'000'9 W93NlA9"Z OOSSV OlaOW 1VN 033 00'000 000'S W9010AS'Z'OOSSV Olaow 1VN 033 00'000'000'9 6EHV96£LE t1 OK-WW 9AVW39EL£ 10.06010 914f399LE MM. LOwsoN9Z OOSSV OlaOW 1VN 03d 00'000'000'OL - ZLN£39£LE t avotoJ'9mt NOI1dIa3630 atld i<L![a'LS ga3r1A1 di500 Y pLLonul pd sdoinsepal DEd LO'L 00'1 8Z'0 13r0 88'0 4Z'0 84'0 04'0 B9'0 04'0 O4'0 0L'0 111111111111111111111111111111111111111. WO £4'Z SZ' 4 003 98'0 9Z'0 Sz'0 90-0 Ore 90'Z OZ' 4 98.0 9Z'0 SZ'0 90'0 94'0 94'0 94'0 £02 94'Z E8'E Z9'E 060 ZE'4 89'4ZL'99Z'9 98'ZBZ'Z98'88/1 94349Y801 993Z9VV899 00'OSL 9L 41,649 LL 00'SZL 6Z (94rot9'LL) (091l9'Z4) 00'OSE'ELL 08'494 9£ 004 'a OVZ09'9E 00'009 004 00'009 8£9 00'009'PM 69 89'68 9£3291129'£69'9 09'190340'899 00'OSL'SZ6'89 00'0008S884 Z6'68 99'084'49964 EE'E80'LS6'6P 09'L4L 41.6 SE 40'PO 1,96 64 90.249'001704 09199'LE9 00'099 964 S 09'997 VOZ 4 0 V%OZB'p 09'009/ZZO'L 00'00Z 004F04 00'004 49409 00'000 000 4 00'009'03W 46'66 ££'E90'LSEL'69 Z6'66 OSYI VPL6'EE 4666 44'9493,9869 oz'99rz99'4o4 49'86 00'000'098 O6'£04 00'00£'EZ0.9 96'ZO4 00'000'OL4l 4£'LOL 0£'49E648'0 00'404 00'00L00Z04 a 004 00'00Z40909 00'00s'6Z8'O£ '41lu0w a4110 Aep sseulsnq lsel awl uo paseq 6uppal'9 11511814 INON ay{ •AlunOas a to uoaemp pal}ipow awl tey6iw ay1 'ple!A ul a6ueyo Leap a to} Apnoea a }o a6uego aoud a6eluamad ayl 'uoOemO pa0lpon .d 'Iood of peeids'suodnoo ate.! algeuen aney suoge600 Aoua6V !Mr! E 'amen {anew Aq pelOam'Alun{ew le petunia! sl 1ed10uud Hun veeA to Jagwnu aLe si e}q a6eianV Z 'aoud asewmnd uo paseq sue saapnoas laAxew AauOw wI311.10 s to pataL pup anlen {axliew ay1 L OLOZ/EZ/6 OLOZ/E/9 040Z/9/S 040ZKL9 Z40u94/9 440Z/l/L 440Z/4/4 OLOZ/94/44 040Z/4/9 040Z/4/L 040240E4 00'Z OLOZ/L/9 8l'0 94'0 94 0 84'Z 009 9L'4 OS'4 VVV/£8V A213110119 N003a0 VVVRgV 9•0.01W-19X1 VdH10 00'0009S9'4 VVV/99V NOISN3d VaV10 VINVS woo.lLL'289's S1tl1O1 00'000'000'0s9 mar" cr _. I a 10404 00' S1lIB AanSV3a1'S'n 000'000'OS 1o�o�ng�stzf4C6 sne A6fISV381'S'n 00'000'000'Os Z8n86LZ46 S1118 Aan5V3a1'sr 00'000000• 44 4Lns6LZL6 91119 AanSV3a1'5n 00'000'000'09 89198LZ46 _`t5:twx ,IIM' ,i.�'.'e�"S,'n411143tZ�I8 S111B AafISV3a1.s.n 00'000b00'96 19n96LZ46 SllIB AansV3a1 Sn oozoo'0oo'o9 L6ns6LZ46 �'... II p0'00000 +Flihi'e ,"��1M,14 E .0400 slue AansV3a1's'n • 1181 00'000'999UL VVV/e8V V3H 10 00'000'099 40N89LLOZ VV/*VVlteV 1S NO1ONIHSVM 00'000'000'S SASO4L6£6 teivvoseo �ry My VV�AAL8a�9,xy�1.�LL'LLaOZ 64 00"000'Ol0'L 40V4Z9408 UTFRIMOMPOW LX809LBE6 y, 4SVL64064 IT VVIZeV W0 2:1358X11H 00'000,i�'0i:00'4 w 9aeL9L640 VCIIIMMIStflONWOM SON081Vd131NnW • INnW VVI+VVleV1S N010NIHSVM 00'000.000'04 -V Mail S3111Nf1WW00 VINaOdIlVO 00'000'000'L£ 90'0 90'0 80'0 0(4 ZL 04 Z3411"OAV 80'0 90'0 90'0 993 Z9'6 OZ'E 94'0 L0'0 89'4 80'4 ana w lvw a-u, SS01/NIVO 00'000 000 00'000'000194 00.00E 00'000'000'4 00'000'000'994 00'000'000'S 00'004 00'000'000'9 00'000'099'94 00'000'099 �i3mtln •tv 00'000'099'9l 00'004 00'000'099 301ad 0 LOZ/0£/9 VVV/eeV 1103a0 aOlOw V10A01 00'000'000'4 06Ad£EZ68 k 4-1MMVtMIWAVAMI RIM,Ent _ t amt 9310N WaO331 W-ON1W a0'o00'000's94 040Z/8Z/0 L0'0 A0N30V 81n00 RV 00'000'000'S XXdOV CNN 13311:IVW A3NOW - AVM OZ E OZOZ/94/Z4 60'4 AllanitlW NOd000 00'000'099'94 3SnOH1an001SIa sn 00'000'099 NOI1d0d0S30 atld d1sno 040Z `L S. w'IDIiJ punuaulksanul papa. -' l3inseal2 6ded • 9ti969 MOO 1N3WNH3A09 VINdOdI1VO 30 S•N3d1f103d 1210d3d 31-11 S3131dW00 SIH1 • '000'000'00S$10 auawallauaw japun sleise taw pue aouauanze saw-g uew ssal you tmak Joslnpe waumonul ue aney isnw 1p E sAep O6 Purpaaoxa =ou,punpew aPerune paay$ram se palaetalul aq,few Alpmew spun] lemon E Nueva IsloJawuwoo auo /(ue 1.171M palseaul aq xeuw NoPal eo slyP,to %0f uega WOW ON s %Z %S6'0 03A0iIddV 08V09 %T Amnon A1Ma VA! XdW %0T SAVa 09 -NAd/TV WIN %SZ 8V3AT Td/Td/CV %0£ SAVO 09T %eV° 30V891N3W1S3ANI %097 SW3A£ %061 V/ZV/V W W09T9 MAT S8V3A £ %0110410d s,AP001/11/d'8S apisiania Ien30V Alilenb 1!al % pazuOpinV AllanleW wnua!xeW %IAA£ 1110I1ON V/N SOMA IN3W1S3ANIAON30V1V001 8V3AT 1110I1 ON SiiV3A5 S11S0d30 NNV9 03:1n03S V/N V/N V/N aNn:i 01831 180HS1S11811e0 _,.,, %0Z SAVO Z6 - . %0£ Si1V3A 5 p' c ��'I:f�I� (T) %OD' SAVO OLZ .12 SOd38 3S83A38 SlIS0d30 31A1I1 8 31VOIdI1830 t.�iktFIlI1 30NV1-10X3 d0 91119 1101I1 ON .._..,. Si1V3A5 0 ,,:...:.- .., SNOIlV°Jn90 AON3JV 1V001 V/ZV/b 1114I1ON S8V3A9 s,V001111/d'a'S AUlenb 31u111 % pazpoLonV Alp nleW wnwlxsW , aaoleo lua1.ulsanul SON09AON3OV •saoslnaadnS 3o paeog iflunop aye kiy panoadde pup amululop ItAsaanp luamasanui s,Xlunop aye Cq Xllenuup pamainaa si iioilod •apop Iuawuaanog eivaojliej ay; ueya ani.o!alsaa WOW st ,i0110d Iuaunsanui sAuno0 ata loin" Iuaualsanui 3o waulavels mammal alp yp[m 20NV7ndiAlop 1111A ❑! sem pund 11.1aU4Sanul mood maans=j, ayd • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Greg Moore, Procurement and Assets Manager THROUGH: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Single Signature Authority Report STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the Single Signature Authority Report for the third quarter ended March 31, 2010; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The attached report details all professional services and administrative contracts that have been executed for the third quarter ended March 31, 2010, under the Single Signature Authority granted to the Executive Director by the Commission. The unused capacity at March 31, 2010 is $327,588. Attachment: Single Signature Authority Report as of March 31, 2010. Agenda Item 7E 32 ££ 00'000'69 00'0 00'fi6S'LZC 00'L WELL 00'ZL9'ZLL ohoa`69 00'0 moot 00'OOS'Z 00'906'6 00101'LL 00119'9Z 00'000'0006 I d�b d Rq pemainea �u Y0 11.1*s034e4 g3aa pap64s %ai°N., 6q paeda+d `r ;nwa41 EIJEI M�d411aW 01.0Z'LC 4aleW 46noa41 ONINIVW32! 1Nf10Wtl'! 03W 1Nf10WV ve Dawes BuILno2! LLS Lued6wd lalaneal ealdw3 puelul LLS elummeo to aims suopegmpeds paad Llsueal a16000 Lo uoimedead r$ caw 1NnOWV; 'ubLBuLJAH r1310 £ _f >peasnlb:ssol olu¢Py=. uOzpeA L111140W 1'81V i 34BIsuI 3xaN 600Z'L Rlnf 316V1IVAV 1Nf10WV''''. 1NnOWV _ 1NnOWV OIVd 1NnOWV S331/12136 d0 NOIld121OS30 1NV1inSNoo .LOV2l1N00 .LOVH/NOO ONINIVLAMI 1VNIDINO 01,0Z `4S HO21Vw AO SV A11210H111V 321n1VNJIS 370NIS • • • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Martha Durbin, Staff Analyst Fina Clemente, Transit Manager THROUGH: Robert Yates, Director, Multimodal Services Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2010/11 Minimum Fare Revenue Ratio for Riverside Transit Agency and SunLine Transit Agency STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Reaffirm the methodology used to calculate the required fare box recovery ratio; 2) Approve the FY 2010/11 minimum fare revenue to operating cost ratio of 17.13% for the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and 18.14% for the SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine); and • 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: RTA and SunLine serve both urbanized and non -urbanized areas of Riverside County. As required by state law, these agencies' minimum required fare revenue to operating expense ratio, would fall between the 10% requirement for non -urbanized area services, and 20% requirement for urbanized area services. The Commission developed a methodology to calculate the required minimum ratio and it was subsequently approved by the state. Per the Transportation Development Act, Section 99270.1, Caltrans must review and approve the methodology on an annual basis. Caltrans staff has concurred in writing that the methodology developed by the Commission is still applicable. The formula used is as follows: R=.1Cn+.2Cu Cn + Cu R = Required Ratio Cn = Costs of Services in Non -Urbanized Areas Cu = Costs of Services in Urbanized Areas Agenda Item 7F 34 The costs for new or expanded services are exempted from the calculation for the year of implementation plus two full fiscal years of operation. For FY 2010/11, RTA has ten routes that are exempt from the farebox recovery calculation. SunLine has three routes that are also exempt from the farebox ratio requirement. Using the above formula and the Short Range Transit Plans, the FY 2010/11 minimum required ratio for RTA is 17.13% and 18.14% for SunLine. This means that passenger fares for RTA and SunLine should cover at least 17.13% and 18.14%, respectively, of the actual cost to operate services. The balance of the operating cost is covered by state, federal and local funding. The farebox recovery ratios for FY 2010/11 have been reviewed and approved by RTA and SunLine staff. The ratios are then fixed for the fiscal year upon adoption of the required ratio by the Commission and cannot be changed, even though actual revenues and expenses may differ from the Short Range Transit Plan estimates. Attachment: Rules and Regulations for Determining Required Fare Revenue Agenda Item 7F • 35 RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR DETERMINING REQUIRED FARE REVENUE TO OPERATING COST RATIOS FOR TRANSIT OPERATORS SERVING BOTH URBANIZED AND NON -URBANIZED AREAS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY I. Based on the latest annually adopted Short Range Transit Plans for Riverside County, the Riverside County Transportation Commission with the cooperation of the transit operator will determine separately the operating cost of those transit services provided in non -urbanized areas and the operating cost of those services in urbanized areas. • For the purpose of this calculation, the operating cost in the urbanized areas shall include the cost of fixed route lines, groups of fixed route lines, and demand responsive service operating entirely within an urbanized area. The operating cost in the non -urbanized area shall include the cost of all fixed route lines, groups of fixed route lines, and demand responsive service operating entirely within a non -urbanized area. • For fixed route lines operating partly within an urbanized area and partly within a non -urbanized area, the cost shall be apportioned to the urbanized area costs and non -urbanized area costs in proportion to the route miles in the non -urbanized area and the route miles in the urbanized area. • For demand response systems serving both an urbanized area and a non - urbanized area, the cost shall be apportioned to urbanized area costs and non -urbanized area costs in proportion to the population of the urbanized area served and the population of the non -urbanized area served. • The costs of extension of public transit service pursuant to Section 99268.8 of the Public Utilities Code (PUC) shall not be included in any of these calculations. II. The required ratio of fare revenues to operating cost in compliance with PUC Sections 99268.3 and 99268.4 shall be calculated as follows: R = .1 Cn + .2 Cu Cn + Cu R = Required Ratio Cn = Operating Cost in Non -Urbanized Areas Cu = Operating Cost in Urbanized Areas III. Annually, prior to the beginning of the fiscal year, the Riverside County Transportation Commission shall calculate the required revenue to operating cost ratio for each transit operator serving both urbanized and non -urbanized 36 areas and submit this calculation to Caltrans. Caltrans shall approve the methodology used to calculate the blended fare box ratio prior to the beginning of the fiscal year. Once approved, the ratio is not subject to change. • 37 • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2010/11 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive input on the proposed Budget for FY 2010/11; 2) Forward to the Commission to close the public hearing to receive input on the proposed Budget for FY 2010/11; and 3) Adopt the proposed Budget for FY 2010/11. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The annual fiscal budget is the result of Commission staff determining the operating and capital needs for FY 2010/11 and identifying the resources to fund those needs. The budget process began in December 2009. The goals and objectives approved by the Commission on March 10, 2010, were the basis of this budget. The goals and objectives considered during the preparation of the budget relate to mobility initiatives, goods movement, improved system efficiency, environmental stewardship, economic development, intermodalism and accessibility, and public and agency communications, and financial and administrative policies. On May 12, 2010, staff presented the proposed budget to the Commission. Subsequent to that presentation, staff updated the document as a result of the following changes, resulting in a net increase of $19.235 million to ending fund balance: Adjustments to Fiscal Year 2009/10 Projected Amounts • Increases of $3.323 million in state and local reimbursement revenues less net increases of $1,721,300 in professional and support, project and operation, and capital outlay expenditures after further review and analysis of department budget worksheets. Agenda Item 8 38 Adjustments to Fiscal Year 2010/17 Budgeted Amounts • A $20,985,200 increase in state reimbursements for various 2009 Measure A Western County highway projects following review of budget compilation; • A $95,600 increase in investment income as a result of a net increase in revenues and the correlating increase in the estimated cash balance • A $50,000 increase in professional costs is related to quarterly sales tax audit services and the new Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 57, OPEB Measurements by Agent Employers and Agent Multiple -Employer Plans; • A $371,600 increase in support costsfor Right of Way Management maintenance expenditures related to Commission -owned property; • A $193,300 increase in program management expenditures for Bechtel services based on a reconciliation to the Bechtel contract amount; • A $600,100 increase in general program operations following review of budget compilation; • A $565,000 increase in right of way expenditures related to the Perris Valley Line project; • Increases of $1.201 million and $457,000 in Local Transportation Fund Western County and Coachella Valley bicycle and pedestrian expenditures, respectively, after further analysis of funds available; and • A $9,500 increase in State Transit Assistance expenditures based on the subsequent review and analysis of the Short Range Transit Plan submissions. A public hearing to allow for public comment on the proposed budget, as revised, is required prior to the adoption of the proposed budget. The public hearing was opened at the May 12, 2010 Commission meeting. After the public hearing is closed on June 9, 2010, adoption of the proposed Budget for FY 2010/11 will follow. In accordance with the Commission's fiscal policies, the budget must be adopted no later than June 15 of each year. Attached is the proposed Budget for FY 2010/11. This document contains the executive summary, as revised, that was presented at the May 12, 2010 Commission meeting; the Gann Appropriations Limit; the guiding policies related to the preparation of the budget; a summary of the budget process; fund budgets; details of program revenues and other sources; debt; department budgets; a community profile; and appendices including a glossary of acronyms, funding definitions, and program/general terms. Agenda Item 8 39 • A summary of the proposed Budget for FY 2010/11 is as follows: Revenues and other financing sources: Sales taxes -Measure A, LTF, and STA Reimbursements (federal, state, and other) TUMF 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 Ending fund balance Attachment: FY 2010/11 Proposed Budget Agenda Item 8 FY 2010/11 Budget $ 174,809,900 64,042, 300 10,000,000 178,000 1,835,600 185,000,000 212,414,700 648, 280, 500 6,225,000 18,618,400 4,837,100 431, 220, 300 587,600 106, 205,000 212,414,700 780,108,100 (131,827,600) 500,770,400 368,942,800 40 • 41 • June 9, 2010 Honorable Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, California FY 2010/11 Budget Introduction It has often been observed that adversity often inspires innovation. During the last few years, government agencies in Riverside County (County), California, have certainly faced economic adversity. However, in looking forward to Fiscal Year (FY) 2010/2011, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission) is ready to enter a year that will be full of promise and activity, much of which will be funded through innovative thinking, careful management, and a commitment to effectively invest scarce resources in much needed and welcomed transportation projects and services. On the financial front, challenges remain. The Commission heavily depends on sales tax revenue which has seen year-to-year declines since the peak in FY 2005/06. Projected sales tax revenues for FY 2010/11 are expected to be comparable to FY 2009/10 revised projections, but the Commission is moving forward with an ambitious program of project development and funding leading to the eventual construction of billions of dollars in transportation projects over the next decade. Construction will begin on three major freeway projects funded by the Commission, and environmental work will wrap up on the Perris Valley Line, a 22 mile extension of the Metrolink commuter rail service. Preliminary project work will also move forward for a dramatic expansion of State Route (SR) 91 in Corona which will feature new toll lanes, a general purpose lane in each direction, and a series of system improvements to include expanded interchange and improved access to and from what might be Southern California's most congested freeway. That's an important development for the County and the region. All too often, capital projects are delayed during tough times, leading to greater challenges in the future. A more thoughtful approach is to continue to invest in infrastructure during challenging times, often leading to welcome economic opportunities and a better future for everyone. Investing in better infrastructure will create jobs immediately as well as an economic base that attracts employers and jobs for the long-term. 42 Maior Projects on the Horizon • By using a combination of funding from sources that include the voter -approved Measure A sales tax, Proposition 1 B, and other state and federal programs, the Commission will be active in construction, environmental, and engineering work for a number of projects: • SR-91 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 interchange • Interstate (1) 215 corridor widening and improvements • 74/215 interchange • 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connectors • SR-91 and 1-15 corridor improvements, including Express Lanes • Perris Valley Line Completed Proiects Making a Difference The Commission has recently completed two important public transit projects that will enhance transit service for many Metrolink users and will be part of a much larger effort in the development of the Perris Valley Line Metrolink extension project. In July 2009, the Commission completed a six -story parking structure at the North Main Corona station. This facility serves two Metrolink rail lines and will be accessed by Perris Valley Line users. Ensuring ample parking at this station is extremely important given its proximity to SR-91 and 1-15. A new station location that has been completed is located in the city of Perris. This municipality has made significant improvements in its historic downtown area. The Commission has added to that progress with the development of a multimodal transportation center which opened in early 2010 and now serves Riverside Transit Agency bus riders. The facility includes rail platforms and will be a featured stop on the Perris Valley Line. Stimulus Dollars Making a Major Impact With Congress's approval of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) in 2009, Ca!trans and local governments in the County have received welcome federal stimulus funding for transportation projects during FY 2009/10. These projects will remain in construction during FY 2010/11. While most of this funding did not come directly to the Commission, the investment in the area's transportation system freed up other dollars controlled by the Commission to build additional projects including the 74/215 interchange. All told, the ARRA program is funding six important freeway projects in various locations including: • I-10/Bob Hope/Ramon Road interchange (Coachella Valley) • 1-10/Palm Drive interchange (Coachella Valley) • 1-10/Date Palm interchange (Coachella Valley 43 • • I-215/Clinton Keith Road interchange (Murrieta) • SR-60Nalley Way interchange (Rubidoux area of Western Riverside County) • 74/215 interchange (Perris) Current Responsibilities During FY 2010/11, the Commission will invest $289 million in capital projects that include highway, regional arterial, and rail projects. The Commission's overall budget will exceed $567 million and includes additional investments for transit operations, payments to cities for street and road improvements, and a variety of smaller programs such as motorist and commuter assistance programs. The Commission's status has become somewhat unique in Southern California. As many transportation agencies have consolidated functions and grown in size, the Commission remains true to the original intent of the state of California (State) legislation that first created it, operating a staff of 40 budgeted positions. In doing so, the Commission remains effective in its role as a transportation planning and funding agency by maintaining productive relationships with other agencies. For example, Measure A pays for a score of lesser -known projects that are extremely important to local residents. In FY 2010/11, the Commission will return $31 million in funding to local cities and the County for local streets and roads needs. The Commission also receives and programs funding from state and federal sources. This includes the State's Transportation Development Act program dollars that are allocated primarily to the County's major public transit providers. Measure A also pays its share by funding transit fare discounts and programs for senior citizens, persons with disabilities, and individuals of limited means and by operating a commuter assistance program that provides traveler information and ridesharing assistance to employers and commuters. Looking Toward FY 2010/11 The focus of FY 2010/11 will be the construction of a number of freeway projects and delivery of two high -profile projects that are part of the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan. The freeway projects include the widening of six miles of 1-215 in Murrieta, the construction of the 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connectors at the interchange in Moreno Valley, the widening of SR-91 in Riverside, and the expansion of the 74/215 interchange in Perris. All of these projects break ground during the 2010 or 2011 calendar years and are funded through a combination of state, federal, and Measure sales tax dollars. The two high -profile projects are the Perris Valley Line Metrolink extension project and the SR-91 corridor improvement project (CIP). The Perris Valley project has received a favorable rating from the Federal Transit Administration and a total of $75 million in federal Small Starts Program funding. In order to receive these dollars, the Commission 44 has participated in a competitive process which has resulted in favorable reviews for the cost effectiveness of the Perris Valley Line project. For the next fiscal year, environmental work will be completed, leading to construction in 2011. The total project budget for the Perris Valley Line is estimated at $233 million. A much larger project in terms of budget is the SR-91CIP which will require an investment of more than $1 billion to be funded through a combination of toll revenue bonds, Measure A funding, and federal Transportation Infrastructure Financing and Innovation Act (TIFIA) financing. The project has received legislative approvals and the go-ahead from the California Transportation Commission to be part of a special pilot program to allow the use of design -build procurement and contracting. During FY 2010/11, the Commission will continue environmental work, begin a design -build procurement, and acquire right of way for this project in anticipation of construction in 2012. Infrastructure 8 Transportation Serve as Economic Stimulus While Riverside County's economy has been negatively impacted by the recession and falling real estate values, the Commission will continue needed investments in transportation and will continue to explore creative and innovative approaches that include partnerships with other agencies, toll financing, the use of TIFIA, and design - build contracting whenever it allows the Commission to better serve the public and safeguard taxpayer dollars —especially Measure A funding. Transportation funding can help jumpstart the economy and create jobs and business opportunities for the entire region. GFOA Distinguished Budget Award The Govemment Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) presented an award of Distinguished Budget Presentation to the Riverside County Transportation Commission for its annual budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2010. In order to receive this award, a govemmental unit must publish a document that meets program criteria as a policy document, as an operations guide, as a financial plan and as a communications device. The award is valid for a period of one year only. The Commission believes that this budget document conforms to program requirements, and it will be submitted to the GFOA to determine its eligibility for another award. Acknowledgements The preparation of this budget has been a collaborative effort of the Commission's staff. The budget reflects the Commission's desire to communicate the components of the budget in terms that are easily understandable and supportable for the general public. Staff acknowledges and appreciates the guidance and leadership of the Commission's • 45 • 32-member Board of Commissioners and the sense of renewal and commitment they have and continue to inspire. Signature on file Signature on file Anne Mayer, Executive Director Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer 46 4110kBLE OF CONTENTS COMMISSION INTRODUCTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction Budget Overview Commission Personnel Department Initiatives Fund Balances Budget Comparative Capital and Operating Budget Budget Expenditures and Uses Highway, Regional Arterial, and Rail Programs GANN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT Section 1: GUIDING POLICIES Commission Policy Goals and Objectives Financial and Administration Policies Policy Matrix Section 2: BUDGET PROCESS SUMMARY Budget Process Functional Organization Chart Staff Organization Chart Section 3: FUND BUDGETS Budgetary Basis and Fund Structure General Fund Special Revenue Funds Capital Projects Funds Debt Service Fund Section 4: REVENUES AND OTHER SOURCES Funding Sources Revenues and Other Sources Program Revenues Section 5: COMMISSION DEBT Debt Capacity Analysis Debt Service Schedule Program and Geographic Debt Legal Debt Margin Debt Service Requirements Section 6: DEPARTMENT BUDGETS Budget Comparison by Department 6.1: MANAGEMENT SERVICES Executive Management Administration Legislative Affairs and Communications Finance 6.2: REGIONAL PROGRAMS Planning and Programming Rail Public and Specialized Transit Commuter Assistance Motorist Assistance 6.3: CAPITAL PROJECTS Capital Project Development and Delivery Location of Capital Projects Capital Projects Summary Narrative discussion of the history of the Commission and list of principal officers Narrative overview of the operational and financial factors considered Summarized narrative overview, charts, and tables of revenues and expenditures Personnel expenditures and full-time equivalents Major initiatives and summarized expenditures by department Projected fund balances by govemmental fund type and program Schedule of budget by summarized line item Schedule of budget classified by operating and capital purposes Schedule of budget by govemmental fund type Listing of budgeted capital project expenditures by program Narrative discussion of the appropriations limit Narrative description of policy goals and objectives Description of financial policies . Linkage of policy goals to departmental goals and objectives Narrative description of various budget stages Organization chart by Commission functions Organization chart of budgeted staff Narrative description of budgetary basis and fund structure Overview; narrative and charts of revenues and expenditures Overview; narrative and charts of revenues and expenditures by Measure A and non - Measure A special revenue funds Overview, narrative and charts of revenues and expenditures Overview; narrative and charts of revenues and expenditures Schedule of funding sources by department/program Narrative description of various revenues and other sources Tables and accompanying narratives of program revenues Charts and accompanying narrative demonstrating debt capacity Schedule of debt maturities by year Charts of debt service by program and geographic area Schedule of calculation of legal debt margin Table summarizing debt service requirements by issue Schedule of expenditures by department Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted expenditures Local map of major capital projects for current year Narrative description of each capital project 47 Section 7: COMMUNITY PROFILE Riverside County Demographics Statistical Information Commission Facts Section S: APPENDICES Glossary of Acronyms Funding Definitions Program Terns General Terns Narrative discussion of Riverside County's community profile Charts of various demographic data Charts of various statistical information Narrative overview of the Commission's programs and services Explanation of commonly used abbreviations Narrative description of various funding sources Description of Commission programs and related terms Commonly used terms in governmental accounting 48 • Commission Introduction State of California (State) law created the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission or RCTC) in 1976 to oversee the funding and coordination of all public transportation services within Riverside County (County). The Commission's mission is to assume a leadership role in improving mobility in the County. The governing body consists of all five members of the County Board of Supervisors, one elected official from each of the County's 26 cities, and one non -voting member appointed by the Govemor of California. The Commission is responsible for setting policies, establishing priorities, and coordinating activities among the County's various transit operators and other agencies. The Commission also programs and/or reviews the allocation of federal, state, and local funds for highway, transit, rail, non - motorized travel (bicycle and pedestrian), and other transportation activities. The Commission serves as the tax authority and implementation agency for the voter approved Measure A Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Measure A was approved by the County's electorate in 1988 and imposes a one-half of one cent sales tax to fund specific programs that commenced in July 1989 (1989 Measure A). The 1989 Measure A was approved for 20 years and expired on June 30, 2009. On November 5, 2002, the voters of Riverside County approved the renewal of Measure A beginning in July 2009 through June 2039 (2009 Measure A). Additionally, the Commission provides motorist aid services designed to expedite traffic flow. These services include the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE), a program that provides call box service for motorists, and the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP), a roving tow truck service to assist motorists with disabled vehicles on the main highways of the County during peak rush hour traffic periods. These services are provided at no charge to motorists and are funded through a $1 surcharge on vehicle registrations. The Commission is also legally responsible for allocating Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds, the major source of funds for transit in the County. The TDA provides two sources of funding: the Local Transportation Fund (LTF), which is derived from a one -quarter of one cent state sales tax, and State Transit Assistance (STA), which is derived from the statewide sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuel. Finally, the Commission has been designated as the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for the County. As the CMA, the Commission coordinates with local jurisdictions in the establishment of congestion mitigation procedures for the County's roadway system. 49 Name Bob Buster John F. Tavaglione Jeff Stone John J. Benoit Marion Ashley Bob Botts Roger Berg Joseph DeConinck Ray Quint° Mary Craton Greg Pettis Eduardo Garcia Karen Spiegel Scott Mates Robin Lowe Patrick J. Mullany Glenn Miller Terry Henderson Bob Magee Wallace Edgerton Bonnie Flickinger Rick Gibbs Malcolm Miller Richard Kelly Steve Pougnet Daryl Busch Ron Meepos Steve Adams Steve Di Memmo Ron Roberts Scott Farnam Raymond Wolfe Riverside County Transportation Commission List of Principal Officials Board of Commissioners Title Chair (Commission) Member Member 2nd Vice Chair (Commission) Member Member Member Member Member Member 1st Vice Chair (Commission), Chair (Budget and Implementation Committee) Member Chair (Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee) Chair (Eastern Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee), Vice Chair (Budget and Implementation Committee) Member Member Member Member Member Member Vice Chair (Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee) Member Member Member Member Member Vice Chair (Eastern Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee) Member Member Member Member Governor's Appointee Management Staff Anne Mayer, Executive Director John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery Director Theresia TreviMo, Chief Financial Officer Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director Agency County of Riverside, District 1 County of Riverside, District 2 County of Riverside, District 3 County of Riverside, District 4 County of Riverside, District 5 City of Banning City of Beaumont City of Blythe City of Calimesa City of Canyon Lake City of Cathedral City City of Coachella City of Corona City of Desert Hot Springs City of Hemet City of Indian Wells City of Indio City of La Quinta City of Lake Elsinore City of Menifee City of Moreno Valley City of Murrieta City of Norco City of Palm Desert City of Palm Springs City of Perris City of Rancho Mirage City of Riverside City of San Jacinto City of Temecula City of Wildomar Ca!trans, District 8 • 50 • 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 State Route (SR) 91, Interstate (I) 15, and 1-215 projects included in the Western Riverside County 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. 51 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 2.24% 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 .70% 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 altematives 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 Total sources (Table 1) are budgeted at $648,280,500, which is a decrease of 17% over FY 2009/10 projected sources and a 18% decrease over the FY 2009/10 budget. Total sources are comprised of revenues of $250,865,800, transfers in of $212,414,700, 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 $437,971,100. Accordingly, total funding available for the FY 2010/11 budget totals $1,086,251,600. Table 1 — Sources FY 2009-2011 Measure A Sales Tax $ 119,688,300 $ 106,000,000 $ 106,000,000 �';' $ 0% LTF Sales Tax 73,059,700 81,055,300 69,037,400 't !I' (12,245,400) -15% STASales Tax 4,860,800 N/A Intergovernmental 104,666,400 78,833,600 45,227,500 nt sF (14,791,300) -19% TLIMF Revenue 10,957,400 11,475,000 6,673,000 a a �" j (1,475,000) -13% Other Revenue 4,399,90(1 1,448,100 309,300 (1,270,100) -88% Investment Income 13,567,900 3,419,100 3,134,800 (1,583,500) -46% ` Operating Transfers In 46,541,200 244,211,600 265,310,100 "` �� „' n,'�, _ }1° (31,796,900) -13% Debt Proceeds 53,716,000 260,000,000 288,284,000 9 �x ' ` o{ a% (75,000,000) -29% TOTAL Sources $ 431,457,600 $ 786,442,700 $ 723,976,100r, '`�' ,$(138,162,200) -1814 • 52 • 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 a more diversified employment and commercial base and an increasing share of the regional economy. Chart 1 — Commission Sources Trend $350,000,000 $300,000,000 $250,000,000 $200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000,000 $50,000,000 FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 --10.• Measure A Sales Tax —�— LTF Sales Tax —f— STA Sales Tax —�E—TUMF --Rt—Federal, State, Local Revenues -411— Operating Transfers In --1— Debt Proceeds 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 1. 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. 53 While the Commission's primary revenues are the Measure A and LTF sales taxes, other revenues and financing sources are required to fund the Commission's programs and • projects as illustrated in Chart 2. Chart 2 — Sources: Major Categories Debt Proceeds 28% Measure A Sales Tax pi16% oi Operating Transfers In 33% LTF Sales Tax 11% Intergovernmental 10% TUMF Revenue 2% Investment Income O% 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. 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. 54 • Intergovernmental revenues include reimbursement revenues from federal sources of $28,870,700, state sources of $34,340,900, 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. As a result of an amended Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Western Riverside Council of Govemments (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 Westem 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 46% 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. Total uses (Table 2), including transfers out of $212,414,700, are budgeted at $780,108,100, a decrease of 15% from the prior year budget amount of $919,996,500. Program expenditures and transfers out totaling $669,053,900 represent 86% of total budgeted uses in FY 2010/11. Program costs have decreased by 7% from $715,872,700 in FY 2009/10. Table 2 —Uses FY 2009-2011 Capital Highway, Rai, and Regional Arterials Capital Local Streets and Roads Commuter Assistance Debt Service Management Services Motorist Assistance Planning and Programming Publk and Specialized Transit Rail Maintenance and Operations $ 301,477,700 45,655,500 6,161,600 45,673,400 4,902,800 2,623,200 8,051,200 83,045,400 8,667,500 S 547,571,000 $ 405,750,700 31,215,900 31,491,700 7,795,200 9,225,500 198,255,000 193,050, 200 5,868,800 4,888,700 3,840,700 3,819,800 11,122,300 5,448,100 90,048,500 72,183,700 24,279,100 13,590, 800 TOTAL Uses $ 506,258,300 $ 919,9%,500 $ 739,449,200 Note: Management Services include Executive Management, Administration, Legislative Affairs $ (14,1191,900) -3% (229,500) -1% (3,420,6001 44% (92,050,000) -46% (1,019,6001 -17% 1,873,300 49% (3,815,800) -34% (13,589,100) -15% (12,745,200) -52% $ (139,888,400) -15% and Communications, and Finance. 55 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. Increased towing services in highway construction areas also result in an increase in another motorist assistance service —the FSP. 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 FY 2009/10 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. The 17% decrease in Management Services budgeted expenditures of $4,849,200 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 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 (ICE) 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. Total uses included in the FY 2010/11 budget by major categories are illustrated in Chart 3. Chart 3 — uses: Major Categories Planning and Programming 1% Motorist Assistance 1% Management Services 1% Debt Service 14% Commuter Assistance 0% Capital Local Streets and Roads 4% Public and Specialized Transit 10% Rail Maintenance and Operations 1% l Capital Highway, Rail, and Regional Arterials 68% • • 56 • Commission Personnel 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 (Chart 4); however, as a cost savings measure, there will be no merit -based salary increases in FY 2010/11. Chart 4 — Salary and Benefits Costs: Five Year Comparison $8.000,000 $7,000,000 s6,000,000 $5,000,o00 s4,000.00o $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 s- FY 06/07 FY 07/08 FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/1] The Full Time Equivalent (FTE) of 40.0 FTE positions is below the FY 2008/09 level (Table 3) as a result of three retirements related to the implementation of an early retirement incentive, position reorganization, and maintaining a position as vacant. Management continues to be firmly committed to the intent of the Commission's enabling legislation that called for a small staff. Staff will continue to be provided the tools needed, including state of the art technology, to ensure an efficient and productive work environment. However, it must be recognized that small is not viewed in an absolute context; it is relative to the required tasks to be performed and the demands to be met. Table 3 — Staff summary by Department FY 2009-2011 Executive Management 0.7 Administration 4,7 Legislative Affairs and Communications 2.6 Finance 6.6 Planning and Programming 5.8 Rail Maintenance and Operations 2.9 Public and Specialized Transit 2.6 Commuter Assistance 1,8 Motorist Assistance 1,8 Capital Project Development and Delivery 15.5 TOTAL 45.0 0.4 4.2 1.9 6.5 5.4 3.2 2.6 1.8. 1.2 13.8. 41.0 57 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. The compensation components are shown in Chart 5. Chart 5 - Personnel Salary and Benefits Other Fringes 2% Health 12% ■ Retirement 22% Department Initiatives 101 Salary 64% 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 (Tables 4 through 13). 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 TOTAL $ 193,900 $ 215,300 $ 211,800 4,300 1% • 58 • • Administration • Provide high quality support services to the Commission and to intemal and external customers. • Continue to strengthen the electronic records management system. • 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 Professional Support Capital Outlay Debt Service TOTAL $ 1,599,900 $ 1,617,600 $ 1,473,000 Legislative Affairs and Communications 41,700 12% (3,500) -3% (454,500) -41% 120,000) -100% N/A (436,300) -27% • 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 $ 353,100 Professional 364,900 666,000 495,000 Support 142,500 166,400 129,900 TOTAL $ 866,300 $ 1,147,100 $ 978,000 (23,500) -7% 22,000 3% 4,600 3% 3,100 0% 59 Finance • 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 Westem Riverside County 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. • 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 $ 703,500 $ 694,600 $ 773,100 Professional 1,331,300 1,779,600 757,500 Support 30,800 59,100 494,300 Capital Outlay 196,000 355500 201,000 Debt Service 3,452,500 6,500,000 TOTAL 0,6o0 1883,100) 515,000 (201,000) (6,500,000) -3% -50% 871% -57% -100% 5,714,100 $ 9,388,800 $ 2,225,900 _ y ` y,.? $ (7,090,700) -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 California Transportation Commission (CTC) and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 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 concems 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. • 60 • • 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. Table 8 - Planning and Programming Personnel Professional Support Projects and Operations TOTAL $ 8,051,200 $ 11,122,3130 $ 5,448,100 65,400 8% (354,300) -50% (13,400) -35% (3,513,500) -37% $ (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 $ 384,200 $ 439,400 $ 399,400 r_c z:=' $ 51,800 12% Professional 226,800 409,300 208,500 �(;: (48,900) -12% Support 895,900 1,188,400 1,048,900 �� "�, to (195,000) -16% Projects and Operations 7,108,000 22,242,000 11,861,900` ' i (12,569,200) -57% Capital Outlay 52,600 72100 ag 16,100 NJA TOTAL $ 8,667,500 $ 24,279,100 $ 13,590800 R `Jli, $ (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. 61 • Monitor public and specialized transit operators' performance through the TransTrack • program. • Provide availability for local matching funds to Westem County applicants seeking FTA Section 5310 federal capital grants. Table 10 — Public and Specialized Transit Personnel $ 297,800 $ 374,500 $ 336,100 (17,300) -5% Professional 176,000 342,800 192,800 (135,000) -39% Support 8,900 29,100 11,800 y„�, (1,500) -5% Projects and Operations 82,562,700 89,302,100 71,643,000 a> r� (13,435,3001 -15% TOTAL $ 83,045,400 $ 90,048,500 $ 72,183 700 a _ ^ $ (13,589,100) -15% 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 San Bernardino Associated Governments (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 carlvanpool arrangements and facilitate transit connections. Table 11 — Commuter Assistance Personnel $ 161,200 $ 215,300 $ 368,200 Professional 386,900 1,483,500 1,462,300 Support 391,000 524,300 545,400 Projects and Operations 4,216,200 3,997,200 3,994,500 Capital Outlay 6,300 17,000 18,200 Transfers Out 1,000,000 1,557,900 2,836,900 TOTAL $ 6,161,600 $ 7,795,200 $ 9,225,500 Motorist Assistance (6,400) -3% (887,700) -60% 8,200 2% (1,176,800) -29% 0% (1,357,900) -87% $ (3,420,600) A4% • 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 Federal Communications Commission (FCC) narrowband regulations. • Operate and maintain the Inland Empire 511 system in partnership with SANBAG. • 62 Table 12 — Motorist Assistance Personnel $ 110,500 $ 141,600 $ 141,000 ?.` $ (61,900) 44% Professional 34,700 404,400 405,900 (48,600) -12% Support 309,100 351,600 350,400 ` `� 595,000 169% Projects and Operations 2,168,900 2,489,600 2,488,800 ^3y°' ' 580,000 23% Transfers Out 454,700 433,700 808,800 178% TOTAL $ 2,623,200 $ 3,840,700 $ 3,819,800 s ; K r $ 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 high occupancy vehicle (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 Westem Riverside County 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 Westem 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 $ 2,149,700 $ 2,578,100 $ 2,406,000 Professional 2,388,900 10,948,500 6,593,600 Support 491,300 1,585,000 795,700 Projects and Operations 295,978,300 320,758,300 165,426,500 Capital Outlay 583,800 718,000 (18,900) Debt Servke 42,202,000 191,755,000 193,050,200 Transfers Out 45,541,200 242,199,000 262,039,500 TOTAL $ 389,335,200 $ 770,54I,900 $ 630,292,600 127,800 5% 4,011,100 37% (715,700) -45% 13,021,200 4% (318,000) -44% (85,550,000) -45% (31,247,800) -13% $ (100,671,400) -13% 63 Fund Balances • The total fund balance as of June 30, 2010 is projected at $500,770,400. The Commission's budgeted activities for FY 2010/11 are expected to result in a $131,827,600 decrease of total fund balance at June 30, 2011 to $368,942,800. 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 presents the components of fund balance by governmental fund type and program at June 30, 2011. Table 14 — Projected Fund Balances by Governmental Fund Type and Program at June 30, 2011 MaoagenEntSerrices Panning and Programming Rail Maintenance and Operations Right of Way Management 53,399,1Bo 100,000 4,317,400 66,300 Budget Summary Measure A Westem County: Bondrmandng Commuteassstanre Economic Development FitimYs New Corridors Pubk and SpedaRaed Transit Rai Regional Arterials Measure A Coachella Valley: i8ghways and Regional Arterial Local Streets and Roads Speciaked Transit Highways S7sewo 9,5: Fri 1,830,300 107,789,500 17,181,700 9,028,100 26,618,400 11,884,700 858,900 1,100 300 Measure A Palo Verde Valley Tool Streets a nd Roads 400 Motorist Assistance State Trawl Assistance LodTransporbtion Fund TUMF 6,463,600 14,680,700 53,317,200 41,318,800 511,098,200 The overall budget for FY 2010/11 is presented in Table 15 by summarized line items, Table 16 by operating and capital classifications, and Table 17 by governmental fund type. Highway, rail, and regional arterial program expenditures by project are summarized in Table 18. 64 • • Table 15 — 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 119,68E1,30D 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 5,448,200 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 (128,516,700) 46,541,200 146,541,200) 53,716,000 53,716,600 $ 106,000,000 $ 106,000,000 81,055,300 69,037,400 40,755,000 36,896,800 1,181,800 11,475,000 1,448,100 3,419,100 282,231,100 17,408,050 25,444,000 2,375,450 6,673,000 309,300 3,134,800 230,382,000 6,063,300 6,158,400 16,946,400 5,095,800 22,042,200 12,824,300 613,730,100 65,043,300 21,425,000 123,605,700 117,475,500 2,232,800 31,215,900 13,761,400 448,314,000 182,395,000 12,610,000 3,250,00D 198,255,000 1,110,500 675,785,000 10,588,300 4,438,600 15,026,900 11,640,000 51,395,000 26,369,300 1,200,000 42,165,000 85,073,300 1,412,200 31,491,700 8,864,700 259,611,200 184,111,000 7,939,900 999,300 193,050,200 292,400 474,139,100 1393,553,900) (243,757,100) 24,1,211,600 (244,211,600) 260,000,000 260,000,000 (74,800,700) (133,553,900) 265,310,100 1265,310,100) 288,284,000 288,284,000 44,526,900 531,044,200 456,243,500 456,243,500 $ 456,243,500 $ 322,689,600 $ 500,770,400 $ 0% (12,245,400) -15% N/A (11,884,30D) -29% 12,555,900) -7% (351,100) -30% 11,475,0001 -13% 11,270,100) -88% 11,583,500) -46% 131,365,300► -11% 161,700 3% 1,672,000 10% (258,700) -5% 1,413,300 6% 3,161,500 25% (8,287,500) -14% 11,596,300 18% 1,575,000 7% 4,103,600 3% (28,779,500) -24% (597,200) -27% (229,500) -1% 363,600 3% (17,093,700) -4% (90,095,000) -49% 1205,000) -2% 11,750,000) -54% (92,050,0001 -46% (522,900) -47% (108,091,600) -16% 76,726,300 -19% 131,796,900) -13% 31,796,900 -13% (75,000,000) -29% (75,000,000) -29% 1,726,300 -I°% 44,526,900 10% $ 46,253,200 14% 65 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 ENDING FUND BALANCE 88,696,000 1,565,600 $ 10,758,600 $ 95,241,400 68,809,900 2,018,4W 26,852,300 5,504,500 28,836,400 790,700 40,000 10,000,000 178,000 502,000 1,333,600 88,384,100 162,481,700 3,519,100 3,658,800 3,967,800 7,626,600 2,705,900 14,959,600 869,300 15,828,900 7,179,200 8,806,600 52,442,600 76,639,600 23,000,000 127,709,300 70,000 30,986,400 14,125,000 97,440,800 333,779,500 187,600 108,774,100 92,300,000 12,405,000 1,500,000 106,205,000 400,000 458,919,300 (20,390,000) (296,437,600) 2,725,700 209,689,000 (1,463,500) (210,951,200) 185,000,000 1,262,200 183, 737,800 (19,127,800) (112,699,800) 120,021,600 380,748,801 100,893,800 $ 268,049,001 66 • Table 17 - Bud et by Governmental Fund Type 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/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 50,000 12,849,200 1,545,600 $ 2,700,000 16,309,900 397,700 1,100,100 178,000 128,000 39,200 $ 103,300,000 $ 52,500,000 28,473,000 33,240,800 652,700 10,000,000 1,499,200 20,902,900 229,665,700 3,088,700 3,136,300 3,269,400 15,349,000 3,085,700 1,751,400 6,355,100 17,100,400 1,340,300 14,645,500 52,442,600 20,139,600 23,000,000 121,389,300 75,846,800 90,000 30,986,400 14,125,000 15,785,100 402,665,200 170,600 25,399,500 423,318,900 (4,496,600) (193,653,200) 2,299,100 98,026,600 (770,000) (26,344,700) 1,529,100 71,681,900 55,200 55,200 6,500,000 6,270,000 12,770,000 242,000 242,000 83,300,000 9,000,000 1,305,000 11,100,000 1,500,000 86,105,000 20,100,000 98,875,000 20,100,000 (98,819,800) (19,858,000) 83,300,000 28,789,000 (180,300,000) (5,000,000) 185,000,000 88,000,000 23,789,000 (2,967,500) (121,971,300) (10,819,800) 3,931,000 10,849,900 423,289,800 21,918,000 44,712,700 7,882,400 $ 301,318,500 $ 11,098,200 $ 48,643,700 67 Table 18 - Hi r hwa , Re tonal Arterial, and Rail Pro rams FY 2010/11 Projects and Operations Bechtel Program Management SCRRA Program Management General TOTAL PROJECTS -GENERAL Highway Engineering 74/21S Interchange 60/21S East Junction HOV Lanes Connector 71/91 Connectors 1-1S Corridor Improvements 1-215 el -county NOV Interim Project 1-215 BI-county Project 1-21S Corridor Improvements (South Segment)/1-15 to Scott Road 1-215 Corn -der Improvement (Central Segment)/Scott Road to Nuevo Read 1-215 Southbound to 1-15 Connector Widening Gap Closure Mld County Parkway SR-79 Realignment 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 La Sierra Station Parking Expansion 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-GO/Valley Way Interchange 60/215 East Junction HOV Lanes Connector 74/215 Interchange 1-21S Corridor Improvements (South Segment)/1-15 to Scott Road 5R-121 City Project SR-74 Curve Widening 5R-91/Green River Interchange Bridge 5R-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 Parking Expansion North Mein Corona Station Parking Structure Perris Valley Line and Other Related Projects Riverside Layover Facility Station Rehabilitation Protects SUBTOTAL RAIL CONSTRUCTION TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL. AND RAIL CONSTRUCTION Highway Design Build SR-91 Corridor Improvements TOTAL HIGHWAY DESIGN BUILD Highway Right Of Way and Land 74/215 Interchange 60/215 East Junction HOV Lanes Connector 1-21S Corridor Improvement (Central Segment)/Scutt Road to Nuevo Road I-21S Corridor Improvments (South Segment)/1-15 to Scott Road Mid County Parkway 5R-74 Curve Widening SR-74/1-15 to 7th Street SR-79 Realignment SR-791rhompson to Oomenigonl 5R-91 Corridor Improvements SR-91 HOV Lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/21S Interchange Coachella Valley MSHCP SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY AND LANO Regional Arterial Right of Way and Land Various Western County TUMF 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 68 • 69 • Commission Policy Goals and Objectives In addition to financial and administration policies, the Commission has seven long-term policy goals: promote mobility, mitigate and address the impact of goods movement, ensure improved system efficiencies, foster environmental stewardship, encourage economic development, support transportation choices through intermodalism and accessibility, and prioritize public and agency communications. For each of these policy goals, the objectives and initiatives that were considered in the framework of the work plan for the FY 2010/11 budget are identified below. While Riverside County grapples with the challenges of a declining real estate market, high unemployment, and an uncertain economy, the need for better transportation remains a top public priority that the Commission is poised to address via the seven policy goals. In moving forward with an aggressive program of projects and services, the Commission will face the challenge of lower Measure A and TDA revenues and uncertainty regarding the availability of federal and state transportation revenues. Due to the long-term nature of many of the Commission's programs, many of the policy goals' objectives and initiatives are ongoing from year to year. Promote Mobility The Commission, in cooperation with local, state, and federal agencies, will strive to create a transportation system that promotes efficient mobility both within the County and region. • Complete projects and programs included in the 1989 Measure A and determine use(s) for any unexpended revenues. • Continue to aggressively pursue completion of the environmental and design processes on key components of the Westem Riverside County Delivery Plan, which includes the SR-91, 1-15, and 1-215 corridor improvement projects. • Continue to develop the toll program consistent with the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan including executing toll program agreements with key regional and state partners namely Caftans, Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), toll operator, California Highway Patrol (CHP), and others. • Continue the preliminary engineering and environmental clearance for the Mid County Parkway and SR-79 realignment projects. • Continue to work with state and federal agencies to fund and construct projects programmed in the STIP, Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP), Proposition 1B bond programs, and Measure A program as well as other high priority regional projects. • Maximize obtaining all available transportation funds and strategically program funds to meet funding deadlines and to prevent the lapse and loss of funds. • Maximize the effective application and use of Western County TUMF funds to deliver eligible Commission priority projects. • Work closely with local jurisdictions to implement the TUMF Regional Arterial Program and facilitate the delivery of arterial improvements in Western County. 70 • Actively participate in the SR-91 Advisory Committee and Riverside Orange Corridor Authority to facilitate near and long-term improvements to SR-91; enhance intercounty public transit options and foster the development of a new corridor between the two counties. • Advocate streamlining efforts at the state and federal levels that will reduce costs, time and delays currently associated with project delivery including, but not limited to, timely project reviews and approvals. • Continue to coordinate and provide public access to commuter information via the newly launched Inland Empire 511 system. • Continue cooperation with the FTA regarding the Small Starts process to support the initiation of the Perris Valley Line commuter rail service in 2012. • Continue to work with the public transit operators to reduce costs and increase system efficiencies in order to accommodate lower revenues from state and federal sources. • Continue to develop a vision of transit service to further promote seamless intracity, intercity, and regional transit connectivity for County residents. Mitigate and Address the Impact of Goods Movement The Commission will work with federal, state, and local governments to facilitate the movement of goods and services to, within, and through the County, recognizing the vital role goods movement mobility plays in the economic health of the County, the State, and the nation. • Seek funding and local agency concurrence to implement the Commission's approved, high -priority railroad grade separation priority list to mitigate the impact of increased goods movement demands on the transportation system. • Remain committed to a regional approach regarding goods movement issues in order to maximize funding from state and federal sources to goods movement needs in Southern California. • Continue working with the Ports and regional transportation commissions to develop a funding mechanism for needed projects and mitigation on a regional basis, including Riverside County. • Continue working with the Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG), Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), OCTA, SANBAG, San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAL), Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC), South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), Mobility 21, and the Coalition for America's Gateway and Trade Corridors to encourage Congress to create a national goods movement program to treat the nation's multimodal national goods movement network as a system rather than individual projects. • • 71 Ensure Improved System Efficiencies The Commission will select projects and allocate funds in a manner that will improve safety and reduce congested traffic corridors. • Advocate the development and use of advanced technologies for transportation applications that are affordable and practical. • In partnership with SANBAG, refine and enhance the recently launched Inland Empire 511 system, which will make real-time traffic information, real-time bus and rail transit trip planning information, and rideshare information available to commuters for the purpose of trip planning and congestion avoidance. • Assure the effectiveness of transit planning through coordination with the Transit Operators Working Group, Citizens' Advisory Committee, and annual SRTP process with a goal toward promoting program productivity, efficiency and effectiveness. • Provide innovative commuter rideshare programs to reduce single occupant vehicle trips and coordinate with other regional rideshare service providers to address intercounty commute trips. • Work with local jurisdictions, Caltrans and the CHP to continue providing a motorist aid system which includes a call box program and an FSP program, including temporary services in freeway construction zones. • Complete construction, in partnership with Caltrans and SANBAG, of the Inland Empire Transportation Management Center. • Leverage resources to incorporate park and ride facilities and additional connecting bus service at Metrolink stations that may have available capacity. Foster Environmental Stewardship The Commission will achieve its mobility goals while promoting environmental stewardship and protecting the area's natural resources and quality of life. • Continue working with the Riverside Conservation Authority (RCA) to implement the Mufti -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). • Work with the SLAG, SCAQMD, sub -regional agencies, and local jurisdictions to implement an RTP that meets regional air quality goals and conformity guidelines. • Support a variety of outreach channels and educational programs that promote the benefits of ridesharing, public and specialized transit, rail, and availability of commuter resources for the purposes of reducing vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled. • Facilitate private/public use of clean fuels technology. • Address new state and federal mandates regarding greenhouse gas emissions, including coordination with local and regional agencies and participation in various forums to develop implementation guidelines. • Continue to develop sustainable and green commuter rail stations and provide upgrades and rehabilitation projects to reduce the environmental impact of the existing stations. 