The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About09 September 25, 2017 Budget & ImplementationComments 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. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA TIME: 9:30 a.m. DATE: Monday, September 25, 2017 LOCATION: BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside  COMMITTEE MEMBERS  Jan Harnik, Chair / Susan Marie Weber, City of Palm Desert Rusty Bailey, Vice Chair / Andy Melendrez, City of Riverside Lloyd White / Nancy Carroll, City of Beaumont Jim Hyatt / Jeff Hewitt, City of Calimesa Randall Bonner / Jordan Ehrenkranz, City of Canyon Lake Greg Pettis / Shelley Kaplan, City of Cathedral City Steven Hernandez / To Be Appointed, City of Coachella Scott Matas / Russell Betts, City of Desert Hot Springs Linda Krupa / Michael Perciful, City of Hemet Dana Reed / To Be Appointed, City of Indian Wells Bob Magee / Natasha Johnson, City of Lake Elsinore Rick Gibbs / Jonathan Ingram, City of Murrieta Michael Naggar / Matt Rahn, City of Temecula John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside, District II Chuck Washington, County of Riverside, District III  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 COMM-BI-00045 Tara Byerly From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Importance: Tara Byerly Tuesday, September 19, 2017 8:16 AM Tara Byerly Anne Mayer; STANDIFO RCTC: Budget and Implementation Committee -09.25.2017 High Good morning Budget and Implementation Committee Members: Attached is the link to the Budget and Implementation Committee Agenda for the meeting scheduled @ 9:30 a.m. on Monday, September 25. http://rctcdev.info/uploads/media items/september-budget-and-implementation-committee-september-25- 2017 .original.pdf Let me know if you have any questions. Respectfully, Tara Byerly Deputy Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 951.787.7141 W 1951.787.7906 F 4080 Lemon St. 3rd Fl. I P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502 rctc.org f ti in m 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, September 25, 2017 BOARD ROOM County of Riverside 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, Government Code Section 54954.2, and the Federal Transit Administration Title VI, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141 if special assistance is needed to participate in a Commission meeting, including accessibility and translation services. Assistance is provided free of charge. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to the meeting time will assist staff in assuring reasonable arrangements can be made to provide assistance at the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 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. 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. Budget and Implementation Committee September 25, 2017 Page 2 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – AUGUST 28, 2017 6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS (The Committee may add an item to the Agenda after making a finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and that the item came to the attention of the Committee subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Committee. If there are less than 2/3 of the Committee members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote. Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.) 7. CONSENT CALENDAR - All matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 7A. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS Page 1 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 1, 2017 (1Q 2017); and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 8. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Page 10 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislation; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 9. CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION’S ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM CYCLE 3 AUGMENTATION FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS Page 14 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the two highest scoring active transportation projects for inclusion in the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Active Transportation Program (ATP) Cycle 3 Augmentation Regional Program, consisting of the Riverside County Department of Public Health’s Cabazon/Banning Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Program and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments’ (CVAG) CV Link project, for funding totaling approximately $4,799,222; Budget and Implementation Committee September 25, 2017 Page 3 2) Approve the Riverside County ATP contingency list, consisting of the next highest scoring projects, for inclusion in the MPO ATP Augmentation Regional Program; 3) Submit the recommended projects to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for inclusion in the MPO ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation Regional Program and subsequent submittal to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) for final approval in December 2017; 4) Submit the MPO ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation regional projects to SCAG for inclusion in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) programming; 5) Direct staff to coordinate with the MPO ATP Regional Program project sponsors regarding timely funding allocations, obligations, and project delivery; and 6) Forward to the Commission for final action. 10. REVISION TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2017/18 SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS Page 24 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the Revised Fiscal Year 2017/18 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program recommended projects as shown in Attachment 1 in the amount of $3,343,187 to include an additional three projects in the cities of Lake Elsinore, La Quinta, and Temecula; 2) Direct staff to prepare and execute memorandums of understanding (MOU) with the three additional project sponsors to outline the project schedule and local funding commitments; 3) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission; and 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. 11. FUNDING FOR THE RIVERSIDE TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS MODEL UPDATE Page 29 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve funding a portion of the Riverside Transportation Analysis Model (RIVTAM) Update in the amount of $200,000 with State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Planning, Programming, and Monitoring (PPM) funds; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. Budget and Implementation Committee September 25, 2017 Page 4 12. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 13. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT Overview This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and staff to report on attended and upcoming meeting/conferences and issues related to Commission activities. 14. ADJOURNMENT AND THE NEXT MEETING The next Budget and Implementation Committee meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Monday, October 23, 2017, Board Chambers, First Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE SIGN-IN SHEET SEPTEMBER 25, 2017 NAME _/ AGENCY E MAIL ADDRESS v) ~ \_./. ..__..,~ %~,,/)~ ~ AAA/?51- I :J lttvt H'?~ e',,+-t, I JV/ t::;~°A ,~~~~\LY :DA 1 a J :--\)~CiFJ7 I ~ _r... """"" ~-, ,, )> ,/t.¢v '~~I 7/!?,t~A;~ ' r~/'/4' ·1~ 1 t• / '/_t:.,h ~/c,~,_a /:.C..../!<!_. ·-. J1-?.4 l ""'·:::\··· ... }.,_ ""--~ -~ --•. -::> _; _>;;~_.,..-7r-. , :-"' '/ c·_ -' (\~;c~ 'G7bi7S ----... . . ---·rtr c~ /'-fc//(fLJY /' ' ,,.,. (; 1U::G f1_ tl7 5 {!_~rz-1t:7'>1U L c,7Y ~n. \,, rr_ t'"-..\~ .I'._(;::> '< \" ,'::>. h. ~ >-,,.._ ) /~r~ - l'/\,r Y~~' AC'.J-CA Kl '-·- l PJ;/'f; ··~~· Qppc-1 ~I RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE ROLL CALL SEPTEMBER 25, 2017 County of Riverside, District II County of Riverside, District Ill City of Beaumont City of Calimesa City of Canyon Lake City of Cathed ra I 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 Palm Desert City of Riverside City of Temecula Present ~ D ...a-- ~ ~ -Er D ~ ..-a- _g-- ~ _g-- -EY _g.- -a-- Abse~ r;Y:--q\ L\~ AM ~ D ~g ~L{dAYl-t D D D ....-9' D l:J D l:J l:J Ll D l:J AGENDA ITEM 5 MINUTES RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE Monday, August 28, 2017 MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL The meeting of the Budget and Implementation Committee was called to order by Chair Jan Harnik at 9:34 a.m., in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California, 92501. Members/Alternates Present Members Absent Rusty Bailey Randall Bonner Rick Gibbs Steven Hernandez Jan Harnik Scott Matas Jim Hyatt Greg Pettis Linda Krupa John Tavaglione Bob Magee Michael Naggar Dana Reed Chuck Washington Lloyd White 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At this time, Commissioner Rick Gibbs led the Budget and Implementation Committee in a flag salute. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no requests to speak from the public. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – JUNE 26, 2017 M/S/C (Gibbs/Naggar) to approve the minutes of June 26, 2017 meeting as submitted. RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes August 28, 2017 Page 2 5. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS There were no additions or revisions to the agenda. 6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS 7. CONSENT CALENDAR - All matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. M/S/C (Bailey/Naggar) to approve the following Consent Calendar item(s): 7A. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 1) Receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the year ended June 30, 2017; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 7B. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT 1) Receive and file the Single Signature Authority report for the fourth quarter ended June 30, 2017; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 7C. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT 1) Receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended June 30, 2017; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 8. EXTENSION OF THE COMMERCIAL PAPER PROGRAM STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer, provided the details for the extension of the Commercial Paper Program standby letter of credit. In response to Commissioner Dana Reed’s clarification since this agenda item was unanimously agreed to by this committee, is it policy this item will be on the Consent Calendar at its September Commission meeting, Anne Mayer replied yes. RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes August 28, 2017 Page 3 M/S/C (Gibbs/Bailey) to: 1) Ratify the Request for Extension of the Reimbursement Agreement, dated as of October 1, 2014, by and between the Commission and State Street Bank and Trust Company (State Street Bank), relating to the Commission’s Commercial Paper Notes, Series A; 2) Ratify the draft Fee Agreement No. 14-19-150-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 14-19-150-00, between the Commission and State Street Bank relating to the Commission’s Commercial Paper Notes, Series A in an amount not to exceed $800,000, and the authorization for the Executive Director and/or other authorized representative to approve and execute the final fee agreement amendment; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 9. