Loading...
04 April 23, 2012 Budget & ImplementationTIME: DATE: LOCATION: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 9:30a.m. Monday, April 23, 2012 BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside '&>-COMMITTEE MEMBERS ~ Rick Gibbs, Chair/ Kelly Bennett, City of Murrieta Ella Zanowic Vice Chair I Jeff Hewitt, City of Calimesa Roger Berg I Jeff Fox, City of Beaumont Mary Craton I Barry Talbot, City of Canyon Lake Greg Pettis I Kathleen DeRosa, City of Cathedral City Steven Hernandez I Eduardo Garcia, City of Coachella Scott Matas, I Yvonne Parks, City of Desert Hot Springs Larry Smith I Robert Youssef, City of Hemet Douglas Hanson I Patrick Mullany, City of Indian Wells Bob Magee I Melissa Melendez, City of Lake Elsinore Steve Adams I Andy Melendrez, City of Riverside Ron Roberts I Jeff Comerchero, City of Temecula John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside, District II Jeff Stone, County of Riverside, District Ill '&>-STAFF~ Anne Mayer, Executive Director Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer '&>-AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY ~ Annual Budget Development and Oversight Competitive Federal and State Grant Programs Countywide Communications and Outreach Programs Countywide Strategic Plan Legislation 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. Tara Byerly From: Sent: To: Subject: Importance: Tara Byerly Wednesday, April18, 2012 4:15PM Tara Byerly RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Agenda-Apri123, 2012 for lpad Users High Good Afternoon Budget and Implementation Committee Members: Attached below is the link to the Budget and Implementation Committee agenda for the meeting scheduled @ 9:30 a.m. on Monday, April 23. http://www. rete .org/uploads/media items/budget-and-implementation-march-26-201 2-ipad-compatible- agenda.original.pdf Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Respectfully, TaraS. Byerly Senior Administrative Assistant 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 787-7141 1 • • • 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, April23, 2012 BOARDROOM 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.org. 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 April 23, 2012 Page 2 5. 6. 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. APPROVAL OF MINUTES-FEBRUARY 27, 2012 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. 7 A. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT Page 1 ·Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1 ) Receive and file the Single Signature Authority report for the third quarter ended March 31, 2012; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 8. PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 Page3 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Discuss, review, and provide guidance on the proposed FY 201 2/13 Budget; and 2) Open the public hearing in order to receive input and comments on the proposed FY 201 2/13 Budget on May 9 and on June 7, 201 2, and • • thereafter close the public hearing. • Budget and Implementation Committee April 23, 2012 Page 3 9. AMENDMENT TO RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY AND SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY'S FISCAL YEAR 2011/2012 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLANS Page 22 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve modification to Riverside Transit Agency's (RT A) FY 2011/1 2 capital improvement program to reflect an additional $2.065 million in Section 5309 State of Good Repair (SGR) program funds and $5,889,196 in FY 2010/11 Proposition 1 B Capital and Security grant funding; 2) Allocate $1 .305 million in Transportation Development Act (TDA) Local Transportation Fund (L TF) funds to provide capital matching funds for the FY 2011/12 Section 5309 program funds awarded to RTA for its paratransit revenue vehicle purchase and facility rehabilitation projects; 3) Approve modification to RT A's FY 2011 I 1 2 operating assistance funding by allocating up to $1 9,000 in 1 989 Measure A Western Riverside County Highway funds to implement a temporary shuttle service Route 54 to support the State Route 91 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes construction project; 4) Approve modification to Sun line Transit Agency's (Sunline) FY 2011/12 operating assistance funding by reflecting a net increase of $83,698 resulting from an increase in federal Section 5307 funds ( + $1 ,026,623), reduction in projected farebox revenues (-$834, 774), a decrease in fuel rebates (-$150,000), and additional Air Quality Management District (AOMD) grant funds ( + $41 ,849) for the special transit services for Coachella and Stagecoach Festivals; 5) Approve modification to Sunline's FY 2011/12 capital assistance funding by reflecting an additional $4,91 7,876 in federal Section 5308 Transit Investments for Greenhouse Gas and Energy Reduction (TIGGER) funds for fuel cell bus purchases and an additional $546,430 in Section 5307 funds for paratransit buses and facility improvement in lieu of TDA State Transit Assistance (ST A) funds; 6) Allocate $546,430 in STA funds to provide capital matching funds for the FY 2011/12 Section 5308 program funds awarded to Sunline for the fuel cell buses; 7) Approve amendments to RTA and Sunline's Short Range Transit Plans (SRTP) to reflect the changes outlined above; and 8) Forward to the Commission for final action. Budget and Implementation Committee April 23, 2012 Page 4 10. CITY OF RIVERSIDE'S AMENDED BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Page 30 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the city of Riverside's (Riverside) amended Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) as submitted; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 11. UPDATE ON STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION Page 32 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file an update on the state and federal legislation; 2) Adopt the following bill positions: a) AB 2405 (Biumenfield) -Oppose; b) AB 1780 (Bonilla) -Support; c) AB 2498 (Gordon) -Support In Concept; d) SB 1 549 (Vargas) -Support In Concept; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 12. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 13. COMMISSIONERS I 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. 14. ADJOURNMENT AND NEXT MEETING The next budget and Implementation Committee meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30a.m., Monday, May 21, 2012, Conference Room A, Third Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE SIGN-IN SHEET APRIL 23, 2012 NAME AGENCY E MAIL ADDRESS /_...AtLtL<-t s~~£;~ Himlllf7 v/-1~ ~A-rbll..! ~Yuw' L~~~ ~ --~~C.iJ -~ . -~\J.C..LL.~ 1\. _fL r c t/c_ C/{Jfl/ q t/1.. 4-1 ~7~ & / . LA / _4./.,.. 0~ / C-/ {' Jh ( ~-=cs A-- ~on. rr_ ~-"'C.o ~ -'LI"->' (~)(_ c ~"VV -*) ...::::-, J z::: fA/1 u:-'-' ~...~ S:a_,r:;-~~ .DTU~ ~r .5;; .... · ,t(LA.t1(' f:ti~ CA. TZ-1-t--O C24L C. 'M.f /c 0 kJ~rt ,d~n___L. /:5 o~v /<-/ t?vr J . ..-D~~ P./ l-4: Q A_{,!) •'"\ T Y1 J.,c. 11 \1\/ellJ· cA. v <~ lfl/J ~c: {!( ~L;;-G/y-~~ <21e ~-u--.. Pr.JNL~ 1vt-~ /.)o , iiiJ .u ~ RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE ROLL CALL APRIL 23, 2012 County of Riverside, District II County of Riverside, District Ill City of Beaumont City of Calimesa City of Canyon Leke City of Cathedral City City of Coachella City of Desert Hot Springs City of Hemet City of Indian Wells City of lake Elsinore City of Murrieta City of Riverside City of Temecula Absent [] D [] D [] D [] D [] D CJ D ,21 D • • • AGENDA ITEM 5 MINUTES • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE Monday, February 27, 2012 MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. 3. 4. The meeting of the Budget and Implementation Committee was called to order by Chair Scott Matas at 9:31 a.m., in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California, 92501. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At this time, Commissioner Jeff Stone led the Budget and Implementation Committee in a flag salute . ROLL CALL Members/ Alternates Present Members Absent Steve Adams John J. Benoit Roger Berg Mary Craton Rick Gibbs. Douglas Hanson Steven Hernandez Bob Magee Scott Matas Greg Pettis Ron Roberts Larry Smith Jeff Stone John Tavaglione Ella Zanowic PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no requests to speak from the public . RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 27, 201 2 Page 2 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES-NOVEMBER 28, 2011 M/S/C (Stone/Zanowic) to approve the minutes of November 28, 2 0 11 meeting as submitted. 6. ADDITIONS I REVISIONS There was additional information for Agenda Item 10, "Extension of the Commercial Paper Program Standby Letter of Credit". 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. MIS/C (Stone/Zanowic) to approve the following Consent Calendar item(s): 7A. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 1) 2) Receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the period ended Dec ember 31, 2011; and Forward to the Commission for final action. 7B. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS 1) Receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 3 (Q3) 2011; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 7C. REPORT ON EXPENDITURE OF PROCEEDS FROM 2010 BONDS 1 ) Receive and fife the report on the expenditure of the proceeds from the 2010 Bonds; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 8. PROPOSED POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 BUDGET Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager, presented the proposed Budget Policy Goals and Objectives for FY 2012/13, and discussed the following areas: • • • • • • RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 27, 2012 Page 3 • Budget development; • Commission policy goals -mobility, goods movement, economic development, system efficiencies, environmental stewardship, intermodalism and accessibility, communications, financial and administrative policies; and • Next steps. Commissioner Rick Gibbs suggested including the Commission pnontrzes resources to match the current project plans in addition to searching for all available transportation funds as this is how the Commission operates. John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director, expressed appreciation for Commissioner Gibbs' comments and stated that while it is implied that the Commission is trying to make the most of what is available, staff will incorporate the suggestion to provide a more explicit budget. M/S/C (Stone/Roberts) to: 1) 2) Approve the proposed Commission Policy Goals and Objectives for the FV 2012/13 Budget; and Forward to the Commission for final action. 9. REVISION OF DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICIES Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer, provided an overvrew of the revisions to the Commission's Debt Management policies. M/S/C (Adams/Craton) to: 1) Approve the revisions to the Commission's Debt Management Policy; 2) Adopt Resolution No. 12-010, ~~ Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding the Revised Debt Management Policy"; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action . RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 27, 201 2 Page 4 10. EXTENSION OF THE COMMERCIAL PAPER PROGRAM STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT Theresia Trevino presented the proposed extension of the Commercial Paper (CP) program standby letter of credit (LOC) and discussed the following areas: • CP basics; • Establishment, evolution, and continuation of the CP program; • CP program illustration and activity; • Letter of credit support; and • Transaction documents. In response to Commissioner Douglas Hanson's question about how many banks were contacted and the limited number that responded, Theresia Trevino replied approximately 1 0 banks were contacted that had strong, quality ratings and could work with the Commission's CP program. Dan Wiles, Principal from Fieldman, Rolapp and Associates, added some banks did not want to participate in a transparent bid process. • In response to Commissioner Hanson's question regarding fees, Dan Wiles • replied the advisors are paid on an hourly basis. There is a contract with the Commission that provides for the advisor's amount of time expended and there is no success fee related to the CP program. At Commissioner Hanson's request, Dan Wiles explained the conversion of basis points to a percent of interest. Commissioner Hanson then asked if the Commission could have reached out and picked up another bank to maintain a lower rate. Theresia Trevino replied Union Bank's initial proposal was 48 basis points and Bank of America proposed 36 basis points. There were negotiations between the two banks and the consensus was 42 basis points. Due to the timing, the Commission will seek an additional bank prior to the Commission meeting. • • • • RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 27, 2012 Page 5 MIS/C (Roberts/Craton) to: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 12-009, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Ratifying and Confirming Prior Authorization of the Execution and Delivery of a Substitute Credit Agreement, a Second Amendment to