72 Encourage Economic Development • Transportation decisions will consider the economic benefits derived from any improvement, and, where feasible and practical, will pursue transportation alternatives that enhance or complement economic development. • Commit to seek opportunities related to transportation projects that will create jobs and improve the economic base in the County. • Support local agencies in the design and construction of interchanges that are in proximity to regional economic centers and developments. • Support local projects, consistent with countywide transportation goals, which enhance business development, local employment, and area tourism. Support Transportation Choices through Intermodalism and Accessibility County residents will be served, where economically feasible, through the development of transportation alternatives and travel options that consider the needs of a wide range of citizens. • Work with transit providers and local social service agencies to provide specialized transit service to meet a broad spectrum of socio-economic transit needs of seniors and persons with disabilities. • Leverage commuter assistance and freeway service patrol outreach channels in order to increase the awareness of and foster the use of alternative commuting modes. • Implement the Commission's commuter rail SRTP and the Southern Califomia Regional Rail Authority's (SCRRA or Metrolink) plan for commuter rail services with an emphasis on the Perris Valley Line, an extension from Riverside to Perris via Moreno Valley. • Develop a long-range strategic plan for the provision of commuter and/ or passenger rail services in Westem County or Coachella Valley. • Pursue the goals and objectives as outlined in the Coordinated Public Transit - Human Services Transportation Plan (Coordinated Plan) for Riverside County related to a unified, comprehensive but flexible strategy for transportation service delivery to address transportation gaps and/or barriers focusing on unmet transportation needs of elderly individuals, persons with disabilities, and individuals of limited income. • Enhance security, surveillance, and emergency response capabilities of County transit facilities and infrastructure through proactive planning, interagency coordination, and investment. Prioritize Public and Agency Communications The Commission will provide timely, informative, and accurate information to encourage informed public and agency participation in the Commission's decision -making processes. 73 • • Promote a close working relationship with news and civic entities to increase interest and understanding of transportation and related issues. • Enhance the provision of public information through various forms of communication (e.g., website, television, Speakers Bureau, print media, radio, etc). • Maintain an ongoing effort of informing Riverside County's Congressional and State Legislative delegations regarding County transportation issues. • Develop an effective long-range legislative strategy regarding the reauthorization of the federal transportation bill to ensure that the federal government participates as a full partner in funding Riverside County projects that are of national and regional significance. • Advocate for sufficient funding for Riverside County transit and transportation projects from various federal and state revenue sources including, but not limited to, annual federal appropriations, economic recovery programs, STIP, and Proposition 1B bond programs. • Seek legislative flexibility for innovative financing and delivery methods. • Maintain ongoing efforts to educate commuters, businesses, and the public regarding the Commission's toll planning efforts and specific project development efforts currently underway. Financial and Administration Policies Financial Planning Policies • Administrative costs, including salaries and benefits, shall be funded by allocations from Measure A, LTF, FSP, SAFE, and TUMF funds. • The Commission shall budget no more than one percent (1 %) of Measure A sales tax revenues for administrative salaries and benefits. • Administrative program delivery costs will be budgeted at whatever is reasonable and necessary, but not to exceed four percent (4%) of Measure A sales tax revenues (inclusive of the one -percent salary limitation). The Commission shall budget 100% of the annual required contribution related to the postretirement health care benefits. • The Commission shall utilize unexpended 1989 Measure A funds only for projects and programs included in the 1989 Measure A. Sales tax revenues from the 2009 Measure A shall be expended only for projects and programs included in the 2009 Measure A. • Amounts will be budgeted by fiscal year for multi -year projects based on best available estimates with the understanding that, to the extent actuals vary from those estimates and the project is ongoing, adjustments will be made on an continual basis. • The fiscal capital budget should be consistent with the strategic plan and deviations appropriately noted, explained, and justified. • A balanced budget shall be adopted annually with operating and capital expenditures and other financing uses funded by identified revenues and other 74 financing sources as well as available fund balances. Revenue Policies • Sales tax revenue projections will be revised semi-annually to ensure use of current and relevant data. Staff may adjust annual amounts to reflect the most current economic trends. • A strategic application of local funding sources will be used to maximize federal and state funding of projects. • Fiduciary responsibility regarding Western County TUMF revenues shall be exercised, and revenues will be allocated pursuant to Commission direction and the approved 2009 Measure A. Debt Management Policies • The Commission will maintain 2.0x debt ratio coverage on all senior debt. • Debt issuance will be for major capital projects including engineering, right of way, and construction. Debt secured by Measure A revenues may be used to advance projects included in the 2009 Measure A expenditure plan. • Operating requirements, if any, must be paid from current ongoing revenues and may not be financed. • Costs of issuance, including the standard underwriter's discount, will not exceed two percent (2%). • The Commission may enter into interest rate swaps to better manage assets and liabilities and take advantage of market conditions to lower overall costs and reduce interest rate risk. • While it is the intent of the Commission to establish a cash debt reserve for long term bond issuance, surety bonds can be obtained when beneficial to the Commission. • All sales tax revenue debt must mature prior to the termination of 2009 Measure A on June 30, 2039. • The Commission will consider actions to lessen the restriction of the $500 million 2009 Measure A bonding cap, which could include the possibility of an administrative action or ballot measure to increase the cap. Expenditure Accountability Policies • Established priorities for planning and programming of capital projects will be reviewed annually with the Commission. • Actual expenditures will be compared to the budget on at least a quarterly basis, and significant deviations will be appropriately noted, explained, and justified. Reserve Policies • The Commission will maintain program reserves in accordance with Measure A 75 • • and TDA policies and guidelines. • The Commission will establish and maintain a transit operator's reserve of ten percent (10%) for the Coachella Valley and Pala Verde Valley. Additionally, a ten percent (10%) reserve will be established and maintained for each of the Western County transit operators (public bus and commuter rail). • The Commission shall prioritize the use LTF reserves for the purpose of transit operations. • The Commission shall require that transit operators draw down their current capital projects list prior to requesting the use of reserves to match capital grants and have no more than a three year backlog of capital projects. Cash Management and Investment Policies • Where possible, the Commission will encourage receipt of funds by wire transfer to its accounts. • Balances in the bank operating account will be maintained at the amount necessary to meet monthly expenditures. • Idle funds will be invested per the Commission's established investment policy emphasizing in order of priority: 1) safety, 2) liquidity, and 3) yield. • Cash disbursements to local jurisdictions and vendors/consultants will be completed in an expeditious and timely manner. Auditing, Accounting, and Financial Reporting Policies • The Commission will replace its financial software system in order to better integrate project accounting needs and improve accounting efficiency. • The Commission will issue a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) in accordance with the GASB Statement 34 financial reporting model. • An audit is to be conducted annually on the Commission's accounting books and records. As long as the Commission has outstanding bonds, an independent accounting firm must conduct the audit. • The Commission is responsible for ensuring that audits of Measure A and TDA funding recipients are completed and reviewed for compliance and other matters in a timely manner. • An internal audit program will be maintained to identify improvements in controls and procedures as well as best practices. Human Resources Management Policies • Commission staffing levels will be consistent with the intent of its enabling legislation, which envisioned a small, but effective staff. • Contract staff and consultants will be used to augment staff efforts as much as possible to support programs or workloads, which do not appear to be of a permanent nature. Information Technology Management Policies 76 • • Significant effort will be made to maintain efficient and cost-effective technology infrastructure by continuously upgrading network equipment and software to ensure quality performance, productivity, and connectivity among staff, other agencies, and the public. Network security will continue to be a top priority to maintain the integrity of the Commission's network and information. Linking Commission Policy Goals and Departmental Goals and Objectives The following matrix (fable 19) illustrates the linkage of the Commission's overall policy goals described in this section to the individual departmental goals and objectives included in Section 6. Table 19 — Relationship Between Commission and Departmental Goals • 77 • littetion 2 [Mmalmst PErse(stm tmuntym 78 • Budget Process Summary The budget is the primary performance tool used to measure and control accountability of public agencies for taxpayer dollars. The budget communicates to all stakeholders (i.e., elected officials, regional agencies, and citizens) how the investment they made will be put to use by providing detailed information on the specifics of resource allocation and expenditures. Progress is monitored on a monthly basis, and revisions and updates are made as deemed necessary to reflect changing dynamics and accommodating unplanned requests. This results in a budget document that is useful and meaningful as a benchmark against which to evaluate government accomplishments and/or challenges and to assess compliance with fiscal accountability. The budget process consists of six primary tasks conducted in phases throughout the fiscal year. Chart 6 illustrates the budget process for the development of the FY 2010/11 budget and monitoring of the FY 2009/10 budget. A summary of each task is described below. Chart 6 - Bud et Process Short -Term Strategic Direction Phase • The first phase of the budget process is to determine the direction of the Commission in the short-term and to integrate this with the Commission's long-term goals and objectives, including the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan as discussed in Section 6.3. Annually a workshop is held for the policy makers to evaluate and determine where the Commission plans to be and what it desires to accomplish over the next five to ten years. Annual reviews allow for timely responsiveness to any significant political, legislative, or economic developments that may occur locally, statewide, or nationally. Staff then adjusts its course based on the long-term strategic direction of the policy makers. Staff convenes in early January to both assess actual results, compared to the current year budget, and map changes in strategy for the ensuing fiscal year by reviewing and, 79 if necessary, redefining departmental mission statements and setting goals. Those goals, upon review by the Board, become the Commission's short-term strategic direction. Chart 7 depicts the organization of the Commission's oversight and management functions. Chart 7 — Functional Organization Chart FY 2010111 a»:e of Pnrel P,4-r; C.wnn'il l,wry C P'= .,m- aPro' t, [RC Prev.a ...nd PrVlr As P a:.:t nlmpnminlafwn -Yn,fiPi�d 43r.-.vey cutsnev4lv:;vey J E\aoRiw Commi4t, te:nl Ceunncl mum imam mei am am N%e5w .P CR.9 CAutAl Prcg,-417a_ FYufe,l=/. 6101,cPrnera .. Rid Rail Cn•r3liww Repro i. rrompurt:.., Resource Identification and Allocation Phase .Peunmrw.z.:i Simultaneous with the short-term strategic direction phase, staff focuses on what funding sources are available and what monies are estimated as carryover from the current year. In actuality, resource identification occurs throughout the year, but it is finalized in the upcoming fiscal year budget. Amounts to be borrowed are determined as parts of the long-term strategic planning process, but such amounts are adjusted in the annual budget to reflect more current information. • 80 • Needs Assessment Phase Staff and consultants evaluate what projects and studies need to be accomplished. Project priority and sequencing set in the long-term strategic plan are the top candidates for budget submission. However, priorities may have changed due to economic necessities or political realities, resulting in projects being rescheduled by acceleration or postponement. New projects may be added or existing priorities deleted based on Commission direction. Development and Review Phase Using all the data and information gathered from the previously mentioned stages, department heads submit their desired budgets to the Finance Department. The information, along with staff and overhead allocations, is compiled into a preliminary or draft budget. After review by the Executive Director and inclusion of the desired changes, the draft budget is presented to the Board for input. Adoption and Implementation Phase The proposed budget is submitted to the Commission at its May meeting. A hearing is scheduled to allow for public comment on the proposed budget. The Commission may choose, after public hearing, to adopt the budget or to request additional information and/or changes to the budget. The budget must be adopted no later than June 15 of each year. Upon adoption by the Commission, the budget is entered into the accounting system effective July 1 for the next fiscal year. Budget Roles and Responsibilities Involvement in the budget permeates all staffing levels, as presented in Chart 8, at the Commission from clerical support staff to policy makers. Each program manager develops a detailed line item operating and capital budget. Those budgets, by program, are submitted to the department head for review and approval. The department heads submit their budgets to the Chief Financial Officer by mid -March. The Finance Department compiles the department budgets. Both the capital and operating budgets are combined into the draft budget for the entire Commission. The Executive Director reviews the entire budget for overall consistency with both the short- and long-term strategic direction of the Commission, appropriateness of funding sources for the identified projects and studies, and reasonableness of the operating budget expenditures, which should also correspond to the capital budget. Expenditure activities of the funds are controlled at the budgetary unit, which is the financial responsibility level (General, Measure A, Motorist Assistance, LTF, STA, TUMF, Capital Projects, and Debt Service Funds) for each function (i.e., administration, programs, intergovemmental distributions, debt service, capital outlay, and other financing uses). These functions provide the legal level of budgetary control (i.e., the level at which expenditures cannot legally exceed the appropriated amount). 81 Budget -to -actual reports are distributed to program managers and directors on a monthly basis for informational purposes and quarterly for identification and evaluation of any significant budget variations. Management has the discretion to transfer budgeted amounts within the financial responsibility unit according to function or may provide support for supplemental budget appropriations requests. Supplemental requests require the authorization of the Commission. The Commission may take action at any monthly meeting to amend the budget. Those amendments are incorporated into the budget, as they occur, and are reflected in the CAFR in the final budget amounts reported in the budgetary schedules. The Finance Department compiles the data and submits a budget appropriations adjustment at mid -year to the Commission for approval. Chart 8 — Staff Organization Chart FY 2010t11 Legal Ceun..1 Chief Fiaandal Officer Board of Consnlsiionm Executive Cirectar De puty Executive Director Multlmodal Serekes Oitectcr • Project Oeveicpment Director 82 • lived& Cooly Tromporidon Commission 83 • Fund Budgets Budgetary Basis The Commission accounts for its budgeted governmental funds using the modified accrual basis of accounting and the current financial resources measurement focus. The basis of accounting is the same as the basis of budgeting. Revenues are recognized as soon as they are both measurable and available to meet current year obligations. Revenues are considered to be available when they are guaranteed as to receipt, based on expenditure of funds (i.e., government matching funds); or certain to be received within 180 days of the end of the fiscal year. Expenditures are generally recorded when a liability is incurred; however, debt service expenditures are recorded when the payment is due. Total sources and uses by governmental fund type for the FY 2010/11 budget are shown in Chart 9. Chart 9 — Total Sources and Uses by Governmental Fund Type FY 2010/11 • Total Sources 4% ■ Total Uses 3% • Total Sources 41 • Total Uses 36% Fund Structure ■ Total Sources4% ■ Total Uses 3% • Total Sources 51% ■ Total Uses 58% • General Fund • Special Revenue Funds IA Capital Projects Funds ■ Debt Service Fund There are 31 funds (Chart 10) that account for the Commission's budgeted resources and are categorized into four governmental fund types: General fund, special revenue funds, capital projects funds, and Debt Service fund. All of the Commission's funds are budgeted. The number of funds has decreased from the 38 budgeted funds included in the FY 2010/11 budget primarily as a result of the expiration of the 1989 Measure A and the use of all available funds for its local streets and roads as well as Coachella Valley regional arterial, and specialized transit programs. There are four funds reported in the General fund and 24 in the special revenue funds. Two capital projects funds are used to account for capital project expenditures financed with short- or long-term debt proceeds. In addition, the Commission has one Debt Service fund to account for debt - related activity. 84 Chart 10 — Budgeted Funds Structure FY 2010/11 General Fund Overview The General fund of the Commission is used to account for all activities not legally required or designated by Board action to be accounted for separately. For many public agencies, the General fund is the largest fund; however, it is less significant for the Commission. The Commission's largest revenue source is Measure A, a locally levied sales tax that legally must be accounted for separately in special revenue funds. In addition to Commission administration and general operations, other General fund activities include commuter rail operations, planning and programming, and right of way management. The FY 2010/11 budget for the General Fund is presented in Table 20, followed by a discussion of significant components of the budget. • 85 Table 20 — General Fund FY 2009 — 2011 Revenues Measure A Sales Tax S 3,400000 $ 2,700,000 $ 2,700,003 1.7F Sales Tax 13,082,000 28,338,700 16537,400 Federal Reimbursements 3,769,800 1,100,000 943,700 State Reimbursements 944,200 5,343,600 3,525,000 Local Reimbursements 619,400 382,500 1,315,500 Other Revenue 448,500 686,100 30'3,300 Investment income 263 83,600 56,400 TOTAL Revenues 22,527,200 38,634,500 25,387,300 Expenditures Personnel Salary and Benefit Professional and Support Professional Services Support Cost TOTAL Professional and Support Costs Polects and Operations Program Operations - General Right of Way/Land Operating and Capital Disbursement Special Studies TOTAL Projects and Operations 'Debt Service Principal Payments Interest Payments TOTAL Debt Service Capital Outlay TOTAL Expenditures Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers in Transfers Out Net Financing Sources (Uses) Ewes (deficiency) of Revenues Over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) 3,088,Ti00 0% (12,028,800) -42% (702,300) -64% (4,243,500) -79% (204,500) -53% (SAM) -74% 44,400) -53% (17,731,600) -46% 3,101A00 3,365,200 �;,;':;Y.,,�1!d:., (12,700) 0% 2599,500 3,834,100 2,731,700 d - (564,700) -15% 2,393,900 3,152600 3273,200 +',^�r,�!±:' 66900) -2% 6,986,700 6,004900 (631,600) -976 1,420,900 338,400 7,742,000 4,611,300 14,112,600 1,511,300 1,266,300 20,00D 28,193,400 13,430,300 2,06 B00 1,362,200 31,787,300 16A58,80D 15,700 2 300 18,000 334,400 375,500 293,100 22 7,000 42,250,900 25722,000 (170,800) -11% 30,000 150% (15,344,200) -54% (517,200) -25% (16 ,002,200) -50% N/A WA N/A (204,900 -55% (16,851,4001 -40% (19,800) (3,616,400) (334 70D) j- ll,(1880,200) 24% (19,800) 591,100 (14 00) 576,800 1,079,200 1,079.200 (3,039,600) 744,500 1,708,000 289% 55,700) 528.5% 952,300 165% 72,100 -2% Beginning fund Balance I0,125,200 10,105,400 10,105400 744,500 7% ENDING FUND BALANCE $ /0,105,400 $ 7,065,8o0 $ 10,849,900 816.600 12% The sources for the General fund (Chart 11) consist of allocations from Measure A and LTF sales tax revenues and transfers from TUMF and motorist services for administration; LTF sales tax revenues for planning, programming, and monitoring (PPM) activities; LTF Article 4 allocations for commuter rail transit operations and capital; state highway account (SB 45) funding for project planning; various other federal, state and local reimbursements not accounted for in other funds for planning project activities; other revenue from licenses and leases related to right of way management; investment income; and other transfers for rail station maintenance of park and ride facilities and for right of way management related to rail and highway properties. General fund uses are depicted in Chart 12. 86 Chart 11 — General Fund Sources FY 2010/11 Transfers In Other Revenue _10% 1% local Reimbursements 1% State Reimbursements 5% Federal Reimbursements 2% Measure A Sales Tax 11% Measure A sales tax revenues allocated for administration are unchanged from the prior year due to the projected flat Measure A revenues. The administrative allocation may be adjusted at mid -year based on required expenditures, but in no event will exceed four percent (4%) of total Measure A revenues (including administrative salaries and benefits). LTF sales tax revenues from the Local Transportation Fund, a special revenue fund, are allocated to the General Fund for administration, planning staff and studies, and rail transit operations and capital. The changes compared to the prior year budget are for the following reasons: • Planning allocations are set by law at three percent (3%) of estimated LTF sales tax revenues. The FY 2009/10 revised budget includes the effect of the mid -year projection adjustment. This adjustment usually includes the unapportioned carryover amount, which is not determined until after the prior year's fiscal year end, and revised revenue projections. The FY 2010/11 budget reflects a $158,400 projected decrease in such planning allocations. • Transit funding for commuter rail and bus transit operators is tied to sales tax revenues; however, allocations are based on need to the extent that revenues and reserved fund balance are available. The FY 2009/10 budget included approximately $8,800,000 in LTF allocations primarily to fund capital contribution expenditures to SCRRA. There are no LTF allocations for such capital expenditures in the FY 2010/11 budget. • Allocations aggregating $6,750,000 for local jurisdictions' grade separation projects were included in the FY 2009/10 General fund budget. The FY 2010/11 budget includes LTF allocations of $3,841,700 for grade separation projects. • • 87 • Federal reimbursements represent funding for geotechnical studies related to the proposed ICE. These studies were substantially completed in FY 2009/10; however, certain project activities may continue through FY 2010/11 with available federal funding. State reimbursements include STIP revenues to fund PPM activities, which may vary annually. The FY 2009/10 budget included a $4,500,000 allocation from the State Transit Assistance special revenue fund to fund a portion of the increased capital contribution expenditures to SCRRA. Local reimbursements and other revenues represent reimbursements from other local agencies related to the geotechnical studies and a portion of the security costs at the commuter rail stations as well as property lease and license revenues. The FY 2009/10 budget also included a $170,000 grant from WRCOG related to an interregional partnership study. Property -related other revenues are anticipated to decrease almost 50% in FY 2010/11. Chart 12 — General Fund Uses FY 2010/11 Capital Outlay Transfers Out 3% ( 3% Personnel5alaryand Benefits 32% Professional Services 32% Personnel salary and benefits expenditures are comparable to the prior year's budget. Professional and support costs decreased 9% as a result of decreased professional services required for administration, right of way management, rail legal and general matters, geotechnical studies, and regional issues as well as decreased support services for repairs and maintenance of properties and commuter rail stations. Project and operations expenditures decreased 50% primarily because the FY 2009/10 budget included $13,300,000 in rail capital contributions to SCRRA; $6,750,000 in allocations for local jurisdictions' grade separation projects; and special studies related to the ICE geotechnical studies, which were substantially completed during the current fiscal year. The FY 2010/11 budget includes no rail capital contributions to SCRRA and $3,841,700 in allocations for grade separation projects. These decreases were partially offset by a $1,000,000 increase in rail operating contributions to SCRRA for FY 2010/11. 88 Capital outlay expenditures decreased 55% due to fumiture, computer equipment, and ERP and other software purchases in FY 2009/10. The ERP implementation represents a significant portion of the capital outlay expenditures in FY 2010/11. The increase in transfers in is primarily due to updates to the administrative cost allocation methodology to ensure that all programs are supporting a fair share of administrative costs. The transfer out of $770,000 is from right of way management lease revenues to the 1989 Measure A Western County Highways special revenue fund related to the 60/215 East Junction HOV lanes connector project. Special Revenue Funds Overview The Commission's special revenue funds are legally restricted as to use for Measure A projects and programs, TUMF projects, motorist assistance services, and funding of Riverside County transit operations and capital. The special revenue funds' budgets are summarized in Table 21, and individual budgets are presented in Tables 22 through 29 along with respective discussions. • • 89 • Table 21- Special Revenue Funds FY 2009 - 2011 Revenues Measure A Sales Tax $ 116,288,30D $ 103,300,000 $ 103,300,000 ?_ $ 0% LTF Sales Tax 59,977,700 52,716,600 52,500,000 216,600) 0% STASales Tax 4,860,800 � N/A Federal Reimbursements 46,922,900 39,655,000 16,464,350 (11,182,000) -28% State Reimbursements 51,726,100 31,553,200 21,919,000 - °` --+i - 1,687,600 5% Local Reimbursements 684,000 739,300 1,059,95D lives k (146,600) -18% TUMF Revenue 10,957,400 11,475,000 6,673,000 , + ' (1,475,000) -13% Other Revenue 3,951,460 762,000 r + (762,000) 400% Investment Income 11,035,600 3,073,900 2,850,000 + 33.M (1,574,700) -51% TOTAL Revenues 306,404,200 243,335,000 204,766,300 4 <, ad ?' (13,669,3001 •6% Expenditures Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional and Support Professional Services Support Costs TOTAL Professional and Support Costs Projects and Operations 2,359,600 2,961,900 2,793,200 ,_ ,.'r,'..; j?, 174,400 6% 1,786,100 12,244,200 7,451,900 +`f e' 3,104,800 25% 945,500 1,943,200 1,165,300 y"gym 2,731,600 14,187,400 8,617,200 `_; , +, :'• 2,913,000 21% Program Operations - General 10,165,500 11,313,200 10,373,700 Engineering 29,782,600 60,730,100 46.193,600 Construction 75,886,800 56,053,300 22,869,300 Design Build 21,425,000 1,200,000 Right of Way/land 47,165,400 115,585,700 35,165,000 Operating and Capital Disbursements 82,302,700 03,282,100 71,643,000 Special Studies 188,400 170,000 50,000 Local Streets and Roads 45,655,500 31,215,900 31,491,700 RegbnalArteriab 10,640,300 13,761,400 8,864,700 TOTAL Projects and Operations 301,787,200 399,536,700 227,851,000 Debt Service Principal Payments Interest Payments TOTAL Debt Service Capital Outlay TOTAL Expenditures Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers out Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Finandng Sources (Uses) (29,949,500) (130,893,400) (10,380,100N 8,922,100 -7% N/A Beginning fund Balance 463,619,400 433,669,900 433,669,900 ' '.-" (10,380,1001 .2% ENDING FUND BALANCE 5 433,669,900 $ 302,776500 $ 423,289,800 's!- ++'r $ (1,458,000) 0% 3,332,300 29% 18,287,500) -14% 14,086,300 25% 1,575,000 7% 5,803,600 5% (13,435,300) -15% (80,000) 47% (229,500) -1% 363,600 3% 3,128,500 1% Roo N/A 100 6,500,000 c (6,500000) -100% 900 6,500,000 �Ih + (6,500,000) -100% 604,400 735,000 (700) i�iu I� firs (318,000) 43% 307,483,700 423,921,000 239,260,700 „4 i3 i (602,100) 0% (1,079,500) (180,586,000) (34,494,400) ..:. . ` k a;, i�i}. 113,067,200) 7% 15,238,100 60,798,900 41,735,600 -� °-+ h 37,227,700 61% (44,108,100) (11,106,300) (17,621,300) } �� +r'=. (15,238,400) 137% (28,870,000) 49,692,600 24,114,300 21,989,300 44% Measure A sales tax, LTF sales tax, Westem County TUMF, state budgetary allocations, and vehicle registration fees are all accounted for in the 24 special revenue funds. Federal, state, and local reimbursements and transfers in of debt proceeds are used to supplement the Measure A sales tax revenues. Chart 13 illustrates the various special revenue fund sources. 90 Chart 13 — Special Revenue Funds Sources FY 2010/11 Investment Income 0% TUMF Revenue 3% Local Reimbursements O% State Reimbursements 10% Federal Reimbursements 9% The special revenue funds' resources are expended on County highway, rail, regional arterial, and new corridors engineering, right of way acquisition, and construction; local streets and roads maintenance, repair, and construction; economic development incentives; bond financing; bicycle and pedestrian facilities; education and incentive programs to encourage use of alternate modes of transportation; special social service transportation programs; public transit operations and capital needs; and motorist towing and freeway call box assistance. As shown in Chart 14, projects and operations expenditures represent the primary use of special revenue fund resources. Chart 14 — Special Revenue Funds Uses FY2010/11 PersonnelSalary and Transfers Out Benefits 6% 1% Capital Outlay 0% Professional Services 3% Support Costs 0% • 91 • Measure A Special Revenue Funds Of the special revenue funds, 19 are funded primarily with Measure A sales tax revenue which is allocated to the three geographic areas of the County (Chart 15). The Measure A funds are comprised of four 1989 Measure A and ten 2009 Measure A Westem County operating funds, one 1989 Measure A and three 2009 Measure A Coachella Valley operating funds, and one 2009 Measure A Palo Verde Valley operating fund. Chart 15 — Measure A Sales Tax Revenues by Geographic Area Palo Verde r Valley 1% Since the 1989 Measure A terminated on June 30, 2009, the remaining 1989 Measure A operating funds will be closed upon the completion of the specific projects and programs. With the commencement of the 2009 Measure A on July 1, 2009, the 14 operating funds will be in existence for the 30-year term. These funds account for all Measure A project and program expenditures and transfers of debt proceeds for capital projects. The Measure A special revenue funds expend monies on capital construction and improvements to highways, commuter rail, regional arterials, new corridors, and local streets and roads. Funding is also reserved for commuter assistance, public and specialized transit, and economic development incentives programs as well as bond financing costs. The Commission is a self-help county, and, as such on major highway projects, the Commission supplements the State's spending. Upon completion of the highway projects, Caltrans takes over the maintenance and operations of the projects. All revenues from the Measure A sales tax have been pledged as security for the Commission's senior sales tax revenue bonds and commercial paper notes. Debt service on the bonds is recorded in the Debt Service fund, and most of the resources for the cash payments are provided through transfers out by the Measure A special revenue funds for the 2009 Measure A bonds. Debt service for the commercial paper notes is recorded in a capital projects fund, as the notes will be paid from 2009 Measure A sales tax revenues or retired with proceeds from sales tax revenue bonds. 92 Western County Measure A Operating Funds The Western County Measure A Operating special revenue funds account for Westem County's approximately 75% share of the Measure A sales tax. As demonstrated in Table 22, most of the Commission's reimbursements flow through these funds, since the sales tax leverages state and federal dollars. Table 22 — Western County Measure A Operating Funds FY 2010 — 2011 Sources Measure A Sales Tax Bond Finandng $ 6,252,000 Commuter Assistance 1,157,300 Economic Development Incentives 917,000 Highways 23,607,000 Local Streets and Roads 22,448,000 New Corridors 8,561,000 Public Bus Transit 1,180,500 Rail 4,721,800 Regional Arterials 6,944,000 Specialized Transit 1,967,400 Total Measure A 77,756,000 LTF Sales Tax 216,600 Federal Reimbursements 38,307,000 State Reimbursements 28,077,400 Local Reimbursements 530,800 TUMF Revenue 6,475,000 Other Revenue 762,000 Investment Income 1,530,900 Transfers In 53,575,200 TOTAL Sources 207,230,900 Uses Personnel Salary and Benefits 2,493,000 Professional Services 11,595,500 Support Costs 1,589,100 Projects and Operations Program Operations- General 8,691,200 Engineering 51,916,600 Construction 39,250,000 Design Build 21,425,000 Right of Way/Land 93,790,700 Operating and Capital Disbursements 5,792.200 Special Studies 170,000 Local Streets and Roads 22,448,000 TOTAL Projects and Operations 233,483,700 Debt Service Interest Payments 6,500,000 Capital Outlay 735,000 Transfers Out 1,882,900 TOTAL Uses 258,279,200 Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ (51,048,300) (29,ODm 0% (5,300) 0% (4,000) 0% (109,000) 0% (105,000) 0% (39,000) 0% (5,400) 0% (21,400) 0% (32,000) 0% (8,900) 0% (359,000) 0% (216,600) -100% (10,195,500) -27% 1,194,000 4% (8,400) -2% (1,475,000) -23% (762,000) -10096 (612,100) 40% 37,194,800 69% 24,760,200 1296 271,300 11% 3,207,400 28% (787,700) -50% 2,593,400 30% (8,370,700) -16% 17,117,000 44% 1,575,000 7% 3,623,400 4% (1,982,200) -34% (80,000) 47% (105,000) 0% 14,370,900 6% (6,500,000) -100% (318.000) -43% 19,247,100 1022% 29,491,000 11% (4,730,800) 9% The budgeted Measure A sales tax revenues are comparable to the prior year; however, taxable sales changes periodically impact the geographic allocation formula. FY 2009/10 LTF sales tax revenues were related to funding for a rail capital project. • 93 • The increase in federal reimbursements is primarily attributable to American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funding of $10,000,000 for the 74/215 interchange project construction. State reimbursements reflect increased STIP and Proposition 1B Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) funding for various highway and rail projects. TUMF revenue represents reimbursements from TUMF zone funds administered by WRCOG for the 74/215 interchange construction and right of way acquisition. Prior year other revenue represented local contributions from the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) for the Perris Station Transit Center, which was completed in FY 2009/10. Investment income is expected to decrease as a result of the use of available 1989 Measure A Western County fund balance for remaining project and program expenditures as well as declining investment yields. As in prior years, a significant portion of transfers in consists of debt proceeds primarily from commercial paper notes as well as sales tax revenue bonds to fund 2009 Measure A Western County highway projects. Other transfers in include funding from available 1989 Measure A debt service reserve funds for a rail capital project and from right of way management accumulated lease proceeds for the 60/215 East Junction HOV lanes connector project. Measure A Westem County professional services expenditures in FY 2010/11 consist of general legal services for the various programs and capital projects, specialized legal and financial advisory services related to the SR-91 and 1-15 corridor improvement projects, other professional services for rail capital and commuter assistance projects, and liquidity facility and professional fees related to the Commission's debt programs. Support costs comprise operations and advertising for the commuter assistance program and maintenance and repairs for the commuter rail station rehabilitation and security projects. The 30% increase in general program operations is due to SCRRA program management related to the Perris Valley Line project. Many of the Commission's Westem County rail and highway projects funded by Measure A have been in the project development phase for several years and are now at or near the construction phase. Such projects include the 74/215 interchange, 60/215 East Junction HOV lanes connector, 1-215 south segment corridor improvements, and Perris Valley Line. As a result, engineering expenditures in the FY 2010/11 budget will be 16% lower than the prior year, while construction expenditures will be 44% higher. For other projects such as the SR-91, 1-15, and 1-215 central segment corridor improvements and Riverside layover facility, engineering and environmental work will continue. Design -build activities related to the SR-91 corridor improvements will increase in FY 2010/11 with the design -build procurement. Right of way acquisition is another major project activity for which the process can be lengthy. Significant right of way acquisitions include the SR-91 corridor improvements, SR-91 HOV lanes, and Perris Valley Line. The 34% decrease in operating and capital disbursements is due to reduced allocations for Westem County intercity bus service and specialized transit expenditures funded by the 2009 Measure A. 94 In FY 2009/10, interest payments were included in debt service expenditures, whereas $14,200,000 for debt service principal and interest is included in transfers out in FY 2010/11. Other transfers out include funding for right of way property management activities and maintenance of park and ride facilities at certain commuter rail stations and for SR-79 related projects aggregating $580,000 and $6,350,000, respectively. Coachella Valley Measure A Operating Funds These special revenue funds account for Coachella Valley's 24% share of the Measure A sales tax. Table 23 — Coachella Valley Measure A Operating Funds FY 2010 — 2011 Sources Measure A Sales Tax Highways & Regional Arterials $ 12,380,000 Local Streets and Roads 8,666,000 Specialized Transit 3,714,000 Total Measure A 24,760,000 Investment Income 46,300 TOTAL Sources 24,806,300 Uses Personnel Salary and Benefits 8,000 ii ,' G (5,700) -71% Professional Services 3,000 _ r'r� f (3,000) -100% Support Costs 1,000 (1,000) -100% Projects and Operations Program Operations - General 16,300. z 17,700 109% Construction 6,719,300 a b 1 S t'a' (6,093,900) -91% Operating and Capital Disbursements 3,714,000 ` Yx tsi2F i' 59,000 2% Local Streets and Roads 8,161,000 ^„T d`u (31,400) 0% Regional Arterials 13 761,400 w r r 238,600 2% TOTAL Projects and Operations 32,372,000 "��r< i �`�< � �,�`�' (5,810,000) -18% Transfers Out 1,556,500 u x 796,300 51% TOTAL Uses 33,940,500 fi (5,023,400) -15% Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ (9,134,200)_`'.`'13I _,..., 7'ar $ 5,374,400 -59% 197,000 2% 137,000 2% 59,000 2% 393,000 2% (42,000) -91% 351,000 1% As shown in Table 23, total sources for the Coachella Valley operating funds are comparable to the prior year's budget. While overall Measure A sales tax revenues are basically unchanged, taxable sales changes among the geographic areas do impact the geographic allocation formula. The Coachella Valley construction expenditures for FY 2009/10 reflect the carryover of project funding for the remaining 1989 Measure A Coachella Valley highway projects. Operating and capital disbursements represent specialized transit funds distributed to SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine) for transit operations. Local streets and roads comprise tumback payments to local jurisdictions net of transfers out for debt service. Regional arterial projects are highway and regional arterial projects managed by CVAG. • 95 • Transfers out are related to debt service for 2009 Measure A debt issued for CVAG highway and regional arterial projects and city of Indio local streets and. roads projects under advance funding agreements. Palo Verde Valley Measure A Operating Fund This special revenue fund accounts for Palo Verde Valley's 1 % share of the Measure A sales tax. Table 24 - Palo Verde Valle Measure A Operating Fund FY 2010 - 2011 Sources Measure A Sales Tax Local Streets and Roads $ 784,000 ' $ (34,000) -4% Total Measure A 784,000 .y k" (34,000) -4% $} Investment Income 700 �, , -i (700) -10076 TOTAL Sources 784,700°r ,x,,-_F�r,, swq'1 (34,700) -4% Uses Projects and Operations Local Streets and Roads 606,900 i # �' ' (93,100) -15% TOTAL Projects and Operations 606,900 - r" r r a (93,100) -15% Transfers Out 177,100' i� a; � �r<aa,°59,100 33% TOTAL Uses 784,000 �i�ty Is"� (34,000) -4% Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ 700 k $ (700) -100% The Measure A sales tax revenues are affected by the impact of shifts in taxable sales changes on the geographic allocation formula as well as the overall changes in Measure A sales tax revenue levels. In the Palo Verde Valley, expenditures are for local streets and roads; however, transfers out relate to debt service for the city of Blythe local streets and roads projects under an advance funding agreement. Non -Measure A Special Revenue Funds The non -Measure A special revenue funds account for LTF disbursements, TUMF Western County project costs, motorist assistance expenditures for towing service as well as freeway call boxes and Inland Empire 511 system operations, and transit disbursements from STA. These activities are budgeted in the LTF, TUMF, FSP, SAFE, and STA special revenue funds, respectively. Local Transportation Fund The LTF special revenue fund derives its revenue from one quarter of one cent of the state sales tax that is returned to source and provides for funding of public transit operations in the County, bicycle and pedestrian facility projects, planning, and administration (Table 25). 96 Table 25 — Local Transportation Fund FY 2010 — 2011 Sources LTF Sales Tax $ 52,500,000 Investment Income 627,900 TOTAL Sources 53,127,900 Uses Projects and Operations Operating and Capital Disbursements 72,813,900 x (10,389,600) -14% TOTAL Projects and Operations 72,813,900 1 w� '� '�° ! (10,389,600) -14% TOTAL Uses 72,813,900 ? �"��' � �= ; a� ,�t; (10,389,600) -14% Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ (19,686,000);„ `. .: °',a',",r .'.1` $ 10,027,000 -51% (362,600) (362,600) 0% -58% -1% The LTF sales tax revenue in FY 2010/11 is projected to be unchanged. Investment income is expected to decrease significantly due to declining yields on investments and cash balances resulting from the use of a portion of available fund balance for FY 2010/11 expenditure requirements. In FY 2010/11, approximately 92% and 8% of the LTF transit expenditures of $57,362,000 are for operating and capital purposes, respectively. The actual allocations will not be approved until July 2010. Planning and administration expenditures of $2,402,300 represent allocations to the General fund. The remaining expenditures of $2,660,000 relate to allocations to local jurisdictions for bicycle and pedestrian facility projects. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Fund The TUMF fund accounts for the Commission's share of developer fee assessments on new residential and commercial developments in Western County for regional arterials and CETAP corridors (Table 26). • • 97 • • Table 26 — Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Fund FY 2010 — 2011 Sources Federal Reimbursements $ 1,173,000 Local Reimbursements 125,000 TUNIF Revenue 5,000,000 Investment biome 606,900 Transfers In 6,790,000 TOTAL Sources 13,694,900 Uses Personnel Salary and Benefits 319,900 : 'ii (29,300) -9% Professional Services 241,000 r r,3;R (51,000) -21% Support Costs 1,500 `i� ` 1,900 127% Projects and Operations Program Operations- General 116,700 ` " Kv 141,200 121% Engineering 8,813,500 r r 83,200 1% Construction 10,084,000 ' a 3,1163,200 30% Right of Way/Land 31,795,000 F 2,180,200 7% Regional Arterials / TOTAL Projects and Operations ui6i(, � 125 000 N A Pe SLt,804,200 , w „ _ G 5,592,800 11% Transfers Out 7,035,100 w r (5,672,900) -81% TOTAL Uses 58,406,700 ' ` �, r (158,500) 0% Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses S (44,711,800)' $ (1,980,800) 4% (1,173,000) -100% (125,000) -100% 0% (401,300) -66% (440,000) 6% (2,139,300) -16% TUMF revenue is projected to remain unchanged due to the weakened housing market. Prior year federal revenues relate to federal reimbursements on the SR-79 realignment project. The transfers in for FY 2010/11 relate to funding from the 2009 Measure A Westem County highways of $4,250,000 for SR-79 realignment right of way acquisition and from the 1989 Measure A Western County highways in the amount of $2,100,000 for an SR-79 regional arterial project. In the prior year, the transfer in was related to an intrafund borrowing that was not required. General program operations increased significantly because of more program management services required for the SR-79 realignment and Mid County Parkway projects. Approximately 86% of the projects and operations costs are attributable to programmed regional arterial projects, including the SR-79 realignment project. The remaining 14% relates to CETAP projects such as the Mid County Parkway preliminary engineering and right of way acquisitions. Transfers out in FY 2010/11 represent administrative allocations to the General fund and funding for right of way property management related to projects acquired for the Mid County Parkway. The prior year transfers out pertained to intrafund borrowings between the regional arterials and CETAP to fund regional arterial projects; however, the transfers were not required. Freeway Service Patrol Fund The FSP fund accounts for the state and local resources provided to cover the costs of servicing stranded motorists in covered service areas and construction zones by means of towing, changing tires, and providing fuel (Table 27). 98 Table 27 — Freeway Service Patrol Fund FY 2010 — 2011 Sources State Reimbursements $ 2,025,800 493,600 24% Local Reimbursements 83,500 7 u=, +._ 0% Investment Income 5,700 g i (2,700) 47% Transfers In 433,700 j 472,900 109% TOTAL Sources 2,548,700 963,800 38% Uses Personnel Salary and Benefits 109,200 x m r (37,500) -34% Professional Services 13,200 0% Support Costs 36,800 �, 15,800 43% Projects and Operations Program Operations- General 2,383,800 " '; T + 566,200 24% TOTAL Projects and Operations 2,383,800 a 566,200 24% Transfers Out 14,000 NS F 194,200 1387% TOTAL Uses 2,557,000, __ 3 s 738,700 29% Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ (8,300); T ?i"' $ 225,100 -2712% While the state's funding share of the covered service areas of $1,768,200 is comparable to the prior year, state reimbursements related to towing service in construction zones is expected to more than double as a result of an increase in Caltrans construction projects on County highways. Transfers in from the SAFE special revenue fund are expected to increase in FY 2010/11 primarily because of the Commission's construction projects on County highways. The increase in operating costs for the towing service in FY 2010/11 is related to the additional towing services required for the construction zones. Transfers out are administrative allocations to the General fund. Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies Fund The SAFE fund accounts for the $1 per vehicle registration fee levied on all registered vehicles within the County. It funds the installation and implementation of emergency aid call boxes located strategically on the highways throughout the County as well as the operations of the recently implemented Inland Empire 511 system (Table 28). 99 • Table 26 — Service Auth • for Freeway Eme s encies Fund FY 2010 — 2011 Sources Federal Reimbursements $ 175,000 State Reimbursements 1,450,000 Local Reimbursements 60,000 Other Revenue Investment Income 60,700 TOTAL Sources 1,745,700 Uses Personnel Salary and Benefits 31,800 Professional Services 391,200 Support Costs 314,800 Projects and Operations Program Operations - General TOTAL Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL Uses Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ 462,000 186,509 (13,200) 107% 0% -22% N/A -52% 8% (24,400) .77% (48,600) -12% 579,200 184% 105,200 ''.' 13,800 13% 105,200 • Pr:i 13,800 13% 440,700 ;_ 614,600 139% 1,283,700 , : a i� = 1,134,600 88% (992,800) -215% Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) federal reimbursements represent the pass -through funds from SANBAG as its share of the Inland Empire 511 system operating costs. Other miscellaneous reimbursements include recoveries from call box knockdowns, which service is provided by a collection agency. Professional services related to the call boxes reflect a $232,200 decrease, which is offset by an $183,600 increase for the 1E511 system operations. Call box equipment maintenance reflected in support costs decreased $60,000 due to the completion of technology upgrades and other call box site -related improvements; however, support costs of $633,000 consisting primarily of communications and advertising related to the 1E511 system are included in the FY 2010/11 budget. The transfers out to the FSP special revenue fund reflect a matching contribution from SAFE funding to the State's contribution for towing services. State Transit Assistance Fund The STA fund accounts for the state budgetary allocation of gas tax revenues designated for rail and bus transit operations and capital requirements (Table 29). The allocation is based on estimates of gas tax revenues provided by the Controller of the State of California, subject to an annual state budget appropriation. Due to the State's budget issues, the STA allocations beginning in FY 2009/10 were suspended. 100 Table 29 —State Transit Assistance Fund FY 2010 — 2011 Sources Investment Income $ 194,800 ',fiy $ (121,800) -63% TOTAL Sources 194,800 _ a !A$ (121,800) -63% i Uses Professional Services 300 ,. 0% Projects and Operations Operating and Capital Disbursements 6,962,000'-`^ (1,122,500) -16% TOTAL Projects and Operations 6,962,000 ' (1,122,500) -16% TOTAL Uses 6,962,300 ;,..: (1,122,500) -16% Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ (6,767,500) -; i k z°.«) $ 1,000,700 -15% Investment income is expected to decrease significantly because of declining yields on investments and cash balances due to the use of available fund balance for expenditures and suspension of state allocations. The FY 2009/10 and FY 2010/11 consist of allocations primarily for Western County bus and rail capital purposes, as available funds for Coachella Valley and Palo Verde Valley are minimal. Similar to the LTF allocations, the actual STA allocations will not be approved until July 2010. Capital Projects Funds Overview The capital projects funds account for all debt proceeds from commercial paper notes and sales tax revenue bonds (Table 30). 101 • Table 30 - Capital Projects Funds FY 2009 — 2011 Revenues Investment Income $ 580,100 $ 10500 $ 32,100 x - - ".! $ 44,700 426% TOTAL Revenues 580,100 10,500 32,100 . 44,700 426% Expenditures Professional and Support Profess -anal Servkes 1,219,000 868,100 404,700 rt :<+ (868,100) -300% Support Costs 2,500 - 100� -. N/A TOTAL Professional and Support Costs 1,221500 868,100 404,800 (868,100) •100% Projects and Operations Engineering 20,505,000 - 5,201,400 - N/A Construction 3,907,600 8,990,000 3,500,000 .s� _'. � eia`; (2,490,000) -28% r Right of Way/Land 58,397,800 8,000,000 7,000,000 a r s� � "+'i (1,730,000) -22% TOTAL Projects and Operations 82,810,400 16,990,000 15,701,400 '� ,,. ;' (4,220,000) -25% Debt Service Principal Payments 50,000,000 180,111,000 7' + �" ,Si �'�e i 33,300,000 67% Interest Payments 4,331,400 3,110,000 3,439,900 (1,805,000) -58% Cast of Issuance 3,250,000 999,300 " �a ays�i: (1,750,000) -54% TOTAL Debt Service 4,331400 56,360,000 184,550,200 '' 29,745,000 53% TOTAL Expenditures 88,363,300 74,218,100 200,656,400 v �'-s.2, ).,.._ 24,656,900 33% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures (87,783,200) 174,207,600) (200,624,300) _. ^?,? F`�'° 124,612,200) 33% Other Flnaming Sources (Uses) Transfers In • 50,000,O00 196,408,300 ) �+ 33,300,000 67% Transfers Out (2,298,200) (233,091,000) (232,246,000) " � < ere ..�or'�S, 52,791,000 -23% Debt Proceeds 53,716,000 260,000,003 288,284,000 �r j� (75,000,000) -29% Net Financing Sources (Uses) 51,417,800 76,909,000 252,446,300 j' ' H's= 11,091,000 14% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) (36,365,400) 2,701,400 51,822,000 " ¢ka +a h!sli 113,521,2001 -501% Beginning Fund Balance 6,461,400 129,904,000) (29,904,000) wo v.?'t ' 51,822,000 -173% ENDING FUND BALANCE' $ (29,904,000) $ (27,102,600) $ 21,918,000 ,vry ���a�.(, n,1r"� $ 38,300,800 -141% As illustrated in the following charts, capital projects funds sources primarily consist of debt proceeds and transfers in (Chart 16) and the significant uses of the capital projects funds are debt service and transfers out (Chart 17). In March 2005 a commercial paper program was established to advance project development and land and right of way acquisition related to the 2009 Measure A projects. During FY 2010/11, the Commission anticipates the issuance of $50,000,000 in additional commercial paper notes whereas the FY 2009/10 budget included $75,000,000. In October 2009, the Commission issued $185,000,000 in variable rate sales tax revenue bonds (2009 Bonds) in connection with the commencement of two interest rate swaps. This issuance retired a portion of the outstanding commercial paper notes and refunded the 2008 sales tax revenue bonds for $126,395,000. The Commission anticipates the issuance of approximately $135,000,000 in fixed rate sales tax revenue bonds in November 2010 (2010 Bonds) to retire a portion of the commercial paper notes and fund 2009 Measure A highway projects. 102 Transfers in represent bond proceeds used to retire commercial paper notes and, in FY 2009/10, to also refund the 2008 bonds. The transfers in related to the refunding were originally budgeted in the debt service fund. Chart 16 - Capital Projects Funds Sources FY 2010/11 Commercial paper proceeds will continue to fund Coachella Valley highway and regional arterial projects and land mitigation subject to an advance funding agreement as well as debt service interest on outstanding commercial paper notes. Proceeds from the 2010 Bonds will be used for debt service purposes to retire $83,300,000 in commercial paper notes and to pay the costs of issuance related to the 2010 Bonds. • In FY 2009/10, the projected debt service included the refunding of the 2008 bonds, which transactions was originally budgeted in the debt service fund. A significant use of the commercial paper and bond proceeds is transfers out of $85,000,000 to the 2009 Measure A Westem County Highway Fund for projects. Additionally $12,000,000 of the 2010 Bonds proceeds will be transferred out to the Debt Service fund to establish a debt service reserve for the 2010 Bonds and to the Commercial Paper capital projects fund to retire $83,300,000 in commercial paper notes. • • 103 • • • Chart 17 — Capital Projects Funds Uses FY2010/11 Projectsand Operations 4% Debt Service Fund Overview Under the 2009 Measure A program, the Commission has the authority to issue bonds subject to a debt limitation of $500,000,000. The debt service fund of the Commission is used to account for all activities related to the sales tax revenue bonds debt incurred by the Commission (Table 31). The Commission's largest single expenditure is debt service. The debt agreements require the trustee to hold all debt proceeds and a portion of the sales tax revenues and to segregate all funds into separate amounts. These monies are included in the restricted investments held by trustee in the capital projects funds and the Debt Service fund. Under the agreements, the Commission may use sales tax revenues for any lawful purpose related to the Riverside County TIP after the trustee has satisfied debt service requirements. In order to advance project development activities, the Commission established a $185,000,000 commercial paper program in 2005. A portion of the commercial papers issued since the program was established has been retired periodically with sales tax revenue bonds issued in FY 2007/08 and FY 2009/10. 