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Jillian Guizado, Senior Legislative Affairs Analyst, presented an update on state and federal legislation, including five recommended bill positions. In response to Commissioner Reed’s question on whether the amendment to AB 1189 (E. Garcia) for lifting the two percent sales tax cap has been done before, Jillian Guizado replied that has been done several times particularly up north and with the County of Los Angeles. M/S/C to: 1) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislation; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 10. 2018 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FINAL FUND ESTIMATE AND PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Director, presented the 2018 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) for Western Riverside County project recommendations, highlighting the following areas: • Past STIP cycles; • 2018 STIP fund estimate for Riverside County; • Palo Verde Valley / city of Blythe (Blythe) memorandum of understanding (MOU) – The Commission and Blyth MOU STIP trade; • 2018 STIP Western Riverside County proposed projects; RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes August 28, 2017 Page 4 • A map depicting the proposed 2018 projects Western Riverside County; 2018 STIP programming for Coachella Valley Association of Governments STIP share; and • Next steps. At Commissioner Michael Naggar’s request to describe the southern extension of the I-15 express lanes, Shirley Medina replied it will be located between the Calajco Road interchange and State Route 74. Anne Mayer explained the master plan includes for the I-15 express lanes to SR-74 a carpool lane to the 15/215 split, and then potentially a carpool lane down from the split to the County line. In response to Commissioner Naggar’s request to receive the plan to share with his staff, Anne Mayer replied staff can get that information and it is in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Commissioner Naggar expressed support for this effort. He explained it is especially important as the region there are approximately 90,000 jobs in the area and 70,000 of those jobs are located in the Murrieta/Temecula area. In response to Commissioner Chuck Washington’s question on which direction was most impacted, Anne Mayer replied it is in both directions on I-15 two lanes in each direction from Cajalco Road down to SR-74. She explained for Riverside County to build a lane in each direction on I-15 in Riverside County only to have traffic stop at the San Diego County line is not going to solve the issue. The primary issue is the lack of capacity between Escondido and the County line, which is in the long range plan for San Diego. Commissioner Washington stated receiving numerous emails regarding the congestion on the I-15, especially every afternoon seven days a week on the northbound side requesting him to fix the issue. He discussed his concerns for what is causing the backup into Temecula on the northbound side and the traffic on the San Diego County line northbound. He suggested to add an additional lane to alleviate some of that back up to benefit the region. Anne Mayer concurred and stated this has been something the Commission has worked on for over 10 years and there was a joint committee between Riverside County and San Diego County elected officials talking about this issue. She discussed why the Commission prioritized the I-215, and to finish the improvements on I-15 from the 15/215 split north to relieve the congestion. She expressed the only way the Commission can solve traffic congestion is by investing in improvements and the Commission is systematically doing that. RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes August 28, 2017 Page 5 Commissioner Washington explained he witnessed especially northbound at Winchester Road people struggled to get on the freeway as it backs up onto Winchester Road and back to the first intersection at Ynez Road. He stated it appears as if there is a lot of lane stacking in the right two lanes although traffic is moving relatively well in the far two lanes. In response to Commissioner Washington’s question to begin dialogue with San Diego County and if Caltrans District 08 boundary ends at the County line, Anne Mayer replied Caltrans District 08 boundary ends at the County line and she would suggest to have conversations within Riverside County and with Caltrans identifying potential options for projects prior to reaching out to San Diego. Commissioner Rick Gibbs explained as he recollected the funding for the I-15 interregional partnership between the Commission and San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) was a grant. If the Commission could get that type of grant again it would probably be worth it, after the internal discussion to try to resurrect the I-15 interregional partnership. Anne Mayer replied the Commission has several plans and concurred the Commission received grant funding to have those interregional county conversations and she does not think a grant is necessary to do that. Anne Mayer explained between the Commission, Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), the jurisdictions in SANDAG there is a lot of staff work that could supply staff support to the elected officials. SANDAG is as tapped out of funding as the Commission is and there is a big dispute in San Diego over transit versus roads. Commissioner Gibbs expressed when it is determined to have this conversation begin one of the things as elected officials should do is send a notice to San Diego County employers of the zip codes that their employees are trying to travel southbound into San Diego County every morning. Commissioner Naggar stated he received a message from Temecula’s City Manager Aaron Adams, and he read it. He suggested having discussions with WRCOG and SANDAG as there may be an appendage to this related to tourism in order to make more compelling arguments for the need of funding. Commissioner Harnik stated she would expect this to prompt more conversation at the September Commission meeting and requested to include a map in the staff report. RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes August 28, 2017 Page 6 M/S/C (Gibbs/Naggar) to: 1) Approve staff project recommendations for the Western Riverside County State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) share as part of the 2018 STIP submittal due to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) by December 15, 2017; 2) Forward the recommended STIP projects to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) to conduct performance analysis as required by the STIP guidelines; 3) Approve Agreement No. 07-71-028-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 07-71-028-00, with the city of Blythe (Blythe) to trade $608,024 of Palo Verde Valley STIP funds with Measure A Western Riverside County Highway funds to facilitate delivery of local arterial projects; 4) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission upon CTC adoption of the 2018 STIP in March 2018; and 5) Forward to the Commission for final action. 11. FISCAL YEAR 2017/18 ANNUAL LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND PLANNING ALLOCATIONS TO WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS AND COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS Lorelle Moe-Lune presented the details for the Fiscal Year 2017/18 Annual Local Transportation Funds (LTF) planning allocations to WRCOG and CVAG. M/S/C (Bailey/Gibbs) to: 1) Approve an allocation of Local Transportation Funds (LTF) funds for planning in the amount of $726,000 for Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) and $396,000 for the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) for efforts identified in each agency’s Fiscal Year 2017/18 LTF Program Objectives/Work Plan (Work Plan) that supports transportation planning programs and functions consistent with regional and subregional plans, programs and requirements; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. RCTC Budget and Implementation Committee Minutes August 28, 2017 Page 7 12. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA There were no items pulled from the consent calendar. 13. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT There were no Commissioner or Executive Director comments. 14. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Budget and Implementation Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 10:15 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Tara Byerly Deputy Clerk of the Board AGENDA ITEM 7A Agenda Item 7A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 25, 2017 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Michele Cisneros, Deputy Director of Finance THROUGH: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Quarterly Sales Tax Analysis STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 1, 2017 (1Q 2017); and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its December 2007 meeting, the Commission awarded an agreement with MuniServices, LLC (MuniServices) for quarterly sales tax reporting services plus additional fees contingent on additional sales tax revenue generated from the transactions and use tax (sales tax) audit services. As part of the recurring contracts process, the Commission approved a five-year extension through June 30, 2018. The services performed under this agreement pertain to only the Measure A sales tax revenues. Since the commencement of these services, MuniServices submitted an audit, which reported findings and submitted to the State Board of Equalization (SBOE) for review and determination of errors in sales tax reporting related to 671 businesses. Through 4Q 2016, the SBOE approved 456 of these accounts for a total sales tax recovery of $7,642,288. Updated amounts for 1Q 2017 will be provided once received from MuniServices. If the SBOE concurs with the error(s) for the remaining claims, the Commission will receive additional revenues; however, the magnitude of the value of the remaining findings was not available. It is important to note that while the recoveries of additional revenues will be tangible, it will not be sufficient to alter the overall trend of sales tax revenues. After December 31, 2017, the SBOE duties regarding sales and use tax will be transferred to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, and the Office of Tax Appeals will hear appeals. Additionally, MuniServices provided the Commission with the quarterly sales tax summary report for 1Q 2017. Most of the 1Q 2017 Measure A sales tax revenues were received in the second quarter of calendar year 2017, during April 2017 through June 2017, due to a lag in the sales tax 1 Agenda Item 7A calendar. The summary section of 1Q 2017 report is attached and includes an overview of California’s economic outlook, local results, historical cash collections analysis by quarter, top 25 sales/use tax contributors, historical sales tax amounts, annual sales tax by business