Credit Agreement and Related Amendments to Certain Other Documents, a Supplement to Offering Memorandum and the Taking of All Other Actions Necessary in Connection Therewith"; 2) Ratify the draft Reimbursement Agreement by and between the Commission and Union Bank, N.A. (Union Bank), relating to the Commission's Commercial Paper Notes, Series A and B and authorization for the Executive Director and/or other authorized 3) 4) 5) representative to approve and execute the final agreement; Ratify the draft Fee Agreement between the Commission and Union Bank relating to the Commission's Commercial Paper Notes, Series A and B, and authorization for the Executive Director and/or other authorized representative to approve and execute the final Fee Agreement; Continue consideration of obtaining a second letter of credit with another qualified bank; Approve the draft supplement to the offering memorandum for the issuance of $12 0 million in Commercial Paper Notes, Series A and Series B and authorize the Executive Director and/or other authorized representative to approve distribution of the supplement to the offering memorandum by Barclays and BAML; 6) Approve the estimated costs related to the amendment of the letter of credit and authorize the Executive Director to execute related professional service agreements, as required; and 7) Forward to the Commission for final action. Abstain: Stone No: Pettis 11. PROPOSITION 1 B STATE-LOCAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM -FORMULA PROGRAM PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager, provided an overview of the Proposition 1 B State-Local Partnership Program formula funds for the Commission's priority projects . RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 27, 201 2 Page 6 M/S/C (Stone/Zanowic) to: 1) Approve programming State-Local Partnership Program (SLPP) formula funds on the following projects: Perris Valley Line, State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP), Interstate 215 Central widening (Scott Road to Nuevo Road), and Foothill Parkway; 2) Authorize the Executive Director to determine the appropriate programming amount for each project; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 12. MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY Andrea Zureick, Senior Staff Analyst, presented the Measure A Local Streets and Roads Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan for the city of Jurupa Valley for FYs 2012-16. Mike Meyers, Assistant City Engineer for the city of Jurupa Valley, expressed appreciation to staff for working with the city and expressed strong support for the request to receive Measure A funds for transportation improvements. M/S/C (Stone/Craton) to: 1) Approve the city of Jurupa Valley's FYs 2012-16 Measure A Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for Local Streets and Roads; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 13. FEDERAL CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY FUNDING FOR THE MEASURE A REGIONAL RIDESHARE PROGRAM Jillian Edmiston, Staff Analyst, provided an overview for the federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds request for the Measure A Regional Rideshare program for FY s 201 2/1 3 -201 7 I 1 8, and to program the CMAQ funds for the Regional Rideshare program in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program. • • • • • • RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 27, 2012 Page 7 In response to Commissioner Douglas Hanson's questions regarding the program for the Coachella Valley, Jillian Edmiston explained Coachella Valley employers are eligible to participate in the Commission's Regional Rideshare program and provide details as to how the program functions and how it is funded. John Standiford added the voter approved Measure A Expenditure Plan for . the Coachella Valley portion does not provide any Measure A funding for commuter assistance. As a result, staff is offering those services to the Coachella Valley residents and employers through other funding sources. Commissioner Hanson expressed appreciation for the responses and for extending the program to the Coachella Valley. At Commissioner Roger Berg's request, Jillian Edmiston provided additional information regarding participant benefits and incentives. In response to Commissioner Steven Hernandez's question about Job Access Reverse Commute (JARC) funding, Jillian Edmiston provided additional information on the JARC funding, noting it is valid for two years through FY 2012/13. At that time, the Commission is responsible for preparing a call for projects to program funds. John Standiford added for future JARC call for projects, it would be open to projects that are eligible and service to the Coachella Valley is part of it. In response to Chair Matas' request for clarification regarding other services receiving JARC funds, Jillian Edmiston responded JARC funding is primarily programmed to non-profit transit. MIS/C (Hanson/Stone) to: 1) Approve the programming of $2.7 million in federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds for continuation of the Regional Rides hare program in fiscal years 2 0 12/13 through 2017/18; 2) Authorize staff to program the CMAQ funds for the Regional Rideshare Program in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP); and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action . RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 27, 2012 Page 8 14. GRADE SEPARATION PRIORITY UPDATE STUDY FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROJECTS LOCATED ON THE ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager, presented the Grade Separation Priority Update Study for Riverside County on the Alameda Corridor East, and discussed the following areas: • Goods movement -Job creation and economic growth; • Goods movement impacts; • Grade separation rankings; • Significant progress since 2008 -Proposition 1 8 funding and four grade separated crossing constructed; • Significant progress -Two crossing permanently closed, three additional projects start construction in three months, and seven additional at-grade crossing scheduled to start construction by August 2013; • Remaining at-grade crossings -46; • Collaboration: 2012 grade separation priority update study; and • Commitment to grade separations. • Tanya Love introduced James "JD" Douglas, lnfraConsult LLC, to present • the technical portion of the study. JD Douglas discussed the following areas: • A map depicting the rail crossings; • Evaluation methodology, criteria and weighting; • Background data -number of trains, train speed and length; and • Priority results compared to 2006. Tanya Love stated staff will return in a few months with an updated 2012 grade separation funding strategy and highlighted the staff recommendations. Commissioner Greg Pettis expressed there will be more than one passenger train passing through the Coachella Valley by 2035, which should be reflected in the study. He expressed strong concern there is no identified funding for further Coachella Valley grade separations, and requested this item be agendized at the next Eastern Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee meeting for discussion. • • • • RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 27, 2012 Page 9 Commissioner Berg referred the San Timoteo Canyon and Apache Trail crossings and expressed concern the train speeds from the technical study are inaccurate. He explained there are a number of grade crossings in Beaumont that would be cost prohibitive. However, he believes a grade crossing at San Timoteo Canyon and Apache Trial would be considerably less and recommended these be evaluated. In response to Commissioner Mary Craton's question regarding the widening of the Panama Canal, Tanya Love indicated its potential impact on the ports was taken into consideration. Commissioner Steve Adams expressed his belief that for the evaluation criteria, emissions should be weighted more heavily as it is the greatest contributor to air quality in this area due to the freight movement and the advent of SB 375 and AB 32. Commissioner Hernandez concurred with Commissioner Pettis' comments and stated as the Coachella Valley meets its grade separation goals, he suggested revisiting the goods movement and corridor studies and priorities, specifically looking at Avenue 86 . MIS/C (Craton/Adams) to: 1 ) Approve the Grade Separation Priority Update Study for Riverside County projects located on the Alameda Corridor East (ACE); 2) Based on study, direct staff to develop a 2 0 12 grade separation funding strategy; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. No: Berg 15. FEDERAl SURFACE TRANSPORTATION REAUTHORIZATION UPDATE Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager, provided an update on the Federal Surface Transportation Reauthorization bill. He noted that Senator Dianne Feinstein visited Riverside County and she stated the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project is her number one transportation priority for California. He recommended Commissioners encourage their national associations and the members that represent each city to remain active in the highway reauthorization debate to ensure a bill moves forward this month . RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 27, 2012 Page 10 Commissioner Pettis reported on the National Association of Regional Councils Conference at which Congressman John Mica and Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood spoke, receiving considerable push back regarding the transit component. M/S/C (Adams/Roberts) to: 1) Receive and file an update on federal surface transportation reauthorization; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 16. ELECTION OF OFFICERS At this time, Chair Matas opened nominations for the slate of officers. Vice Chair Ron Roberts stated that since he is retiring in 2013, he did not wish to be nominated as Chair for 2012. Commissioner Pettis, seconded by Commissioner Jeff Stone, nominated Commissioner Rick Gibbs for the Chair position and Commissioner Ella Zanowic for the Vice Chair position for 2012. No other nominations were received. Chair Matas closed the nominations. Commissioners Rick Gibbs and Ella Zanowic were elected as the Budget and Implementation Committee's Chair and Vice Chair for 2012, respectively. Commissioners Gibbs and Zanowic abstained from the vote. Chair Matas expressed his appreciation to the Committee for allowing him to serve as Chair and thanked staff for its hard work. 17. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA There were no items pulled from the Consent Calendar. 18. COMMISSIONERS I EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT 18A. Chair Matas announced a ribbon cutting ceremony is scheduled for March 9 for two overpasses at Indian Avenue and Palm Drive in the Coachella Valley. 188. John Standiford announced the SR-91 HOV groundbreaking ceremony is scheduled for March 9 at noon and invitations will be sent. • • • RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes February 27, 2012 • Page 11 • • 18C. Commissioner Pettis requested a discussion at a future meeting on the IE511 .org website and plans to include real time traffic monitoring for the Coachella Valley. 19. ADJOURNMENT AND NEXT MEETING There being no further business for consideration by the Budget and Implementation Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 11 :00 a.m. The next meeting of the Budget and Implementation Committee is scheduled for March 26, 2012 at 9:30a.m. Respectfully submitted, Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board • AGENDA ITEM 7 A • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 23, 2012 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Matt Wallace, Procurement Manager Marla Modell, Procurement Administrator ~---·· THROUGH: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer ~--~- SUBJECT: Single Signature Authority Report STAFF RECOMMENDA T/ON: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the Single Signature Authority report for the third quarter ended March 31, 2012; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: • Certain contracts are executed under single signature authority as permitted under: • • Resolution No. 98-013 authorizes the Executive Director to sign professional services and administrative contracts in an aggregate amount not to exceed $500,000 in any given fiscal year; and • Public Utilities Code Section 130323(c) authorizes the Executive Director to sign public works contracts. The attached report details all contracts that have been executed for the third quarter ended March 31, 2012, under the single signature authority granted to the Executive Director. The unused capacity of single signature authority under Resolution No. 98-01 3 for the quarter ended March 31, 2012 is $311 ,81 5. Attachment: Single Signature Authority Report Agenda Item 7 A 1 • CONSULTANT Agreements that fall under Resolution No. 98-013 AMOUNT AVAILABLE July 1, 2011 Transportation Management & Design, Inc. Joanna Capelle GCAP Services, Inc. MGB Construction MK Consulting Beacon Economics Pauf Blae'i<Welder Southstar Engineering & Con&ultlng Giiosham Savage Nolan & nicllin AMOUNT USED • SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY AS OF March 31, 2012 DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES Strategic Analysis Services· Support SR-91 CIP Project Grant Funding Consulting Services Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Consulting Services Asphalt Repair Services Rides hare Incentive Program Analysis & Development Services Sales Tax Reveune Projections TOMF Consulting Se..Vlees,· RO\V Ma'riag~~e~fSupport Services ,. l..