104 Table 31— Debt Service Fund FY 2009 — 2011 Revenues hrvestment Income TOTAL Revenues Expenditures Debt Service Principal Payments 33,630,000 332,395,000 4,000,000 r ,.`= s a �<, (123,395,0001 -93% Interest Payments 7,693,100 3,000,000 4500,000 `Yj 8,100,000 270% TOTAL Debt Service 41,323,100 135,395,600 8 * (315,295,000) -85% TOTAL Expenditures 41,323,100 135,395,000 8,500,000 " $ 1,688,900 $ 251,103 $ 196,300 19,100) -4% 1,688,900 251,103 196,300 ..._==ib l' '.`i 19,100) -4% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures (39,634,200) 1135,143,900) (8,303,700) Other Finandng Sources (Uses) Transfers In 31,303,160 132,821,600 26,087,000 i 4 (104,032,600) -78% Transfers Out (134,900) (15,442,M) a9 '. 15,000,000) N/A Net Financing Sources (Uses) 31,168,203 132,821,600 10,644,200 , '? ,•;� 1109,032,600) -82% 115,285,903 -85% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over {under) Expenditures and Other financing Sources (Uses) (8,466,000) 12,322,300) 2,340,500 �. ' ;,;� � 6,253,300 -26996 Beginning Fund Balance 50,838,200 42,372,200 42,372,200 ENDING FUNDBAWNCE $ 42,372,200 $ 40,049,900 $ 44,712,700 2,340,500 6% $ 8,593,800 21% Transfers in represent the primary source of the Debt Service fund (Chart 18). Transfers in consist of bond proceeds to establish a debt service reserve for the 2010 bonds and Measure A funds from the 2009 Measure A Western County Highways, Coachella Valley Highways and Regional Arterials, and Palo Verde Valley Local Streets and Roads special revenue funds for debt service payments on the sales tax revenue bonds. The FY 2010/11 budget included transfers in related to the refunding of the 2008 bonds. Chart 18 — Debt Service Fund Sources FY 2010/11 Investment Income 1% 105 Debt Service fund uses (Chart 19) consist of debt service on the sales tax revenue bonds as well as a transfer out of $5,000,000 from excess 1989 Measure A debt reserves to the 1989 Measure A Western County Rail Capital special revenue fund for a rail project. Chart 19 — Debt Service Fund Uses FY 2010/11 106 • Rime County Trill *settee 4 107 Revenues and Other Sources Total revenues and other sources are budgeted at $648,280,500 and consist of Measure A sales tax of $106,000,000 (or 16°% of total sources); LTF sales tax of $68,809,900 (or 11 % of total sources); federal revenues of $28,870,700 (or 4°% of total sources); state revenues, including vehicle registration fees, of $34,340,900 (or 5% of total sources); TUMF of $10,000,000 (or 2°% of total sources); debt proceeds of $185,000,000 (or 29% of total sources); transfers in of $212,414,700 (or 33% of total sources) and other revenues of $2,844,300. The specific revenue funding sources are shown in Table 32. Table 32 — Revenues and Other sources FY 2010/11 Management 5enkes $ 2,700,000 $ 700,000 s MEASURE A AND OTHER CAPITAL PROGRAMS Mond Rondos 4221000 CETAP Economic Development 913,000 ri 36.075,000 Local Streets and Roads 31,896,000 New Corridors 8,522,000 Rail 4,200,400 RegionalArteriab 6,912900 IiginofWay Management _ REGIONAL PROGRAMS Public and Waked Transit - 6,906,603 52,500990 Plarming and Programming 5,416,700 Rail Station Malnomame/Operations 10,193,200 Can nuterAssistance 1,152900 Motorist Assistance OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Debt Proceeds Transfers In TOTAL Funding Sources J000,4700 $ 68,809.900 S -s -s - $ $ 18,900 MOO 2,705,000 9,100 27,195.900 16,852,300 5.837,700 85,500 1.640,500 10,000,000 172,500 2,559,700 178,300 313,200 1,100,100 367,700 71,500 • 30,000 126,500 435.000 1.259.200 530,100 3,969A00 361,500 162,500 - 185,000,000 - 212,414,700 34,340,900 $ 28,870,700 $ 410,259,000 Revenues --Definitions and Background Measure A: Measure A is a one-half of one percent transactions and use tax that was first approved by Riverside County voters in 1988 and expired on June 30, 2009 after a 20-year term. On November 5, 2002, the voters of Riverside County approved the renewal of Measure A through 2039. The 2009 Measure A is expected to raise more than $6.7 billion (in nominal dollars) during its lifespan. The amount raised by the Measure A levy has increased as the County and its economic base have grown during the past two decades, peaking in FY 2005/06 at $157 million. As a result of the recent economic slowdown, Measure A revenues have decreased and are projected to approximate $106,000,000 in FY 2009/10 and FY 2010/11. 108 Measure A requires that all sales taxes collected may only be used for transportation purposes including administration and the construction, capital acquisition, maintenance, and operation of streets, roads, highways, including state highways and public transit systems and for related purposes. These purposes include expenditures for planning, environmental reviews, engineering and design costs, and related right of way acquisition. The Commission historically has obtained and updated Measure A revenue projections through a consultant for budget and strategic project planning purposes. The UCLA Anderson Forecast completed the last update in May 2006; however, this forecast has been updated frequently because of the weakened Inland Empire economy that began in 2007. Measure A revenue projections for the next five fiscal years are presented in Chart 20 below. Chart 20 - Forecasted Measure A Sales Tax Revenues 2011 - 2015 $125,000,000 $120,000,000 $115,000,000 $110,000,000 $105,000,000 $100,000,000 $95,000,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 The following additional assumptions were used in the development of the Commission's revenue forecast for FY 2010/11: • The Inland Empire economy is not expected to improve significantly in FY 2010/11; however, a slow recovery is expected to begin in FY 2010/11. • The State does not change mix of items subject to the sales tax from what has been included historically. • The relative sales and property tax rates of Riverside and surrounding counties do not change from historical levels. • Internet sales will have minimal impact on revenue. The Measure A sales tax revenue projections have been considered in the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan financing strategy and an analysis of a potential increase to be sought in the $500 million 2009 Measure A bonding cap. Geographic Allocation - Riverside County is comprised of three geographic areas: Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley. The percentage of Measure A revenues allocated to each of these areas based on return to source is approximately • 109 • 75% for Western County, 24% for Coachella Valley, and 1 % for Palo Verde Valley (Chart 21). These percentages will experience some variations from year to year based on changes in levels of taxable sales among the geographic areas. Chart 21 — Geographic Allocation of Measure A Revenues Palo Verde Valley 196 Program Allocation - The 2009 Measure A TIP defines the manner in which the sales tax revenues are to be spent, as presented in the Table 33. In Western County, public transit includes funding for specialized transit, commuter rail, intercity bus service, and commuter assistance. For the Coachella Valley, public transit includes specialized transit and public bus services. Table 33 - Program Allocation of 2009 Measure A Revenues \Nestern Cctanty •Ra�;�Finsnrh�s 4Ec¢11371r.ecel7.1;irer1 •y€-.vat's-3�-. +L i Str et and asas • 35-5 •3.f?lar2l Arc=: k.., _ Coaelella a€12iC �h,-_ - aegia11a1 +hoc-_.rec'-arrd,c,-"_s -35°< •pL13lic-r•%it Palolie rd e la'ley •Loca':Stree_ and Reads • .0;r.; Local streets and roads allocations to the local jurisdictions within each geographic area are based on population (in Western County and Palo Verde Valley) or dwelling units (in Coachella Valley) and taxable sales. 110 • Proposition 16: In November 2006, the voters in Califomia approved Proposition 1 B, which funds various transportation programs from bonds issued by the State. Programs that are funded include CMIA, transit capital, STIP supplement, and Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF). CMIA and transit capital revenues for certain highway and rail projects are included in state revenues. Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) Registration Fees: State law that allows county SAFE agencies to impose a $1 surcharge on vehicle registrations within the County to pay for call box purchases and operations; excess SAFE revenues may be used for 511 operations and as a match for FSP operations. The call boxes enable motorists to summon help should they encounter mechanical or emergency problems while on the road, while the Inland Empire 511 system provides real-time traffic and transit trip information available via the internet or telephone. Caltrans Freeway Service Patrol Allocations: Caltrans is the primary sponsor of the FSP and provides the majority of funding for the program, including towing services in construction zones. The State provides nearly 80% of the funding for the FSP program based on population, freeway miles, and level of congestion throughout the State. The Commission administers and implements the program along with the CHP and Caltrans. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality: The CMAQ program is federally funded and is targeted for transportation improvements in areas with air quality problems. This program pays for improvements that reduce congestion while improving air quality. The Commission has also used CMAQ dollars to include fuel and commuter assistance programs, signal interconnects, HOV lanes, and transit projects. CMAQ reimbursement estimates are based on budgeted expenditures for specific projects with CMAQ allocations. Federal Transit Administration: FTA funding is generally allocated annually by the federal government to urbanized areas and is based on calculated miles of service. On a reimbursement basis, the federal government provides funding for qualified capital investments in rail facilities, track, and vehicles. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee: In connection with the 2009 Measure A, the TUMF program was established in the Western County to provide additional funding for regional arterial projects. TUMF is administered by WRCOG. As a result of an MOU with WRCOG, the Commission will receive 48.7% of the TUMF revenues, which are divided equally between the regional arterial and CETAP programs. TUMF revenues maintained by WRCOG are allocated for regional arterial zone improvements and regional transit facilities. TUMF revenue estimates are based on monthly receipt trends and consideration of local housing and commercial construction activity. Rail and Highway Licenses: The Commission owns parcels of land and right of way for highway, rail, and regional arterial projects in selected areas throughout the County. The ownership provides licensing opportunities for fiber-optic cable, advertising signs, and business tenants. The amount of funding received from the licenses provides revenue to partially support the cost of owning and maintaining the Commission's land and facilities. 112 Investment Income: The Commission has established a prudent investment policy for cash on hand that is intended to maximize retum while providing absolute safeguards on principal and liquidity, as noted in Section 1. Interest earnings on the State and County investment pools are estimated at an interest rate of .50%. The earnings on funds held by the trustee for debt service and projects in money market funds and investment agreements are assumed to be at .50%. Program Revenues and Other Sources Revenues and other financing sources for FY 2010/11 are allocated to the various Commission programs as follows: Management Services The primary funding sources for management services are Measure A and LTF allocations aggregating $3,400,000 as well as administration funding transfers in of $1,619,100 from TUMF, SAFE, and FSP. Interest and other miscellaneous reimbursement revenues in FY 2010/11 are $18,900. Bond Financing Measure A Western County revenues of $6,223,000 will be used to support bond financing costs. Interest revenues are $3,800. CETAP The Western County CETAP program will also receive $2,500,000 from TUMF for development of new corridors. Additionally, other local revenues include $205,000 representing investment income. Economic Development In order to attract commercial and industrial development and jobs to locate in the Western County area, Measure A Western County revenues of $913,000 will be used to create an infrastructure improvement bank to improve and construct interchanges, provide public transit linkages or stations, and make other improvements to the transportation system. Interest earnings are $9,100. Highways Funding for the highway program includes 2009 Measure A sales tax revenues of $36,075,000 for Western County highways and Coachella Valley highways and regional arterials programs. The 2009 Measure A sales tax revenues will be used primarily for the SR-91, 1-15, and 1-215 corridor improvements. Unexpended 1989 Measure A revenues from prior years will be used on remaining projects such as SR-74 widening from 1-15 to 7th Street and curve realignment, 74/215 interchange, SR-91 HOV lanes, 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connectors, and SR-111 projects as well as for pass - through funding to the city of Riverside for interchange improvements for SR-91 at La Sierra Avenue and Van Buren Boulevard and to the County for SR-60 at Valley Way. • 113 • STIP funds totaling $22,188,900 will be used for the SR-91 HOV lanes, the 71/91 connectors, and 1-215 corridor improvements, including the 1-215 bi-county project. The 1-215 corridor improvements on the southem segment will receive $4,500,000 in Proposition 113 CMIA funds. Other state funds of $507,000 are related to the SR-91 HOV lanes. Federal funds for highways projects include $10,000,000 in ARRA and $200,000 in demonstration and Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds for the 74/215 interchange, $6,578,300 in CMAQ funds for the SR-91 HOV lanes, and $74,000 for the 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connectors. Additional local funding includes $5,000,000 in TUMF zone reimbursements from WRCOG for the 74/215 interchange and interest revenue of $837,700. The Commission will need to issue $50,000,000 in commercial paper notes and $135,000,000 to fund 2009 Measure A projects such as the SR-91 corridor improvements and MSHCP land acquisition and highway projects in Coachella Valley. Bond proceeds will also be used to retire a portion of the outstanding commercial paper notes and fund a debt service reserve. Transfers in represent $83,300,000 in 2009 Bonds proceeds to retire outstanding commercial paper notes, commercial paper project funding of $50,000,000 and bond proceeds of $35,000,000 to fund the 2009 Measure A projects, and $770,000 from Right of Way Management for the 60/215 East Junction HOV lanes connector project. Other transfers in to the Debt Service fund includes $12,000,000 in 2009 Bonds proceeds to establish a debt service reserve fund as well as $14,200,000 and $1,679,400 for Measure A Westem County and Coachella Valley highways debt service, respectively. Local Streets and Roads Measure A allocations of $31,896,000 and $909,600 for the local streets and roads program are distributed to the cities and the County for local street repairs, maintenance, and construction and transferred to the Debt Service fund for debt service related to advance funding agreements, respectively. Local revenues represent investment income. New Corridors To leverage local, state, and federal funding for four new transportation corridors identified through CETAP, Measure A Westem County revenues of $8,522,000 will be available for environmental clearance, right of way acquisition, and construction of these new corridors. Interest revenues of $85,500 are included in local revenues. 114 Rail • Unexpended 1989 Measure A revenues will be used primarily for the Perris Valley Line and other related projects as well as the Riverside layover facility. The 2009 Measure A Westem County's public transit program allocated $4,700,400 for rail. Proposition 1 B transit allocations of $1,640,500 will fund station rehabilitation and security projects. FTA transit capital funding will be used for the Perris Valley Line. Local revenues include investment income of $132,500 and reimbursements of $40,000 related to the Perris Station Transit Center. A $5,000,000 transfer in from available 1989 Measure A debt service reserves is to be used for a project related to the Perris Valley Line. Regional Arterials The Western County regional arterial program will receive funds from Measure A and TUMF in the amounts of $6,912,000 and $2,500,000, respectively. The new TUMF revenues along with unexpended TUMF revenues from prior years will fund be the primary source of funding TUMF regional arterial projects, including the SR-79 realignment. Other local revenues also consist of investment income of $59,700. Transfers in of $6,350,000 for regional arterials represent funding from 2009 Measure A Westem County highways for the SR-79 realignment project and from 1989 Measure A Western County highways as a match for a TUMF regional arterial project. Right of Way Management Property management licenses and other miscellaneous revenues consist of $178,000 related to the San Jacinto and San Bernardino subdivision rail program and other highway properties. Transfers in of $480,000 are related to Measure A highway and rail funding for the maintenance of the Commission's highway and rail properties. Other local revenues for property management of $300 are related to investment income. Public and Specialized Transit LTF sales tax revenues of $52,500,000 are allocated primarily for public bus and rail transit operations and capital in the County. A small portion of these revenues is used for LTF planning and administration allocations as well as bicycle and pedestrian facilities grants. Prior to FY 2009/10, the STA allocation received from the State was used to fund transit capital; however, these allocations have since been suspended by the State. Under the 2009 Measure A, public transit funding of $6,906,600 has been allocated for Westem County specialized transit and intercity bus services and Coachella Valley specialized and public transit services. Local revenues represent investment income. 115 Planning and Programming Transportation planning studies are funded with an LTF off -the -top allocation of $1,575,000, or three percent of estimated LTF revenues. An LTF allocation of $3,841,700 will fund grade separation projects for the cities of Riverside and Corona and the County. STIP in the amount of $1,100,100 will fund PPM activities of the Commission and CVAG. A federal earmark of $367,700 will be used to fund the completion of the geotechnical studies related to ICE. Local revenues consist of other agency reimbursements of $71,000 and investment income of $500. Rail Station Maintenance and Operations Rail operations, which include Metrolink operating and capital contributions, station maintenance, and support will be funded with an LTF allocation of $10,193,200. A $30,000 federal grant will also fund an intern. In addition to interest revenues of $21,500, local revenues include $105,000 in reimbursements primarily from SCRRA for security costs. Transfers in of $200,000 represent funding from the Measure A commuter assistance program for maintenance of park and ride facilities at the commuter rail stations. Commuter Assistance The Commuter Assistance program will receive funding of $1,152,000 from Measure A public transit to assist in implementing services to commuters and employers in promoting use of alternate modes of transportation in Western County. The Commission will also receive CMAQ pass -through funds of $1,220,400 to support the San Bernardino cornmuter assistance program, STP federal revenues of $26,000 for a ridesharing demonstration project in the Coachella Valley, and $12,800 of other federal revenues. State revenues include $435,000 in a grant from the Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (MSRC). Local revenues consist of other agency reimbursements of $482,400 primarily for regional ridematching as well as investment income of $47,600. Motorist Assistance SAFE is funded from $1,450,000 in revenues received through DMV registration fees, while Ca[trans will allocate $1,768,200 in State highway account funds to cover the FSP and $751,200 for special FSP services required for construction. The Commission will also receive $361,500 of CMAQ pass -through funds to support SANBAG's share of the Inland Empire 511 system operations. Local revenues represent investment income of $32,200, cost recoveries of $46,800 from responsible parties related to call box knockdowns, and reimbursements of $83,500 from the city of Riverside for FSP services required on SR-91 for interchange construction projects. The State's FSP contribution is matched with an operating transfer in from SAFE of $906,600. 116 • action MI MoaKluua 117 • Commission Debt The Commission's debt under the 2009 Measure A has been incurred for highway, regional arterial, and local streets and roads projects for which title usually vests or, upon completion, will vest with Caltrans or local jurisdictions. Future Measure A sales taxes are pledged to cover Measure A debt service payments. Since these projects are not assets of the Commission for which the Commission will have operating responsibilities, except for the intangible rights to operate a toll franchise on highways, future operating costs related to these projects cannot be determined and are not applicable. However, for toll and rail assets, operating budget impacts are considered in future project development. Commercial Paper In March 2005 the Commission established a $185,000,000 commercial paper program to advance project development and land and right of way acquisition under the 2009 Measure A TIP. Maturities of commercial paper notes are rolled over to new issuances of commercial paper. Regarding the commercial paper notes, the Commission currently maintains a P-1 and an A-1+ rating from Moody's Investors Service (Moody's) and Standard and Poor's Rating Service (S&P) rating agencies, respectively. Interest payments are made from available commercial paper proceeds or sales tax revenues. The current amount of outstanding commercial paper notes is $83,284,000 and an additional $20,000,000 in commercial paper notes is projected to be issued in June 2010. Approximately $83,300,000 of the outstanding commercial paper notes is expected to be retired in connection with the 2010 Bonds. In FY 2010/11 the Commission will issue 650,000,000 in new commercial paper notes for capital project funding and interest payments for a projected. outstanding amount of $69,984,000 at June 30, 2011. The Commission will make $1,305,000 in estimated commercial paper interest payments during the year. The Commission has an irrevocable direct draw letter of credit and reimbursement agreement with Bank of America, N.A. (Bank of America) as credit and liquidity support for the commercial paper notes. In February 2010 the letter of credit was reduced from $190,000,000 to $121,500,000 and renewed for an additional two-year period through March 2012. Due to the financial crisis in 2008, the cost for the liquidity support increased significantly from 21 basis points to 105 basis points. Such costs are reflected in the 2009 Measure A Western County Bond Financing special revenue fund. 118 Interest Rate Swap • As a means to achieve a greater level of interest rate stability in connection with a refinancing of outstanding debt in late 2009, the Commission entered into two forward -starting interest rate swaps in August 2006 for a total notional amount of $185,000,000 at a fixed rate of 3.679% for 20 years effective October 2009; the counterparties will pay the Commission a floating rate equal to 67% of the one - month London Interbank Offer Rate (LIBOR). The counterparty for the first swap ($100,000,000 notional amount) is Bank of America, and the counterparty for the second swap ($85,000,000 notional amount) was Lehman Brothers Derivative Products Inc. (Lehman DP). In September 2008, Lehman Brothers Holdings filed for bankruptcy, which was a trigger event under the swap agreement with Lehman DP. Accordingly, the swap agreement was terminated, and a termination payment of approximately $3,453,000 was paid to Lehman DP. The Commission entered into a replacement swap with Deutsche Bank AG (Deutsche Bank) for a notional amount of $85,000,000 at similar terms, except that the Commission will pay Deutsche Bank as the counterparty a fixed rate of 3.206%. Sales Tax Revenue Bonds In June 2008, the Commission issued $126,395,000 in sales tax revenue bonds to refinance $110,005,000 in outstanding commercial paper notes issued since the inception of the program, fund capitalized interest through December 2009 and a reserve fund, and pay accrued interest and costs of issuance. The 2008 bonds were necessary for the restoration of the commercial paper program to its maximum capacity in order to fulfill existing commitments for the use of commercial paper, pay costs related to 2009 Measure A projects during FY 2008/09, and provide short-term financing of FTA Small Starts reimbursable costs related to the Perris Valley Line project, as required. The Commission received ratings of Aa2, AA+, and AA from Moody's, S&P, and Fitch Ratings, respectively. In connection with the commencement of the interest rate swaps in October 2009, the Commission issued $185,000,000 in variable rate sales tax revenue bonds to retire $53,716,000 of outstanding commercial paper notes, refund the 2008 bonds, fund a portion of the debt service reserve, and pay costs of issuance for the 2009 bonds. The 2009 Bonds are secured by standby bond purchase agreements with JP Morgan Chase Bank at a fee of 125 basis points. The costs for this liquidity facility are accounted for in the 2009 Measure A Western County Bond Financing special revenue fund. The Commission maintained its debt ratings with this bond issuance; in April 2010, Fitch Ratings completed its recalibration of the Commission's bond and revised its rating from AA to AA+. For FY 2010/11, the Commission has budgeted debt service principal and interest payments of $6,300,000 and $7,700,000, respectively. 119 • The Commission expects to issue $135,000,000 in bonds in November 2010 to retire approximately $83,300,000 of outstanding commercial paper notes, provide funds for 2009 Measure A Western County capital projects, fund a debt service reserve, and pay costs of issuance. Estimated debt service payments for the 2010 Bonds in FY 2010/11 are $2,700,000 for principal and $3,400,000 for net interest payments. Debt Capacity Analysis The Commission is legally prohibited from issuing additional debt if its debt coverage ratio is less than 1.5 to 1 on all senior debt. The Commission has adopted a higher standard of 2 to 1 as part of its debt management policy. As Chart 22 and Table 35 indicate, the Commission has successfully met its policy standard for debt issued under the 2009 Measure A, even in a declining sales tax revenue environment. The 1989 Measure A related debt consistently exceeded the Commission's standard, and coverage for the 2009 Measure A related debt of 5.27 is anticipated for FY 2010/11. Any coverage less than 2 to 1 would necessitate using other program funding to cover all debt service expenditures. Chart 22 — Measure A Debt Capacity Analysis $120,000,000 $100,000,000 $80,000,000 $60,000,000 $40,000,000 $20,000,000 5- FY 2009/10 FY2010/11 'table 35 Measure A Debt Capacity Analysis Sales Tax Revenues Senior Debt Service Coverage Ratio - Senior Debt Senior Debt Ratio Commercial Paper Rating ■ Senior Debt Service ■ Available Revenues 120 Debt Service Schedule Debt service requirements for the sales tax revenue bonds are based on actual and estimated amortization schedules for the 2009 Bonds and 2010 Bonds, respectively. Since commercial paper is expected to be refinanced with sales tax revenue bonds, debt service requirements for commercial paper are not included in Table 36; however, the debt service interest expenditures in FY 2010/11 are estimated at $1,305,000. Table 36 — Commission Sales Tax Revenue Bonds Debt Service Requirements 2011 $ 9,000,000 $ 11,100,000 2012 11,895,000 14,600,000 2013 12,265,000 14,200,000 2014 12,655,000 13,750,000 2015 13,065,000 13,200,000 2016-2020 73,305,000 57,200,000 2021-2025 88,985,000 38,650,000 2026-2030 94,830,000 14,400,000 Total $ 316,000,000 $ 177,100,000 Outstanding Debt as of June 30, 2010 Under the provisions of the 2009 Measure A, the Commission has the authority to issue bonds subject to a bond debt limitation of $500,000,000. The following is a summary of debt issued and secured by 2009 Measure A revenues: 2005 Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A and Series B: In February 2005, the Commission authorized a $200,000,000 commercial paper program. On March 31, 2005, the Commission established the program for $185,000,000 Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A and B. The repayment of principal and interest on the commercial paper notes is secured by an irrevocable direct draw letter of credit issued by the Bank of America, as the Measure A sales tax revenues securing such repayment commenced on July 1, 2009. Maturities of the commercial paper notes may range from one to 270 days, and interest rates are variable and dependent on current market conditions. The initial issuance of commercial paper in April 2005 was $30,005,000; additional amounts of $50,000,000 and $30,000,000 were issued during FY 2006/07 and FY 2007/08, respectively. The $110,005,000 in outstanding commercial paper notes was refinanced by the 2008 sales tax revenue bonds in June 2008. During FY 2008/09 and FY 2009/10, the Commission issued $110,000,000 and $27,000,000, respectively, in commercial paper notes. Proceeds from the 2009 bonds were used in October 2009 to retire $53,716,000 121 • of these outstanding notes. The Commission anticipates an issuance of $20,000,000 in additional commercial paper notes in June 2010. The note agreements require the trustee to hold all note proceeds and a portion of sales tax revenues and to segregate all funds into separate accounts as required by the indenture. Receipt of the 2009 Measure A sales tax revenues began in FY 2009/10. 2009 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds). Series A. B. and C: In October 2009, the Commission issued $185,000,000 principal amount of serial bonds to refinance the 2008 bonds, retire a portion of the outstanding principal amount of the commercial paper notes and a portion of accrued interest on the notes, and fund a reserve fund. The bonds are mature in annual installments ranging from $4,000,000 to $13,700,000 on various dates through June 1, 2029 with variable interest rates set on a weekly basis. The 2009 Bonds are integrated with the interest rate swaps that are effective in October 2009, thereby creating synthetic fixed rate debt. The bond agreements require the trustee to hold all bond proceeds and a portion of sales tax revenues and to segregate all funds into separate accounts as required by the indentures, including a reserve fund equal to the maximum annual debt service of approximately $14,213,000. Receipt of the 2009 Measure A sales tax revenues commenced in FY 2009/10. The allocation of the sales tax revenue bonds to the 2009 Measure A programs is presented in Chart 23. Chart 23 — Program Long -Term Debt Local Streets and Roads 2% The allocation of the sales tax revenue bonds by the benefiting geographic area is presented in Chart 24. 122 Chart 24 - Long -Term Debt by Geographic Area Palo Verde Valley 1% Coachella Valley 9% Outstanding Debt and Legal Debt Margin at June 30, 2010 A summary of the Commission's outstanding debt secured by Measure A sales tax revenues and related legal debt margin at June 30, 2010 is presented in Table 37: Table 37 - Legal Debt Margin 2 � Authorized Debt 2005 Commercial Paper Notes 2009 Series A, B, C Bonds Total Outstanding Debt Legal Debt Margin Listed below in Table 38 are the principal and interest payments by bond issue for FY 2010/11: Table 38 -Debt Service Requirements by Issue 2009 Senior Bonds $ 6,300,000 $ 7,700,000 2010 Senior Bonds 2,700,000 3,400,000 Commercial Paper 83,300,000 1,305,000 TOTAL FY 2010/11 Debt Service • 123 • beside County frousportotion llootion [St4rptnatill;fliccitytl Momclaja z 124 • Table 39 — Budget Comparison by Department 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 Management Services: Executive Management Administration Legislative Affairs and Communkations Finance Total Management Services Regional Programs: Planning and Programming Services Rail Maintenance and Operations Public and Specialized Transit Commuter Assistance Motorist Assistance Total Regional Programs Capital Project Development and Delivery Debt Service: Principal Payments Interest Payments Cost of Issuance Total Debt Service 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 6 73,059,700 4,860,800 50,692,700 52,670,300 1,3O3,400 10,957,400 4,399,900 13,567.900 331,200,400 193,903 1,581,000 866.300 2,261,600 4,902,800 8,051,200 8,667,500 83,045,400 5,161,600 2,623,200 107,548,900 301,592,000 33,645,500 12,026,900 m6,000,000 $ 106,000,000 81,055,300 69,O37,400 40,755,000 17,408,050 36,896,800 15,444,000 1,181,800 2,375A5O 11,475.000 6,673,000 1,448,100 309,300 3,419,100 3,134,800 282,231,100 23O,382,000 215,300 1,617,600 1,147,100 2,888,800 5,868,800 11,122,300 24,279,100 90,048,500 6,237,300 3,386,000 135,073,200 211,800 1,473,00O 978,0130 2,225,900 4,888.700 5p58,100 13590,800 72.183,700 6,388,600 3,386,100 100997,300 336,587,900 175,202,900 182,395,000 12,610,000 3,250,000 184,111,000 7,939,900 999,300 45,673,400 198,255,000 193,050,200 459,717,100 675,784,900 474,139,100 (128,516,700) 46,541,200 146,541,200) 53,716,000 53,716,000 (393,553,800) (243,757,100) 244,211,600 (244,211,600) 260,000,000 260,000.000 265,310,100 126631O,100) 288,284,000 288,284,000 (74,800,700) (133,553,800) 44,526,900 531,044,200 456,243,500 456,243,500 $ 456,243,500 $ 322,689,700 $ 500,770,400 $ 0% (12,245,400j -15% N/A (11,884,300) -29% 12,555900) -7% (351,100) -30% (1,475.0001 -13% (1,270,100) -88% (1,583,500) 46% (31,365,300) -11% 4,300 2% (436,300) -27% 3,100 0% (590,700) -20% (1,019,600) -17% (3,815,800) -34% (12,745,200) -52% 113,589,103) -15% 12,062,700) -33% 1,064,500 31% 131,148,300) -23% 16,126.400 5% (90,095,000) -49% (206000) -2% (1,750,000) 54% (92.050,000) 46% (108,091,500) -16% 76,725,260 -19% (31,796,900) -13% 31,796,300 -13% (75,000,000) -2996 (75,000,000) -29% 1,726,200 -1% 44,526,900 10% $ 46,253,100 14% 125 • lleation t:oximmtarkri ticacet32tts 126 • Executive Management Mission Statement: "To maintain the highest level of achievement and professionalism possible while managing the activities of the Commission with a small staff, complemented with consultants, to effectuate sound transportation policies and legislation compatible with environmental standards." Chart 25— Executive Management Expenditures Executive Management has a budget of $219,600 (Table 40), an increase of 2% from last year's budget, for oversight of all Commission functions. Professional costs include legal fees and consulting services. Support costs include various membership dues of $50,200. Table 40 — Executive Management Expenditure Detail Salaries and Benefits $ 98,800 $ 93,700 $ 113,d00 a °'' has;`, $ 5,700 6% Professional Costs Legal Services 46,100 45,000 40,600 .. io ! 0% Professional Services - General 25,000 10,000 rs 0% Total Professional Costs 46,100 70,000 50,600 -, 0% Support Costs 49,000 51,600 47,800 (1,400) -3% TOTAL Executive Management $ $ 193,900 $ 215,300 $ 211,800 _ ;,�.__ ,, c r i„ $ 4,300 296 127 Executive Management Staffing Summary Administrative Assistant Deputy Executive Director Executive Director FTE Department Budget Overview Department Description The Executive Director is responsible for and provides strong leadership in developing and implementing new strategies at the local, regional, and statewide levels to assure project delivery of transportation improvements throughout the County. Furthermore, Executive Management is committed to fostering a positive and supportive work environment for staff that emphasizes quality work and encourages teamwork and open communication, while recognizing individual achievement. This is accomplished through a productive and collaborative effort with the members of the Commission and the oversight of the Commission's Executive Committee. Key Assumptions • The Executive Director will play a prominent role with extemal audiences with an emphasis on working with Congress, the California Legislature, Riverside County business organizations, and Southem California transportation agencies and local governments regarding the reauthorization of the federal transportation act and on advancing transportation policy in California. • Project delivery will be a top priority in FY 2010/11 as construction will begin on the 74/215 interchange, 60/215 East Junction HOV lanes connector, SR-91 HOV lanes, 1-215 corridor improvement south segment, and Perris Valley Line Metrolink extension projects. • The advancement of construction on a number of projects will require a requisite increase in public outreach to the media and local governments as well as the need for watchful oversight to make the most of lower construction and right of way costs. • The development of the Perris Valley Line project will mark Riverside County's first major fail expansion in more than 12 years and will require significant effort frgm the Executive Director to obtain approvals from the FTA, local railroads, and community. • The Commission will have a high profile throughout the state due to its efforts to secure design -build authority for the construction of the SR-91 corridor improvement project in Corona. • As a cost savings measure, there will be no merit -based pay increases for employees during FY 2010/11. 128 • • The Commission will play a leadership role in advocating for the approval of a federal transportation bill to fund needed transportation priorities in Riverside County with an emphasis on goods movement infrastructure and priority transportation corridors. Accomplishments FY 2009/10 saw extraordinary accomplishments at the Commission, placing it in the top tier of California transportation organizations. In several areas, the Commission stood by itself in successful advocacy, innovation, and leadership. • Advocated for and received ARRA stimulus funding for five freeway interchange projects throughout the County. Four of the interchanges are currently under construction. The fifth is the 74/215 interchange in Perris; the Commission will serve as the lead agency for this project. Construction on this project will commence in June 2010. • Continued to implement components of the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan. Federal tolling approval has been granted for corridor improvement projects on SR-91 and 1-15, and the CTC approved the SR-91 project for design -build contracting and procurement. • Continued progress on the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process for the Perris Valley Line project, which included a number of public hearings and presentations to stakeholder groups, including the March Joint Powers Authority and the Riverside Unified School District. • Moved forward with the eventual implementation of the Perris Valley Line project by reaching agreement with Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) for access to its mainline. • Continued right of way acquisition for the SR-91 HOV lanes project in downtown Riverside. • Completed a draft environmental document for the Mid County Parkway and conducted a lengthy public comment period. As a result of the comments, a number of changes have been made to the proposed project. • Continued multiagency implementation efforts related to the proposed ICE and, as part of this effort, completed drilling for geological testing to determine the viability of a tunnel for this project. A report on the overall study and feasibility effort was presented at the Commission's January workshop. • Partnered with OCTA on the addition of an eastbound lane on SR-91 located in both counties. Construction began in late 2009 and is funded primarily with ARRA dollars. • Opened the Perris Station Transit Center which is currently served by RTA buses, but will also be served by the Commission's Perris Valley Line project in 2012. • Guided the Commission through an uncertain economic environment with costs savings and successful adherence to limits on salaries and administrative expenditures. In spite of a struggling economy, the Commission's most recent debt issuance received excellent credit ratings, thereby reducing the Commission's borrowing costs. 129 • Obtained approval in the President's budget for the maximum level of federal Small Starts funding for the Perris Valley Line project. Federal involvement in the project will top $75 million. • Partnered with SANBAG to launch the Inland Empire 511 system to assist motorists, transit users, and carpoolers. Major Initiatives FY 2010/11 will be one of constant activity and will feature efforts to launch a number of projects while being challenged by a slow economy. The recent infusion of ARRA funding foreshadows a great deal of construction activity that the Commission will lead such as the 74/215 interchange in Perris, the 60/215 East Junction HOV lanes connector project in Moreno Valley, the widening of SR-91 through downtown Riverside, and the widening of 1-215 in Murrieta. All of these projects will be funded through various Commission revenue sources, and the Commission has either played a major role in right of way acquisition and design or will do so during construction. At the same time, a number of other planned improvements will continue through project development work with an eye on construction in the near future. This includes completing environmental work and right of way acquisition on the Perris Valley Line project and continuing environmental work on the Mid County Parkway and SR-79 realignment projects. The largest project currently in development is the SR-91 corridor improvement project through Corona, a billion dollar effort that will add general purpose and express lanes to an 11-mile stretch of one of Southern Califomia's most congested freeways. Environmental work on the project will continue along with advance right of way acquisition and the solicitation of a design -build team. The use of design -build procurement is a key element of the project, and the Commission will be active in ensuring that the project meets state requirements for eligibility as part of the state's design -build pilot program. Financing the project will also be a major concern, and the Commission will consider raising its Measure A debt limit and may consider private sector involvement. On a larger scale, a major concern in moving forward is the state of California's financial position and commitment to funding infrastructure and transportation. The Commission will take an aggressive and active role in advocating for state investments in transportation. The Commission is an active member of the Self -Help Counties Coalition and Mobility 21, and a major focus will be placed on advocacy for transportation in the state budget. Federal funding is also an important factor for the Commission's future, and the Commission will advocate strongly for the approval of a federal transportation bill. Congress's priorities will need to include funding for Positive Train Control (PTC) and for goods movement and freight -related projects in. Southern California. In Riverside • 130 • County, goods movement investment must focus on the need to complete highway/rail grade separation projects. The success of many of these efforts will rely on enhanced external communications. Media relations will continue to be a priority, and press releases will remain a major effort along with social media and the Commission's On the Move monthly newsletter and annual report. An expanding and systematic outreach to business and civic groups, focusing on Commission efforts in terms of funding, construction, and services, will be the central feature of the communications program. While actively participating in all of these major endeavors, the Executive Director will maintain and improve administrative efficiency and fiscally sound practices characteristic of the Commission. With a total of 40 budgeted staff positions, the Commission organization remains consistent with Commission direction. The Commission will continue to be competitive in the employment market and will retain capable staff as well as attract high quality applicants. Staff training and development will continue, enabling our small and dedicated staff to enhance skills, productivity, and value. Our goal is to maintain the most effective mid -sized transportation agency in Califomia. Department Goals Maximize funding for transportation improvements in Riverside County through legislative advocacy. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement) Objectives: • Implement the Commission's early development project priorities outlined in the recent Commission workshops, focusing on the first ten years of the 2009 Measure A, which will include an emphasis on project development for the SR-91 corridor improvement project and the Perris Valley Line. • Advocate federal appropriations for current projects, FTA Small Starts rail funding, and the regional efforts to reduce the community impacts of rail goods movement. • Place an emphasis on initiating federally authorized and funded projects included within the new federal transportation bill and the Commission's ongoing project priorities. Executive staff will respond to the State's transportation funding issues by continuing project work on named Measure A projects, including the widening of SR-91 in downtown Riverside. • Work with the Ports and others on comprehensive efforts to develop a surcharge to pay for regional transportation improvements including railroad grade separations. • Continue implementation of Transit Vision while addressing short- and long-term funding constraints. 131 Focus on timely and effective completion of capital projects. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement, lntermodalism 8 Accessibility) Objectives: • Serve as the lead agency for the construction of the 74/215 interchange in Perris. • Work closely with Caltrans on construction of the 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connector project in Moreno Valley as well as the SR-91 HOV lanes project in downtown Riverside. • Address Metrolink rider concerns with ongoing rehabilitation work at the Commission's commuter rail stations. • Ensure effective communication with the public regarding construction and project details throughout the county. Support regional transportation solutions in cooperation with surrounding counties that are of benefit to Riverside County. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement, System Efficiencies) Objectives: • Continue work on grade separation and rail capacity projects funded through the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) and TCIF as well as those called for in the Commission's $561 million Grade Separation Plan adopted in October 2006 and updated in 2009. • Work with neighboring counties regarding corridor improvements on SR-71 and SR-91 as well as on 1-15 and 1-215. • Maintain an effective working relationship with the agencies that comprise Metrolink to ensure that Riverside County commuter rail needs are served in an efficient, effective, and safe manner. • Partner with SANBAG to enhance and publicize the Inland Empire 511 system and work with agencies in San Diego, Orange, and Los Angeles counties to provide effective, regional 511 traveler information services. Maintain effective working relationships with Commissioners to strengthen and expand the Commission's leadership in transportation policy decision -making at all levels of government. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objectives: • Facilitate Commissioner participation at the regional, state, and federal levels to raise the interests of the Commission and seek favorable action. • Continue regular one-on-one meetings between the Executive Director, senior staff, and the Commissioners. • Continue collaborative efforts with member agency staff regarding local priorities and funding challenges. 132 • While maintaining a relatively small staff, promote the Commission's effectiveness by improving and developing staff skills, using state-of-the-art working tools, and fostering an environment that encourages and rewards individual and team effort. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Continue to maintain a well -documented employee appraisal process that provides clear, understandable, and measurable performance criteria for all employees. • Maintain and encourage staff morale and effectiveness. Develop the framework for a Commission culture that enhances productivity, encourages regular and open communication among staff, and promotes the mutual achievement of individual and organizational goals and objectives. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Conduct a semi-annual review of organization accomplishments as measured against planned objectives to determine progress in meeting those objectives and action steps needed. • Facilitate open communications and coordination between management, professional staff, and support staff through regular meetings. Executive Management PerformancelWorkload Indicators FY 08/09 Actual FY 09/10 Estimated FY 10111 Projected $567,693,400 Expenditures $459,717,100 $474,139,100 Staffing levels 45 41 40 Administration costs as percentage of expenditures 1.07% 1.03% 0.85% 133 • Administration Mission Statement: "To provide quality and efficient services to the Board of Commissioners, its staff, and external customers and to comply with applicable federal and state requirements." Chart 26 - Administration Expenditures As noted in Table 41, the Administration Department's total budget is $1,181,300 for office operations including management of office space, lease, and equipment; records; Commission and committee meetings; and special events as well as for the clerk of the board and human resources functions. Salaries and benefits expenditures of $399,400 reflect an increase in FTEs from 4.22 to 4.32. Professional costs of $134,500 cover various services including, but not limited to, Commissioners' per diem, legal fees, and consuftant and other professional services. Support costs of $647,400 cover administrative overhead including office maintenance; information technology updates, support, and maintenance; and recruitments. Beginning in FY 2010/11, general business insurance costs, which were previously included in the Administration Department, are included in the Finance Department budget. 134 Table 41— Administration Expenditure Detail Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Commissioner Per Diem Legal Services Professional Services- General Total Professional Costs Support Costs Capital Outlay Debt Service TOTAL Administration • $ 349,800 $ 357,700 $ 341,700 61,800 55,000 50,000 30,503 33,000 16,800 43,600 50,000 41,500 135,900 138,000 108,300 995,200 1,101,900 1,033,000 100,100 20,000 20,000 18,903 $1,599,900 $ 1,617,600 $ 1,473,000 Administration Staffing Summary Accounting and Human Resources Manager Administrative Assistant Executive Director Office and Board Services Manager Senior Administrative Assistant Senior Office Assistant Staff Analyst FTE 0.17 1.17 0.01 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.00 4.30 Department Budget Overview — Office Operations Department Description 41,700 12% (5,0001 -9% 3,000 9% (1500( -3% (3500( -3% 1454,5001 41% (20,000( -100% N/A $ (436,300( •27% 0.23 1.05 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.00 4.22 Office Operations oversees the daily maintenance needs of the Commission's office facility and its staff; manages information technology and records management systems; oversees the office lease; purchases office supplies and equipment; maintains a safe working environment for Commission board members, staff, and consultants; and provides support services. Office Operations continues to operate with a small staff of six consisting of the Office and Board Services Manager, Senior Administrative Assistant, three Administrative Assistants, and Senior Office Assistant. Key Assumptions • Support is provided to 40 full-time Commission staff. • Requests for project proposals and project notices of completion are posted and printed in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations. • Information technology systems are updated to ensure efficiency. 135 • • An accurate and efficient records management system is maintained. Accomplishments • Updated the web page in a timely manner for the postings of agendas, legal notices, requests for proposals, and employment opportunities. • Maintained efficient information technology infrastructure. • Maintained the electronic records management system to ensure accurate and efficient processing of incoming and outgoing correspondence and documents. • Developed and implemented a Disaster Recovery Plan to ensure uninterrupted Commission operations. Major Initiatives The Commission will continue to maintain a robust electronic records management system. Achieving greater efficiencies and strengthening the Commission's records management processes and procedures, the system pertains to the management, storage, and accessibility of the Commission's actions and documents and the retention capability for incoming and internally created records. Office Operations will continue to provide high quality support services to the Board of Commissioners and to internal and external customers by providing a working environment that enhances the overall mission of the Commission. Department Goal — Office Operations Ensure quality service that demonstrates responsiveness and flexibility and provides services at the most reasonable cost. (Policy Goals: Communications, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Support 40 full-time staff. • Provide accessibility to meeting agendas, legal notices, requests for proposal, and employment opportunities through the Commission's web page. • Continue to improve administrative efficiency through automation of records processing. • Provide a safe working environment with the maintenance of an injury and illness prevention program. • Post legal notices and requests for proposal on the Commission's web page and in the newspapers on a timely basis. • Provide office supplies, equipment, and services consistent with intended quality and capabilities at the most advantageous price afforded in the market. • Manage the Commission's information technology systems. 136 Department Budget Overview — Clerk of the Board Department Description The Clerk of the Board staff provides support services to the Board of Commissioners and its alternates and for Commission and committee meetings. It serves as an important resource for the Commission and has the responsibility for recording, publishing, preserving, and filing meeting proceedings of documents acted upon by the Commission and its committees; posting legal notices, capital project requests for proposals, and notices of project completion; processing claims against the Commission; fulfilling requirements of the Commission and the committees as it relates to the Conflict of Interest Code; serving as the Filing Officer for Economic Interest and Campaign Disclosure statements and legal claims against the Commission; coordinating Commission special events and meetings; and performing all duties required by law, riles, or order of the Board of Commissioners. Key Assumptions • Staff support and meeting services are provided to 32 Commissioners and their alternates, the Commission, four established committees, and a number of ad hoc committees. • Monthly agenda packets and supporting documents are published and distributed in accordance with the Brown Act. • Officers and members of the Commission are kept informed by providing them with the most current and accurate data to assist them and facilitate their decision making responsibilities. • Frequent communication with Commissioners continues to provide news and updates on Commission items and transportation -related meetings. • Available technology is used to provide simplified access of agenda items and Commission actions to the public, local agencies, and staff. Accomplishments • Updated the web page and the bulletin board for the agenda, minutes, and supporting documents. • Posted legal notices in local newspapers and on the Commission's web page. • Regularly advised officers and members of the Commission and their staff on changes to Commission meetings and other transportation -related meetings. • Arranged Commission and committee meetings and special events of the Commission. • Scheduled and advertised unmet transit needs hearing in Blythe for the Palo Verde Valley area. • Processed and transmitted Commission -approved resolutions to appropriate agencies in a timely manner. • • 137 Department Budget Overview — Human Resources Department Description Human Resources responsibilities include administering the recruitment, selection, and appraisal process; updating and conducting a biennial survey of comparable salaries and benefits; maintaining personnel policies and procedures; and scheduling periodic sessions for staff to review benefits and personnel rules and for supervisors to review the performance evaluation process. Key Assumptions • The use of consultant services for Human Resources administration is maximized. • The assessment of Human Resources practices and procedures will continue. • Continuous improvement in communication with employees regarding Human Resources information will be an ongoing process. • Compliance with state and federal labor law regulations is achieved. Accomplishments • Provided the annual Benefit Statement to all employees. • Regularly provided information to employees on changes to health insurance, 401(a) defined contribution, 457 deferred compensation plans, and the personnel policies and procedures manual through the Commission's intranet. • Recruited and filled one staff position. • Held training session on violence in the workplace. Major Initiatives Human Resources focuses on managing employees and consists of a framework of activities and practices that support and develop a motivated workforce while at the same time complying with legislation and regulations that govern the employer/employee relationship. Staff will use written position descriptions and performance expectations in order to give each employee a clear and consistent understanding of what is expected. Additionally, staff will utilize qualified human resources consultants to assist in establishing good human resources management practices, based on policies to establish parameters for fair and consistent decision - making, and to institute good workplace practices. The Commission's practice is to conduct a compensation program review every two years to ensure fair compensation is established to attract and retain the most qualified employees. During FY 2008/09, the Commission opted to postpone the compensation program review due to the slowdown in the economy and decline in sales tax revenues. The Commission will reintroduce the compensation program review when the economy and sales tax revenues improve. Additionally, there will be no annual merit increases for staff in FY 2010/11, as was the case in FY 2009/10. • 139 Department Goals — Human Resources Administer human resources policies, procedures, and programs in order to align personnel laws and the Commission's policies with continuous improvement principles. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Review and update personnel policies and procedures to comply with federal and state requirements. • Provide information to enhance the employee's knowledge of current personnel policies and procedures in various forms including electronic access, workshops, and printed information. • Ensure that employee personnel records are updated timely for various personnel actions. Continue to employ and recruit a dynamic and talented workforce. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objective: • Maintain a compensation program that ensures internal equity and external competitiveness within the pay structure for Commission employees. Develop people to be their best in order to meet the needs of the organization. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Build and maintain an effective performance system to include timely performance evaluations, personal development, and a supportive work environment. • Provide appropriate and timely training to meet the demands of the organization. Understand and consistently deliver excellent customer service to all employees. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objective: • Focus on "employee as customer" and consistently strive to exceed expectations by supporting and maintaining individual respect, appreciation, management accessibility, and communication. Improve the quality of the work culture. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Develop and maintain a safe working environment. • Maintain a proactive employee relations process. • Promote a work/family balance. 140 • Recognize and reward individual contributions. Administration Performance/Workload Indicators FY 08/09 Actual FY 09/10 Estimated FY 10/11 Projected Employee rules/Benefits review sessions held 2 2 2 Recruitments 2 1 0 Positions filled 2 1 0 Documents processed 7,860 3,617 4,000 Legal notices 20 18 18 Commission/Committee/Ad Hoc meetings 62 52 56 Commissioners supported (including alternates) 57 57 57 Staff supported: Regular full-time Temporary/Seasonal 45 1 41 0 40 1 • 141 • Legislative Affairs and Communications Mission Statement: "To strive to improve the mobility of Riverside County residents by working through the legislative process and by maintaining effective interagency relationships. This is supported by facilitating interactive communications with the public and transportation stakeholders through various outreach and media efforts." Chart 27 — Legislative Affairs and Communications Expenditures The Legislative Affairs and Communications Department has a total budget of $1,150,200 (Table 42). Staffing costs make up 25% of the total department expenditures and reflect a decrease in FTEs from 1.89 to 1.72. Professional costs of $688,000 include legislative advocacy, graphic design, and website updates. Support costs of $171,000 have increased 3%, or $4,600, from last year's budget. Table 42 — Legislative Affairs and Communications Expenditure Detail Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Legal Services Professional Services -General Total Professional Costs Support Costs $ 358,500 $ 314,700 8,000 364,900 658,000 364,900 666,000 495,000 142,500 166,400 129,900 F (23,500) -7% (6,000) -75% 28,000 4% 22,000 3% 4,600 3% TOTAL Legislative Affairs and Communications $ 866,300 $ 1,147,100 $ 978,000 x�` i` ea rs $ 3,100 0% 142 Legislative Affairs and Communications Staffing Summary Administrative Assistant 0.17 0.15 Community Relations Manager 0.53 0.26 Deputy Executive Director 0.46 0.48 Government Relations Manager 1.00 1.00 FTE 2.16 1.89 Department Budget Overview Department Description Legislative Affairs Transportation issues and system enhancements typically affect a number of jurisdictions and stakeholders. Through increased participation, the Commission is able to play a stronger leadership role at all levels of government to advance its interests and policy goals. The importance of this is magnified when the Commission is seeking changes in law or needs legislative authorization to move forward with a speck project. The Commission's Legislative Affairs efforts focus on taking full advantage of opportunities at both the federal and state levels when there is a potential impact to Commission programs. In doing so, the Commission maintains its role as a major legislative force and a statewide leader on a broad range of issues affecting transportation policy such as project delivery and enhanced funding. This requires the establishment and maintenance of ongoing communication with Riverside County's legislative delegations in Washington and Sacramento. The Commission accomplishes this via a combined effort that includes Commissioners, staff, and legislative consultants in the two capitals. The effort also requires working with other transportation agencies throughout the State in order to collaborate on issues of mutual concern. This cooperation takes place in a number of forums including a monthly meeting of transportation commission chief executive officers, the legislative roundtable., Mobility 21, Self -Help Counties Coalition, and Coalition for America's Gateways and Trade Corridors (CAGTC). In FY 2010/11, the Commission will advocate to protect transportation funding sources at both the state and federal level. The keys to the effort will be in warding off attempts to divert state transportation funding to close California's budget gap and to push for a new authorization of the federal transportation bill. Communications The Commission is committed to communicating with and educating a broad arena of interested parties on the roles and responsibilities of the agency. An emphasis will continue to be placed on informing Riverside County residents and businesses 143 • about transportation projects and services and maintaining open communication with other transportation stakeholders. Various forms of media and communication tools are used in these outreach efforts with the overall objectives to provide accurate, informative, and easily accessible information; facilitate public participation in the Commission processes; and increase interagency coordination and cooperation. The Deputy Executive Director is responsible for communications with the news media and prepares text for Commission materials, presentations, and speeches. Along with the Executive Director, the Deputy Executive Director, Community Relations Manager, and individual project managers actively participate in public presentations at the local, regional, and state levels to represent the Commission's interests. Strong relationships with the news media are very important to ensure that the public is well informed regarding the Commission's progress in determining funding priorities, designing infrastructure improvements, and constructing projects. There are many points throughout these processes in which the public can and should play a role in shaping the future of the County's transportation network. Key Assumptions • The Government Relations Manager will oversee legislative affairs work efforts with guidance from the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director. • The annual newspaper report to the public will be distributed throughout the County. • The On the Move newsletter will be published monthly as well as distributed electronically and posted on the Commission website. • The Speakers Bureau effort will continue to seek local community opportunities to expand outreach regarding the Commission's activities. • The Commission's website will be updated and refreshed on a regular basis. • Additional communications tools and opportunities will be explored for incorporation into the ongoing program to help build public awareness of Commission activities including radio, television, social media outlets such as Twitter, and the internet. • The Commission will take a leadership role in formulating a countywide direction on federal transportation policy in order to influence the new authorization of the federal transportation act. • Public outreach will take a heightened role as project development activities accelerate on projects such as the SR-91 corridor improvement project, 1-215 corridor improvements, SR-91 HOV lanes, Perris Valley Line project, Mid County Parkway, and SR-79 realignment. • Goods movement will remain a key policy priority for the Commission, and there will be an emphasis to ensure that Riverside County receives significant funding for this need from state and federal governments. • Another governmental relations priority will be to secure design -build procurement authority for the SR-91 corridor improvement project through Corona. 144 • Another federal legislative priority will be seeking federal funding for the implementation of PTC technology for Metrolink trains. Accomplishments • Published a four -page annual report supplement in three major newspapers — The Press Enterprise, Desert Sun, and The Californian. • Continued effective relationships with the news media resulting in informative coverage regarding local and regional transportation issues and Measure A project delivery. • Provided extensive public outreach support as part of the project development process for the Mid County Parkway, Perris Valley Line, SR-91 and 1-15 corridor improvement projects, and Riverside County to Orange County Major Investment Study projects. • Supported the Rail Department in the development of various marketing materials and advertisements including weekend and holiday train services. • Increased the Commission's presence on television and radio with interviews on Time Wamer Cable, KVCR, KESQ, and KOCE. • Updated an informational video and held a workshop regarding goods movement issues and railroad grade separations. • Continue to take a leadership role and work together with the five -county consensus working group, Mobility 21, and CAGTC on goods movement issues through the federal legislative reauthorization process. • Developed new collateral materials for an overview of the Commission's programs and projects as well as construction projects planned for Westem County, which are often distributed at public events. • Improved the functionality of the Commission's website and updated a number of specific project -related websites including those for the Mid County Parkway and the SR-91 and 1-15 corridor improvement projects. • Developed a photo library that will assist in documenting the progress of the voter -approved sales tax program and can be accessed by staff. • Updated the appearance and effectiveness of the On the Move monthly e-mail newsletter by expanding its distribution. • Launched a new presence on the social networking site Twitter which can be accessed at http://twitter.com/RCTC. • Held widely attended grand opening events for the North Main Corona station parking structure and the Perris Station Transit Center. • Developed video presentations on the completion of the first Measure A program and the construction of the North Corona Main station parking structure, both of which were included on the Commission's website. • Actively participated in a region -wide effort to expand the reach of Mobility 21, a Southern California transportation advocacy group, to the Inland Empire. The emphasis resulted in co -hosting a major conference in Los Angeles in late 2009. • Upgraded a new Commissioner orientation program that bolsters Commissioner knowledge and participation regarding Commission projects and activities and was presented to every new Commissioner. 145 • • • Major Initiatives Legislative Affairs Legislatively, the continued quest for additional state and federal investment in transportation infrastructure will be an ongoing concem. At the state level, ongoing state funding problems will likely result in the diversion of state transportation funding. The uncertainty of state funding has led the Commission to embark upon new funding strategies such as toll financing to build new projects. Making these projects more efficient, such as allowing for design -build procurements, will continue to be a major priority in FY 2010/11. Additionally, in shaping state transportation policy, there is a need to be especially active in state legislative matters to ensure that Riverside County needs obtain proper consideration and funding. Another concern to monitor is state legislation that could impact transportation economic development in Riverside County through planning regulations as evidenced in SB 375. Another priority will be dealing with Congress on the new authorization of the federal transportation act. The federal transportation bill will be a critical opportunity to secure funding for goods movement -related needs such as the funding for four priority corridors: Alameda Corridor East grade separations in Riverside County, I- 215, SR-91, and 1-10. Even after more than a year of delay, it appears that a new authorization of the federal transportation program will remain on hold; however, the next several months present an opportunity to propose favorable policy to major congressional committees. In anticipation of this priority, the Commission has already bolstered its lobbying presence in Washington, D.C. to play an influential role in shaping the reauthorization legislation. Developing effective partnerships with agencies such as RTA, SunLine, and CVAG will be an important component of the Commission's federal lobbying strategy pertaining to the federal transportation bill authorization process. Ideally, Riverside County will communicate a unified message to Congress regarding its mobility needs. During the coming year, the Commission will play a leadership role in bringing various agencies together in this effort that will include cities, the County, and transit operators. Another important effort in working with Washington is joining with other Southern California transportation agencies to maximize regional funding. This proved to be successful in California during the TCIF funding allocations and can be counted on in terms of the federal authorization as well. One organization that the Commission has membership is Mobility 21, which is comprised of transportation agencies, the Automobile Club of Southern Califomia, and major business organizations such as the Greater Riverside Area Chambers of Commerce. Communications The Commission provides information to the public through various channels including: 1) participation at public meetings, chambers of commerce, industry 146 associations, and service clubs; 2) production and provision of resource materials and fact sheets; 3) maintenance and enhancement of the Commission's website; and 4) development of newspaper press releases, radio and television interviews, and cable television spots. The Commission's largest publication effort to provide widespread understanding of its projects and expenditures is its four -page annual report which is published in three area newspapers throughout the County. Broad distribution of the On the Move, an e-mail newsletter highlighting actions of the Commission and emerging topics, will continue as part of the Commission's communications efforts. Efforts will continue to update and expand the Commission's contact database including e-mail addresses in order to support distribution of the Commission's public information materials. A continuing emphasis will be placed on providing communications support to major project development efforts including the Perris Valley Line, the Mid County Parkway, and the SR-91 and 1-215 highway construction projects. The need for proactive public communication and outreach remains important, as the Commission continues to move forward with the delivery of the 2009 Measure A work program. This is an area of emphasis, as the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan places the Commission in a high -profile role to deliver large-scale highway projects. This will require additional contact with the public by the Community Relations Manager. The Commission's outreach will include a proactive effort to work closely with various media formats such as print, radio, intemet, and television to increase their understanding of and interest in transportation issues and to generate a higher level of media coverage. Toward that end, opportunities will be identified for live or taped interviews and presentations that speak to local residents and employers and their questions conceming transportation issues. Appropriate forums may include city council meetings, local cable television, and radio. New Commissioner orientation meetings will be provided by the Executive Director, Deputy Executive Director, and Clerk of the Board in individualized settings. To supplement individual Commissioner meetings with the Executive Director, continuing education opportunities at the small group level will also be provided to Commissioners that focus on timely issues. Department Goals Foster the Commission's full involvement in a broad range of local, regional, state, and federal government settings. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement, System Efficiencies) Objectives: • Participate in the Self -Help Counties Coalition, the Califomia Transit Association, Southern Califomia Legislative Roundtable, League of Cities, Mobility 21, • • 147 CAGTC, state and federal transportation agencies, and community/business organizations. • Work with the CTC and the regional transportation planning agencies to protect and enhance project funding for the County through influencing policy decisions. • Maintain a leadership role in local and regional transportation venues related to project development efforts and current and emerging issues including coordination with other county transportation commissions, councils of governments, and local jurisdictions. • Continue to foster the success of the Southern California Working Group and Mobility 21 in advocating for additional funding for goods movement projects. • Participate and influence intercounty discussions between Riverside and Orange counties regarding the operation of the 91 Express Lanes as well as overall transportation policy between both counties. This includes supporting efforts to develop a new transportation corridor between the counties and to support additional transit service. • Participate and influence intercounty discussions with SANBAG on issues involving improvements to 1-215 and major arterials such as Pigeon Pass Road and Reche Canyon Road. • Participate and influence intercounty discussions with SANDAG on intercounty transportation issues including planning, vanpooling, transit connections, and the future improvement of 1-15. • Provide leadership to the Technical Advisory Committee of the MSRC to ensure that funding for air quality -related transportation improvements is fully distributed to Riverside County jurisdictions. • Work with SCAG, WRCOG, and CVAG to monitor and respond to transportation issues involving the implementation of SB 375 on smart growth planning. Implement the Commission's state and federal legislative program to maximize flexibility in the use of existing transportation revenues by supporting legislation to protect and increase current funding levels, ensuring an equitable distribution of available resources, streamlining administrative procedures to reduce costs and time of project development, and accelerating the allocation and use of existing resources. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement) Objectives: • Coordinate legislative activities of federal and state legislative consultants related to SAFETEA-LU, ARRA, STIP, and Proposition 1B. Obtain monthly reports on activities performed. • Work with board members to establish policy positions, visit with elected representatives in Sacramento and Washington, draft legislation, and take positions on pending legislation. • Review and analyze legislation and recommend positions for the Commission to adopt on specific legislative proposals. • Effectively represent the Commission before the state and federal legislative bodies, the CTC, and other agencies in funding, programming, and policy matters. 148 • Maintain contact and good working relationships with state and federal lawmakers and their staffs. Regularly meet and inform them of County transportation issues, policy positions, and project priorities. • Convene meetings with state, federal, and legislative staff members. Support the continuing education of Commissioners to increase their understanding of transportation -related issues at local, state, and federal levels to maximize the effectiveness of the Commission in affecting policy and funding actions. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objectives: • Provide orientation training for new Commissioners. • Produce and distribute a monthly e-mail newsletter, On the Move, highlighting actions and activities of the Commission. • Provide periodic educational workshops or study sessions for Commissioners. Develop and maintain an information program which educates the public and other stakeholders on the roles and responsibilities of the Commission as it relates to accomplishments achieved through Measure A or other funding sources controlled or administered by the Commission. (Policy Goals: Communications, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Expand, maintain, and update information on the Commission's website including individual project websites and social media. • Annually produce a report that informs the public regarding Measure A progress and other Commission programs. • Issue news releases to the local media announcing significant achievements and providing information on Commission actions and activities. • Develop and maintain open lines of communication with news reporters to facilitate adequate and accurate news coverage. • Schedule periodic media information briefings or news conferences when a particular issue warrants it. • Expand the stock of video footage for use in production of cable television spots that feature transportation projects funded and or implemented by the Commission. • Periodically use cable television and other forms of media such as internet sites and blogs, if appropriate, to communicate information to the public regarding the Commission's activities and services. • Coordinate and oversee message content of all Commission publications and communications to provide uniformity of message and direction. • Support the development and planning of projects in regard to public outreach and communication efforts. • Require the use of Measure A project/program signage by funding recipients to increase public awareness of Measure A accomplishments. • Continue to administer and expand the use of the Speakers Bureau to reach community members in service and other organizations. 149 • • Monitor and distribute media coverage from various outlets in the County and throughout the region to Commissioners and staff to enable them to closely follow transportation policy trends. • Provide oversight and coordination to Commission departments in the development of communications' materials. Foster and maintain effective communications with other agencies to heighten their understanding of the roles and responsibilities of the Commission and increase interagency coordination and cooperation. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objective: • Assign designated staff members to attend other agency meetings and require staff to provide written/verbal communication on topics of discussion during regular staff meetings. Legislative Affairs and Communications II Performance/Workload Indicators FY 08/09 Actual FY 09/10 Estimated FY 10/11 Projected Speakers bureau presentations 30 30 30 I Legislative action submittals to Commission 9 9 9 Commissioner and state and federal legislator in -person meetings 50 55 50 Inland Empire delegation staff briefings 2 1 2 Southern California legislative staff roundtables 9 9 9 150 • Finance • Mission Statement: 'To safeguard the Commission's assets and maintain strong and prudent fiscal controls in investing, accounting, budgeting, procurements, and financial reporting including ongoing disclosure to all interested parties. Seek financing altematives that complement the Commission's strategic direction.' Chart 28 - Finance Capital Outlay 7% Ilth Expenditures The Finance Department's total budget is $2,298,100 (Table 43) and reflects a 76% decrease over the prior year's budget, primarily related to a change in reporting certain debt administration professional services and debt service costs in the Capital Development and Delivery Department. Department staffing costs will total $673,000, reflecting a decrease of 3% due to Finance staff providing increased support to various programs and projects and one unbudgeted position vacancy. Professional costs of $896,500 include various services related to general legal, investment and financial advisory, extemal and internal audits, debt management, and CAFR and annual budget graphic design. Support costs of $574,100 reflect an 871% increase over the prior year's budget, because general business insurance costs previously included in the Administration Department are now included in the Finance Department budget beginning in FY 2010/11. Capital outlay is related to the carryover of budgeted costs for the ERP system software implementation. 151 Table 43 — Finance Expenditure Detail Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Legal Services Audit Savkes Financial Advisory Professional.Seraices • General Total Professional Costs Support Costs Capital Outlay Debt Smite TOTAL Finance Finance Staffing Summary • $ 703,500 $ 694,600 $ 773,100 75,000 30,000 30,000 399,903 550,000 428,000 90,000 65,000 30,000 766,400 1,134,600 269,500 1,331,300 1,719,600 757,500 30,800 53,100 494,300 196,000 355,500 201,000 3,452,500 6,500,000 $ 5,714,100 $ 9,388,800 $ 2,225,900 Accounting and Human Resources Manager Accounting Assistant Accounting Clerk Accounting Supervisor Accounting Technician Administrative Assistant Chief Financial Officer Procurement and Assets Administrator Procurement and Assets Manager Senior Office Assistant FTE 0.81 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.01 0.58 0.66 0.65 0.03 6.74 (21,600) -3% 0% (60,000) -11% (15,000) -23% (808,100) -71% (883,100) -50% 515,000 871% (201,000) -57% (6,500,000) -100% $ (7,090,700) •76% 0.77 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 0.01 0.55 0.10 0.05 0.03 6.51 Department Budget Overview Department Description Finance and Accounting Commission resources are allocated to assure financial stability and fiscal accountability. Finance activities include investing the Commission's cash resources, planning and directing financial transactions, and subsequent monitoring of legal and regulatory requirements. Adequate cash flow must be maintained while at the same time prudently investing idle funds. Borrowing needs are carefully planned using both short- and long-term debt. Once debt is issued, there are ongoing responsibilities including interaction with financial advisors, bankers, dealers and remarketing agents, underwriters, bond counsel, bond insurers, trustees, issuing and paying agents, arbitrage consultants, and rating agencies as well as providing regular and consistent information disclosure to investors. 152 Fiscal accountability involves receiving all funds due the Commission, paying all Commission obligations, maintaining the general ledger, reporting regularly on the Commission's fiscal results, and preparing and monitoring the budget. Fiscal accountability requires the coordination of budget planning and monitoring and the accurate and timely accounting for all funding sources, including compliance with all applicable laws and regulations goveming those funds. Accounting encompasses cash receipt and disbursement functions, maintenance of the general ledger including project cost accounting, payroll processing, quarterly and annual financial reporting, and retention of and coordination with independent auditors. The Commission also recognizes the importance of accountability for the organization. As a result, the Commission is highly regarded by individuals, peers, other organizations, and government officials at a local, regional, state, and national basis. A formal organizational accountability program was approved in January 2006 to address fraud risk, ethical conduct, financial and operational disclosure, and maintaining the public's confidence in the Commission. Accordingly, measures have been implemented based on a conceptual framework related to oversight, reporting, fraud, intemal control, and ethics. Procurements and Assets Management In the management of the procurements and contracts process, the responsibility of the procurement and assets management function is to ensure that the procurement policies approved by the Commission are followed and procurement procedures are updated as required. The function is responsible for the purchase of all goods and services, except for real property acquisition, in accordance with Commission policies and federal and state funding requirements to ensure the implementation of the Commission's projects and programs. This includes updates to the disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE) program and anticipated DBE participation level (AADPL) goals for federally funded projects. Procuring goods and services for the Commission is a cooperative effort. All Commission staff involved in procurements for their projects and programs are responsible to employ sound judgment and appropriate standards of ethics and fairness to procure in a manner most advantageous to the Commission. This division also conducts a review and updates insurance coverage for the Commission and its properties. The Commission owns and maintains six Metrolink commuter rail stations, and stations along the Perris Valley Line extension will be added in the next few years. Assets management oversees the daily maintenance of these stations; however, expenditures are identified in the Rail Department budget. It is the responsibility of assets management to ensure that the rail passengers have a safe and pleasant experience at the Commission -owned Metrolink commuter rail stations. 153 Key Assumptions • The commercial paper program will continue as a short-term financing vehicle for the Westem Riverside County Delivery Plan projects and as grant anticipation funding for the Perris Valley Line project. • Sales tax revenue bonds will be issued to retire a portion of the outstanding commercial paper notes and to provide funding for capital projects. • The Commission will pay 100% of the annual required contribution related to postretirement health care benefits. • Arbitrage calculations related to the outstanding debt issues will be performed by a consultant on an annual basis. • Directors and program managers will continue to have adequate project budget and accounting information to make informed decisions. • ERP system auxiliary modules related to human resources/payroll, fixed assets, budget preparation, position budgeting, accounts receivable, and GASB 34 financial reporting will be implemented by June 30, 2011. Implementation of web - based applications has not been determined. • Investments will be maintained primarily in state and local agency investment pools for short-term liquidity purposes; however, investments in mid-term treasury and federal agency securities may be made as available funds are identified and yields increase. The overall interest rate is conservatively projected to be .50%. • Procurements and contracts management processes will be reviewed and updated as a result of the ERP system implementation of the contracts and purchasing modules. • Existing procurement policies and procedures will be reviewed and updated as necessary. • A standardized procurement filing system will be developed and implemented and centralized procurement files will be implemented. • Rehabilitation of five Metrolink stations will continue. • A procurement to outsource the daily property management and maintenance of the commuter rail stations to a single vendor will be developed. Accomplishments • Implemented the core financial modules (general ledger, project accounting, accounts payable, purchasing, and contracts management) of EDEN, an ERP financial management system, to replace the existing financial management system in October 2009. • Instituted new business processes in the finance department as a result of the implementation of EDEN. • Conducted internal audit reviews of the EDEN implementation, transit provider services, and procurement and contracts management function. • Updated the internal audit risk assessment and related audit plan. • Issued variable rate sales tax revenue bonds in connection with the commencement of the interest rate swap and to retire a portion of the commercial 154 • paper notes outstanding and refund the 2008 bonds. A liquidity facility with a bank was obtained as security for the bonds. • Extended the term for the commercial paper program's letter of credit for an additional two years. • Commenced the planning for a toll revenue bond issuance in 2011 by selecting an underwriting team to develop a financial model and provide financial input related to the design -build procurement. • Submitted CAFR for consideration of financial reporting excellence award from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) (17r" year) related to the CAFR for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009. • Obtained GFOA distinguished budget award (14th year) for annual budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2009. • Provided assistance in revisions to the Measure A maintenance of effort (MOE) guidelines and determination of FY 2010-2019 base year MOE amounts. • Generated almost $700,000 in additional Measure A sales tax revenue since the engagement of a firm in January 2008 to provide sales tax audit services in order to detect and correct point of sale reporting errors. Major Initiatives Finance and Accounting The commercial paper program has been in place for over five years and has provided advance funding for projects included in the 2009 Measure A and related Westem Riverside County Delivery Plan. Commission management will continue to consider appropriate uses of commercial paper to advance 2009 Measure A projects of the Commission and CVAG and to provide FTA Small Starts grant anticipation funding for the Perris Valley Line project. In order to restore additional funding capacity to the commercial paper program, a portion of the outstanding commercial paper notes will be retired in connection with the issuance of sales tax revenue bonds in late 2010. A portion of the proceeds from the 2010 Bonds will provide funding for capital projects. Staff continues to develop a comprehensive financing plan to support the highway and rail capital projects to be delivered through 2019 and to assess future financing requirements. This financing plan incorporates revised sales tax revenue forecasts as well as other potential federal, state, and local revenue sources, including tolls. Based on the updated cost estimates for these projects and identified revenues, potential project funding shortfalls may result in project deferrals or require alternative financing strategies. Financing alternatives to be considered include commercial paper, long-term bond issues to finance Measure A and toll projects, and federal loan programs. The financing plan also includes consideration of the restriction of the $500 million 2009 Measure A bonding cap, which could include the possibility of an administrative action or ballot measure to increase the cap. 155 Approximately three intemal audit projects per year will be developed as part of the organizational accountability program. Projects may include a second phase for capital project management, station management, and accounts payable and disbursements. An outcome of the projects will be operational solutions such as process improvements. The intemal audit risk assessment and audit plan will continue to be updated annually. To ensure that the Commission receives the proper of amount of Measure A sales taxes, the Commission will continue to engage a firm to conduct sales tax audit services. The firm will also provide quarterly sales tax analysis and reporting services, of which a summary report is presented to the Commission on a quarterly basis. The Finance Department will continue to keep abreast of GASB technical activities affecting the Commission's accounting and financial reporting activities. New standards related to fund balance reporting and govemmental fund type definitions as well as the accounting and reporting for derivatives such the interest rate swaps will be implemented as part of the preparation of the CAFR for the year ended June 30, 2010. The Finance Department will continue the implementation of EDEN, an ERP financial management software system that will integrate data processing across the Commission, automate administrative processes, and embrace data integration. The ERP implementation efficiency gains include an automated paperless workflow system, advanced project accounting, multi -year budgeting, multi -year contract management, grant tracking, and readily available scanned images that can be retrieved by all users. Procurements and Assets Management A centralized procurements process will continue to be implemented to manage requests for proposals, qualifications, invitations for bid, small purchases, and related contract administration issues. Accordingly, this will strengthen controls to ensure consistency in the development and application of procurement policies and procedures and adherence to applicable laws and regulations, especially those related to federal and state grants. The procurement and assets management staff assist in the property management functions of the Commission's commuter rail stations. To prepare for the long-term maintenance of Commission -owned stations, a commuter rail station rehabilitation and strategic plan is being implemented (see Section 6.2, Rain. Part of the implementation of this plan will be the development of a procurement to outsource some or all of the property management responsibilities, including maintenance, of the stations during FY 2010/11. Staff also assists the Commission's insurance broker in procuring competitive quotes, on an annual basis, for various insurance coverages secured by the Commission in order to provide cost effective solutions to meet its diverse insurance needs. • 156 • Staff will determine the annual DBE and AADPL goals for federal fiscal year (FFY) 2010/11, subject to Commission approval. The race conscious AADPL and the race - neutral AADPL relate to projects for which funding is received from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) through Caftans, and the annual race -neutral DBE goal is related to FTA-funded projects. Department Goals Protect the Commission's cash resources by regular monitoring of investment practices to ensure consistency with established investment policy. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objective: • Achieve a rate of retum at least equal to the County of Riverside Treasury Pool rate. Manage the Commission's outstanding debt ensuring compliance with applicable laws and regulations and continued investor awareness and receptivity to the Commission's program. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Provide an annual update and review of the debt programs with rating agencies no later than December 2010. • Meet continuing disclosure requirements of the debt program. • Prepare arbitrage calculations as required. Ensure the Commission and funding recipients comply with Measure A and TDA laws and regulations as they relate to the annual financial and compliance audits as well as close cooperation and coordination with independent auditors. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Minimize the number of substantive management letter comments and compliance findings requiring corrective action by the Commission. • Maintain appropriate fiduciary review and monitoring procedures for Measure A recipient and TDA claimant audits. Maintain fiscal and budgetary control through monitoring of periodic results and ensuring consistency with the Commission's strategic direction. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Obtain the GFOA Distinguished Budget Award for the FY 2010/11 budget. • Facilitate a comprehensive budgeting approach that effectively involves management staff, requiring full accountability for all department expenditures. 157 • Fund 100% of the annual required contribution related to the postretirement health care benefits. Assure fiscal accountability for Commission funds with general ledger accounting and financial reporting consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Ensure proactive communication and timely responses to any noted errors, corrections, and budget transfers related to program management reviews of accounting and budget information. • Obtain an unqualified opinion on the basic financial statements. • Receive financial reporting excellence awards from the GFOA. • Stay abreast of finance, accounting, and financial reporting developments by attending training and conferences in these general areas or in specialized areas applicable to job duties. • Update and maintain the fiscal policies and procedures manual. • Update and maintain complete accounting desk procedures manual for EDEN implementation to facilitate cross training. • Assist local governments with Measure A funding by providing timely allocation of funds for eligible projects and financing opportunities to the extent funding does not impact other programs and is financially feasible and prudent. • Maintain financial software to reflect technical updates and current technology. Develop and maintain an organizational accountability program encompassing financial and operational functions. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Establish and implement measures related to oversight, fraud, internal control, and ethics. • Issue annual disclosure statements related to financial and operational responsibilities. • Develop an annual intemal audit plan to include approximately three intemal audit projects and update business risk analysis at least on an annual basis. Procure goods and services from qualified consultants, contractors, and other vendors in accordance with laws and regulations at a competitive price. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Assist departments and programs to procure and obtain goods and services in a cost effective and efficient manner. • Ensure that procurements are conducted in accordance with a comprehensive Procurement Policies Manual. • Ensure that agreements, amendments, and MOUs are entered into with appropriate legal considerations. 158 • • Process agreements, amendments, and MOUs in a timely and efficient manner. • Ensure that consistent procedures, processes, and tools are used for procurements. Review existing procurement policies and procedures. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Ensure that the procurement polices reflect Commission requirements and practices. • Segregate policies and procedures so that procedures can be easily updated without Commission approval. • Ensure that procurement policies and procedures reflect the requirements of the Commission's federal, state, and other funding sources. • Create an easy to read desktop quick procurement policies reference guide for use by Commission staff. • Maximize the value received for the Commission's expenditure of public funds. • Provide all vendors an equal opportunity to provide needed goods and/or services. Maintain order, security, and safety at the Commission's commuter rail stations. (Policy Goal: Intermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Monitor and improve closed circuit television systems at the Commission -owned Metrolink stations. • Replace signage and repair facilities in an orderly and cost-efficient manner. Finance PerformanceMlorkload Indicators FY 08/09 Actual FY 09/10 Estimated FY 10/11 Projected Sales tax revenue bond rating Aa2/AA+/AA Aa2/AA+/AA+ Aa2/AA+/AA+ Commercial paper rating P-1/A-1+ P-1/A-1+ P-1/A-1+ GFOA Certificate of Achievement Awarded Awarded Awarded GFOA Distinguished Budget Award Proficient Proficient Proficient Invoices processed 5,285 5,500 5,600 Checks processed _ - 3,516 3,600 3,700 Audit adjustments 1 0 0 Average yield on investments 1.32% 1.00% 1.00% Payroll hours processed 86,596 84,000 84,000 Accounts receivable invoices processed 280 290 300 Agreements processed 427 360 410 159 • bolds Couniy Transportation Cmamission Seetion Sta2 MiLsg:OzoteaU CP[i(Dmrtit:iwalt 160 Planning and Programming Mission Statement: "To exert leadership in transportation planning and the programming of funds to improve mobility, foster environmental stewardship, expedite project delivery, and form partnerships with regional, state, and federal agencies resulting in maximum return on local investment. Support a coordinated regional approach to solving transportation funding issues." Chart 29 — Planning and Programming Professional Costs 5% Support Costs 0% Expenditures Planning and Programming expenditures of $7,306,500 have decreased 34% from last year's budget (Table 44). Salaries and benefits represent 13% of total expenditures and increased slightly due to an increase in FTEs. Professional services totaling $350,000 have decreased 50% compared to the FY 2009/10 budget due to completion of the feasibility and water monitoring studies for the proposed ICE and a reduction in consulting services related to goods movement issues. Professional services include CMP implementation efforts, air quality analysis, project database management, local and regional planning activities, on - call goods movement consultants, and legal services. Projects and operations costs have decreased 37% due to a decrease in LTF disbursements of rail allocations for grade separation projects in the cities of Riverside and Corona and the County as well as in the costs for the ICE feasibility and water monitoring. 161 Table 44 - Planning and Programming Expenditure Detail Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Legal Services Professional Services - General Total Professional Casts 513,100 704,300 313,800 Support Costs 28,200 38,400 11,400 Projects and Operations Program Operations 53,030 49,100 49,000 Right of Way 10,100 Special Studies 4,611,300 1,862,800 1,162,200 Operating and Capital Disbursements 2,001,700 7,613,400 2,985,300 Total Projects and Operations 65,400 (22,000) •55% (332,300) -50% (354,300) -50% (13,400) -35% (37,100) -76% N/A (492,200) -26% (2,924,200) -39% 6,676,100 9,525,300 4,196,500 y, ram.;, (3,513,500) -37% TOTAL Planning and Programming $ 8,051,200 $ 11,122,300 $ 5,448,100 $ (3,815,800) -34% Planning and Programming Staffing Summary Administrative Assistant Chief Financial Officer Community Relations Manager Deputy Executive Director Executive Director Goods Movement Manager Muitimodal Services Director Planning and Programming Manager Procurement and Assets Administrator Procurement and Assets Manager Project Delivery Director Project Development Director Senior Staff Analyst Staff Analyst Toll Project Director FTE 0.78 0.76 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.19 0.15 0.48 0.45 1.00 1.00 0.14 0.00 0.96 0.91 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.16 1.00 0.90 1.06 0.90 0.00 0.02 5.85 5.33 • 162 • Department Budget Overview Department Description The Commission is responsible for short- and long-range transportation planning and programming. Short-range planning and programming involves the development of the five-year STIP and preparation of the five-year FTIP for Riverside County. These programming documents identify projects and their respective funding and schedules. The Commission's involvement with long-range planning efforts includes the coordination and input into planning efforts throughout the County and southern California region. These efforts involve participation in local, bi-county, and regional corridor studies, including the continued development of the CETAP corridors. Regional planning efforts are incorporated in the RTP (a 30-year transportation plan) developed by SCAG in conjunction with county transportation commissions, sub -regional agencies, local agencies, transit operators, and other interested parties. The Commission is responsible for approving projects for Regional Improvement Program (RIP) funds and coordinating with Caltrans on the selection of Interregional Improvement Program (IIP) funds as part of the STIP approved by the CTC every two years. In November 2006, Proposition 1 B was approved by the voters of California, which provided $20 billion in transportation infrastructure funding. Various program categories were established including a $2 billion infusion into the STIP. Other competitive program categories included CMIA and TCIF; Riverside County was successful in receiving funding for the SR-91 HOV and 1-215 widening projects, twelve grade separation projects, and a ground access improvement project at the I-215Nan Buren interchange. Given the current economic conditions, Proposition 1B funds have been the most reliable state funding source for transportation projects this past year; however, continued funding is subject to the State's ability to issue Proposition 1 B bonds. The Commission is a member of the Southern California Consensus Group that developed and submitted project proposals for the TCIF program. As with the RIP and IIP funds, CMIA and TCIF funds are administered and allocated by the CTC. Programming specifically involves the development, review, and approval of projects for various funding programs. In order to receive federal funds and approvals, all projects funded with federal and state dollars, or local projects that are regionally significant, must be included in the FTIP. SCAG is responsible for incorporating all six -county (Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura) transportation improvement programs into one regional programming document and conducting a conformity analysis with the adopted air plans to ensure compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. This 163 • FTIP update effort is performed every 18 to 24 months. Multiple amendments occur within the 18 to 24 month FTIP update cycle for minor changes that do not affect the conformity analysis. The Commission is responsible for allocating the following local, state, and federal funding sources: Local Sources: • 1989 and 2009 Measure A Expenditure Plans • Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Program State Sources: • SB 821 bicycle and pedestrian projects • RIP • Proposition 1 B Federal Sources: • Transportation Enhancements (TE) • STP • CMAQ The Commission also serves as the CMA for the County and is responsible for developing and updating the CMP. The CMP was developed to meet state legislation and federal Congestion Management System (CMS) requirements, which includes an enhanced traffic monitoring system. The CMP's highways and regional arterials are regularly monitored to ensure that they are not operating at deficient levels [Level of Service (LOS) "F"]. If a deficiency occurs along the CMP system, a deficiency plan must be prepared that identifies mitigation measures and/or projects that will improve the LOS to "E" or higher. Partnership development, public and private, is critical to the Commission's continued success in affecting positive transportation decisions to meet future demands. Commission staff works in close coordination with its partners to advocate for federal, state, and local funding to improve mobility and mitigate the impacts of goods movement. Key Assumptions • The Commission will continue its efforts in working with transportation partners to streamline and improve project delivery. • Project development work for CETAP corridors will be funded with a combination of local, state, and federal funds. • MSHCP funding contributions to the RCA through 2019 have been completed. 164 • • A consultant contract for CMP services is maintained to provide assistance with ongoing traffic monitoring efforts, biennial updates to the CMP, and support on other related planning activities. • The Commission will utilize all available funding sources on transportation projects identified in the 1989 Measure A and the 2009 Measure A as well as other regional high priority projects, including TUMF regional arterial projects. • The Commission will continue participation in local, bi-county, and regional planning efforts representing the interests of the County. • The Commission will work with the CTC, Caltrans, and local project sponsors to implement projects funded with STIP-RIP, CMIA, and TCIF to ensure that the programming and timing of allocations are consistent with project schedules. • The Commission will continue to manage and host the project management database to improve efficiencies in monitoring projects and funding and in reporting to state and federal agencies. • The Commission will continue to assist local project sponsors with the processing of state and federal funding approvals and overall project delivery. Accomplishments • Developed 2010 STIP Update and submitted it to the CTC by established deadline. • Processed 18 STIP allocation and amendment requests to the CTC. • Completed the draft project level Environmental Impact Study (EIS)/Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Mid County Parkway project. • Completed the Feasibility Evaluation Report for the ICE tunnels. • Completed 22 local agency agreements and/or amendments for the implementation of TUMF regional arterial projects. • Completed 66 RTP project amendments. • Processed over 290 project amendments into the 2008 FTIP. • Developed the 2011 FTIP Update, consisting of a review and update of 402 projects totaling $9.2 billion, and submitted it to SCAG by established deadline. • Coordinated with Caltrans and project sponsors regarding the obligation of ARRA highway and TE projects, met obligation deadlines, and prevented loss of funding to Riverside County. • Completed Phase III activities for the 1-15 Interregional Partnership between the Commission, Caltrans, RTA, SANDAG, and WRCOG. • Developed and held a workshop regarding advancing the issue of goods movement in the Inland Empire. • Updated an informational video regarding goods movement issues and railroad grade separations. 165 • Submitted a $31.8 million grant application to the U.S. Department of Transportation for Auto Center Drive (Corona) and Iowa Avenue (Riverside) grade separation projects. • Monitored and provided written comments on port expansion projects for each of the Ports. • Monitored TCIF project development to ensure timely completion of the 12 grade separations and a ground access improvement project to improve the 1- 215Nan Buren interchange as required for the $162.7 million Proposition 1B TCIF funds. One project (Columbia Avenue in Riverside) was completed in March 2010; an additional project (Magnolia Avenue in Riverside) is under construction. Two additional projects, Auto Center Drive and Iowa Avenue, are projected to complete the right of way phase so that construction can start in early 2011. • Continued to take a leadership role and work together with the five -county consensus working group and with Mobility 21 on goods movement issues. Major Initiatives Each county transportation commission throughout the State is responsible for programming RIP funds, which represents 75% of the total STIP funding available statewide for capital enhancement projects. The 75% funding level is then further distributed with 60% of the funds allocated to Southern California and 40% to Northern California. A population formula is then applied to determine county funding levels called "county shares." The Commission is responsible for ensuring that projects funded with STIP funding are administered and implemented consistent with CTC and Caltrans policies. Two percent of RIP funding available to Riverside County was allocated for staff support to carry out STIP PPM activities. Federal TE funds are also administered through the STIP. TE funds are not subject to general fund diversions; however, TE funds are authorized each year by the passage of the state budget. CMIA and TCIF funds are monitored by Caltrans and the CTC. Baseline agreements are developed for each project under these programs. Any changes to project funding, scope, or schedule will require an amendment to the baseline agreement. The CTC allocates the CMIA and TCIF funds and the process for allocating the funds is similar to the process established for STIP funds. Included in the 2009 Measure A is a provision that identifies $400 million of TUMF revenues collected on the Western County TUMF network to be allocated to TUMF regional arterial projects. Of the $400 million, $200 million is slated specifically for the CETAP corridors and the other $200 million for regional arterial projects. The Commission and WRCOG entered into an amended MOU which identifies a distribution of the TUMF revenues prior to the commencement of the 2009 Measure A. The distribution, after deduction of a WRCOG administrative fee, • • 166 • is 48.7% to the Commission for regional arterials and CETAP corridors. The remaining revenues are distributed to WRCOG for the five TUMF improvement zones and for regional transit facilities. An amendment to the $400 million cap provision was approved by WRCOG and the Commission in August and September 2008, respectively. As a result, the Commission will continue receiving 48.7% of TUMF funds for the CETAP and Regional Arterial Program projects above the original $400 million cap. In September 2004 the Commission established a 5-year program and approved $71.7 million to fund project development work for 24 regional arterial projects. Planning and Programming manages the Regional Arterial Program; however, the expenditures for these regional arterial capital projects are included in Capital Projects. In 2006 the Commission initiated strategic partnership efforts to identify and evaluate alternative financing strategies. Alternative financing will likely be necessary to fund the significant gap between funding readily available through conventional governmental funding/financing techniques and project needs. Alternative financing structures including the use of public toll roads will be necessary to fully fund the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan. The toll projects are discussed in the Capital Project Development and Delivery section. Transportation Planning The Commission's role in planning throughout the year will involve working with SCAG, sub -regional agencies, local agencies, and the other county transportation commissions in the region on various planning efforts relative to the development of the 2012 RTP and SB 375-mandated Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), implementation of the 2008 RTP, corridor studies, goods movement studies, and efforts to update transportation computer models and project databases. Staff will also be an active participant in the development of green house gas reduction implementation guidelines and SB 375 legislative amendments. In FY 2010/11 the Commission will continue its work efforts on the CETAP corridors. The draft environmental document for the Mid County Parkway was circulated for public review and public comment received. An updated environmental document is being prepared to address changes made to the project limits and, once completed, will again be available for public review and comment. While the geotechnical feasibility report for the ICE has been completed, funding is included in the FY 2010/11 budget in the event that the Commission and the Riverside Orange Corridor Authority board decide to move forward with hosting a workshop to gauge interest from the private sector in its taking the lead on the tunnel concept. The Commission will also provide coordination and oversight, along with SANBAG, for the Moreno Valley -San Bernardino County corridor activities that are being led by the County, focusing on the Pigeon Pass and Reche Canyon road improvements. 