category, five-year economic trend for significant business category (construction), and final results. Taxable transactions for the top 25 tax contributors in Riverside County generated 20.5 percent of taxable sales for the benchmark year ended 1Q 2017 – comparable to the benchmark year ended 1Q 2016. The top 100 tax contributors generated 34 percent taxable sales for the benchmark year ended 1Q 2017, comparable to the 33.9 percent benchmark year ended 1Q 2016. In the Economic Category Analysis below, all six categories experienced new highs in the 1Q 2017 benchmark year compared to the prior seven benchmark years. An analysis of sales tax performance by quarter through 1Q 2017 is attached and illustrates fairly consistent cycles for sales tax performance for most of the economic categories since the economic recession in 2009. For 8 of the top 10 segments (auto sales-new, restaurants, department stores, miscellaneous retail, building materials-wholesale, apparel stores, food markets, and building materials-retail) during the past eight benchmark year quarters, sales tax receipts reached a new high point. The 8 segments represent 61.9 percent of the total sales tax receipts. Service stations and light industry representing 7.4 percent and 4.3 percent respectively, were lower than the 1Q 2016 benchmark year due to lower fuel prices and completion of renewable energy developments in Riverside County, respectively. These top 10 segments represent 73.6 percent of the total sales tax receipts. For the other 19 segments representing 26.4 percent of the total sales tax receipts, 14 segments representing 22.3 percent of the total sales tax receipts reached new high points in the benchmark year 1Q 2017. % of Total / % Change RCTC State Wide Riverside County San Bernardino County Inland Empire South Coast S.F. Bay Area Sacramento Valley Central Valley North Coast Central Coast General Retail 28.4 / 3.5 28.1 / 0.8 27.9 / 0.6 26.2 / 5.9 27.0 / 3.2 28.8 / -0.2 26.3 / -0.3 27.6 / 1.9 31.4 / 5.7 28.5 / 1.9 31.4 / -5.7 Food Products 18.2 / 4.6 21.0 / 3.9 20.0 / 4.0 15.1 / 3.3 17.4 / 3.7 22.3 / 4.1 22.4 / 3.7 17.2 / 4.6 16.8 / 4.3 18.8 / 3.6 30.0 / -8.3 Transportation 25.4 / 1.1 23.7 / 0.4 26.6 / 0.8 27.8 / 1.8 27.2 / 1.3 23.1 / -1.5 20.9 / 2.5 28.5 / 4.4 25.9 / 1.3 30.0 / 1.0 22.4 / 0.8 Construction 10.9 / 3.4 9.4 / -0.5 12.7 / 0.1 8.8 / -22.6 10.7 / -11.0 8.3 / 1.1 9.5 / 1.4 11.6 / 4.1 11.9 / 1.7 13.5 / 4.6 8.6 / -11.7 Business to Business 15.2 / 4.1 16.5 / 1.3 11.7 / 11.1 20.4 / 3.8 16.2 / 6.2 16.2 / 1.6 19.6 / -0.8 13.9 / 1.3 12.4 / -0.7 8.2 / -2.1 6.6 / 1.5 Miscellaneous 2.3 / 10.8 1.3 / 9.8 1.1 / 3.1 1.8 / 64.1 1.5 / 35.3 1.3 / 11.5 1.3 / 5.6 1.2 / -22.4 1.5 / 8.8 1.0 / 2.3 0.9 / -15.2 Total 100.0 / 3.4 100.0 / 1.4 100.0 / 2.4 100 / 1.3 100.0 / 1.8 100.0 / 1.0 100.0 / 1.3 100.0 / 2.8 100.0 / 3.1 100.0 / 2.0 100.0 / -5.3 General Retail: Apparel Stores, Department Stores, Furniture/Appliances, Drug Stores, Recreation Products, Florist/Nursery, and Misc. Retail Food Products: Restaurants, Food Markets, Liquor Stores, and Food Processing Equipment Construction: Building Materials Retail and Building Materials Wholesale Transportation: Auto Parts/Repair, Auto Sales - New, Auto Sales - Used, Service Stations, and Misc. Vehicle Sales Business to Business: Office Equip., Electronic Equip., Business Services, Energy Sales, Chemical Products, Heavy Industry, Light Industry, and Leasing Miscellaneous: Health & Government, Miscellaneous Other, and Closed Account Adjustments ECONOMIC CATEGORY ANALYSIS 2 Agenda Item 7A In the Economic Segment Analysis below, auto sales-new, restaurants, and department stores represent the three largest segments for Riverside County, or 32.4 percent of total sales tax receipts. This is the eighteenth consecutive quarter since 4Q 2008, that auto sales-new and department stores have been in the top three economic segments. Growth seen in previous quarters for service stations segment has been declining continuously from the high in the last six years due to lower fuel prices. Restaurants replaced service stations in the top three economic segments beginning in 4Q 2014. During the review of the 1Q 2017 detailed report with MuniServices, information regarding sales tax comparison by city and change in economic segments (two highest gains and two highest losses) from 1Q 2017 to 1Q 2016 was provided and is attached. Staff continues to monitor monthly sales tax receipts and other available economic data to determine the need for any adjustment to the revenue projections. Staff will utilize the forecast scenarios included with the complete report and receipt trends in assessing such projections. Attachments: 1) Sales Tax Digest Summary 1Q 2017 2) Sales Tax Performance Analysis by Quarter 3) Quarterly Sales Tax Change Comparison by City for 1Q 2017 to 1Q 2016 RCTC State Wide Riverside County San Bernardino County Inland Empire South Coast S.F. Bay Area Sacramento Valley Central Valley North Coast Central Coast Largest Segment Auto Sales - New Restaurants Restaurants Restaurants Restaurants Service Stations Restaurants Restaurants Department Stores Auto Sales - New Restaurants % of Total / % Change 11.6 / 5.0 15.0 / 5.0 13.0 / 6.8 10.3 / 5.6 11.6 / 6.3 18.5 / -57.9 16.0 / 4.1 16.5 / 5.3 13.3 / 1.8 12.2 / 9.3 21.7 / -8.8 2nd Largest Segment Restaurants Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Department Stores Auto Sales - New Restaurants Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Restaurants Auto Sales - New % of Total / % Change 11.6 / 6.4 11.4 / 4.2 12.4 / 3.2 10.2 / -0.2 11.2 / 5.0 14.5 / -32.6 11.3 / 5.7 11.4 / 2.5 11.0 / 6.2 10.9 / 4.3 10.6 / 20.6 3rd Largest Segment Department Stores Department Stores Department Stores Auto Sales - New Department Stores Auto Sales - New Department Stores Department Stores Restaurants Department Stores Misc. Retail % of Total / % Change 9.4 / 1.2 9.3 / -0.7 10.4 / 0.6 10.1 / 7.2 10.3 / 0.2 11.8 / 11.8 7.6 / -2.1 9.0 / -1.3 10.9 / 5.6 10.7 / -1.3 10.4 / -8.4 ECONOMIC SEGMENT ANALYSIS 3 Riverside County Transportation Commission Sales Tax Digest Summary Collections through June 2017 Sales through March 2017 (2017Q1) www.MuniServices.com (800) 800‐8181 Page 1 CALIFORNIA’S ECONOMIC OUTLOOK California sales tax receipts increased by 2.3% over the same quarter from the previous year, with Northern California reporting a 2.3% increase compared to 2.3% for Southern California. Receipts for the Riverside County Transportation Commission changed by 3.6% over the same periods. E‐Commerce transactions are growing as consumers shift to online shopping. During the holiday season of 2016, overall consumer spending growth increased 4.7%. Online retail sales grew by 12% making up 21.3% of all holiday spending, a substantial increase from 15.4% last year. (First Data) Will California's unemployment rate continue to drop? The state continued the downward trend in the unemployment rate, landing at 4.8% in April, just 0.4% above the national rate. The forecast for 2017, 2018 and 2019 total employment growth is 1.4%, 1.0% and 0.9%, respectively. (UCLA Anderson) California's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has grown consistently faster than the nation's as a whole for five straight years. GDP is one of the most comprehensive and closely watched economic statistics; it measures the market value of goods, services, and structures produced by the nation’s economy within a particular period. In 2016, the California GDP rose 4.5%, while the U.S. GDP increased 3% (unadjusted for inflation). (BEA) LOCAL RESULTS Net Cash Receipts Analysis Local Collections $42,950,611 Share of County Pool 0.0% 0 Share of State Pool 0.0% 0 SBE Net Collections 42,950,611 Less: Amount Due County 0.0% .00 Less: Cost of Administration (507,340) Net 1Q2017 Receipts 42,443,271 Net 1Q2016 Receipts 40,977,671 Actual Percentage Change 3.6% Business Activity Performance Analysis Local Collections $42,950,611 Less: Payments for Prior Periods (1,977,076) Preliminary 1Q2017 Collections 40,973,535 Projected 1Q2017 Late Payments 1,663,875 Projected 1Q2017 Final Results 42,637,410 Actual 1Q2016 Results 41,284,078 Projected Percentage Change 3.3% ATTACHMENT 1 4 Riverside County Transportation Commission www.MuniServices.com (800) 800‐8181 Page 2 HISTORICAL CASH COLLECTIONS ANALYSIS BY QUARTER TOP 25 SALES/USE TAX CONTRIBUTORS The following list identifies RCTC’s Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors. The list is in alphabetical order and represents sales from April 2016 to March 2017. The Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors generate 20.4% of Riverside County Transportation Commission’s total sales and use tax revenue. ALBERTSON'S FOOD CENTERS LOWE'S HOME CENTERS AMAZON.COM MACY'S DEPARTMENT STORE BEST BUY STORES RALPH'S GROCERY CARMAX THE AUTO SUPERSTORE ROSS STORES CHEVRON SERVICE STATIONS SAM'S CLUB CIRCLE K FOOD STORES STATER BROS MARKETS COSTCO WHOLESALE TARGET STORES DEPT OF MOTOR VEHICLES USA SERVICE STATIONS FERGUSON WATERWORKS VERIZON WIRELESS FOOD 4 LESS WAL MART STORES HOME DEPOT WALGREEN'S DRUG STORES JOHNSON MACHINERY COMPANY WHIRLPOOL KOHL'S DEPARTMENT STORES 5 Riverside County Transportation Commission www.MuniServices.com (800) 800‐8181 Page 3 HISTORICAL SALES TAX AMOUNTS The following chart shows the sales tax level from sales through March 2017, the highs, and the lows for each segment over the last two years. ANNUAL SALES TAX BY BUSINESS CATEGORY 6 Riverside County Transportation Commission www.MuniServices.com (800) 800‐8181 Page 4 FIVE‐YEAR ECONOMIC TREND: Construction FINAL RESULTS: April 2016 ‐ March 2017 Sales Local Net Cash Collections $46,147,211 Less: Pool Amounts ($‐507,340) Less: Prior Quarter Payments ($2,109,695) Add: Late Payments $1,537,811 Local Net Economic Collections after Adjustments $46,082,667 Percent Change from April 2015 – March 2016 Sales UP BY 3.5% MUNISERVICES’ ON‐GOING AUDIT RESULTS This Quarter $292,096 Total to Date $7,788,622 7 RCTC 1/2%: Sales Tax Performance Analysis by QuarterTOTALConfidentialEconomicTOTAL2017Q1 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆$42,636,447 3.3% $1,352,933 3.3% $5,527,756GENERAL RETAIL2017Q1 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆$11,644,582 1.6% $189,016 3.5% $1,652,47427.3%FOOD PRODUCTS2017Q1 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆$8,327,884 3.4% $276,304 4.6% $1,377,037% of Total: 19.5%TRANSPORTATION2017Q1 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆$10,971,259 5.9% $610,572 1.1% $460,173% of Total: 25.7%CONSTRUCTION2017Q1 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆$4,496,699 2.7% $119,635 3.4% $615,715% of Total: 10.5%BUSINESS TO BUSINESS2017Q1 QoQ %∆QoQ $∆YoY %∆YoY $∆$6,214,031 0.4% $21,910 4.1% $1,035,188% of Total: 14.6%Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1TOTALCATEGORYQoQ = 17Q1 / 16Q1 YoY = YE 17Q1 / YE 16Q1% of 2017Q1 Total:$0$2,000,000$4,000,000$6,000,000$8,000,000$10,000,000$12,000,000$14,000,000$16,000,000$0$5,000,000$10,000,000$15,000,000$20,000,000$25,000,000$30,000,000$35,000,000$40,000,000$45,000,000$50,000,0002012Q12012Q22012Q32012Q42013Q12013Q22013Q32013Q42014Q12014Q22014Q32014Q42015Q12015Q22015Q32015Q42016Q12016Q22016Q32016Q42017Q1ATTACHMENT 28 INLAND EMPIRE: Quarterly Comparison of 2016Q1 and 2017Q1 ( January