~gal s.ervices::r.or~RCA Ag:reeni~r1t -/tA·~ AMOUNT REMAINING through March 31, 2012 Agreements that fall under Public Utilities Code 130323 (C) Elrod Fence •· ·.•· · ·.·... · . /•'11•'1hstan chain link fenife)>edf~y;!!l~tr~h. Elrod Fence lnsta 11 c haln tin ii to' rice \hth v;rougbt Iron ~ C<>ro~~ Station. "", EcOh·o··F~Oce fnsi~'' chain link r&riC'e at'ld ·g-ate,p~sts,. ('''"Sierra Elrod Fence Install fence·located at the.nOft~ end Orih• plant~( .. N.M.¢.)/~ ., t;Jrod F·ence Install chairi:!frl~k fence P8dJey Stat1or1: ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT 500,000.00 35,000.00 6,500.00 20,000.00 3,685.00 10,000.00 18,000.00 40,000.00 . so;ooo,oo s,o'qo.oo 188,185.00 311,815.00 5,889.00 1s,35o.oo 12,146.00 10,452.00 1,697.00 AMOUNT USED $ 46 534.00 Matt Wallace P'rep.~lr·e·ci" bY Theresia Trevino ReViewed··bv No~~.: Shaded a~,a represents new c~ntratt'.$ ·nSte~ ty;jhfth~~a,:~q~·rter: c.,.-},·_;<., 2 PAID AMOUNT 25,147.70 2,795.00 2,400.00 3,685.00 1,316.60 5,000.00 9,408.00 7,150.00 2,725.00 59,627.30 5,889.00 16,350.00 12,146.00 10,452.00 REMAINING CONTRACT AMOUNT 9,852.30 3,705.00 17,600.00 8,683.40 13,000.00 30,592.00 42,850.00 2,275.00 128,557.70 1,697.00 • • AGENDA ITEM 8 • • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 23, 2012 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 2012/13 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Discuss, review, and provide guidance on the proposed FY 2012/13 Budget; and 2) Open the public hearing in order to receive input and comments on the proposed FY 2012/13 Budget on May 9 and on June 7, 2012, and thereafter close the public hearing. BACKGROUND INFORMA T/ON: Staff has completed the initial budget preparation process, and attached is an executive summary for the proposed FY 2012/13 Budget. The policy goals and objectives approved by the Commission on March 14 were the basis of this budget. The policy goals and objectives considered during the preparation of the budget relate to mobility initiatives, goods movement, improved system efficiencies, environmental stewardship, economic development, intermodalism and accessibility, and public and agency communications as well as financial and administration policies. Staff will present highlights of significant items included in the budget and is seeking review of and input on the proposed FY 2012/13 Budget. Based on input received from Commissioners, staff will update the document, as necessary, and present the proposed budget for the opening of the public hearing and for the Commission's review on May 9. As a result of input received from the public and the Commission, staff will make any necessary changes to the budget document for final review, close of the public hearing, and adoption at the June 7 Commission meeting. The executive summary document contains a summary of all departmental budgets and summarizes the information for the entire Commission. The department budgets present the goals and objectives, the resources needed to accomplish the Agenda Item 8 3 goals, and the appropriations required to accomplish the tasks. Staff also included the budgets by governmental fund type, as this table provides a summary of the budgeted revenues and expenditures from a fund perspective. Preliminary funding estimates for transit operating and capital expenditures have been included in the budget, although the draft Short Range Transit Plans are still under review. An adjustment for a revised estimate of these transit expenditures may be included in the final budget document presented in June 2012. At the June 7 Commission meeting, staff will present the entire budget with detailed narratives. A summary of the proposed FY 2012/13 Budget is as follows: Revenues and other financing sources: Sales taxes-Measure A and Local Transportation Funds Reimbursements (federal, state, and other) Transportation Uniform Mitigation Funds, including reimbursements State Transit Assistance Other revenues Interest on investments Debt proceeds Transfers in Total revenues and other financing sources Expenditures and other financing uses: Personnel salary and fringe benefits Professional services Support services Projects and operations Capital outlay Debt service (principal, interest and costs of issuance) Transfers out Total expenditures and other financing uses Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Beginning fund balance (projected) Ending fund balance (projected) FY 2012/13 Budget $ 185,000,000 97,476,600 5,257,300 14,212,500 882,800 7,321,700 1 ,240,172,000 326,313,700 1,876,636,600 6,777,300 13,891,200 5,326,600 456,013,100 432,700 143,413,000 326,313,700 952,167,600 924,469,000 546,924,700 $ 1,471,393,700 Attachment: FY 2012!13 Proposed Budget Executive Summary Agenda Item 8 4 • • • • • • Executive Summary Introduction The budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012/13 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 accomplishments, major initiatives, and key assumptions. Staff used the goals and objectives approved at the Commission meeting on March 14, 2012, 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, design, and construction 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 SR-91 corridor improvement project toll program including executing toll program agreements with key partners, preparing requests for proposals for a design-build contract, and completing funding opportunities via the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan program. • • • • • • • • • • • 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. Work with local and regional agencies in developing resources for preservation and maintenance of the highways and regional arterials. 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 controls 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. 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 2012/13 Management Services budget is 2.63% of Measure A revenues. • Maintain administrative salaries and benefits at less than 1% of Measure A revenues; the FY 2012/13 administrative salaries and benefits is .96% 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. 5 • Move forward on Measure A projects for highways and regional arterials using sales tax revenues, TUMF revenues, and state and federal funding as well as financing alternatives such as commercial paper, sales tax revenue bonds, and toll revenue bonds. • Leverage and protect past Measure A investments in rail with state and federal funding for additional rail improvements, including the Perris Valley Line. • Maintain the financial software system to integrate project accounting needs and improve accounting efficiency. Budget Overview Total sources (Table 1) are budgeted at $1,876,636,600, which is an increase of 286% over FY 2011/12 projected sources and a 308% increase over the FY 2011/12 budget. Total sources are comprised of revenues of $310,150,900, transfers in of $326,313,700, and debt proceeds of $1,240,172,000. The projected fund balance at June 30, 2012 available for expenditures (excluding reserves for debt service of $5,665,300 and advances receivable of $31,350,700) is $509,908,700. Accordingly, total funding available for the FY 2012/13 budget totals $2,386,545,300. Table 1-Sources FY 2011-2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 DoU~r:;,:,~ ; : Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected BUdget Chang~1Ik Change ~'~ '"< "~-v Measure A Sales Tax $ 123,439,800 $ 124,000,000 $ 124,000,000 $ 124,000,000 $ 0% LTF Sales Tax 60,772,800 61,000,000 61,000,000 61,000,000 0% STA Sales Tax 9,537,000 14,073,600 14,2f2;SOO 4,675,500 49% Intergovernmental 40,569,000 48,667,600 50,481,900 97;476;600 48,809,000· 100",{, TUMF Revenue 9,157,900 6,784,300 6,397,400 5,257,300 (1,527,000) -23% Other Revenue 2,321,800 592,400 450,800 "882,800 290,400 49% Investment Income 4,524,200 1,824,000 3,391,100 7,321,700 5,497,700 301% Operating Transfers In 185,354,800 169,739,100 166,283,400 326,3,13,700 156,574,600 92% Debt Proceeds 170,000,000 38,000,000 60,000,000 .. 1,240,172,000 1,202,172,000 3164% TOTAL Sources $ 596,140,300 $ 460,144,400 $ 486,078,200 $1,876;636;ti00 $ 1,416,492,200 308% 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 nearby 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. Today the economy in Riverside County reflects the recent nationwide recession, as evidenced by high unemployment; lower 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 distressed properties. The impact of the recession has been amplified in the Inland Empire (i.e., Riverside and San Bernardino counties) due to its relatively greater growth through 2006 and the relatively lower average income levels when compared to coastal areas. These factors have resulted in fluctuating Measure A and LTF sales tax revenues and decreased TUMF fees as noted in Chart 1; however, the sales tax revenues appear to have stabilized since FY 2009/10. 6 • • • • • • Chart 1 -Commission Sources Trend $1,400,000,000 $1,200,000,000 $1,000,000,000 $800,000,000 $600,000,000 $400,000,000 $200,000,000 $0 FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 ........ Measure A Sales Tax .......,. L TF Sales Tax ~~STASales Tax ~Federal, State, Local Revenues -OperatingTransfers In ,,~-Debt Proceeds While economic reports indicate that the national recession ended in 2009 and economic growth has resumed, recovery in the local Inland Empire economy continues to be affected by the area's housing woes due to the exposure to the subprime mortgage market collapse several years ago. The economic outlook for the Commission in FY 2012/13 is encouraging with the stabilization of sales tax revenues; however, the state and federal budget issues continue to affect funding of the Commission's capital projects and programs. Should Measure A and LTF sales tax revenues decline again and the availability of federal and state revenues continues to be uncertain, the timing and scope ofthe Commission's projects and programs may be impacted. 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 Measure A Sales Tax l TF Sales Tax 7 Sales Tax 1% Intergovernmental 5% Revenue 0% stment Income 1% The State Board of Equalization (SBOE) recently provided to cities and other agencies its projections that statewide taxable sales over the next fiscal year will increase 4%. However, given the tenuous local economy, the Commission is not basing its estimate of revenues on the SBOE's projection and will continue its conservative projection practices. 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 2011/12 revised projection of $124,000,000. At midyear the Commission will reassess sales tax revenue projections based on the economy and revenue trends. On behalf of the County, the Commission administers the L TF 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 $61,000,000, unchanged from the FY 2011/12 revised projection due to the economic concerns discussed earlier. STA funds generated from the statewide sales tax on motor vehicle fuel are allocated by formula by the State Controller to the Commission for allocations to the County's public transit operators; however, these funds have been subject to suspension in past years due to the State's budget issues. The STA transit allocation, which is based on recent State estimates, for FY 2012/13 is $14,212,500. Intergovernmental revenues include reimbursement revenues from federal sources of $57,619,900, state sources of $37,168,000, and local agencies of $2,688,700 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 Governments (WRCOG), the Commission will receive 48.7% of TUMF revenues (as updated by the most recent Nexus study). TUMF represents fees assessed on new residential and commercial development in Western County . FY 2012/13 TUMF fees are expected to remain flat at $4,000,000 based on the weakened housing market in the Inland Empire, and additional TUMF zone reimbursements of $1,257,300 are expected for.the 74/215 interchange project. Other revenue of $882,800 is projected to increase 49% from the prior year's budget of $592,400 primarily because of property management revenues generated from properties acquired in connection with the SR-91 corridor improvements project. Investment income is anticipated to remain flat in FY 2012/13 as a result of low investment yields. 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 of $326,313,700 relate primarily to the transfer of available debt proceeds for highway and regional arterial projects; LTF funding for general administration, planning and programming, rail operations and station maintenance, and grade separation project allocations; approved interfund allocations for specific projects; and debt service requirements from highway, regional arterial, and local streets and roads projects. Debt proceeds consist of the issuance of $100,000,000 in commercial paper notes and $1,140,172,000 in sales tax and toll revenue bonds as well as TIFIA loan proceeds related to the SR-91 corridor improvement project. Total uses (Table 2), including transfers out of $326,313,700, are budgeted at $952,167,600, an increase of 55% from the prior year budget amount of $615,387,900. Program expenditures and transfers out totaling $796,369,800 represent 84% of total budgeted uses in FY 2012/13. Program .costs have increased by 37% from $581,943,400 in FY 2011/12. . 