167 • The FY 2010/11 CMP effort will involve continued monitoring of traffic data and review of any new state and federal requirements pertaining to the CMP and CMS. Transportation Programming As mentioned above, the Commission is responsible for allocating various state and federal funds. The funds are monitored to ensure that regulations are adhered to in order to prevent funds from lapsing. The following summarizes the status of these funding programs: Local Funding TUMF Project monitoring and tracking of TUMF regional arterial projects by Planning and Programming will occur according to the agreements between local agencies and the Commission. In addition, Cornmission staff will work with local agencies regarding amendments to agreements and any issues regarding project delivery. To date, 22 project agreements have been executed totaling approximately $78 million. During FY 2010/11, a total of $40.7 million is anticipated to be reimbursed to local agencies using TUMF regional arterial funding. These project expenditures are included in Capital Projects. 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial Program A call for projects was initiated for the 2009 Measure A Westem County Regional Arterial program. Due to the economic downturn, the selection of projects was postponed. It is anticipated that the call for projects will be revisited when revenues are at a level that can sustain reasonable cash flow to fund the projects selected for this program. 2009 Measure A Local Streets and Roads In order to receive Measure A local streets and roads funding, each year the cities and the County are required to submit their 5-year capital improvement plans (CIPs) based on Measure A revenue projections. Additionally the local jurisdictions are required to submit an MOE certification consistent with adopted MOE guidelines. Amendments to CIPs are processed administratively for minor changes that do not affect the total programmed amount or are within budget levels. Significant changes require Commission approval. 168 • State Funding STIP- R1P/11P The 2010 STIP cycle is scheduled for approval by the CTC in May 2010. The 2010 STIP is anticipated to be overprogrammed, requiring many projects to be delayed or deleted. Staff will identify other available fund sources and propose altemative funding options to fund projects that are not included as priority allocations by the CTC. This will involve amendments to the STIP and FTIP to reflect any changes made to funding sources and/or programming years. SB 821 Annually, the Commission releases a call for bicycle and pedestrian projects in April. These projects are funded by 2% of LTF revenues, as required by SB 821. The Commission establishes an evaluation committee to rank eligible projects that meet the established criteria. Project recommendations are approved by the Commission in June of each year. The Commission approved 13 projects in the amount of $1.2 million for FY 2009/10. The FY 2010/11 call for projects will have funding of $2.66 million available for award. These expenditures are included in the LTF special revenue fund, which is reflected in the Transit Department since this fund's activities relate primarily to transit funding. Federal Funding CMAQ, STP, and TE The Commission is responsible for allocating CMAQ, STP, and TE funds to transportation projects. In 2003, the Commission directed staff to program SAFETEA-LU funds (CMAQ and STP) to projects that were impacted by the state budget crisis and/or the rise in construction material costs with the exception of the CMAQ funding that is apportioned to the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB). In 2007, the Commission approved 25% of future CMAQ and STP funds (from the reauthorization of the federal transportation act) for grade separation projects approved in the Proposition 1B TCIF program. The Commission will be reviewing federal funding options for the Westem Riverside County Delivery Plan projects once the federal transportation act is authorized and future funding levels are known. The Commission delegates the selection of projects for CMAQ funds apportioned to the SSAB to CVAG. In 2009 CVAG issued a call for projects for $2.1 million of CMAQ funding as a local stimulus to facilitate job creation. In December 2009, CVAG approved seven projects that are scheduled to be delivered within a year. 169 In 2004 the CTC restructured the administration of the TE program by incorporating it in the STIP. Although TE funds are federal, they must be granted state budget authority in order for the funds to be allocated by the CTC. If the state budget approval is delayed, the TE funds cannot be allocated until the state budget is passed. In 2005, the Commission approved 18 projects totaling $17.6 million. To date, 14 projects have been delivered, and the remaining four projects will be allocated between FY 2010/11 and FY 2012/13. Project Monitoring The high demand for reporting and monitoring the progress of projects is essential to prevent funds from lapsing. The programming project database allows for efficient monitoring of project schedules and funding. Local agencies have been provided access to project information as well as the capability to update their respective project information in a timely manner. The Programming Department provides assistance to the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department with preparing and submitting requests for authorization of federal funding. In addition, Programming also monitors expenditures and project closeout of federally funded (CMAQ, STP, and TE) projects to prevent loss of funds. Regional issues The Commission's work effort will remain focused on facilitating ongoing commitments as well as being responsive to various emerging issues. These include bi-county issues with the counties of San Bernardino, Orange, and San Diego as well as goods movement. The Commission will continue working with partners from the Southern California Consensus Group (Ports, Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority, Alameda Corridor East Construction Authority, SANBAG, OCTA, Metro, Ventura County Transportation Commission, and SCRRA) to develop a regional infrastructure cargo fee. A priority will be to coordinate with legislative staff and advocacy groups such as Mobility 21 and the CAGTC to secure funding through the federal transportation bill for goods movement -related needs such as the funding of Alameda Corridor East grade separations in Riverside County. The Commission will continue to monitor the Ports' projects for possible impacts on Riverside County by reviewing agendas and requesting notices for projects under CEQA and the Brown Act. 170 • Department Goals Build upon relationships with local, state, and federal agencies to coordinate short- and long-range planning to ensure that transportation projects receive funding and approvals. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Environmental Stewardship, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Work with CVAG, WRCOG, Caltrans, transit operators, local agencies, and SCAG to coordinate project submittals and amendments to the 2012 RTP and SCS development, including the development of strategies to meet SB 375 greenhouse gas emission reduction targets. • Provide the Commissioners information to assist in advocating Commission projects. • Continue CETAP inter- and intracounty corridor work. • Continue working with the RCA to implement the MSHCP, although funding to assist in the assembly of the reserve system through 2019 has been completed. Continue to seek a stronger role for county transportation commissions in state and regional transportation and air quality programs in order to direct funding for programs and projects that will improve air quality and mobility in Riverside County. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Environmental Stewardship) Objectives: • Support efforts to seek additional funding at the local, state, and federal levels for projects that improve air quality. • Support ongoing efforts to regulate federal emission sources. • Support efforts that allow more flexibility in funding transit operating and capital costs. Continue implementation of the CMP in cooperation with SCAG, WRCOG, CVAG, Caltrans, and local agencies and maintain federal certification for the CMP. (Policy Goal: Mobility) Objectives: • Implement the CMP to meet federal CMS requirements cited under the metropolitan planning organization (i.e., SCAG) planning regulations. • Provide data collected on the CMP system to SCAG and Caltrans for reporting on the Highway Performance Monitoring System. • Provide data collected on the CMP system to local agencies and other interested parties. 171 • Continue monitoring the CMP system to ensure the minimum adopted level of service threshold is met. Continue to advocate for jobs/housing balance and attracting high income jobs to Riverside County in addition to addressing intercounty congestion. (Policy Goal: Economic Development) Objectives: • Participate in ongoing studies and activities regarding the jobs/housing imbalance between Orange and Riverside counties and San Diego and Riverside counties. • Support the County interests pertaining to transportation planning as population, job, and housing forecasts are developed by SCAG and the State. Consolidate project databases to allow for efficient monitoring of projects and funding with the ability to share project information with local jurisdictions. (Policy Goals: Communications, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Maintain consultant contract to manage and host the Commission's web -based project management database. • Work with SCAG and other county transportation commissions to refine and maintain the SCAG regional database, including the coordination of the Commission's database with SCAG's FTIP database. • Coordinate with Caftrans to assure database compatibility and promote information sharing including timely reporting of fund obligation information. Ensure maximum funding and flexibility for projects funded with STIP-RIP, Proposition 1 B, SAFETEA-LU, and future federal reauthorization funds. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement) Objectives: • Participate in statewide efforts to develop and implement guidelines and legislation for the various Proposition 1 B funding programs. • Work with Ca!trans and the CTC to meet the intent of the CMIA and TCIF programs related to implementing projects within the timeframes specified in the baseline project agreements. • Advocate that local and federal funds used to replace state funding due to the state budget shortfall be given high priority for repayment when the state is in a position to repay such loans. • Participate in various forums regarding authorization of the federal transportation bill to increase funding levels, streamline programming processes, and provide flexibility in obligating funds. 172 • • Support efforts advocating the continuation and protection of Proposition 42 funding and the payback of loans taken from state transportation accounts. • Advocate that RIP county share reserves receive priority programming over counties that advance shares. • Continue to strategically program and fund projects in an effort to obligate and/or allocate funds in an expeditious manner for the maximum use of all available funding. • Continue to monitor project implementation through the use of milestone reporting on a quarterly basis to maintain maximum funding levels for projects and prevent loss of funds to Riverside County. Provide support to the Commission's Capital Project Development and Delivery and Finance departments to maintain project funding and schedules and minimize programming issues. (Policy Goal: Mobility) Objectives: • Provide input to the budget development process. • Attend regular meetings with the Capital Projects Development and Delivery Department. • Serve in an oversight role regarding project invoicing and close-outs. • Prepare project agreement summaries. • Coordinate project request for authorization/obligation packages. • Monitor progress of project milestones and requests for authorization as they are processed through Ca!trans Headquarters and FHWA. Provide assistance to local agencies to facilitate and streamline project delivery. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Communications) Objectives: • Continue coordination of monthly Technical Advisory Committee meetings and quarterly Project Delivery Subcommittee meetings. • Provide information regarding project programming data, including funding status, to project sponsors on a quarterly basis. • Provide local agencies with recommendations on project programming to minimize unnecessary requirements and delays. • Upon request, attend local agency project delivery team meetings to provide advice on programming issues. • Meet regularly with Ca'trans local assistance staff to monitor project submittals and resolve project implementation and obligation issues. 173 • Continue to work with state and federal agencies to streamline processes for funding and project approvals. (Policy Goal: Mobility, Environmental Stewardship, Communications) Objectives: • Maintain relationships with key staff at regional, state and federal agencies. • Participate in SCAG's National Freight Gateway Collaboration to define a system that meets the region's long term mobility, safety, environmental and energy needs including developing a brand specific to goods movement projects in Southern California. • Identify problematic areas with project delivery and/or programming and develop solutions for streamlining and clarifying processes. • Participate in regional, state, and federal forums addressing issues related to project programming, implementation, and air quality conformity. Facilitate development of regional transportation solutions that benefit Riverside County, including implementation of Proposition 1B TCIF projects and the Commission's Grade Separation Plan. (Policy Goal: Goods Movement, lntermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Monitor progress made in constructing the TCIF-funded projects through discussions with staff from partner agencies including Caftans; cities of Banning, Corona, and Riverside; and the County of Riverside. Timely completion of the TCIF projects is required to demonstrate the region's ability to deliver projects consistent with the CTC's direction when the Proposition 1 B funding was allocated. • Secure new sources of revenue supported by user fees and/or customs fees in support of the 2008 Grade Separation Funding Strategy that identified a funding shortfall of $565 million. Determine where future efforts regarding addressing Riverside County goods movement issues would prove most effective. (Policy Goal: Goods Movement) Objectives: • Identify drivers of demand for goods movement services and performance of modal systems and services as well as public benefits, specific areas of inefficiency, and the impacts of goods movement on communities. • Implement the Commission's 2008 Grade Separation Funding Strategy through coordination of advocacy efforts with legislative Affairs and Communications. 174 • Facilitate public and private investments in clean air technology in support of the broader air quality programs for SCAG, SCAQMD, and Riverside County local entities. (Policy Goal: Environmental Stewardship) Objectives: • Monitor the impact of AB 32 (greenhouse gas emission reduction) application to Commission transportation projects. • Monitor the impact of SB 375 (greenhouse gas emission reduction) from light trucks and automobiles through land use and transportation efforts to reduce vehicle miles traveled. • Actively participate on the MSRC's Technical Advisory Committee to ensure equitable funding is available in support of capital projects within Riverside County. Planning and Programming Perfonnance/Workload Indicators FY 08/09 Actual FY 09/10 Estimated FY 10/11 Projected Number of projects monitored (excluding TUMF Regional Arterial Projects) 125 402 150 Number of TUMF Regional Arterial projects monitored 24 24 24 Number of TUMF agreements/amendments 6 8 8 Number of FTIP amended projects 92 175 125 Number of STIP allocations, amendments, and extensions for Commission projects 7 17 13 Number of STIP allocations, amendments, and extensions for local agency projects 4 8 8 Number of written comments on expansion projects submitted to Ports 2 1 1 175 Rail Mission Statement: "To develop and support passenger rail transportation options for increased mobility within Riverside County and the region." Chart 30 — Rail Capital Outlay 0% Expenditures Salaries and Benefits 4% Professional Costs 3% Support Costs 9% Rail expenditures of $11,533,900 include Metrolink operations and capital support as well as maintenance and operations of the five Commission -owned and operated commuter rail stations (Table 45). Personnel costs increased 12% as a result of an increase in FTEs from 3.18 in FY 2009/10 to 3.31. Professional costs include legal and consultant services; legal costs have decreased 48% while professional services have increased 26%. Support costs, which reflect a decrease of 16%, include station maintenance, media ads, printing services, and marketing incentives. Station maintenance includes property management, utilities, grounds maintenance, repairs, cleaning, and security services at the five Commission -owned commuter rail stations, adjacent parking structures, and the new Perris Station Transit Center. The decrease in support costs is primarily related to lower station maintenance costs as a result of the implementation of the station rehabilitation plan. 176 Projects and operations include an operating contribution of $8,220,000 to SCRRA for Metrolink operations, whereas the prior year budget also included a $13,300,000 capital contribution to SCRRA for new rail cars. The Commission's commuter rail program intends to meet the number of required Productivity Improvement Program (PIP) targets for FY 2010/11. However if the serious economic circumstances impacting ridership in the current year continue, these targets may not be met. Table 45 — Rail Expenditure Detail Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Legal Services Professional Services- General Total Professional Costs Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations SpecialStudies Operating and Capital Disbursements Total Projects and Operations Capital Outlay TOTAL Rail Maintenance and Operations Rail Staffing Summary 384,200 $ 439,400 $ 399,400 122,700 210,000 77,200 104,100 199,300 100,400 226,800 409,300 208,500 895,900 1,188,400 1,048,900 1,367,700 1,462,000 1,216,900 200,000 200,000 5,740,300 20,580,000 10,445,030 7,108,000 22,242,030 11,861,900 52,600 72,100 $ 8,667,500 $ 24,279,100 $ 13,590,800 Administrative Assistant Chief Financial Officer Community Relations Manager Multimodal Services Director Procurement and Assets Administrator Procurement and Assets Manager Project Development Director Rail Manager Right of Way Manager Senior Office Assistant Staff Analyst FTE 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.07 0.33 0.25 0.00 0.96 0.01 0.02 1.00 2.70 51,800 12% (100,000) -48% 51,100 26% (48,900) -12% (195,030) -16% (184)200) -13% (25,000) -13% (12,360,000) -60% (12,569,200) -57% 16,100 N/A $ (12,745,200) -52% 0.10, 0.05 0.00 0.25 0.55 0.20 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.03 1.00 3.18 • • 177 • Department Budget Overview —Rail Operations Department Description The Commission has directed efforts in the areas of regional commuter rail, intercity passenger rail, high-speed rail, and capital improvements to support enhanced passenger and freight rail service. The entire program includes elements of planning, programming, commuter rail development and support, station and corridor management, mitigation of community and environmental impacts, legislative and regulatory advocacy, and construction of capital projects. Many elements are managed or supported by other Commission departments, legal counsel, and consultants. Departmental efforts contributing to the rail program are found throughout the budget document. Coordination and consultation also occur with a variety of public and private entities including the CTC, Ca!trans, California Public Utilities Commission, California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA), Federal Railroad Administration, FTA, Amtrak, environmental agencies, the University of California, transit providers, SCAG, WRCOG, CVAG, SANDAG, Los Angeles -San Diego -San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency, local govemments, private freight railroads, businesses, and property owners. The Commission participates in the ongoing funding and govemance of Metrolink by SCRRA, a joint powers authority consisting of the county transportation commissions of Riverside, San Bemardino, Orange, Los Angeles, and Ventura counties. The Commission holds two voting positions on SCRRA's eleven member board. Commission staff serves on the five -county Technical Advisory Committee which negotiates service and funding levels, based upon the county's established priorities, and provides technical assistance, coordination between various SCRRA and commission departments, and linkages to local communities. Of the seven commuter rail lines operated by Metrolink, three routes consisting of the Riverside, Inland Empire -Orange County (IEOC), and 91 Lines directly serve Western County. Unlike the other SCRRA member agencies, the Commission owns and operates the commuter rail stations serving Riverside County: Riverside Downtown, Pedley, La Sierra, West Corona, North Main Corona (Chart 31). The Commission is also the owner of and the operating partner with RTA at the Perris Station Transit Center, a multimodal transportation facility. Station operation and maintenance costs are included in the Rail Department budget with services currently coordinated by the Finance Department's Procurements and Assets Management Division. New and ongoing construction projects at these stations are described in the capital budget managed by the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department. 178 Chart 31 — Riverside County Metrolink Station Locations riverside Gourd lieireild Service E%ISTING STATIONS 0 PROPOSED SWIMS ff***0441. METROUNK UNE *+N++w PROPOSE° PERRIS VALLEY LINE Key Assumptions • Metrolink's preliminary FY 2010/11 budget is adopted by the Commission and SCRRA. The Metrolink budget may include SCRRA approval of a fare increase, fare policy adjustments, and service reductions. The Commission's budgeted operating subsidy includes a contingency if only some of these actions are approved by the SCRRA board. • Ridership and fare revenues recover on the Riverside, IEOC, and 91 Lines (Chart 32). • The Commission manages the station security guard contract. Estimated costs are based on the actual contract terms with a portion to be reimbursed by SCRRA. • 179 • Chart 32 - Metrolink Average Daily Ridership 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 ® 91 Line ■ 1EOC # Riverside/LA Accomplishments • Fully implemented parking service for customers at the 1,000 space North Main Corona station parking structure. • Completed construction of the Perris Station Transit Center with the immediate commencement of transit services. This facility also includes a park and ride area and will serve as a rail station for the Perris Valley Line. • Continued implementation of the Green Metrolink Station Rehabilitation Plan to upgrade the existing Metrolink stations for energy and resource efficiency and to rehabilitate station elements. • Completed a comprehensive safety and security assessment at the Metrolink stations that identified upgrades to the security camera system, monitoring activities, and security patrol monitoring. • Established joint station operations and multimodal coordination by developing a permit program to allow carpools and vanpools to use the North Main Corona and La Sierra stations' excess parking. • Established the La Sierra station as the primary origination point for the RTA/OCTA Route 794 Express Bus service to Orange County. • Supported the holiday toy train events at Riverside County commuter rail stations. The community continues to support these events with strong local participation. These events also generate needed donations for the Spark of Love Toy Drive for local charities. Major Initiatives Over the last 17 years, more than $110 million in capital improvements have been made in developing stations and securing access to support the Commission's commuter rail services operations. Recently completed initiatives include the completion of a 1,000 space parking structure at the North Main Corona station and the Perris Station Transit 180 Center. The station rehabilitation project continues at all stations. Detailed planning and environmental efforts are continuing at the La Sierra station with the addition of a multimodal park and ride facility and bus transit services. The development of the Perris Valley Line project and its operational impacts will continue to be pursued and evaluated, respectively. The Commission adopted the Commuter Rail and Multimodal Facility Design Criteria Manual to establish the design guidelines for future commuter rail stations, park and ride facilities, and multimodal transit centers developed by the Commission. The most immediate project to utilize this manual is the station development related to four Perris Valley Line stations which are currently at 65% design (see Chart 31 above). The goal of this effort is to provide the best approach to build, maintain, and operate cost effective and environmentally sustainable facilities that meet the public's transportation needs. Department Goals —Rail Operations Improve utilization and increase efficiency of commuter rail lines serving Riverside County. (Policy Goals: System Efficiencies, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Support improved Metrolink system safety initiatives. • Meet PIP goals through increased peak period patronage on the Riverside Line, IEOC Line, and 91 Line. • Maintain weekend, midday, and reverse -peak patronage in FY 2010/11. • Try to maintain the public subsidy per passenger mile traveled on lines currently serving the County through economies of scale, efficient use of train sets and crew hours, and increased passenger fares. Maximize opportunities for public use of rail -related investment. (Policy Goal- lntermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Support transit operator efforts to expand availability and use of connecting transit in order to improve access and reduce demand on parking capacity; costs associated with transfers are currently reimbursed to the transit operators by the Commission and are budgeted. • Expand opportunities with the Commuter Assistance Program's park and ride operations for the designation of specific car/vanpool parking at commuter rail stations with available capacity. • Expand opportunities for interline travel through coordination of schedules with Amtrak intercity and long distance trains, such as the Sunset Limited, and other Metrolink lines, including encouraging joint ticketing options. • 181 • Implement energy efficient systems and generate revenue to offset maintenance costs of rail properties. (Policy Goal: Environmental Stewardship) Objective: • Implement the concept of "green power" at the Metrolink stations by changing landscape materials to reduce water consumption and explore more energy efficient lighting. • Explore revenue potential of advertising at the rail stations and develop a Commission advertising policy. Department Budget Overview --Rail Development In order to expand passenger rail options throughout the County, the Commission conducts feasibility studies to assess the viability of commuter rail expansion. In 2005, the Commission completed the Commuter Rail Feasibility Study that examined the viability of extending Metrolink commuter rail service largely within existing rail rights of way. The Commission approved the study and recommended advanced study of extensions on the San Jacinto Branch Line (SJBL) to Hemet/San Jacinto and MurrietalTemecula. The next phase of Altematives Analysis for these corridors will be pursued in future years as funding availability allows. San Jacinto Branch Line The Commission holds title to and manages the 38-mile SJBL (Chart 33) and several adjacent properties, preserved for future passenger rail service. BNSF holds the freight rights in the corridor, providing service to local shippers, and performs maintenance on the line. 182 Chart 33 — San Jacinto Branch Line San Jacinto Branch Line Perris Valley Line Small Starts Project In June 2000, the Commission allocated $20 million of Measure A funds for capital and operating expenditures related to the implementation of passenger rail service on the initial operating segment of the SJBL, known as the Perris Valley Line (see Chart 31). Project cost estimates have been revised and are now approximately $232.7 million. Staff is seeking a project construction grant agreement from the FTA Small Starts Program to fund $75 million of the project cost with the balance to be funded by other federal, state, and local funding sources, as illustrated in Table 46 and Chart 34. The 183 FFY 2008/09 appropriations bill included $45 million of the $75 million funding. The current draft FFY 2010/11 appropriations bill includes the remaining Small Start funding. Details on this capital project are included in the Capital Project Development and Delivery section. Chart 34 - Perris Valley Line Funding Chart Rail Property Sale Proceeds 7% Table 46 - Perris Valley Line Funding Plan Federal: STP FTA 5307 FTA 5309 Small Starts FTA 5309 Rail Modernization CMAQ State: STI P Total $ 500,000 26,157,000 75,000,000 9,516,000 5,907,000 57,672,000 Local: Measure A 42,666,000 Rail Property Sale Proceeds 15,276,000 Total Perris Valley Line Project Estimate $ 232,694,000 The project has received FTA approval to begin project development and advance preliminary engineering. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) draft environmental assessment was circulated for public review in 2004, and a new Supplemental Environmental Assessment will be released in fall 2010. A new CEQA document will be circulated for review and is expected to be finalized in fall 2010. The FY 2010/11 budget in the Capital Project Development and Delivery section includes total expenditures of $48.5 million for the Perris Valley Line and other related projects. The public outreach program for this project continues to be a priority with ongoing efforts to reach all the communities including residents, businesses, and schools along the corridor. • 184 • Passenger Rail to Coachella Valley In recent years the Commission has also focused attention on the creation of intercity passenger rail service between the Coachella Valley, Riverside, and the Los Angeles basin through advocacy efforts with state, federal, and local government entities and negotiation with the freight railroads. The Commission's current efforts include seeking capital and operating funds and coordinating with Amtrak and Caltrans. The Commission is also working closely with CVAG to update the feasibility studies to include current cost and travel time information. High Speed Rail The Commission continues to play a proactive role in the development of a statewide, high-speed passenger rail system, including routing of the backbone corridor through the Inland Empire with possible stations in the Riverside/Corona and Murrieta/ Temecula areas. With the passage of Proposition 1A in November 2008, there is now a proposed funding mechanism to move the state high speed rail project forward. The 2010 award of $2.3 billion in ARRA funds to the State will also advance other corridors in the state. The CHSRA has begun work on a project level environmental assessment and corridor alignment study for the section between Los Angeles and San Diego via the Inland Empire. The Commission has directed the review to include an alignment alternative along 1-15 for analysis. The Commission has entered into an MOU to be supportive in the development of this high speed rail project and is participating in the Southern California Inland Corridor Group meetings. The Commission is actively contributing to the current Alternatives Analysis process and coordinating local participation at Technical Working Group meetings attended by local stakeholders. Key Assumption • Project development on the Perris Valley Line will continue in FY 2010/11. Accomplishments • Having received a medium -high rating from the FTA on the Perris Valley Line in December 2007, continued project development activities including progress on environmental documents and the related public reviews. • Began preliminary engineering to provide for additional layover track capacity at the Riverside Downtown station. • Continued the Green Metrolink Station Rehabilitation Plan to improve the existing Commission -owned stations. 185 Major Initiatives • During FY 2010/11, the Commission will initiate engineering and design of a Riverside Downtown station layover facility. Additionally, as discussed above, project development and right of way acquisition related to the Perris Valley Line project is expected to continue. Department Goals —Rail Development Identify and plan for capital improvements necessary to increase the scope, appeal, and reliability of commuter rail operations. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Continue efforts to fully fund the Perris Valley Line (Riverside to Perris via Moreno Valley) on the SJBL. • Finalize the station design elements for the Perris Valley Line. • Continue development of the Riverside Downtown station layover facility expansion. Maintain efforts with local agencies, other Southern California counties, and the state and federal governments to expand intercity passenger rail service into Riverside County and the Coachella Valley. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Continue to support and influence state efforts in the creation of a high-speed passenger rail system along an Inland Empire alignment through coordination with state and local agencies. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Rail FY 08/09 FY 09110 FY 10/11 Performance/Workload Indicators Actual Estimated Projected Average daily ridership on existing commuter lines • Riverside Line 5,063 4,926 5,129 • IEOC Line 4,683 3,911 4,267 • 91 Line 2,256 2,089 2,177 Farebox recovery ratio • Riverside Line 56.19% 55.92% 59.0% • IEOC Line 33.03% 27.33% 29.1% • 91 Line 50.02% 48.44% 51.6% Rail PIP targets: • Passenger trips 3,120,423 3,279,966 2,939,639 • Farebox recovery ratio 44.50% 47.04% 44.02% • Subsidy per passenger mile $0.22 $0.20 $0.22 • Passenger miles per revenue car mile 35.54 38.76 40.02 186 • Public and Specialized Transit Mission Statement: "To coordinate the operation of all public transportation services within the County with a goal toward promoting compliance and improving mobility as well as program efficiency and effectiveness between transit operators. To maintain and enhance, as resources allow, mobility options for seniors, persons with disabilities, and persons of limited means through innovative solutions and community interaction." Chart 35 — Public and Specialized. Transit Salaries and Benefits 1% Expenditures Professional Costs 0% Public and specialized transit expenditures are budgeted at $76,459,400 for FY 2010/11, as presented in Table 47, and consist primarily of projects and operations costs. Projects and operations costs have decreased because of declining LTF sales tax revenues and the State's suspension of STA funding. LTF disbursements consist of transit operating and capital allocations of $57,362,000, bicycle and pedestrian facilities allocations of $2,660,000, and planning and administration allocations of $2,402,300. The LTF transit allocations reflect the use of $9,659,000 in fund balances. STA disbursements of $5,839,500 are primarily for bus and rail capital purposes in Western County, as minimal fund balances for the Coachella Valley and Palo Verde Valley areas are projected to be available in FY 2010/11. Measure A disbursements include $2,920,000 for Western County specialized transit funding of the second year of the two-year call for projects from 1989 Measure A. The majority of Measure A disbursements relate to 2009 Measure A public transit programs: $490,000 for Western County Consolidated Transportation Service Agency (CTSA) 187 allocations, $3,773,000 for Coachella Valley public and specialized transit, and $400,000 for Westem County intercity bus services. The Coachella Valley allocation is disbursed monthly to SunLine, the major transit provider in the Coachella Valley. Table 47 — Public and Specialized Transit Expenditure Detail Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Legal Services Audit Services Professional Services - General Total Professional Costs Support Costs Projects and Operations Special Studies Operating and Capital Disbursements Total Projects and Operations TOTAL Publk and Specialized Transit 297,800 $ 374,500 $ 336,100 20,700 35,000 25,000 70,000 155,300 237,800 167,800 176,000 342,800 192,800 8,900 29,100 11,800 20,000 82,562,700 89,282,100 71,643,000 82,561,700 89,302,100 71,643,000 $ 83,045,400 $ 90,048,500 $ 72,183,700 Public and Specialized Transit Staffing Summary Administrative Assistant Chief Financial Officer Deputy Executive Director Multimodal Services Director Procurement and Assets Administrator Procurement and Assets Manager Staff Analyst Transit Manager FTE Department Budget Overview 0.29 0.09 0.00 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.62 1.00 2.63 117,300) -5% 15,0001 -14% (70,00D) -100% 160,000) -25% (135,000) -3996 11,500 -5% 0% (13,435,300) -15% (13,435,300) -15% $ (13,589,100) -15% 0.20 0.11 0.04 0.60 0.09 0.21 0.40 1.00 2.65 Department Description The Measure A specialized transit program provides a valuable service to the community by serving the needs of commuters, such as seniors and persons with disabilities, whose transportation needs are not met by traditional services. Specialized transit operations are typically managed by social service and nonprofit agencies. The Commission also allocates funding, following a competitive call for projects, through the FTA Section 5310 program that is administered by Ca[trans. This program provides funding to nonprofit transportation and social service agencies and public operators under special circumstances for the purchase of capital equipment. • 188 • • • With the passage of SAFETEA-LU, the following are two relatively new federal funding sources for specialized transit services: • Jobs Access Reverse Commute (JARC) (Section 5316) program provides funding for the development and maintenance of jobs access projects to transport welfare recipients and eligible low-income individuals to and from work during non -peak hours as well as supply reverse commute options for workers in suburban areas. • New Freedom (Section 5317) program provides funding for new public transportation services and alternatives for people with disabilities beyond the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. In accordance with the provisions of SAFETEA-LU, recipients under these programs must comply with all federal coordinated planning requirements to be eligible for funds. Projects selected for funding under these programs must be originated from a locally derived Coordinated Plan and must be developed through a process that includes representatives of the public, private, and nonprofit transportation and human service providers. Development of the Coordinated Plan was completed in April 2008, and the first Universal Call for Projects was issued shortly thereafter. Approval of Measure A and JARC/New Freedom grant awards were completed in October 2008 for the Coachella Valley and Western County applicants, and projects began provision of services on July 1, 2009. The Commission is responsible for short-range transportation planning and programming. Planning includes the development of the countywide SRTPs for eight public transit operators consisting of the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona, and Riverside; SCRRA's Metrolink commuter rail; Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency; RTA; and SunLine. The Commission assists in coordinating the annual development, review, and approval of the operator SRTPs and allocates Measure A, LTF, STA, and FTA Section 5307, 5309, 5311, 5316, and 5317 transit funding resources to public transit programs. The Commission is responsible for the disbursement of Measure A, LTF, and STA funds, while federal transit funds are administered by the FTA. In partnership with the County's transit operators, the Commission coordinates the allocation of available Proposition 1B transit funding and ensures proposed projects meet the mobility needs of the County. Proposition 1B funds are annually appropriated by the legislature and used for transit related capital purchases or infrastructure/facility improvements. The Riverside County operators applied for Proposition 1B funds; however, due to the state's ongoing financial crisis, the release of funds is contingent upon available proceeds from future bond sales. The Commission has public transit operator oversight and fiduciary responsibilities to ensure that annual fiscal audits and a state triennial performance audit are conducted in accordance with TDA regulations. The Commission is also charged with annually reviewing public transit operator activities and recommending potential productivity improvements to lower operating costs. To ensure that specialized transit allocations are expended and required service goals are met in accordance with funding 189 agreements, the Commission engages an audit firm to perform certain agreed -upon procedures for the Measure A specialized transit funding recipients. Key Assumptions • The Commission will approve specific funding allocations for specialized transit for FY 2011/12 and FY 2012/13 following the development and implementation of a second Universal Call for Projects. • LTF, STA, and Measure A disbursements are based on projected budgetary allocations but may be adjusted after the Commission has approved actual allocations in July 2010. • Declining LTF revenues will require streamlining operating expenses by all operators while maintaining efficiency and quality of service. • Transit Vision, adopted by the Commission in June 2008, established a 25% allocation of Measure A Western County Specialized Transit funds to the RTA as the CTSA for Western County. Accomplishments • Completed the application evaluation, funding award, and contract agreement execution processes for successful recipients of Measure A, JARC, and New Freedom funding under the Universal Call for Projects. • Oversaw the successful implementation of the new specialized transit services resulting from the initial Universal Call for Projects funding allocation process. • Completed the local review and project ranking process for the FY 2008/09 FTA Section 5310 applications submitted to Caltrans for the statewide application. Projects are derived from a locally developed Coordinated Plan. • Incorporated FY 2008/09 Proposition 1B Public Transportation, Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) funds with transit capital funding sources following Caltrans' partial release of program funding. • Approved allocation of FY 2008/09 Proposition 1 B California Transit Security Grant Program —California Transit Assistance Funds (CTSGP-CTAF) for eligible transit safety and security projects identified by transit operators following release of program funding and guidelines by the Governor's Office of Homeland Security. • Adopted the Transit Vision and related funding formulas for the TDA and Measure A funds through 2019. • Identified the development of a mobility management program through the transit visioning process. Major Initiatives For 20 years, the Commission has long demonstrated a strong commitment to assist in the mobility of those with specialized transit needs. Through its 1989 Measure A Specialized Transit Program, the Commission provided millions of dollars to public and nonprofit transit operators for the provision of special transit services to improve the mobility of seniors and persons with disabilities. Along with support of traditional dial -a - ride services, the Commission supports innovative programs that provide transit • 190 • assistance in hard to serve rural areas or for riders having very special transit needs. The riders, many frail and elderly, have come to depend on these services that provide a higher level of assistance than can be provided by the public transit providers and/or operate in areas not served by public transit As a result of the 2009 Measure A, these specialized transit programs will continue through 2039. In July 2010, 17 programs in Westem County and 5 programs in Coachella Valley will start their second year of specialized transit services under the Universal Call for Projects, including the non -emergency medical transportation component. Ten of these projects will be fully funded with Measure A funds, while the other 12 projects will be funded by a mix of Measure A, JARC, and New Freedom funds. As identified in the Coordinated Plan, the specialized transit projects approved for funding will require implementation and yearlong performance monitoring. In order to assure the availability of funds to support matching of FTA Section 5310 capital grants, $150,000 on an annual basis is budgeted for Western County applicants to meet the 11.47% local match requirements for such grants. As a result of declining LTF and Measure A revenues, staff will be conducting long- range planning activities to ensure that anticipated revenues are in line with projected levels of service by the various public transit operators. Department Goals Provide timely information to the public regarding Commission -implemented projects and support public relations activities of Measure A, JARC, and New Freedom funded programs by grant recipients. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objective: • Produce and distribute public information materials as needed including press releases, flyers, brochures, marketing materials, and newspaper ads. Allocate Measure A Specialized Transit and federal funds to support services that will maintain and/or enhance mobility by alleviating transportation barriers for seniors, persons with disabilities, and the truly needy. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Intennodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Monitor performance of specialized transit grant recipients through analysis of their quarterly performance reports. • Support the FTA Section 5310, 5316 and 5317 grant processes to improve mobility for seniors, persons with disabilities and individuals of limited means by working with Caltrans, public operators, and social service agencies to ensure a competitive process statewide for the allocation of federal transportation dollars for social service programs. • Provide technical assistance and program support to agencies offering specialized transit programs to ensure the maximum benefit of funding for improved mobility for seniors, persons with disabilities, and individuals of limited means. 191 • Seek Commission approval on a funding allocation for the second Universal Call for Projects and then initiate and develop process specific requirements for interested parties to submit applications. Coordinate the operation of all public transportation services within the County with a goal toward promoting program efficiency and harmony between transit operators as outlined in state law. (Policy Goals: Mobility, System Efficiencies, Intermodalism & Accessibility, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Review transit planning, resource allocation, and service implementation policy requirements including appropriate coordination of commuter rail, intercounty and intercity bus, local bus and paratransit, and social service transportation services to ensure convenient service for passengers. • Assure the ongoing effectiveness of the SRTP process and work with the County's eight transit operators to assure efficiency and effectiveness as well as compliance with the PIP. • Coordinate regional transit connections among commuter rail, buses, and paratransit services to ensure convenient service for passengers. • Monitor transit operators' quarterly capital grants reports. • Monitor transit operators' performance through analysis of their quarterly performance reports using the TransTrack computer -based tracking program. Continue to provide staff resources to assist and support the coordination of transit services within the County and throughout the State. (Policy Goals: Mobility, System Efficiencies, Intermodalism & Accessibility, Communications) Objectives: • Implement mobility management countywide. • Participate and influence intercounty discussions between Riverside, Orange, and San Diego regarding the enhancement of intermodal options. This includes additional transit services (rail and express bus) and rideshare services. • Regularly participate in meetings that focus on the coordination of transit services, such as the California Association for Coordinated Transportation, SunLine's Access Committee, RTA's ADA Committee, the Riverside County Foundation on Aging Board of Directors, the Older Californian Traffic Safety Task Force, and the Commission's Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Service Transportation Advisory Council. • Continue the development of a marketing and distribution network for communicating specialized transit mobility options to seniors, the disabled, and persons of limited means. • 192 Public and Specialized Transit Performance! Workload Indicators FY 08109 Actual FY 09M0 Estimated FY 10111 Projected 8 SRTPs submitted by operators and reviewed 8 8 Number of SRTP amendments 4 2 2 Number of Specialized Transit grants awarded 13 22 22 Number of one-way trips provided by Measure A funded projects 87,865 119,000 121,000 Number of one-way trips provided by JARC & New Freedom funded operators N/A 91,000 92,000 Number of one-way trips reimbursed through the Westem County Transportation Reimbursement and Information Project 76,226 80,000 85,000 Number of transit tickets provided through the Transportation Access Program & Beaumont Adult School Transit Program 94,950 73,000 76,000 Number of clients served through Blindness Support Services 32 40 45 193 Commuter Assistance Mission Statement: "To encourage and promote transportation alternatives for commuters through employer partnerships, information services, technological innovation, and community outreach." Chart 36 — Commuter Assistance Transfers Out 5% Salaries and Benefits Expenditures Commuter Assistance expenditures and transfers out total $4,374,600, which represents a 44% decrease from last year's budget (Table 48). Professional costs of $595,800 have decreased 60% over the prior year due to the implementation of the Inland Empire 511 system during FY 2009/10. Operations for the Inland Empire 511 system will be supported through SAFE. Support costs totaling $532,500, which is comparable to the prior year, include mail and printing services, computer and vehicle maintenance, communications, and other office expenditures. Projects and operations expenditures of $2,820,400 consist of park and ride lease payments of $118,000 and regional transportation consultant services totaling $2,081,400 to manage and implement the program and merchant vouchers valued at $621,000. Reimbursements from local county transportation commissions for regional rideshare services provided by the Commission are included in revenues to offset these expenditures. The prior year budget included transfers out to other departments to fund new park and ride facilities and commencement of 2009 Measure A commuter assistance services. 194 Table 48 — Commuter Assistance Expenditure Detail Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Legal Services Audit Services Professional Services - General Total Professional Costs Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations Construction Operating and Capital Disbursements Total Projects and Operations Capital Outlay Transfers Out TOTAL Commuter Assistance 161,200 $ 215,300 5 368,200 30,800 30,000 68,700 4,600 351,500 1,453,500 1,393,600 386,900 1,483,500 1,4 62,300 (6,400) -3% 0% N/A (887,7001 -61% (887,700) -60% 391,000 524,300 545,400 ? ) 8,200 2,373,200 1,701,000 142,000 4,216,200 6,300 1,000,000 2,897,200 2,894,500 1,I00,000 1,100,000 3,997,200 17,000 1,557,900 3,994,500 18,200 2,836,900 $ 6,161,600 $ 7,795,200 $ 9,225,500 Commuter Assistance Staffing Summary Administrative Assistant Chief Financial Officer Deputy Executive Director Commuter Assistance Manager Multimodal Services Director Procurement and Assets Administrator Procurement and Assets Manager Staff Analyst FrE Department Budget Overview Department Description 0.08 0.01 0.00 0.86 0.14 0.00 0.00 1.16 2.25 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.53 0.10 0.03 0.02 1.00 1.77 (76,800) (1,100,000) 2% -3% -100% N/A (1,176,800) -29% 0% (1,357,900) 87% $ (3,420,600) -44% While much of the Commission's work is focused on increasing transportation infrastructure and capacity, there is significant value in ensuring that the transportation systems are used efficiently. To help foster more efficient use of these systems, the Commission's Commuter Assistance Program seeks to encourage Riverside County constituents and commuters to make a mode -shift decision away from single occupancy vehicle commuting and into alternative modes of transportation such as a carpool, vanpool, buspool, public bus, Metrolink, walking, bicycling, or telecommuting. 195 • • The Commuter Assistance Program seeks to efficiently influence driver behavior by fostering a mode -shifting decision at both the employer and commuter levels via the following methods: • The provision of employer services to foster the implementation of employer - based mode -shift and rideshare programs; • The use of incentives both for beginning and then maintaining a mode- shift/rideshare arrangement; and • Public information services including the dissemination of personalized commute options and traveler information through technology in order to educate commuters of all travel options available to them and to foster congestion avoidance behavior when traveling. The Commission's Commuter Assistance Program was implemented as a speck requirement under Measure A to address congestion mitigation. While ridesharing has a beneficial impact on air quality, first and foremost, it is a strategy to improve mobility through increased use of alternative travel modes of transportation. Key Assumptions • The Commission will continue to contract with a consulting firm to administer the Commuter Assistance Program. • Maintaining its long-term partnership with the Commission, SANBAG will contract with the Commission to manage and implement a "sister" Commuter Assistance Program for its residents and employers in San Bernardino County. • At the regional level, four county transportation commissions (Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, and Ventura) will contract with the Commission for the provision of regional ridematching database and network operations. Accomplishments • The Commission, in partnership with SANBAG, implemented an Inland Empire 511 system in accordance with national 511 implementation standards. This system includes a website and call center component that serves Riverside and San Bernardino County residents and commuters with traveler information, a transit planner, access to rideshare services, and more. While the Commuter Assistance Program funded the implementation costs of the Inland Empire 511 system, SAFE will fund the annual operating costs. • The Commission received the 2009 Association for Commuter Transportation (ACT) Creative Excellence Award for demonstrating creativity and originality that generated a significant response and results through the Amazing Rideshare Challenge Campaign. ACT is an internationally recognized transportation demand management association. • Enhanced the value of the RidesharePlus Rewards program benefits for commuters who maintain a rideshare arrangement. Members now have access to discounts at more restaurants, theaters, stores and hotels in the revamped program. Members receive an Entertainment -style book with coupons to local merchants and access to 196 an online savings guide where members can print coupons at home for discounts at thousands of merchants nationwide. • Implemented on-line tools to better serve employer partners and their employees and for more efficient processing of Rideshare incentives and RidesharePlus rewards applications and renewals. • Continued to operate the report card program for both program participants and employer partners which translates individual or worksite rideshare participation into money saved, congestion reduced, and emissions reduced. This outreach is intended to recognize rideshare efforts and to motivate participants to continue ridesharing and/or grow employer program participation. • Continued to operate, maintain, and enhance the regional ridematching database on behalf of the five -county region. In addition, www.CommuteSmart.info the regional rideshare website, was refreshed with a new look and navigation to better integrate with the regional 511 websites. • Continued use of the Program Measurement Tool to evaluate program performance. • Continued to provide rideshare services to employers and commuters in the Coachella Valley, leveraging JARC funds which will sunset at the end of FY 2010/2011. • Continued work on a variety of MSRC grant projects such as the enhancement and integration of the dormant MSRC Bike Metro website, the enhancement of commuter RideGuides with the addition of custom transit itineraries, and support of the Rideshare to School project. • Renewed leases for park and ride facilities with the following locations: Canyon Community Church of the Nazarene (Corona), Living Truth Christian Fellowship (Corona), West Community Friends Church (Corona), Elsinore Naval Military School (Lake Elsinore), Revival Christian Fellowship (Menifee), La Sierra University (Riverside), San Jacinto Assembly of God (San Jacinto), Hope Lutheran Church (Temecula), Mountain View Community Church (Temecula), Orchard Christian Fellowship (Temecula), and the United Methodist Church (Temecula). • Worked in partnership with the Rail Department to develop a permitted section of park and ride spaces in the city of Corona at the North Main Corona Metrolink station as well as develop blueprints for potential parking security options to consider for future implementation. Major Initiatives A cornerstone of the Commuter Assistance Program is its continued partnership among commuters, employers, and government. The partnership, based on voluntary efforts, makes a collective difference in increasing the efficiency of our transportation system — local roads, freeways, commuter rail, and public bus. The combined effort results in less congestion, decreased vehicle miles traveled, and improved air quality. The major initiatives to continue these partnerships and efforts in FY 2010/11are described below. Grow Employer Partnerships: Given that the highest percentage of rideshare arrangements is formed at work sites, voluntary employer participation is critical to addressing congestion and air quality goals; employers are the conduit to directly influencing their employees' personal transportation choices. The ongoing success of the • • 197 core Western County rideshare program and the explosive success of the now three-year old Coachella Valley rideshare program demonstration is a testament to the.significance of employer partnerships in the program's success. However, the current economic downturn will pose challenges in terms of maintaining and/or growing these partnerships. Employer Transportation Coordinators (ETC) have to do more with less. Delivery of value-added services and tools to make the ETC jobs easier will be critical to their continued partnership. Enhance Program Tools and Outreach: The Commission is continuously looking for ways to improve the suite of services and outreach to both our program participants and employer partners to foster partnerships and participation. Through a grant -funded work effort, RideGuides distributed to commuters will be refreshed and reprogrammed to include personalized transit itineraries in addition to custom car/vanpool matches and park and ride information. An electronic RideGuide will also be available as part of this work effort. Potential alternatives to the current suite of services and outreach will be researched and assessed with program enhancement and garnering efficiencies as the objectives for areas including ridematching and leveraging social marketing. Support Multimodal Travel: In addition to ridematching, information services, and incentives to facilitate ridesharing, the Commuter Assistance Program also implements park and ride facilities to support ridesharing efforts. The last Ca!trans park and ride facility in Riverside County was built in 1999. The Commission leases park and ride spaces from property owners to supplement the network of park and ride spaces in Riverside County. A continued focus for FY 2010/11 will be to monitor and optimize the number of spaces leased and coordinate with ridesharers and transit and rail partners to identify areas where the lease program can help support car/vanpool arrangements as well as facilitate transit connections. Department Goals Operate a cost-effective Commuter Assistance Program within Riverside County that results in a demonstrable reduction in single occupant vehicle trips thus assisting with congestion mitigation and improving air quality. (Policy Goals: Mobility, System Efficiencies, Environmental Stewardship) Objectives: • Continue to offer short-term incentives for commuters to try a transportation mode other than driving alone. • Continue to provide a rewards program for long-term ridesharers to encourage their continued use of alternative modes of transportation. • Ensure the effectiveness of the Commuter Assistance Program through program analysis and recurring assessments of participation and retention of ridesharers. Through the implementation of the Program Measurement Tool, the Commission will continue to look for ways to pare program costs without impacting service delivery or participation. 