thru March Sales )General RetailFood ProductsTransportationConstructionB2BMisc.Jan ‐ Mar2017(2017Q1)Jan ‐ Mar2016(2016Q1)% Chg GainGainDeclineDeclineBANNING53.8%‐0.2% 8.9%‐8.1% 6.0%‐18.1%501,596454,98410.2%Auto Sales ‐ New Apparel Stores Auto Sales ‐ Used Bldg.Matls‐WhsleBEAUMONT‐3.8% 0.0% 8.0%‐74.8% 6.8%‐16.5%898,516982,009‐8.5%Light Industry RestaurantsBldg.Matls‐Retail Food MarketsBLYTHE‐9.7% 4.4%‐3.3%‐7.6%‐18.1%‐41.2%377,570395,114‐4.4%Restaurants Energy Sales Light Industry Department StoresCALIMESA62.5%‐12.5% 15.7% 6.3%‐20.5% 50.5%159,985151,8905.3%Service Stations Miscellaneous Retail RestaurantsLight IndustryCANYON LAKE‐23.6% 2.1% 2.7%‐25.1%‐16.8%‐10.5%44,82747,276‐5.2%Misc. Vehicle Sales Service Stations Miscellaneous Retail Auto Sales ‐ UsedCATHEDRAL CITY‐6.6%‐6.6% 1.5% 1.7%‐0.5%‐30.8%1,993,3682,015,930‐1.1%Energy SalesLeasingFood Markets Heavy IndustryCOACHELLA‐3.2%‐1.1% 3.8%‐19.2% 64.4%‐11.4%803,111778,7173.1%Energy SalesService Stations Food Processing Eqp Auto Sales ‐ UsedCORONA‐2.3%‐2.1% 5.3%‐11.1% 6.6% 51.4%7,671,9907,803,214‐1.7%Service Stations Office Equipment Bldg.Matls‐Retail Electronic EquipmentDESERT HOT SPRINGS‐1.5% 2.1%‐0.1% 3.5% 16.2% 40.7%329,550324,8601.4%RestaurantsBusiness Services Department Stores Auto Sales ‐ UsedEASTVALE‐4.2%‐25.7%‐3.2%‐49.9% 158.4% 28.6%1,419,8751,337,3396.2%Electronic Equipment Heavy Industry Bldg.Matls‐Retail Food MarketsHEMET3.6% 0.8%‐2.6%‐49.9% 4.8%‐51.3%2,363,8572,486,228‐4.9%Service Stations Apparel Stores Bldg.Matls‐Retail Auto Sales ‐ NewINDIAN WELLS6.8%‐6.2%‐100.0%‐100.0%‐80.8%‐72.1%468,719502,944‐6.8%Miscellaneous Retail RestaurantsFood Markets Light IndustryINDIO‐6.9%‐15.5% 5.4%‐28.2% 23.5% 25.5%2,361,1512,471,851‐4.5%Auto Sales ‐ New Service Stations Bldg.Matls‐Retail Food MarketsJURUPA VALLEY10.4% 5.2% 5.7% 4.4%‐12.3%‐29.9%2,135,4372,127,9440.4%Service Stations Bldg.Matls‐Whsle LeasingLight IndustryLA QUINTA3.5%‐0.2%‐0.4%‐54.6%‐15.0% 2.3%2,054,3562,150,560‐4.5%Department Stores Apparel Stores Bldg.Matls‐Retail Recreation ProductsLAKE ELSINORE‐0.4%‐1.0% 8.4%‐38.6% 7.0% 115.3%1,862,4571,907,590‐2.4%Service Stations Department Stores Bldg.Matls‐Retail Bldg.Matls‐WhsleMENIFEE 8.9% 7.8% 13.5% 0.1% 6.6%‐32.6%1,541,5401,428,4927.9%RestaurantsService Stations Food Markets Bldg.Matls‐WhsleMORENO VALLEY‐1.4%‐12.1% 5.7%‐43.5% 3.3% 9.9%3,574,1013,812,588‐6.3%Service Stations RestaurantsBldg.Matls‐Retail Food MarketsMURRIETA5.5%‐4.9% 34.0%‐35.7% 3.7%‐27.7%3,269,9113,090,0995.8%Auto Sales ‐ Used RestaurantsBldg.Matls‐Retail Food MarketsNORCO1.4% 0.7% 16.8%‐57.0% 3.1% 1.4%1,383,4831,315,5175.2%Auto Sales ‐ New Auto Sales ‐ Used Bldg.Matls‐Whsle Food MarketsPALM DESERT‐3.0% 3.6% 13.2% 8.7% 70.4%‐84.5%4,675,4794,684,322‐0.2%Leasing Restaurants Miscellaneous Other Furniture/AppliancePALM SPRINGS4.8% 3.9% 14.8% 3.9% 1.6% 4.9%3,203,7413,041,8625.3%Auto Sales ‐ New RestaurantsLight Industry Office EquipmentPERRIS4.9%‐0.2% 0.1%‐66.1% 8.7%‐15.5%1,798,4902,096,055‐14.2%Light Industry Service Stations Bldg.Matls‐Retail Auto Sales ‐ NewRANCHO MIRAGE‐2.8% 2.9% 13.0%‐77.5% 47.3% 19.0%1,255,6181,271,137‐1.2%Restaurants Auto Sales ‐ New Bldg.Matls‐Retail Food MarketsRIVERSIDE‐2.6%‐6.1%‐0.3%‐11.0%‐3.3% 32.0%12,618,20313,000,189‐2.9%Misc. Vehicle Sales RestaurantsFood Markets Bldg.Matls‐RetailSAN JACINTO‐3.7%‐2.0% 6.6% 0.1%‐55.6% 80.0%579,748593,206‐2.3%Service Stations Auto Parts/Repair Light Industry Food MarketsTEMECULA‐39.0%‐2.1% 9.8%‐23.7% 113.1% 10.3%7,321,4807,703,814‐5.0%Light Industry Auto Sales ‐ New Miscellaneous Retail Bldg.Matls‐RetailWILDOMAR 4.2%‐0.4% 9.1% 44.2%‐19.9%‐22.8%354,127344,2572.9%Service Stations Bldg.Matls‐Retail Light Industry Food MarketsRIVERSIDE COUNTY‐4.7%‐3.4% 4.1%‐12.6% 3.3%‐2.1%5,611,7595,836,365‐3.8%Service Stations Light Industry Bldg.Matls‐Whsle Food MarketsNon‐ConfidentialMuniServicesATTACHMENT 39 AGENDA ITEM 8 Agenda Item 8 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 25, 2017 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Jillian Guizado, Legislative Affairs Manager THROUGH: Aaron Hake, External Affairs Director SUBJECT: State and Federal Legislative Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislation; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. DISCUSSION: State Update AB 1189 (E. Garcia) The Commission’s sponsored legislation is on Governor’s Brown’s desk for consideration. Staff, the Commission’s state advocate in Sacramento, and the coalition backing AB 1189 are communicating support of the bill and encouraging Governor Brown to sign the bill into law. AB 135 (Assembly Budget Committee) In accordance with the Commission-adopted 2017 State and Federal Legislative Platform, staff communicated the Commission’s support of AB 135, a budget trailer bill authored by the Assembly Budget Committee. AB 135, if approved, would make three important changes: 1) Caltrans would be authorized to perform National Environmental Policy Act assignment on all rail, transit, and multimodal projects in California; 2) Local and regional agencies could request approval of a letter of no prejudice to use local funding to advance SB 1 projects; and 3) Cities and counties would be given more time and flexibility for adopting Local Streets and Roads project lists for submittal to the California Transportation Commission. For self-help counties like the Commission, having the ability to advance local road funding enables us to get projects to construction sooner. Attachment: October 2017 Legislative Matrix 10 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - POSITIONS ON STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION – October 2017 Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption AB 1189 (Garcia) Clarifying legislation that allows the Commission to implement a second self- help sales tax, subject to approval of two-thirds of the electorate in a future election. Enrolled and presented to the Governor. (September 13, 2017) SPONSOR 1/26/217 AB 91 (Cervantes) Requires Caltrans to convert existing HOV lanes in Riverside County to operate only during hours of heavy commuter traffic; during all other times the lanes would be open to all vehicles, including those with a single occupant. Ordered to third reading. (September 13, 2017) OPPOSE Opposition removed 5/30/17 as a result of amendments 3/8/17 AB 351 (Melendez) Proposes to bring truck weight fees back to transportation accounts. Referred to Committee on Transportation. May be heard in committee after March 10. (February 21, 2017) SUPPORT 3/8/17 AB 179 (Cervantes) Changes the membership of the California Transportation Commission. Enrolled and presented to the Governor. (September 12, 2017) OPPOSE 4/12/2017 AB 408 (Chen) Final offer of compensation in eminent domain cases. Died prior to going to committee pursuant to Joint Rule 62(a). (March 20, 2017) OPPOSE 4/12/2017 AB 697 (Fong) Exempts private ambulances from paying tolls when responding to emergency and urgent calls. Read second time; ordered to third reading. (July 11, 2017) OPPOSE Opposition removed 6/14/2017 as a result of amendments 4/12/2017 SB 132 (Budget and Fiscal Review Committee) Amendment to the Budget Act of 2016. Creates the Riverside County Transportation Efficiency Corridor. Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. (April 28, 2017) SUPPORT 4/12/2017 11 Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption SB 268 (Mendoza) Changes the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority board of directors governance structure. Re-referred to Assembly Local Government Committee. (September 5, 2017) OPPOSE 5/9/2017 Staff action based on platform AB 1523 (Obernolte) Authorizes the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) to use design-build for local agencies to reconstruct the Mt. Vernon Avenue Viaduct project in San Bernardino. Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. (July 31, 2017) SUPPORT 5/10/2017 SB 150 (Allen) Requires the state board to update and revise greenhouse gas emission reduction targets while considering vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reductions. Requires the state board to assess current and historic VMT. Requires the state to prepare a report every four years that assesses metropolitan planning organization progress toward meeting metrics. Ordered to engrossing and enrolling. (September 11, 2017) OPPOSE 5/10/2017 SB 264 (Nguyen) Requires net excess toll revenue from the Orange County Transportation Authority’s (OCTA) Interstate 405 Improvement Project to be allocated to OCTA and project corridor jurisdictions and requires the moneys to be spent on specified transportation improvement projects. Hearing in Transportation and Housing Committee scheduled for April 25; author cancelled hearing. (April 25, 2017) OPPOSE 5/10/2017 SB 477 (Cannella) Allows for the extension of an existing rail corridor to provide intercity rail service beyond the defined boundaries of the corridor, subject to approval by the joint powers authority board and Secretary of Transportation. Held in Assembly Appropriations Committee. (September 1, 2017) SUPPORT 5/10/2017 AB 686 (Santiago) Requires agencies to “affirmatively further fair housing” opportunity with all governmental actions. Amended and re-referred to Senate Transportation and Housing Committee. (July 17, 2017) OPPOSE 6/14/2017 SB 768 (Allen, Wiener) Extends authority to Caltrans and regional transportation agencies to enter into public private partnership agreements for transportation projects. Held in Senate Appropriations Committee. (May 25, 2017) SUPPORT 6/14/2017 H.R. 100 (Brownley) Increases the sub-allocation for local communities under the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG). Referred to House T&I subcommittee on Highways and Transit. (January 3, 2017) SUPPORT 6/14/2017 12 Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption AB 115 (Ting); SB 99 (Budget) Trailer bill containing elements that will streamline transportation project delivery. Approved by the Governor. Chaptered by Secretary of State. (June 27, 2017) SUPPORT 6/14/2017 Staff action based on platform AB 805 (Gonzalez Fletcher) Changes the San Diego Association of Governments board of directors governance and voting structure. Ordered to engrossing and enrolling. (September 11, 2017) OPPOSE 6/15/2017 Staff action based on platform AB 1069 (Low) Requires ten countywide transportation agencies, including the Commission, to regulate taxicabs. Ordered to the Assembly for concurrence. (September 13, 2017) OPPOSE 6/28/2017 Staff action based on platform AB 1282 (Mullin) Requires the California State Transportation Agency Secretary to establish a Transportation Permitting Task Force. Enrolled and presented to the Governor. (September 7, 2017) SUPPORT 7/12/2017 AB 135 (Budget) Trailer bill containing elements that allow agencies to request approval for letters of no prejudice to advance spending on SB 1 projects using local funding sources; authorizes the California State Transportation Agency to perform NEPA Assignment on transit, rail, and multimodal projects; and provides flexibility to cities and counties for adopting Local Streets and Roads project lists. Referred to Senate floor. (September 13, 2017) SUPPORT 9/13/2017 Staff action based on platform 13 AGENDA ITEM 9 Agenda Item 9 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 