8 • • • • • • Table 2-Uses FY 2011-2013 Capital Highway, Rail, and Regional Arterials Capital Local Streets and Roads Commuter Assistance Debt Service Management Services Motorist Assistance Planning and Programming Public and Specialized Transit Rail Maintenance and Operations TOTAL Uses FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change $ 300,680,000 $ 395,337,600 $ 297,581,700 $ 627,840,800 $ 232,503,200 36,857,000 2,831,900 123,364,100 8,394,000 4,761,900 4,564,600 64,024,400 12,865,700 36,025,000 9,386,400 20,195,000 13,249,500 6,377,600 7,459,500 105,858,700 21,498,600 36,934,600 4,391,400 62,964,000 17,544,100 6,400,900 4,065,300 77,623,200 21,012,900 36,893,000 4,190;300 143,413,000 12,384,800 6,169,500 4,527,900 102,162,500 14,585,800 868,000 (5,196,100) 123,218,000 (864,700) (208,100) (2,931,600) (3,696,200) (6,912,800) $ 558,343,600 $ 615,387,900 $ 528,518,100 $ 952,167,600 $ 336,779,700 Note: Management Services includes Executive Management, Administration, Legislative Affairs and Communications, and Finance. Percent Change 59% 2% -55% 610% -7% -3% -39% -3% -32% 55% Capital highway, rail, and regional arterials budgeted uses of $627,840,800 are 59% higher compared to FY 2011/12 due to commencement of construction of the Perris Valley line and significant right of way activities related to the SR-91 corridor improvement project in addition to transfers out of debt proceeds from capital projects funds to finance 2009 Measure A Western County highway project costs. Df?bt Service of $143,413,000 has increased 610% as a result of the retirement of $120 million of outstanding commercial paper notes from sales tax revenue bond proceeds issued in connection with the SR-91 corridor improvement project financing. Commuter Assistance budgeted expenditures of $4,190,300 are 55% lower than FY 2011/12 due to a $5,000,000 transfer in FY 2011/12 to the Perris Valley line projects to offset the multimodal benefits of the projects. Planning and Programming budgeted expenditures of $4,527,900 reflect a 39% decrease from the FY 2011/12 budget of $7,459,500 as a result of a decrease in jump-start funding disbursements for grade separation projects. The $6,912,800 decrease in Rail Department budgeted expenditures of $14,585,800 is primarily due to capital funding for new Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA or Metrolink) rail cars in FY 2011/12. Total uses included in the FY 2012/13 budget by major categories are illustrated in Chart 3. Chart 3-Uses: Major Categories Planning and Programming 0% Motorist Assistance 1% Management Services 1% Public and Specialized Transit Rail Maintenance and Debt Service---- 15% Commuter Assistance 0% Capital Local Streets and Roads 4% 9 Commission Personnel The Commission's salary and fringe benefits total $6,777,300 for FY 2012/13. This represents a slight increase of 3% or $200,400 over the FY 2011/12 budget of $6,576,900 (Chart 4). The increase relates to a set-aside pool of 3% for cost of living adjustments and 3% for merit-based salary increases. The Commission had not provided a merit- based salary increase since FY2007 /08. Chart 4-Salary and Benefits Costs: Five Year Comparison $8,000,000 $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $- FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 The Full Time Equivalent (FTE) of 41.0 FTE positions is comparable to the FY 2011/12 level (Table 3). 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 2011-2013 FY10/11 Executive Management 0.3 Administration 4.3 Legislative Affairs and Communications 2.0 Finance 6.2 Planning and Programming 5.2 Rail Maintenance and Operations 3.8 Public and Specialized Transit 2.6 Commuter Assistance 1.5 Motorist Assistance 0.9 Capital Project Development and Delivery 12.2 TOTAL 39.0 10 ' .. FY.11/12 0.2 4.5 2.3 6.9 4.8 3.4 2.6 1.8 0.9 13.6 41.0 FYlZ/~3 0.4 4.6 2.0 6.7 4.8 3.3 . "14.0 41.0 • • • • • • 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 (Ca!PERS), postretirement health care, deferred compensation, and employee assistance program. The compensation components are shown in Chart 5. Chart 5-Personnel Salary and Benefits Department Initiatives Other Fringes 1% The preparation of each department's budget was based on key assumptions, accomplishments in FY 2011/12, major initiatives for FY 2012/13, 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. • Ensure the SR-91 corridor improvement project environmental review will be completed along with advance right of way, solicitation of a design build team, and a federal loan from the TIFIA program. • 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 ·.·. ··~.·.• FY 10/li ···· · FY 11/12 · FY11j12 fY 12/13 Dollar Percent ·· · )\ctuat · Revised Budget ~rojetted Budget Change. thange Personnel $ 128,000 $ 83,600 $ 61,600 $ 120,700 $ 37,100 44% Professional 459,300 102,000 70,000 105,000 3,000 3% Support 38,900 58,700 54,100 57,600 (1,100) -2% TOTAL $ 626,200 244,300 $ 185,700 $ 283,300 39,000 16% 11 Administration • Provide high quality support services to the Commission and to internal 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 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar .Percent. Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change .Change Personnel 400,700 $ 412,400 $ 372,400 460,600 48,200 12% Professional 97,000 132,000 100,900 114,500 (17,500) -13% Support 558,400 670,800 586,200 640,600 (30,200) -5% Capital Outlay 29,000 20,000 5,000 125,000 105,000 525% Debt Service 25,300 N/A TOTAL 1,110,400 1,l35,200 $ 1,064,500 $ 1,340,700 105,500 9% Legislative Affairs and Communications • Continue efforts to protect and seek greater state and federal investment in transportation infrastructure and goods movement. • Develop effective partnerships with transportation providers to communicate a unified message to Congress regarding mobility needs. • Advocate positions in the State Legislature and in Congress that advance the County's transportation interests, especially those related to the implementation of the SR-91 corridor improvement project. • Develop a leadership role in formulating a countywide direction on federal transportation policies. • 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 proactive public 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 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FYll/12 f¥12/13 Dollar Percent . Actu.al Revised Budget Projected •. Budget Change ·· >Change Personnel $ 321,300 $ 437,100 $ 367,500 $ 395,400 $ (41,700) -10% Professional 385,200 688,500 420,500 587,500 (101,000) -15% Support 145,100 171,400 170,100 187,100 15,700 9% TOTAL $ 851,600 $ 1,297,000 $ 958,100 $ 1,170,000 $ (127,000) -10% Finance • Continue appropriate uses of long-and short-term financing to advance 2009 Measure A projects of the Commission and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG). • Apply the sales tax revenue forecast update to develop a financing plan to support the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan and CVAG highway and regional arterial projects. • Continue to support the financing efforts for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. 12 • • • • • • • Annually update the 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 to strengthen the enterprise resource planning (ERP) system to benefit all staff in the management of accounting and project information and automation of 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. Table 7-Finance FY 10111:· fY11/12 FY 11/12 fY12/13' · Dollar: Per£ent Actual Revised Budget Projected. Budget Change Change Personnel 778,200 $ 818,500 659,300 $ 829,300 $ 10,800 1% Professional 4,483,500 3,956,000 4,096,800 3,160,500 (795,500) -20% Support 544,700 569,000 575,700 601,000 32,000 6% Capital Outlay 24,700 129,500 4,000 (129,500) -100% Transfers Out 5,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 00/o TOTAL $ 5,831,100 10A73,000 15,335,800 $ ·g;s9o,soo $ (882,200) -8% 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 lB funded projects are administered and implemented consistent with California Transportation Commission (CTC) and California Department ofTransportation (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 concerns and maintain effective working relationships involving various bi-county transportation issues, including goods movement. Coordinate planning efforts with regional and local agencies relating to the development of regional transportation plans (RTP) and green house gas reduction implementation guidelines. Secure funding through the federal transportation bill for goods movement-related needs . Monitor and track the TUMF regional arterial projects . Work cooperatively with member agencies to continue the work efforts on the new Community Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) corridors. Continue the Congestion Management Program (CMP) update and traffic monitoring along urban and rural highway systems. Administer the SB821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program . Monitor the Port of Los Angeles and Port of Long Beach's (Ports) projects for impacts on Riverside County . 13 Table 8-Planning and Programming FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Personnel 817,600 $ 833,000 788,600 $ 846,000 $ 13,000 2% Professional 102,500 351,000 207,700 362,800 11,800 3% Support 9,800 18,800 18,400 19,400 600 3% Projects and Operations 3,634,700 6,247,500 3,050,600 3,299,700 (2,947,800) -47% Transfers Out 9,200 (9,200) -100% TOTAL $ 4,564,600 7,459,500 $ 4,065,300 $ 4,527,900 (2,931,600) -39% Rail Maintenance and Operations • Continue active participation in governance and operations of the Metrolink commuter rail system. • Continue the planning and implementation of capital improvements at the commuter rail stations in Riverside County, including the Perris Valley line, security and rehabilitation projects, and parking requirements. • Continue to support activities related to the Perris Valley line project and evaluate its operational impact. • Establish best approach to build, maintain, and operate cost effective and environmentally sustainable facilities that meet the public's transportation needs. • Continue coordination with CVAG, Amtrak and the State to focus attention on the creation of intercity passenger rail service between Coachella Valley, Riverside, and the Los Angeles basin. Table 9-Rail Maintenance and Operations FYlfi/11 FY 1i/1t.· " Revised Btidget< ~ : :: F:v 11/1i FY12{13. DoUar.·•· /',, \~~r~ntH: ':{:;~~ctij~' <Projected ·Budg~i ·· >(:~arigW-" · ·-'thange. Personnel $ 491,500 $ 494,300 $ 429,300 $ 493,100 $ (1,200) 0% Professional 128,100 317,000 178,100 421,0QO 104,000 33% Support 1,209,200 1,640,700 1,640,000 1,811,200 170,500 10% Projects and Operations 11,021,600 18,985,900 18,740,800 11,794;800 (7,191,100) -38% Capital Outlay 15,300 60,700 24,700 . 'GS,70a 5,000 8% ... TOTAL $ 12,865,700 $ 21,498,600 $ 21,012,900 $ .. 14,585,800 $ (6,912,800) -32% 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. • Implement the specialized transit funding allocations related to the second universal call for projects and monitor performance. • Continue long-range planning activities to ensure that anticipated revenues are in line with projected levels of service by transit operators. • Monitor public and specialized transit operators' performance through the Trans Track program. • Provide availability for local matching funds-to Western County applicants seeking FTA Section 5310 federal capital grants. • Coordinate with operators on major capital purchases and investments into new rolling stock and other system improvements in order to maintain a viable on-hand reserve. 14 • • • • • • Table 10-Public and Specialized Transit FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Personnel 320,900 $ 361,900 338,400 $ 326,500 (35,400) ·10% Professional 129,600 187,300 159,000 291,500 104,200 56% Support 11,400 23,800 10,400 18,900 (4,900) ·21% Projects and Operations 46,288,000 86,469,800 61,131,900 82,698,300 (3,771,500) -4% Transfers Out 17,274,500 18,815,900 15,983,500 18,827,300 11,400 0% TOTAl 64,024,400 $ 105,858,700 77,623,200 $ 102,162,500 (3,696,200) -3% 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. • Maintain and operate a four-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 car/vanpool arrangements and facilitate transit connections. Table 11-Commuter Assistance FY10{11 . fY1!tJ~2 fYU/12 f\',fl/13 :6olfat "<-.~'~, "v ' c6~~~e Actual Revised Budget Proje~ted su~get Personnel 197,600 $ 228,900 $ 264,800 $ 219,100 $ (9,800) ·4% Professional 230,700 805,100 663,600 . 640,300 (164,800) ·20% Support 309,100 503,400 505,000 529,2QO 25,800 5% Projects and Operations 2,079,000 2,559,000 2,668,000 2,u33AOO 74,400 3% Capital Outlay 15,500 130,000 130,000 . 17,000 (113,000) ·87% Transfers Out 5,160,000 160,000 ·.·. 