198 • Continue the mode-shift/rideshare incentive and services to the Coachella Valley and explore other grant opportunities to extend the program beyond the sunset of JARC funds at the end of FY 2010/11 and recommend a long term funding model. • Continue on-line services to employer partners to make the administration of a trip reduction program an easier task. • Optimize the number of park and ride spaces leased and address park and ride gaps in the system. • Assess vanpool program funding opportunities. Ensure the coordination of ridesharing programs throughout the Inland Empire and the southern California region. (Policy Goals: System Efficiencies, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Continue to administer a "sister' Commuter Assistance Program in San Bernardino County on a contract basis, thus expanding the reach and effectiveness of commuter programs throughout the Inland Empire area. • Continue to contract for the enhancement of the RideGuides through a grant funded by the MSRC. Working in partnership with Metro, this grant will enable personalized transit information to be displayed on individualized RideGuides produced for employees who have been surveyed. • Continue to provide leadership with regard to the ongoing operation, maintenance, and enhancement of both the regional ridematching database and network. • Fund and participate in regional rideshare marketing programs to enhance awareness of and encourage participation in commute modes that provide an alternative to driving alone. Enhance and pursue educational activities that encourage alternatives to driving alone and that encourage employers to assist employees in seeking commute methods other than driving alone. (Policy Goals System Efficiencies, Communications) Objectives: • Continue the operation of the Commuter Exchange vehicle to include 35 site visits for the FY 2010/11. • Continue and enhance the dissemination of the report card program for both program participants and employer partners that translates individual or worksite rideshare participation into money saved, congestion reduced, and emissions reduced. • In partnership with the four county transportation commissions and others, utilize the regional ridesharing database and website, www.ridematch.info. • Maintain, update, and enhance the Rideshare Plus members' only website, www. R id esha replus.info. • Distribute regular broadcast information bulletins via email to local employers regarding commuter issues. • Continue with the implementation of the on-line transactions program in order to increase employer participation and reach out to end user commuters. • 199 • • Publicize the participation of local employers in the Commission's Commuter Assistance Program through various media options. Work with Ca!trans and local governments including transit operators to seek opportunities to develop and implement Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) applications that improve the accessibility of highway and transit information to the public as well as achieve operational efficiencies. (Policy Goal: System Efficiencies) Objectives: • Seek federal and state funding sources to support implementation of ITS strategies and projects consistent with the Inland Empire ITS Strategic Plan. • Program ITS projects in the FTIP to account for air quality benefits. Commuter Assistance Performance/Workload Indicators FY 08/09 Actual FY 09/10 Estimated FY 10/11 Projected Number of one-way single occupant vehicle trips reduced as a result of Advantage Rideshare incentives 184,707 108,000 110,000 Number of Club Ride Members 7,378 6,229 6,450 Number of incoming 1-866-RIDESHARE telephone calls 2,423 1,980 2,100 Number of services provided by Inland Empire Commuter Services to support employer trip reduction efforts at worksites: • Employers requesting survey services 152 146 150 • RideGuides produced 34,940 25,000 26,000 • Technical assistance services 264 200 210 Number of events participated in by the Commuter Exchange in total, and as identified individually below: • Public events 7 6 6 • Employer work sites 8 4 4 • Elementary schools 58 39 41 200 • Motorist Assistance Mission Statement: "To improve safety, reduce congestion, and enhance access to traveler information for motorists through the provision of a comprehensive motorist aid system." Chart 37 — Motorist Assistance Salaries and Professional Benefits Costs 1% 6% Expenditures Motorist Assistance expenditures and uses are budgeted at $5,714,000 for FY 2010/11, or an increase of 49% compared to the prior year budget (Table 49). Salaries and benefits reflect a reduction in the motorist assistance manager and staff analyst FTEs for FY 2010/11. Professional costs of $355,800 include legal services and contracted consultants to monitor the Commission's call box program and provide monthly operating and statistical reports for the program. Support costs of $946,600 increased $595,000, or 169°/a, as a result of the operations and maintenance costs related to the newly implemented Inland Empire 511 system. Budgeted expenditures for project operations include $2,700,000 in towing contract costs for the FSP program. Projects and operations costs have increased 23% due to the provision of additional FSP service to help relieve congestion in construction zones. These incremental costs for construction FSP services are reimbursable from Caltrans and local jurisdictions. Transfers out of $1,263,500 represent SAFE's matching funds to state funding for FSP services and an allocation of administrative costs. 201 Table 49 — Motorist Assistance Expenditure Detail Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Legal Services Professional Services -General Total Professional Costs Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations Total Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL Motorist Assistance 2,168,900 2,489,000 2,4813,800 454,700 433,700 $ 2,623,200 $ 3,840,700 $ 3,819,800 Motorist Assistance Staffing Summary Administrative Assistant Chief Financial Officer Commuter Assistance Manager Multimodal Services Director Procurement and Assets Administrator Procurement and Assets Manager Staff Analyst FTE Department Budget Overview Department Description 0.02 0.01 0.14 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.35 -44% 0% -12% -12% 169% 23% 580,000 23% 808,800 178% $ 1,873,300 49% 0.05 0.02 a 0.47 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.60 1.19 As a SAFE, the Commission is responsible for providing a motorist aid system for Riverside County. This system is comprised of three components: 1) call boxes, 2) FSP, and 3) an Inland Empire 511 traveler information system. The call box system allows motorists to call for assistance in the event of a mechanical breakdown or accident on the freeway. The FSP clears small debris on freeways and assists stranded motorists on certain segments of the freeway by towing, changing flat tires, and providing a gallon of fuel at no charge to the motorists. FSP service is also provided in construction zones through separate funding agreements with Caltrans to help mitigate congestion. The Inland Empire 511 system is a telephone and web -based service that delivers real-time traffic information including incidents and travel times, bus and rail trip planning, and rideshare information. It was launched by the Commission in partnership with SANBAG. Key Assumptions • In partnership with SANBAG, the Commission will develop, maintain, and operate an Inland Empire 511 system in accordance with national 511 implementation standards. 202 • • Current percentage levels of vandalism, knockdowns, and miscellaneous repairs to call boxes will remain consistent with the past year. • Annual maintenance costs are based on a flat -fee contract based on the number of call boxes. • Call box operating costs are based on estimates from the CHP and the call answering center contract through SANBAG. • Cellular service charges are based on the existing agreement for digital cellular service. • Tow truck contractor costs for the nine existing FSP beats are based on Commission -approved contracts. • The Commission will maintain and operate an Inland Empire 511 system to be funded 50% by the Commission and 50% by SANBAG. The Commission's share of operating costs will be funded with SAFE revenues. Accomplishments • Maintained competitive rates across all tow operators as a result of exercising option years with no cost increases and obtaining competitive rates for new tow contracts awarded. • Continued research into potential radio options to address coverage gaps and pending FCC regulated radio narrowband conversion. • In partnership with SANBAG, developed the Inland Empire 511 system in accordance with national 511 implementation standards. • Continued the "cost recovery" program for call box knockdowns in an effort to collect reimbursement from motorists involved in accidents that damage Commission property. Major Initiatives Major Motorist Assistance initiatives will focus on system efficiencies and enhancing traveler information. Staff will complete the implementation of the AVL system for the FSP tow trucks. All of the vehicles and operators will be fully equipped by early FY 2010/11, thus providing CHP with a tool to more efficiently monitor the fleet and respond to incidents. Additionally staff will implement a cost-effective and expandable radio system that addresses coverage issues and pending FCC narrowband regulations. The Commission, along with its partner, SANBAG, will operate and maintain the Inland Empire 511 system. This system includes a website interface and an interactive voice recognition (IVR) telephone system that serves Riverside and San Bernardino county residents and commuters. 203 Department Goals • Maintain the integrity of the call box system and service levels. (Policy Goal: System Efficiencies) Objective: • Along with San Bernardino County SAFE, continue to monitor the operation of the call answering center contractor. • Renegotiate rates with the existing call box maintenance contractor and prepare to put the call box maintenance contract out to bid. Enhance access to real-time traveler information. (Policy Goal: System Efficiencies) Objective: • Operate and maintain the Inland Empire 511 website and telephone systems supporting the Inland Empire 511 system on behalf of the Commission and SANBAG. • Continue to refine and enhance Inland Empire 511 web content, applications and outreach. • Continue to leverage existing resources such as traffic data provided by Caltrans District 8, existing IVR software, and Google Transit to minimize costs. Continue the Freeway Service Patrol as long as state funding support is available. (Policy Goal: System Efficiencies) Objectives: • Complete the implementation of the AVL system across the entire FSP fleet. • Implement a cost-effective and expandable radio system that addresses coverage issues and pending FCC narrowband regulations. • Continue to monitor program statistics and consult with the CHP and Caltrans to evaluate existing beats and determine if changes in service hours, number of vehicles assigned to each beat, or service hour adjustments should be considered in response to changes in funding. • Review proposed construction projects with Caltrans and local cities and coordinate the use of temporary tow service to mitigate congestion. • Implement the new statewide FSP logo across all program materials and collateral. Motorist Assistance Performance/Workload Indicators FY 08/09 Actual FY 09/10 Estimated FY 10/11 Projected Number of call boxes 618 618 618 Number of call box calls 6,574 6,200 6,000 Number of vehicle assists 43,163 44,500 45,800 204 • beside County. Transportation eQettliAn 411115 M2:1[5t)IT�L u 205 • Capital Project Development and Delivery Mission Statement: "To keep the Commission's contract with the voters of Riverside County by accelerating the planning, programming, and implementation of projects and programs in the Measure A Transportation Improvement Plan, as enhanced by the Toll Program, to the extent that funds are available. To ensure that capital projects are environmentally acceptable, expertly designed, and implemented in a cost effective manner. To acquire and manage required right of way in the most economical, efficient, and timely manner." Chart 38 — Capital Project Development and Delivery Salaries and Benefits 0% Expenditures Professional Costs 2% Capital Outlay 0% Support Costs 0% The budgeted expenditures and transfers out total $669,870,500 to cover all of the Commission's major capital projects (Table 50). Personnel costs represent less than .5% of the budgeted uses. Professional costs of $14,959,600 are primarily related to general legal costs, specialized legal and financial advisory services related to the toll program, debt management services, and BNSF services related to a rail capital project. Support costs of $869,300 consist primarily of services needed to maintain the Commission's real properties in a condition that cornplies with all local codes and regulations governing property maintenance. 206 General project costs include $8,806,600 related to program management provided by Bechtel Infrastructure (Bechtel), SCRRA, and the project and construction manager and interagency support related to the SR-91 corridor improvements project design -build phase as well as permits for rail capital projects. Significant projects included in engineering expenditures of $52,442,600 are SR-91, 1- 15, and 1-215 corridor improvements; Mid County Parkway; various Western County TUMF regional arterial projects; and the Perris Valley Line and other related projects. Construction expenditures of $76,639,600 are primarily related to the 74/215 interchange, 1-215 corridor improvements south segment, various Western County TUMF regional arterial projects, and the Perris Valley Line and other related projects as well as funding to the city of Riverside for SR-91 interchange improvements at Van Buren. Design -build costs of $23,000,000 pertain to the SR-91 corridor improvements. Approximately 38% of the projects and operations costs represent right of way expenditures on significant projects including SR-91 corridor improvements, SR-91 HOV lanes, Mid County Parkway, various Westem County TUMF regional arterial projects, and Perris Valley Line and other related projects. Funding will also be provided for CVAG's MSHCP land mitigation acquisitions. Local turnback payments to cities and the County for local streets and roads repair, maintenance, and construction amount to $30,986,400, net of debt service payments from the cities of Blythe and Indio. Disbursements to CVAG for the 2009 Measure A Coachella Valley highway and regional arterial program comprise 99% of the regional arterial expenditures. Rail capital equipment purchases for the SJBL represent 96% of the capital outlay expenditures. Interest payments on outstanding commercial paper, the 2009 Bonds, and proposed 2010 Bonds are approximately $12,405,000. Cost of issuance related to the proposed 2010 Bonds is estimated at $1,500,000. Principal payments include the retirement of $83,300,000 in outstanding commercial paper notes as well as $9,000,000 for the 2009 Bonds and proposed 2010 Bonds. Significant transfers out include $130,300,000 in 2010 Bonds proceeds for the retirement of a portion of the outstanding commercial paper notes, funding of 2009 Measure A Western County highway projects, and establishment of a debt service reserve; $50,000,000 in commercial paper proceeds to fund 2009 Measure A Western County and Coachella Valley highway projects such as the SR-91 corridor improvements project; and transfers to debt service aggregating $16,789,000. • • 207 • Table 50 — Capital Project Development and Delivery Uses Detail Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Legal Services Audit Services FnandalAdvisory Professional Services - General Total Professional Costs Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations Engineering Construction Design Build Right of Way and land Local Streets and Roads Regional Arterials Special Studies Operating and Capital Disbursements Total Projects and Operations Capital Outlay Debt Service Transfers Out TOTAL Capital Project Development and Delivery 2,149,100 $ 2,578,100 $ 2,406,i i i , ;';, $ 127,800 5% 1,348,700 3,904,500 1,686,100 9, (776,900) -20% 14,300 55,000 55,000- o 7, (25,000) -45% 15,100 653,100 } , � a"t 1,255,000 N/A 1,010,800 6,989,000 4,199,400 3,558,000 51% 2,388,900 10,948,500 6,593,600 r ` f 3'3s`` 4,011,100 37% 491,300 1,585,000 795,700 �t�' �r `4°�° (715,700) -45% 5,623,600 5,921,000 4,990,800 2,879,600 49% 50)81,600 60,130,050 51,395,000 a � { � r,r�, ° � (8,287,450) -14% 78,093,400 63,943,300 25,269,300 i1 a t='a! rk 12,696,300 20% 21,425,000 1,200,000 ��,�'� r ; 1,575,000 7% 105,891500 123,605,650 42,165,000 tE 4,103,650 3% 45,655,500 31,215,900 31,491,700 ; . ;7 i'i 1229,500) -1% 10,640,300 13,761,400 8,864,700 _ � 3, 9:t� 363,600 3% 188,400 150,000 50,000 j} , y"',r +Y :.' (80,000) -53% (402,000) NSA M 295,918,300 320,758,300 165,426,500 13,021,200 4% 583,800 718,000 (18,900) (318,0001 -44% 42,202,000 191,755,000 193,050,200 [r id, r+ (85,550,000) -45% 45,541,200 242,199,000 262,039,500 '� �r�,� (31,247,800) -13% 389,335,200 $ 770,541,900 $ 630,292,600 fro $ (100,611,400) -136/0 208 Capital Project Development and Delivery Staffing Summary Accounting and Human Resources Manager 0.02 0.00 Administrative Assistant 0.46 0.55 Capital Projects Manager 3.00 3.00 Chief Financial Officer 0.25 0.22 Community Relations Manager 0.44 0.74 Deputy Executive Director 0.34 0.28 Executive Director 0.28 0.30 Multimodal Services Director 0.00 0.00 Planning and Programming Manager 0.04 0.09 Procurement and Assets Administrator 0.00 0.18 Procurement and Assets Manager 0.10 0.52 Project Delivery Director 1.00 1.00 Project Development Director 0.80 0.84 Rail Manager 0.04 0.00 Right of Way Manager 0.99 1.00 Senior Staff Analyst 1.00 1.10 Staff Analyst 1.00 1.10 Toll Project Director 1.00 0.98 Toll Project Manager 2.00 2.00 FTE 12.76 13.90 Department Budget Overview Department Description Capital Projects is primarily responsible for the development and delivery of major highway and rail capital projects where the Commission is identified as the lead agency. The delivery of a capital project can include tasks such as feasibility studies, preliminary engineering, environmental clearance, final design, right of way acquisition, construction, and construction management. Funding is also provided through Capital Projects for local jurisdiction highway and regional arterial projects based on funding agreements with the Commission. Approximately 68% of the Commission's FY 2010/11 budget originates in this department managed by the Toll, Project Delivery, and Project Development Directors responsible for the capital program. The primary goal of Capital Projects is to accelerate delivery of the Measure A, toll, state, and federally funded highway, regional arterial, and rail capital improvement projects throughout the County. Highway improvements currently in progress include the addition of mixed flow and carpool lanes and tolled Express Lanes, widening and realignment projects, and interchange improvements as well as planning for new CETAP corridors. Regional arterial capital improvements include funding for Western County TUMF regional arterial projects. Commuter rail capital improvements include the expansion of commuter rail service in Riverside County, increased train storage 209 • facilities, parking improvements at the commuter rail stations, and station rehabilitation and security projects. This department also provides the necessary coordination between the Commission and Ca!trans for the development of scope, cost, and project delivery schedules for Measure A projects that are funded by the STIP and Proposition 1B CMIA. Capital Projects also has lead agency status over certain demonstration projects identified in SAFETEA-LU. The 2009 Measure A program includes funding to the incorporated cities and the County for local streets and roads maintenance, repair, and construction. The budgeted amount is set by formula established in the Measure A TIP. To be eligible to receive these Measure A funds, each city in the Western County and Coachella Valley areas and the County must participate in the TUMF program, which is administered by WRCOG in Western County and by CVAG in Coachella Valley. Additionally, for Western County jurisdictions, they must also participate in the MSHCP. Annually all cities and the County are required to submit a five-year capital improvement plan and meet an MOE requirement. Each jurisdiction's respective allocation is based on population (Western County and Palo Verde Valley) or dwelling unit (Coachella Valley) and the amount of sales tax generated. The city of La Quinta does not participate in the Coachella Valley TUMF Program, and the city of Beaumont was determined to be in noncompliance with the Western County TUMF program. Accordingly, La Quinta's Measure A allocation is remitted to CVAG in lieu of the TUMF, and Beaumont's Measure A allocation is transferred to the Commission's Measure A regional arterial program. Given the support required to oversee and participate in the project development work, costs for Commission staff and related support have been included in this department budget. The projects identified in the FY 2010/11 budget funded by Measure A, TUMF, state, or federal funds as well as future toll revenues require the continued support of the Bechtel program management team which includes program managers, project engineers, construction engineers, inspectors, contracts administration, and support staff. Right of Way Acquisition and Support Services The primary goal of the Right of Way Management Division is to deliver right of way in the most cost effective manner and within project schedules, while adhering to federal and state regulations. Commission staff required to supervise and manage right of way services and related support for individual projects are included in the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department budget. The Commission authorized the development of a Right of Way Acquisition Program in 2006. To implement the Commission's directive, staff procured the services of on -call right of way consultant services in the fields of title and escrow, right of way engineering and surveying, environmental assessment, appraisal and appraisal review, acquisition and relocation, feasibility studies and cost estimates, property management, and utilities 210 relocation. These consultants are managed and supervised by the Right of Way Management Division. Property Management The Commission strives to manage its real property with the objective of maximizing existing and future public transportation benefits, safety, and income by means of professional property management policies and procedures. This includes issuing licenses and rights of entry for authorized third -party uses, as well as investigating and resolving issues regarding uses that are not authorized by the Commission. On certain occasions, the Commission may also grant easements. General maintenance activities and security measures are also part of the property management scope of work on all Commission -owned properties. The demolition and clearance of structures and other improvements on acquired property, excluding commuter rail stations, is included in the property management function. Additionally, the Commission must manage real property acquired for a project until it is required for construction. Since 1990, the Commission has acquired property assets in the course of rail and highway project implementation. To date, the rail properties number over 225 parcels. The Commission acquired approximately 500 parcels for the SR-74 widening project (Segments 1 and 2), and most of these parcels, which were related to Segment 1, have been transferred to Caltrans. In addition approximately 40 properties have been acquired for the Mid County Parkway, SR-79 realignment, Perris Valley Line, and the SR-60 HOV lanes/1-215 to Redlands Boulevard projects. These properties were acquired in fee, and some will be transferred primarily to Caftans upon completion of the projects. Upon project completion, all remaining properties within every project are reassessed and deemed surplus when it has been determined that the continued retention of the property no longer supports the Commission's policy goals and objectives. Long -Term Strategic Planning Several years ago, the strategic plan for the 1989 Measure A highway program was updated and provided the guidance for completion of the 1989 Measure A highway projects. A significant effort was completed in December 2006 to develop an implementation plan strategy for the 2009 Measure A state highway program, with a focus on the first 10 years of the program through 2019. An objective -based assessment of the Western County portion of the 2009 Measure A TIP was completed along with the prioritization of the program of projects. Four highway corridors, 1-215, I- 15, I-10, and SR-91, were selected as the priority focus for the first 10 years of the 2009 Measure A program, and long-term development work was approved for large scale projects such as the development of the Mid County Parkway, realignment of SR-79, and the bicounty widening of 1-215 to San Bernardino County. Project development activities for these projects have been ongoing. • 211 As a result of the recession and related decline in Measure A revenues, staff recently updated project costs and anticipated funding. After several months of review of funding issues with an ad hoc committee, an update and reprioritization of the Westem Riverside County Delivery Plan was presented to the Commission at its annual workshop in January 2010. Various actions were taken on the four priority highway projects (SR-91, 1-10, 1-15, and 1-215). Four of the 1-215 corridor projects were selected as a top priority (1-215 south and central segments, 1-215 Bi-county Gap Closure, and French Valley interchange), while the 1-215 north segment was deferred to a later year. Preliminary engineering and environmental clearance activities for the 1-15 corridor project will be completed; however, final design will be deferred for a few years. A scope reevaluation and related project reassessment is expected to be completed in July 2010. The 1-10 truck climbing lanes project was deferred several years. The SR-91 corridor projects will continue to move forward with a phased implementation plan, and alternative funding options will continue to be explored. For the strategic projects, preliminary engineering and environmental clearance will be completed for the Mid County Parkway and SR-79 realignment; right of way acquisition for Mid County will be considered for extraordinary acquisitions on a pay-as-you-go basis, while right of way acquisitions for SR-79 realignment will be suspended due to lack of available funding. Updated capital project implementation strategic plans are expected in 2019 and 2029, as required by the 2009 Measure A. CVAG has developed a strategic plan for Coachella Valley highway and regional arterial projects based upon a transportation project prioritization study that is updated periodically. The Perris Valley Line is the most significant rail capital project, and it was included in the 1989 and 2009 Measure A programs. Other rail capital projects are developed in coordination with SCRRA as well as the implementation of the Perris Valley Line. Four new transportation corridors were identified through CETAP and are eligible for 2009 Measure A new corridor and TUMF CETAP funding. TUMF regional arterial projects were approved in 2004 based on a call for projects, which is discussed in the Planning and Programming Department. These strategic planning activities play a significant part of the Commission's annual budget process, in particular the capital budget. Key Assumptions • The Commission will continue its emphasis on the closeout of the 1989 Measure A program. • The Western Riverside County Delivery Plan serves as the basis for defining the 2009 Measure A project selection and prioritization. • Western County TUMF regional arterial project costs are based on the list of projects approved by the Commission in 2004. • Agreements for the advancement of 2009 Measure A funds have been obtained from CVAG and cities desiring to participate in the commercial paper program. The 212 annual principal and interest payments for these loans will be deducted by the Commission from each agency's respective disbursements based on the terms of the loan agreements. • Highway project costs are based on engineers' estimates and scope agreements with Caftans. • Construction projects are competitively bid to minimize costs. • All projects will be built to required standards. • All highway projects, with the exception of tolled Express Lane facilities, are transferred upon completion to Ca!trans; operation of these facilities is the responsibility of Caftans. Tolled Express Lane facilities, when completed, will be operated and maintained by the Commission through the term of a future agreement between Caftrans and the Commission. • The Commission will develop strategies to implement aftemative financing structures including public toll roads. • 2009 Measure A regional arterial projects will be selected and programmed when revenues are at a level that can sustain reasonable cash flow to fund the projects selected for this program. • Development of the SR-79 realignment and Mid County Parkway strategic projects through preliminary engineering and environmental clearance will continue. Accomplishments • Continued implementation of the Westem Riverside County Delivery Plan. • Completed the project report and environmental process and substantially completed final design for 1-215 south segment widening from Murrieta Hot Springs Road to Scott Road. • Obtained federal and state tolling authority for the SR-91 and 1-15 corridor improvement projects. • Selected a project and construction manager and issued limited notice to proceed for the design -build phase of the SR-91 corridor improvements project. • Made substantial progress on the project report and environmental studies for the following projects: • SR-91 corridor improvement project (65% complete); • 1-15 corridor improvement project (65% complete); • SR-71/SR-91 interchange connectors project (70% complete); • 1-215 central segment widening project from Scott Road to Nuevo Road; and • 1-215 Bi-County HOV project. • Completed 95% of final design and continued right of way acquisitions and utility relocations for the SR-91 HOV lanes project through Riverside from Adams Street to the 60/91/215 interchange. • Completed final design and right of way acquisition for the 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connector project. • Completed final design and right of way acquisition for the 74/215 interchange project and began construction phase. • Began design of SR-74 curve widening project. 213 • • • Modified the project limits for the proposed Mid County Parkway project in response to public comment on the draft environmental document. • Made substantial progress related to the environmental process for the SR-79 realignment project. • Continued successful negotiations with the FTA related to the Small Starts funding authorization for the Perris Valley Line. • Substantially completed preliminary engineering for Perris Valley Line project. • Completed construction on the parking structure project at the North Main Corona station. • Completed construction of the Perris Station Transit Center. • Completed the demolition and clearance of structures for the 60/215 East Junction HOV lanes connector and SR-91 HOV lanes project. • Supported public outreach activities by providing graphics from the right of way project management database for Commission presentations to facilitate public understanding of project issues. • Declared property no longer needed for transportation purposes as surplus. Major Initiatives FY 2010/11 will mark the second year as the Commission closes out the 1989 Measure A programs and continues project activities related to the 2009 Measure A programs, of which the highway, rail, regional arterial, and local streets and roads programs represent the majority of the funding allocations. While most of the 1989 Measure A highway projects have been completed, a few projects will continue such as the SR-91 HOV lanes from Adams Street to 60/91/215 interchange, SR-74 curve widening, 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connectors, and interchange improvements at SR-91/La Sierra Avenue, SR-91Nan Buren Boulevard, and SR-60Nalley Way. The 1-215 Bi-County HOV Gap Closure Project and Perris Valley Line rail projects will continue, as both are also included in the 2009 Measure A. Various stages of project development work for projects included in the Western County Highway Delivery Plan will continue in FY 2010/11. Implementation of tolling facilities within the SR-91 and 1-15 corridors, two major projects in the Westem County Highway Delivery Plan, requires obtaining tolling authority from state and federal jurisdictions. Efforts to obtain this authority include successful passage of state legislation, approval of state and federal tolling authority applications, and administrative approval from Caftrans and FHWA. In September 2008, SB 1316 and AB 1954 were successfully passed and signed into law by the Governor providing state tolling authority. Federal tolling authority was granted by FHWA via the Value Pricing Pilot Program in July 2009 for the 1-15 and via Section 129, Title 23 of the United States Code in August 2009 for the SR-91 corridor improvement projects. Detailed descriptions of the capital projects, including local streets and roads funding, that are included in the FY 2010/11 budget follows the Performance/Workload Indicators. 214 Department Goals Build upon and strengthen the partnership with Caltrans toward timely delivery of identified Measure A, CMIA, toll program, and STIP projects. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Environmental Stewardship, Economic Development) Objectives: • Develop agreements with Caltrans and FHWA, as may be required, to finalize project scoping and cost issues for the STIP, federal demonstration, toll, and Measure A funded highway projects in Riverside County. • Provide quarterly contract status and cost schedule reports to the Commission and Caltrans. • Meet the project milestones identified in the CMIA agreements between Commission, Caltrans, and the CTC. To the extent permitted by law, pursue reasonable involvement of local DBE firms and minority and women business enterprises in contract work. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objective: • Maintain goal for a minimum DBE participation in all federally funded contracts. Continue to review quarterly report on DBE participation levels. Provide effective communication of project progress to the Commission board members, city councils, the County Board of Supervisors, Caltrans, CTC, FTA and FHWA. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objective: • Develop a strategy with Caltrans District 8 that would allow the Commission to advance specific projects identified in the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan to take advantage of any unexpected state or federal funding which may become available through increased state or federal budget authorizations, federal stimulus or potential loan programs to advance construction. Work with Caltrans and other agencies toward completion of preliminary engineering and environmental clearance of all projects. (Policy Goal: Mobility) Objective: • Work with Caltrans, the County, and the cities in Riverside County to complete preliminary design and environmental clearance for Measure A projects that could be eligible to receive additional or early funding from various sources that could become available if a project is sufficiently developed. • Release for public review and comment the updated NEPA and CEQA environmental documents for the Perris Valley Line. • Circulate for public review the draft project level environmental document related to the SR-79 realignment project. 215 • Complete the Project Approval and Environmental Document for the 71/91 interchange connectors improvement project. Construct the highway projects identified in the budget. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Economic Development, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Continue to provide funding and support for interchange improvements along the SR-91. • Continue construction of the 74/215 interchange project. • Commence construction on the 1-215 south widening project, the first project in the Westem Riverside County Delivery Plan to reach construction, subject to availability and programming of State bond funds. • For the SR-91 corridor improvement project: a) secure authority to utilize the best - value design -build method of project delivery to advance the project schedule, b) start design -builder industry outreach and procurement of the design -build contractor, and c) adopt the locally preferred project alternative. In coordination with the Rail Program Manager, construct capital improvements at existing commuter rail stations as identified in the budget. (Policy Goals: Mobility, System Efficiencies, Environmental Stewardship, lntermodalism & Accessibility, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Continue advance preliminary engineering, complete environmental clearance and final design, and start right of way acquisition for the Perris Valley Line. • Continue various station rehabilitation and security projects. • Complete engineering and commence construction of Riverside Downtown station layover facility. • Complete engineering and construction of the La Sierra station parking expansion. Acquire right of way for rail and highway projects identified in the budget. (Policy Goal: Mobility, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Acquire right of way for the following projects: Mid County Parkway, SR-91 HOV lanes project, and Perris Valley Line. • Protect and maintain properties acquired for future projects. Commence advance right of way acquisition for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. (Policy Goal: Mobility, Financial & Administration) • Ensure compliance with federal and state regulations governing advanced acquisition. • Provide cost estimates and other right of way support services through the environmental phase of the project. 216 Identify alternative financing strategies in order to fully fund projects identified in the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan. (Policy Goal: Mobility) Objectives: • Continue the assessment and evaluation of available strategies. • Support efforts to develop design -build legislation. Location of Major FY 2010/11 Projects within Riverside County INSERT MAP HERE 1) SR-74 Final design and right of way acquisition for the curve widening on SR-74 from Calvert Avenue to California Avenue. 2) 74/215 Construction of the interchange. 3) SR-79 Realignment between Gilman Springs Road and Domenigoni Parkway including project study report, project report, and environmental document. 4) SR-91 (A) Construction of interchange improvements at Van Buren Avenue. (B) Final design, right of way acquisition, utility relocation, and advertisement for construction for MOV lanes from Adams Street to the 60/91/215 interchange. (C) Preliminary engineering and environmental studies for improvements to the 71/91 interchange. (D) Preliminary engineering, environmental studies, and design -build procurement for toll and mixed flow lanes from SR-241 to Pierce Street in the city of Riverside. 5) SR-111 6) Mid County Parkway 7) Perris Valley Line Construction of intersection improvements by the city of Cathedral City. Preliminary engineering, project report, and environmental documentation for the project. Advanced preliminary engineering and right of way acquisition for the Perris Valley Line (Riverside - Moreno Valley -Perris) along the SJBL. • • 217 • 8) Local Streets and Roads Allocation of Measure A revenues to each city and the County to improve, maintain, and repair high priority local streets and roads. 9) 60/215 Construction of the East Junction HOV lane connectors. 10) 1-215 Bi-County HOV Gap Closure Project 11) 1-215 Preliminary engineering, environmental document, and at -risk design for the interim project to provide two HOV lanes on the 1-215 from the 60/91/215 interchange to Orange Show Road in San Bernardino County. (A) Complete final design and begin construction for the south segment from 1-15 to Scott Road, (B) Preliminary engineering and environmental document preparation for segments from Scott Road to Nuevo Road. 12) 1-15 Preparation of engineering and environmental document for the addition of mixed flow, HOV, and tolled Express Lanes from SR-60 to 1-215 in Temecula. 13) La Sierra Station Parking Expansion Final design and construction for parking expansion to accommodate public bus connections and provide park and ride facilities for commuters. 14) Riverside Downtown Environmental, engineering and right of way activities Layover Facility for train layover facility. Capital Project Development & Delivery Performance/Workload Indicators FY 08/09 Actual FY 09/10 Estimated FY 10/11 Projected Preliminary Engineering (project reports and environmental documentation) Contracts awarded 5 1 0 Plans, specifications, and estimates contracts awarded 3 3 1 Number of projects with active right of way acquisition 3 2 5 Construction awards 2 3 4 Highway and Rail project close-outs 4 4 6 License agreements managed 42 55 50 Appraisals completed 146 120 121 Appraisal reviews completed 143 122 121 Right of Way on -call consultants: 3 2 2 Title and escrow services 3 3 3 Survey and right of way engineering 3 3 3 Appraisers 5 6 6 218 Appraisal reviewers 3 5 5 Acquisition/relocation 3 2 2 Environmental assessment 5 5 5 Fumiture, fixture, and equipment appraisers 2 2 2 Goodwill appraisers 2 2 2 Property management 3 2 2 Capital Projects Summary The following is a summary of the capital projects included in the FY 2010/11 budget. Costs are generally categorized by preliminary engineering, final design, right of way, construction, and design -build phases in addition to other project -related costs such as salaries and benefits, Bechtel project management, and legal fees. Western County Highway and Regional Arterial Projects SR-60Nalley Way (P3032) Provide funding and support to start construction to improve interchange at Valley Way. This project is expected to be completed in 2011. FY 2010/11 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 1,000,000 Construction Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds with the County as lead agency. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR-74/I-15 to 7th Street (P3001) Complete right of way acquisition closeout for Segment II related to the realignment and widening of four -lane roadway between Wasson Canyon Road in the city of Lake Elsinore and 7th Street in the city of Perris. FY 2010/11 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 3,150,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 36,600 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. • 219 • 74/215 Interchange (P3015) Preliminary engineering began in 2006 and was completed in 2009. Final design was completed in 2009. Construction of the project is expected to begin in mid=2010 and be completed in 2012. The total project cost is estimated at $41 million. FY 2010/11 Cost $ 75,000 Engineering $11,170,000 Construction $ 1,285,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 366,300 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds, TUMF zone contributions, ARRA funds, and a federal earmark. Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR- 74 Curve Widening (P3009) Complete preliminary design, final design, and right of way acquisition. Preliminary engineering began in 2009. Construction of the project should begin by the end of 2011. The total estimated project cost is $ 4.2 million. FY 2010/11 Cost $ 20,000 Construction $ 1,460,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 103,700 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds. Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR-79 Realignment (P3003 & P5127) Perform realignment environmental and preliminary engineering services from Gilman Springs Road to Domenigoni Parkway. The total estimated project cost is $1.2 billion. The project is expected to be completed with the environmental phase in 2012. Initiation of subsequent phases will be dependent upon the availability of funding. FY 2010/11 Cost $ 2,000,000 Preliminary engineering $ 4,250,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 228,200 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact None; costs have been funded using TUMF regional arterial, federal earmarks, and SAFETEA-LU federal funds. Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 220 SR-91 Corridor Improvements (P3026 & P3028) Continue the preliminary engineering and environmental study phase and the design - build phase for the toll and mixed flow lanes project from SR-241 to Pierce Street, including tolled Express Lanes connectivity to 1-15 and improvements to the SR-91/I-15 interchange. The SR-91 corridor improvements project cost is estimated at $1.3 billion, and project development activities began in September 2007. The project is expected to be completed and open to traffic in December 2016. FY 2010/11 Cost $11,523,000 Preliminary engineering $27,000,000 Right of way acquisition $23,000,000 Design -build $ 4,020,300 Other project -related costs, including toll feasibility work Measure A Budget Impact Project development costs will be funded using commercial paper proceeds as advance funding of 2009 Measure A highway funds. Toll revenue bonds are expected to be issued in late 2011/early 2012 to provide project financing and reimburse the 2009 Measure A for toll -related project costs not covered by the 2009 Measure A. A federal Transportation Investment Finance Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan is also anticipated to be secured concurrent with the toll revenue bonds to complete the funding plan. Operating Budget Impact Operation and maintenance of future tolled Express Lanes facilities are the responsibility of the Commission, while all other state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. Preliminary estimates of annual operating and maintenance costs are $7,800,000. Such costs will be paid from the collection of toll revenues. 71/91 Connectors (P3021) Complete preliminary engineering and environmental studies in December 2010, and potentially start final design for interchange improvements to the 71/91 interchange when funding becomes available. The total estimated project cost is $126 million. Preliminary engineering began in February 2008. FY 2010/11 Cost $ 676,200 Preliminary engineering $ 2,400,000 Final design $ 197,800 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using STIP-RIP funds and commercial paper proceeds as advance funding of 2009 Measure A highway funds. Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. • 221 • SR-91 HOV Lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 Interchange (P3005) Continue final design and right of way acquisitions. Preliminary engineering began in 2001. Construction of the project should be completed in the summer of 2015. The estimated total project cost is $273 million. FY 2010/11 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 195,000 Final design $24,680,300 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 479,500 Other project -related costs Final design costs will be funded using LONP funds received and CMAQ with 1989 Measure A highway funds for local match. Right of way costs will be funded using STIP-RIP, Traffic Congestion Relief Program, CMAQ, and 1989 Measure A highway funds. CMAQ and CMIA funds generated by Proposition 1 B will be used for construction activities. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR-91/La Sierra Avenue Interchange (P3014) Provide funding and support to start construction to widen and fully improve La Sierra Avenue from SR-91 to El Sobrante Road. This project is expected to be completed in 2010. FY 2010/11 Cost $ 200,000 Construction Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds with the city of Riverside as lead agency. The Measure A funding commitment for this project was $27.2 million. Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway and regional arterial operations are the responsibility of Caltrans and the local jurisdiction, respectively. SR-91Nan Buren Boulevard Interchange (P3008) Provide funding and support for construction to widen and fully improve the interchange at Van Buren Boulevard. This project is expected to be completed in 2011. FY 2010/11 Cost $ 5,000,000 Construction Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds with the city of Riverside as lead agency. The Measure A funding commitment for this project was $7.6 million. Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway and regional arterial operations are the responsibility of Caftans and the local jurisdiction, respectively. 222 1-15 Corridor Improvements (P3027) Continue preliminary engineering and environmental studies to add two tolled Express Lanes and one mixed flow lane in each direction from SR-60 to SR-74 and to add one HOV lane in each direction from SR-74 to 1-215. Preliminary engineering and environmental work started in April 2008 and is scheduled for completion in fall 2012. Project development beyond preliminary engineering for final design and construction is dependent upon the ongoing toll feasibility studies and are not currently budgeted. FY 2010/11 Cost $ 9,000,000 Preliminary engineering $ 1,360,300 Other project -related costs, including toll feasibility work Measure A Budget Impact Project development costs will be funded using 2009 Measure A highway funds, including commercial paper proceeds as advance funding. It is anticipated that toll revenue bonds will be issued in the future to provide project financing and reimburse the 2009 Measure A for toll -related project costs not covered by the 2009 Measure A. Operating Budget Impact Operation and maintenance of future tolled Express Lanes facilities are the responsibility of the Commission, while all other federal and state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. Preliminary estimates of annual operating and maintenance costs are $15 million. Such costs will be paid from the collection of toll revenues. 60/215 East Junction HOV Lane Connectors (P3017) Complete final design and right of way acquisition. Preliminary engineering began in 2006. Construction of the project is expected to be completed by 2012. The total project cost is estimated at $59 million. FY 2010/11 Cost $ 47,500 Final design $ 2,719,000 Construction $ 84,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 161,200 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using CMAQ and STP funds with 1989 Measure A highway funds for local match for final design. STP funds with 1989 Measure A highway funds for local match funds will be used for right of way. STP and CMAQ, with STIP-RIP and STIP-IIP for local match funds, as well as lease proceeds will be used for construction. Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. • 223 • 1-215 Corridor Improvements (South Segment)/I-15 to Scott Road (P3022) Continue final design to add one mixed flow lane in each direction. Preliminary engineering began in 2007 and was completed in 2008. Final design began in 2008. Construction of the project is expected to begin in early 2011 and finish in 2013. The total project cost is estimated at $64 million. FY 2010/11 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 100,000 Preliminary engineering/environmental $ 1,250,000 Final design $12,275,000 Construction $ 10,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 347,000 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using STIP-RIP funds and 2009 Measure A highway funds; CMIA funds generated by Proposition 1 B bonds will be used for construction activities. N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 1-215 Corridor Improvements (Central Segment)/Scott Road to Nuevo Road (P3023) Continue preliminary engineering and environmental documentation to add one mixed flow lane in each direction. Preliminary engineering began in 2007. Final design is expected to begin in 2011, and construction will begin two years later. Construction of the project is expected to be completed by 2016. The total project cost is estimated at $188 million. FY 2010/11 Cost $ 1,800,000 Preliminary engineering $ 5,000,000 Final design $ 2,550,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 250,100 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using STIP-RIP funds and 2009 Measure A highway funds. Operating Budget Impact N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 224 1-215 Southbound to 1-15 Connector Widening Gap Closure (P3031) Commence preliminary engineering to widen southbound connector to 1-15, which is expected to begin in 2010 with construction expected to be completed by 2012. The total project cost is estimated at $8.5 million. FY 2010/11 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 550,000 Preliminary engineering $ 58,200 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using 2009 Measure A highway funds. N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 1-215 Bi-county Project (P3012) Continue to fund the Project Study Report and EIR/EIS on the 1-215 North from the city of Riverside to the San Bernardino County line through a cooperative agreement with SANBAG. Preliminary engineering began in 2003. Construction of the project should be completed by 2040. The total estimated project cost is $1.4 billion. FY 2010/11 Cost $ 500,000 Preliminary engineering/environmental $ 18,400 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact Current phase costs of this project will be funded using 2009 Measure A highway funds. Operating Budget Impact N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 1-215 Bi-county HOV Interim Project (P3030) Continue to fund preliminary engineering phase to add one HOV lane in each direction on the 1-215 North from the city of Riverside to the San Bemardino County line through a cooperative agreement with SANBAG, which has a match up project north from the San Bernardino County line to I-10. Preliminary engineering began in 2009. Final design is expected in 2012. Construction is estimated to be completed by 2014. The total project cost is $167 million. FY 2010/11 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 741,200 Preliminary engineering/environmental $ 1,248,000 Final design $ 36,500 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using 2009 Measure A highway funds. N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. • 225 • Mid County Parkway (P2302 & P5123) Perform activities related to the development of a recirculated project report and environmental document for a new corridor from 1-215 to SR-79. This phase is anticipated to be completed in 2012. Construction of this new facility will be completed over many years as funding becomes available and is estimated to cost $1.6 billion. FY 2010/11 Cost $ 1,050,000 Preliminary engineering/environmental $ 6,100,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 429,700 Other project -related costs and uses Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded with TUMF CETAP funds and 2009 Measure A new corridor funds. Operating Budget Impact N/A; responsibility for highway operations has not been determined. Various Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Projects (P5101, P5102, P5103, P5104, P5105, P5106, P5107, P5108, P5113, P5114, P5115, P5116, P5118, P5119, P5120, P5121, P5125, & P5128) Provide TUMF funding and support for the engineering, right of way, and construction activities related to various Westem County TUMF regional arterial projects approved by the Commission in September 2004 following a call for projects. Total project costs approved for TUMF regional arterial projects approximate $73 million. FY 2010/11 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 5,846,700 Engineering and design $13,147,200 Construction $23,625,200 Right of way acquisition $ 162,000 Other project -related costs None; costs will be funded using TUMF regional arterial funds with various local jurisdictions as lead agency for their respective projects. N/A; regional arterial operations are the responsibility of the local jurisdictions. 