25, 2017 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Lorelle Moe-Luna, Senior Management Analyst Grace Alvarez, Planning and Programming Manager THROUGH: Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Director SUBJECT: California Transportation Commission’s Active Transportation Program Cycle 3 Augmentation Funding Recommendations STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the two highest scoring active transportation projects for inclusion in the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Active Transportation Program (ATP) Cycle 3 Augmentation Regional Program, consisting of the Riverside County Department of Public Health’s Cabazon/Banning Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Program and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments’ (CVAG) CV Link project, for funding totaling approximately $4,799,222; 2) Approve the Riverside County ATP contingency list, consisting of the next highest scoring projects, for inclusion in the MPO ATP Augmentation Regional Program; 3) Submit the recommended projects to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for inclusion in the MPO ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation Regional Program and subsequent submittal to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) for final approval in December 2017; 4) Submit the MPO ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation regional projects to SCAG for inclusion in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) programming; 5) Direct staff to coordinate with the MPO ATP Regional Program project sponsors regarding timely funding allocations, obligations, and project delivery; and 6) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: ATP Cycle 3 ATP is a highly competitive statewide program that funds bicycle and pedestrian facilities and programs to enhance or encourage walking and biking. Cycle 3 commenced in June 2016, and approximately $264 million was available in funding for Fiscal Year 2019/20 and FY 2020/21. A total of 456 applications were submitted statewide requesting nearly $977 million. The CTC awards 50 percent of the funds at the statewide competitive level, 10 percent to small urban and rural regions, and 40 percent at the large MPO level. The ATP process allows applicants two 14 Agenda Item 9 rounds of opportunity to be awarded – statewide and MPO level. As part of the sequential project selection, projects are first evaluated statewide and those that are not ranked high enough for statewide funding are automatically provided a second opportunity for funding through the large MPO share. ATP guidelines require that the large MPOs work with county transportation commissions to develop its regional program recommendations. SCAG, as one of the largest MPOs receives about half of the MPO funds in the state and distributes 95 percent to the counties based on population for implementation projects and sets aside 5 percent for planning and non-infrastructure projects. Riverside County was allotted approximately $6.6 million for implementation projects and in January 2017, the Commission approved the award of these funds to the next highest scoring projects. A total of 26 projects were submitted from local agencies in Riverside County, requesting about $66 million. In total, 7 projects were awarded (three from statewide and four from MPO), totaling $18 million in ATP Cycle 3 funds. See Attachment 1 for list of approved Cycle 3 statewide and MPO projects. ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation Funds In April 2017, with the passage of SB 1, an additional $200 million for the program became available for FY 2017/18 and FY 2018/19 and a call for projects for ATP Augmentation funds was released on June 30, 2017, allowing only Cycle 3 applicants to apply. A total of $8 million, which is 4 percent of the available funding was allocated to the California Conservation Corps and the remaining funds were distributed as follows: $96 million (48 percent) for the statewide competitive component, $19.2 million (9.6 percent) for small urban and rural regions, and $76.8 million (38.4 percent) for the large MPO component. Priority of funds were given to projects, which could deliver one or more phases in FY 2017/18 and FY 2018/19, and as programming capacity became available in FY 2019/20 and FY 2020/21 additional projects were considered for funding. Applications were due August 1, 2017, and a total of 20 applications were submitted from local agencies in this county. CTC staff’s statewide competitive component recommendations were released August 31, 2017 and included 11 projects (8 of which are new) from Riverside County, as shown in the table below. ATP Augmentation Statewide – CTC Staff Recommendations Agency Project Title ATP Funding ($000) CTC Score Cycle 3 Funded/Projects Requesting Advances Moreno Valley Juan Bautista De Anza Trail Gap Closure $ 2,849 94.0 La Quinta La Quinta Village Complete Streets – A Road Diet 7,313 90.0 Desert Hot Springs Palm Drive and Pedestrian Improvement 772 89.5 New Funded Projects Riverside County Cabazon SRTS Sidewalk Safety Improvements 1,070 85.0 15 Agenda Item 9 Agency Project Title ATP Funding ($000) CTC Score Riverside County Clark Street SRTS Sidewalk and Intersection Safety Improvements 684 84.0 Indio Herbert Hoover Elementary Improvements 2,983 83.0 Hemet Hemet Valley Bikeway Connect 2,288 83.0 Perris Perris Valley Storm Drain Channel Trail – Phase 2 3,004 83.0 Temecula Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect 3,759 80.0 County Public Health Riverside County SRTS Program, Lake Elsinore 500 80.0 Riverside La Sierra Neighborhood Sidewalk Improvements 999 79.0 Total $ 26,221 The projects listed above represent 26.5 percent of the proposed $98.9 million of programming for Cycle 3 Augmentation funds, which total includes the recommendation to over program by approximately $3 million. Approval for these projects is anticipated at the October 18-19, 2017 CTC meeting. See Attachment 2 for full listing of CTC Recommendations. The SCAG MPO ATP Augmentation share is about $40 million (of the $76.8 million large MPO funds) and includes $38 million for implementation projects and $2 million for planning and non-infrastructure activities. Riverside County’s share for implementation projects is approximately $4.8 million. MPO ATP guidelines allow each county transportation commission to add up to 10 points to the CTC score for projects based on local criteria. In May 2014, the Commission approved adding 10 points to projects consistent with adopted local and regional plans, consistent with state and MPO ATP guidelines. All projects submitted within the county, at a minimum, are consistent with the SCAG adopted 2016 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. The CTC’s ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation program guidelines added a provision for the MPO component to allow supplanting of funds to projects that received less ATP funding than requested in Cycle 3 due to the fact that the SB 1 funding was made soon after the CTC’s recommendations for Cycle 3 were approved. Staff recommends that the approximately $4.8 million allotted to Riverside County for implementation projects be awarded to the next highest scoring projects, listed below, that requested advancements in programming or received partial funding in Cycle 3. 16 Agenda Item 9 MPO ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation Recommendations Agency Project Title Original ATP Request – Cycle 3 ($000) Cycle 3 Award Amount ($000) Recommended Augmentation Funding ($000) Total Award – Cycle 3/ Augmentation ($000) CTC/RCTC Score County Public Health Cabazon/ Banning SRTS Program $ 500 $ 500 $ 500 $ 500 87.0/97.0 CVAG CV Link $ 24,307 $ 5,584 4,299 9,883 85.5/95.5 Total $ 4,799 Staff is continuing to work with SCAG on the programming capacity of funds available under Cycle 3 and the Cycle 3 Augmentation. It is possible that after a comprehensive review of all of the county transportation commissions’ recommendations for Cycle 3 Augmentation that further adjustments may be required; however, the total allocation of $4.8 million will be distributed among the highest scoring projects. Staff also recommends the next highest scoring projects (as shown in Attachment 1) be submitted to SCAG for a contingency list. In the event that a programmed project is delivered for less or fails, a contingency list will be provided to the CTC and will be in effect only until the adoption of the next statewide program. The $2 million set aside for planning and non-infrastructure projects will be selected from SCAG’s Sustainability Planning Grants (SPG) program. Projects that will be considered for funding are: 1) those that submitted through SCAG’s 2016 SPG program that were unfunded; and 2) new projects submitted in SCAG’s 2017 supplemental call for projects, which opened July 6, 2017 with applications due August 31, 2017. To qualify as a planning project, applicants must also meet ATP requirements such as qualification as a disadvantaged community (DAC). The DAC requirement does not apply to non-infrastructure programs. As of the writing of this staff report, SCAG recommendations for this program have not been made available. Next Steps Upon approval of the above recommendations, staff will submit the projects to SCAG for inclusion in the MPO ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation Regional Program, which will be approved by the SCAG Regional Council on October 5, 2017. SCAG will then submit the MPO Augmentation projects to the CTC for final approval at the CTC’s December 5-6, 2017 meeting. Staff will work closely with project sponsors in preparing allocation funding requests and requests for obligating federal funds. Projects awarded under the MPO component must obtain concurrence from the Commission on each allocation request for funding as required by the CTC. Projects will also be required to be included in the FTIP. As a condition of the project allocation for the statewide and MPO ATP programs, the CTC requires project sponsors to submit to Caltrans semi-annual reports on the activities and progress 17 Agenda Item 9 made toward implementation of the project and a final delivery report upon project completion. The purpose of the reports is to ensure that the project is implemented in a timely manner according to the scope and budget identified in the project application. Staff will continue to participate in CTC/Caltrans working groups to further develop and improve the ATP guidelines and process, and participate in future evaluations of ATP project applications. The next ATP Call for Projects is expected to commence in early Spring 2018. Financial Impact ATP funds are administered through the CTC, Caltrans, and the Federal Highway Administration. The Commission is not a recipient of these MPO ATP funds; therefore, there is no fiscal impact to the Commission’s budget. Attachments 1) ATP Award Status for Cycle 3/SB 1 Augmentation Applications 2) CTC Staff Recommendations for ATP Augmentation Funds 18 ATTACHMENT 1: ATP AWARD STATUS FOR CYCLE 3/SB 1 AUGMENTATION CALLS FOR PROJECTS BY PROJECT RANKINGS - RIVERSIDE COUNTY APPLICATIONS Applicant Project Title DAC 1 