151,300 (5,008,700) ·97% TOTAL 2,831,900 $ 9,386,400 4,391,400 $ 4,190,300 $ (5,196,100) ·55% Motorist Assistance • Assess opportunities for efficiency related to the call box program operations. • Maintain a high benefit-to-cost ratio related to the performance of the FSP program. • Operate and maintain the IESll system in accordance with national 511 implementation standards in partnership with SAN BAG. • Enhance the IESll with more personalized traffic information services. Table 12-Motorist Assistance Personnel Professional Support Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL $ $ FY 10/11 Actual 103,800 $ 649,500 435,600 2,341,800 1,231,200 4,761,900 $ FYJl/12 FY11/12 Revised Budget Projected 112,200 196,900 1,008,700 916,000 599,300 587,900 3,543,100 3,585,800 1,114,300 1,114,300 6,377,600 6,400,900 15 FY12fl3 Dol!ar •. ·.\~;•;Percent Budget_ chirige· Cha e' ·. ng 176,100 63,900 57% 717,500 (291,200) ·29% 874;600 275,300 46% 3,080,000 (463,100) ·13% 1,321,300 207,000 19% $ "6,169,500 $ (208,100) ·3% Capital Project Development and Delivery • Continue project development, right of way, and construction act1v1t1es on remammg 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. • Continue project activities on the 1-215 bi-county highway and Perris Valley line rail projects, which were included in both the 1989 Measure A and 2009 Measure A programs. • Continue project work on the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan projects, including the 91/71 connectors; the SR-91, 1-15, and 1-215 corridor mobility improvement projects; SR-79 realignment; and Mid County Parkway. • Provide Western County TUMF funding and support to local jurisdictions for regional arterial project engineering, right of way acquisition, and construction. • Provide advance funding and support of 2009 Measure A highway and regional arterial projects and for the acquisition for land as mitigation in the Coachella Valley. • Develop strategies to implement alternative financing structures including public toll roads. • 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, safety, and security of Commission-owned properties including commuter rail stations, properties in acquisition process, and income-generating properties. Table 13-Capital Project Development and Delivery · FY 10/11 Actual FY.ll/12 Revised sGctget fYll/12 " ·::H)~if¥r··. ·• · · thi!liet:: Personnel 2,308,900 $ 2,795,000 Professional 5,450,000 9,601,500 Support 309,200 813,000 Projects and Operations 162,557,000 278,337,400 Capital Outlay 62,800 176,000 $ 6,202,200 459,200 185,625,800 177,000 587,00~· .. 352,506!,900 :.•22~000 143;~t~qti6 $ 115,500 (2,110,900) (226,000) 74,169,500 49,000 123,218,000 161,374,100 4% ·22% ·28% 27% 28% Debt Service 123,338,800 20,195,000 Transfers Out 166,849,100 139,639,700 62,964,000 ' 139,025,600 .•: i;· 301,013,800 • 610% 116% TOTAL 460,875,800 $ 451,557,600 397,480,300 $ ~00,146,800 356,589,200 Fund Balances The total fund balance as of June 30, 2012 is projected at $546,924,700. The Commission's budgeted activities for FY 2012/13 are expected to result in a $924,469,000 increase of total fund balance at June 30, 2013 to $1,471,393,700. The primary cause of the increase is related to the completion of financing activities for the SR-91 corridor improvement project near the end of FY 2012/13. Table 14 presents the components of fund balance by governmental fund type and program at June 30, 2013. 16 79% • • • • • • Table 14-Projected Fund Balances by Governmental Fund Type and Program at June 30, 2013 Riverside County Transportation Commission General fund $13,008,300 Management Se~ces Planning and Programming Rail Maintenance and Operations Budget Summary $1,471,393,700 Special Revenue funds $407,752,200 )6,431.700 Measure A Western County: 1,632,200 Bond Financing 4,944,400 Commuter Assistance Economic Development Highways local Streets and Roads New Corr~ors Public and Specialized Transit Rail Regional Arterials Measure A Coachella Valley: Highways and Re~onal Arterial local Streets and Roads Specialized Transit Measure A Palo Verde Valley local Streets and Roads Motorist Assistance State Transit Assistance local Transportation Fund TUMF: CETAP Regional Arteria5 $2,002,000 12,778,100 3,463,400 118,768,800 1,300 39,932,900 8,394,200 64,611,900 32,297,900 1,500 1,600 842,500 500 4,629,300 42,627,600 61,603,200 15,081,800 713,700 Highways Capital Projects funds $1,045,926,700 $1,045,926.700 Debt Service fund $4,706,500 The overall budget for FY 2012/13 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 . 17 • Table 15-Budget Comparative by Summarized Line Item FY 2011-2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Revenues Measure A Sales Tax s 123,439,800 s 124,000,000 s 124,000,000 $ 124,000,000 s 0% LTF Sales Tax 60,772,800 61,000,000 61,000,000 61,000,000 0% STA Sales Tax 9,537,000 14,073,600 14,212,500 4,675,500 49% Federal Reimbursements 17,735,600 23,650,700 24,349,500 57,619,900 33,969,200 144% State Reimbursements 17,811,800 23,935,100 23,200,200 37,168,000 13,232,900 55% Local Reimbursements 5,021,600 1,081,800 2,932,200 2,688,700 1,606,900 149% TUMF Revenue 9,157,900 6,784,300 6,397,400 5,257,300 (1,527,000) -23% Other Revenue 2,321,800 592,400 450,800 882,800 290,400 49% Investment Income 4,524,200 1,824,000 3,391,100 7,321,700 5,497,700 301% TOTAL Revenues 240,785,500 252,405,300 259,794,800 310;150,900 57,745,600 23% Expenditures Personnel Salary and Benefits 5,868,500 6,576,900 6,505,300 6,777,300 200,400 3% Professional and Support Professional Services 12,115,400 17,149,100 13,014,800 13,891,200 (3,257,900) -19% Support Costs 3,571,400 5,068,900 4,607,000 5,326,600 257,700 5% TOTAL Professional and Support Costs 15,686,800 22,218,000 17,621,800 19,217,800 (3,000,200) -14% Projects and Operations Program Operations-General 10,554,500 16,827,000 14,057,700 16,6Q5?00 (221,300) -1% Engineering 27,545,300 41,568,800 27,796,100 24;3121~00 (17,256,200) -42% Construction 24,414,800 59,777,600 31,472,700 122,586,900 62,809,300 105% Design Build 16,272,900 29,438,000 11,000,000 29,050,000 (388,000) -1% Right of Way/Land 44,663,000 85,927,000 54,535,100 1o9.476!soo 23,549,500 27% Operating and Capital Disbursements 58,516,500 109,547,300 81,317,500 95,888)ioo (13,659,300) -12% Special Studies 459,500 770,000 280,000 800,000~ 30,000 4% Local Streets and Roads 36,857,000 36,025,000 36,934,600 36;893,000. 868,000 2% Regional Arterials 8,638,600 16,262,000 17,409,200 2(),400,400 4,138,400 25% • TOTAL Projects and Operations 227,922,100 396,142,700 274,802,900 456;013;100 59,870,400 15% Debt Service Principal Payments 109,607,200 6,500,000 46,500,000 126,800,000 120,300,000 1851% Interest Payments 11,296,300 13,695,000 16,464,000 . 16,613,000 2,918,000 21% Cost of Issuance 1,493,100 N/A TOTAL Debt Service 122,396,600 20,195,000 62,964,000 f43A13,ooo 123,218,000 610% Capital Outlay 147,300 516,200 340,700 432,700 (83,500) -16% TOTAL Expenditures 372,021,300 445,648,800 362,234,700 . ·625,853,900 180,205,100 40% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures (131,235,800) (193,243,500) (102,439,900) (315, 703,000) (122,459,500) 63% Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In 185,354,800 169,739,100 166,283,400 326,313,700 156,574,600 92% Transfers Out (185,354,800) (169,739,100) (166,283,400) (326,313,700) (156,574,600) 92% Debt Proceeds 170,000,000 38,000,000 60,000,000 1,240,172,000 1,202,172,000 3164% Payment to Refund Bond Escrow Agent N/A Bond Discount (967,500) N/A Net Financing Sources (Uses) 169,032,500 38,000,000 60,000,000 1,240,172,000 1,202,172,000 3164% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) 37,796,700 (155,243,500) (42,439,900) 924,469,000 1,079,712,499 -695% Beginning Fund Balance 551,567,900 589,364,600 589,364,600 546,924,700 (42,439,900) -7% ENDING FUND BALANCE $ 589,364,600 $ 434,121,100 s 546,924,700 $ 1,471,393,700 s 1,037,272,600 239% • 18 Table 16-Operating and Capital Budget FY 2012/13 • FY 12/13 FY•12/13 FY 12/13 Operating Budget Capital Budget TOTAL Budget Revenues Measure A Sales Tax s 12,059,000 s 111,941,000 s 124,000,000 LTF Sales Tax 61,000,000 61,000,000 STA Sales Tax 14,212,500 14,212,500 Federal Reimbursements 911,800 56,708,100 57,619,900 State Reimbursements 4,460,000 32,708,000 37,168,000 local Reimbursements 2,167,300 521,400 2,688,700 TUMF Revenue 5,257,300 5,257,300 Other Revenue 882,800 882,800 Investment Income 717,300 6,604,400 7,321,700 TOTAL Revenues 95,527,900 214,623,000 310,150;900 Expenditures Personnel Salary and Benefits 3,856,000 2,921,300 6,777,300 Professional and Support Professional Services 4,046,600 9,844,600 13;891,200 Support Costs 4,739,600 587,000 5~326,600 TOTAL Professional and Support Costs 8,786,200 10,431,600 19,217,800 Projects and Operations Program Operations-General 7,048,200 9,557,500 16,6'05, 7oo Engineering 24,312,600 24,§}2,600 ' . ;., .. : Construction 60,000 122,526,900 · .. 1~~;(~6.~00 Design Build 29,050,000 ... ·· 2~,Q39,000 Right of Way and land 109,476,500 ·. ii·+Q9,;j4;~.6;500 Operating and Capital Disbursements 95,638,000 250,000 95;88'8;000 Special Studies 760,000 40,000 •8.00,000 local Streets and Roads 36,893,000 36,893))00 • Regional Arterials 20,400,400 . 2.0;4oQ,4oo . TOTAL Projects and Operations 103,506,200 352,506,900 · '•456;oi3;'ioo Debt Service Principal Payments 126,800,000 .·' ''i26;~p:Q;cn;>o Interest Payments 16,613,000 ·· ····.· H~/6i3,ol;lo Cost of Issuance TOTAL Debt Service 143,413,000 143,413,000 Capital Outlay 207,700 225,000 432,700 TOTAL Expenditures 116,356,100 509,497,800 625,853,900 Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures (20,828,200) (294,874,800) (315, 703,000) Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In 20,202,400 306,111,300 326,313,700 Transfers Out (20,299,900) (306,013,800) (326,3.13, 700) Debt Proceeds 1,240,172,000 1,240,17~,000 Net Financing Sources (Uses) (97,500) 1,240,269,500 1,240,:1, 72,000 Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) (20,925, 700) 945,394,700 924,469,000 Beginning Fund Balance 164,808,700 382,116,000 546,924; 700 ENDING FUND BALANCE s 143,883,000 $ 1,327,510,700 1,4 71,393; 700 • 19 20 Table 18-Highway, Regional Arterial, and Rail Programs FY 2012/13 Description Projects and Operations Bechtel Program Management SCRRA Program Management TOTAL PROJECTS-GENERAL Highway Engineering SR-60 Truck Climbing Lanes 91/71 Connectors 1-15 Corridor Improvements 1-215 Corridor Improvement (Central Segment)/Scott Road to Nuevo Road 1-215 Southbound to 1-15 Connector Widening Gap Closure Mid County Parkway SR-91 Corridor Improvements SR-91 HOV Lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 Interchange General SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY ENGINEERING Regional Arterial Engineering Various Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Projects, including SR-79 realignment SUBTOTAL REGIONAL ARTERIAL ENGINEERING Rail Engineering Perris Valley line and Other Related Projects SUBTOTAL RAIL ENGINEERING TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL ENGINEERING Highway Construction 60/215 East Junction HOV Lanes Connector 74/215 Interchange 1-215 Corridor Improvements (South Segment)/1-15 to Scott Road 1-215 at Blaine Street 1-15 Los Alamos Road Bridge Replacement SR-74 Curve Widening SR-91 Corridor Improvements SR-91/La Sierra Interchange SR-91/Van Buren Interchange General {details presented in Section 6.3 Motorist Assistance) SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION Regional Arterial Construction Various Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Projects SUBTOTAL REGIONAL ARTERIAL CONSTRUCTION Rail Construction Perris Valley line and Other Related Projects 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 1-215 Corridor Improvement (Central Segment)/Scott Road to Nuevo Road Mid County Parkway SR-74 Curve Widening SR-74/1-15 to 7th Street 91/71 Connectors SR-91 Corridor Improvements SR-91 HOV Lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 Interchange Coachella Valley MSHCP SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND 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 SUBTOTAL RAIL RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND GRANO TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL. AND RAIL PROGRAMS 21 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 5,882_700 2,608,000 8,490,700 3,000,000 4,000,000 8,000,000 1,000,000 750,000 2,000,000 _,2,oop.ooo 150,000 419,100 21,319,100 1,952,000 1;952,000 1,04]..500 1,041,500 24,312,600 "'", 30,_00o ·-{82o,o6Q 14;780,000_ ·. . • 1~ 750,000. • • 2j()OQ,OOO > ~;.. . ' .)!.!i()9,()Qb .• 4,000,000 110,600 3,184,300 60;000 • . ~90;'2;34,900 _;,:''tr\_.·., -;-:··';~· ···(" /'·'.: ·.; ' • .:2'7.2~6;ooo ··iQ!t'246,000'• 5SO,OOO ,2,65,000 .