226 Coachella Valley Highway and Regional Arterial Projects SR-111 City Project (P3413) Provide funding and support to complete signal and local intersection widening improvements along SR-111 and SR-86 as a result of the cooperatively programmed 1989 Measure A highway program funds by the Commission and CVAG. In 2003 nine projects were approved for 1989 Measure A highway funding. As amended in December 2007, total funding of these projects approximates $24.4 million. Substantially all of the projects have been completed, with the exception of one project which is expected to be completed in FY 2011/11 and a project for which sufficient funds are not available. FY 2010/11 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 625,500 Construction project in the city of Cathedral City Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds with city of Cathedral City as lead agency for its project. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. MSHCP Land Acquisition in Coachella Valley (P8100) Provide funding and support for the acquisition of land as mitigation for the cumulative and indirect impacts associated with construction of future highway and regional arterial projects as required by 2009 Measure A under an advance funding agreement with CVAG. In September 2005 the Commission approved the advance funding of 2009 Measure A highway and regional arterial funds in the amount of $15.025 million for CVAG's land mitigation acquisitions. CVAG began expending these funds in FY 2008/09 following completion of federal permit and other matters. As of June 30, 2010, the projected remaining funding commitment for this project is approximately $7.7 million. FY 201011 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 6,270,000 Land acquisition Costs will be funded using commercial paper proceeds as advance funding of 2009 Measure A highway and regional arterial funds. N/A; land mitigation operations are the responsibility of CVAG. 227 • Various Coachella Valley Highway and Regional Arterial Projects (P8100) Provide funding and support for the Monterey Avenue corridor in Rancho Mirage and Jackson Street, Avenue 42, and Jefferson Street in Indio under an advance funding agreement with CVAG. In September 2005 the Commission approved the advance funding of 2009 Measure A highway and regional arterial funds in the amount of $28.275 million for nine regional transportation projects in the cities of Coachella, Indio, Palm Desert, and Rancho Mirage and the County. As of June 30, 2010, the projected remaining funding commitments for these projects are approximately $13.5 million. FY 2010/11 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 6,500,000 Construction Costs will be funded using commercial paper proceeds as an advance of 2009 Measure A regional arterial funds with the cities of Indio and Rancho Mirage as lead agencies for their respective projects. N/A; regional arterial operations are the responsibility of the local jurisdictions. Rail Projects Perris Valley Line and Other Related Projects (P3800, P3823, P3824, P3825, and P3827) Continue advanced preliminary engineering and right of way acquisition and complete environmental clearance for extension of commuter rail services to Perris. Project commenced in December 2007 when the Commission received approval from FTA to move into project development. Other related projects include adding a fourth main track between the Riverside Downtown station to the connector to the SJBL branch line at Highgrove as well as right of way acquisition. Expected completion date is December 2012 for a total project cost of $233 million. FY 2010/11 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 3,285,000 Engineering/support.services $ 3,150,000 Final design $20,300,000 Construction/support services $21,835,600 Right of way acquisition/support services $10,628,200 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using FTA and 1989 Measure A rail funds as well as proceeds from sales of surplus properties. Subsequent year costs will also include STIP funding. Rail station operations related to this project, which will be the responsibility of the Commission upon completion of the project, will be funded with LTF and property management fees. Rail service and capital operations will be the responsibility of Metrolink and will be funded by the Commission with LTF and STA based on an allocation 228 determined by Metrolink. Annual station operations approximate $300,000 per station, or $1,500,000 annually in the aggregate for five proposed stations. North Main Corona Station Parking Structure (P3808) Complete construction of a 1,000 space parking structure at the North Main Corona station. Construction commenced in January 2008 with an expected completion date of June 2010 for a total construction cost of $21 million. FY 2010/11 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 33,000 Construction and support services $ 36,600 Other project -related costs None; costs will be funded using STIP-IIP funds, CMAQ, STA, LTF, and FTA Section 5307 funds. Operations of this parking structure will be the responsibility of the Commission. Annual operating costs are estimated at $300,000 to be funded with LTF. La Sierra Station Parking Expansion (P3826) Commence final design and construction for the parking expansion at the La Sierra station to accommodate public bus transit connections and provide park and ride facilities for commuters. Construction is expected to be completed by December 2011. FY 2010/11 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 30,000 Engineering $ 2,000,000 Construction $ 59,200 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using Proposition 1 B PTMISEA and 1989 Measure A rail and commuter assistance funds. Operations of this parking expansion will be the responsibility of the Commission. Annual operating costs are estimated at $100,000 to be funded with LTF. Riverside Downtown Layover Facility (P3822) Commence environmental, preliminary engineering, final design, and right of way activities for a Riverside Downtown station layover facility. Project development activities commenced in April 2010, and the project is expected to be completed by 2011. FY 2010/11 Cost $ 1,400,000 Preliminary engineering $ 400,000 Final design $ 50,000 Construction/support services $ 266,800 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A rail funds. Operating Budget Impact Operations of the layover facility will be assumed by Metrolink upon completion. • 229 • Station Rehabilitation and Security Projects (P4011 & P4012) Continue various station rehabilitation and security projects. In April 2008, the Commission approved the Commuter Rail Station Rehabilitation Maintenance Plan with initial phase costs estimated at $2.5 million. The Commission approved a Comprehensive Station Security Upgrade Program in July 2008 at an estimated cost of $368,000. Several contracts have been awarded and are in progress. FY 2010/11 Cost $ 100,000 Final design (rehabilitation) $ 1,500,000 Construction (rehabilitation) $ 332,000 Other project -related costs (rehabilitation) $ 161,700 Other project -related costs (security) Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using LTF capital, Measure A rail, and Proposition 1 B PTMISEA and CTSGP-CTAF funds. Operating Budget Impact Operating costs at the stations, which are the responsibility of the Commission, are expected to decrease as a result of the rehabilitation projects; however, the savings have not yet been determined. Local Streets and Roads Annually monitor the MOE requirements to ensure local agencies are expending funds according to the 2009 Measure A ordinance. Review local agency 5-year capital improvement plans to ensure Measure A funds are expended on eligible local street and road projects. Western County Area Distribute local retum funding for local streets and roads projects in Western County. FY 2010/11 Cost $ 351,000 Banning 0 Beaumont 93,000 Calimesa 117,000 Canyon Lake 2,468,000 Corona 1,022,000 Hemet 717,000 Lake Elsinore 746,000 Menifee 2,270,000 Moreno Valley 1,339,000 Murrieta 416,000 Norco 729,000 Perris 4,366,000 Riverside 434,000 San Jacinto 1,768,000 Temecula 349,000 Wildomar 230 4,742,000 Riverside County 416,000 Commission $22,343,000 Total Westem County Measure A Budget Impact All costs will be distributed in accordance with 2009 Measure A local streets and roads funds. Operating Budget Impact N/A; local streets and roads operations are the responsibility of the local jurisdiction. Coachella Valley Distribute local return funding for local streets and roads projects in Coachella Valley. FY 2010/11 Cost $ 936,000 Cathedral City 422,000 Coachella 282,000 Desert Hot Springs 167,000 Indian Wells 1,098,000 Indio 0 La Quinta 1,800,000 Palm Desert 1,288,000 Palm Springs 635,000 Rancho Mirage 1,166,000 Riverside County 1,009,000 CVAG 8,803,000 Total Coachella Valley (673,400) Less: debt service payments $ 8,129,600 Total Coachella Valley, net Measure A Budget Impact All costs will be distributed in accordance with 2009 Measure A local streets and roads funds. Operating Budget Impact N/A; local streets and roads operations are the responsibility of the local jurisdiction. Palo Verde Valley Area Distribute local return funding for local streets and roads projects in Palo Verde Valley. FY 2009/10 Cost $ 606,000 Blythe 144,000 Riverside County 750,000 Total Palo Verde Valley (236,200) Less: debt service payments $ 513,800 Total Palo Verde Valley, net Measure A Budget Impact All costs will be distributed in accordance with 2009 Measure A local streets and roads funds. Operating Budget Impact N/A; local streets and roads operations are the responsibility of the local jurisdiction. 231 • eation 7 cm au [Mqv Lec-.)13Lic 232 • Community Profile Riverside County is the fourth largest county in Califomia, stretching westward nearly 200 miles from the Colorado River and comprising more than 7200 square miles that include 26 incorporated cities. This includes the newly -incorporated cities of Menifee and Wildomar. Riverside County can trace its beginning back to 1893 when voters approved the formation of a new county. The area was carved from parts of San Bemardino and San Diego counties. In its 115 years of existence, the County's economy has diversified and prospered. Originally, Riverside County was a very agricultural area, known for a wide variety of crops grown on its fertile soils. The County remains a strong agricultural area, but it is increasingly becoming a. leader in manufacturing, transportation, construction, and tourism. The success of the area has brought dramatic population growth to Riverside County (Chart 39). Since the 1980's, the County has been one of the fastest growing counties in the state. The available and affordable housing in Riverside County has attracted many people to the County; however, a housing slowdown has occurred in recent years primarily as a result of the effect of the subprime mortgages, ensuing credit crisis, and recession (Chart 40). During the growth period, jobs also increased as many firms relocated to the area and moved away from older communities; however, the current economic slowdown has caused the County's unemployment rate to rise from its near all-time lows (Chart 41). The overall economic outlook for Riverside County is expected to improve in 2011 based on various economic forecasts. The area is preparing for its future as well in supporting better education. The County is home to a number of colleges and universities including University of California, Riverside. Chart 39 - Population 233 Chart 41 — Unemployment Rate (%) 16.074 14011 12-0% MO% 6.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% OA% 1q9^ 1°90 e Santa: 66fpnis 77.01%7747I UIWIOgnMI D,7770771t roP1 ticfP M1�y 41. As a result of demographic changes and growth, retail sales in the County increased through 2006 (Chart 42 and Table 50); however, the effect of the recession on retail sales was noted in sales tax receipts beginning in 2007. The prior years' increases in retail sales had a positive effect on the sales tax receipts generated in the County, which has a 7.75% sales tax rate including the Measure A rate through March 2009 and 8.75% thereafter (Table 52). The taxable sales generation by jurisdiction in the County is presented in Table 53. 234 • Chart 42 — Retail Sales (%) - $ Billion — 2008 Data ApparelStores 431% Specialty Stores 4.02% Food Stores 4.82% Household 3.14% Building Materials 5.52% Table 51 — Sources of County of Riverside Taxable Sales by Business Type (in 000's) Apparel Stores General Merchandise Specialty Stores Food Stores Eating & Drinking Household Building Materials Automotive Other Retail Sales Total all other services & outlets Source: Sete Board of Equalization $ 1,171,013 $ 3593,134 L210,642 1,352,609 2,388,039 843,945 1,961,911 7,137,075 1,584,148 7,781,093 1.080,385 3,553,554 2,262,442 1,309,782 2,316,422 948,217 2,390,236 6,956.756 1,024,551 7,973,892 29,023,609 $ 29,816.237 Table 52 — Direct and Overlapping Sales Tax Rates $ 990,129 3,304,474 2,104,040 1,197,438 2,157,801 964,629 2,424,898 6,751,648 944,155 7,417,279 $ 867,276 $ 746,015 3,026.335 2,671.971 1,885,435 1,649,224 1,079,972 L028,392 1,940,610 1,713,632 862,551 691,051 2,226,117 1,678,347 6,035,203 5,198,391 792,450 653,929 6,52L199 5,678,183 $ 26,256.491 $ 25,237,148 $ 21,709.135 SourceCommission Finance Department and California State Board of Equalization 235 Table 53 — Principal Taxable Sales Generation by Jurisdiction in Riverside County for 20081 City of Riverside $ 4,093,218 City of Corona 2,994,438 City of Temecula 2,307,072 City of Palm Desert 1,447,663 City of Moreno Valley 1,154,650 City of Murrieta 972,575 City of Hemet 840,655 City of Palm Springs 826,056 City of La Quinta 731,831 City of Indio 673,527 City of Cathedral City 649,612 City of Lake Elsinore 639,732 City of Perris 562,025 City of Rancho Mirage 438,400 City of Norco 436,753 City of Coachella 307,494 City of Beaumont 270,480 City of Banning 193,333 City of San Jacinto 192,541 City of Blythe 160,476 City of Desert Hot Springs 91,671 City of Indian Wells 91,534 City of Calimesa 54,285 City of Wildomar 23,983 City of Canyon Lake 12,300 City of Menifee Incorporated 20,166,304 Unincorporated county area 5,837,291 1 22.4% Countywide $ 26,003,595 100.0% 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 15.7% 11.5% 8.9% 5.6% 4.4% 3.7% 3.2% 3.2% 2.8% 2.6% 2.5% 2.5% 2.2% 1.7% 1.7% 1.2% 1.0% 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% 0.4% 0.4% 0.2% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% California $ 531,653,540 Source: California State Board of Equalization z Year represents most recent data available • 236 • Commission Facts Programs and Services Measure A: The Commission administers Measure A, the local half -cent sales tax for new transportation projects in the County. Under Measure A, funding is used to improve highways, commuter rail, regional arterials, local streets and roads, transit and specialized transportation services including commuter assistance, economic development, new corridors, and Commission administration. Measure A expires in 2039. Transportation Development Act: The TDA is comprised of two elements: Local Transportation Fund and State Transit Assistance funding. The Commission administers the LTF one -quarter of one cent of the state sales tax on behalf of the County. STA is generated from the statewide sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuel and is allocated by the State to the Commission on the basis of population and as a percentage of transit fare revenues. TDA funding is allocated primarily to bus and rail transit operators for transit operating and capital needs. Additionally, LTF funding is available for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, planning, and administration and allocated to the Commission and local jurisdictions in the County. Highways: The Commission assists with the planning and funding for highway improvements. Major current projects include: SR-60 East Junction to 1-215 HOV lanes connector, SR-74/G Street to 1-215 interchange, SR-79 realignment, SR-91 corridor improvement project (HOT and mixed flow lanes), SR-91 HOV lanes/Adams Street to the SR-60/SR-91/1-215 interchange, SR-91 interchange improvements at Van Buren Avenue, 1-15 corridor improvement project, 1-215 corridor mobility improvement projects, and Mid County Parkway. State highway maintenance is the responsibility of Ca[trans. Local Streets and Roads: The Commission administers funding to local jurisdictions to improve streets, intersections, signal coordination, and pavement. Local streets and roads maintenance is the responsibility of the local jurisdictions. Commuter Rail: The Commission funds and oversees Metrolink rail services within the County. The Commission's three Metrolink lines are the Riverside, IEOC, and 91 lines. The Commission owns and maintains five Metrolink stations located at: ➢ Riverside Downtown Station, 4066 Vine Street, Riverside ➢ La Sierra Station, 10901 Indiana Avenue, Riverside ➢ Pedley Station, 6001 Pedley Road, Riverside ➢ North Main Corona Station, 250 E. Blaine Street, Corona ➢ West Corona Station, 155 S. Auto Center Drive, Corona Motorist Assistance: The Commission provides emergency call boxes through the SAFE and offers emergency towing services through the FSP. Commuter Assistance: The Commission provides a variety of rideshare services both to employers and commuters. Through voluntary participation, commuters and employers receive a direct benefit from their sales tax dollars, and the entire region benefits from reduced traffic congestion and improved air quality. Specialized Transit: The Commission maintains a strong commitment to assist in the mobility of those with specialized transit needs. Through its Specialized Transit Program, the Commission has provided millions of dollars to public and nonprofit transit operators to assist in the provisions of special transit services to improve the mobility of seniors and persons with disabilities. 237 • Rivasidetotelylionsportahon Cumnobsien 238 • Glossary of Acronyms AADPL - Annual Anticipated DBE Participation Level ACT - Association for Commuter Transportation ADA - Americans with Disabilities Act ARRA - American Recovery and Reinvestment Act AVL - Automatic Vehicle Locator Bank of America - Bank of America, N.A. Bechtel - Bechtel Infrastructure BNSF - Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Board - Board of Commissioners for the Riverside County Transportation Commission CAFR - Comprehensive Annual Financial Report CaIPERS - California Public Employees Retirement System Caltrans - Califomia Department of Transportation CAGTC - Coalition for America's Gateways and Trade Corridors CEQA - California Environmental Quality Act CETAP - Community Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process CHP - California Highway Patrol CHSRA - Califomia High Speed Rail Authority CIP - Capital Improvement Plan CMA - Congestion Management Agency CMAQ• - Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality CMIA - Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (Proposition 1B funding category) CMP - Congestion Management Program CMS - Congestion Management System Commission - Riverside County Transportation Commission Coordinated Plan - Coordinated Public Transit —Human Services Transportation Plan County - County of Riverside CTC - California Transportation Commission CTSA - Consolidated Transportation Service Agency CTSGP-CTAF - Califomia Transit Security Grant Program—Califomia Transit Assistance Funds (Proposition 1B funding category) CVAG - Coachella Valley Association of Governments Deutsche Bank - Deutsche Bank AG DBE - Disadvantaged Business Enterprise DMV - Department of Motor Vehicles EIR - Environmental Impact Report EIS - Environmental Impact Study ERP - Enterprise Resource Planning ETC - Employer Transportation Coordinators FCC - Federal Communications Commission FFY - Federal Fiscal Year FHWA' - Federal Highway Administration FSP - Freeway Service Patrol FTA' - Federal Transit Administration FTE - Full-time Equivalent FTIP - Federal Transportation Improvement Program FY - Fiscal Year GASH - Governmental Accounting Standards Board GFOA - Government Finance Officers Association HOV - High Occupancy Vehicle (Carpool Lane) 1 - Interstate ICE - Irvine -Corona Expressway IEOC - Inland Empire -Orange County Metrolink Service IIP' - Interregional Improvement Program ITS - Intelligent Transportation System IVR - Interactive Voice Recognition JARC - Jobs Access Reverse Commute (FTA Section 5316) Lehman DP - Lehman Brothers Derivative Products Inc. LIBOR - London Interbank Offer Rate LOS - Level of Service 239 LTF" — Local Transportation Fund Metro — Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Metrolink — Operating Name for SCRRA (see SCRRA) Moody's — Moody's Investors Service MOE — Maintenance of Effort MOU — Memorandum of Understanding MSHCP - Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan MSRC — Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (AB 2766) NEPA — National Environmental Policy Act OCTA — Orange County Transportation Authority Perris Valley Line — Perris Valley Line Metrolink Extension Project PIP — Productivity Improvement Program Ports — Port of Los Angeles and Port of Long Beach PPM — Planning, Programming, and Monitoring PTC — Positive Train Control PTMISEA — Public Transportation, Modernization, hnprovement, and Service Enhancement Account (Proposition 1B funding category RCA — Regional Conservation Authority RCTC — Riverside County Transportation Commission RIP* — Regional Improvement Program RTA — Riverside Transit Agency RTP — Regional Transportation Plan S&P — Standard & Poor's Rating Service SAFE — Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies SAFETEA-LU• — Safi, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users SANBAG — San Bernardino Associated Governments SANDAG — San Diego Association of Governments SB 45 — Senate Bill 45 Kopp 1997 Transportation Funding SB 821 — LTF Bicycle and Pedestrian Funds SCAG — Southern California Association of Govemments SCAQMD — South Coast Air Quality Management District SCRRA — Southern California Regional Rail Authority SJBL — San Jacinto Branch Line SR — State Route SRTP — Short Range Transit Plan SSAB — Salton Sea Air Basin STA• — State Transit Assistance State — State of California STIP• — State Transportation Improvement Program STP" — Surface Transportation Program SunLine — SunLine Transit Agency TC1F — Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (Proposition lB funding category) TDA" — Transportation Development Act TE' — Transportation Enhancements TIP — Transportation Improvement Plan TUMP — Transportation/Traffic Uniform Mitigation Fee (Western County/Coachella Valley) VC IL — Ventura County Transportation Commission Westem County — Westem area of Riverside County WRCOG — Westem Riverside Council of Govemments 1989 Measure A — Original 1/2 cent transportation sales tax measure approved by voters in November 1988 2009 Measure A — Extension of sales tax measure approved by voters in November 2002 which became effective upon expiration of original sales tax measure on July 1, 2009 2009 Bonds — Sales Tax Revenue Bonds, Series A, B and C issued in October 2009 2010 Bonds — Sales Tax Revenue Bonds anticipated to be issued in November 2010 • Additional information provided in Funding Definitions. 240 • Funding Definitions Federal Fund Sources Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5309 discretionary funds generally provided to urbanized areas for funding new start rail projects, major bus fleet replacement, and transit facility construction. Matching ratios range from 50/50 to 80% federal and 20% local. Section 5307 formula funds made available to urbanized areas for operating subsidies, capital projects and planning. Operating match is up to 50%of the net operating cost; capital and planning match is 80%federal and 20% local. Section 5310 funds made available to states for providing capital support to private non-profit and, in certain circumstances, public transit operators. This is a state administered discretionary program providing funds on an 88.53% federal and 11.47% local basis. Section 5311 funds provided to support rural transit operating subsidies and capital projects. Operating match is up to 50% of the net operating cost; capital match is 80% federal and 20% local. Section 5316 funds provided for the development and maintenance of jobs access projects to transport welfare recipients and eligible low-income individuals to and from work during non -peak hours as well as supply reverse commute options for workers in suburban areas. Section 5317 funds made available for new public transportation services and alternatives for people with disabilities beyond the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) In 1991, the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) was approved by Congress to replace the former Federal Aid Urban/Federal Aid System funding programs. 1STEA was established as a six -year funding program and was reauthorized for another six years in 1997. This new transportation act was renamed as the Transportation Equity Act of the Twenty-first Century (TF.A21) and was extended through August 10, 2005 when the President signed into law the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFEfEA-LU). With guaranteed funding for highways, highway safety, and public transportation totaling S244.1 billion, SAFETEA-LU represents the largest surface transportation investment in our nation's history. Under these programs the following fund sources are allocated to each county, and the Commission further allocates these funds based on federal provisions. Surface Transportation Program (STP) Funds allocated by the Commission and administered by Caltrans that provide funding for local street and road improvements. Current matching rate is 88.53% federal and 11 A7% local. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Funds allocated by the Commission for transportation related air quality improvement projects in air quality non - attainment areas. Current matching rate is 88.53% federal and 11.47% local. Safety projects can qualify for 100% of CMAQ funding. Transportation Enhancements (TE) The amount of funds made available under this program is 10% of the state apportionment of STP funds. Projects are qualified and prioritized by the Commission and submitted to the California Transportation Commission for inclusion in the State Transportation Improvement Program. The basic definition of a transportation enhancement project is an improvement that is over and above the base transportation project. Project categories are pedestrian and bicycle facilities, scenic or historic highways, scenic beautification, historic preservation, rehabilitation of historic transportation facilities, preservation of abandoned railway corridors, control/removal of outdoor advertising, archaeological planning and research, and mitigation of water pollution due to highway runoff Current matching rate is 88.53% federal and 11.47% local. 241 State and Local Fund Sources • State Transportation Improvement Program The State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) consists of Regional Improvement Program (RIP) and Interregional Improvement Program (IIP) funds. The RIP and IIP programs are mainly supported by Proposition 42 fimding. The RIP component represents 75% of STIP funds available for capacity projects. Regional Transportation Planning Agencies are responsible for selection of projects proposed for RIP funds. The IIP component represents the remaining 25% of STIP funds available for capacity projects and Ca}trans is responsible for the selection of IIP-funded projects. The Commission and Caltrans District 8 work closely in coordinating projects for these fund sources. Proposition IB Program In November 2006, the voters in California approved Proposition 1B, which will fund various transportation programs from bonds issued by the state of California. Programs to be funded include corridor mobility improvements (CMIA), transit capital (PTMISF.A), STIP supplement, goods movement (TCIF), state -local partnership funds, and cities and counties. Transportation Development Act (TDA) The TDA is oomprised of two elements: Local Transportation Fund (LTF) and State Transit Assistance (STA) funds. LTF funds are derived from 1!4 of one cent of the state sales tax and are returned to source. There are three areas of apportionment within Riverside County comprised of Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley (Blythe). The Commission administers the LTF on behalf of the County of Riverside. Funds are provided for program administration, Southern California Association of Govemments regional planning, local transportation planning, and transit services in Westem County and the Coachella Valley. In the Palo Verde Valley, funds support transit services and local street and road improvements. Funds are also provided to the County for local street and road improvements in unincorporated areas. Additionally, under SB 821, 2%of LTF funds are made available for bicycle and pedestrian projects. STA funds are generated from the statewide sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuel and are allocated by the state to the Commission based on population and as a percentage of transit fare revenue. The Commission has generally used these funds to support capital purchases and improvements as these funds have been subject to state budgetary actions. Measure A Measure A is a half -cent local retail transaction and use tax that was initially approved by the voters in November 1988 for 20 years (Ordinance 88-1) and extended in November 2002 for an additional 30 years (Ordinance 02-001), through June 2039, to help fund key transportation improvements in Riverside County. It provides funds to improve highways and local roadways, to initiate commuter mil services on existing tracks, to expand dial -a -ride services and commuter programs, and to guarantee half-price bus fares for seniors and persons with disabilities. These types of improvements are needed to control traffic, increase safety, and maintain the quality of life within the County. Since existing state and federal sources provide only a limited amount of funding for a limited number of projects, Measure A will cover the shortfall for key projects with a funding source that is under local control. It will use the revenue generated in Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley to meet the unique transportation needs of each of those areas. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee The Transportation. Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program was adopted by all local jurisdictions in the Western County area of Riverside County in July 2003. Under this program, which is administered by the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), fees are assessed on new residential and commercial development in Western Riverside County to ensure that new development pays its fair share toward providing the needed infrastructure improvements on the regional system of highways and arterials. In accordance with the extension of Measure A in 2002, the Commission shall receive the first $400 million of TUMF revenues to fund equally the regional arterial system and the development of new corridors. As a result of an amended Memorandum of Understanding with WRCOG, the Commission will continue to receive TUMF above the original $400 million cap. Program Terms The following explanations of terms are presented to aid in understanding the various program terms used and discussed in the narrative and generally used in outlining the Commission's functions for auditing, governmental accounting, financial reporting and budgeting. 242 • Bicycle and Pedestrian LTF provides revenues for the construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities and related right-of-way costs. Commuter Assistance The purpose of this program is to provide short-term incentives to encourage single occupant vehicle drivers to use alternate modes of transportation including carpools, vanpools, bus pools, public bus, commuter rail, walking, and bicycling. Commuter Rail Measure A provides operating and capital revenue for commuter rail service to Orange and Los Angeles counties. LTF provides revenue for commuter rail operations in Riverside County. These trains operate on existing railroad tracks parallel to major freeways. Commuter rail service provides a safe and reliable transit altemative to driving alone during the peak period. Plans to expand commuter rail service in Western Riverside County from Riverside to Penis via Moreno Valley are currently underway. Highways Measure A provides revenues to widen existing highways, expand interchanges, and improve remote freeways. These improvements are needed to control traffic congestion in Western County and improve access and safety in Coachella Valley. Costs of these improvements will be covered by funds from state and federal sources. Measure A revenue will be used to supplement —not replace —these other sources and to accelerate work on projects deferred for lack of funding. Local Streets and Roads Measure A provides revenues to local jurisdictions for the construction, repair, and maintenance of local streets and roads. The County and local cities are required to supplement those expenditures with other previously dedicated revenue sources to maintain road improvements at a level equal to or greater than the base year amount. LTF provides revenue for local street and road improvements in the Palo Verde Valley and unincorporated areas of the County. Metrolink The Commission's commuter rail program is part of the regional network operated by the Southem California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) operating under the name of Metrolink, a five -county joint powers agency composed of the transportation commissions of Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Orange, Riverside, and Ventura The purpose of this agency is to manage the operation and maintenance of commuter rail in the five -county metropolitan area Motorist Assistance The Motorist Assistance program has two elements. The Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) is a special team of tow trucks that travel on selected Riverside County freeways during peak commuter hours to assist drivers when their cars break down. The other element is the call box system, which installation and operation is made possible with revenue provided by the public. One dollar per year from every motor vehicle registration pays for the call boxes and their operation and maintenance. Call boxes are being provided by the Commission, which serves as the County's Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE). Regional Arterials Measure A funds generated within the Westem County and Coachella Valley areas are used for major regional road projects. The system is to be implemented with a mix of funding required from new development under a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee to be paid by developers from new development and from Measure A funds retumed to the Western County and Coachella Valley areas. The Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee schedule shall be established in order to generate at least the equivalent of Measure A funding toward the regional arterial system. Specialized Transit Measure A provides revenues to improve transportation services for seniors, persons with disabilities and commuters. For seniors and persons with disabilities, it provides dial -a -ride cab service at night for emergency purposes, guarantees half-price bus fares, and assists centers with their transit programs. For commuters, it improves express bus service and expands ridesharing programs. In the Coachella Valley, revenues also are available for bus replacement and local bus service. Transit The Commission is the agency responsible for short-range transportation planning and programming and coordinating the operation of all public transportation service within the County. The Commission allocates and disburses TDA funds to the transit operators for operating and capital purposes. 243 Transportation Improvement Plan This plan also acts as the County's expenditure plan and was prepared by the Commission for the proposed 1/2%local retail transaction and use tax for transportation purposes to be collected. This was proposed by the Commission as a means to fill the funding shortfall to implement needed highway, regional arterial, and commuter rail projects; local street and road programs; and transit improvements for seniors and disabled persons. General Terms The following explanations of terns are presented to aid in understanding the narrative discussions and illustrations included in this budget document and the terminology generally used in governmental accounting, auditing, financial reporting, and budgeting. Accountability The state of being obliged to explain one's actions, to justify what one does. Accountability requires a government to answer to its citizenry to justify the raising of public resources and the purposes for which they are used. Accounting System The methods and records established to identify, assemble, analyze, classify, record, and report a government's transactions and to maintain accountability for the related assets and liabilities. Accrual Basis of Accounting The accounting of the financial effects of transactions, events, and interfund activities when they occur, regardless of when cash is received or paid. Advance Refunding Bonds New bonds issued to refinance an outstanding bond issue before the date the outstanding bonds become due or callable to obtain better interest rates and/or bond conditions. Proceeds of the advance refunding bonds are deposited in escrow with a fiduciary, invested in U.S. Treasury Bonds or other authorized securities, and used to redeem the underlying bonds at their maturity or call date and to pay interest on the bonds being refunded. Agency Fund A fiduciary fund type used to report resources held by a govemment for others in a purely custodial capacity and cannot be used to support the government's own programs. Audit A systematic collection of the sufficient, competent evidential matter needed to attest to the fairness of management's assertions in the financial statements or to evaluate whether management has efficiently and effectively carried out its responsibilities. The auditor obtains this evidential matter through inspection, observation, inquiries, and confirmations with third parties. Balanced Budget The identification of revenues and other financing sources as well as available fund balances to fund operating and capital expenditures and other fmancing uses on an annual basis. Basis of Accounting A term used to refer to when the effects of transactions or events are recognized for financial reporting purposes. For example, the timing of recognition can be when the transaction or event occurs (accrual basis) or when cash is received or paid (cash basis). Bond A written promise to pay a specified sum of money (face or principal amount) at a specified date or dates in the future (maturity date), together with periodic interest at a specified rate. Bonds are primarily used to finance capital projects. Budget A plan of financial activity for a specified period indicating all planned revenues and expenditures for the budget period. Annual budgets are usually required by law and are essential to sound financial management. The Commission prepares an annual budget that is applicable to a single fiscal year. • • 244 • Budgetary Control The control or management of a government in accordance with an approved budget to keep expenditures within the limitations of available appropriations and available revenues. Budget Document The instrument used by the budget -making authority to present a comprehensive financial program to the appropriating governing body. Capital Outlay Expenditures resulting in the acquisition of or addition to the government's capital assets or assets to be transferred to Caltrans, such as highway projects. Capital Projects Fund A governmental fund type created to account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or construction of major capital projects. The Commission has two capital projects funds for Commercial Paper and Sales Tax Bonds to account for debt proceeds from 2009 Measure A commercial paper notes and 2009 Measure A sales tax revenue bonds related to highway, commuter rail, regional arterial, and local streets and roads projects. Commercial Paper An unsecured short-term promissory note issued primarily by corporations with maturities ranging from two to 270 days. The credit risk of ahnost all commercial paper is rated by a rating service. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report A financial report that encompasses all funds of the government In the fmancial section of the CAFR are the basic financial statements and required supplementary information as well as combining and individual fund financial statements, as necessary. The CAFR also contains introductory information and statistical data Current Financial Resources Measurement Focus A measurement focus that reports on the near -term or current inflows, outflows, and balances of spendable financial resources. This focus is unique to accounting and financial reporting for state and local governments and is used for reporting the financial position and results of operations of governmental funds. Debt An obligation resulting from the borrowing of money or from the purchase of goods and services. Debts of govemrens include bonds, time warrants, and notes. Debt Coverage Ratio The ratio of pledged revenues to related debt service for a given year. Debt Limit The maximum amount of outstanding gross or net debt legally permitted. Debt Proceeds The difference between the face amount of debt and the issuance discount or the sum of the face amount and the issuance premium. Debt proceeds differ from cash receipts to the extent issuance costs, such as underwriters' fees, are withheld by the underwriter. Debt Service Fund A governmental fund type created to account for the accumulation of resources for and payment of general long-term debt principal and interest. The Commission has one debt service fund for its sales tax revenue bonds. Expenditures Represents decreases in net financial resources on the transfer of property or services for acquiring an asset, service, or settling a loss. Fiduciary Funds Funds used to report assets held in a trustee or agency capacity for others and cannot therefore be used to support the government's own programs. 245 Financial Advisor In the context of the issuance of debt, a annuitant who advises the issuer on any of a variety of matters related to the issuance. The financial advisor sometimes also is referred to as the fiscal consultant. Financial Audit An audit made to provide independent assurance whether the fmancial statements of a government are presented fairly in conformity with GAAP. Financial Resources Resources that are or will become available for spending and include cash, resources ordinarily expected to be converted to cash such as receivables, inventory, and prepaid assets. Fiscal Year For the Commission, the 12-month period that begins July 1 and ends June 30 of the designated fiscal or operating year for accounting and budgeting purposes. Fund A fiscal and accounting entity with a self -balancing set of accounts in which cash and other financial resources, all related liabilities, and residual equities or balances, and changes therein, are recorded and segregated to carry on specific activities or attain certain objectives in accordance with special regulations, restrictions, or limitations. Fund Balance The excess of governmental fund's assets over its liabilities. Fund Type Any one of eleven classifications into which all funds are categorized in governmental accounting. Govenunental fund types include general, special revenue, debt service, capital projects, and permanent funds. Proprietary fund types include enterprise and internal service funds. Fiduciary fund types include pension trust, investment trust, and private - purpose trust funds and agency funds. GASH 34 Statement No. 34 issued by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board that was implemented by the Commission in FY 2001/02. GASB 34 established new financial reporting standards for state and local govemments. Under the new fmancial reporting model, governmental financial statements include basic financial statements that present both government -wide and fund financial statements and required supplementary information, including Management's Discussion and Analysis. GASH 45 Statement No. 45, Accounting for Other Postemployment Benefits (OPEB), issued by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board implemented by the Commission in FY 2007/08. GASB 45 requires recognition of postretirement health care costs on an accrual basis over a period approximating the employees' years of service and to provide information about actuarial accrued liabilities associated with these benefits and whether and to what extent progress is being made in funding the plan. General Fund The govemmental fund type used to account for all financial resources, except those required to be accounted for in another fund. General Ledger A record containing the accounts needed to reflect the financial position and the results of operations of a govemment. In double -entry bookkeeping, debit balances equal the credit balances in the general ledger. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) Minimum standards and guidelines for financial accounting and reporting. GAAP encompasses the conventions, rules, and procedures that serve as the norm for the fair presentation of financial statements. The GASB is the primary authoritative accounting and financial reporting standard -setting body on the application of GAAP to state and local govemments. Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS) Rules and procedures established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (A1CPA) for the conduct of a financial audit. There are ten basic GAAS, classified into three broad categories: general standards, standards of • 246 • fieldwork, and standards of reporting. The Auditing Standards Board of the AICPA publishes Statements on Auditing Standards (SAS) and related interpretations to comment and expand upon these basic standards. Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS) Standards established by the General Accounting Office (GAO) in its publication, Government Auditing Standards, for the conduct and igrating of both fmancial and performance audits in the public sector. GAGAS set forth general standards applicable to both types of audits and separate standards of fieldwork and reporting for financial and performance audits. The GAGAS standards of fieldwork and reporting for financial audits incorporate and build upon GAAS. Governmental Funds Funds generally used to account for tax -supported activities. The Commission's governmental funds are comprised of general, special revenue, debt service, and capital projects funds. Grant A contribution by a government or other organization to support a particular function or program. Independent Auditor An auditor meeting the independence criteria set forth in GAAS and GAGAS. Internal Audit An independent appraisal of the diverse operations and controls within a government entity to determine whether acceptable policies and procedures are followed, established standards are met, resources are used efficiently and economically, and the organization's objectives are being achieved. The tern covers all forms of appraisal of activities undertaken by auditors working for and within an organization. Internal Control Policies and procedures established to provide reasonable assurance that specific government objectives will be achieved. Joint Venture A legal entity or other organization resulting from a contractual agreement and that is owned, operated, or governed by two or more participants as a separate and specific activity for the benefit of the public or service recipients and in which the government retains an ongoing financial interest or ongoing financial responsibility. The Commission is a member agency of Metrolink. Legal Level of Budgetary Control The level at which a government's management may not reallocate resources without special approval from the legislative body. Loans Receivable An asset account reflecting amounts loaned to individuals or organizations external to the Commission, including notes taken as security for such loans. Measurement Focus The objective of a measurement, that is what is being expressed in reporting a govemment's financial performance and position. A particular measurement focus considers not only which resources are measured (financial or economic), but also when the effects of transactions or events involving those resources are recognized (basis of accounting). The measurement focus of the Commission's government -wide and fiduciary fund financial statements is economic resources, whereas the measurement focus of governmental fund financial statements is current financial resources. Modified Accrual Basis The accrual basis of accounting adapted to the governmental funds' measurement focus according to which revenues and other financial resource increments (e.g., bond issue proceeds) are recognized when they become susceptible to accrual, that is when they become both "measurable" and "available to finance expenditures of the current period." Expenditures are recognized when the fund liability is incurred except for unmatured interest on general long-term debt and certain similar accrued obligations when due. The Commission's governmental funds are accounted for using the modified accrual basis of accounting. 247 Other Financing Sources Amounts classified separately from revenues to avoid distorting revenue trends that represent an increase in current financial resources. Other financing sources generally include general long-term debt proceeds, amounts equal to the present value of minimum lease payments arising from capital leases, proceeds from the sale of general fixed assets, and transfers in. Other Financing Uses Amounts classified separately from expenditures to avoid distorting expenditure trends and represent a decrease in current financial resources. Other financing uses generally include transfers out and the amount of refunding bond proceeds deposited with the escrow agent. Overhead Indirect costs that cannot be specifically associated with a given service, program, or department and thus, cannot be clearly associated with a particular functional category. Principal In the context of bonds other than deep -discount debt, the face value or par value of a bond or issue of bonds payable on stated dates of maturity. Program Group activities, operations, or organizational units directed to attaining specific purposes or objectives. Program Budget A budget wherein expenditures are based primarily on the functions or activities of a government rather than to specific items of cost or to specific departments. Purchase Order A document authorizing the delivery of specified merchandise or the rendering of certain services and the making of a charge for them. Refunding Bonds Bonds issued to retire bonds already outstanding. The proceeds of refunding bonds may be used to repay the previously issued debt (current refunding) or to be placed with an escrow agent and invested until used to pay principal and interest on old debt at a future date (advance refunding). Reimbursement Grant A grant for which a potential recipient must first incur qualifying expenditures to be eligible. Reserved Fund Balance Those portions of fund balance which are not appropriable for expenditure or that are legally segregated for a specific future use. Special Revenue Fund A governmental fund type used to account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources (other than major capital projects) that are legally restricted to expenditure for specified purposes. The Commission maintains special revenue funds for Measure A Westem County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde; Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee; Freeway Service Patrol; Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies; State Transit Assistance; and Local Transportation Fund. Transfers All interfund transfers representing flows of assets between funds of the govemment without equivalent flows of assets in return and without a requirement for repayments. Trust Fund A fiduciary fund type used to report pension, investment, or private -purpose trust arrangements, under which principal and income benefit individuals, private organizations, or other governments. Trustee A fiduciary holding property on behalf of another. • 248 TT/OTOZ aeaA ieDsu 4a6pna pasodcud (009'6) (000'899`T (000`999) (00T'009) (00£'£6T ) (009 `TL£) (000'05 ) 009'S6 00Z'S86'OZ (00£1ZL'T ) 008'L04`6tr£ $ ;' apuele9 pun3 TT/OZ A3 (01/6/9 lagpnq pug aad) amele8 pun3 2uipu3 TT/OTOZ A3 suon.ncrosip dls ui aseanui suoRnmilsip uepTsapad pue apitom 311 ui @seam' sisoo uomsinb3e Aem Jo 144 ui aseanui slsop suoReaado wea8oad ui @seam' slsoo luauaa2eueua uaeiSoad ui @seam! slsoo 1aoddns Aem Jo 148ia ui aseanui si.soo leuoissajoad ui aseanui auaoDui luaua}sanui ui aseanui s}uauaasanquaiaa awls ui aseanui :sluaualsnfpy TTOZ A3 1a8pne saanlipuadxa Aellno lelidea pue'uo!leaado pafoad `voddns pue leuoissajoad ui aseanui sluauaasanquaiaa Imo! pue awls ui °seam! :sluaualsnfpyOTOZAA P@Pafoad (OT/Zt/s palaodaa se) apue leg pun3 8uipu3 OT/600Z A3 ileum ileaa) sluaua}snfpd lapng Budget Summary Beginning Fund Balance $ 500,770,400 Revenues 250,865,800 Debt Proceeds 185,000,000 Transfers In 212,414,700 Total Estimated Sources Expenditures Debt Service Transfers Out Total Estimated Uses Uses Over Sources (offset by beginning fund balance) Ending Fund Balance (461,488,400) (106, 205,000) (212,414, 700) 648,280,500 (780,108,100) (B1,8271600); {68,; i42, 800 Funding Sources Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Federal reimbursements State reimbursements Local reimbursements TUMF Other revenues Investment income Debt proceeds Transfers in Total Sources $250,000,000 $200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000,000 $50,000,000 $- \�,`ai �e'Sa+ �e'a* is �s c, P ��S Pc' J(s Jch .c5 e ce` e\ ce` ay C� e<s ayecc'a lea St v� �a a a ewe ewe ewe FY 10/11 Sources 106,000,000 68,809,900 28,870,700 34,340,900 830,700 10,000,000 178000 1,835,600 , 185,000,000 212, 414, 700 648, 280, 500' ��F Je5 �e eay y�c ec e� pn9 .sca or Sxcc cf. -e S %£T sweawd leuopaa %T savtaas wawaSeum %bT ap!mas }q ad saimipuadx3 le�ol aovuas Naa Aianilaa pue luawdolanaa pafoad le�ide� sweiSaid leuopab sa3ina8S wowa8eueN 001 `80i 08c 0001SOZ 901 00S`S991E9S' 0017188E`SOt 00Z`678$ $ saanlipuadx3 TZ/OZ A3 samvpuadx3 jo kiewwns ptie stiul ealunuiu�c,� sa emle`is12 I sae � a�lll�e4�.i{d,cipl,R�lJ,d;;r r ul aApe uie4tati rr OT/600Z aneq seanlipuedxg . OOZ`6tr8`b 00�`86Z`Z ooz`osi'i %5 wawa8euey� anilnDax3 savwaSluawaeueW ameui j suoppunwwo3 pue saiegv angeispa3 uopealsiuppy luawa2eueW anpax3 saoinaas ;Lie eBeuew %II suo!lendo pue nueualu!elAi I1eb 0017'88E150T 000`btL'S 009$LE't OOti'6St'9L saanlpuadx3 tZ/Ot m • %L sapwas Sup wea2oad pue2quue!d %S nuels!ssy lspoloW %b aouels!ssy aalnwwoD swea wd leuopq le�ol apuelslssy }spoloW apuelslssda owwoD �lsueal pazllepads pue Dllgnd suopeaado pue apueualuleW Ilea sappas aup.uweaoad pue auluueld iS `OL8`699 OOZ'ZS6`OZZ 000 `SOZ `90T 000tot 000'SZZ ` 71 OOti`986`0£ 00£160L`LZZ 000`000`£Z 009`6£9`9L 009'ZI717`ZS 009'9L8`8 00£'698 009`6S6`tiT 006'SOL`Z saanlipuadx3 TZ/OL A3 kaannaa luawdolanaa pafoad Iewle0 ono saa}sueu apvuas Tgaa AeRno lelide0 siepave Ieuo!Sab spew pue slams lepoi puei pue Aenn to lippj punq uS!saa uopn4suo0 8upaau!Su3 suoReaado wea wd :suop.eaado pue spafoad slsop voddns sisoa leuoissa}oad swauaq pue sapeies saarmpua • x3 uaeaBoad !elide° %Z sleuave ieuo!Saa %S spew pue spans ego' %£ prq alsa0 %T suoi;eaado uaea8ad %Z slsoaleuo!ssa}oad %0 siyauaq puesaueleS %0 Aenno e;idep panui;uo9 saanlipua • x3 uaeaBoad !elide° s;oafoad uope;!l!geyaa uope;S k;!l!oed aanaei uope;S unno;uMOCI ap!saan!b au!� AolleA s!aaad demved 4;un403 p!lN 6u!u0p!M 444-21S wled a;ea pue ue!pul;e safiueyoaa;ul 04-1 uol;e6PHAl pue-1 dOHSW Aellen ellayaeoa s;uawanoadwl aop!aaoO 94Z-I PUe `94-1 `46-21S a6ueyoaa;ul 54Z1�L a6ueyoaa;ul 92/1,6/09 o;;aaa;S swepy/saue-1 AOH 46-21S s14611116iH aanHpuadx3 uaeaBoad !elide° 001'801'0BL OOL IVIVZZZ 000 `SOZ `90Z 009`L8S 008`OZZ`T8tr 00T `L€81r 00ti`8T9`8T 000`SZZ'9 sasn T/OTOZ Ad sash ono saa�sueal aouenssi Jo Ism pue aDvuas lgaa Aellno inide0 suop.eaado pue spafoad voddns ieuoissajoad Iauuosaad unnopmeaa8 sash ieuogounA %05'Z also D sAn.e4spuipvel siilauee pue seueleSs %00'Z %05 . & %00' L %GTO uogergsiupLupy d aanseaw Continue monitoring revenues Finalize budget and related document Close public hearing and adopt budget June 9, 2010 get, close the pub' RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Greg Moore, Procurement and Assets Manager THROUGH: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Agreement with Elite Electric Inc. to Provide Lighting Maintenance Services for the Five Commission -Owned Metrolink Stations in Riverside County STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Award Agreement No. 10-24-082-00 to Elite Electric, Inc. for lighting maintenance services at the five Commission -owned commuter rail stations and the Perris Transit Center for a three-year period, and two one-year options, for a total contract amount of $550,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement, including option years, on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission owns and operates five commuter rail stations in Riverside County. Station lighting maintenance services are essential to provide continued safety and security for Metrolink commuters, as well as preserving and maintaining the Commission's property. The Commission requires the services of a qualified contractor to provide both quarterly and on -call lighting maintenance services, which includes the cleaning of station lights and the repair or replacement of all defective lighting system components and fixtures. Components include blown lamps, fuses, defective ballasts, controllers, timers, connectors, conduits, circuit breakers, j-boxes, and damaged or unsafe wiring. Under Commission supervision, quarterly field inspections would be conducted at each station for a fixed price in order to indentify all necessary repairs. Alternatively, on -call services would be used on an as -needed basis to address repairs required between quarterly inspections. Pricing for on -call services would be based upon fixed labor rates and a pre -established markup on materials. 