Total Project Cost (000's) Total Fund Request (000's) CTC Final Score RCTC Score Funding Status PROJECTS AWARDED AT THE STATE LEVEL (California Transportation Commission Approved 12/7/16) 1 Moreno Valley Juan Bautista De Anza Trail Gap Closure X 3,149 2,849 94.00 n/a *Awarded Statewide Cycle 3/ Recommended for Augmentation Funds 2 La Quinta La Quinta Village Complete Streets - A Road Diet Project X 9,533 7,313 90.00 n/a *Awarded Statewide Cycle 3/ Recommended for Augmentation Funds 3 Desert Hot Springs Palm Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvement Project X 965 772 89.50 n/a *Awarded Statewide Cycle 3/ Recommended for Augmentation Funds 4 Wildomar City of Wildomar Active Transportation Plan 375 300 88.00 98.00 Awarded SCAG Sustainable Planning Grants (received local funds) 5 Riverside County Dept. of Public Health Riverside County Safe Routes to School Program, Cabazon/Banning X 625 500 87.00 97.00 *Awarded MPO Cycle 3/ Recommended for Augmentation Funds 6 Jurupa Valley Pacific Avenue Safe Route to School and Road Diet Project X 2,638 607 86.00 96.00 Awarded MPO Cycle 3 7 CVAG CVLink X 99,997 24,307 85.50 95.50 * Awarded MPO Cycle 3 (partial funding $5.584M)/ Recommended for Augmentation Funds 8 Riverside County Dept. of Public Health (Injury Prevention Services) Riverside County Safe Routes to Schools Program, Eastern Coachella Valley X 625 500 85.00 95.00 *Awarded MPO Cycle 3 (SPG Plng/NI 5%) (partial funding $349k) 9 Riverside County Transportation Department Cabazon Safe Routes to School Sidewalk Safety Improvements X 1,120 1,070 85.00 95.00 *Recommended for Statewide Augmentation Funds 10 Riverside County Transportation Department Clark Street SR2S Sidewalk and Intersection Safety Improvements X 2,945 684 84.00 94.00 *Recommended for Statewide Augmentation Funds 11 Indio Herbert Hoover Elementary Pedestrian Improvements X 2,983 2,983 83.00 93.00 *Recommended for Statewide Augmentation Funds 12 Perris Perris Valley Storm Drain Channel Trail - Phase 2 X 3,204 3,004 83.00 93.00 *Recommended for Statewide Augmentation Funds 13 Hemet Hemet Valley Bikeway Connect X 2,288 2,288 83.00 93.00 *Recommended for Statewide Augmentation Funds 14 Riverside County Dept. of Public Health (Injury Prevention Services) Riverside County Safe Routes to Schools Program, Lake Elsinore X 625 500 80.00 90.00 *Recommended for Statewide Augmentation Funds 15 Temecula Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect X 4,761 3,759 80.00 90.00 *Recommended for Statewide Augmentation Funds 16 Riverside La Sierra Neighborhood Sidewalk Improvements X 1,215 999 79.00 89.00 *Recommended for Statewide Augmentation Funds 17 Riverside County Transportation Department Lakeview Avenue Safe Routes to School Sidewalk Safety Improvements X 1,349 1,269 75.00 85.00 * 18 Eastvale Road Diet, Bike Lanes, Education, Encouragement and Enforcement Program 1,510 1,208 74.00 84.00 *Awarded partial funding from SB821 19 Cathedral City Cathedral City Pedestrian Safety Improvements X 573 419 71.00 81.00 * 20 Calimesa County Line Road Active Transportation Program – Cycle 3 X 1,342 1,005 67.00 77.00 * UNFUNDED PROJECTS (Contingency List) 19 ATTACHMENT A: ATP AWARD STATUS FOR CYCLE 3/SB 1 AUGMENTATION CALLS FOR PROJECTS BY PROJECT RANKINGS - RIVERSIDE COUNTY APPLICATIONS Applicant Project Title DAC 1 Total Project Cost (000's) Total Fund Request (000's) CTC Final Score RCTC Score Funding Status 21 Palm Springs Citywide Sidewalk Gap Closures, Safety Lighting, and ADA-Compliant Upgrades X 2,855 2,425 58.00 68.00 * 22 Coachella Coachella - Grapefruit Avenue Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Roadway Safety Improvement Project X 2,209 2,209 58.00 68.00 23 Perris Multi-modal SRTS & Metrolink to Metrolink Stations Connectivity Project X 2,000 950 54.00 64.00 24 Riverside County Transportation Department Dillon Road Bike Lane Improvements X 3,280 3,200 45.00 55.00 * 25 Riverside Riverside Recreational Trail (PA&ED)X 750 750 39.00 49.00 26 Riverside Traffic Circle Installation to Encourage Increased Biking and Walking 242 242 8.00 18.00 Grand Total 153,158 66,112 1 Project identified as partially or fully in a Disadvantaged Community (DAC). *Indicates applicant applied for ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation funds. 20 2017 Active Transportation Program Augmentation - Statewide Component Staff Recommendations ($1,000's) California Transportation Commission Page 1 of 3 September 5, 2017 Application ID Co Project Title DAC Total Project Cost Recommended ATP Funding 17-18 18-19 19-20 20-21 CON CON NI PA&ED PS&E ROW Project Type SRTS REC TR Final Score 7-Paramount-1 LA West Santa Ana Branch Bikeway Phase 2 X 4,550 3,423 345 3,078 0 0 3,078 0 0 345 0 Infrastructure 99.00 4-Oakland-4 ALA 14th Street: Safe Routes in the City X 13,939 10,578 0 1,235 9,343 0 9,343 0 0 1,235 0 Infrastructure 95.00 9-Kern County Road Department-6 KER Boron/Desert Lake Pedestrian Path X 2,319 1,971 461 1,510 0 0 1,510 0 0 268 193 Infrastructure X 95.00 7-Los Angeles DPW (Bureau of Engineering)-4 LA Jefferson Boulevard Complete Street X 6,336 5,986 925 5,061 0 0 5,061 0 600 325 0 Infrastructure X 95.00 8-Moreno Valley-1 RIV Juan Bautista De Anza Trail Gap Closure X 3,149 2,849 275 2,574 0 0 2,574 0 90 160 25 Infrastructure X 94.00 6-Kern County Road Department-1 KER Rexland Acres Community Sidewalk X 6,376 5,640 375 5,265 0 0 4,519 0 25 746 350 Infrastructure X 93.00 3-Yuba County-2 YUB Eleventh Avenue Pedestrian and Bicyclist Route Improvements X 1,701 1,505 227 1,278 0 0 1,253 25 57 170 0 Combination X 92.00 7-SCAG-4 LA Southern California Disadvantaged Communities Planning Initiative X 1,350 1,150 1,150 0 0 0 0 1,150 0 0 0 Plan 91.00 4-Oakland-1 ALA Fruitvale Alive Gap Closure X 8,241 5,850 850 5,000 0 0 5,000 0 0 800 50 Infrastructure 90.00 7-Lancaster-2 LA 2020 Safe Route To School Pedestrian Improvements X 7,443 5,272 0 5,272 0 0 5,272 0 0 0 0 Infrastructure X 90.00 8-La Quinta-1 RIV La Quinta Village Complete Streets - A Road Diet X 9,533 7,313 0 7,313 0 0 7,313 0 0 0 0 Infrastructure X 90.00 5-Santa Barbara-2 SB Eastside Green Lanes & Bike Boulevard Gap Closure X 2,763 2,736 73 207 18 2,438 2,438 0 73 207 18 Infrastructure X 90.00 8-Desert Hot Springs-1 RIV Palm Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvement X 965 772 0 772 0 0 772 0 0 0 0 Infrastructure X 89.50 4-Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District (SMART)-1 SON SMART Pathway - Petaluma (Payran to Southpoint)X 3,272 1,461 1,461 0 0 0 1,461 0 0 0 0 Infrastructure X 89.00 7-Compton-1 LA Compton-Carson Regional Safe Bicycling and Wayfinding X 1,868 1,617 0 1,617 0 0 1,617 0 0 0 0 Infrastructure 88.00 3-Yuba County-1 YUB McGowan Parkway Bicycle Lane and Pedestrian Route Improvements X 1,559 1,246 216 0 1,030 0 1,000 30 54 162 0 Combination X 88.00 12-Santa Ana-2*ORA City of Santa Ana - First Street Pedestrian Improvements X 4,572 4,572 0 540 4,032 0 4,032 0 10 530 0 Infrastructure X 88.00 Totals Funded Projects Requesting Advances 79,936 63,941 6,358 40,722 14,423 2,438 56,243 1,205 909 4,948 636 * Applicant received $19,000 less than requested in the 2017 ATP. This $19,000 was restored from 2017 ATP Augmentation Funds 11-Imperial Beach-1 SD Imperial Beach Boulevard Improvement and Safe Routes to Schools X 5,175 2,570 312 2,258 0 0 2,193 65 0 303 9 Combination X 88.00 4-San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency-5 SF Geneva Ave Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Improvement X 9,987 2,350 2,350 0 0 0 2,350 0 0 0 0 Infrastructure 88.00 3-Davis-1 YOL Providing Safe Passage: Connecting Montgomery Elementary and Olive Drive X 4,425 3,540 412 0 3,128 0 3,128 0 0 380 32 Infrastructure X 86.50 4-Sunnyvale-1 SCL Sunnyvale Safe Routes to School Improvements X 2,362 1,889 0 380 1,509 0 1,509 6 56 318 0 Combination X 86.00 10-Stockton-4 SJ Miner Avenue Complete Streets X 5,347 3,816 0 3,816 0 0 3,816 0 0 0 0 Infrastructure 85.00 3-Roseville-2 PLA Washington Boulevard Bikeway and Pedestrian Pathways X 3,982 2,212 0 0 2,212 0 2,030 182 0 0 0 Combination X 85.00 2017 ATP Funded Projects Requesting Advances New Projects Recommended for Funding 21 2017 Active Transportation Program Augmentation - Statewide Component Staff Recommendations ($1,000's) California Transportation Commission Page 2 of 3 September 5, 2017 Application ID Co Project Title DAC Total Project Cost Recommended ATP Funding 17-18 18-19 19-20 20-21 CON CON NI PA&ED PS&E ROW Project Type SRTS REC TR Final Score 8-Riverside County Transportation Department-3 RIV Cabazon Safe Routes to School Sidewalk Safety Improvements X 1,120 1,070 282 788 0 0 788 0 0 122 160 Infrastructure X 85.00 3-Citrus Heights-1 SAC Citrus Heights Electric Greenway (Class 1 Multi-Use Trail)X 7,015 5,866 0 311 5,555 0 5,525 30 0 246 65 Combination X X 84.00 3-El Dorado County-1 ED El Dorado Trail - Missouri Flat Road to El Dorado X 4,394 3,419 3,419 0 0 0 3,374 45 0 0 0 Combination X 84.00 8-Riverside County Transportation Department-4 RIV Clark Street SR2S Sidewalk and Intersection Safety Improvements X 2,945 684 0 684 0 0 684 0 0 0 0 Infrastructure X 84.00 10-Patterson-1 STA Ninth Street Improvements X 907 907 75 832 0 0 764 0 75 68 0 Infrastructure X 84.00 6-Tulare County-8 TUL County of Tulare: Earlimart Sidewalk Improvements X 1,973 1,868 180 1,688 0 0 1,688 0 0 180 0 Combination X 84.00 4-East Bay Regional Park District-2 ALA Doolittle Drive Bay Trail, Martin Luther King Jr. Shoreline, Oakland X 7,950 4,000 500 3,500 0 0 3,500 0 0 250 250 Infrastructure 83.00 3-Placerville-1 ED Upper Broadway Pedestrian Connection X 2,206 1,886 500 1,386 0 0 1,386 0 0 173 327 Infrastructure 83.00 8-Indio-1 RIV Herbert Hoover Elementary Pedestrian Improvements X 2,983 2,983 100 240 0 2,643 2,638 5 100 240 0 Combination X 83.00 8-Hemet-1 RIV Hemet Valley Bikeway Connect X 2,288 2,288 0 200 2,088 0 1,990 98 0 200 0 Combination X 83.00 8-Perris-1 RIV Perris Valley Storm Drain Channel Trail - Phase 2 X 3,204 3,004 237 524 0 2,243 2,243 0 237 287 237 Infrastructure 83.00 5-Guadalupe-1 SB Guadalupe Street (Hwy 1) Pedestrian Improvements X 458 401 0 401 0 0 401 0 0 0 0 Infrastructure 83.00 4-Pittsburg-2 CC Pittsburg Active Transportation and Safe Routes Plan (WalkBikePittsburg2035)X 312 312 312 0 0 0 312 0 0 0 0 Plan 82.00 6-Fresno-4 FRE Downtown Fresno Courthouse Park Interconnectivity Project X 915 809 28 781 0 0 715 0 28 66 0 Infrastructure 82.00 7-Glendale-1 LA Glendale Transportation Center 1st/Last Mile Regional Improvements Phase II X 1,301 1,101 172 929 0 0 929 0 43 129 0 Infrastructure 82.00 7-Palmdale-1 LA City of Palmdale - Civic Center Complete Streets X 2,564 1,700 66 212 0 1,422 1,422 0 66 212 0 Infrastructure 82.00 7-Rosemead-1 LA SR2S Sidewalk Gap Closure on Delta Avenue X 1,175 1,100 0 0 1,100 0 1,100 0 0 0 0 Infrastructure X 82.00 7-Santa Monica-2 LA Active Aging - Safe Routes for Seniors 500 400 0 400 0 0 0 400 0 0 0 Non-Infrastructure 82.00 10-Angels Camp-1 CAL Route 49 Sidewalk Infill and Bike Lanes, Angels Camp X 1,985 1,985 165 1,820 0 0 1,820 0 0 0 165 Infrastructure X 81.00 6-Kern County Road Department-2 KER Virginia Street Pedestrian Path Project X 2,456 2,173 22 420 0 1,731 1,731 0 22 354 66 Infrastructure X 81.00 10-Merced County PW-2 MER Plainsburg Road Complete Street Upgrade X 1,688 1,671 76 200 0 1,395 1,351 