· 1,303;000 20,000 jio,ooo 38,200 1,250,000 66,400,000 14,195,000 3,024,100 17,632,500 109.476,500 293;916,700 • • • M +-' ~ GJ bO N -c ~ :::J 0 CD N -c ..... ta GJ ~ "' 0 c. ta 0 u ..... "' D. ·-LL " --Resource Estimation Commission Policy Goals • Department Goals and Objectives Department Budget Development Budget Compilation Budget Review and Adoption Project-driven nature of RCTC operations • Use of accumulated reserves for projects and programs • Flexibility to change scope and timing of projects • Small staff with heavy use of consultants • Interfund borrowing policy, if required Fluctuating sales tax revenues • Impact on transit operations and capital project needs • Encouraging signs of economic recovery Flat TUMF revenues • Use of TUMF reserves for project expenditures • Issuance of commercial paper in FY 2012/13 • Issuance of toll revenue bonds in FY 2012/13 Beginning Fund Balance (projected) Revenues Debt Proceeds Transfers In Total Estimated Sources Department/Program Expenditures Debt Service Transfers Out Total Estimated Uses Sources Over Uses Ending Fund Balance (projected) 310,150,900 1,240,172,000 326,313,700 (482,440,900) (143,413,000) {326,313,700) FV2012/13 $ 546,924,700 1,876,636,600 (952,167,600) 924,469,000 $ 1,471,393,700 Measure A Sales Tax $ LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Intergovernmental TUMF Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income Operating Transfers In Debt Proceeds TOTAL Sources $ FY 11/12 Revised Budget 124,000,000 61,000,000 9,537,000 48,667,600 6,784,300 592,400 1,824,000 169,739,100 38,000,000 460,144,400 $ $ FY 11/12 Projected 124,000,000 61,000,000 14,073,600 50,481,900 6,397,400 450,800 3,391,100 166,283,400 60,000,000 486,078,200 $ FY12/13 Budget 124,000,000 61,000,000 14,212,500 97,476,600 5,257,300 882,800 7,321,700 326,313,700 1,240,172,000 $ 1,876,636,600 .... IU 1111 "'C ::I "'C co Ill Ill .... IU , .... IU u IU 1111 IU Ill ~ , "0' ·:; ::I ... IU ~$ co Q. a: \)0 ,., N N .-t .-t .-t ~ ...... ...... ...... N .-t .-t -'9. .-t .-t .-t ~C> > > > .... .... .... ~ • • • ~ ~ :if.r~ ~ ~~ $~ ~ ·~ o_, ..,~ ~ ~ .,~ ~~ $~ II .s-CI) ~(I) ~~ ~$ ~ ~"'-~ $~ ~0 ~(I) ~$ ~~ /~ ~J? ~ ~(I) ~~ "(I) ~0 +~ ~ ~a/. ~~ ~ ~~ 'J'~ "'J' I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 qo N 0 co ... ... ... 11). .-t .-t .-t 11). 11). 11). 11). SUO!II!W %Z SeDIAJeS wawageum %EZ aNnaaS 11laa Capital Highway, Rail, and Regional Arterials $ Capital Local Streets and Roads Commuter Assistance Debt Service Management Services Motorist Assistance Planning and Programming Public and Specialized Transit Rail Maintenance and Operations -TOTAL Expenditures $ FY 11/12 Revised Budget 255,697,900 36,025,000 4,226,400 20,195,000 8,249,500 5,263,300 7,450,300 87,042,800 21,498,600 445,648,800 $ $ FY 11/12 Projected 158,556,100 36,934,600 4,231,400 62,964,000 7,544,100 5,286,600 4,065,300 61,639,700 21,012,900 362,234,700 $ $ BUdget 326,827,000 36,893,000 4,039,000 143,413,000 7,384,800 4,848,200 4,527,900 83,335,200 14,585,800 625,853,900 ,.~ 0 ·~ ~.,. 0)0! 04 "'~ ~~ ·~ o)_, ~., ~~ ~4 ~o) 0)~ i?~~ ·~~ ~ .~ ~ 0)~ ~~ ·"~ J'4 ~ ~ ~~ ~.,~ .) .Ill ·~ o.., 9~ o).) 0'4 0' ~~ ~~ ~ ~,1\ ~~ .~ ... ~ ~~ ,,I\ ~ .~ .S'o) Oa~, 0 ~ ·~ ~ "'c,. 0)~ o)_, 0)~ ·~ ~('. .... ~ Cll ~ till "'9. "tt ::II O)G> "tt 110 .... Cll "tt .... o).) Cll u Cll till Cll Ill ~~ . "tt .0' ·:; ::II ... Cll ~,I\ 110 a. a: .~ M N N ... ~ .-4 .-4 .-4 --:::;--"'o) N .-4 i?~ .-4 .-4 .-4 ~ ~~ > > > ~0 u. u. u. ($f4 ~ 1111 1111 1111 ~~ 'fl. ~~ O)o) "{/, .~ ::r~ 0).(, ~., ~~ 0> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I ~~ /~ ..,. <?~ ·"~ 1.1\ 0 1.1\ 0 1.1\ 0 1.1\ ~ M M N N """ """ ..,. 0)~ ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. ..,. -<>c,. SUO!II!W ~, ~~ ~, "'~ ""' ~~ ·~ /~ ·"~ ~ auri /tallp/1 suaad swauaanoadwi aopiaa00 SZZ-I pup ST-I 't6-HS a2upypaa1u1 SZZ/tiL pup anan0 tiL a2umpialul SZZ/Z6/09 lea.% swepd/saupi AOH Z6-HS Nam+\° sli•PHL-15.11-1 a•ml!puadx3 luaLulJedaG Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional Services Support Costs Projects and Operations Debt Service Capital Outlay TOTAL Expenditures Personnel Salary & Benefits 3% Support Costs 5% Projects & Operations 15% Debt Service 610% Professional Services 19% Capital Outlay 16% FY 11/12 Revised Budget $ 6,576,900 $ 17,149,100 5,068,900 396,142,700 20,195,000 516,200 $ 445,648,800 $ FY 11/12 Projected 6,505,300 $ 13,014,800 4,607,000 274,802,900 62,964,000 340,700 362,234,700 $ FY12/13 Budget 6,777,300 13,891,200 5,326,600 456,013,100 143,413,000 432,700 625,853,900 O&nO&nO&nO&n 0 &nO &nO &n .. J. &nNOI'&nNOI'&nNOI'&nN...,, MMMNNNN'P"''P"''P"'~ ~ SUO!II!II\I -1.,; ~ ~0 /~ .~~ ~ ~~ ·~ v~ 3'a~, 9~ t> .... cu QO "C ::II "C Ill cu "C .... t:: cu cu QO cu Ill "C '0' ·:; ::II .. cu Ill a. a:: m N N .... .... .... ....... ....... ....... N .... .... .... .... .... > > > Y. Y. Y. • • Ill Measure A administrative salaries and benefits needs for projects and transit operators Sales tax and TUMF revenue trends Timeliness of federal and state reimbursements Receive input for the proposed budget and open the public hearing Review the final budget draft, close the public hearing, and adopt the final budget • AGENDA ITEM 9 • • ----~~~~--~ -~ -~ • I • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 23, 2012 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Josefina Clemente, Transit Manager THROUGH: Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director SUBJECT: Amendment to Riverside Transit Agency and Sun line Transit Agency's Fiscal Year 2011/2012 Short Range Transit Plans STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) Approve modification to Riverside Transit Agency's (RTA) FY 2011/12 capital improvement program to reflect an additional $2.065 million in Section 5309 State of Good Repair (SGR) program funds and $5,889,196 in FY 2010/11 Proposition 1 B Capital and Security grant funding; Allocate $1.305 million in Transportation Development Act (TDA) Local Transportation Fund (L TF) funds to provide capital matching funds for the FY 201111 2 Section 5 309 program funds awarded to RT A for its paratransit revenue vehicle purchase and facility rehabilitation projects; Approve modification to RTA's FY 2011/12 operating assistance funding by allocating up to $19,000 in 1989 Measure A Western Riverside County Highway funds to implement a temporary shuttle service Route 54 to support the State Route 91 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes construction project; Approve modification to Sunline Transit Agency's (Sunline) FY 2011/12 operating assistance funding by reflecting a net increase of $83,698 resulting from an increase in federal Section 5307 funds ( + $1 ,026,623), reduction in projected farebox revenues (-$834, 774), a decrease in fuel rebates (-$150,000), and additional Air Quality Management District (AQMD) grant funds ( + $41 ,849) for the special transit services for Coachella and Stagecoach Festivals; Approve modification to Sunline's FY 2011112 capital assistance funding by reflecting an additional $4,917,876 in federal Section 5308 Transit Investments for Greenhouse Gas and Energy Reduction (TIGGER) funds for fuel cell bus purchases and an additional $546,430 in Section 5307 funds for paratransit buses and facility improvement in lieu of TDA State Transit Assistance (ST A) funds; Allocate $546,430 in STA funds to provide capital matching funds for the FY 2011/12 Section 5308 program funds awarded to Sunline for the fuel cell buses; Agenda Item 9 22 I 7) 8) Approve amendments to RTA and Sunline's Short Range Transit Plans (SRTP) to reflect the changes outlined above; and Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its July 13, 2011 meeting, the Commission approved and adopted the FY 2011 /12 operating and capital funding allocations for Riverside County based on the FY 2011/12 SRTP updates prepared by the eight transit operators providing public transit services in the county. Since that time, RT A received additional federal Section 5309 grant awards, as well as state 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 2009/10 Proposition 1 B grant program. In April 2012, RTA, in partnership with the Commission, will also implement a temporary shuttle service, Route 54, to support the SR-91 HOV lane construction project. Sunline also received new federal Section 5308 capital funds that necessitate adjustments in the configuration of approved STA and federal Section 5307 capital funding. Sun line's operating funds also need to be reconfigured to reflect • additional Section 5307 operating funds requested as a result of decreased farebox • revenue and a reduction in fuel rebate that was partially offset by additional revenues from AQMD funds and required matching funds to meet Sunline's mandated TDA farebox recovery ratio. RT A Operating Assistance RT A's currently approved funding structure for operating assistance is outlined in Attachment 1, Table 1 a, which is contained in the approved SRTP. Table 1 b shows the proposed modified operating assistance funding distribution. RTA is requesting approval to modify its FY 2011/12 operating funding to reflect an increase of $19,000 in 1989 Measure A Western County Highway funds. The additional Measure A funds will be used to implement a temporary shuttle service, Route 54, to operate between Downtown-Riverside station and the Riverside County Administration Center. The shuttle service is needed to provide service to both public and county employees during the initial construction activities associated with the SR-91 HOV lanes project and the planned incremental closure of the Riverside County Administration Center parking lot adjacent to SR-91 between Eleventh and Lime Streets. Route 54 is anticipated to begin service on April 16, 2012, and will operate for a period of approximately 24 months for six revenue hours per day during weekdays. The service will be offered at no charge to Riverside County employees and the public. Agenda Item 9 23 • • • • RT A Capital Assistance Table 2a of Attachment 1 shows the currently approved capital requests based on the initial SRTP capital funding plan and Table 2b shows the proposed capital project requests based on actual revenues received by RTA during FY 2011/12. Modification requests are as follows: • Reflect an additional $5,589, 196 1n Proposition 1 B Capital and Security grant funds (combination of FY 2009/10 and FY 2008/09 PTMISEA allocations) for revenue vehicle rolling stock; • Reflect $291,000 in Proposition 1 B Security funds (FY 2009/10 CTSGP- CT AF allocation) awarded to RT A for safety and security projects; • Reflect the newly awarded $2,065,000 in capital funds under the SGR Discretionary Program for the Dial-a-Ride (DAR) vehicle replacement project for $735,000 and Riverside and Hemet facility rehabilitation project for $1 ,330,000; and • Allocate a total of $1 ,305,000 in L TF funds to provide matching funds for the above SGR projects. Sunline Operating Assistance Table 1 a of Attachment 2 outlines the currently approved funding structure for Sunline' s operating assistance which is contained in the approved SRTP while Table 1 b shows the modified funding distribution. Sunline is requesting approval to modify its operating funding as follows: • Reflect a decrease of $834,774 in farebox revenue; • Reflect a decrease in other revenues due to decrease 1n fuel rebate by $150,000; • Recognize other revenues of $41 ,849 expected from AQMD for extra services for the Coachella and Stagecoach Festivals; and • Reflect an increase of federal Section 5307 funds by $1,026,623 for preventive maintenance to offset the decrease in farebox and other revenues and comply with the mandated farebox recovery ratio of 17.8%. With the above adjustments, the net effect on Sunline's operating assistance for FY 2011112 is a net increase of $83,698. Sunline' s Capital Assistance Table 2a of Attachment 2 shows the original capital requests contained in the approved SRTP and Table 2b outlines the modified capital funding to recognize the additional Section 5307 funding request as well as the new Section 5308 federal funding received by Sunline. Modification requests are as follows: Agenda Item 9 24 • • Reflect the new capital funding of $4,917,876 in Section 5308 federal funds for the purchase of two new fuel cell buses and allocate ST A matching funds for $546,430 by reducing the STA matching funds from the replacement paratransit buses and facility improvement projects by the same amount without requesting additional ST A monies; and Reflect additional $546,430 in federal Section 5307 funding to offset the reduced ST A matching funds for the replacement paratransit buses and facility improvement projects. Overall, these modifications increased Sunline' s FY 11/12 capital funding by $5,464,306. Financial Impact Staff reviewed RT A and Sun line's revised plan and recommends approval of its operating and capital funding modifications and related amendments to the FY 2011/12 SRTP. Sun line's modifications do not have financial impacts to the Commission since the additional revenues stem from federal funds. For RTA's modifications, the Proposition 1 B state funds are directly allocated to RT A and the only financial • impact to the Commission is the allocation of Measure A funds. There is sufficient • funding in the 1989 Measure A Western Riverside County Highway FY 2011/12 right of way expenditures budget to cover the additional $19,000 to support RTA's operation of temporary shuttle service in FY 2011/12. At its April 2012 meeting, the Commission approved an agreement with RT A for the shuttle service. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: I Yes I Year: I FY 2011/12 Amount: I $19,000 s f F d 11989 Measure A Western Riverside Budget Adjustment: I No ource o un s: H. h 1g way GLA No.: 1003005 81401 222 31 81401 Fiscal Procedures Approved: ~~~ I Date: j 04/16/12 Attachments: 1) RTA FY 2011/12 Operating and Capital Assistance by Funding Source 2) Sunline FY 2011/12 Operating and Capital Assistance by Funding Source • Agenda Item 9 25 • • • Riverside Transit Agency ATTACHMENT 1 FY 2011112 SRTP -Table# 4 Amendment# 1 Table 1 ·Operating Assistance Table 1a. currently App~oved operating Funding Plan Measure A Operating Section Section LTF Western STA Measure A Assistance Section 5307 Section 5307 5307. Section 5309-Sectton 5317 Total Amount County (RCTC Operating RCTC • Riv-San -Temecula/ Hemet/San State of Good 5309 SectiOn TUMF Sectron New Prop 18 Prop 18 Farebox I Pro ect Descri lion of Funds LTF Reserve STA Reserves) Assistance Reserves Bernardino Murrieta Jacinto Repair Carryover 5311 Carryover 5316 JARC Freedom PTMISEA Securrty Other Operating Assistance 26,385,883 22,939,055 1,164,397 6.223 1,850,000 426.208 Operating Assistance -CTSA 605,113 524,300 80,813 GASB 43/45 ARC 645,000 645,000 OCTA 794 129,100 129,100 CommuterUnk 212 & 217 750,489 47,130 328,114 375.245 Extended Fixed Route Service 673,059 94,810 241,719 336,530 Farebox (Cash, Tix, Passes) 9,284,413 9,284,413 i Travel Training 213,026 21.303 21,303 85.210 85,210 COAIBRT Study ' 400,000 240,000 160,000 Federal Excise Tax Credit Interest Income 50,000 50,000 Advertising Revenue 18,000 18,000 CNG Sales 250.000 250.000 Lease Revenue Cal PER$ CERBT Reimbursement 200.000 200,000 Capitalized Preventive Maintenance 9.187.500 1.837,500 4,350,000 3,000,000 Ca ital Cost of Contracting 5,312.500 1.062,500 1.250,000 3.000,000 Total: Operating ___ -~~-~104,083 $26,647,2~8 so ~ L_ _ _______!Q_ _!1l10_.1)00 ~~~9 ~~.~ L_$_!,000,000 $1,850,000 so $240,0__Q_Q $426,~~8 $160,000 $796,985 $85,210 so $0 $9,802,413 b. M dO ........... ·-· .................... .Jperatlng t"unal PI n ...... Operating Assistance 26,385,883 22.939,055 1,164,397 6,223 1,850,000 426.208 Operating Assistance -CTSA 605.113 524,300 80,813 GASB 43/45 ARC 645.000 645.000 OCTA 794 129,100 129,100 CommuterLink 212 & 217 750,489 47.130 328,114 375,245 Extended Fixed Route Service 673,059 94,810 241,719 336,530 Fare box {Cash, Tix, Passes) 9,284,413 9.284.413 I Travel Training 213,026 21.JOJ 21,303 85.210 85.210 COA/BRT Study ! 400,000 240.000 160.000 Federal Excise Tax Credit Interest Income 50.000 50,000 Advertising Revenue 18.000 18.000 CNG Sales 250.000 250.000 Lease Revenue Cal PERS CERBT Reimbursement 200.000 200.000 Capitalized Prevent1ve Maintenance 9,187,500 1,837.500 4,350,000 3.000,000 Capital Cost of Contracting 5,312.500 1.062,500 1,250,000 3,000,009 91 Hwy Pro'ect Shuttle-Route 54 19.000 "19.000 Total: Operating S54,123,083 $26,647,298 $0 $0 so $1,729,000 $785,969 $5,600,000 $6,000,000 $1,850,000 so $240,000 $426,208 $160,000 $796,985 $85,210 $0 so $9,802,4~~ 26 Riverside Transit Agency ATIACHMENT1 FY 2011/12 SRTP-Table# 4 Amendment# 1 Table 2 • Capital Assistance Table 2a. Currently Approved Capital Funding Plan Measure A Operating Section Section LTF Western STA Measure A Assistance Section 5307 Section 5307 5307. Section 5309-Section 5317 Total Amount County (RCTC Operating RCTC • Riv-San -Temecula/ HemeVSan State of Good 5309 Section TUMF Section New I Prop 16 I Prop 18 I Farebox Pro·ect Oescri lion of Funds LTF Reserve STA Reserves) Assistance Reserves Bernardino Murrieta Jacinto Repair Carryover 5311 Carryover 5316 JARC Freedom PTMISEA Security Other Revenue Vehicles-(55) DO Heavy Duty 18,659,314 10,225.000 4,213,408 2.220.906 I I I 2,000.000 Revenue Vehicles-(3) Commuterlink E-Lo's 524,794 104,959 419,835 Revenue Vehicles-(6) COFR E-Lo's 1,052,000 210,400 841,600 Revenue Veh1cles-(17) DAR Type IJ's 1,318,451 224,137 1,094,314 Non-Revenue Vehicles-(9) Support Vehicles 135,791 27.158 108.'633 Non-Revenue Vehicles-(2) Travel Treining 40,000 4,000 4,000 I I I I I I I 16,ooo I 16,000 Non-Revenue Vehicles -(3) S&Z Trucks 161,625 32,325 129,300 Capital Maintenance Spares 1,678,372 335,674 1,342,698 Capitalized Tire Lease 243,034 48,607 194,427 Bus Stop Amenities Maintenance Equipment Facility Maintenance Information Systems-Travel Training 2,080 Total: Ca ital $18,0801 SOl SOl $2,000,000 Table 2b. Modified Capital Funding Plan Revenue Vehicles-(85) DO He-avy Duty ~4.24U10 10,225,000 4.213.408 2.220,906 I I I I I I I I I 5,589.196 I I 2.000,000 Revem1e Vehicles-(3) Commuterlink E-Lo's 524.794 104,959 419,835 Revenue Vehicles-(6) COFR E-Lo's 1,052.000 210,400 841,600 Revenue Vehicles. (17) OAR Type Ws 1,318,451 224,137 1,094,314 Non-Revenue Vehicles-(9) Support Vehicles 135.791 27,158 108,633 Non-Revenue Vehicles-(2) Travel Training 40.000 4,000 4,000 I I I I I I I 16 ooo I 16.000 Non-Revenue Vehicles-(3) S&Z Trucks 161,625 32.325 129,300 Capital Maintenance Spares 1,678,372 335,674 1,342,698 Capitalized Tire Lease 243,034 48,607 194,427 Bus Stop Amenities Maintenance Equipment Facility Maintenance 897.2761 520 I I I 179.4551 520 I I 717,821 Information Systems-Travel Training 5,200 I I I I I I I 2.o8o I 2.080 Security Projects -Prop 18 291,oaq I I I I I I I 291.ooo Revenue Vehicles-(21) DAR Type ll's 1.470.000 735,000 735,000 FaciUity Rehabiliatlon. Riverside & Hemet 1,9oo.ooo 570,000 1,330,000 Total: Capital $33,966,053 $1,309,520 S10,225,000 $4,213,408 $3,383,621 $4,520 $0 $4,848,628 $0 $0 $2,oss,ooo) Sol soJ soJ $18,080( $18,0801$5,589,1961 $291,000( $2,000,000 • • • • Table 4-Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2011112 Capital Project Total Amount Project Description Number (1) of Funds LTF Operating Assistance 26,385,883 22,939,055 Operating Assistance-CTSA 605,113 GAS6 43/45 ARC 645,000 645,000 OCTA 794 129,100 CommuterUnk 212 & 217 826,713 47,130 Extended Fixed Route Service 751,389 94,810 Farebox (Cash, Tix, Passes) 9,129,859 Travel Training 213,026 21,303 COA/BRT Study ' 400,000 Interest Income 50,000 Advertising Revenue 18,000 CNG Sales 250,000 Cal PERS CERBT Reimbursement 200,000 Capitalized Preventive Maintenance 9,187,500 1,837,500 Ca ita I cost of Contractino 5,312,500 1,062,500 Subtotal: Operating SRTP 6/23/11 54 104,083 26,647 298 91 H\W Pro·ect Shuttle· Route 54 27,000 Subtotal: Operating SRTP Amend 2/26/12 27,000 Subtotal: RTA Operating $54,131,083 $26,647,298 Care Connexxus, Inc-Travel Training 10,691 R1v Cty Regional Med Ctr-Med Transport 197.452 Subtotal: Soc Svcs Operating $208,143 so Subtotal: Operating $54,339,226 S26,647,298 Revenue Vehicles· (85) DO Heavy Duty FY12-1 18,659,314 Revenue Vehicles· (3) Commuterlink E·Lo's FY12-2 524,794 Revenue Veh1cles • (6) COFR E~Lo's FY12-2 1,052,000 Revenue Vehicles· (17) DAR Type Irs FY12-3 1,318,451 Non-Revenue Vehicles· (9) Support Vehicles FY12-4 135,791 Non-Revenue Vehicles • (2) Travel Traming FY12-5 40,000 4,000 Non-Revenue Vehicles-(3) S&Z Trucks FY12-6 161,625 Capital Maintenance Spares FY12-7 1,678.372 Capitalized Tire Lease FY12-8 243,034 Facility Maintenance FY12·9 897,276 Information Systems-Travel Training FY12-10 5,200 520 Subtotal: Capital SRTP 6/23/11 $24 715 857 $4 520 Security Projects -Prop 1 8 291,000 Revenue Vehicles-DO Heavy Duty 5,589,196 Revenue Vehicles-(21) DAR Type ll's 1.470,000 735,000 Facitlity Rehabiliahon-Riverstde & Hemet 1,900,000 570,000 Subtota: Capita SRTP Amend 1/26/12 $9,250,196 $1,305,000 Subtotal: Capital $33,966,053 $1,309,520 Total: Operating & Capital $88,305,279 $27,956,818 1 Operating Expense budget does not include any GASB pre-funding, ARC only. 2 $6.434,314 STA is Gas Tax Swap funds. 3 $1,16:2,715 ofSTA is RCTC reserves. 4 Social Services Pass-Thru funds are exempt from Farebox and PIP calculahons. LTF Western 2 County Reserve STA so $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 10,225,000 4,213,408 $10 225 000 $4 213 408 so $0 s 10,225,000 $4,213,408 $10,225,000 $4,213,408 • Riverside Transit Agency FY 2011/12-FY 2013-14 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan [ Amended: 2/26/12[ 3 Measure A Operating STA Measure A Assistance Section 5307 (RCTC Operating RCTC • Riv-San Reserves) Assistance Reserves Bernardino 1,164,397 6,223 524,300 80,813 129,100 328,114 241,719 21,303 4,350,000 1 250 000 1710000 785 969 5,600 000 36,120 3·6,120 $0 $1,746,120 $785,969 $5,600,000 so so so $0 $0 S1,746,120 $785,969 $5,600,000 2,220,906 104,959 419,835 210.400 841,600 224,137 1,094,314 27,158 108,633 4,000 32,325 129,300 335,674 1,342,698 48,607 194,427 179,455 717,821 520 $3 383 621 $4 520 $0 S4 848 628 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,383,621 $4,520 $0 $4,848,628 $3,383,621 $1,750,640 $785,969 $10,448,628 5 COA Study to use $400,000 of unencumbered 5309 and TUMF funds from Transtl Enhancements Program of Projects (TBD). 6 Other Funding ($2,000,000) for (85) DO Heavy Duty Revenue Vehicles is 2010 & 2011 FET Credit. 7 Other FUnding ($291 ,000) for Secunty Projects is Prop 18 CTSGP, ($5,589, 196) for DO Heavy Duty Revenue Vehicles is Prop 18 PTMISEA. 28 • Section 5 Sect1on 5309 -5 6. 7 Section 5307 5307-State of Section Section Sect1on -Temecula/ HemeVSan Good 5309 Section TUMF 5316 5317 New Farebox I Murrieta Jacm to Repair Carryover 5311 Carryover JARC Freedom Other 1,850,000 426.208 375,245 76.224 336,530 78.330 9.129.859 85,210 85.210 240,000 160.000 50,000 18,000 250,000 200.000 3,000,000 3 000 000 6 000,000 1 850,000 240,000 426 208 160,000 796,985 85,210 9,802,413 $6,000,000 $1,850,000 $0 $240,000 $426,208 $160,000 $796,985 $85,210 $9,802,413 10 691 197.452 so so so so so so so S208, 143 $0 $6,000,000 $1,850,000 $0 S240,000 S426,208 $160,000 S796,985 $293,353 $9,802,413 2,000.000 16,000 16,000 2,080 2.080 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 so S18 080 $18 080 $2 000 000 291,000 5,589,196 735,000 1,330,000 $0 $0 $2,065,000 $0 so $0 $0 $0 $5,880,196 $0 $0 $2,065,000 $0 $0 $0 $18,080 S18,080 $7,880,196 $6,000,000 $1,850,000 S2,065,000 $240,000 $426,208 $160,000 $815,065 S311,433 $17,682,609 "'. SUNLINE. AGENCY ATTACH. FY 2011/12 SRTP-TABLE 4 AMENDMENT #1 Table 1 ·Operating Assistance Table 1 a Currentl::t A~12roved OI!IHatlng Funding Plan Total Amount J. lncl~~~~~lgA;:~~yn~ver Without Carryover Total Carryov~r Carryover'See5307 Pro eel De~c" lion Fund5 Amount "' CarryoverLTF Measure A Federa1Se<:5307 Funds Federa1Son::5308 FederaiSecS311 FederaiSecS316 Feder<OfSec5317 A 51St n ,, 20 1 153 2 '1013 -I• 10258.596 4256 81 924.804 .I. 264566 119057-+l 1014751$ soo.o_oo Is 3,7847711 Preven~ve Mamt nance I 1.967 01 U5.0.oaa 717 1 ~1 a 1 "nco Z5noo Total: Operating 22177 354 21460.153 717,201 10,258,596 467201 4256,881 2.174,604 250.000 a 264566 11s.os7 I 101 475 I soo.ooo I 3.784.774 250_000 250,000 83.698 1.026,623 s Table 2 • Capital Assistance Table 2a. Currentlv Approved CaPital Fund ina Plan Total Amount ProJect Description Capital I Total Amount I Without Carryover ProJect# Including Carryover Funds us Rehab1litatio SL-12..01 7~~.il_tr:a_n_stJ.Buses SL-12-0l__ Trans1tEnhancement .SJ..-P-fl~ Tran51tSecurrtv ProJectfFY10111 SL-12..04 Facilit\'lmcrovemen -12..05 Adminl&tratwe Bid a fFY1 0111 IMru FY 12/131 ·12..()6 ~! L-12-07 ~Vend1noMachin SL-1?-l'lA ITS Proiect ~1-12..{)9 Transit Plann1na and Fea~b1liN StL Sl-12-10 IMalrtten_ance Tools& Eawomen SL-12·11 le_IJJ!I_ronse Resource Plann~na SL-12-12 Total: C.!R!_tal 14.351473 14,334.516 lillie'" NIOUITiell\.il lUll n.HIUIIl r-1an IS.B.~habllila"on ·1 1hOOOO 1<nnnn 7 Rool n, n P r n """" SL-1 -{)2 665000 665.000 Trans1tEnhancemen "·1 -Q3 65 78 48721 r n 1! SecuritvProiect FY1 111 s ·1 4 ,CI4Q'7 39<19'7 F tli !m r v m n Sl-1 5 5 0000 <50 lOa Admm1str tivt Bid FY1 /11 Mr FY 1 /131 SL-12 6 10 nn ~h.<~ 1n77nR<R ffieF rn 1r ~L-1 -07 120 000 1?0000 T1 ketVen ino Machine Sl·1 -o 75onn 7 onn TS Pro c SL-1 ..() sooooa 500 0 0 Trans1!Pann1n and Feasrbrlit Stl.ld ~L-12-10 450 000 45 00 Ma"ntenan T I ~ Eaui m nt . SL-12·11 100.000 1ooann nter nse R urce Plan in "·1 _, saOIOO son ona Fool C•IIBu'" 121 ''"'4 ,0, 5464306 Total Carryover Amount 16.957 I, 169571$ 16Q57 LTF I, ·II Carryover L TF Funds I, I, I, _,, TotaiCa ltal 19 815 779 19798822 169571$ ' . ' Difference Between CurrenUy Approved and Modified Ca ltal Plan ' 5464 306 I S464306 ' $ Note Total Revenue for PIP calculation include· Farebo)( of $2.950 000, Other Revenue (Fuel Rebate, AOMD Grant) of $391 849 and $625.000 of Measure A. Other Revenues equals $350,000 tn fuel rebale plus $41.849 from AQMD for the Coachella & Stagecoach spec1al services Apnl2012 ($391 ,849 total). SunL1ne is using carrvover Secbon 5316 funds of $16.957 from the 2009 CaU tor oroiects for transtt enhancement rmorovements. $ STA 32.000 o;o=:o;nnn 13.Po; ::~~~1: liQQQ. ,, 000 <O.MO 13135 '" '?n o;oonoo <1000 75 00 000000 300 000 a ooo I' o ·onnl < ,;.".,n 2 779 135 $ I 29 Federal Section 5307 128000 100.000 ~<:; <:;P.F; ::: ;~: I p• non .,~-000 "5" 21 .. 4JO 40000n '"" 00 noo 150000 •anon 1836016 S46 430 Fed;:;,r~~~e;3071 Federal Sec 53081 ~~ocpu~r;~;~t 394.927 I I Prop 18 Capital Transit {PTMISEA} 9 870868 Federal Sec 5316 16.957 Federal Sec 53171 Federal Sec 5309 1---·-----··+--~------·-· -··--Is ----~r;--394.9271 $ s-.