249 Procurement Process Request for proposals (RFP) was released by staff and advertised on March 15, 2010. A pre -proposal conference was held at the downtown Riverside Metrolink station on March 23, 2010, and five firms attended. Commission staff responded to all questions submitted by potential proposers prior to the March 29, 2010, deadline date. Five firms — Elite Electric, Inc. (Elite), IES Commercial, Inc., Playa Vista Property Management, Inc., Republic Intelligent Transportation Services, and Safeway Electric — submitted proposals prior to the April 12, 2010 deadline. Each of the five firms submitted responsive and responsible proposals. Utilizing the evaluation criteria set forth in the RFP, the firms' proposals were evaluated and scored by an evaluation committee comprised of Commission staff, Bechtel staff, and a representative from Metrolink. Based on the stated criteria, Elite earned the highest total evaluation score. As a result, the evaluation committee recommends the award of Agreement No.10-24-082-00 to Elite for lighting maintenance services at the five Commission -owned Metrolink stations for a five year period, inclusive of three single -year options, for a total contract amount of $550,000. Elite's rates are considered fair and reasonable based upon adequate price competition. Elite has provided services for the Commission and performed satisfactorily. In addition, Elite has successfully performed similar work as described in the scope of services for the Jurupa Area Recreation and Parks District and the Orange County Public Works Department. This agreement will enable the Commission to control lighting maintenance costs by establishing fixed fees/rates for quarterly inspections and reports, labor, equipment, and a fixed materials mark up for quarterly and on -call repairs. It also allows the Commission to budget annually, make scheduled and emergency repairs, and provide optimal safety for visitors and Metrolink patrons. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes No Year: FY 2010/11 FY 2011/12+ Amount: $ 110,000 $ 440,000 Source of Funds: Local Transportation Fund Budget Ad ustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 004001 004002 004003 004004 004006 73315 103 24 73301 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \1.124,4,,,ai Date: 05/13/10 250 • • • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Fina Clemente, Transit Manager THROUGH: Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director SUBJECT: Amendment to SunLine Transit Agency's Fiscal Year Short Range Transit Plan 2009/10 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve a modification to the SunLine Transit Agency's (SunLine) FY 2009/10 operating assistance funding by amending the original amount from $22,735,270 to $21,903,610 due to a combination of decreases in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds, Measure A funding, and federal Sections 5307, 5311, and 5317 allocations; 2) Approve a modification to SunLine's FY 2009/10 capital improvement program by using FY 2006/07 carryover funds of $502,865 in State Transit Assistance (STA), replacing previously approved LTF for local match to federally funded capital projects; and using an additional $594,000 in Section 5309 to replace Section 5307 funds for the bus rehabilitation project; 3) Approve a budget adjustment to the FY 2009/10 budget to reflect a reduction of $761,500 in LTF and $546,000 in Measure A expenditures; 4) Approve an amendment to SunLine's FY 2009/10 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) to reflect these changes; and 5) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In June 2009, SunLine's Board of Directors adopted the FY 2009/10 operating and capital budget of $25,827,098 based on the agency's SRTP. Typically, the SRTPs of public operators are based on the latest revenue estimate amounts available at the beginning of the year. Since then, SunLine's main sources for operating and capital funds, namely LTF and Measure A funding, have been reduced significantly due to the recession. In addition, actual grant awards from federal Sections 5307, 5311, and 5317 also decreased because of lower apportionments in the Coachella Valley for FY 2009/10. Due to the shortfall in LTF revenues, SunLine is requesting to use FY 2006/07 carryover STA funds as a local match for federally funded capital projects. Additionally, an adjustment has to be made to move a previously identified Section 5307 funding to Section 5309 funding. As a result, SunLine is Agenda Item 10 251 requesting an amendment to its FY 2009/10 SRTP to accommodate these funding level changes. Operating Assistance Table la of the attachment outlines the currently approved funding structure for operating assistance while Table 1 b shows the proposed modified funding distribution. SunLine is requesting approval to modify its operating funding as follows: Reflect a decrease of $258,635 in LTF funding; Reduce Measure A funding by $546,000; and Reflect a decrease of $24,164 in Section 5311 and $2,861 in Section 5317 revenues. The combined decrease in operating funding plan for FY 2009/10 is $831,660, which has been in SunLine's operating budget. Capital Assistance Table 2a of attachment shows the original capital requests based on SunLine's currently approved SRTP capital funding plan and Table 213 outlines the modified capital funding plan based on actual revenues available. Modification requests are as follows: Replace $502,865 in LTF capital match with the same amount using FY 2006/07 carry over STA funds currently held at SunLine; and Move $594,000 from federal Section 5307 to Section 5309 funding for the bus rehabilitation project. Commission staff has reviewed SunLine's reprogramming structure and recommends approval of its operating and capital funding plan and related amendments to the FY 2009/10 SRTP. SunLine has initiated an update to the FY 2010 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) to reflect these changes in funding. Financial Impact A budget adjustment to reduce LTF operating expenditures by $258,635 and LTF capital expenditures by $502,865 is required. The adjustment for the decreased Measure A expenditures was made in January 2010 in connection with the mid -year revenue projections. Agenda Item 10 252 • Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2009/10 Amount: (5258,635) ($502,865) Source of Funds: Coachella Va ley LTF, Measure A Specialized Transit Funds Budget Ad ustment: Yes GLA No.: 002211 86101 601 62 86101 (5258,635) 002211 86102 601 62 86102 0502,865) Fiscal Procedures Approved: \ilib,4, 14, Date: 05/13/10 Attachment: FY 2009/10 SRTP Table 4 Amendment Agenda Item 10 253 • SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2009/10 SRTP - TABLE 4 AMENDMENT FY 2009/10 OPERATING and CAPITAL ASSISTANCE BY FUNDING SOURCE Table 1 - Operating Assistance Table la. Currently Approved ATTACHMENT 1 Project Description Total LTF Measure A Federal Sec 6304 Federal Sec 5307 FY 07/08 Sec 5307 Carryover Funs Federal Set 5311 Federal Sec 5316 Federal Sec 5317 Farebox 6 Other Revenue Operating Assistance 5 20,990,095 tp',,. �. $ 30,250 5 924,804 $ 924.804 '�. $ 117609 $ 4,145078 Preventive Maintenance 1,745.175 349035 D 1,398,140 0 -„ 0 p - 0 Total:Operatig 22,735,270 10,627,803 4,260,000 30,250 2 320 944 924,800 289.247 117,609 19,445 4145,078 Table lb. Modified Operatin Operalino Asmslame $ 20,158 035 } . . ,++ & f i $ 30,250 5 924,804 $ 924,804 = '. $ 117,609 E 4 165,078 Preventive Maintenance 1,746,175 349,035 0 1,398,140 0 - n 0 0 :: 0 Total:Operating 21,803,610 10,369.256 3 714 000 30,250 2320,940 924,800 265,083 117,609 16,584 4,145,078 Difference Between Currently Approved an Modified Operating Plan _ 5 (831,660) $ (258,635) $ (646,000) S - $ E - $ (24,1E10 $ - $ (2,861) $ Table 2a. Current) Approved Capita Table 2 - _Capital Assistance Project Description Capital Project 5 Total LTF Measure A STA FY 06/07 STA Carryover Funs Federal Sec 5307 Federal Sec 6311 Federal Sec 6318 Federal Sec 5317 Federal Sec 5309 Bus Rehabilitation SL-90A1 S 712,500 5 Replacement Suppon Vehicles SL-10-02 E 231,428 $ 3,285 $ 185,143 �b 4 Expansion Support VeOkNs SL-10-03 5 112,000 e 5 89,600 4 Expansion Parthenon Buses SL-10-04 $ 400,000 f 27,140 $ 260000 f 112,860 SunLine-CelStan Fuel Cell Prograr S140.05 5 282,150 ;rtm.° $ 28,215 a 225,720 ITS EqulpmeM SL-10-06 $ 650,000 E 520600 Transit Enhancement SL-10-07 $ 30,000 $ 4000 5 64000 Trans6 Hub SL-10-08 $ 593,750 3 $ 475,000 Taal: CapWl $ 3,091,828 ^ --t $ - $ 62,640 $ - 5 1 712,743 $ - 5 - $ - f 813,580 Table 2b. Modified Capital Protect Description Capital Project Total LTF Measure A STA FY 05/07 STA Carryover Funs Federal Sec 5307 Federal Sec 5311 Federal Sec 5316 Federal Sec 5317 Federal Sec 5309 Bus Rehabilnalion SL-10-01 5 742,500 ni 5 Replacement suppon Vehicles SL-10-02 5 231,428 $ 3,285 $ 43909-�; 5 185,143 4 Expansion Suppon Vehicles SL-10-03 $ 112,000 $ '22A9b:. $ 89,600 4 Expansion Parthenon Buses SL-10-04 5 400,600 5 27140 - 260.000 5 112,860 SunLme-CalStan Fuel Cell Prograr SL-10-D5 $ 282,150 $ 28,215 ,$., -:$8;2t51 $ 225, 720 ITS Equipment SL-10-05 5 660,000 -. $_ l3o,a40 $ 520,000 Transit Enhancement SL40.07 $ ao,00D 5 4000 3 _.._-12,000-^ 5 64000 Trunsil Hub SL-10-09 5 503,750 $ ,,. ){8,750/' $ 475,000 Taal: Capitol 5 3091,825 5 - 5 - $ 62,640 $ 502,865-. $ 1,118.743 $ - $ S - $ 1,407,580 DiNerence Between Currently Approved and Modified Calmar Plan 5 - 5 (502,865) $ - $ - $ 502,865 $ (594,000) S - $ - $ - y 594,000 NET CHANGE 'Operating 8 Capilal Funding) 5 1831,660) f (761,500) E (546,000) 5 - $ 502,365 $ 1594,0001 $ 824,164) $ - S 12,861) $ 594,000 - SunLine is recommending using carryover STA funds from FY 06/07 held at the AgonCy a5 match for federal capital funds and to cover shortfall in LTF revenues for FY09/10. 254 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Fina Clemente, Transit Manager THROUGH: Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director SUBJECT: Amendment to Riverside Transit Agency's Fiscal Year 2009/10 Short Range Transit Plan STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve a modification to the Riverside Transit Agency's (RTA) FY 2009/10 operating assistance funding by allocating $50,000 in Measure A funds designated for Specialized Transit/Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA) for Western Riverside County (Western County); 2) Approve a modification to RTA's FY 2009/10 capital improvement program to reflect an additional $4,007,425 in Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF) and $3,508,333 in FY 2008/09 Proposition 1 B grant funding; 3) Approve Amendment No. 1 to RTA's FY 2009/10 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) to reflect these changes; and 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its June 25, 2009 meeting, RTA's Board of Directors approved and adopted the FY 2009/10 operating and capital budget of $63,196,476 based on the agency's SRTP. Since that time, RTA received additional grant awards from the TUMF program as well as state Proposition 1 B bond funds from the Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) and the California Transit Security Grant Program -California Transit Assistance Fund (CTSGP-CTAF) under the FY 2008/09 Proposition 1 B grant program. Operating Assistance RTA's currently approved funding structure for operating assistance is outlined in Attachment 1, Table 1 a. Table 1 b shows the proposed modified funding distribution. RTA is requesting approval to modify its FY 2009/10 operating funding to reflect an increase of $50,000 in Measure A - CTSA funds designated for Western County. Agenda nem 11 255 The Commission adopted the Coordinated Plan in April 2008 making Riverside County eligible for federal funding of specialized transit in the Jobs Access Reverse Commute (JARC) 5316 and New Freedom (NF) 5317 programs. Additionally, an identified goal in the Transit Vision Plan adopted by the Commission in June 2008, is to reduce the rising costs of paratransit service through increased coordination between public transit operators and non-profit providers. The Transit Vision Plan designated RTA as the Western County CTSA and as such, the agency can use 25% of the Measure A Specialized Transit funds set -aside for CTSA. With the implementation of the Universal Call for Projects awards for Specialized Transit in July 2009, federal funds were made available to operators of specialized transit in Riverside County. With the introduction of these federal funds came the federal requirements for oversight. RTA, as the designated CTSA, handled the newly required oversight of several social service entities that were funded with the federalized dollars. This effort requires regular site visitations, compliance with vehicle safety and maintenance requirements, as well as drug and alcohol testing. RTA is now requesting an additional $50,000 to fund this effort. There is sufficient Measure A funding available in the Western County Specialized Transit/CTSA apportionment to meet this request. Capital Assistance Attachment 2, Table 2a and 2b shows the currently approved capital requests based on the initial SRTP capital funding plan and the proposed capital project requests based on actual revenues received by RTA during FY 2009/10, respectively. Modification requests are as follows: • Increase TUMF expenditures by $4,007,425; and • Include Proposition 18 funds awarded to RTA in the amount of $2,642,868 (PTMISEA) and $865,465 (CTSGP-CTAF) for various capital and safety projects. The additional TUMF funds in the amount of $4,007,425 are for the Corona Transit Center project. The Proposition 1 B/PTMISEA capital grant consists of $800,000 for fareboxes and data collection system and $1,842,868 for RTA's solar panel project. Included in the $865,465 CTSGP-CTAP award are funds for block walls, security lighting for the Riverside site parking lot, fire alarm, generator for the mobile command vehicle, and security signage. Commission staff has reviewed RTA's revised plan and recommends approval of its operating and capital funding modifications and related amendment to the FY 2009/10 SRTP. Agenda Item 11 • 256 • Financial Impact Since the TUMF and Proposition 1 B state funds are directly allocated to RTA, the only financial impact to the Commission is the allocation of Measure A funds. There is sufficient funding in the Measure A Specialized Transit FY 2009/10 budget to cover the additional $5O,000 to fully support RTA's CTSA function. No budget adjustment is necessary. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2009/10 Amount: $50,000 Source of Funds: Measure A Specialized Transit Funds/CTSA Budget Adjustment: No GLA No.: 260 26 86101 $50,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \14€4,440.1 �,,,� Date: 05/17/10 Attachments: 1) Table 1 -Operating Assistance 2) Table 2 -Capital Assistance Agenda Item 11 257 89Z • $• $• $• $• $ • s $• $• $- $• s 000'09 $ • 9 • $ 000'09 $ NIld 0N11:01,13d0031i10001 803/LObtldV Al1N3tltl113'490 39N383ii10 29 L'LL2'01 9L20L9 L9012114 096'921 999 E59 996590 9L9'£01 LCO L681 Z9Z'ZS9 0 0 8L0'660'l 0 062'894'1.2 9LL 065E5 0u00.0d0 ae101 LSC SCe 5 LSE see 5 Ou40e4000 L0100510101e0 056 CC 40991U1 2E06L8L (u000V10 MO 0,0010. >bu00J000 VOV 096'000 2eL 6£9'0 949 COL 59IL 05 OCS 09 C6L-BP, 6 aaueuel.0014 en961uanaLd 000g010e0 000 095 000 009 I00w00Ln9L0021 10835 5d3d 105 000'09 00009 anuanad eseal 000 CZ 000 CZ 0000000f 6ursurArr 000'05L 00005L awoaul IrrLrIrl 000'005 000009 10co xel 001003 Weped ZWOL69 2LDOL60 Lusted Au 4100)xo90,03 OLL'LE 1,4151 OLEO DLL LE 869 LLE 00.0501005 00% 01.209 DOC 921 LLB 902 BBl Lb 56E'E08 a L4Z 92L2,Iu.501nw000 000 al 000 al Vet V100 0 600000 -6+d 50/Ca 99b9 966 59r 5 Le0469'L5 LL9 Ce9 S 000059 S 9E8'900 LL54 9SC LLS DZ S a0ueleisay builemtl0 Laid bulpuni bupeaad0 p999,01N '9L rl9 el ZCIYLZ01 9LZ OL9 L901.21. 91 09692L 099'£50 0 996'590 0 DO EDI LCO 469L ZSZ 229 0 0 0 9LiE00'L 0 DE5'651.R 9Ll'9665S aulourd0 V101 456 SU'S I96'SCL'S 4 owire0uo0 A 1a00106600 8202L ON Ph I, 2E061.9'L 5 0L0605 00 MO 00LmelseV 00000100 VOV DSC 909 26L 8699 9L9 COL 9,19S GCS OD COL 9966 S Sautualule0y angewan0Ld 1000001mo 000'049 DOD OILS S 1Lawea00wir819830943d RS 00000 ON OD 4 enuared areal 00002 000 De s anuanad ou1erLawv 000051 000094 4 ew0>01150.0101 NO 009 000005 S 1400L00020ep03 Purpri 21.40L69 ZLe OG60 4 (reared "LI'4rrOl x04e+ed OLL LE 606051 OLC 56 OL1LC S 609 LLC rat,r9 aln 011pa0ld papue1,3 DSC 92L LLB 962 191 L20 SEE Z68 4 s L LZ 9 EL 5,001+00nww00 000 al 000 al $ 06G V150 • S n0.000L550/000SMJ 996'50IL4 LE0'168%5 LLB EZ9 4 00000r 9 966090 Lei DSL 49002 S aauelrirry 6u0eu00 i0410 TICS (0061w09) VeeV LOC9 (0015.55) VLNV 11100.0011 M001 LLCS 001409 OW, 91ES wpo09 Aviru LLes 1000009 60ES 09005,9 asla605 001- L065 009500 010100E 00550w010' L065 urAr09-L069 elaunm /elnoewal uo9rLLS ouipLeuL05 'ue9,ge -L065509 001.in0a9 -el dmd b351LN1d 'et ead C0001000 ValnaOeyy 015 ill Fool u01Wburro Ira loLd 11N3VIHOVLIN • 00ue14146Fi BulieiedO • L a gal nanoS ONION Nd AS 30NVISISSV IVLdVO P00 ONI1VS3d0 04/600Z A3 A0SeSV IISueil epleienla • u Id Oulpund Oup 1etl0 panoLaOV Nluaun0 'el a14e1 • 65Z ' S• S• S S S 9ZV'L00'7 s • S• S S S S S 566'sse S ess'Z69'L S- 4 E E 69L'El6'L S Wild 1vilev00311100✓a a038OLddb Al1N3tle00'138 30N3E 31310 - $ 000 OS S 0116 CPC L t - S 6L9'LOC S SSC LOS 0 S - 4 024'SLL Lt - S• t LS971.2'Z t 94094C'C t S9e'599 $ 999'299"2 t 09E'St t EC696C L S - S BS6004 LI 3 108383 1 of 41 599599 sl0elaid Ae,ng94 Na1es y p 990'L694 flawed 40109 000 i•�,'�"4 1 COO 00B 6•9196$ u0i,1001100019015ax9p99d BLS LOC OBE SL 689'9LC (808401 3010s6££0069 16446£6de uare!nay Luce) 01066804 edb •.LZ 000058 SU 0645 401400066011 111111$1lRu0400 BZ OBB al SLO'LIL !LOWS 1.1092£0wl lalane11090veApb SLZ 92 09B ZLL 510 1.04 1awa066ueq erL6346l 0009El 11000C 000 OLI Sw949A$ 6/4884/64 69Z'LOC LLE 51 99594£ 00111180011 899!99i OLL'LS OC6 ZL OS9149 awalSAS 0168046 anuanad £96 BBL LL96e 00490Z 06011 011110E10000 6169961 6ZL'960 E09 LBO seleds 00u0u0$4.806060183 050 GC 68B'5BBZ 9EE BEL 849'L09E 011,61 49e0e601 0S9611 059 PL. 419,0ey11% 4/ 60Lm9w006041131!601,1 000 OS MO 05 999.99wy 801S.9 6CC 691 l t SEE 69L 4 S 06,1081900 d00 19619 TICS 19n01w191 baav LOOS (enlpwRs) b812Y wapeeld ibeN LIES uotta9 08bf MS U0e294 3841 LLES u0008 80ES u00099 aeleeub .1- LOSS owes 8066ap 00509£9H- LOSS 366603.30E911160S eyepmpy le18099,91 d6560180954 '995.9b •DES 994 Nunes 'el dOud 4f3SIWld -$t 88,d 611e1940 bemae0w $1S 311 I0301 uop3806301601643 081d Bu!Pund WI! d 90 Pa!1!11016I '9L 01991 • t COO OS t 896'EtE 4 $ - $ OLS'LOC S OC6$62 S $ OUSEL IS - S $ LS9'2L2 L $ 945 04E E t • S OSE'5L S EE6'96E L E • t DOZ'SZZ'01 S 116363 1e101 646 1.08 09E 5L 660'93E 160/Lin L 88.306£6602 60 panoldde u0!s!n8d 1u9101 a1ee91CS 03v 005 !CZ 000'056 005 Lel1 466.30s41e43 946p64661eeumo0 SIL BL 0997LI SLO IpI wake$ u089w1Nu! 1019A94 p9oubg9b SL292 0902LL SLO LeI 10160 0 usual y elna0wal 000'9EL 0000C 000034 9446313449 400e4810131 882 LOE LICSL 9959LC 00ueutiNIOy Nll!oei OZL 15 DEB Z4 0S9'09 604015149 916640/468896841 CB, 96l LID 60 004802 9seel 011 I. Pe29e10e0 01.69961. fill 98t EP9E90Z 9DIMS 068e8014.0006 08e0 0S0 L2 698588Z 9EE BZL 6L91Y9E 999E MO d00 1399 tL1 0$9'eL1 !'1mddV10%LI 5,0.4,68883688e0413119.11 000'OS 000"05 14090u1y d05 sna 8£C 891. L S 8EC'891.'4 4 "WOG Wee d00 mno RCS 40011011191 baav LOCS 191188805) bBtlV 1114100li 66eN LLCB 980099 OLIVE Bass woes i6^J!11 ILLS uCIMUS 5005 1.10p0S 591989b 901• LOSS 8949e5 014100E 396094£4H• LOES 98809S-LOS e108mB1 R186946e1. 90909S 68844e84e6 '0e9-618 -TOES 046 64818e5 -ELL 6413 1335111141 -BL dmd 16/13000 tlemaesh 1815 311 19061 0113.38043a1613 Z 1N3INHOYlly aauetslssy let de0 • Z emel 331mos ONION nd AB 30Ny1SISSy 1y11dy0 Dub ONI1ytl3d0 014600Z Ad doua6y iisuedy aplslaniN • Id Pu!Puni 191!tle0 Pen01 V rtpostal 0 •PE e1091 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Jillian Edmiston, Staff Analyst Brian Cunanan, Commuter Assistance Manager THROUGH: Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2010/11 SB 821 Bicycle and Program Funding Recommendations Pedestrian Facilities STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the FY 2010/11 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program recommended funding as shown in the attached schedule; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In March 2010, Commission staff notified the cities and the county that an estimated $1,002,064 would be available for programming in FY 2010/11 through the SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program. This program is funded by an allocation of 2% of the total Local Transportation Fund (LTF) apportioned to Riverside County by the state. In addition to the current estimate of funds, unallocated carryover funds from . previous years totaling $1,657,761, have recently been identified as being available for use. These unallocated carryover funds are the result of claims coming in significantly lower than the estimated project cost; projects that were approved and subsequently abandoned; actual LTF revenues coming in higher than estimated in previous years; and interest earnings. Subsequent to the earlier notification of the call to the agencies, staff applied these unallocated carryover funds to the FY 2010/11 call for projects, resulting in a revised total of $2,659,825 available for projects. DISCUSSION The SB 821 proposals were due on May 4, 2010. The Commission received 35 project proposals, totaling $3,188,793 in SB 821 funding requests as attached. Agenda Item 12 260 A diverse evaluation committee comprised of three members from the Commission's Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) and three members from the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) reviewed the proposals on May 11, 2010. Two committee members represent all of Riverside County, another two represent the Coachella Valley area, and the final two represent Western Riverside County. All of the project applicants were invited to give a presentation on the proposals and to answer questions from the committee members. Based upon the Commission's adopted scoring criteria, which is attached, the proposals were evaluated and ranked by members of the evaluation committee. Twenty-four projects are recommended for funding, as indicated in the attachment. It should be noted that project no. 4 did not receive a funding allocation as there is a separate agenda item for the reallocation of FY 2008/09 funds for this project for a total allocation of $2,598,871. Staff recommends approval of the evaluation committee's recommendations. rFinancial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2010/11 Amount: $2,598,871 Source of Funds: LTF Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 601 62 86106 Fiscal Procedures Approved: ,4,3 Date: 05/13/2010 Attachments: 1) SB 821 FY 2010/1 1 Funding Recommendations 2) SB 821 Evaluation Criteria Agenda Item 12 • 261 • • • Rank Agency 1 Lake Elsinore 2 Moreno Valley 3 Canyon Lake 4 Beaumont 5 Hemet 6 Riverside County 7 Indio 8 Coachella 9 Wildomar RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM FY 2010/11 RECOMMENDED FUNDING Project Description Riverside Drive Sidewalks Citywide Sidewalk and Access Ramps Railroad Canyon Road Infill Sidewalk Noble Creek Pedestrian Bridge Citywide Sidewalk and ADA Ramps Krameria Avenue Highway 111 Sidewalk Infill & Access Badouma Park Vicinity Wildomar Sidewalk Improvements Attachment 1 Total SB 821 Funds Recommended Cummulative Average Costs Requested Allocation Funds Allocated Score $207,000 868,525 140,000 143,000 150,000 389,000 188,000 111,877 407,500 $103,500 150,000 70,000 71,500 75,000 194,500 94,000 55,939 285,250 $103,500 $150,000 $70,000 $0' $75,000 $194,500 $94,000 $55,939 $285,250 $103,500 253,500 323,500 323,500 398,500 593,000 687,000 742,939 1,028,189 94.0 94.0 91.2 90.3 89.7 85.8 85.3 83.7 83.3 10 Riverside County 11 Riverside County 12 Riverside County 13 Riverside County 14 Corona 15 Rancho Mirage 16 Coachella 17 Coachella 18 Banning 19 San Jacinto 20 San Jacinto 21 Riverside 22 Riverside 23 Riverside 24 Riverside 25 Banning 66th Avenue Camino Campanero Ben Nevis Boulevard Jurupa Road Corona Sidewalk Gap Closures Frank Sinatra Dr. Sidewalk Improvements Valley View Vicinity Pueblo Viejo Vicinity Handicap Ramps at Various Locations West Cottonwood Avenue Sidewalk Ext. Project West Esplanade Avenue Pedestrian Pathway Randolph & Lake Streets Sidewalk Construction Wheelchair Ramp Construction Dauchy Avenue Sidewalk Orrenmaa School Footpath Access Project Almond Way Sidewalk 294,000 254,000 198,000 231,000 71,561 141,588 137,290 148,016 80,625 200,000 140,000 330,000 400,000 54,000 200,000 145,000 147,000 127,000 99,000 115,500 34,721 111,588 68,645 74,008 60,470 75,000 70,000 165,000 175,000 39,000 100,000 108,750 $147,000 $127,000 $99,000 $115,500 $34,721 $111,588 $68,645 $74,008 $60,470 $75,000 $70,000 $165,000 $175,000 $39,000 $100,000 $108,750 1,175,189 1,302,189 1,401,189 1,516,689 1,551,410 1,662,998 1,731,643 1,805,651 1,866,121 1,941,121 2,011,121 2,176,121 2,351,121 2,390,121 2,490,121 2,598,871 82.7 82.3 82,2 81.5 80.8 79.2 78.0 75.5 75.0 75.0 74.7 74.2 72.3 70.9 70.7 70.5 26 Desert Hot Springs 27 Desert Hot Springs Palm Drive ADA Ramps Avenida Jalisco Sidewalk 120,000 80,000 90,000 60,000 $0 2,598,871 69.3 $0 2,598,871 68.0 262 Rank Agency 28 Beaumont 29 Palm Desert 30 Lake Elsinore 31 Desert Hot Springs 32 Palm Desert 33 Riverside 34 Palm Springs 35 Palm Springs Totals RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM FY 2010/11 RECOMMENDED FUNDING Proiect Description Rangel Park & Historical Area Sidewalks Magnesia Falls Drive Ped/Bike Improvements Langstaff Street Sidewalk Improvements Desert Hot Springs Bike Lanes Access. Ped. Signal at Intersections Purchase/Install Bike Rack in Dwntn Riverside Farrell Drive Missing Link Sidewalk Cerritos Road Missing Link Sidewalk Total SB 821 Funds Costs Reauested 193,830 91,472 25,000 12,500 87,500 43,750 40,000 30,000 100,000 30,000 50,000 37,500 48,000 38,400 106,000 84,800 Attachment 1 Recommended Cummulative Allocation Funds Allocated $0 2,598,871 $0 2,598,871 $0 2,598,871 $0 2,598,871 $0 2,598,871 $0 2,598,871 $0 2,598,871 $0 2,598,871 S6,480 312, S3,188.793 $2,598,871 * The Beaumont Noble Creek Pedestrian Bridge project is a continuation of an FY 09/10 approve project. A funding reallocation request for this project is a separate item in the agenda. .ILE: 5/12/2010 Average Score 67.8 67.8 67.5 67.3 64.7 63.8 63.3 61.3 • 1113 • ATTACHMENT 2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SB 821 EVALUATION CRITERIA FACTOR 1. USE The extent of potential use of a bicycle or pedestrian facility is the most important factor. Emphasis of this factor helps ensure the greatest benefits will be derived from the expenditure of SB 821 funds. Relative usage is to be derived from analysis of trip generators and attractors adjacent to the project. 2. SAFETY Points are awarded on the basis of a project's potential to correct current safety problems. 3. IMPORTANCE AS A TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVE Points are awarded on the basis of a project's potential to attract users who would otherwise use an automobile. 4. MISSING LINK, EXTENSION, OR CONNECTIVITY Points are awarded to projects that link, are extensions of, or potentially connect to existing facilities. 5. MATCHING FUNDS This factor is used to help ensure that there is local funding participation in the project - not just an application for "free" money. One point would be awarded for each 5% of total project cost that is financed by the local agency. 6. POPULATION EQUITY The purpose of this factor is to help ensure that one agency does not receive all the funds. The applicant receives the maximum 10 points if the amount of funds requested does not exceed what the applicant would receive if the funds were allocated by population. Year to year totals are recorded so that an applicant could build up a "credit". (Calculated by RCTC) 7. PHYSICAL ACCESSIBILITY ENHANCEMENT The purpose of this factor is to enhance the physical accessibility of existing pedestrian projects. Applicant agencies may receive up to 10 "bonus" points for their project proposals which improve the physical access to existing facilities. RCTC: 04/12/1995 MAXIMUM POINTS 25 20 20 15 10 10 10 BONUS 264 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Jillian Edmiston, Staff Analyst Brian Cunanan, Commuter Assistance Manager THROUGH: Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director SUBJECT: SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program Reallocation for the City of Beaumont STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Grant the city of Beaumont (Beaumont) a reallocation of unused SB 821 funds from its FY 2008/09 SB 821 project to its FY 2009/10 SB 821 project; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Each year, 2% of the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) revenue is made available for use on bicycle and pedestrian facility projects through the Commission's SB 821 program. This is a discretionary program administered by the Commission. There are three steps to carry out the program: 1. All cities and the county are notified of the SB 821 program estimate of available funding and are requested to submit project proposals. The Commission's SB 821 program policies, project application, and selection criteria are also provided with the notification. 2. A SB 821 evaluation committee, comprised of members of the Commission's Technical and Citizens Advisory Committees (three each), meets to review and rank the project applications using the evaluation criteria adopted by the Commission and recommends projects and funding amounts to the Commission for approval. 3. The Commission reviews the Committee's recommendations and approves a program of bicycle and pedestrian projects for funding. The agencies then have 24 months to complete the projects. Any unused SB 821 program funds must be returned to the Commission unless that agency can Agenda Item 13 265 a) demonstrate why the costs were substantially lower than the estimate; and b) utilize the unused funds to complete approved but unfunded projects. DISCUSS/ON: At its June 2008 meeting, the Commission awarded $1,367,095 to fund 15 projects as part of its SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program. The agencies that were awarded funds in this cycle have until June 30, 2010, to complete the projects. Within this funding cycle, Beaumont was awarded $179,280 for the construction of the Citywide Sidewalk and Access Ramps project. The project was competitively bid in April 2010, and came in 47% under bid due to the widespread decrease of construction costs in the current economy. This project savings has resulted in $93,390 of SB 821 funds being returned to the Commission for reprogramming in future calls. In July 2009, the Commission awarded $1,204,397 in SB 821 funds to 13 projects. The Beaumont Avenue Sidewalk and Access Ramps project ranked fourth and received an SB 821 allocation of $199,110. Per Beaumont's attached letter, Beaumont is requesting a $36,714 reallocation of Beaumont's FY 2008/09 residual SB 821 funds to its approved FY 2009/10 project to enable Beaumont to complete the sidewalk project on Beaumont Avenue. In addition, Beaumont will match the amount one for one with the approval of this reallocation. Staff recommends approval of this request given that Beaumont has demonstrated why the costs were lower than the estimate for the Citywide Sidewalk and Access Ramps project and the Beaumont Avenue Sidewalk and Access Ramps project is an approved SB 821 project. Furthermore, a total of $56,676 will still be returned to the Commission if this reallocation request is granted. Upon Commission approval of the reallocation, Beaumont will begin construction of the project. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2010/2011 Amount: $36,714 Source of Funds: Local Transportation Fund Budget Ad ustment: No GLA No.: 601 62 86106 (Fiscal Procedures Approved: \4a,j_iii. a> Date: 05/13/10 Attachments: 1) Letter from the City of Beaumont 2) Chart of Beaumont Allocation Figures 3) SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program Adopted Policies Agenda Item 13 • 266 ATTACHMENT 1 88997 JE April 26, 2010 Jillian Edmiston Staff Analyst RCTC P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502 City of Beaumont 550 E. 6th Street Beaumont, CA92223 (951) 769-8520 FAX (951) 769-8526 Email: ciryhall@ci,beaumonr.ca.us wwvci, beaumont. ca. us APR S ?i'VERSik COUNTY ;2:1NSPO riTAPON C trrOA�,r:��IS W1v RE: City of Beaumont SB 821 Reallocation Request Additional funds for a pedestrian bridge are needed to complete the project as shown on the SB 821 2009/10 application. Based on the winning bid the total cost for the project is $471,647.56. In order to complete the approved project the City of Beaumont is requesting to use $36,713.78 of the money not spent (due to low bid) from the 2008/09 project. This would include the City paying an additional $36,712.78 for the City's 50% match of the remaining balance. The City of Beaumont's SB 821 2008/09 project bid came in 47% less than originally estimated on the application. If this reallocation is approved., there would still be a balance for 2008/09 SB 821 unused funds totaling $56,676.28. This needed pedestrian bridge will connect sidewalks on each end of the creek and allow the students who walk to and from Beaumont High School to cross Noble Creek without walking in the street. Attached is a map to show you the location of the Pedestrian Bridge as well as a chart showing the amounts applied for and bid result of both the 2008/09 and 2009/10 SB 821 Projects. Your policy regarding SB 821 states: "No agency will be allowed to carryover unused funds for projects not previously included in an application (annual project proposals) submitted to the Commission for consideration. (12/11/91)" This can also be interpreted as an agency shall be allowed to carryover unused funds for projects previously included in an application submitted to the Commission for consideration. The project which needs additional funds has been included in an application which was submitted and approved by the Commission. The City wishes to thank you for your consideration in this matter. Very truly yours, CITY OF BEAUMONT Rebecca Deming Assistant Director of Planning 267 U.26.03 bb'8170'09T$ ZZ'ZL£`£OT$ ZZ'9L9'95$ 9S'ZL£`989$ 8L'8S9179£$ 8L'£TL'IZE$ 001Z17'968$ 001E0'8914 00'06£`8L£$ lelol 00'SLVEEZ$ 00'880'0VT$ 00'068'86$ 00'SZL'bTZ$ 00'5£8`8ZT$ 00'068'58$ 00'00Z'8bb$ 00'0Z6`89Z$ 00'08Z`6LT$ 'CMS 60/80 (9S'9Zb'£L$) (8L'ZTL`9E$) (8L'£TL`9E$) 9S'L179`TL17$ 8L'£Z8`5£Z$ 8L'£Z8'5£Z$ 001ZZ'86£$ 00'TTT`66T$ 00'0TT`66t$ MINOt/60 lelol 4neKI lex/ mamma spunA TENS lelol 4aaeW leaoi sllnsaa pig spunA MOS leiol 4aleW leaol slsoa palewps3 spunA TZ8 8S • sveyo uosuedwoj TZ88S • • Proposed Pedest Bridge Over Was Planned Sidewalks per S13 821 2009-2©10 269 ATTACHMENT 3 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM ADOPTED POLICIES • The Commission will not allocate funds to a project in its approved SB 821 Program until the sponsoring agency awards a contract for the construction of the project or until local agency forces begin construction of the project. (12/18/86) • If funds for a project are not claimed prior to the end of the fiscal year, the project will be deleted from the program and the funds will be reprogrammed in the next fiscal year's SB 821 Program. (12/18/86) • A project sponsor may request an extension of time beyond June 30th if substantial progress has been made on the project which, at minimum, would mean completion of preliminary engineering. (12/18/86) • Funds allocated for projects in FY 86/87 and prior years must be spent or encumbered (construction contract awarded) by December 31, 1987, or the funds and interest earned on the funds shall be returned to the SB 821 Account. (12/18/86) ***Following four policies pertain to multi -year projects*** • Cities and the County may submit applications for projects to be funded over a 2-3 year period with engineering in year 1 and construction in years 2 and 3. (9/2/87) • Multi -year projects approved in the Commission's program shall be given priority for funding in years 2-3 over new projects submitted and approved. (9/2/87) • When actual construction and/or right-of-way costs are not more than 15% over the initial application cost estimate, the increase will be funded by SB 821 funds, if requested by the applicant, during the development of the annual program by the Commission. (9/2/87) • When actual construction and/or right-of-way costs are more than 15% above the initial application estimate, the applicant may either fund costs in excess of 15% with local funds or resubmit the project as a new project for consideration by the Commission. (9/2/87) • Any unused SB 821 Program funds must be returned to the Commission unless that agency can a) demonstrate why the costs were substantially lower than the estimate, and b) utilize the unused funds to complete approved but unfunded projects. (12/11/91) • No agency will be allowed to carryover unused funds for projects not previously included in an application (annual project proposals) submitted to the Commission for consideration. (12/11/91) • The Commission will not award funds for projects that do not meet physical accessibility standards (i.e. California Government Code 4450, Civil Code 51 Et. Seq., Title 24 of the California Building Code, Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990). (4/12/95) • An agency will have twenty-four (24) months from the time of the allocation to complete the project using local forces or award a construction contract. There will be no time extensions granted unless the project is part of a larger, federally funded project, which has been delayed beyond the agency's control. Also, projects requiring coordination with another public agency that has been delayed beyond the agency's control may receive one twelve-month extension, if necessary. Projects not completed or awarded within the twenty-four months will be deleted from the program, and the funds will be reprogrammed in the next fiscal year's SB 821 Program. (3/12/03) ROTC: 3/20/03 270 • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Jillian Edmiston, Staff Analyst Brian Cunanan, Commuter Assistance Manager THROUGH: Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director SUBJECT: SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program Extension for the City of Temecula STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Grant the city of Temecula (Temecula) an extension to June 30, 2011 for approved SB 821 program funds for the Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge Overcrossing project; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Each year, 2% of the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) revenue is made available for use on bicycle and pedestrian facility projects through the Commission's SB 821 program. This is a discretionary program administered by the Commission. There are three steps to carry out the program: 1. All cities and the county are notified of the SB 821 program estimate of available funding and are requested to submit project proposals. The Commission's SB 821 program policies, project application, and selection criteria are also provided with the notification. 2. SB 821 evaluation committee, comprised of members of the Commission's Technical and Citizens Advisory Committees (three each), meets to review and rank the project applications using the evaluation criteria adopted by the Commission and recommends projects and funding amounts to the Commission for approval. 3. The Commission reviews the Committee's recommendations and approves a program of bicycle and pedestrian projects for funding. The agencies then have 24 months to complete the projects: Any projects not completed using local sources or awarded a construction contract within the Agenda Item 14 271 24-months are deleted from the program and the funds are reprogrammed in the next fiscal year. There are to be no time extensions granted unless the project is part of a larger, federally funded project or a project requiring coordination with another public agency that has been delayed beyond the city's/county's control. DISCUSS/ON At its July 2007 meeting, the Commission awarded $1,591,765 to fund 16 projects as part of its SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program. The agencies had until June 30, 2009, to complete the projects within this funding cycle. Temecula was allocated $132,000 for construction of the Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge Overcrossing project. In May 2009, Temecula asked for a 12-month extension, which was approved by the Commission in June 2009. Per Temecula's extension request letter, which is attached, the project was also awarded federal funds as part of the Safe Routes to School program and therefore must comply with National Environmental Policy Act. Due to exceptionally stringent environmental processes and formal government -to -government consultation with two Native American tribes in the project area, Temecula is requesting a second and final 12-month extension. The 12-month extension gives Temecula until June 30, 2011 to complete the project and claim the allocated SB 821 funds. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2010/11 Amount: $132,000 Source of Funds: LTF Budget Ad ustment: No GLA No.: 601 62 86106 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \,%d„0,11.toma Date: 05/13/2010 Attachment: 1) Letter from City of Temecula 2) City of Temecula Project Timeline 3) SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program Commission Adopted Policies Agenda Item 14 • 272 • • 89080 JE ATTACHMENT 1 jPublic Works Department 43200 Business Park Dnve•Temecula, CA 92590•Mailing Address: PO- Box 9033•Temecula, CA 92589-9033 (909) 694-6411 - Fax (909) 694-6475 fi.. April 29, 2010 City of Temecula Ms. Jillian Edmiston, Staff Analyst Riverside County Transportation Commission 4040 Lemon Street, ri Floor Riverside, CA 92501 16) —. r 1 -, t: i 2. tvi,a). 'i .. Re: Santa Gertr udis Creek Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge Overcrossing — Request for Extension FY2007/2008 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Dear Ms. Edmiston; The City of Temecula requests an additional extension of time beyond the June 30, 2010 deadline to claim approved SB821 program fimds for the Santa Ger4-udis Creek Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge Overcrossing project. As you are aware, in addition to the SB821 program fiords, the City was fortunate in obtaining grant funding in support of our Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge Overcrossing through the Safe Routes to School (SR2S) program. Due to the State's economic challenges, we were unable to solidify state funds through this program and have since been allocated federal HSIP funds. As a result of the funding source change, the City has been tasked with administering the federal environmental processes to acquire NEPA clearance. For the past eighteen (18) months we have worked diligently toward accomplishing NEPA environmental approval through Caltrans. Unfortunately, at this time we have been unsuccessful at acquiring NEPA approval due to many, unforeseen delays in the process. (Summary of Milestone Tasks - attached). The City of Temecula is committed to continuing the pursuit of the environmental approval and ultimately engaging the construction phase of work to complete this project. We feel that this project is significant and extremely beneficial to the community, its residents and supports the goals and objectives of the SB821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Program and Safe Routes to School. The project provides a vital link between schools and residential neighborhoods and ensures the safety of motorists and trail commuters. We have prioritized this project in our Five Year Capital Improvement Program in the upcoming Fiscal Year 2010/2011 and with the benefit of the SB821 program funding the project is fully funded and will be ready for contract bid and award immediately following environmental approval. Therefore, we respectfully request the additional extension beyond the June 30, 2010 timeframe to continue our efforts to project implementation and completion. We are confident that we will receive approval of the environmental documents from Caltrans and it is hopeful that this project will be bid, awarded and constructed well within the new fiscal year ® Por7tol cn kecycPape. RACIPIPROJECTS\PW05\PW05-11 SG Creek Ped BridgeltetterARCTC-SB821-ExtensionRest-6-30-10.icd.doc 273 U.26.06 Your serious consideration of our request to extend the time for a period of twelve months to claim approved fiords will allow us to move forward with the construction of this much needed pedestrian facility. Sine f Public Works cc: Jon Salazar - Associate Engineer — Capital Projects Rudy Graciano — Revenue Manager, Finance RACIPWROJECTSIPWOS1PW05-11 SG Creek Ped Bridge LetterslRCTC-SB821-ExtensionRgst-6-30-10jcd.doc 274 ATTACHMENT 2 PW05-11— Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge Over Santa Gertrudis Creek Project Timeline Date Milestone Remarks September 2008 Preliminary Environmental Study (PES) Submitted seven (7) copies to Caltrans, local Assistance November 2008 Received Comments from Caltrans ' regarding PES submittal Various comments received from Local Assistance, Hazardous Waste, Air, Noise, Cultural Studies & Biological Studies & Permits November 2008 Response to Comments completed by City All items requested by Caltrans to be addressed either by form or action to be completed by City Consultant 12/2/08 Preliminary Environmental Study (PES) Form Approved by Caltrans, required studies identified Cakrans approved the PES, with required studies including NES (MI), Noise, Hazardous Material, Section 106, HPSR, detailed APE Map, ASR, etc. May 2009 First submittal of required Cultural & Biological reports to Caltrans June & July 2009 Review of APE, ASR & Cultural Studies received from Caltrans on first submittal Extensive requests of Caltrans to further address ASR to SER guidelines, specific elements to be included on APE map, Native . American Consultation & in depth paleontological study is required; PIR & PER should be prepared. City Consultant to further review comments and complete additional studies October 2009 Second submittal to Caltrans January 2010 Response from Caltrans on second submittal Biological reports now appear to require extensive revision; cultural reports also again require extensive revision. More comments regarding HPSR, APE and NES (MI), etc. Note that there was a key personnel change at Caltrans between the first and second submittals. March 2010 Third submittal to Caltrans April 2010 Caltrans response received (note that an expedited review was requested) Additional revisions required to cultural reports. HPSR, ASR and Native American Consultation & Correspondence to be further addressed and requires additional submittal and considerable time to be reviewed 275 4/20/10 Meeting held with Ca!trans for final Prior to this meeting, extensive phone approval/sign-off on cultural reports coordination had taken place between Caltrans and the City's environmental consultant to work out ail required revisions to cultural reports. It was thus anticipated that at the meeting, it would simply be verified that the reports reflected the results of the Caltrans-consultant coordination. In the meeting, Caltrans identified that formal government -to -government consultation would be required for two Native American tribes. Caltrans provided their first notification to the tribes on 4/20/10; they have 30 days to respond. 276 ATTACHMENT 3 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM ADOPTED POLICIES • The Commission will not allocate funds to a project in its approved SB 821 Program until the sponsoring agency awards a contract for the construction of the project or until local agency forces begin construction of the project. (12/18/86) • If funds for a project are not claimed prior to the end of the fiscal year, the project will be deleted from the program and the funds will be reprogrammed in the next fiscal year's SB 821 Program. (12/18/86) • A project sponsor may request an extension of time beyond June 30th if substantial progress has been made on the project which, at minimum, would mean completion of preliminary engineering. (12/18/86) • Funds allocated for projects in FY 86/87 and prior years must be spent or encumbered (construction contract awarded) by December 31, 1987, or the funds and interest earned on the funds shall be returned to the SB 821 Account. (12/18/86) ***Following four policies pertain to multi -year projects*** • Cities and the County may submit applications for projects to be funded over a 2-3 year period with engineering in year 1 and construction in years 2 and 3. (9/2/87) • Multi -year projects approved in the Commission's program shall be given priority for funding in years 2-3 over new projects submitted and approved. (9/2/87) • When actual construction and/or right-of-way costs are not more than 15% over the initial application cost estimate, the increase will be funded by SB 821 funds, if requested by the applicant, during the development of the annual program by the Commission. (9/2/87) • When actual construction and/or right-of-way costs are more than 15% above the initial application estimate, the applicant may either fund costs in excess of 15% with local funds or resubmit the project as a new project for consideration by the Commission. (9/2/87) • Any unused SB 821 Program funds must be returned to the Commission unless that agency can a) demonstrate why the costs were substantially lower than the estimate, and b) utilize the unused funds to complete approved but unfunded projects. (12/11/91) • No agency will be allowed to carryover unused funds for projects not previously included in an application (annual project proposals) submitted to the Commission for consideration. (12/11/91) • The Commission will not award funds for projects that do not meet physical accessibility standards (i.e. California Government Code 4450, Civil Code 51 Et. Seq., Title 24 ofthe California Building Code, Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990). (4/12/95) • An agency will have twenty-four (24) months from the time of the allocation to complete the project using local forces or award a construction contract. There will be no time extensions granted unless the project is part of larger, federally funded project, which has been delayed beyond the agency's control. Also, projects requiring coordination with another public agency that has been delayed beyond the agency's control may receive one twelve-month extension, if necessary. Projects not completed or awarded within the twenty-four months will be deleted from the program, and the funds will be reprogrammed in the next fiscal year's SB 821 Program. (3/12/03) RCTC: 3/20/03 277 • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: May 24, 2010 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager THROUGH: John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: State and Federal Legislative Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislation; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State Budget General The coming weeks in the Capitol will begin to focus on the condition of the annual budget. The Governor released the May Budget Revise on May 14, which provides a more recent case load and revenue estimate for many state programs. The Governor pegs the state budget deficit $19 billion through the end of next fiscal year, ending July 2011. Historically, it is at this point in the budget process that transportation programs have become mired in the state budget discussions. However, this year, due to the gas tax swap enacted last month, it is not expected that local transportation programs will become affected by the overall state budget condition. This is in ►arge part due to the realignment in highway programs of how they are funded (Proposition 42 replaced with an excise tax) and the commitment of more than $600 million in resources resulting from the tax swap to offset General Fund debt service obligations to support transportation bonds. Nonetheless, there are three key budget relief proposals related to transportation programs: First, the Governor proposes to loan the General Fund $650 million of unallocated Highway Users Tax Account (HUTA) funds, as allowed under Article XIX. This Agenda Item 15 278 unallocated fund was created in the negotiations over the gas tax swap enacted earlier this year. Once this loan is repaid to HUTA, the funds would be returned to fund the State Highway Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP). Arguably, while disappointing, this $650 million is not associated with any project at this time and results in no slow down of the program. Second, the General Fund benefits from the direct transfer of $72 million in non - Article XIX (rents, etc.) funds to the General Fund. These monies would have otherwise been available to supplement transit funding in past years. Finally, due to bid savings, the Governor proposes to fund additional project delivery work to deliver new projects, and still use efficiencies to gain a net overall reduction of Caltrans staff of 500 person years, equal to $42 million in savings. Transit Operations With respect to transit funding, the gas tax swap did provide more funding for agencies throughout the state, with an appropriation of $400 million to be distributed through the State Transit Assistance (STA) formula. Although that appropriation was made in March, the actual bill that contained the appropriation will not become effective until mid -June; it is expected that the Controller will issue checks to transit agencies shortly thereafter. This funding could be vulnerable to a proposal by the Governor to redirect these funds to aid the General Fund, but the commitment of legislative leadership to securing that appropriation was very strong and they will likely defend the appropriation against any such proposal. State Legislation Due in large part to the focus this year on enacting the gas tax swap, there is not much in the way of transit related legislation pending. There are a couple of bills pertaining to the high-speed rail project; two of these (AB 1375 and SB 409) would re-establish the agency within the executive branch, while a third (AB 2021), began as a bill to end the project, but has been amended into a more helpful measure that would require the authority to adopt a rolling six -year capital investment program to regulate the application of Proposition 1A bond funds. Federal Legislation Kerry -Lieberman American Power Act The Commission typically does not venture into the realm of energy policy; however, a major proposal to address climate change and fuel consumption was introduced earlier this month. This bill would have a profound impact on transportation revenues and the prospects for a federal surface transportation Agenda Item 15 • 279 • authorization bill that is timely and funded at an adequate level to address the national mobility and job creation needs. Staff would like to keep the Commission apprised of how this bill could impact federal transportation policy and the Commission's interests. The American Power Act proposed by Senator John Kerry (D-MA) and Senator Joe Lieberman (I -CT) includes a pollution fee on gasoline and diesel used by cars and trucks. The fee would be paid at the terminal rack, just as gas taxes are currently paid to the IRS. It is presumed that these fees would be passed along to the consumer. In the first year of the bill, it is estimated that almost $20 billion would be raised by this pollution fee. The floor for the pollution fee - i.e., the lowest amount of the fee - is estimated to be 11 to 12 cents per gallon. Each year, this floor would increase by inflation, plus 3%. Therefore, the amount raised and the increase in fuel prices would rise each year as well. Under the proposed legislation, $6.25 billion of the approximately $20 billion raised in the first year would go to transportation with the following breakdown: $2.5 billion for the Highway Trust Fund with use of the funds restricted to transportation efficiency projects (13% of the amount raised in year 2013); - $1.875 billion for a Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) program type discretionary program; and - $1.875 billion for states and metropolitan planning organizations to develop greenhouse gas reduction targets and to meet new planning requirements. Each year under the bill, transportation would continue to receive $6.25 billion, with the same allocations from that amount - regardless of how much is raised by the pollution fee. In other words, while the amount raised from the pollution fee continues to increase over time, the amount for transportation remains static and would therefore be a reduced percentage of the amount raised. As the price of carbon increases over time and the pollution fee increases as well, the bill could divert as much as 91 % of fuel revenues away from transportation investments by the year 2034. If the climate legislation was to pass and includes this pollution fee, it is likely that there will be a diminished appetite and ability to raise revenue to pay for the transportation authorization bill, either from a fuel tax or other user fee. There has been an effort within the transportation community to press for all revenue from a pollution fee to go to the Highway Trust Fund for highway and transit programs. This push is being made due to a serious concern that further funding options for a surface transportation authorization will be eliminated if this legislation becomes law. Agenda Item 15 280 The politics of moving the climate bill this year are tenuous at best. There are not 60 votes yet to move the legislation and the Majority Leader's staff has stated they will not move to the bill without a firm vote count of 60. There are many concerns with the legislation - treatment of coal, offshore oil drilling, impacts to manufacturing companies and what do to if China and India do not take similar steps. In addition, the pollution fee is being described as a gas tax in the media - and the Commission knows the difficulty of passing a fuel tax, especially in this volatile economy and political climate. Despite the grim prospects for passage of this legislation, the public debate over a fuel tax will have implications on the pending debate for a surface transportation bill; thus, Commission staff will continue to monitor the American Power Act and keep the Commission updated. Agenda Item 15 • 281 89rtrET $ 6ZZ'£T $ 005 $ 809'LT $ T8E'LZ $ OSO'SL $ 8ulww tekud dLLS OTOZ PenaddY letol oo5'Z S 00$ $ DOS $ 00S $ 00S $ 00S $ 8u6b1luoWpue '8ulu ad'8uluueld DIN sempatps »e(wd Jed palsn(pe ZZ6'9 $ S99'E $ LSZ'E $ aAuasaN sluawaoue4u3 uopepodsuul snoPJq DI TOLL wall ZT9g $' Pr 31.004 LTTS$'STAFT Al 6ZL'ZT S 6ZL'ZT $ Z 4d • slumping Ael IA 4weM St emeweipile+lleJ 990'LE $ T88'4Z $ Wit $ wimp dell ul ACNI'Wm:0i° STZ 9Y6NYS/31.78 0001 $ 0001 $ see 104/loalwdluaLumoidwlioPWP7 t6 JJad 8L6'ZS S 8L6'ZS $ Wad of eplstanlN nu Salnwwoa *ill MUSA spuad pet' =V OES'9T $ OES'9t S (Viva sui dW PPe'Pti llmS of ids loH el:7+s+Ni STE JL78 01 AelleA Weald 01 aeon $ "mum uapounf pa Strips 3178 LtT 7 $ JI MA 431Jeri 03 spun; will'dilS woy alela0 - $ sieveuuoa pue efltetp»lt4 tam DIX tfi9 ► ; E6i'ET $ £99$T $ nuq AN PPe teeeN of P8 003S STZ JJ—Ne sluawwoJ Pnel dilS xeA-S ST/VT Ai VT/ET Ai ETJZT M Zt/TT M TT/OT Ai loa(oid el8 Ax efY I5,000) Poled dllS OTOZ BZs6ST Supwea8oad pamuddd 31.1- dlIS OTOZ AZuno3 aPIsJoAM Dos $ 00s $ TWEE $ Ezra $ NEU $ Sulwwulesd duf OTOZ Peeeday lelol AS gale se 8W3e+uedlowd PPY 00st $ DOS $ 00$ $ 00S $ dos $ COS Suualluon pue'lulwwu8aud Seuueld 31.18 Mel ul esee�l ou' ou�e selloP esteell WTI $ 9TVT ZSZ MS sweet% queu scum lu3 uor a iodsueil mum fit/ZT M 03 TT/0T M 0104 in8 0A0W' SKIS $ SAS'T£ $ Z Md - aueI1114W ARM 4ligui ST olnaawelj"�se SYeNYS m 4346441 7u1of °POW ails OTOZ Menl 990'LZ $ Tien $ Sett $ ems* dell ul AOH /euedJ-18 STZ 988NY5/3171i Wu Ad ul Pefad dllS 800r 000'Z S 000'Z $ sill 10H/1>a<ad luawaaadwl ioppi00 16 3t4711 TT/01 Ad el ioejad &M 800E SL6'ZS S 8L6'ZS $ spied of epls+eADI 11u mentuwoi'oun Aallen slued Ord 71J18 TT/ma ul ioafad dIJ S 800Z OES'9T $ OES`9T $ (vim) sul dY4 PPe'pa non w idS IOH elal-unIN STZ am TT/OT Ad ul Pe[oid dLLS 800E ZT9'4 $ ZT9'6 $ siopeuum pue elluetpialul Tam JJ.1N spun; dll se4 osle'0T/60 Ad wou ianaiieJ LIT`8 $ LTT'8 $ iolpauuoo uorpun f lse3 STZ/09 JA N £T/Zt M of oT/60 Ad mu; dm WWI E46'£T $ ` E69'ET $ ewe' AIN ppe'onanN 03 pN A005 StZ ION sluawwoo IeloL dLI S ieeA-S ST/tT M 4T/£T M £T/ZT M ZT/TT M TT/OT M rafad eni AeueSy 0.000) PoPed dLLS OTOZ upuweJ aid pasodo id - ALS DMZ Jyuno3 swami