44 76 200 0 Combination X 81.00 5-Monterey County Resource Management Agency DPW-2 MON Las Lomas Drive Bicycle Lane & Pedestrian Project X 3,168 2,894 0 368 0 2,526 2,431 0 98 270 95 Infrastructure 81.00 3-Sacramento County-1 SAC Folsom Boulevard Complete Street Improvements, Phase 1 X 5,001 4,180 532 176 3,472 0 3,472 0 0 532 176 Infrastructure 81.00 8-Big Bear Lake-1 SBD Alpine Pedal Path Rathbun Creek Extension - Big Bear Lake X 986 788 0 788 0 0 788 0 0 0 0 Infrastructure X 81.00 8-Ontario-1 SBD Sultana Elementary and De Anza Middle School Pedestrian Improvements X 1,506 1,278 178 0 1,100 0 1,100 0 0 136 42 Infrastructure X 81.00 6-Tulare County-1 TUL Allensworth Elementary Sidewalk Improvements X 313 260 0 260 0 0 260 0 0 0 0 Combination X 81.00 7-Norwalk-1 LA Alondra Active Transportation Improvement X 973 963 12 138 0 813 813 0 12 138 0 Infrastructure 80.50 10-Sonora-1 TUO Red Church Pedestrian and Circulation Improvement X 815 722 76 646 0 0 646 0 0 67 9 Infrastructure X 80.50 22 2017 Active Transportation Program Augmentation - Statewide Component Staff Recommendations ($1,000's) California Transportation Commission Page 3 of 3 September 5, 2017 Application ID Co Project Title DAC Total Project Cost Recommended ATP Funding 17-18 18-19 19-20 20-21 CON CON NI PA&ED PS&E ROW Project Type SRTS REC TR Final Score 7-Baldwin Park-3 LA Walnut Creek-San Gabriel River East Bank Greenway & Neighborhood Connections X 2,193 1,355 0 0 1,355 0 573 782 0 0 0 Combination 80.00 10-Merced County PW-1 MER Delhi Community Pedestrian and Bike Connectivity Project X 1,531 1,531 266 0 1,265 0 1,221 44 88 178 0 Combination X 80.00 8-Temecula-1 RIV Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect X 4,761 3,759 189 3,570 0 0 3,570 0 189 0 0 Combination 80.00 8-Apple Valley-2 SBD Bear Valley Road Class 1 Bike Path Connector X 999 792 792 0 0 0 792 0 0 0 0 Infrastructure 80.00 8-Apple Valley-1 SBD Apple Valley South - Safe Routes to School X 4,294 3,470 333 3,137 0 0 3,137 0 0 333 0 Infrastructure X 80.00 11-Chula Vista-1 SD Class 2 Bike Lanes on Broadway in Chula Vista, CA X 1,466 851 104 747 0 0 747 0 0 104 0 Infrastructure 80.00 11-El Cajon-2 SD Cajon Valley Union School District SRTS Plan (Phase 2) X 500 500 500 0 0 0 0 500 0 0 0 Plan 80.00 11-Encinitas-1 SD Santa Fe Drive Corridor Bike and Pedestrian Improvements 1,142 996 41 0 173 782 742 40 41 148 25 Combination X 80.00 11-National City-1 SD National City Safe Routes to School Pedestrian Enhancements X 2,028 1,678 0 0 1,678 0 1,678 0 0 0 0 Infrastructure X 80.00 2-Redding-3 SHA West Street Area School Safety Improvements X 3,196 2,538 400 0 2,138 0 2,138 0 400 0 0 Infrastructure X 80.00 8-Riverside County DPH-4 RIV Riverside County SRTS Program, Lake Elsinore X 625 500 0 500 0 0 0 500 0 0 0 Non-Infrastructure X 80.00 4-Berkeley-3 ALA Sacramento Street Complete Streets Improvements X 1,814 1,542 0 185 1,357 0 1,357 0 0 185 0 Infrastructure 79.00 1-Humboldt County PW-2 HUM McKinleyville Safe Routes to School Program X 612 612 25 52 535 0 490 45 25 40 12 Combination X 79.00 6-Arvin-1 KER Franklin Street Pedestrian and Bicycle Infrastructure Improvements X 350 350 0 0 50 300 300 0 5 45 0 Infrastructure X 79.00 7-Los Angeles Co Dept. of PW-5 LA Puente Creek Bikeway X 3,700 2,960 0 400 0 2,560 2,360 200 0 400 0 Combination X 79.00 9-Mono County-1 MONO Mono County Complete Streets: Bridgeport Main Street Revitalization X 434 434 23 43 368 0 368 0 23 43 0 Infrastructure X 79.00 12-Buena Park-1 ORA Buena Park School District Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Improvements X 1,654 1,644 50 166 1,428 0 1,428 91 50 75 0 Combination X 79.00 8-Riverside-1 RIV La Sierra Neighborhood Sidewalk Improvements X 1,215 999 0 0 0 999 999 0 0 0 0 Infrastructure 79.00 3-Sacramento-5 SAC Two Rivers Trail (Phase II)X 6,361 3,333 0 3,333 0 0 3,333 0 0 0 0 Infrastructure X 79.00 8-Fontana-1 SBD Fontana Safe Routes to Schools Pedestrian Improvements X 1,918 1,918 10 157 191 1,560 1,556 4 10 157 191 Combination X 79.00 Totals New Projects 135,172 98,851 12,739 36,436 30,702 18,974 85,686 3,081 1,644 6,579 1,861 PA&ED: Environmental Phase REC TR: Recreational Trails Eligible ROW: Right-of-Way Phase SRTS: Safe Routes to School CON: Construction Phase DAC: Benefit to Disadvantaged Communities Plan: Active Transportation Plan PS&E: Plans, Specifications & Estimate Phase 23 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM Cycle 3 Augmentation (SB 1) Recommendations Lorelle Moe-Luna Senior Management Analyst ATP Program Overview •Administered by the California TransportationCommission(CTC) •Competitive Statewide Program •Funds bicycle and pedestrian facilities and programstoenhanceorencouragewalkingandbiking CTC Scoring Criteria Total Points Category 35 pts Potential for Increased walking and biking 25 pts Potential for reducing the number and/or rate of bicycle/pedestrian fatalities and injuries 15 pts Public Participation and Planning 10 pts Improved Public Health 10 pts Benefit to Disadvantaged Communities 5 pts Leveraging of non-ATP funds 100 pts Total Review of Previous Cycles Cycle (Year) Funds Available (millions) Riv County Awarded (millions) % of Total 1 (2014)$ 368.1 $ 31.4 8.5% 2 (2015)$ 359.0 $ 10.4 2.9% 3 (2017)$ 263.5 $ 17.9 6.8% 3 Augmentation (SB 1) (2017) $ 192.0* $ 20.1**10.5% Total $1,182.6 $ 79.8 6.7% *$8 million allocated to CA Conservation Corps **Excludes awarded advancements from Cycle 3, pending CTC approval Oct 2017 Palo Verde Valley Statewide Award MPO Award ATP Funded Projects (Cycles 1, 2, 3, SB 1 Augmentation) Distribution of Funds –Cycle 3 461 total applications = $977M 26 from Riv Co = $66M$264M FY 2020 FY 2021 CTC Awardees: Moreno Valley La Quinta Desert Hot Springs $158M (60%) State/Rural SCAG = $53M $105M (40%) MPO RCTC Awardees: Riv Co Public Health –Cabazon/Banning Jurupa Valley CVAG (partial $5.584M) $6.6M Riverside County $53.2M (95%) Implementation $2.8M (5%) Planning/Non- Infrastructure + other local $ 2016 Sustainability Planning Grants (SPG) Program Call for Projects SCAG Awardees: Wildomar Riv Co Public Health – Eastern Coachella Valley Distribution of Funds –Cycle 3 Augmentation $192M* FY2018 FY2019 $115.2M (60%) State/Rural SCAG = $40M $76.8M (40%) MPO $2M (5%) Planning/Non- Infrastructure 2017 Sustainability Planning Grants (SPG) Program Call for Projects $4.8M Riverside County $38M (95%) Implementation *$8M to CA Conservation Corps Applications due August 31st New projects ok Must have applied in Cycle 3 Supplemental applications due August 1st Priority Order: Projects that can advance all phases to FY18, FY19 Projects that can advance one or more phases to FY18, FY19 Capacity may become available in FY20 and FY21 Distribution of Funds –Cycle 3 Augmentation (cont’d) $192M* FY2018 FY2019 $115.2M (60%) State/Rural SCAG = $40M $76.8M (40%) MPO $2M (5%) Planning/Non- Infrastructure 2017 Sustainability Planning Grants (SPG) Program Call for Projects $4.8M Riverside County $38M (95%) Implementation *$8M to CA Conservation Corps CTC Recommendations: Advancements ($10.9M) Moreno Valley La Quinta Desert Hot Springs New projects ($15.3M) County (2 projects) Indio Perris Hemet Riv Co Public Health –Lake Elsinore Temecula Riverside (Pending Approval at Oct 18th CTC Meeting) RCTC Recommendations: Advancements/Partial Funding Riv Co Public Health – Cabazon/Banning CVAG SCAG recommendations to be announced at their October 5th Regional Council Meeting Recommendations 1.Approve the two highest scoring active transportation projects for inclusion in the MPO ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation Regional Program,consisting of the Riverside County Department of Public Health’s Cabazon/Banning Safe Routes to School (SRTS)Program and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments’(CVAG ) CV Link project,for funding totaling approximately $4,799,222; 2.Approve the Riverside County ATP contingency list,consisting of the next highest scoring projects,for inclusion in the MPO ATP Augmentation Regional Program ; 3.Submit the recommended projects to the SCAG for inclusion in the MPO ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation Regional Program and subsequent submittal to the CTC for final approval in December 2017; 4.Submit the MPO ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation regional projects to SCAG for inclusion in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP)programming; 5.Direct staff to coordinate with the MPO ATP Regional Program project sponsors regarding timely funding allocations,obligations,and project delivery. AGENDA ITEM 10 Agenda Item 10 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 25, 2017 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Martha Masters, Management Analyst Grace Alvarez, Planning and Programming Manager THROUGH: Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Director SUBJECT: Revision to the Fiscal Year 2017/18 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program Funding Recommendations STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the Revised Fiscal Year 2017/18 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program recommended projects as shown in Attachment 1 in the amount of $3,343,187 to include an additional three projects in the cities of Lake Elsinore, La Quinta, and Temecula; 2) Direct staff to prepare and execute memorandums of understanding (MOU) with the three additional project sponsors to outline the project schedule and local funding commitments; 3) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission; and 4) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On July 12, 2017, the Commission approved 21 projects totaling $3,599,364 for SB 821 funding as indicated in Attachment 1. Due to the passage of SB 1, which provides an increase of $100 million annually to the Active Transportation Program (ATP), the California Transportation Commission (CTC) decided to augment the ATP Cycle 3 program. On June 30, 2017, the CTC released the ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation call for projects allowing agencies that applied under the recently concluded ATP Cycle 3 process the opportunity to apply for ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation funds made available from SB 1. Applications were due to the CTC on August 1, 2017. Staff was aware that projects submitted under the Commission’s SB 821 call for projects were also being submitted for the CTC’s ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation call for projects. In most cases, these ATP project applications represented larger projects, and the SB 821 project applications represented smaller portions of the ATP applications. Project sponsors strategically submitted larger projects for the ATP program since the ATP funding had a significant amount of funding 24 Agenda Item 10 available compared to the SB 821 funding. As a result, at the July 12, 2017 Commission meeting staff recommended to return to the Commission with a revision to the FY 2017/18 SB 821 funding recommendations, if SB 821 funding was freed up from projects approved through the ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation. Revised Allocations On August 31, 2017, the CTC notified agencies of the 2017 ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation recommendations that will be presented to the CTC at its October 18-19, 2017 meeting for final adoption. Two projects that were included in the SB 821 funding recommendations are being recommended for ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation funding: • County of Riverside – Clark Street Sidewalk project • City of Riverside – Carmine Street Sidewalk Improvements project Upon CTC’s approval of ATP Augmentation funds for the above two projects in October, staff recommends removing these projects from the FY 2017/18 SB 821 allocations. This action would free up a total of $724,000 SB 821 funds that would be programmed to the following three next highest scored projects: Agency Project Title Allocation Lake Elsinore Palomar Multi-Use Trail $ 245,523 La Quinta Jefferson Street Sidewalk Gap Closure 90,000 Temecula Citywide Buffered Bike-Lane Striping 132,300 Total $ 467,823 The remaining FY 2017/18 SB 821 amount of $256,177 is not sufficient to fully fund the construction of the next two projects that were tied at a score of 33.67; therefore, based on prior practice it is recommended the remaining funds be reserved for the FY 2019/20 SB 821 Call for Projects. All project scores are included in Attachment 1. Summary of Revised Recommended SB 821 Allocations Coachella Valley Western Riverside Recommended Projects 7 15 Revised Total SB 821 Recommended Allocation $1,178,672 $2,164,515 Recommended Allocation % 35% 65% 25 Agenda Item 10 List of Revised FY 2017/18 SB 821 Recommended Projects Project Title Allocation Coachella Valley (7) Palm Desert Class II Bike and Golf Cart Lane Improvements - Citywide $ 85,000 Desert Hot Springs Desert View Sidewalk Project 293,000 La Quinta La Quinta High School ADA Improvements 109,500 Rancho Mirage ADA Pedestrian Access Ramp Upgrades on Highway 111 234,925 Palm Springs Racquet Club Road and Farrell Drive Missing Links Sidewalks 277,500 Indio Avenue 42 Sidewalk Gap Closure 88,748 *La Quinta Jefferson Street Sidewalk Gap Closure 90,000 Subtotal Coachella Valley Projects (35%) $ 1,178,672 Western Riverside (15) Eastvale 65th Bicycle Safety Enhancement $ 123,700 Riverside County Mayberry Avenue Sidewalk Improvements (Stanford Street – Meridian Street) 244,000 Moreno Valley Gentian Avenue and Eucalyptus Avenue Class II Bike Lanes 49,000 Wildomar Grand Avenue Bike Lane – Phase I 270,000 Wildomar Grand Avenue Bike Lane – Phase II 214,000 Lake Elsinore Bicycle Lanes to Downtown 50,100 Lake Elsinore Machado Street Missing Link Bike Lanes 75,900 Riverside County Serfas Club Drive Sidewalk Improvements 307,500 Hemet Sidewalk and ADA Ramps – Alessandro Street 75,000 Lake Elsinore Chaney Street Missing Link Sidewalk 137,830 Lake Elsinore Sumner, Mohr and Davis Street Missing Link Sidewalk 97,953 Lake Elsinore W. Lakeshore Drive Missing Link Sidewalk 131,934 Lake Elsinore Mission Trail Missing Link Bike Lanes 9,775 *Lake Elsinore Palomar Multi-Use Trail 245,523 *Temecula Citywide Buffered Bike-Lane Striping 132,300 Subtotal Western Riverside Projects (65%) $ 2,164,515 Grand Total** $ 3,343,187 *Recommended additional projects for FY 2017/18 SB 821 funds. **There may be a difference due to rounding. Per the Commission’s SB 821 adopted policies, jurisdictions receiving an allocation have 24 months to complete approved projects and submit claim forms for reimbursement upon project completion. MOUs will be required to outline the project schedules, funding plan, and local agency match commitment. Staff will monitor the progress of the projects to ensure timely implementation of delivery and expenditures as the intent of the SB 821 program is to deliver and expend FY 2017/18 and FY 2018/19 funds within the timeframe of this cycle. 26 Agenda Item 10 Future Opportunities It is anticipated that the CTC will have an ATP Cycle 4 Call for Projects sometime in March of next year. Staff encourages the agencies to start considering projects to apply for ATP funds and begin the process of crafting the applications as soon as possible. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2017/18 FY 2018/19 Amount: $1,671,594 $1,671,594 Source of Funds: Local Transportation Fund SB 821 Allocations Budget Adjustment: No N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 601 62 86106 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 09/14/2017 Attachment: Revised FY 2017/18 SB 821 Funding Recommendations 27 ATTACHMENT 1 Total SB 821 Funds Recommended Cumulative Average Rank Agency Project Description Project Cost Requested Allocation Funds Allocated Score 1 Palm Desert Class II Bike and Golf Cart Lane Improvements - Citywide 170,000$ 85,000$ 85,000$ 85,000$ 43.67 2 Desert Hot Springs Desert View Sidewalk Project 493,000$ 293,000$ 293,000$ 378,000$ 42.00 3 Eastvale 65th Bicycle Safety Enhancement 247,400$ 123,700$ 123,700$ 501,700$ 42.00 4 La Quinta La Quinta High School ADA Improvements 219,000$ 109,500$ 109,500$ 611,200$ 41.33 5 Riverside County Mayberry Ave Sidewalk Improvements (Stanford St. - Meridian St.)488,000$ 244,000$ 244,000$ 855,200$ 41.33 6 Moreno Valley Gentian Ave. and Eucalyptus Ave. Class II Bike Lanes 70,000$ 49,000$ 49,000$ 904,200$ 40.67 -Riverside County Clark Street Sidewalk Project*1,111,000$ 555,500$ -$ 904,200$ 40.67 7 Wildomar Grand Avenue Bike Lane-Phase I 1,800,000$ 270,000$ 270,000$ 1,174,200$ 40.00 8 Wildomar Grand Avenue Bike Lane-Phase II 1,426,000$ 214,000$ 214,000$ 1,388,200$ 39.00 9 Rancho Mirage ADA Pedestrian Access Ramp Upgrades on Highway 111 469,850$ 234,925$ 234,925$ 1,623,125$ 38.33 10 Lake Elsinore Bicycle Lanes to Downtown 100,200$ 50,100$ 50,100$ 1,673,225$ 37.67 11 Lake Elsinore Machado Street Missing Link Bike Lanes 151,800$ 75,900$ 75,900$ 1,749,125$ 37.67 12 Riverside County Serfas Club Drive Sidewalk Improvements 615,000$ 307,500$ 307,500$ 2,056,625$ 37.67 13 Palm Springs Racquet Club Road & Farrell Drive Missing Links Sidewalks 555,000$ 277,500$ 277,500$ 2,334,125$ 37.00 14 Hemet Sidewalk and ADA Ramps (Alessandro Street)150,000$ 75,000$ 75,000$ 2,409,125$ 36.33 15 Lake Elsinore Chaney Street Missing Link Sidewalk 275,660$ 137,830$ 137,830$ 2,546,955$ 36.33 16 Lake Elsinore Sumner, Mohr and Davis St. Missing Link Sidewalk 195,905$ 97,953$ 97,953$ 2,644,908$ 36.33 17 Lake Elsinore W. Lakeshore Drive Missing Link Sidewalk 263,868$ 131,934$ 131,934$ 2,776,842$ 36.33 -Riverside Carmine Street Sidewalk Improvements (College Ave. - Sierra Vista Ave.)*337,000$ 168,500$ -$ 2,776,842$ 36.33 18 Indio Avenue 42 Sidewalk Gap Closure 177,495$ 88,748$ 88,748$ 2,865,589$ 36.00 19 Lake Elsinore Mission Trail Missing Link Bike Lanes 19,550$ 9,775$ 9,775$ 2,875,364$ 35.67 20 Lake Elsinore Palomar Multi-Use Trail 491,046$ 245,523$ 245,523$ 3,120,887$ 34.67 21 La Quinta Jefferson Street Sidewalk Gap Closure 180,000$ 90,000$ 90,000$ 3,210,887$ 34.67 22 Temecula Citywide Buffered Bike-Lane Striping 189,000$ 132,300$ 132,300$ 3,343,187$ 34.00 23 Moreno Valley Heacock St Sidewalk and Bicycle Lane Improvements 650,000$ 582,000$ 33.67 24 Riverside County Mayberry Ave Sidewalk Improvements (Peartree-Casino)495,000$ 371,250$ 33.67 25 Moreno Valley Juan Bautista De Anza Trail Segment (Cottonwood-Bay)650,000$ 585,000$ 32.67 26 San Jacinto Cottonwood Ave Pedestrian Improvements 200,000$ 80,000$ 32.67 27 Banning Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements 188,278$ 75,311$ 32.00 28 Riverside County Mecca Curb Ramp Accessibility 363,800$ 272,850$ 31.67 29 Perris Mountain Ave Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements 150,000$ 75,000$ 29.67 30 Palm Springs Cerritos Road Missing Links Sidewalks 190,800$ 133,560$ 29.33 31 San Jacinto Lyon Avenue Sidewalk Installment 100,000$ 50,000$ 28.67 32 Coachella Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements 257,641$ 128,821$ 25.67 Totals 13,441,293$ 6,420,979$ 3,343,187$ ** *Projects recommended for ATP Cycle 3 Augmentation award totaling $724K (pending October CTC approval). **Remaining $256K will be utilized for future SB 821 Call for Projects. Note: There may be a difference due to rounding. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM FY 2017/18 PROJECT RANKING/FUNDING REVISED RECOMMENDATIONS Recommended Projects for Funding Unfunded Projects Additional Recommended Projects for Funding 28 AGENDA ITEM 11 Agenda Item 11 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 25, 2017 TO: Budget and Implementation Committee FROM: Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Director THROUGH: John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Funding for the Riverside Transportation Analysis Model Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve funding a portion of the Riverside Transportation Analysis Model (RIVTAM) Update in the amount of $200,000 with State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Planning, Programming, and Monitoring (PPM) funds; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In 2009, the county of Riverside, in partnership with the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG), Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), and the Commission, funded the development of a countywide travel demand model referred to as RIVTAM. RIVTAM was based on the SCAG regional model with greater network detail in Riverside County yet remaining consistent with the SCAG regional model. RIVTAM has been used by the Commission and local agencies as a tool to evaluate plans, programs, and projects to forecast and analyze traffic impacts and land use outcomes. RIVTAM is also specifically used for traffic studies and analyses required for environmental impact reports under the California Environmental Quality Act and the National Environmental Protection Act, in addition to supporting the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Nexus studies administered by WRCOG and CVAG. Local agencies also utilize the forecasts provided by RIVTAM in the development of general plans and specific plans. RIVTAM is in need of an update to incorporate changes to the network and modeling assumptions to be a reliable tool for transportation modeling and forecasting. The update will require consistency with the SCAG Regional Model used for the 2016 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategies. WRCOG has taken the lead in preparing a scope of work and to be responsible for the development and maintenance of the model given its staffing 29 Agenda Item 11 capabilities. WRCOG committed $500,000 to fund the RIVTAM update and the county of Riverside, and CVAG have committed $50,000 and $25,000, respectively. The Commission has been requested to participate in funding the RIVTAM update in the amount of $200,000. Given the Commission’s reliance on transportation modeling for its Measure A program of projects and other regional planning and project implementation efforts, staff recommends the approval of $200,000 over a two-year period (Fiscal Year 2018/19 and FY 2019/20) for participation in the model update. STIP PPM funds are available to fund the Commission’s cost share. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A N/A Year: FY 2018/19 FY 2019/20 Amount: $100,000 $100,000 Source of Funds: STIP PPM Budget Adjustment: N/A N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 106 65 81501 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 09/14/2017 30