~7o.s6el $ 16957 Is 16957 394927 iO.B68 4.917 87 . ' 4 917.876 $ 394927 $ 9870868 16957 ' . ' I • I 4517876 I $ . I • $ • AGENDA ITEM 1 0 • • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 23, 2012 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Jillian Edmiston, Staff Analyst Brian Cunanan, Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager THROUGH: Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director SUBJECT: City of Riverside's Amended Bicycle Transportation Plan STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the city of Riverside's (Riverside) amended Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) as submitted; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMA T/ON: Riverside's amended BTP was submitted to the Commission for certification that it complies with the requirements of the state's Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) program as required by state law. The state's BT A program may fund a maximum of 90 percent of the cost of eligible projects, and each jurisdiction is eligible to receive up to 25 percent of the funds available for any given year. Riverside amended its BTP in March 2012. Accordingly, the Commission must reaffirm that the amended plan meets the requirements of the state's BTA program. Riverside modified the BTP in order to utilize remaining grant monies from the state's BTA. Staff reviewed Riverside's amended BTP and finds that it satisfies the requirements of the state's BTA program as specified by state law. There is no financial impact to the Commission, as the state's BTA funding is directed through the state to the city. Attachment: Riverside's Amended BTP Map Agenda Item 10 30 • • 31 • FIGURE 6-1 CITY OF RIVERSIDE EXISTING AND PROPOSED BIKEWAYS Legend Data: City of Riverside. CA. Field work. I 0 Date: December 2006 H1ghways Parks Elementary Schools H1gh Schools and Universities 81ke Path and Lane· 81ke Path and Lane-Extsl1ng 81kePath-Ex1S!1ng 81ke Lane-Ex1s11ng 81ke Path-Proposed Bike Lane -Proposed 81ke Route/Lane • Proposed•• 81ke Route -Proposed Trail-Ex1sting l"r:>d · i'roposed ' Though bike lanes and a path ex1st on V1ctcna Ave. between Van Buren Blvd and Wash1ngton St., the path does not currently meet Caltran$ Class I b1ke path standards " These proposed segn1ents require add1t1onal f1eld wori< to determme the feas1bllity of stnpmg bicycle lanes. Installing bicycle lanes on these segmenu may requ1re lane reduction, ro<~d widen1ng. or other major adjustments to the roadway 2 Miles 0.5 1.5 • AGENDA ITEM 11 •• • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 23, 2012 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager THROUGH: John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Update on State and Federal Legislation STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file an update on the state and federal legislation; 2) Adopt the following bill positions: a) AB 2405 (Biumenfield) -Oppose; b) AB 1780 (Bonilla) -Support; c) AB 2498 (Gordon) -Support In Concept; d) SB 1549 (Vargas) -Support In Concept; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action . BACKGROUNDINFORMA TION: At the time this report was written, Congress remained on recess with the fate of the federal surface transportation reauthorization bill in limbo. No clear direction from the House of Representatives has yet emerged with a fractured Republican caucus and zero support from Democrats. Meanwhile, the Senate continued to apply pressure to House leadership to pass Senator Boxer's S. 1813, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 2Pt Century (MAP-21). As a sign of increasing concern about Congress' inability to approve long-term infrastructure funding and policy, in early April, Standard & Poors (S&P) authored an ominous report warning of severe economic decline across the nation if Congress did not provide reliability and predictability to the nation's infrastructure. Meanwhile, in Sacramento, budget committees in both the Senate and Assembly continue to churn through their options ahead of the upcoming May Revise from Governor Brown. Of greatest concern to the Commission in the budget proceedings this year are issues related to the appropriation of Proposition 1 A High-Speed Rail Bond Act funds and a lesser-known yet important issue of Caltrans' ability to produce project initiation documents (PIDs), which is discussed later in this report . 32 Agenda Item 11 High-speed rail will face many decisions points in the months ahead. Several bills • have been introduced to stall or prohibit appropriation of Proposition 1 A bond funds or send the project back to the voters. However, the revised Business Plan from the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) includes a blended approach to integrate high-speed rail to existing regional rail systems, resulting in lower costs to the overall project and increased investments in Metrolink and Los Angeles' transit network. The expenditure of bond funds to reflect this new policy direction will be a key element of deliberations in the Legislature's budget process, as they determine how much -and to where -any Proposition 1 A funds will be appropriated this year. Proposition 1 A also contains a $900 million funding pot for connectivity projects, intended to link high-speed rail to local and regional feeder systems. Governors Schwarzenegger and Brown have been consistent in vetoing any appropriations from this funding pot except to fund positive train control (PTC). Connectivity money, if appropriated this year, could yield benefits to Metrolink projects. The Governor is also beginning to make appointments to the Business, Transportation & Housing Agency (BT&H). Senate staffer Brian Kelly has been appointed as Acting Secretary of BT&H; Mr. Kelly is familiar with Riverside County, having played a key role in the Commission's sponsored legislation over the years to authorize tolling on State Route 91 and Interstate 15 and utilize design-build. Mr. Kelly is working quickly to assemble his agency's staff. Concurrently, Governor Brown's proposal to reorganize BT&H and other state agencies has been referred to the Little Hoover Commission for a 60-day review. As a reminder, the Governor has proposed creating a singularly-focused transportation agency that would house Caltrans, California Highway Patrol (CHP), California Transportation Commission (CTC), Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), and CHSRA. Also in the State Capitol, transportation policy committees are beginning to ramp-up to consider several dozen bills that have been introduced since January. Hearings are slated in the Assembly and Senate over the next several weeks. Most bills moving through committees pertain to vehicle code matters or are specific to certain areas of the state. Below are four bills of interest to the Commission for which staff is recommending the Commission adopt positions. AB 2405 (Biumenfield)-Toll Exemptions for Low~Emissions Vehicles Recommended Position: Oppose This bill would exempt certain low-emissions vehicles from being charged for using toll lanes in California. The bill identifies several categories of low-emissions vehicles according to state and federal legal definitions: • Super Ultra-Low Emission Vehicles (SULEV); 33 Agenda Item 11 • • • • • • Inherently Low Emission Vehicles (ILEV); and Advanced Technology Partial-Zero Low Emission Vehicles (AT PZEV). These types of vehicles currently receive stickers, which allows them to travel in high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes with fewer than the otherwise-required number of occupants. The authority for these stickers exists until January 1, 2015. AB 2405 would amend current law to also exempt these vehicles from paying tolls that are charged to single-occupant vehicles traveling in toll lanes. Interestingly, the bill does not allow the new exemption for low-emission vehicles traveling on a toll road, toll highway, or toll bridge. This bill is of concern to the Commission because of its upcoming 50-year operation of the new SR-91 Express Lanes, following the completion of the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP). The Commission's new facility has been planned and will be financed on the assumption that single-occupant vehicles traveling in the express lanes will be tolled, regardless of their emissions. Removing this class of vehicles from tolling will negatively impact the Commission's ability to finance the SR-91 CIP and reduce the revenue available to pay for debt service, operations, and maintenance of the express lanes. Additionally, AB 2405 would hamstring the Commission's ability to achieve one of the most important objectives of the SR-91 CIP -to manage congestion and maximize throughput of people in the SR-91 corridor. Staff is concerned any time legislation is introduced to preempt, manipulate, or subvert local control of toll policies. SB 1316 (Correa), which became law in 2008 and authorized the Commission to collect tolls on SR-91 , created the SR-91 Advisory Committee. This committee of Orange and Riverside County elected officials was assigned the legal responsibility of recommending toll policy to the Commission and the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCT A). The Legislature created this local decision-making structure out of recognition that severe congestion in the SR-91 Corridor would be managed best through regional cooperation. While recognizing the author's desire to create incentives to reduce air pollution, Commission staff believes that AB 2405 is an unwelcome intrusion on the local control needed to finance the $1 .3 billion SR-91 CIP and efficiently manage congestion in the corridor. Therefore, staff recommends the Commission adopt an Oppose position on AB 2405 (Biumenfield). AB 1780 (Bonilla) -Project Initiation Documents Recommended Position: Support This bill is similar to AB 1134 (Bonilla), which the Commission supported in 2011. The bill amends Caltrans protocols for conducting project study reports (PSR), also known as PIDs, for transportation projects on the state highway system. Over 34 Agenda Item 11 recent years there has been growing concern among self-help counties and the • Legislative Analyst Office (LAO) over Caltrans policies on performing PIDs for local and regional transportation agencies' projects. These documents are the essential first step to "birth" a new project on the state highway system. After an arcane and complex series of events in recent years related to state budget crunches and outdated bureaucratic approaches, the Self-Help Counties Coalition has taken proactive measures legislatively and administratively to push for reform of PIDs. The major provisions of AB 1780 would require that Caltrans perform PSRs at its own expense for state highway projects that are included in voter-approved self- help sales tax expenditure plans. For state highway projects that are not in such expenditure plans but are still locally funded, local agencies can request Caltrans to perform a PSR; however if Caltrans resources are not available to perform the PSR, the local agency could perform its own PSR at its own expense. The bill would further require Caltrans and local agencies requesting PSRs to be in continuous communication. A PSR describes the potential project, assesses the cost and schedule, and helps agencies make an informed decision about making financial commitments to the project. PSRs for projects on the state highway system are typically performed by Caltrans. Local entities such as cities, counties, and transportation commissions, can request that Caltrans perform PSRs on its behalf, subject to availability of • Caltrans resources. Local entities can also perform the PSRs with Caltrans review. The bill is sponsored by the Self-Help Counties Coalition, of which the Commission is a member. SB 1549 (Vargas) I AB 2498 (Gordon) -Construction Manager/General Contractor Recommended Position: Support In Concept Both of these bills provide a new innovative project delivery method for transportation projects in California, known as construction manager/general contractor (CM/GC). Similar to design-build, CM/GC allows an agency to procure one contractor to be responsible for multiple phases of a project, as opposed to the traditional design-bid-build process that is standard in California. This streamlined contracting method also helps transfer risk to the private sector and allows for innovation and time savings in delivering projects. CM/GC is used in other states and is currently being promoted by the Obama Administration's leadership at the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S.DOT) under the Every Day Counts initiative. 35 Agenda Item 11 • • • • AB 2498 (Gordon) would provide CM/GC authority to Caltrans only and spells out a specific process for these procurements to take place. SB 1549 provides CM/GC authority to San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) for 20 projects in San Diego County. The Commission's adopted legislative platform calls for the Commission to support legislation that expands the use of innovative, streamlined project delivery methods for transportation projects. While neither of these bills provides the Commission with new authorities, the increased use of these methods elsewhere across the state increase the opportunity for successes and hopefully a trend towards their expanded use. At this time, the Commission does not have any projects contemplated for CM/GC contracting. Staff recommends the Commission adopt a Support In Concept position on both AB 2498 and SB 1549 as introduced, while monitoring any amendments to these bills by opponents of innovative contracting that could curtail its benefits or set harmful precedents for future laws and projects . 36 Agenda Item 11